What's next? Are they going to start testing peoples' front doors to see if they're unlocked?
And that would be a bad thing? Some years ago cities and police departments figured out that abandoned building were a breeding place for crime and started going after landlords to either secure the property or face penalties ranging from fines to loss of the property. The result was that crime dropped, and the neighbourhood became livable.
Mind you I'm not suggesting an open network is analogous to a vacant crack house, but being a good and responsible neighbour is good for everyone involved, whether that's a residential area or the internet doesn't make much difference. It's perfectly reasonable that the responsibility is shared by everyone.
If one of my neighbours leaves their door open, that's fine by me. But if the habit or a laissez-faire attitude starts inviting problems (allowing strangers to party, kids hanging out, etc.) it's a different story altogether. Similarly, I couldn't care less if the average Windows user can't or won't grasp the necessity of securing his or her system, but if that system starts spewing out spam that ends up in my inbox, then yes, I would care. Someone taking the trouble to get involved and checking up on such dimwits can only be A Good Thing.
Stick to your department, which is upholding the law.
Given the state of affairs today, I'd prefer everyone be required to pass a proficiency test and receive a license to use a computer. No, I'm not kidding. Until that or something similar happens, the "law" is going to remain a hodge-podge of rules and regulations that remain mostly unenforced leaving people to think It's All Good and what people do or don't do doesn't really matter since no one's in charge anyway.
Why would this data be on a laptop in transit in the first place?
The answer to that question would provide some relevance, context and insight as to the why the decision was made. Aside from the obvious, of course.
I can't quote any specifics, but I remember hearing the tail end of an NPR story on the "laptop" incident mentioned in the article. Seems the person who had the laptop stolen worked for the VA and typically worked in the field and required routine access to a large database of records to verify claims or something similar. The impression I got listening to the story was that it was a case benign ignorance more than anything else. My guess is that kind of ignorance, both on the part of the laptop owner and his/her agency, wouldn't be unlike the widespread ignorance found in the private sector. I'll resist the too easy Blame Microsoft angle, but we do have a generation of computer users who grew up blissfully unconcerned with such notions of security, so it shouldn't surprise anyone when the folks in charge over-react, or hand down edicts to force everyone into line.
Government does have a role in setting agendas (ODF is a good example), so I guess this is a good thing. At the very least, it raises awareness.
What's better than having the trust and reliability of Microsoft paired with the strategy and insight of Yahoo!
I don't know, but I'm sure some marketing genius will come up with the answer and express it in a multi-line spam footer and have it appear on every other email that arrives in my inbox.
------------ The all-new My! Live! Microsoft! Yahoo! Bringing your online world together. Personalize your homepage. One place for your news, search, mail, and more... Register online now!
Yeah, you Yahoo/MSN/Hotmail users, I'm talking to you.
...before they are told to just take a print-screen of the document
Huh?
If we're talking about Acrobat, the option to save a PDF as a JPEG, etc. is already provided. Or are we talking about Acrobat Reader? Or an application that generates PDFs? Or just PDFs in general?
I know the article submitter doesn't know, given the normal PDF browser such as Acrobat statement which suggests to me that he's confusing his web browser with a PDF application.
That said, I'd like to think that the program used to author the PDF (a Corel program in this particular case) would be the proper place to make redactions or alterations. Alternatively, an after-the-fact hack could by converting the PDF to an image format, but I doubt hitting the print-screen key could be considered anything other than clumsy at best.
Inexpensive, biodegradable, and easy. Also helps you rid yourself of the notion that CDs/DVDs are anything more than bits of plastic that somehow merit being displayed on a shelf.
I went through this a couple of years ago. I had just under 2K CDs and spent a few weeks investigating storage alternatives which included everything from the consumer oriented 100-CD display racks for your living room, to large capacity wooden shelving, to painfully expensive specialised office cabinets. Complete waste of time.
Now, everything gets put into a paper window-less sleeve. Each CD gets a number, the relevant info is keyed into a database, and a simple label is applied to the outside of the sleeve. I figure it takes me about 20 seconds for each CD. Compare that to the time and expense of designing/printing/cutting up inserts for jewel cases (slim or otherwise), and you get the idea. If a database isn't your kind of thing, grepping a simple list should work just fine. As a side note, I entertained the idea of printing on the sleeves directly using a LaTeX template, but decided against it and use simple adhesive labels exclusively. Note that I opted for window-less sleeves to avoid having to design and print and insert for each CD.
As for "storing" all the CDs, I just modified a drawer by sectioning it off so that each section would hold exactly 100 CDs. The CDs are stored upright (to protect the CD) and arranged front to back, so finding and retrieving, say, CD number 0983, is quick and easy. Two drawers == 2K CDs. Easily expandable.
As for the old jewel cases, well, they were in mint condition so I gave them to a friend that collects music. Last I heard, he gave them away to a friend of his. I've reclaimed a huge amount of space in my office, and the clutter is gone. I have no "dusting" or similar nonsense to contend with, and made my life is a bit more sane by sticking a few plants on the shelves that were once reserved for CDs. Knowing that my CDs are protected in a cool dry place doesn't hurt, either.
You can buy sleeves directly from any paper manufacturer. There's plenty that offer specialised CD selections that will be happy to sell to you. Alternatively, you can buy a box of 1K from a reseller on eBay for just a few bucks.
As a final note, you may want to investigate something similar ready-made in the form of small metal or plastic boxes that resemble miniature hanging file folders; you can find these in most office-supply stores. The problem I've found with that approach, however, aside from the price, is that each hanging insert is prenumbered (a problem if for large collections) and requires you to squeeze 2 CDs into each. Hardly a safe approach considering how tightly they fit, not to mention that if you remove the entire insert from the box, you'll be carrying around 2 CDs instead of just the one you wanted.
So, as much as I hate chaufinism (either US or otherwise), this is not it but just a basic truth.
I don't know whether it can characterised as "chaufinism," but in the US people do seem to prefer driving themselves around, even when going to school, and insist that the the right hand side of the road is, well, the right side of the road on which to be driving.
The hard truth of the matter is dogs, like cats, cows, horses and just about any other animal you're familiar with is the result of selective breeding. There was no such thing as a German Shepherd or an English Sheepdog until someone decided (hundreds or more years ago) on what they liked (or needed) and went about breeding the offspring to come up with the desired result.
Breeding, regrettably, requires a certain amount of inbreeding or you won't get where you want to go. That includes everything from nationalities, to the English Royal Family down to cats and dogs. And with inbreeding, problems are likely to crop up so the process has to be carefully controlled.
How that process is managed or controlled is a wide-open subject, but typically it comes to down breeder's reputation and abilities in conjunction with the established rules of various organisations (the AKC being one example in the dog world) to which the breeder belongs. Effectively, an animal that wins shows is prized. To show an animal, a full documented history of the animal has to be provided. No papers, no ability to show.
When a breeder decides to give or sell off an animal without papers, the effect of that decision is twofold; first, the new owner lacks sufficient information to successfully breed the animal; and secondly, the new owner is prevented from ever being able to show the animal. The reasons behind it aren't capricious. The breeder has simply determined that his line of animals would be negatively impacted if "substandard" animals were allowed to breed, and the breed, in general, would be negatively impacted as well. Keep in mind that "substandard" can include everything from appearance and temperament, to genetic defects (bad hips, heart problems, eye problems, etc.). If a person doesn't care about a breed, that's fine. The responsibility of the continuing existence and success of a particular breed, however, has to fall on someone's shoulders, and that someone is ultimately the breeder. Consequently, substandard animals are almost always sold spayed or neutered.
If you want to get last place in a show, that's just fine. Somebody needs to get last place. What is their problem?
"Last place" is fine, but I think you're speaking metaphorically. Animals like that don't belong in breeding programs or shows (agility shows, etc. are the exceptions), but can and do make great pets. And judging from what the typical person has as a pet, it seems oddball animals are indeed popular and loved.
I'm sure they will be delivering them spayed and neutered. But for my $4000, I'd want one that had all its parts... And if one got out into the wild, would they pull a "Monsanto" (Monsanto demanded and got fees from farmers who ended up with genetically altered crops from cross polarization, not because they planted them)
My guess is that the same rules that apply to normal breeding would apply in this case. I'll speak from the point of view of dogs because that's what I'm familiar with, but I'm sure the same applies to cats as well.
Typically, when you buy from a breeder, the sale is made at the discretion of the breeder. Put another way, you get the animal (with all the parts) and the papers only if the breeder considers you responsible enough to continue the line and/or are interested and capable of showing the animal. Most breeders won't have anything to do with the general public, so the idea of getting a "pet" (either with or without all the parts) is out of the question.
The exception, of course, is in the case of where part of the litter is, for lack of a more polite term, substandard. Those animals won't get bred. If the breeder decides not to keep them around as a pet, they will be given to or sold to an interested buyer who is already known to the breeder (most breeders will maintain waiting lists that span years). The animal will be spayed or neutered beforehand, and the papers will be provided. In certain circumstances, an exception is made and the animal is let go without being spayed or neutered under an agreement that the animal will not be bred, and the papers are withheld indefinitely, or until such time that the new owner provides evidence that the animal was spayed or neutered after the fact.
The above doesn't apply to backyard breeders, puppy mills, pet stores, etc. so all bets are off as to what you get, or what the rules are. With respect to the article, my guess is that anyone breeding cats specifically for hypoallergenic qualities is looking to sell them as pets only and definitely wouldn't want them going out the door with all their parts.
Well crap. Now I'll have to make a photocopy of a $20 and send it to the RIAA for every copy of an mp3 I make. A copy for a copy, neither being denied anything, it's only fair, right?
That's selfish. Make the copy of the $20 bill available as a torrent, and send the RIAA a link to it.
Do you wish that Louis Pasteur didn't invent the pasteurization process too? Or are only current scientific advancements "mucking up" our food sources?
It's possible that the OP remembers cheese before it became the plastic-wrapped flavourless, dead, waxy stuff that fills the aisles of supermarkets today.
As for Wisconsin or cream cheese, I know I'm not at all interested in technological advances. The last time I had real (fresh, non-pasteurised and and unadulterated) milk or cream was on a farm, and that farm wasn't in Wisconsin. And it came from a decidedly low-tech bovine animal feeding on grass. Unsurprisingly, the farm makes world-famous cheese, the same way it had been making it for hundreds of years.
Granted lawmakers are... law makers, and as lawmakers their job is to pass laws, but I wonder to what degree anyone believes public policy (addressing the gambling problem, as opposed to getting their share) can be positively influenced by an act of criminalising personal behaviour.
That said, I'll bet my last dollar there's not a 50/50 chance it'll work.
We live in a nation where 45% of eligible voters believe the world is 6000 years old and their kids think WWF wrestlers are quality role models to be emulated.... It doesn't surprise me at all that people are smacking each other around with frying pans.
Dunno about frying pans, but I'm eagerly waiting for Nacho Libre. And I can't stand wrestling, let along Mexican wrestling.
The director was responsible for Napoleon Dynamite, so maybe there's a geek angle to the movie. Or this post, for that matter.
Just so you know, not all of these programs need admin rights to run; they need certain privs on certain folders (usually either write or modify to their program directory).
Yeah, but that's more of the same voodoo, isn't it? To the extent the Windows directory structure and associated permissions makes sense and are consistent, I wonder how the typical Windows administrator would find time to right-click his or her way through the file system, or bury their nose in the registry until everyone's gone home for the day, to determine what's what, let alone work out problems on a case-by-case basis, keeping track of all the changes.
Some time ago, I came up against a failed OfficeXP install. Reason? The user's $TEMP folder was owned by the user (novel concept), and had rwxr-xr-x permissions. (Converting those perms to the Windows' ACL equivalent I'll leave as an exercise for the reader.) Never mind the full admin rights of the user, the install failed consistently with a nondescript message. Not having the time or patience to narrow down the problem (no doubt SYSTEM needed write privileges or some such nonsense to create yet another goofy one-off log file), I changed the perms to 777, re-ran the install, and called it a day.
Personally, I think someone could write a book on the subject of Running as Non-Admin, but it would be a miserable read. As for possibility of the folks at Microsoft going through changes, good for them! They may yet discover treating everything as a file just works better, especially when you have to start paying attention. Even if that is a slippery slope that leads away from the Windows way of doing things.
Windows XP to run, and won't install on Windows 2K systems. Hrmmmm. How helpful.
Reminds of trying to slipstream an XP service pack using files located on a Win2K share. Running the 'upgrade' executable (Microsoft is now using lower case!), it just dies with some brief on-screen message about an error log being created. Which wouldn't be so bad as subsequently discovering the traditional -s switch (or was it the/s switch) is now the/integrate switch. Which is kindoflike downloading something from Microsoft and playing that guessing game to discover whether what you downloaded is an executable that does something (which you have little say in), a compressed archive of some sort that spits out its contents to some predefined location (about which you may be informed, but it's anybody's guess what happens next) and may or may not delete itself afterwards, or an executable that doesn't do anything but starts downloading something in the background. The last one is the scary one.
Where was I?
Oh, yeah. Windows programs are always cross-platform. Except when they're not. Personally, I think they'll just keeping making shit up and changing things until they figure it out. We're here to follow along. Who knows, maybe they'll discover Unix?
It's easy for you to bitch and moan and fear-monger about the ethics of human DNA in some rice... Meanwhile there are people whose well-being would trump these silly goddamn over-analytical beardo quack ideas and "what ifs"
What ifs? Is that meant to be imply some negative connotation to perfectly reasonable and serious concerns?
Here's a whatif, for you. What if we give hard working salt-of-the-earth farmers the chance to save some money and allow them to feed their cows animal protein instead of corn? Never mind the overly analytical issue of feeding herbivores other herbivores, there's livelihoods at risk, economies at stake, and benefits to go around for everyone.
Sorry, but the history of technological progress is littered with Really Bad Ideas that sounded really good at one time. Mad cow is just the latest, and a Google search will turn up as many as you want. Any radical idea deserves serious vetting, whether it takes the form of catcalls from the/. audience, or academic studies really isn't so important.
This is probably one of the most absurd and ill-informed posts I've read in a while.
I tried in vain to setup FreeBSD 6.0 as a SATA software raid machine. I was using a more recent motherboard with graphics, network and SATA integrated on-board. I think they are all VIA chipsets. I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running.
I bought a new motherboard without thinking too much about what I was buying and tried to install an operating system about which I knew just as little. Instead of taking the opportunity to make up for my obvious deficiencies, I quit when I realised my approach wouldn't work, but made a mental note to tell everyone about it when I had the chance.
I then tried Debian. All-in-all it was another less than positive experience. Both the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel versions of Sarge had problems with my hardware.
I popped in another CD and see what would happen, hoping that doing the same thing again would yield different results. It didn't.
I decided to explore Gentoo.
Despite, the fact that some people consider doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is a mark of insanity, I popped in yet another CD
Its working great with SATA and EVMS.
I was surprised that it worked.
It did require some source level tweaks
Well, it didn't really work, but someone told what I should be doing.
but part of the coolness I found with Gentoo is the very active user/support community and the tons of HowTos and guides.
Instead of visiting the FreeBSD website, where I could have found that FreeBSD offers a bewildering collection of well-written documentation in almost every imaginable format, I decided that The Handbook, the Books and Articles Online section, Publications, Web Resources, A Section For Newbies or The Documentation Project, or reading the documentation in/usr/share/doc, manpages (also available online, or subscribing to the mailing list or reading its online archives, or the newsgroups, didn't fit with the way I do things. Instead, I found some forum using Google's I'm Feeling Lucky that has little or nothing to do with FreeBSD but is definitely better than all those places I didn't visit.
Unless they've made a quantum leap in improvements, FreeBSD would NOT be my choice for a SATA raid server.
I firmly believe my anecdotal experience qualifies me to offer non-sequitors with hyperbole but without embarassment.
The obvious solution is to allow farmers to grow hemp
Obviously. But maybe start off more slowly so as not to upset the voters in the red states?
My idea would be first to start with buying cheap sugar from Cuba. That'll ease the ethanol transition, lower the price of soft drinks and snack foods, and resurrecting the popularity of smoking by making good cigars more fashionable. From there we can move to growing hemp.
Just think, one day we'll all be able to stay home and drink rum, smoke cigars or get stoned while watching I Love Lucy reruns, or fill up the tank with no worries.
Let's avoid the vulgar confusion of good writing and good grammar. Horrifying grammar is a common problem, but its not a problem I can fix in a semester-long class.
Sorry, but that's wrong. I have taught such classes (both to adults, and to young students), and you can indeed cram everything needed into single semester. Once upon a time, when Latin was taught and History wasn't referred to as Social Studies, basic grammar was a single-semester course of study. For most, the subject can be mind-numbingly dull, but without it you have no foundation on which to build anything. If a student can't parse a sentence, he most certainly won't understand how to form one, except perhaps by mimicry.
Put another way, no one has learned advanced mathematics without having gone through the requisite rote memorisation of multiplication tables at an early age. If I was in your position and the subject was teaching advanced algebra and I discovered that many students couldn't rattle of a multiplication table, I'd call up a time-out until the deficiency was corrected. And I'd ignore the groans knowing that everyone would then be in a position to move forward when done.
It also might be enlightening to pause for a moment and consider the reasons why students whose first language isn't English typically don't suffer from the "horrifying grammar" that you believe to be so widespread.
As for the discussions of style and clarity, I'd think those are moot in a class where the students are unable to recognise and hence use the basic parts of speech. Can't conjugate a verb or understand tense? If you can get past writing a full sentence, you'll choke in a paragraph or two, leaving the reader to wonder where the hell you are or going. Can't make sense of subjects and objects or know what a gerund is? Refrain from laughing (or crying) and nod approvingly when you hear: "I don't need to know, because me being an engineering student, it's not that important." Transitive and intransitive verb forms? No worries. The words "effect" and "affect" are homonyms and interchangeable, right? Cases? Who the fuck cares?! I've got a busy life and no way am I going to learn all this ablative, genetive, nominative, possessive gobbledygook. So what if I can't distinguish between "its" and "it's", or my overuse of subjunctive (whatever that is) is routinely criticised as bad style. An introduction to foreign languages to teach appreciation of derivations and, hence, meanings? No way! My students are American, and Latin is a dead language. Besides, that would be so unrelevant, irregardless.
If your target audience consists of engineers, your pupils can and will appreciate being taught standards and clear rules. The fact that you'd be covering ground that should be have been addressed in grade school should provide reason enough let alone an impetus.
Even putting that aside, these arguments are ridiculous. We have a problem of kids being subjected to predators on a website. The state has a duty (not even just a right, a duty) to ensure that if there are unacceptable risks, safeguards are put in place to assure that we've done all we reasonably can to protect the children. This is bad how?
First off, it's bad because it obscures the problem. Parenting is an obligation, and that obligation rests with the parents. The fact that most parents are busy, or tired, or spend too much time working doesn't lessen that obligation. Life sucks.
Second, it changes the problem. Kids who are taken advantage or molested are most often the victim of a family member or relative. The internet bogeyman is one in a million. Unfortunately for the Nancy Grace's of the world, it's tough to create a useful hysteria over a family member. The girl who is currently testifying before Congress about her ordeals was adopted. She's angry and upset that her pictures are floating around the internet, but the media would have us believe the problem is somehow with the "billion-dollar kiddy porn internet business" (a real quote), and not with her abusive father.
Third, an emotional subject often encourages emotional reactions. If no one can think rationally and clearly, or if lawmakers insist on pandering to their base using hot-button topics, nothing useful or constructive is accomplished. Moreover, the discussions that do occur in such an environment often take the form of "If you're not on our side, you're on the side of predators." Hardly a recipe for success.
And last, over-reacting and hastily making well-intentioned changes will result in unexpected consequences. If thinking of the children results in widepsread government involvement and routine invasion of privacy and loss of rights, I'd suggest we stop thinking of them as children altogether.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe it said on the FBI's report that it looked like the data had not been looked at.
If you don't find porn, what's to look at?
What's next? Are they going to start testing peoples' front doors to see if they're unlocked?
And that would be a bad thing? Some years ago cities and police departments figured out that abandoned building were a breeding place for crime and started going after landlords to either secure the property or face penalties ranging from fines to loss of the property. The result was that crime dropped, and the neighbourhood became livable.
Mind you I'm not suggesting an open network is analogous to a vacant crack house, but being a good and responsible neighbour is good for everyone involved, whether that's a residential area or the internet doesn't make much difference. It's perfectly reasonable that the responsibility is shared by everyone.
If one of my neighbours leaves their door open, that's fine by me. But if the habit or a laissez-faire attitude starts inviting problems (allowing strangers to party, kids hanging out, etc.) it's a different story altogether. Similarly, I couldn't care less if the average Windows user can't or won't grasp the necessity of securing his or her system, but if that system starts spewing out spam that ends up in my inbox, then yes, I would care. Someone taking the trouble to get involved and checking up on such dimwits can only be A Good Thing.
Stick to your department, which is upholding the law.
Given the state of affairs today, I'd prefer everyone be required to pass a proficiency test and receive a license to use a computer. No, I'm not kidding. Until that or something similar happens, the "law" is going to remain a hodge-podge of rules and regulations that remain mostly unenforced leaving people to think It's All Good and what people do or don't do doesn't really matter since no one's in charge anyway.
Why would this data be on a laptop in transit in the first place?
The answer to that question would provide some relevance, context and insight as to the why the decision was made. Aside from the obvious, of course.
I can't quote any specifics, but I remember hearing the tail end of an NPR story on the "laptop" incident mentioned in the article. Seems the person who had the laptop stolen worked for the VA and typically worked in the field and required routine access to a large database of records to verify claims or something similar. The impression I got listening to the story was that it was a case benign ignorance more than anything else. My guess is that kind of ignorance, both on the part of the laptop owner and his/her agency, wouldn't be unlike the widespread ignorance found in the private sector. I'll resist the too easy Blame Microsoft angle, but we do have a generation of computer users who grew up blissfully unconcerned with such notions of security, so it shouldn't surprise anyone when the folks in charge over-react, or hand down edicts to force everyone into line.
Government does have a role in setting agendas (ODF is a good example), so I guess this is a good thing. At the very least, it raises awareness.
What's better than having the trust and reliability of Microsoft paired with the strategy and insight of Yahoo!
...
I don't know, but I'm sure some marketing genius will come up with the answer and express it in a multi-line spam footer and have it appear on every other email that arrives in my inbox.
------------
The all-new My! Live! Microsoft! Yahoo!
Bringing your online world together. Personalize your homepage. One place for your
news, search, mail, and more
Register online now!
Yeah, you Yahoo/MSN/Hotmail users, I'm talking to you.
...before they are told to just take a print-screen of the document
Huh?
If we're talking about Acrobat, the option to save a PDF as a JPEG, etc. is already provided. Or are we talking about Acrobat Reader? Or an application that generates PDFs? Or just PDFs in general?
I know the article submitter doesn't know, given the normal PDF browser such as Acrobat statement which suggests to me that he's confusing his web browser with a PDF application.
That said, I'd like to think that the program used to author the PDF (a Corel program in this particular case) would be the proper place to make redactions or alterations. Alternatively, an after-the-fact hack could by converting the PDF to an image format, but I doubt hitting the print-screen key could be considered anything other than clumsy at best.
Inexpensive, biodegradable, and easy. Also helps you rid yourself of the notion that CDs/DVDs are anything more than bits of plastic that somehow merit being displayed on a shelf.
I went through this a couple of years ago. I had just under 2K CDs and spent a few weeks investigating storage alternatives which included everything from the consumer oriented 100-CD display racks for your living room, to large capacity wooden shelving, to painfully expensive specialised office cabinets. Complete waste of time.
Now, everything gets put into a paper window-less sleeve. Each CD gets a number, the relevant info is keyed into a database, and a simple label is applied to the outside of the sleeve. I figure it takes me about 20 seconds for each CD. Compare that to the time and expense of designing/printing/cutting up inserts for jewel cases (slim or otherwise), and you get the idea. If a database isn't your kind of thing, grepping a simple list should work just fine. As a side note, I entertained the idea of printing on the sleeves directly using a LaTeX template, but decided against it and use simple adhesive labels exclusively. Note that I opted for window-less sleeves to avoid having to design and print and insert for each CD.
As for "storing" all the CDs, I just modified a drawer by sectioning it off so that each section would hold exactly 100 CDs. The CDs are stored upright (to protect the CD) and arranged front to back, so finding and retrieving, say, CD number 0983, is quick and easy. Two drawers == 2K CDs. Easily expandable.
As for the old jewel cases, well, they were in mint condition so I gave them to a friend that collects music. Last I heard, he gave them away to a friend of his. I've reclaimed a huge amount of space in my office, and the clutter is gone. I have no "dusting" or similar nonsense to contend with, and made my life is a bit more sane by sticking a few plants on the shelves that were once reserved for CDs. Knowing that my CDs are protected in a cool dry place doesn't hurt, either.
You can buy sleeves directly from any paper manufacturer. There's plenty that offer specialised CD selections that will be happy to sell to you. Alternatively, you can buy a box of 1K from a reseller on eBay for just a few bucks.
As a final note, you may want to investigate something similar ready-made in the form of small metal or plastic boxes that resemble miniature hanging file folders; you can find these in most office-supply stores. The problem I've found with that approach, however, aside from the price, is that each hanging insert is prenumbered (a problem if for large collections) and requires you to squeeze 2 CDs into each. Hardly a safe approach considering how tightly they fit, not to mention that if you remove the entire insert from the box, you'll be carrying around 2 CDs instead of just the one you wanted.
YMMV.
Don't forget "latte-drinking"
And turtle neck-wearing.
So, as much as I hate chaufinism (either US or otherwise), this is not it but just a basic truth.
;-)
I don't know whether it can characterised as "chaufinism," but in the US people do seem to prefer driving themselves around, even when going to school, and insist that the the right hand side of the road is, well, the right side of the road on which to be driving.
Or did you mean "chauvinism?"
How to bypass and disable the Genuine Windows Validation Check (from ...
I think you can narrow down those 13 steps to 3:
$ cd %ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Application Data\Windows Genuine Advantage\data
$ echo "" > data.dat
$ attrib +h -r data.dat
Why put "Not Show Quality" on the papers?
The hard truth of the matter is dogs, like cats, cows, horses and just about any other animal you're familiar with is the result of selective breeding. There was no such thing as a German Shepherd or an English Sheepdog until someone decided (hundreds or more years ago) on what they liked (or needed) and went about breeding the offspring to come up with the desired result.
Breeding, regrettably, requires a certain amount of inbreeding or you won't get where you want to go. That includes everything from nationalities, to the English Royal Family down to cats and dogs. And with inbreeding, problems are likely to crop up so the process has to be carefully controlled.
How that process is managed or controlled is a wide-open subject, but typically it comes to down breeder's reputation and abilities in conjunction with the established rules of various organisations (the AKC being one example in the dog world) to which the breeder belongs. Effectively, an animal that wins shows is prized. To show an animal, a full documented history of the animal has to be provided. No papers, no ability to show.
When a breeder decides to give or sell off an animal without papers, the effect of that decision is twofold; first, the new owner lacks sufficient information to successfully breed the animal; and secondly, the new owner is prevented from ever being able to show the animal. The reasons behind it aren't capricious. The breeder has simply determined that his line of animals would be negatively impacted if "substandard" animals were allowed to breed, and the breed, in general, would be negatively impacted as well. Keep in mind that "substandard" can include everything from appearance and temperament, to genetic defects (bad hips, heart problems, eye problems, etc.). If a person doesn't care about a breed, that's fine. The responsibility of the continuing existence and success of a particular breed, however, has to fall on someone's shoulders, and that someone is ultimately the breeder. Consequently, substandard animals are almost always sold spayed or neutered.
If you want to get last place in a show, that's just fine. Somebody needs to get last place. What is their problem?
"Last place" is fine, but I think you're speaking metaphorically. Animals like that don't belong in breeding programs or shows (agility shows, etc. are the exceptions), but can and do make great pets. And judging from what the typical person has as a pet, it seems oddball animals are indeed popular and loved.
I'm sure they will be delivering them spayed and neutered. But for my $4000, I'd want one that had all its parts... And if one got out into the wild, would they pull a "Monsanto" (Monsanto demanded and got fees from farmers who ended up with genetically altered crops from cross polarization, not because they planted them)
My guess is that the same rules that apply to normal breeding would apply in this case. I'll speak from the point of view of dogs because that's what I'm familiar with, but I'm sure the same applies to cats as well.
Typically, when you buy from a breeder, the sale is made at the discretion of the breeder. Put another way, you get the animal (with all the parts) and the papers only if the breeder considers you responsible enough to continue the line and/or are interested and capable of showing the animal. Most breeders won't have anything to do with the general public, so the idea of getting a "pet" (either with or without all the parts) is out of the question.
The exception, of course, is in the case of where part of the litter is, for lack of a more polite term, substandard. Those animals won't get bred. If the breeder decides not to keep them around as a pet, they will be given to or sold to an interested buyer who is already known to the breeder (most breeders will maintain waiting lists that span years). The animal will be spayed or neutered beforehand, and the papers will be provided. In certain circumstances, an exception is made and the animal is let go without being spayed or neutered under an agreement that the animal will not be bred, and the papers are withheld indefinitely, or until such time that the new owner provides evidence that the animal was spayed or neutered after the fact.
The above doesn't apply to backyard breeders, puppy mills, pet stores, etc. so all bets are off as to what you get, or what the rules are. With respect to the article, my guess is that anyone breeding cats specifically for hypoallergenic qualities is looking to sell them as pets only and definitely wouldn't want them going out the door with all their parts.
Well crap. Now I'll have to make a photocopy of a $20 and send it to the RIAA for every copy of an mp3 I make. A copy for a copy, neither being denied anything, it's only fair, right?
That's selfish. Make the copy of the $20 bill available as a torrent, and send the RIAA a link to it.
Do you wish that Louis Pasteur didn't invent the pasteurization process too? Or are only current scientific advancements "mucking up" our food sources?
It's possible that the OP remembers cheese before it became the plastic-wrapped flavourless, dead, waxy stuff that fills the aisles of supermarkets today.
As for Wisconsin or cream cheese, I know I'm not at all interested in technological advances. The last time I had real (fresh, non-pasteurised and and unadulterated) milk or cream was on a farm, and that farm wasn't in Wisconsin. And it came from a decidedly low-tech bovine animal feeding on grass. Unsurprisingly, the farm makes world-famous cheese, the same way it had been making it for hundreds of years.
Maybe the OP has a point?
Granted lawmakers are ... law makers, and as lawmakers their job is to pass laws, but I wonder to what degree anyone believes public policy (addressing the gambling problem, as opposed to getting their share) can be positively influenced by an act of criminalising personal behaviour.
That said, I'll bet my last dollar there's not a 50/50 chance it'll work.
So who's in?
We live in a nation where 45% of eligible voters believe the world is 6000 years old and their kids think WWF wrestlers are quality role models to be emulated.... It doesn't surprise me at all that people are smacking each other around with frying pans.
Dunno about frying pans, but I'm eagerly waiting for Nacho Libre. And I can't stand wrestling, let along Mexican wrestling.
The director was responsible for Napoleon Dynamite, so maybe there's a geek angle to the movie. Or this post, for that matter.
Just so you know, not all of these programs need admin rights to run; they need certain privs on certain folders (usually either write or modify to their program directory).
Yeah, but that's more of the same voodoo, isn't it? To the extent the Windows directory structure and associated permissions makes sense and are consistent, I wonder how the typical Windows administrator would find time to right-click his or her way through the file system, or bury their nose in the registry until everyone's gone home for the day, to determine what's what, let alone work out problems on a case-by-case basis, keeping track of all the changes.
Some time ago, I came up against a failed OfficeXP install. Reason? The user's $TEMP folder was owned by the user (novel concept), and had rwxr-xr-x permissions. (Converting those perms to the Windows' ACL equivalent I'll leave as an exercise for the reader.) Never mind the full admin rights of the user, the install failed consistently with a nondescript message. Not having the time or patience to narrow down the problem (no doubt SYSTEM needed write privileges or some such nonsense to create yet another goofy one-off log file), I changed the perms to 777, re-ran the install, and called it a day.
Personally, I think someone could write a book on the subject of Running as Non-Admin, but it would be a miserable read. As for possibility of the folks at Microsoft going through changes, good for them! They may yet discover treating everything as a file just works better, especially when you have to start paying attention. Even if that is a slippery slope that leads away from the Windows way of doing things.
I'd suggest multipart .RAR archives, and have someone generate a new NFO file every 3 days.
Windows XP to run, and won't install on Windows 2K systems. Hrmmmm. How helpful.
/s switch) is now the /integrate switch. Which is kindoflike downloading something from Microsoft and playing that guessing game to discover whether what you downloaded is an executable that does something (which you have little say in), a compressed archive of some sort that spits out its contents to some predefined location (about which you may be informed, but it's anybody's guess what happens next) and may or may not delete itself afterwards, or an executable that doesn't do anything but starts downloading something in the background. The last one is the scary one.
Reminds of trying to slipstream an XP service pack using files located on a Win2K share. Running the 'upgrade' executable (Microsoft is now using lower case!), it just dies with some brief on-screen message about an error log being created. Which wouldn't be so bad as subsequently discovering the traditional -s switch (or was it the
Where was I?
Oh, yeah. Windows programs are always cross-platform. Except when they're not. Personally, I think they'll just keeping making shit up and changing things until they figure it out. We're here to follow along. Who knows, maybe they'll discover Unix?
It's easy for you to bitch and moan and fear-monger about the ethics of human DNA in some rice ... Meanwhile there are people whose well-being would trump these silly goddamn over-analytical beardo quack ideas and "what ifs"
/. audience, or academic studies really isn't so important.
What ifs? Is that meant to be imply some negative connotation to perfectly reasonable and serious concerns?
Here's a whatif, for you. What if we give hard working salt-of-the-earth farmers the chance to save some money and allow them to feed their cows animal protein instead of corn? Never mind the overly analytical issue of feeding herbivores other herbivores, there's livelihoods at risk, economies at stake, and benefits to go around for everyone.
Sorry, but the history of technological progress is littered with Really Bad Ideas that sounded really good at one time. Mad cow is just the latest, and a Google search will turn up as many as you want. Any radical idea deserves serious vetting, whether it takes the form of catcalls from the
This is probably one of the most absurd and ill-informed posts I've read in a while.
/usr/share/doc, manpages (also available online, or subscribing to the mailing list or reading its online archives, or the newsgroups, didn't fit with the way I do things. Instead, I found some forum using Google's I'm Feeling Lucky that has little or nothing to do with FreeBSD but is definitely better than all those places I didn't visit.
I tried in vain to setup FreeBSD 6.0 as a SATA software raid machine. I was using a more recent motherboard with graphics, network and SATA integrated on-board. I think they are all VIA chipsets. I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running.
I bought a new motherboard without thinking too much about what I was buying and tried to install an operating system about which I knew just as little. Instead of taking the opportunity to make up for my obvious deficiencies, I quit when I realised my approach wouldn't work, but made a mental note to tell everyone about it when I had the chance.
I then tried Debian. All-in-all it was another less than positive experience. Both the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel versions of Sarge had problems with my hardware.
I popped in another CD and see what would happen, hoping that doing the same thing again would yield different results. It didn't.
I decided to explore Gentoo.
Despite, the fact that some people consider doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is a mark of insanity, I popped in yet another CD
Its working great with SATA and EVMS.
I was surprised that it worked.
It did require some source level tweaks
Well, it didn't really work, but someone told what I should be doing.
but part of the coolness I found with Gentoo is the very active user/support community and the tons of HowTos and guides.
Instead of visiting the FreeBSD website, where I could have found that FreeBSD offers a bewildering collection of well-written documentation in almost every imaginable format, I decided that The Handbook,
the Books and Articles Online section, Publications, Web Resources, A Section For Newbies or The Documentation Project, or reading the documentation in
Unless they've made a quantum leap in improvements, FreeBSD would NOT be my choice for a SATA raid server.
I firmly believe my anecdotal experience qualifies me to offer non-sequitors with hyperbole but without embarassment.
The obvious solution is to allow farmers to grow hemp
Obviously. But maybe start off more slowly so as not to upset the voters in the red states?
My idea would be first to start with buying cheap sugar from Cuba. That'll ease the ethanol transition, lower the price of soft drinks and snack foods, and resurrecting the popularity of smoking by making good cigars more fashionable. From there we can move to growing hemp.
Just think, one day we'll all be able to stay home and drink rum, smoke cigars or get stoned while watching I Love Lucy reruns, or fill up the tank with no worries.
Reading in the TDI Club I was surprised to read that Ethanol provides worst MPG than pure gasoline.
Does anyone have information on this topic?
Sure.
worst: (adjective) most bad, severe, or serious.
worse: (adjective) less good, satisfactory, or pleasing. 2 more serious or severe. 3 more ill or unhappy.
wurst: (noun) German or Austrian sausage.
Let's avoid the vulgar confusion of good writing and good grammar. Horrifying grammar is a common problem, but its not a problem I can fix in a semester-long class.
Sorry, but that's wrong. I have taught such classes (both to adults, and to young students), and you can indeed cram everything needed into single semester. Once upon a time, when Latin was taught and History wasn't referred to as Social Studies, basic grammar was a single-semester course of study. For most, the subject can be mind-numbingly dull, but without it you have no foundation on which to build anything. If a student can't parse a sentence, he most certainly won't understand how to form one, except perhaps by mimicry.
Put another way, no one has learned advanced mathematics without having gone through the requisite rote memorisation of multiplication tables at an early age. If I was in your position and the subject was teaching advanced algebra and I discovered that many students couldn't rattle of a multiplication table, I'd call up a time-out until the deficiency was corrected. And I'd ignore the groans knowing that everyone would then be in a position to move forward when done.
It also might be enlightening to pause for a moment and consider the reasons why students whose first language isn't English typically don't suffer from the "horrifying grammar" that you believe to be so widespread.
As for the discussions of style and clarity, I'd think those are moot in a class where the students are unable to recognise and hence use the basic parts of speech. Can't conjugate a verb or understand tense? If you can get past writing a full sentence, you'll choke in a paragraph or two, leaving the reader to wonder where the hell you are or going. Can't make sense of subjects and objects or know what a gerund is? Refrain from laughing (or crying) and nod approvingly when you hear: "I don't need to know, because me being an engineering student, it's not that important." Transitive and intransitive verb forms? No worries. The words "effect" and "affect" are homonyms and interchangeable, right? Cases? Who the fuck cares?! I've got a busy life and no way am I going to learn all this ablative, genetive, nominative, possessive gobbledygook. So what if I can't distinguish between "its" and "it's", or my overuse of subjunctive (whatever that is) is routinely criticised as bad style. An introduction to foreign languages to teach appreciation of derivations and, hence, meanings? No way! My students are American, and Latin is a dead language. Besides, that would be so unrelevant, irregardless.
If your target audience consists of engineers, your pupils can and will appreciate being taught standards and clear rules. The fact that you'd be covering ground that should be have been addressed in grade school should provide reason enough let alone an impetus.
It was on a Sunday if I recall (I was all of 9 years old)and I slept right through it...
...
...
It was Tuesday. In time it came to be known as Mount St. Helens Tuesday.
That was one day before Wednesday.
Which came to be known as
wait for it
Ash Wednesday.
Even putting that aside, these arguments are ridiculous. We have a problem of kids being subjected to predators on a website. The state has a duty (not even just a right, a duty) to ensure that if there are unacceptable risks, safeguards are put in place to assure that we've done all we reasonably can to protect the children. This is bad how?
First off, it's bad because it obscures the problem. Parenting is an obligation, and that obligation rests with the parents. The fact that most parents are busy, or tired, or spend too much time working doesn't lessen that obligation. Life sucks.
Second, it changes the problem. Kids who are taken advantage or molested are most often the victim of a family member or relative. The internet bogeyman is one in a million. Unfortunately for the Nancy Grace's of the world, it's tough to create a useful hysteria over a family member. The girl who is currently testifying before Congress about her ordeals was adopted. She's angry and upset that her pictures are floating around the internet, but the media would have us believe the problem is somehow with the "billion-dollar kiddy porn internet business" (a real quote), and not with her abusive father.
Third, an emotional subject often encourages emotional reactions. If no one can think rationally and clearly, or if lawmakers insist on pandering to their base using hot-button topics, nothing useful or constructive is accomplished. Moreover, the discussions that do occur in such an environment often take the form of "If you're not on our side, you're on the side of predators." Hardly a recipe for success.
And last, over-reacting and hastily making well-intentioned changes will result in unexpected consequences. If thinking of the children results in widepsread government involvement and routine invasion of privacy and loss of rights, I'd suggest we stop thinking of them as children altogether.