I am not passing judgment on the Chinese. I am passing judgment on human beings. More specifically I am passing judgment on human beings who are dictators.
You can dilute and diverge the argument over more trivial cultural differences (nice try), but the topic is about censorship and more generally human rights, and not more specifically (as you imply) about a cultures spitting habits.
Dilute and diverge, huh? To be fair (and not to offer an defense of the original post), using the term "dictators" in a vague, hand-wavy ill-defined manner, implying that "cultural differences" are generally "trivial", and then using that overbroad dismissal to imply that "human rights" is a singular, absolute and universal truth suggests to me you're not a student of history, politics, or human nature.
I'd suggest folks with a similar politically-correct set of assumptions start with a slow reading of Wikipedia article on human rights and make a list of all shit they they haven't read, studied, or heard about, all the while keeping in mind that China is a permanent member of the Security Council. Learning something about China and its history and culture wouldn't hurt, either. Spitting habits may not play much of a role, but I'd wager that there's plenty that does.
[I]n 1998, Obama stated that he would Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons... I look around at the social networking sites, and see that no one seems to be mentioning this; this freaks me out to the core
Dude, it freaks me out, too. I already have eleventy million good reasons to vote for him without needing one more reason, however good. Not to worry, though; they won't let Canadians vote.
Microsoft doesn't want anyone to know that so they'll frighten kids with fire and brimstone to protect their business model. Brilliant!
If they, or anyone else, do make inroads, I expect much of their success will go the way of the Just Say No or abstinence programs, but not before bits of it start infiltrating the educational system.
Maybe what they need to is start earlier. Instead of allowing kindergarten teachers to instruct little Jimmy that sharing is A Good Thing, and that people who don't share are rude and bad people, teachers can be mandated to offer pedagogical instruction on the various licensing alternatives available so little Jimmy can protect his toys from little Susie and little Bobby, and that nutty sandal-wearing kids who insists on giving stuff to everyone that asks.
Reminding or otherwise educating people of your "in the beginning" points would go a long way, but then you'd still be faced with general ignorance of the "in the beginning" principles of copyright law (not to mention the apathy that comes with identifying oneself as a "consumer"). You'd also have to stave off the content industry from confusing the issues or otherwise mucking things up for everyone while they struggle for relevance and control.
It's an uphill battle, but in the end, we tend to get what we deserve. That's a cynic's way of saying that educating is probably the only answer. When a politician stands up and says "IP infringment is the single greatest threat to our economy", I don't blame Microsoft, or those lining the politician's pockets, but the ordinary folks who, by not knowing any better, allowed this to happen.
Just seeing that the name of this new command is the "cyber command" makes me want to run right out and hack a Gibson.
I think the Gibson is scheduled to be replaced. At least if the scene in Breach, where the Chris Cooper character storms into the CIA server room and demands that all the equipment be replaced with "mumble mumble Red Hat Linux Enterprise 5! mumble mumble Gigabit! mumble mumble" is any indication.
I expect hackers in the future will be clicking icons on a Gnome desktop. Only the old-timers will remember the days when we used spooky coloured one-character-at-a-time terminals, and performed incredible feats of hackery while being simultaneously threatened by a supervillain and distracted with a blowjob from a supermodel.
LOL. Nor are most Starbucks patrons, it seems. Those folks in line are mostly ordering "drinks" which, from what I can gather, amount to a slice of chocolate cake thrown into a blender with some coffee, and served up with whip cream in a plastic cup and a straw. I guess drinking coffee out of a cup while using a fork to eat your desert is too fattening, or maybe just too old skool.;-)
That said, I agree about the "comfy chair" environment. Whether you want to socialise, hit on babes using Thinkpads (I've seen them!), or just hang out, it's hard to beat. The fact that people are conducting actual business (interviews, meetings, etc.) in those same comfy chairs shouldn't surprise anybody.
As for the wireless thing, it's obviously a business decision to counteract the falling stock price and stave off competition from the bottom feeders like MacDonalds and donut stores, but it does translate into a nice perk for Starbucks patrons. I have ATT DSL, so I believe I have (or soon will have) free wireless, but I've not bothered yet to check it out yet as I already have a comfy chair and espresso machine. If I do get free wireless, then I expect I'll be spending more time sitting among the "coffee drink" drinkers.
Re:Unix syndrome
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Anything that isn't prohibited is not only allowed, but also ethical.
There may be some truth in that, but I don't see how that applies to interpersonal behaviour. My own preference is to defer to what my grandmother taught me: ethics is insisting on doing what's right even when no one is looking.
She also taught me to the principle of keeping things simple, both from a moral perspective and practical one. I never asked, but I'm sure she preferred vi to emacs.
When we're running Windows 7, Internet Explorer 8.0 in Protected Mode, and IIS 7.0 on Windows Server 2008, fools like you are still going to be apologizing for every bug in by bringing up bugs from Microsoft products 5+ years ago.
So... you're dismissing the long and tiresome history of Microsoft's security record by stating that the next version of Windows, IE, etc. will be the most secure version ever?
Normally I don't use inflammatory terms like "apologist", but in this case, I think the characterisation is appropriate. If there's anything tiresome in the matter, it's not those who take the opportunity to point out the history, but those who repeatedly insist that doing so is somehow unfair, undeserved, or worse, somehow not relevant.
I just have a question for any legal scholars or experts in this field...
Well, you've come to the right place. I'm certain the Slashdot audience consists of constitutional scholars, department heads in the Department of Homeland Security, employees of Customs and Border Inspection, and lots of ordinary folks who just happen to have law degrees and keep up with relevant legislation.
Or maybe not.
The article, however, does offer the following comment:
If conducted inside the country, such searches would require a warrant and probable cause, legal experts said.
In contrast to many Slashdot articles, this one is especially worth reading, notwithstanding that the last article on the same subject was fairly vague on the nature and extent of the searches (when it wasn't discussing a particular legal case) and provided few examples that anyone could relate to.
I point out the value of the article also for the benefit of those ready and eager to chime in with multiple, redundant TrueCrypt suggestions to save everyone else the wasted screen real estate. Put another way, this is serious, folks. More depressingly, the subject of the lawsuit is a FOIA request, and doesn't seek to address the legality of what is happening.
How often does a car catch file after a crash? Only very rarely.
Wrong. Everyone knows that cars always explode after a crash. Sometimes, though, the explosion happens after the driver and occupants escape to a safe distance.
I've seen it myself hundreds of times, both on TV and in movies.
Men are not attracted to "big boobs and ass" to the exclusion of all else because those qualities are universally associated with the ability to carry on the gene line by bearing and raising children, but because they've watched too much porn.
Women are not attracted to "strong and handsome" (especially at ovulation time), or alternatively, rich and powerful, because those qualities are indicative of someone who can provide and protect, but because they read about it in a magazine.
The object of dating is to make more friends.
Women never ever have relations with a man solely because they want to get pregnant. This is particularly true for girls in their teens, and women in their forties.
Both a mother and father are absolutely required to raise a normal, healthy child. It is untrue to suggest that it's in any way acceptable acceptable to be a single parent. Recent medical advances don't disprove this, and are mere curiousities that have no effect on the actions or mores of society as a whole. Who cares what gays and lesbians think. It's a fact they're all going to hell.
Everyone wants security but it's a lie to say that women absolutely need it and will demand it first among all things. Men and women are not animals, and any similarity to the behaviour of animals on the NatGeo channel is a mere coincidence.
It's a myth that men will seek a great number of sex partners. See above. What men really want is long-term companionship.
Woman really prefer dogs to cats.
Marriage is not a legal contract that involves bargaining and an exchange of money and property. Marriage is a union of love, and the historical nature of it should be dismissed as an unfortunate error. The reason why the rich continue to insist that their lawyers handle it is simply because their lawyers need the work. The main cause of arguments and divorce is never money
It's a myth that a woman's sex drive decreases during pregnancy. It does not disappear for an extended time after childbirth. In fact, the woman regards the man in the same manner as when they were dating, and the man regards the woman's changed attitudes and weight gain as enhancing her attractiveness and desirability.
Love conquers all.
Women who choose to leave or divorce are routinely criticised on Oprah, and it is false to suggest they have near universal sympathy from everyone, or free access to the local district attorney to pursue financial claims.
Men who choose to leave or divorce are never regarded as irresponsible or deadbeats.
It is not true that men have few rights with respect to custody, other than the freedom to hire a lawyer of their own choosing to pursue a protracted and expensive legal case in a court system that vastly prefers the rights of the mother. Women never deny or otherwise interfere with visitation rights for capricious reasons. That simply doesn't happen.
Writing ascerbic posts on Slashdot on the subject of mating is proof of a history of bad relationships, bad choices, and/or failed marriages. It is "unpossible" that the poster is simply having fun reiterating fairly mundane observations made by him and countless others for longer than most care to remember.
Smooch! My apologies, of course, for presuming Slashdot is primarily a male audience.;-) No offense meant.
From a sexual point of view, most women are still part conditioned and part pre-programmed to want male ahem companionship.
I take it you haven't fathered any offspring. That "want" you're referring to is at its height during the brief courtship phase. Past that, it's replaced with something very different.
Here's how it works. The girl gets pregnant and your "companionship" privileges are revoked with occasional but increasingly rare exceptions using rules that only a woman could understand.
The child is born. Companionship has been replaced by sharing of duties. A year or two passes, and the privileges return occasionally, but only if you've met your workload. That continues for several years (in an ideal environment) until lust and love are relegated to "remember when?" memories. The bond between the mother and child is strong and unbreakable. The bond between the two of you is weak. You're now living the life of someone who's entered into a series of complex, interwined legal and financial agreements. Satisfy all those agreements and you may reach the 6-7 year mark. Fail, or complain about the loss of companionship, you'll discover what misery really means.
If you've come this far, and you're unhappy, then it's hookers and blackjack for you (she's busy and has "her" kids to think about). On the other hand, if she's unhappy, she will consider you as unimportant, and leave. The legal and financial agreements stay, so she gets the kids and house, and you get the bills. The world will be supportive of her decision, and you end up like a stray dog wandering the streets.
Let's all be friends, instead.
Only if you were friends to begins with. Good friends are sufficiently motivated to work things out. But then, ask yourself often people marry their friends?
I want to get ten years' worth of email off Yahoo and to my local hard drive so I can ditch the service if the MS buyout goes through
Using fetchmail and procmail? A simple 3-line procmail recipe could forward the mail to user@gmail.com, for example. Equally short and simple recipes could sort your mail into different folders.
If you're using Windows, you can download the email using your favourite email client using POP3 (forwarding all the mesesages to Gmail, if desired) would also work fine. Better yet, install Cygwin and use the first approach.
As a final note, it's worth pointing out that the possibility of such a changeover, irrespective of whether it happens, is a strong argument in favour of maintaining your email storage. A bit more work, perhaps, but more satisfying in the end.
Could this be the first superhero comic where the audience roots for the villain and is constantly happy throughout the comic only to get really let down in the end?
Naah. For someone to root for a villain, the villain has to be endowed with a certain measure of cool, or otherwise be extraordinarily interesting. In this scenario, we'd likely see a slow-moving and slightly stupid superhero dressed in a costume emblazoned with the letters WGA, a belt decorated with animated icons, a magic red "Reboot" button on his wrist, and cape with a big blue "e" on it. When not pressing the magic button, he'd be spending his time shouting at a motley collection of unwashed, bearded, sandal-wearing villains, or, when the action really heats up, throwing a chair or two.
Personally, I find the majority of tags being used are pointless...
If it helps, you may want to consider doing what I do and regard the tags as you would the graffiti on the walls of a bathroom stall: similarly pointless, irrelevent, badly written, but occasionally informative or even entertaining if you have nothing better to do.
Come to think of it, you may want to extend that approach to the comments, as well.;-)
Your sentiments are shared, but it's worth pointing out we're also responsible for Anne Murray, Gordon Lightfoot and Celine Dion.
So in fact, the $5 is a savings when it comes to all Canadian taxes. That's what I mean by a small problem -- $5 for music -- solving a large problem -- many hundreds of dollars for law regulation, enforcement, and court fees; not to mention the resources of those court personnel and the delays towards court cases that actually matter -- not that we have many murders in this country.
The suddenoutbreakofcommonsense might work in Canada, but in the U.S., it's a very different story. I'm reminded of the quote that the difference between Candians and Americans is that a Canadian will yield to authority, but an American will bow to power. Here, attempting to pass legislation to remove power from those who have jurisdiction (or otherwise eliminate the profit motive) from such diverse interests as the court system, law enforcement, the legal profession, trade groups and big business will, to put it simply, will fail miserably. The chants of Communist! (or worse, Liberal!) from the general population may have something to do do with it, to say nothing of the cultural notion that any tax is an infringement on liberty.
I guess we all get the kind government we deserve.
"Open the pod bay doors, HAL." "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave."
My take on the matter is that the reason that's all you can think of is that everything else is inappropriate, inefficient or simply too goofy for consideration.
Not to anthropomorphise electronic devices (I know, they don't like it when you do that), but I think they'd prefer to be treated anonymously and respond the most basic of instructions only. And we'd prefer they remain that way, except in very limited circumstances where the device is named Lenore.
In the Star Trek movies you'll find something similar to the above, with an occasional "Tea, Early Gray, Hot" for good measure, but the rest of the time everyone is interacting with devices using... wait for it... keys and buttons. And this is into the technologically advanced future where most everything is a device, including crew members. Seeing Picard, for example, say "Computer, send a message to Data telling him to work on his joke-telling skills", or to use the article's example, [asking] his phone for a song by Mississippi John Hurt, would be seen by everyone as a ridiculous use of technology and dismissed as absurd.
Voice recognition, in the abstract, is fascinating and no doubt fun, but I wouldn't want to live in a Tourettes-like world where everyone is shouting out instructions to unthinking devices, let alone work in a cubicle where the next guy's phone conversation are competing with the noise of his regular work.
So past opening and closing doors, keyboards it is. Or for those unskilled in the expressive art of the command-line, a mouse or function buttons.
Finally someone else who sees (or hears) through the Beatlemania hype. Thank you for that post.
Yer welcome.;-)
The OP's issue is an interesting one, and is illustrative of the many issues concerning on-line distribution of music. That said, I can't help but find it funny for a number of different reasons. My first record was a '45 of 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' on the 'Apple' logo. I outgrew both the recording and the crappy turntable I used to play it on in short order, and discovered the Rolling Stones allowing me to relegate Beatles' recordings to the same category hippies could be said to belong to. In those days, it was fair to categorise people into either a Beatles camp or Stones camp. The generalisations for both groups were, I think, justified.
If there's any nostalgic element to the music made in those years, I wouldn't attribute it the pop music of the day that was forced down the throats of anyone and everyone with a radio, despite the fact I got laid to much of it. The Stones were interesting (still are, in many respects), but much more interesting music followed in the years after. Nostalgia is comforting, but I'd rather listen to scratchy old recordings of Lou Reed, or some of the really interesting music (typically orginating in England) during the 70's or early 80's than be caught singing along to a Beatles hit of any era. Millions of middle-aged housewives would disagree, of course.
So, for the OP, I wish him well on his efforts to create a collection of whatever floats his boat; for many new to collecting, doing so can be as fun and the pursuit can have an almost noble quality to it. For me, there's too much interesting music being made today to bother with relistening to what's already been played to death, or simply wasn't that great to begin with. Besides, for a $10/month usenet subscription you can download the Full Collection of Everyone before the first month is up and boredom sets in during the second month. That isn't to say that watching a documentary showing old footage of John Lydon singing about the monarchy doesn't still get my hands all sweaty.
I bought a bunch of these for use at home. They seemed to work fairly well at first, and offered some fun when people would ask how I installed stuff onto something that that small and with no CD. On the down side, you can't stack them on top of each other because the amount of heat being radiated. Then there's the crappy Rhine NIC (or crappy NIC in combination with sundry other crappy components): moderate NFS usage would result in my logs filling up with kernel messages about lost packets, and one unit, which was to function as a dedicated log server, also lost packets.
Since then, I've sold them off to friends at a discount and picked up a few Soekris 5501s to replace them; oddly enough, they also use similar NICs, but I've never seen or experienced any problems whatsoever. I doubt I'll spend any money on VIA products in the future, but I'm sure they work well enough for many who do buy them. Either way, low power systems, when used appropriately can't be beat and for the average consumer, and they're definitely a nice improvement over those ubiquitous blue boxes bearing the Linksys logo.
See: Moonies, Scientology, any number of local Jesus franchises in USA, and yes, even the Mormons, tho they succeeded in all points listed above so long ago that no one remembers they are a cult.
Agreed, but have you have noticed that Mormons tend to be really nice people? I'm serious. It's like Romney -- no one can really find fault with him except to say his hair is too perfect, that he's just a successful businessman, or that he's Mormon.
I have zero patience for the Protestant evangelical crowd and less for members of any cult, but Mormons, at least in my experience, tend to be shiny happy people that don't really bother anyone. Even the ex-Mormons I've met seem to have few bad things to say and if they do, you can't help but notice there's a certain lingering nostalgia in their eyes. That's not to say their beliefs aren't loony, but if members of cults were as benign as the typical Mormon, I wonder if anyone would notice, or care.
Firstly, for governments to "encourage" private corporations to help the poor basically means: the government should give the rich some money, and the rich will, in turn, give a fraction of that to the poor.
Indeed. But they don't even have to that -- it'll just trickle down.
Windows has supported '/' as a path separator since about NT 3.1... The only app that doesn't work with it is cmd.exe, because it uses that as a command line switch.
And where is it, I wonder, that you are routinely typing path information?
Between the goofy directory structure and the absence of meaningful $PATH (hello Program \Files and shortcuts!), pointing out a feature that's not a feature merits a "LOL" moderation.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not passing judgment on the Chinese. I am passing judgment on human beings. More specifically I am passing judgment on human beings who are dictators.
You can dilute and diverge the argument over more trivial cultural differences (nice try), but the topic is about censorship and more generally human rights, and not more specifically (as you imply) about a cultures spitting habits.
Dilute and diverge, huh? To be fair (and not to offer an defense of the original post), using the term "dictators" in a vague, hand-wavy ill-defined manner, implying that "cultural differences" are generally "trivial", and then using that overbroad dismissal to imply that "human rights" is a singular, absolute and universal truth suggests to me you're not a student of history, politics, or human nature.
I'd suggest folks with a similar politically-correct set of assumptions start with a slow reading of Wikipedia article on human rights and make a list of all shit they they haven't read, studied, or heard about, all the while keeping in mind that China is a permanent member of the Security Council. Learning something about China and its history and culture wouldn't hurt, either. Spitting habits may not play much of a role, but I'd wager that there's plenty that does.
[I]n 1998, Obama stated that he would Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons ... I look around at the social networking sites, and see that no one seems to be mentioning this; this freaks me out to the core
Dude, it freaks me out, too. I already have eleventy million good reasons to vote for him without needing one more reason, however good. Not to worry, though; they won't let Canadians vote.
Microsoft doesn't want anyone to know that so they'll frighten kids with fire and brimstone to protect their business model. Brilliant!
If they, or anyone else, do make inroads, I expect much of their success will go the way of the Just Say No or abstinence programs, but not before bits of it start infiltrating the educational system.
Maybe what they need to is start earlier. Instead of allowing kindergarten teachers to instruct little Jimmy that sharing is A Good Thing, and that people who don't share are rude and bad people, teachers can be mandated to offer pedagogical instruction on the various licensing alternatives available so little Jimmy can protect his toys from little Susie and little Bobby, and that nutty sandal-wearing kids who insists on giving stuff to everyone that asks.
Reminding or otherwise educating people of your "in the beginning" points would go a long way, but then you'd still be faced with general ignorance of the "in the beginning" principles of copyright law (not to mention the apathy that comes with identifying oneself as a "consumer"). You'd also have to stave off the content industry from confusing the issues or otherwise mucking things up for everyone while they struggle for relevance and control.
It's an uphill battle, but in the end, we tend to get what we deserve. That's a cynic's way of saying that educating is probably the only answer. When a politician stands up and says "IP infringment is the single greatest threat to our economy", I don't blame Microsoft, or those lining the politician's pockets, but the ordinary folks who, by not knowing any better, allowed this to happen.
Just seeing that the name of this new command is the "cyber command" makes me want to run right out and hack a Gibson.
I think the Gibson is scheduled to be replaced. At least if the scene in Breach, where the Chris Cooper character storms into the CIA server room and demands that all the equipment be replaced with "mumble mumble Red Hat Linux Enterprise 5! mumble mumble Gigabit! mumble mumble" is any indication.
I expect hackers in the future will be clicking icons on a Gnome desktop. Only the old-timers will remember the days when we used spooky coloured one-character-at-a-time terminals, and performed incredible feats of hackery while being simultaneously threatened by a supervillain and distracted with a blowjob from a supermodel.
I'm not much of a coffee drinker ...
;-)
LOL. Nor are most Starbucks patrons, it seems. Those folks in line are mostly ordering "drinks" which, from what I can gather, amount to a slice of chocolate cake thrown into a blender with some coffee, and served up with whip cream in a plastic cup and a straw. I guess drinking coffee out of a cup while using a fork to eat your desert is too fattening, or maybe just too old skool.
That said, I agree about the "comfy chair" environment. Whether you want to socialise, hit on babes using Thinkpads (I've seen them!), or just hang out, it's hard to beat. The fact that people are conducting actual business (interviews, meetings, etc.) in those same comfy chairs shouldn't surprise anybody.
As for the wireless thing, it's obviously a business decision to counteract the falling stock price and stave off competition from the bottom feeders like MacDonalds and donut stores, but it does translate into a nice perk for Starbucks patrons. I have ATT DSL, so I believe I have (or soon will have) free wireless, but I've not bothered yet to check it out yet as I already have a comfy chair and espresso machine. If I do get free wireless, then I expect I'll be spending more time sitting among the "coffee drink" drinkers.
Anything that isn't prohibited is not only allowed, but also ethical.
There may be some truth in that, but I don't see how that applies to interpersonal behaviour. My own preference is to defer to what my grandmother taught me: ethics is insisting on doing what's right even when no one is looking.
She also taught me to the principle of keeping things simple, both from a moral perspective and practical one. I never asked, but I'm sure she preferred vi to emacs.
When we're running Windows 7, Internet Explorer 8.0 in Protected Mode, and IIS 7.0 on Windows Server 2008, fools like you are still going to be apologizing for every bug in by bringing up bugs from Microsoft products 5+ years ago.
... you're dismissing the long and tiresome history of Microsoft's security record by stating that the next version of Windows, IE, etc. will be the most secure version ever?
So
Normally I don't use inflammatory terms like "apologist", but in this case, I think the characterisation is appropriate. If there's anything tiresome in the matter, it's not those who take the opportunity to point out the history, but those who repeatedly insist that doing so is somehow unfair, undeserved, or worse, somehow not relevant.
Well, you've come to the right place. I'm certain the Slashdot audience consists of constitutional scholars, department heads in the Department of Homeland Security, employees of Customs and Border Inspection, and lots of ordinary folks who just happen to have law degrees and keep up with relevant legislation.
Or maybe not.
The article, however, does offer the following comment:
In contrast to many Slashdot articles, this one is especially worth reading, notwithstanding that the last article on the same subject was fairly vague on the nature and extent of the searches (when it wasn't discussing a particular legal case) and provided few examples that anyone could relate to.
I point out the value of the article also for the benefit of those ready and eager to chime in with multiple, redundant TrueCrypt suggestions to save everyone else the wasted screen real estate. Put another way, this is serious, folks. More depressingly, the subject of the lawsuit is a FOIA request, and doesn't seek to address the legality of what is happening.
How often does a car catch file after a crash? Only very rarely.
Wrong. Everyone knows that cars always explode after a crash. Sometimes, though, the explosion happens after the driver and occupants escape to a safe distance.
I've seen it myself hundreds of times, both on TV and in movies.
You're absolutely right. I'm wrong on all counts.
Smooch! My apologies, of course, for presuming Slashdot is primarily a male audience. ;-) No offense meant.
From a sexual point of view, most women are still part conditioned and part pre-programmed to want male ahem companionship.
I take it you haven't fathered any offspring. That "want" you're referring to is at its height during the brief courtship phase. Past that, it's replaced with something very different.
Here's how it works. The girl gets pregnant and your "companionship" privileges are revoked with occasional but increasingly rare exceptions using rules that only a woman could understand.
The child is born. Companionship has been replaced by sharing of duties. A year or two passes, and the privileges return occasionally, but only if you've met your workload. That continues for several years (in an ideal environment) until lust and love are relegated to "remember when?" memories. The bond between the mother and child is strong and unbreakable. The bond between the two of you is weak. You're now living the life of someone who's entered into a series of complex, interwined legal and financial agreements. Satisfy all those agreements and you may reach the 6-7 year mark. Fail, or complain about the loss of companionship, you'll discover what misery really means.
If you've come this far, and you're unhappy, then it's hookers and blackjack for you (she's busy and has "her" kids to think about). On the other hand, if she's unhappy, she will consider you as unimportant, and leave. The legal and financial agreements stay, so she gets the kids and house, and you get the bills. The world will be supportive of her decision, and you end up like a stray dog wandering the streets.
Let's all be friends, instead.
Only if you were friends to begins with. Good friends are sufficiently motivated to work things out. But then, ask yourself often people marry their friends?
I want to get ten years' worth of email off Yahoo and to my local hard drive so I can ditch the service if the MS buyout goes through
Using fetchmail and procmail? A simple 3-line procmail recipe could forward the mail to user@gmail.com, for example. Equally short and simple recipes could sort your mail into different folders.
If you're using Windows, you can download the email using your favourite email client using POP3 (forwarding all the mesesages to Gmail, if desired) would also work fine. Better yet, install Cygwin and use the first approach.
As a final note, it's worth pointing out that the possibility of such a changeover, irrespective of whether it happens, is a strong argument in favour of maintaining your email storage. A bit more work, perhaps, but more satisfying in the end.
Could this be the first superhero comic where the audience roots for the villain and is constantly happy throughout the comic only to get really let down in the end?
Naah. For someone to root for a villain, the villain has to be endowed with a certain measure of cool, or otherwise be extraordinarily interesting. In this scenario, we'd likely see a slow-moving and slightly stupid superhero dressed in a costume emblazoned with the letters WGA, a belt decorated with animated icons, a magic red "Reboot" button on his wrist, and cape with a big blue "e" on it. When not pressing the magic button, he'd be spending his time shouting at a motley collection of unwashed, bearded, sandal-wearing villains, or, when the action really heats up, throwing a chair or two.
As long as residential ISPs only let you have 1 IP address, there will be LANs.
Huh? I have a residential phone line, and residential DSL, all through ATT -- I get 5 IP addresses.
Personally, I find the majority of tags being used are pointless ...
;-)
If it helps, you may want to consider doing what I do and regard the tags as you would the graffiti on the walls of a bathroom stall: similarly pointless, irrelevent, badly written, but occasionally informative or even entertaining if you have nothing better to do.
Come to think of it, you may want to extend that approach to the comments, as well.
This is why I love being Canadian.
Your sentiments are shared, but it's worth pointing out we're also responsible for Anne Murray, Gordon Lightfoot and Celine Dion.
So in fact, the $5 is a savings when it comes to all Canadian taxes. That's what I mean by a small problem -- $5 for music -- solving a large problem -- many hundreds of dollars for law regulation, enforcement, and court fees; not to mention the resources of those court personnel and the delays towards court cases that actually matter -- not that we have many murders in this country.
The suddenoutbreakofcommonsense might work in Canada, but in the U.S., it's a very different story. I'm reminded of the quote that the difference between Candians and Americans is that a Canadian will yield to authority, but an American will bow to power. Here, attempting to pass legislation to remove power from those who have jurisdiction (or otherwise eliminate the profit motive) from such diverse interests as the court system, law enforcement, the legal profession, trade groups and big business will, to put it simply, will fail miserably. The chants of Communist! (or worse, Liberal!) from the general population may have something to do do with it, to say nothing of the cultural notion that any tax is an infringement on liberty.
I guess we all get the kind government we deserve.
"Open the pod bay doors, HAL."
... wait for it ... keys and buttons. And this is into the technologically advanced future where most everything is a device, including crew members. Seeing Picard, for example, say "Computer, send a message to Data telling him to work on his joke-telling skills", or to use the article's example, [asking] his phone for a song by Mississippi John Hurt, would be seen by everyone as a ridiculous use of technology and dismissed as absurd.
"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave."
My take on the matter is that the reason that's all you can think of is that everything else is inappropriate, inefficient or simply too goofy for consideration.
Not to anthropomorphise electronic devices (I know, they don't like it when you do that), but I think they'd prefer to be treated anonymously and respond the most basic of instructions only. And we'd prefer they remain that way, except in very limited circumstances where the device is named Lenore.
In the Star Trek movies you'll find something similar to the above, with an occasional "Tea, Early Gray, Hot" for good measure, but the rest of the time everyone is interacting with devices using
Voice recognition, in the abstract, is fascinating and no doubt fun, but I wouldn't want to live in a Tourettes-like world where everyone is shouting out instructions to unthinking devices, let alone work in a cubicle where the next guy's phone conversation are competing with the noise of his regular work.
So past opening and closing doors, keyboards it is. Or for those unskilled in the expressive art of the command-line, a mouse or function buttons.
Finally someone else who sees (or hears) through the Beatlemania hype. Thank you for that post.
;-)
Yer welcome.
The OP's issue is an interesting one, and is illustrative of the many issues concerning on-line distribution of music. That said, I can't help but find it funny for a number of different reasons. My first record was a '45 of 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' on the 'Apple' logo. I outgrew both the recording and the crappy turntable I used to play it on in short order, and discovered the Rolling Stones allowing me to relegate Beatles' recordings to the same category hippies could be said to belong to. In those days, it was fair to categorise people into either a Beatles camp or Stones camp. The generalisations for both groups were, I think, justified.
If there's any nostalgic element to the music made in those years, I wouldn't attribute it the pop music of the day that was forced down the throats of anyone and everyone with a radio, despite the fact I got laid to much of it. The Stones were interesting (still are, in many respects), but much more interesting music followed in the years after. Nostalgia is comforting, but I'd rather listen to scratchy old recordings of Lou Reed, or some of the really interesting music (typically orginating in England) during the 70's or early 80's than be caught singing along to a Beatles hit of any era. Millions of middle-aged housewives would disagree, of course.
So, for the OP, I wish him well on his efforts to create a collection of whatever floats his boat; for many new to collecting, doing so can be as fun and the pursuit can have an almost noble quality to it. For me, there's too much interesting music being made today to bother with relistening to what's already been played to death, or simply wasn't that great to begin with. Besides, for a $10/month usenet subscription you can download the Full Collection of Everyone before the first month is up and boredom sets in during the second month. That isn't to say that watching a documentary showing old footage of John Lydon singing about the monarchy doesn't still get my hands all sweaty.
I'm still waiting on my Beatles on iTunes that was announced in early 2007!
I wouldn't worry about it. I have a friend who has a complete Beatles collection on LPs, and from what I've heard, you're not missing much.
and people who type in all lower-case and consider periods optional
Well, to be fair, the absence of punctuation may be due to the possibilitty he's a fan of the William Shatner School of Composition where one
needs to stop
and pause
before anything is said
for
dramatic effect.
I bought a bunch of these for use at home. They seemed to work fairly well at first, and offered some fun when people would ask how I installed stuff onto something that that small and with no CD. On the down side, you can't stack them on top of each other because the amount of heat being radiated. Then there's the crappy Rhine NIC (or crappy NIC in combination with sundry other crappy components): moderate NFS usage would result in my logs filling up with kernel messages about lost packets, and one unit, which was to function as a dedicated log server, also lost packets.
Since then, I've sold them off to friends at a discount and picked up a few Soekris 5501s to replace them; oddly enough, they also use similar NICs, but I've never seen or experienced any problems whatsoever. I doubt I'll spend any money on VIA products in the future, but I'm sure they work well enough for many who do buy them. Either way, low power systems, when used appropriately can't be beat and for the average consumer, and they're definitely a nice improvement over those ubiquitous blue boxes bearing the Linksys logo.
See: Moonies, Scientology, any number of local Jesus franchises in USA, and yes, even the Mormons, tho they succeeded in all points listed above so long ago that no one remembers they are a cult.
Agreed, but have you have noticed that Mormons tend to be really nice people? I'm serious. It's like Romney -- no one can really find fault with him except to say his hair is too perfect, that he's just a successful businessman, or that he's Mormon.
I have zero patience for the Protestant evangelical crowd and less for members of any cult, but Mormons, at least in my experience, tend to be shiny happy people that don't really bother anyone. Even the ex-Mormons I've met seem to have few bad things to say and if they do, you can't help but notice there's a certain lingering nostalgia in their eyes. That's not to say their beliefs aren't loony, but if members of cults were as benign as the typical Mormon, I wonder if anyone would notice, or care.
But I digress.
Back at you.
Firstly, for governments to "encourage" private corporations to help the poor basically means: the government should give the rich some money, and the rich will, in turn, give a fraction of that to the poor.
Indeed. But they don't even have to that -- it'll just trickle down.
Windows has supported '/' as a path separator since about NT 3.1... The only app that doesn't work with it is cmd.exe, because it uses that as a command line switch.
And where is it, I wonder, that you are routinely typing path information?
Between the goofy directory structure and the absence of meaningful $PATH (hello Program \Files and shortcuts!), pointing out a feature that's not a feature merits a "LOL" moderation.
Do you take offense if someone refers to the the perl language?
... ;-)
For starters, the language is Perl, not perl.
If you're referring to the executable, than maybe "perl language" doesn't merit any objections, aside from the fact that it's a tortured construct.
Two pedants walk into a bar