The kind of mind that takes a keen interest in government and politics and the kind of mind that has a strong interest in computers and technology typically do not mix.
ROTFLMAO! What a crock! Just because somebody's interested in computers and tech doesn't mean they're not interested in politics and vice versa. Just to show you how possible it is, take a look at Jerry Pournelle, a major computer columnist (and SF author) with a PhD in Poly Sci, and another one in Psyc, both earned. He's not the only one, either. I'm quite interested in politics and I've been earning my living from computers, off and on, for over thirty years.
If an elected official knowingly (and politicians overwhelmingly tend to be lawyers, so I doubt they can claim ignorance) contradicts the highest law of the land, especially for the purpose of political gain, they should simply be charged with treason and tried in a criminal court, and if found guilty by a court of law, they should be executed or receive life in prison.
From the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Even if Vista was a spyware killer, that gives Claria at least three years to make money with their current business model.
If Vista's anti-spyware works anywhere near as well as NanoLimp claims, Claria will have nothing to sell when it comes out. Selling now, while their software's still effective is just good business sense. They'll still have the algorithms, and the know-how, so it it turns out to be a false alarm, they can start coding new programs to do the same thing.
'm assuming you don't own any supermarket loyalty cards.
There are three differences here. First, you have to specifically request the card and fill out an application. (Most spyware installs itself without telling you.) Second,you are explicitly agreeing to let the market track your purcheses when you get the card. (Spyware doesn't even ask.) Last, you are paid for that by the discounts you get. (Spyware gives back nothing.)
Probably. However, I'm not the admin, just a member of the society. We first set up lasfs.info as a test-bed for website changes, and since we already had it set up, it was probably simplest just to switch the records over and make it the official site.
I'm not the admin for the site, just one of the people with an address there. I use Email Remover to examine the messages on the server and delete spam before downloading; works for me. It got to the point that even with whatever filtering the admin was using I was nuking 80-90% of the messages. Since we changed from.org to.info, I've not received a single spam. Yet. I'm sure I will, given time, but for the moment the domain's clean.
I'm sure it's officially forbidden, and that anything they hear is barred from the courtroom. However, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I'm sure that if they did learn about what was going on by listening in, they had an admissable way to learn about it, such as somebody "accidentally" getting too close to the phone booth and overhearing something. I'm not saying they did listen in, but it's best to assume they can, and plan accordingly.
I'm a membeer of LASFS, this world's oldest science fiction club. For years, we've used lasfs.org, both for our website and email to club officers. Recently, it's gotten so bombarded by spam that we've registered lasfs.info. Going to www.lasfs.org just redirects you to www.lasfs.info, now, and there are no longer any MX records for lasfs.org email addresses; they're all lasfs.info. It's a shame, really, because we really are a registered non-profit orinazation, but.info works as the website's there for information purposes.
As several posters pointed out, there's no evidence he spamvertised perscription drugs. However, when he started the drug business, he was already known as a spam king.
Now, he's in jail, using the jail's phone to set up witness intimidation and, possibly, murder. Anybody who thinks jail phones aren't monitored is a fool. It just goes to show: spammers are stupid.
Of course it's not on the list. It's a real tool, used by real sysadmins. This list was made by a 17-year-old munchkin sysadmin wannabe. He hasn't a clue what system administration realy is he just wanted to show off how much he thinks he knows about Linux.
Some zombies (or so I've heard) act as an SMTP server, making the box into a spam relay. Having the server software built into the OS just makes that easier.
Since what we're really talking about here is WindowsTNG (or whatever Vista will be when it ships)...
How apropriate! Windows That's No Good, just like Star Trek That's No Good. I'm sure it will go on and on for years, with fanbois making excuses for its inadequacies, just like they did with NuTrek.
If you don't like Windows XP's default Fischer-Price color scheme, why don't you change it? You don't have to use it, you know. There's no way the most anal admin can lock your system down far enough that you can't even change the look of the desktop. Set it to something you like and be done with it, unless you'd rather bitch about it.
There's one thing in Gnome that's just eye candy for some people, but usefull to me. I've got my mouse configured so that if I tap the control key, a little box spins around the mouse pointer. I use a trackball sitting on my knee. Not only don't I have room for a mouse, I have a shoulder problem and this is more comfortable. Once in a while, of course, the trackball drops on the floor and when I pick it up, it can be hard to see where it's pointing, so this can be quite convenient. I've never seen this in Windows, although it'd be easy to implement. Maybe there's just not enough people out there that could take advantage of it?
You miss two important points. First, the senior chamber of Parliment is answerable to the electorate and second, the most the HoL can do is delay legislation they don't like. It's not easy to overrule them, so it's not done lightly, but it is possible. (Just like Congress overriding a Presidential veto; if it's that important, it can be done, but more often than not, it isn't even attempted.) Considering some of the blatent attempts to violate civil rights made in Britian by elected officials, it's probably a good thing for them that the unelected HoL is still concerned about maintaining freedom.
I wonder how many of the Supremes became activists after their appointments and how many were appointed because the were activists? I honestly don't know. As I've said elsewhere in this discussion, the main reason I don't think the HoL needs changing is because it works for them. Judging by SCOTUS, it probably wouldn't for us.
Okay let me see if I got this straight here. You have a bunch of unelected rich kids who decide what becomes law or not in your country.
You're starting off with an invalid assumption here: I'm not British, I'm born and raised in the USofA. My main reason for defending the current British systim is very simple: it works. It's not broke, so there's no need to fix it. The only people who really want to change it are Tony Blair and his crowd and that's because the HoL has repeatedly rejected his most blatent attempts to turn Great Britian into a police state. The peers, especially the hereditary ones, tend to take a long-term view, rather than going for whatever's convenient at the moment, or worrying about re-election.
People on the Left side of the Pond may laugh at Britian's love of tradition, but those that do forget that it became tradition because (and only because) it works. It's not the way we do things, and it probably wouldn't work for us if we tried it, but it does for them, and that's all that matters.
Holding those with the most responsibility to the highest standards is fine. Objecting to their failure to live up to that standard while refusing to make any effort to live up to it yourself is hypocrisy. Their failure is no excuse for you not to try. In debate, tu quoque, or, "you did it too!" is just one form of ad hominem fallacy; in law, it's often a valid argument, also referred to as "dirty hands." In this case, I'm using it in the legal sense, that is, if you aren't willing to act responsibly, you have no right to complain when others don't. Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.
The only reason I have to think that they put the national interest first is that they've opposed a number of very bad bills in the last few years. They've been more interested in preserving civil rights than Tony Blair has, and he's elected.
I agree with you in general, however, that their own interests are going to come first. I don't consider this the best of all ways to run a government, but it does seem to work OK. I don't consider it to be broke, and see no reason to tinker with it.
Slashdot Mirror
ROTFLMAO! What a crock! Just because somebody's interested in computers and tech doesn't mean they're not interested in politics and vice versa. Just to show you how possible it is, take a look at Jerry Pournelle, a major computer columnist (and SF author) with a PhD in Poly Sci, and another one in Psyc, both earned. He's not the only one, either. I'm quite interested in politics and I've been earning my living from computers, off and on, for over thirty years.
From the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
If Vista's anti-spyware works anywhere near as well as NanoLimp claims, Claria will have nothing to sell when it comes out. Selling now, while their software's still effective is just good business sense. They'll still have the algorithms, and the know-how, so it it turns out to be a false alarm, they can start coding new programs to do the same thing.
There are three differences here. First, you have to specifically request the card and fill out an application. (Most spyware installs itself without telling you.) Second,you are explicitly agreeing to let the market track your purcheses when you get the card. (Spyware doesn't even ask.) Last, you are paid for that by the discounts you get. (Spyware gives back nothing.)
Probably. However, I'm not the admin, just a member of the society. We first set up lasfs.info as a test-bed for website changes, and since we already had it set up, it was probably simplest just to switch the records over and make it the official site.
I'm not the admin for the site, just one of the people with an address there. I use Email Remover to examine the messages on the server and delete spam before downloading; works for me. It got to the point that even with whatever filtering the admin was using I was nuking 80-90% of the messages. Since we changed from .org to .info, I've not received a single spam. Yet. I'm sure I will, given time, but for the moment the domain's clean.
I'm sure it's officially forbidden, and that anything they hear is barred from the courtroom. However, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I'm sure that if they did learn about what was going on by listening in, they had an admissable way to learn about it, such as somebody "accidentally" getting too close to the phone booth and overhearing something. I'm not saying they did listen in, but it's best to assume they can, and plan accordingly.
I'm a membeer of LASFS, this world's oldest science fiction club. For years, we've used lasfs.org, both for our website and email to club officers. Recently, it's gotten so bombarded by spam that we've registered lasfs.info. Going to www.lasfs.org just redirects you to www.lasfs.info, now, and there are no longer any MX records for lasfs.org email addresses; they're all lasfs.info. It's a shame, really, because we really are a registered non-profit orinazation, but .info works as the website's there for information purposes.
Now, he's in jail, using the jail's phone to set up witness intimidation and, possibly, murder. Anybody who thinks jail phones aren't monitored is a fool. It just goes to show: spammers are stupid.
Of course it's not on the list. It's a real tool, used by real sysadmins. This list was made by a 17-year-old munchkin sysadmin wannabe. He hasn't a clue what system administration realy is he just wanted to show off how much he thinks he knows about Linux.
That explains it. I use a Logitech tracball and have never needed to install the Gateswear drivers.
It's not in Mouse, Tweak or Accesability under Win98SE. Maybe you mouse had a custom driver that included it? Thanx anyway.
Some zombies (or so I've heard) act as an SMTP server, making the box into a spam relay. Having the server software built into the OS just makes that easier.
Thanks! If and when I ever use XP, I'll remember that. I just checked and it's not available in 98SE.
And what protocol do they use to send it? SMTP, of course.
This has been another D'oh! moment.
Really? What version? I've never run across it before, but haven't tried every version. (I've never worked on XP, but I have supported it by phone.)
How right you are! I'd expect something more like an Earth-Shattering KABOOM!
How apropriate! Windows That's No Good, just like Star Trek That's No Good. I'm sure it will go on and on for years, with fanbois making excuses for its inadequacies, just like they did with NuTrek.
If you don't like Windows XP's default Fischer-Price color scheme, why don't you change it? You don't have to use it, you know. There's no way the most anal admin can lock your system down far enough that you can't even change the look of the desktop. Set it to something you like and be done with it, unless you'd rather bitch about it.
There's one thing in Gnome that's just eye candy for some people, but usefull to me. I've got my mouse configured so that if I tap the control key, a little box spins around the mouse pointer. I use a trackball sitting on my knee. Not only don't I have room for a mouse, I have a shoulder problem and this is more comfortable. Once in a while, of course, the trackball drops on the floor and when I pick it up, it can be hard to see where it's pointing, so this can be quite convenient. I've never seen this in Windows, although it'd be easy to implement. Maybe there's just not enough people out there that could take advantage of it?
You miss two important points. First, the senior chamber of Parliment is answerable to the electorate and second, the most the HoL can do is delay legislation they don't like. It's not easy to overrule them, so it's not done lightly, but it is possible. (Just like Congress overriding a Presidential veto; if it's that important, it can be done, but more often than not, it isn't even attempted.) Considering some of the blatent attempts to violate civil rights made in Britian by elected officials, it's probably a good thing for them that the unelected HoL is still concerned about maintaining freedom.
I wonder how many of the Supremes became activists after their appointments and how many were appointed because the were activists? I honestly don't know. As I've said elsewhere in this discussion, the main reason I don't think the HoL needs changing is because it works for them. Judging by SCOTUS, it probably wouldn't for us.
You're starting off with an invalid assumption here: I'm not British, I'm born and raised in the USofA. My main reason for defending the current British systim is very simple: it works. It's not broke, so there's no need to fix it. The only people who really want to change it are Tony Blair and his crowd and that's because the HoL has repeatedly rejected his most blatent attempts to turn Great Britian into a police state. The peers, especially the hereditary ones, tend to take a long-term view, rather than going for whatever's convenient at the moment, or worrying about re-election.
People on the Left side of the Pond may laugh at Britian's love of tradition, but those that do forget that it became tradition because (and only because) it works. It's not the way we do things, and it probably wouldn't work for us if we tried it, but it does for them, and that's all that matters.
Holding those with the most responsibility to the highest standards is fine. Objecting to their failure to live up to that standard while refusing to make any effort to live up to it yourself is hypocrisy. Their failure is no excuse for you not to try. In debate, tu quoque, or, "you did it too!" is just one form of ad hominem fallacy; in law, it's often a valid argument, also referred to as "dirty hands." In this case, I'm using it in the legal sense, that is, if you aren't willing to act responsibly, you have no right to complain when others don't. Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.
I agree with you in general, however, that their own interests are going to come first. I don't consider this the best of all ways to run a government, but it does seem to work OK. I don't consider it to be broke, and see no reason to tinker with it.