Why do God and Science have to be mutually exclusive?
Personally, I'm more impressed by a "God" that can design the rules to the universe and start the big bang more than one who just created everything "as is", in motion.
They don't have to be mutually exclusive. It's the nature of, forgive me for sounding cruel, low intelligence people to turn things in to a black and white equation. They also happen to be a vocal bunch in this country, which is unfortunate. I also believe they are the minority, but a very vocal minority.
And by the way, is it one of/.'s top priorities to attack religion every chance it gets?
ID isn't a religion, last I checked. Further, I don't believe any major religiouns associate themselves with it.
It's a silly little idea being pushed by a vocal minority of nut jobs in the US. It may have roots in religion, but that's about it.
While we are on the subject, religions are pretty silly to begin with. How many do we have, in the US alone? How many are sure their flock is going to be saved while everyone else is going to burn? Further, do you agree with everything your religion your teaches you? Does that make you a sinner if you don't?
The entire concept of religion really starts seeming silly when you sit down and think about it.
I still say the best method for backing data up is a seperate backup server, with disks in raid5. Email notification when a disk goes bad ( to a cell phone ).
In a corporate enviroment, you'd have a pair of these things, rsyncing to each other in different locations.
That way, you can guarantee:
1) Media will be readable in the future 2) Active correction: I fix errors as they occure 3) I always know the status of my backup
I even recommend this for home users. It's more expensive than blank CDs, but it's far more reliable. As paraniod as I am about losing my pictures of my daughter, I know most people are worse.
Anybody else think that the only reason the government still denies the existance of area 51 is to keep people looking at it? Makes you wonder why, doesn't it?/conspiracy theory
There is only one thing the next generation has going for it; Capacity. In everything else, DVD has a distinct advantage. It's cheaper, it's entrenched and it's easier to work with.
Personally, I think the "industry" is in for quite a shocker this year, as bluray and hddvd barely make a blip on the radar. Same with next year.
What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs. Everything from showing the series out of order to playing musical timeslots to abruptly killing the series without advanced warning, these shows were actively campainged against by the execs ( although I can't imagine why you'd want to mess up a money maker ).
This is why I don't watch TV anymore ( in fact, I don't own a TV ). I purchase DVDs, and I get to watch things ad free through liberal use of dvd decrypter and dvd shrink.
With the music industry demanding a sliding pay scale for music and Apple dominating the online music industry, it's worth noting that this is a horrible time to get into it. For most people, the question will be, "Does it work with my ipod?", and of course the answer is "Not without jumping through some hoops".
What MS should have done, if they were serious about this, is wait for Apple to lose their edge with the ipod, then hit this full force *WITH* a player of their own that rivals the Ipod.
Anything less means disaster for any online music shop.
That "article" is a press release. Written by Fugifilm, or someone that thinks very very highly of them.
I mean, it's nice to know that they predict mid 2006 for the arrival of the media, but that's really the only nugget of news in both the article and/. summary.
They hook the hs/waterblocks up in series. So the hot fluid from the first processor is attempting to cool the second processor.
This seems a bit scary to me. The processors really get that hot, then shooting the exhaust fluid from one over the other isn't going to do as much good as they might expect.
From my understanding of the issue, blocking *.wmf and unregistering the dll should be sufficient to block the vulnerability. By unregistering the dll, you block the "check in the headers and see what it really is" behavior of *.wmf.
I could be wrong, but that's what I've gathered from all I've read.
I may just have chosen to suffer from using a slightly crippled OS (i.e. no workie Fax & Picture Viewer, etc) by unregistering the DLL until it's fixed.
And even better, it's an easier work around ( which is all this unofficial patch is ) in a large enviroment. AD, made a script to disable the dll, and bam! One reboot later, work around implemented.
Except for this time, they're not outright buying the company providing the technology. They're partnering, which means the Japanese company here could maintain its company culture. Maybe.
Which means exactly Jack and Shit. This is more a problem with how the internet works in relation to how MS works than anything else. Nothing else really matters.
I think you miss an important thing about how Microsoft markets their products
Doesn't matter how they market their product. VoIP is not something they can half ass and bind to an established and successful product ( say, outlook ). People won't stand for flaky telephones in a business. It could have the best PHB-esse ever written. It could make you believe that it really can solve world hunger and lower your ROI in a single bound. But if it's flaky, people will not stand for it.
MS has never taken on a task as demanding in quality as VoIP before. Ever. And given their past behavior, they will fail in this.
How has this hurt Microsoft before? How has an unreliable product put into a market that already has many alternative reliable products ever stopped Microsoft?
It's really no different than MS getting into the toaster market. There is a level of expectation people have for appliances, and they freak out when an appliance starts acting up. Add in to the mix that those same people who have a certain level of expectations in their phone systems are business types, and you have to tread carefully.
I know. I do voip stuff ( with asterisk. ask for it by name ), and normal, rational people get very weird when something acts up in a phone system. Even if it's something that doesn't actually mean anything ( like the tones don't echo, or it takes longer to connect a call than they are used to. ). Businesses depend on their phone systems more so than their computers, and with the advent of computers in the work place, the phones are kind of seen as the last bastion of technology that "Just Works", making them that much more precious.
I refuse to setup someone's business using voip over the internet, given how flaky it can be. If that's truly what MS wants to try, more power to them, but they will fail hard. Further, it will damage their already shaky rep.
Yeah, sorry, no. MS doesn't exactly have a winning track record when it comes to reliability, and VoIP is not something you want to be flaky. People just won't stand for it.
On top of the fact there are tons of internet based voip players out there that give people more options than they might ever need. Further, voip over the internet is too flaky for business use. All of these factors hurt anything MS may try in this field, and they aren't equipped to do it right.
Thanks. Not only do you apparently not understand the full nature of spamhaus, you never even read my full comment, else you wouldnt have made yours.
The truth of the matter is, of course, a bit more complex: You made a silly request, and instead of acknowledging the idiocy of such a request, I offered a valid substitute.
However, if you need me to be more blunt to you in the future, I will do my best to accomidate.
2)Blacklist any server/ip/whatever that sends email to x amount of disabled accounts (I would say x ==5 but any value really would work) 3) Publish said blacklist
I mispoke then: From the CO to my location is Voip ( or similar tech. Voice delivered over digital means ). What's beyond the CO is not something I've every really dug in to, so I wouldn't know. But I can tell you that delivering voice from the CO is often done via voip ( or again, with it's like ).
How your area does it, I don't know. The central valley in California, however, does it this way.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do God and Science have to be mutually exclusive?
Personally, I'm more impressed by a "God" that can design the rules to the universe and start the big bang more than one who just created everything "as is", in motion.
They don't have to be mutually exclusive. It's the nature of, forgive me for sounding cruel, low intelligence people to turn things in to a black and white equation. They also happen to be a vocal bunch in this country, which is unfortunate. I also believe they are the minority, but a very vocal minority.
And by the way, is it one of /.'s top priorities to attack religion every chance it gets?
ID isn't a religion, last I checked. Further, I don't believe any major religiouns associate themselves with it.
It's a silly little idea being pushed by a vocal minority of nut jobs in the US. It may have roots in religion, but that's about it.
While we are on the subject, religions are pretty silly to begin with. How many do we have, in the US alone? How many are sure their flock is going to be saved while everyone else is going to burn? Further, do you agree with everything your religion your teaches you? Does that make you a sinner if you don't?
The entire concept of religion really starts seeming silly when you sit down and think about it.
I still say the best method for backing data up is a seperate backup server, with disks in raid5. Email notification when a disk goes bad ( to a cell phone ).
In a corporate enviroment, you'd have a pair of these things, rsyncing to each other in different locations.
That way, you can guarantee:
1) Media will be readable in the future
2) Active correction: I fix errors as they occure
3) I always know the status of my backup
I even recommend this for home users. It's more expensive than blank CDs, but it's far more reliable. As paraniod as I am about losing my pictures of my daughter, I know most people are worse.
Anybody else think that the only reason the government still denies the existance of area 51 is to keep people looking at it? Makes you wonder why, doesn't it? /conspiracy theory
This is why we need a -1, Factually Incorrect.
We actually have something like this: It's called +1 Funny.
And I meant it as a joke. Fortunately, most people got it.
http://www.the-electric-universe.info/welcome.html
Burn baby, burn
...does that mean when you get a -1 Flamebait on slashdot, the authorities are dispatched?
There is only one thing the next generation has going for it; Capacity. In everything else, DVD has a distinct advantage. It's cheaper, it's entrenched and it's easier to work with.
Personally, I think the "industry" is in for quite a shocker this year, as bluray and hddvd barely make a blip on the radar. Same with next year.
Network execs aren't in business to broadcast the best shows, they just want the shows that make the most money.
Go lookup the top TV series DVD sellers. Then come back here and tell me they killed it to make room for something that would make more money.
Oh, and I have heard so many people buying the series dvd because they saw the movie and thought it was amazing ( which it was ).
Firefly, Farscape, Family guy, Futurama
What do these shows have in common? These are great shows that were killed before their time due to poor decisions of TV execs. Everything from showing the series out of order to playing musical timeslots to abruptly killing the series without advanced warning, these shows were actively campainged against by the execs ( although I can't imagine why you'd want to mess up a money maker ).
This is why I don't watch TV anymore ( in fact, I don't own a TV ). I purchase DVDs, and I get to watch things ad free through liberal use of dvd decrypter and dvd shrink.
With the music industry demanding a sliding pay scale for music and Apple dominating the online music industry, it's worth noting that this is a horrible time to get into it. For most people, the question will be, "Does it work with my ipod?", and of course the answer is "Not without jumping through some hoops".
What MS should have done, if they were serious about this, is wait for Apple to lose their edge with the ipod, then hit this full force *WITH* a player of their own that rivals the Ipod.
Anything less means disaster for any online music shop.
That's actually about the funniest thing I've read on this article.
That "article" is a press release. Written by Fugifilm, or someone that thinks very very highly of them.
/. summary.
I mean, it's nice to know that they predict mid 2006 for the arrival of the media, but that's really the only nugget of news in both the article and
They hook the hs/waterblocks up in series. So the hot fluid from the first processor is attempting to cool the second processor.
This seems a bit scary to me. The processors really get that hot, then shooting the exhaust fluid from one over the other isn't going to do as much good as they might expect.
Still, awsome bit of home engineering.
So blocking WMF files doesn't seem to help :(
From my understanding of the issue, blocking *.wmf and unregistering the dll should be sufficient to block the vulnerability. By unregistering the dll, you block the "check in the headers and see what it really is" behavior of *.wmf.
I could be wrong, but that's what I've gathered from all I've read.
But it seems to be if you do the work around and block WMF files at the border.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary.
I may just have chosen to suffer from using a slightly crippled OS (i.e. no workie Fax & Picture Viewer, etc) by unregistering the DLL until it's fixed.
And even better, it's an easier work around ( which is all this unofficial patch is ) in a large enviroment. AD, made a script to disable the dll, and bam! One reboot later, work around implemented.
Except for this time, they're not outright buying the company providing the technology. They're partnering, which means the Japanese company here could maintain its company culture. Maybe.
Which means exactly Jack and Shit. This is more a problem with how the internet works in relation to how MS works than anything else. Nothing else really matters.
I think you miss an important thing about how Microsoft markets their products
Doesn't matter how they market their product. VoIP is not something they can half ass and bind to an established and successful product ( say, outlook ). People won't stand for flaky telephones in a business. It could have the best PHB-esse ever written. It could make you believe that it really can solve world hunger and lower your ROI in a single bound. But if it's flaky, people will not stand for it.
MS has never taken on a task as demanding in quality as VoIP before. Ever. And given their past behavior, they will fail in this.
How has this hurt Microsoft before? How has an unreliable product put into a market that already has many alternative reliable products ever stopped Microsoft?
It's really no different than MS getting into the toaster market. There is a level of expectation people have for appliances, and they freak out when an appliance starts acting up. Add in to the mix that those same people who have a certain level of expectations in their phone systems are business types, and you have to tread carefully.
I know. I do voip stuff ( with asterisk. ask for it by name ), and normal, rational people get very weird when something acts up in a phone system. Even if it's something that doesn't actually mean anything ( like the tones don't echo, or it takes longer to connect a call than they are used to. ). Businesses depend on their phone systems more so than their computers, and with the advent of computers in the work place, the phones are kind of seen as the last bastion of technology that "Just Works", making them that much more precious.
I refuse to setup someone's business using voip over the internet, given how flaky it can be. If that's truly what MS wants to try, more power to them, but they will fail hard. Further, it will damage their already shaky rep.
Yeah, sorry, no. MS doesn't exactly have a winning track record when it comes to reliability, and VoIP is not something you want to be flaky. People just won't stand for it.
On top of the fact there are tons of internet based voip players out there that give people more options than they might ever need. Further, voip over the internet is too flaky for business use. All of these factors hurt anything MS may try in this field, and they aren't equipped to do it right.
Compared to the crap RIAA spews out, I'd say that's actually the better alternative.
Thanks. Not only do you apparently not understand the full nature of spamhaus, you never even read my full comment, else you wouldnt have made yours.
The truth of the matter is, of course, a bit more complex: You made a silly request, and instead of acknowledging the idiocy of such a request, I offered a valid substitute.
However, if you need me to be more blunt to you in the future, I will do my best to accomidate.
2)Blacklist any server/ip/whatever that sends email to x amount of disabled accounts (I would say x ==5 but any value really would work)
3) Publish said blacklist
Gee, what a great idea
I mispoke then: From the CO to my location is Voip ( or similar tech. Voice delivered over digital means ). What's beyond the CO is not something I've every really dug in to, so I wouldn't know. But I can tell you that delivering voice from the CO is often done via voip ( or again, with it's like ).
How your area does it, I don't know. The central valley in California, however, does it this way.