Just fix the bugs first. I'd be happy if gconfd-2, clock-applet, and evolution didn't leak memory like it was going out of style. Even with a gig of memory, having to kill of these processes once or twice a day to keep the machine from crashing is a bit over the top.
It was a couple days before I had all my programs installed and whatnot, but I really don't see how a Mac would help there.
Actually, the Mac does help a lot there -- installing an application on OSX is very easy. In most cases I just drag the icon from the CD (or disk image) to the Applications folder and call it good. Much faster, no reboot, no registry, just works. I wish KDE would implement something similar for Linux.:-)
Dialup isn't going away anytime soon. Apart from the residential users, there are business users who use dialup when they're on the road. Not every hotel has broadband access at this point, but phone lines are pretty standard.
I do not see how that applies here. Did the congressman give specific examples? I think it is safe to say that Hitler had policies we now consider evil. At least one. It therefore is perfectly okay to use him as a reference for "legitimate governments that have laws that Americans consider evil." Reductio ad Absurdum/Hitlerum does not suggest that using that generalization is a fallacy, only that getting specific and saying "because Hitler promoted autobahns, autobahns are therefore evil." is absurd.
I find myself spending hours every day online. Eventually I reach the point where I realize that the last hour I've spent surfing nothing at all. Just going from site to site looking for something new & interesting to pop up. It is especially bad when you get involved in discussion forums.
I absolutely recognize that it is detrimental to the rest of my life -- I do neglect things that are arguably more important. And I get frustrated sometimes, and seriously consider yanking the cord right out of the wall and throwing the computer in the closet for a few weeks.
It may not be a classic addiction in the physical sense, but I could see it being similar to something like a gambling addiction, as mentioned. I know that I'll sit down at the computer frequently, even when I know there is nothing new to see, because I just looked a few minutes earlier;). And yet I will do a little surfing anyway.
And that is why I am typing this on Valentine's Day, instead of being out with my non-existent girlfriend.
I'm starting to wonder why there are any people on the Gnome side. Three times per day I have to kill gconfd-2, evolution, and clock-applet, or my workstation will crash when it runs out of memory. I am impressed with software that can suck down a gigabyte of real memory and another gigabyte of swap in the space of a few hours. And all three pieces of software are part of Gnome.
Except that the car does not come with claims that the locks are impenetrable. If GM were making marketing claims about the invulnerability of their cars to being stolen, and then provided inadequate locks, they are opening themselves up to a civil suit for fraudulent marketing. Microsoft does routinely make marketing claims about the security of Windows. While an experienced technical person knows that to be provably false, it does not shift liability for making the claims to the purchaser.
In my personal opinion, the students in this case are guilty of some crime -- the only potential problem I have with the charges is the one relating to medical equipment. Unless they knew hospital computers were being infected, then I think that charge should be dropped. Intent does matter.
The hospital may not be criminally liable for anything, however I absolutely believe they have demonstrated negligence -- for failing to implement best practice security. If anyone got hurt, I expect that they do have a viable civil case against the hospital.
I don't know about where you work, but at my workplace the rules are pretty clear. No games on company owned equipment. So it may be your lunchtime, but if you do not own the PC, hiring a solicitor will be a waste of your time.
That statement requires a bit of qualification. Owning a Windows PC now is a bit like having a pet rabbit, etc.
At work I primarily use a Linux workstation. I give it no care and feeding, as it requires none. It has no registry, it has no spyware, adware, or virii. Completely boring, untinteresting, and extremely useful. Perfect for me, as I am more interested in doing my job than fighting my PC.
And at home I primarily use a Macintosh running OSX. Similar experience to Linux, better graphics, better applications, but fundamentally the same result -- my day to day experience does not center around the operating system and dealing with it's bugs, security risks, and annoying "features." I had gotten so used to dealing with Windows that the first few weeks of using my Mac I kept feeling like I was missing something. Then I figured out what it was:-).
Mod parent down.
The vast, vast majority of Windows XP users are clueless. None of these things suggested come naturally to them. I can't fathom what would happen if I asked my mother to keep a CD of security patches handy, enable the software firewall, don't connect the cable until she's protected, etc... She can install the OS if need be, but that's about it.
The real solution -- Microsoft should be sending free updates to all registered XP owners with updated CD's that contain pre-patched installations.
What does a office computer need that a 32MB video card can't handle? For at least 6 years we've had plenty of power to manipulate a 2D graphical interface at any common resolution (say, up to 1600x1200) with essentially instant updates. Why spend money on one part that has no need to be faster? Or does your company allow you to play games on work time...?
Every single header line you listed is put there by the e-mail client. Without a Message-ID field, some mail servers will add one. But it will not be nearly as descriptive as the one you have there. And the mail server software should identify the envelope sender address (the address specified during the SMTP conversation). Some mail server software will also added Received header fields that include the envelope recipient (specified during the SMTP conversation). qmail is an example I can think of immediately. But not all software will do that, and the entire remainder of the message, headers & body alike, are supplied by the e-mail client.
Nah, I still say that you really win the argument. Because what you just pointed out is that doing a simple task in Windows can change depending on how you have configured it. Not just between different versions of Windows, but the same version -- with and without the welcome screen disabled.
I hope you are just trolling. Or perhaps you just have not thought this all the way through.
Ok, and i give the same answer to people who whine about DNA databases.
make it voluntary, but everyone who doesnt will immideately be locked up for any crime committed untill they can find a better way of proving their innocence. let see who gets bored 1st.
What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? That is a fundamental attribute of our criminal justice system. Are you advocating that we rewrite it as "guilty until proven innocent"?
but as a person who doesnt mind, i naturally feel suspicious of those who do, what are you hiding?
Everybody is hiding something. There are many things in my life that are not illegal in the slightest, nor are they immoral by societal standards, and yet I would prefer to keep them to myself. All of my life is none of your business, and all of my life outside of my workplace is none of my employer's business.
The market can deal with nonsense like this quite easily. I work for a CLEC, and doing something like this is not on our radar -- nor will it ever be. We have a focus on customer service, because ultimately that earns us more business than exceptionally good prices or any type of coercion. I have a lot of experience that indicates that this kind of policy would truly piss off our customers like very few other things could, and they would start looking for another provider.
So, instead... WE will be the "other provider." And because we are a CLEC, we are very enthusiastic about taking customers away from Verizon and Qworst.
You can sue anyone for anything BUT you shouldn't be able to sue (and win) against e.g. MacDonalds for huring yourself with hot coffee. I mean for pitys sake, you knew it was hot when you bought it. It's bloody coffee. What do you expect?
Tip: Quit using the MacDonalds case as an example of frivilous litigation. You have just demonstrated that you don't know what you're talking about on at least one topic, so informed people are just going to ignore the rest of what you're trying to say.
Bah. I listen to music on headphones all the time. I get uncomfortable with the sound level well before it becomes a danger to my hearing. If you are willing to endure pain while listening to your music, you deserve the resulting hearing loss. It's a little piece of Darwin in action.
There are many other targets, then, besides Apple. And there are better targets, too, by your reasoning -- take for example Etymotic, with their earphones that absolutely seal into your ear canal, blocking out almost all outside noise, and putting themselves very close indeed to your eardrum.
Except those are no more likely than earbuds to damage your hearing. In order to cause damage, the volume has to be high enough to hurt. You ever hear something at 110+ decibels? Holy shiat, you deserve what you get if you cannot respond properly to pain stimuli.
And while I'm ranting... what about concerts? I went to an Aerosmith concert a few years ago, and the sound was so loud it was distorting in my ear. I mean... LOUD. Shouldn't we be suing them too? Especially since we can't turn down the volume in that situation.
Oh wait... personal responsibility. Almost forgot it existed. As it seems the person who brought the suit did as well. Either that or he's just looking for money. That might explain going after Apple instead of smaller fish. No, it can't be, he's definitely looking out for all of our best interests...
I'd expect Google to freely remove any news site that does not want to be represented on Google News. If they do that, instead of holding out for the news organizations to band together (assuming that would actually occur), then the demonstration will be very quick and to the point. As others have mentioned, I have definitely gone to many news sites via Google News that I would never have bothered going to otherwise.
I can see that a guide would be helpful. Not necessarily for the raw technical stuff -- OS's and routers have been IPv6 capable for the most part for such a long time. But there ought to be a guide to help people really understand what's going on. We've been dealing with dotted quad for a very long time, and we're used to it. Just the notation alone for IPv6 requires a change of mindset. IMO that's going to be the biggest stumbling block to converting.
It was a good point, though. Quoting conservation of energy is of extremely limited value when discussing nutrition. It does not matter that at a basic level it is true. What matters is that there are processes at work that are complex enough to make it irrelevant. People who argue conservation of energy are inevitably heading toward the argument that it takes X energy to do Y physical labor, regardless of who is doing it, so you must be overeating. Of course, the very first problem is that food is not directly fuel for the body. You cannot simply say that "X amount of food" translates to "Y amount of Calories", despite what what the nutritional label says. Perhaps naturally thin people just have fast moving or inefficient digestive systems and they shit out 80% of all the Calories in the food they eat, where the naturally fat person absorbs 80%. Without actually knowing the energy in to the system, how do you try to argue conservation of energy in the first place?
Re:Obesity comes from a simple condition...
on
Obesity Contagious?
·
· Score: 1
The thin people who never exercise only get to feel morally superior for a while. And then they die. That's the beauty of it. Unless you are very obese indeed, the bigger risk factor to your health is lack of exercise, not a few extra pounds. There's a guy who works across the hall from me who is quite thin, has been for all his life, and doesn't exercise a bit. A bit of a shocker a few years ago when he went to the doctor and found out that his blood pressure was about twice normal (or something like that -- the nurse gave him aspirin to chew on and called an ambulance, even though he had no symptoms other than such high pressure), and his cholesterol was in the mid-200's. Ooops. So much for feeling superior.
Slashdot Mirror
Just fix the bugs first. I'd be happy if gconfd-2, clock-applet, and evolution didn't leak memory like it was going out of style. Even with a gig of memory, having to kill of these processes once or twice a day to keep the machine from crashing is a bit over the top.
Actually, the Mac does help a lot there -- installing an application on OSX is very easy. In most cases I just drag the icon from the CD (or disk image) to the Applications folder and call it good. Much faster, no reboot, no registry, just works. I wish KDE would implement something similar for Linux. :-)
Dialup isn't going away anytime soon. Apart from the residential users, there are business users who use dialup when they're on the road. Not every hotel has broadband access at this point, but phone lines are pretty standard.
I do not see how that applies here. Did the congressman give specific examples? I think it is safe to say that Hitler had policies we now consider evil. At least one. It therefore is perfectly okay to use him as a reference for "legitimate governments that have laws that Americans consider evil." Reductio ad Absurdum/Hitlerum does not suggest that using that generalization is a fallacy, only that getting specific and saying "because Hitler promoted autobahns, autobahns are therefore evil." is absurd.
Perhaps the point is that the first mile is significantly more difficult than the next 61,999?
I absolutely recognize that it is detrimental to the rest of my life -- I do neglect things that are arguably more important. And I get frustrated sometimes, and seriously consider yanking the cord right out of the wall and throwing the computer in the closet for a few weeks.
It may not be a classic addiction in the physical sense, but I could see it being similar to something like a gambling addiction, as mentioned. I know that I'll sit down at the computer frequently, even when I know there is nothing new to see, because I just looked a few minutes earlier ;). And yet I will do a little surfing anyway.
And that is why I am typing this on Valentine's Day, instead of being out with my non-existent girlfriend.
I have already come up with a solution. Hint: KDE
In my personal opinion, the students in this case are guilty of some crime -- the only potential problem I have with the charges is the one relating to medical equipment. Unless they knew hospital computers were being infected, then I think that charge should be dropped. Intent does matter.
The hospital may not be criminally liable for anything, however I absolutely believe they have demonstrated negligence -- for failing to implement best practice security. If anyone got hurt, I expect that they do have a viable civil case against the hospital.
I don't know about where you work, but at my workplace the rules are pretty clear. No games on company owned equipment. So it may be your lunchtime, but if you do not own the PC, hiring a solicitor will be a waste of your time.
At work I primarily use a Linux workstation. I give it no care and feeding, as it requires none. It has no registry, it has no spyware, adware, or virii. Completely boring, untinteresting, and extremely useful. Perfect for me, as I am more interested in doing my job than fighting my PC.
And at home I primarily use a Macintosh running OSX. Similar experience to Linux, better graphics, better applications, but fundamentally the same result -- my day to day experience does not center around the operating system and dealing with it's bugs, security risks, and annoying "features." I had gotten so used to dealing with Windows that the first few weeks of using my Mac I kept feeling like I was missing something. Then I figured out what it was :-).
The real solution -- Microsoft should be sending free updates to all registered XP owners with updated CD's that contain pre-patched installations.
I'm serious. This is Microsoft we're talking about. THE example of a company completely losing touch with reality.
What does a office computer need that a 32MB video card can't handle? For at least 6 years we've had plenty of power to manipulate a 2D graphical interface at any common resolution (say, up to 1600x1200) with essentially instant updates. Why spend money on one part that has no need to be faster? Or does your company allow you to play games on work time...?
Every single header line you listed is put there by the e-mail client. Without a Message-ID field, some mail servers will add one. But it will not be nearly as descriptive as the one you have there. And the mail server software should identify the envelope sender address (the address specified during the SMTP conversation). Some mail server software will also added Received header fields that include the envelope recipient (specified during the SMTP conversation). qmail is an example I can think of immediately. But not all software will do that, and the entire remainder of the message, headers & body alike, are supplied by the e-mail client.
Nah, I still say that you really win the argument. Because what you just pointed out is that doing a simple task in Windows can change depending on how you have configured it. Not just between different versions of Windows, but the same version -- with and without the welcome screen disabled.
Ok, and i give the same answer to people who whine about DNA databases.
make it voluntary, but everyone who doesnt will immideately be locked up for any crime committed untill they can find a better way of proving their innocence. let see who gets bored 1st.
What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? That is a fundamental attribute of our criminal justice system. Are you advocating that we rewrite it as "guilty until proven innocent"?
but as a person who doesnt mind, i naturally feel suspicious of those who do, what are you hiding?
Everybody is hiding something. There are many things in my life that are not illegal in the slightest, nor are they immoral by societal standards, and yet I would prefer to keep them to myself. All of my life is none of your business, and all of my life outside of my workplace is none of my employer's business.
So, instead ... WE will be the "other provider." And because we are a CLEC, we are very enthusiastic about taking customers away from Verizon and Qworst.
Tip: Quit using the MacDonalds case as an example of frivilous litigation. You have just demonstrated that you don't know what you're talking about on at least one topic, so informed people are just going to ignore the rest of what you're trying to say.
Seriously. Research it.
Bah. I listen to music on headphones all the time. I get uncomfortable with the sound level well before it becomes a danger to my hearing. If you are willing to endure pain while listening to your music, you deserve the resulting hearing loss. It's a little piece of Darwin in action.
Except those are no more likely than earbuds to damage your hearing. In order to cause damage, the volume has to be high enough to hurt. You ever hear something at 110+ decibels? Holy shiat, you deserve what you get if you cannot respond properly to pain stimuli.
And while I'm ranting... what about concerts? I went to an Aerosmith concert a few years ago, and the sound was so loud it was distorting in my ear. I mean... LOUD. Shouldn't we be suing them too? Especially since we can't turn down the volume in that situation.
Oh wait... personal responsibility. Almost forgot it existed. As it seems the person who brought the suit did as well. Either that or he's just looking for money. That might explain going after Apple instead of smaller fish. No, it can't be, he's definitely looking out for all of our best interests...
I think part of the problem is that there are no judges or warrants involved...
I'd expect Google to freely remove any news site that does not want to be represented on Google News. If they do that, instead of holding out for the news organizations to band together (assuming that would actually occur), then the demonstration will be very quick and to the point. As others have mentioned, I have definitely gone to many news sites via Google News that I would never have bothered going to otherwise.
I can see that a guide would be helpful. Not necessarily for the raw technical stuff -- OS's and routers have been IPv6 capable for the most part for such a long time. But there ought to be a guide to help people really understand what's going on. We've been dealing with dotted quad for a very long time, and we're used to it. Just the notation alone for IPv6 requires a change of mindset. IMO that's going to be the biggest stumbling block to converting.
It was a good point, though. Quoting conservation of energy is of extremely limited value when discussing nutrition. It does not matter that at a basic level it is true. What matters is that there are processes at work that are complex enough to make it irrelevant. People who argue conservation of energy are inevitably heading toward the argument that it takes X energy to do Y physical labor, regardless of who is doing it, so you must be overeating. Of course, the very first problem is that food is not directly fuel for the body. You cannot simply say that "X amount of food" translates to "Y amount of Calories", despite what what the nutritional label says. Perhaps naturally thin people just have fast moving or inefficient digestive systems and they shit out 80% of all the Calories in the food they eat, where the naturally fat person absorbs 80%. Without actually knowing the energy in to the system, how do you try to argue conservation of energy in the first place?
The thin people who never exercise only get to feel morally superior for a while. And then they die. That's the beauty of it. Unless you are very obese indeed, the bigger risk factor to your health is lack of exercise, not a few extra pounds. There's a guy who works across the hall from me who is quite thin, has been for all his life, and doesn't exercise a bit. A bit of a shocker a few years ago when he went to the doctor and found out that his blood pressure was about twice normal (or something like that -- the nurse gave him aspirin to chew on and called an ambulance, even though he had no symptoms other than such high pressure), and his cholesterol was in the mid-200's. Ooops. So much for feeling superior.