Do backups to a raid system. Even IDE raid with only mirroring, just throw the data there every now and then. And don't use it too often for regular usage if you can help it.
By backing up to it and unmounting it once a night, you run less chance of corruption due to power outages, kernels going nuts.. generals going nuts...:)
Sorry.. too much strongbad. I guess this is where I'd mumble something under my breath. gah!
So let me get this straight. They built a system, for the public, and are now deciding to limit it.
Would it have been ok to shut it down? Would it have been ok to never allow non-ms clients in the first place?
It's "not fair" in the sense that it's technically stupid, since it's not that hard to make a linux client, or keep the protocol open, but someone gives something away and changes its mind, it's not right anymore... and you complain? It's theirs. if they wanted to, they can change all their IM's to sanscrit, in transit, if they wanted to. You don't like it, don't use 'em!
Oh yeah, now we have to shell out money just to manage the licensing. And you know what, it takes one person, JUST one, to install the wrong piece of software, N amount of times, NOT the CEO, NOT the CTO, not even someone in management, to install THAT piece of software somewhere, call the BSA, and cause a shit load of trouble.
The ratio of the least amount of people to cause trouble, vs the amount of damage caused, just for illegal softare installed is WAY too high and too fast to accrue.
BTW, It's called due process and due dilligence. You TRY to do your best, even when you fail. Or would you rather your first speeding ticket, your first petty crime, your first major crime, be taken out to the fullest conviction, or would you rather the judge understand, "Wait, it was a mistake (if it can be proven as such) or this person usually, 99% of the time, does the right thing. A slap on the wrist makes more sense."
Or maybe you are one of those who has enough cash, that if you do make a mistake, you can just blow it off. I'm sorry buddy, most of us don't.
And you know what, companies don't have to buy MS 'cause you don't have to. OO, Linux, Java, Tomcat, Struts, Apache, GnuCash, Pan, Evolution.. they are all viable. And you know what... just 'cuz some people do get fired for using opensource doesn't mean I won't. If anything, when time rolls around, and the proof is in the pudding, people will see. Not that OSS is right for everyone, but it isn't wrong.
Accidents happen. And it's not always because people slack off. People trip and fall all the time, but we don't go around with our shoe laces untied. We don't walk down the yellow line of a two way road to get to where we want to. Companies don't intend to put the wrong dollar amount on your pay cheque that goes into direct deposit.
But you know what... it happens. It's live. We aren't robots. We tie our shoe laces, try and stay on the side walks and we sign agreements to say, "If we get overpaid, or udner, the company can rectify that w/ the bank directly, w/o us."
There are people who live dangerously, stealing stuff left and right, making a killing and never get caught. This is a case of someone unconsciously making a mistake (misteak, mmmm) and accidentally having one too many copies installed.
If YOU never break the law, kudos to you. I commend you. Hell, run for president. But the rest of us don't mind having judges to weed out the guilty from the innocent. And that same group understands, those same people are fallible. It's why we have a multi layered court system.
The rest of us are human and expected to be treated as such.
prolly because the politicians want the crisis to happen, and to come out smelling like a rose. Imagine a president where everything happened "just fine", w/ no problems.
Now imagine a president w/ thousands and THOUSANDS [/sb] of problems thrown at him and he solves 'em all.
I love how bloomberg said, "All areas of NYC will get back power ASAP, with no preferences." Yes the poorest parts got electricity back last. Fuckin' liar.
In the supreme court, yeah.. well, it's always a jury that makes the final decision a lot of the time, but nevermind that.
Remember, all law suits have to end somewhere. Either they start and end in a supreme court, or move up from a lower-level court, gets appealed and moved to a supreme court where they say either "The ruling makes 100% sense, respect the ruling!" or "We need more deliberation"
Operant is on chance that you'll do something over and over again... like the people who witness the arrest as it were.
Think of the people on usenet, irc etc.. they prolly aren't scared at all and will likely continue sharing. People on things like, gnutella might. That's seems to be the nature of the RIAA. It's negative reinforcement since it is punishment against the behavior vs say, the RIAA giving money away for doing that as a one time thing, which would be positive.
For the 800 file sharing people, they have been punished directly. If they do it again, they'll be punished directly. They have the tools and the resources. Will they do it again? prolly not unless they want the RIAA on their tails again.
--
Here's a better one. Think of women. We all love women. well.. unless you are a woman:) But whatever. You come home and surprise your lady with a rose. She kisses you and hugs you and makes you feel good in turn. That is opperant.
Now if she asks you, "Do you think I'm fat?" That is classical. It's the dependency of if the opportunity is there before hand or if it is forced upon you.
The RIAA had already made clear they would go after people. They did it anyway and look what happened.
"Classical conditioning, is a process by which a stimulus that previously did not elicit a response coms to elicit a response in a reflexlike fashion, after it is paired for one or more trials with a simulus that elicits a response."
In this case, you get sued for doing something bad, you don't do it anymore. After all, getting sued isn't a desired behavior. It costs time, money and other valuable stuff.
Eating may be a bad example since it can be considered instict, but you know not to touch a pot that was on a stove since it was hot and burned you ever ever again.
"Operant conditioning is a proces sby which the consequences of a response increase or decrease the likelihood that the response occurs again."
The increased (or decreased chance) you'll do something based off of the consequneces of a response...
That's from "Psychology", Peter Gray. Second edition.
---
"The term 'positive reinforcement' is used to idicate that a positive contingency or correlation exists between an organism's response or appearance of a rewarding stimulus"
This ties to both operant and classical conditioning. Reward for doing good or good response for having done something. They both increase the liklihood of something happening on one's own accord or when presented the chance to chose.
"Negative reinforcemnt -- that is, the removal or disappearance of some aversive stimulus response. Here 'aversive stimulus' referes to any stimulus that an organism dislikes or would atempt to avoid."
Pain is the easiest one. Take a gun to your foot or cursinging someone out and getting pistol whipped... they are both exampels of classical and operant behaiors with negative responses.
Both of those quotes from "Learning and Memory", Willicam c gordon.
--
Sorry.. I took psych through college:) Minor'd in it and everything.
No, negative reincorcement is somethign that simply deter one behavior. Positive reinforcement promotes. It's independent of operant or classical conditioning.:)
For operant training, you more learn what the procedure is. So if you leaern, "you wave hi, someoen waves back hi", you'll learn that if someone waves to you, you reciprocate.
True if things were one for one, but look at it this way.
Via the media and word of mouth, they'll turn a behavior that would be classically conditioned to operantly conditioned.
Background: Classical conditioning is when you do X, Y happens when the choice is proactively given to you. Operant conditioning is when the choice isn't, but you always have the opportunity to. Classic conditioning, you eat and hunger goes away. Operant, you wave hi to someone, they wave hi back.
Anyway, for the one person they sue, they classically train him, never do that again. For those who are witness, they get operantly trained, "you do behavior X, Y is likely to happen."
You can govern the success of that with just how many people don't trade for each person you sue.
Slashdot Mirror
Do backups to a raid system. Even IDE raid with only mirroring, just throw the data there every now and then.
:)
And don't use it too often for regular usage if you can help it.
By backing up to it and unmounting it once a night, you run less chance of corruption due to power outages, kernels going nuts.. generals going nuts...
Sorry.. too much strongbad. I guess this is where I'd mumble something under my breath. gah!
Hah, that's nothing. I've had my ACLs all my life. Though mine will break down at some point :(
So let me get this straight. They built a system, for the public, and are now deciding to limit it.
Would it have been ok to shut it down? Would it have been ok to never allow non-ms clients in the first place?
It's "not fair" in the sense that it's technically stupid, since it's not that hard to make a linux client, or keep the protocol open, but someone gives something away and changes its mind, it's not right anymore... and you complain? It's theirs. if they wanted to, they can change all their IM's to sanscrit, in transit, if they wanted to. You don't like it, don't use 'em!
See this reply
;)
With less angst. At least you replied nicely
Oh yeah, now we have to shell out money just to manage the licensing. And you know what, it takes one person, JUST one, to install the wrong piece of software, N amount of times, NOT the CEO, NOT the CTO, not even someone in management, to install THAT piece of software somewhere, call the BSA, and cause a shit load of trouble.
The ratio of the least amount of people to cause trouble, vs the amount of damage caused, just for illegal softare installed is WAY too high and too fast to accrue.
BTW, It's called due process and due dilligence. You TRY to do your best, even when you fail. Or would you rather your first speeding ticket, your first petty crime, your first major crime, be taken out to the fullest conviction, or would you rather the judge understand, "Wait, it was a mistake (if it can be proven as such) or this person usually, 99% of the time, does the right thing. A slap on the wrist makes more sense."
Or maybe you are one of those who has enough cash, that if you do make a mistake, you can just blow it off. I'm sorry buddy, most of us don't.
And you know what, companies don't have to buy MS 'cause you don't have to. OO, Linux, Java, Tomcat, Struts, Apache, GnuCash, Pan, Evolution.. they are all viable. And you know what... just 'cuz some people do get fired for using opensource doesn't mean I won't. If anything, when time rolls around, and the proof is in the pudding, people will see. Not that OSS is right for everyone, but it isn't wrong.
Accidents happen. And it's not always because people slack off. People trip and fall all the time, but we don't go around with our shoe laces untied. We don't walk down the yellow line of a two way road to get to where we want to. Companies don't intend to put the wrong dollar amount on your pay cheque that goes into direct deposit.
But you know what... it happens. It's live. We aren't robots. We tie our shoe laces, try and stay on the side walks and we sign agreements to say, "If we get overpaid, or udner, the company can rectify that w/ the bank directly, w/o us."
There are people who live dangerously, stealing stuff left and right, making a killing and never get caught. This is a case of someone unconsciously making a mistake (misteak, mmmm) and accidentally having one too many copies installed.
If YOU never break the law, kudos to you. I commend you. Hell, run for president. But the rest of us don't mind having judges to weed out the guilty from the innocent. And that same group understands, those same people are fallible. It's why we have a multi layered court system.
The rest of us are human and expected to be treated as such.
TYVM.
prolly because the politicians want the crisis to happen, and to come out smelling like a rose. Imagine a president where everything happened "just fine", w/ no problems.
Now imagine a president w/ thousands and THOUSANDS [/sb] of problems thrown at him and he solves 'em all.
I love how bloomberg said, "All areas of NYC will get back power ASAP, with no preferences." Yes the poorest parts got electricity back last. Fuckin' liar.
It's the net withdrawl speaking.
Hey, we need SOMETHING to make us look busy.
And there in lies the rub, eh?
nono.. it's the things we can do with our balls. /tasteless
Which, at last check, are freebsd (for hotmail).
Until you have something silly like autofill on, which gets stored on disc, and a virus that mails your autofill to someone. Hrm...
Thank you Michael Buffer.
Jerry Garcia is Dead, not BSD. Hell, I doubt any of them can carry a tune much less jam on a guitar.
Dying? I hope it isn't doing T-shirts. Tie-dye is so lame.
karl?
Install the binary packages provided by FreeBSD.org.
They change slowly.
In the supreme court, yeah.. well, it's always a jury that makes the final decision a lot of the time, but nevermind that.
Remember, all law suits have to end somewhere. Either they start and end in a supreme court, or move up from a lower-level court, gets appealed and moved to a supreme court where they say either "The ruling makes 100% sense, respect the ruling!" or "We need more deliberation"
Operant is on chance that you'll do something over and over again... like the people who witness the arrest as it were.
:) But whatever. You come home and surprise your lady with a rose. She kisses you and hugs you and makes you feel good in turn. That is opperant.
Think of the people on usenet, irc etc.. they prolly aren't scared at all and will likely continue sharing. People on things like, gnutella might. That's seems to be the nature of the RIAA. It's negative reinforcement since it is punishment against the behavior vs say, the RIAA giving money away for doing that as a one time thing, which would be positive.
For the 800 file sharing people, they have been punished directly. If they do it again, they'll be punished directly. They have the tools and the resources. Will they do it again? prolly not unless they want the RIAA on their tails again.
--
Here's a better one. Think of women. We all love women. well.. unless you are a woman
Now if she asks you, "Do you think I'm fat?" That is classical. It's the dependency of if the opportunity is there before hand or if it is forced upon you.
The RIAA had already made clear they would go after people. They did it anyway and look what happened.
You made me get my textbook for this:
:) Minor'd in it and everything.
"Classical conditioning, is a process by which a stimulus that previously did not elicit a response coms to elicit a response in a reflexlike fashion, after it is paired for one or more trials with a simulus that elicits a response."
In this case, you get sued for doing something bad, you don't do it anymore. After all, getting sued isn't a desired behavior. It costs time, money and other valuable stuff.
Eating may be a bad example since it can be considered instict, but you know not to touch a pot that was on a stove since it was hot and burned you ever ever again.
"Operant conditioning is a proces sby which the consequences of a response increase or decrease the likelihood that the response occurs again."
The increased (or decreased chance) you'll do something based off of the consequneces of a response...
That's from "Psychology", Peter Gray. Second edition.
---
"The term 'positive reinforcement' is used to idicate that a positive contingency or correlation exists between an organism's response or appearance of a rewarding stimulus"
This ties to both operant and classical conditioning. Reward for doing good or good response for having done something. They both increase the liklihood of something happening on one's own accord or when presented the chance to chose.
"Negative reinforcemnt -- that is, the removal or disappearance of some aversive stimulus response. Here 'aversive stimulus' referes to any stimulus that an organism dislikes or would atempt to avoid."
Pain is the easiest one. Take a gun to your foot or cursinging someone out and getting pistol whipped... they are both exampels of classical and operant behaiors with negative responses.
Both of those quotes from "Learning and Memory", Willicam c gordon.
--
Sorry.. I took psych through college
No, negative reincorcement is somethign that simply deter one behavior. Positive reinforcement promotes. It's independent of operant or classical conditioning. :)
I thought Steve Balmer was. With all hi running and jumping, you'd think he'd be a short to long term disability risk if he hurt himself.
For operant training, you more learn what the procedure is. So if you leaern, "you wave hi, someoen waves back hi", you'll learn that if someone waves to you, you reciprocate.
True if things were one for one, but look at it this way.
Via the media and word of mouth, they'll turn a behavior that would be classically conditioned to operantly conditioned.
Background: Classical conditioning is when you do X, Y happens when the choice is proactively given to you. Operant conditioning is when the choice isn't, but you always have the opportunity to. Classic conditioning, you eat and hunger goes away. Operant, you wave hi to someone, they wave hi back.
Anyway, for the one person they sue, they classically train him, never do that again. For those who are witness, they get operantly trained, "you do behavior X, Y is likely to happen."
You can govern the success of that with just how many people don't trade for each person you sue.