As long as they don't let any pot smokers out to make room for this spammer, we're safe.
As I see no visual cue I hope this was a joke. Governments, and businesses, have done a pretty good job of brainwashing people into believing pot makes people violent.
I wouldn't mind getting spam if every piece of it came from a company's own servers and with a legitimate return address.
You left out getting paid. I could use a dollar for every spam message I get. You also left out the added expenses to the ISP of handling the spam. I don't know if it's true but I heard that something like half of the bandwidth, which cost money, is used by spam. ISPs pay for the bandwidth used then have to pay for the mail servers and storage.
Someone sending spam *entirely* with their own equipment (NOT using botnets, hacked servers, open relays, etc.) is within their rights. They may be a PITA but so are streetcorner preachers hollering over the town square
No, they are compleatly different. What a spammer does is commercial speech whereas the preacher is using religious speech, and freedom of religion is another of the rights in the First Amendment.
The mailman is just as much a spammer when he delivers junkmail. Do you charge him for using your mailbox ?
The mailman is just a deliverer, not a spammer. The spammer is the one that sends the junkmail, which I call spam.
Spam is annoying, but really what are your costs ?.. your time to delete the email ?..
Keep going, spam doesn't just cost the tyme it takes to delete it. It also cost bandwidth and the hardware costs of the ISP for mail servers both of which mean more money is needed to deliver services.
It seems strange to me that so many people on slashdot (and more generally on the internet at large) seem so gung ho free speech, yet at the same time are ready to burn spammers at the stake.
I am sorry for your inconvenience, but I think free speech is a little bit more important than that.
While Free Speech is important commercial speech is not nearly as important. In Kasky v. Nike California's Supreme Court set up a 3 part test on "when a court must decide whether particular speech may be subjected to laws aimed at preventing false advertising or other forms of commercial deception. . .." While the majority voted this way some Justices rejected it.
I'm free to buy my own house and spray-paint the side of it.
Actually that depends on where you live. In some neighborhoods the Home owner's association has bylaws that prevent people from painting the exterior of their homes however they want. Here's what Copper Creek Association has to say.
What we need is an acceptable definition of spamming, that's better than "I know it, when I see it", which is the current standard. Maybe, a cool and well publicized X-prize would result in somebody coming up with one?..
Just because the flyers go at a cheaper rate does not mean that without them first class prices would be higher.
You're right, instead of being higher they'd be lower.
A large proportion of the mail costs are essentially fixed: the cost of delivering it from your local post office to your door. Flyers contribute to revenue without increasing this fixed cost.
Weight and volume are not fixed, and bulk mail increases both. As these increase either more tyme is needed to deliver the mail or more people are needed to deliver them, both of which increase costs.
In addition, don't you have to do some of the post office's work to get those bulk rate? They have to be pre-sorted, I think.
Yes, in order to qualify for bulk mail what's mailed has to be sorted by zip code. Almost all of my tyme doing bulk mail was sorting it. That however does not decrease either the volume or the weight.
No, the First doesn't cover ads, see Free speech v commercial speech. After 1971 Supreme Court rulings whittled away at the separation of commercial speech and free speech. Whereas SC rulings before then maintained the separation. If that isn't enough, for instance if you don't accept that website, then try Findlaw. Julie Hilden writes that commercial speech should have the same First Amendment rights, rights it didn't have in 2001.
Until they start locking up the directors of capital-one and other similar companies (that do snail mail spam), what right do they have to lock up email spammers? I hate spam as much as the next person, but it is no different.
It takes some research but you can opt out of at least some of those offers. For instance OptOutPrescreen.com let's you opt out of credit card offers.
In fact, if there weren't any junk mail, first class postage rates would be higher.
Actually first class mail would be cheaper as those commercial flyers are mailed at a lower bulk rate. I used to mail them as part of a job I had as an assistant to a gallery curator. If I recall right we paid less than half the cost of a first class stamp.
And no we didn't send ads out to everyone. In the gallery we had a visitors' guest book which visitors could sign and provide an address if they wanted to be notified of shows.
No, the First Amendment doesn't apply in this case. In this case the speech used is commercial speech and it's only been recently that commercial speech has even been considered. The phrase "commercial speech" first appears in a Supreme Court ruling in 1971. Prior to then the First was never applied to commercial advertizing.
True, in extreme cases rich people do go to jail, but it takes almost overwhelming evidence for it to happen.
That's how it's supposed to be, for a criminal trial it requires the jury to believe beyond a reasonable doubt to vote guilty. Only in civil cases does "guilty" only require guilty based on a preponderance of evidence. That's why OJ won the criminal case but lost the civil case. As Thomas Jefferson said, "Better one hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man be condemned."
So either Darl is the world's biggest idiot of a CEO, or he perjured himself, or SCO lied in their SEC filing.
The The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires the CEO, in this case Darl, sign that all accounting the corporation files is truthful so 2 and 3 are the same.
But is he really all that rich now? I'm assuming most of his money was probably tied into company stock that's worth less than toilet paper at this point.
Though I disagree about the "plutocracy" statement Darl could have unloaded a lot of stock before the company tanked.
See, he can be misinformed, stupid, confused, or just plain wrong... none of which gets you convicted for perjury. He just has to believe what he's saying.
However he said "When you go to the bookstore and look in the UNIX section, there's books on 'How to Program UNIX' but when you go to the Linux section and look for 'How to Program Linux' you're not gonna find it, because it doesn't exist" which would seem to indicate he has been to bookstores lately. I know I have and I see the opposite, I see books on how to program for Linux but hardly any for Unix. Actually when it comes to books on any *nix, most deal with Linux (quite a few are Ubuntu books) while a small number of others are about Solaris, BSD, FreeBSD and such. There might be one or two about "Unix".
You'd have to show that he deliberately lied -- I bet any half-way decent lawyer could convince a jury that Darl doesn't really understand half of what he says,
Yeap, that's the hard part, proving he knew what he said was wrong.
I can't see McBride getting thrown into the clink for perjury.
He should be introduced to Bubba, his new room mate, for driving stockholders' value into the toilet.
This is based on the mistaken assumption that markets always grow and go up, never contract.
BS, investing in growth when young is based on the fact that if a growth stock crashes there's still plenty of tyme before retirement to rebuild an investment portfolio. And stats back this up. Over any given 20 year period, maybe even 10 year period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Standard & Poor's 500 index, and other composite indexes beat inflation. An 18 year old can invest $2000 a year until the age of 25, that's 7 years, and not invest anymore money and by the tyme they reach 65 they can have more than $750,000 invested. It's simple math, have a look at Wiki's page on Future value, you could say compound interest does wonders. Heck I learned that in intro to algebra.
it is hard to see a time when they wouldn't contract or expand. Most people don't even know how to work this out when the market is "growing" nevermind when it is contracting.
Dollar cost averaging, or in Europe Euro cost averaging, helps here. By consistently investing periodically, say once a month, the ups and downs of the market are evened out. Say you invest $1000 monthly, on the first day stocks are bought a stock being bought may sell for $50. So ignoring transaction fees, which many brokers charge $10 or under, 20 stocks can be bought. The next month the stock price has increased to $55 so only 18 shares are bought. The third month the price had gone down to $45 so 22 shares are bought.
My in-laws' cattle get one scoop of corn a day in the winter, every other day in the summer. The scoop's an old Folger's coffee can, so call it two pounds. The rest of the time, they're eating grass or hay. I've never followed them around, but I'm told that a 1,200 lb cow eats 28 lbs of hay/day.
The water that the cattle drink all comes from stream-fed ponds. Climate change might be a problem, but historically this area was forest, so the only well is for the house, not the livestock.
So they've got enough water then, but if they have a lot of cattle I wonder what all that manure does to the water quality.
Down in the flatlands, however, the rice farmers are complaining about the water table dropping, and they're sitting next to major rivers.
Hmm. That's interesting. Unfortunately, as I said before, LA is a cesspool, plus it's also very expensive to live there unless you live in the ghetto. Pilots don't usually get paid a lot.
It's a cesspool and expensive, because of all the oil there.
I don't know where the oil drilling is in Africa
Nigeria is one place oil is pumped, and it's a dangerous place. Angola, Cameroon and Gabon also produce oil. While Cameroon and Gabon are relatively safe Angola isn't. South Africa also has some oil. allAfrica.com has more articles on Africa countries with oil.
Even Kenya, which used to be a safe place for tourists to visit and see wild animal parks, has lately become violent and dangerous.
Many African countries are no longer safe because of the natural resources they have in abundance and the wealth generated from them are not shared by the ruling clicks. Take for instance Nigeria, the Niger Delta is rich in oil yet those than live there live in squalor because they are from different ethnic groups than those that make up the government. In the Congo the conflict and fighting is over the control of mining for coltan, diamonds, and gold as well as logging. Sadly when the European colonizers went to Africa they set national borders that ignored the different ethnic groups. Latin America didn't have as many colonizers there, basically it was just the Portuguese and Spanish, and for a while Portugal was ruled by Spain. Portugal controlled South America east of the Andes while Spain did the west. While the language in Colombia used is Spanish, it's Portuguese in Brazil.
If only they worked. Kibbutz is failing in Israel as more and more people move away from them. However spreading throughout the world are Intentional Communities and Communitarianism. I wonder how long these will last though.
You know its funny that you say that because I often think that people don't realize how close Open Source is to communism.
There's a hugh difference between Open Source and communism, "choice". With OS people have a choice whereas under communism they don't. Well they do but it's between doing what you're ordered to do, being sent to the Gulags, or being shot and having your family billed for the cost of the bullet.
It would be amusing to see Dell or HP in talks with Apple. They both need something better than Vista. It would actually make sense for Apple to sell off the desktop market to another vendor
It would be a mistake for Apple to sell off their desktop market. Apple seel hardware as much as software. Actually Apple is a systems integrator, they design whole systems so they "just work".
Slashdot Mirror
As long as they don't let any pot smokers out to make room for this spammer, we're safe.
As I see no visual cue I hope this was a joke. Governments, and businesses, have done a pretty good job of brainwashing people into believing pot makes people violent.
FalconGreat, you just opened the door for all the smug replies about how people haven't seen ads in years because of adblock plus.
Better than ad blocking software is using a Hosts file. Hosts files are great for blocking unwanted parasitic websites.
FalconPeople should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
Two things, one is I totally agree with this statement. But is it said in the movie?
FalconI wouldn't mind getting spam if every piece of it came from a company's own servers and with a legitimate return address.
You left out getting paid. I could use a dollar for every spam message I get. You also left out the added expenses to the ISP of handling the spam. I don't know if it's true but I heard that something like half of the bandwidth, which cost money, is used by spam. ISPs pay for the bandwidth used then have to pay for the mail servers and storage.
FalconSomeone sending spam *entirely* with their own equipment (NOT using botnets, hacked servers, open relays, etc.) is within their rights. They may be a PITA but so are streetcorner preachers hollering over the town square
No, they are compleatly different. What a spammer does is commercial speech whereas the preacher is using religious speech, and freedom of religion is another of the rights in the First Amendment.
FalconThe mailman is just as much a spammer when he delivers junkmail. Do you charge him for using your mailbox ?
The mailman is just a deliverer, not a spammer. The spammer is the one that sends the junkmail, which I call spam.
Spam is annoying, but really what are your costs ? .. your time to delete the email ? ..
Keep going, spam doesn't just cost the tyme it takes to delete it. It also cost bandwidth and the hardware costs of the ISP for mail servers both of which mean more money is needed to deliver services.
FalconIt seems strange to me that so many people on slashdot (and more generally on the internet at large) seem so gung ho free speech, yet at the same time are ready to burn spammers at the stake.
I am sorry for your inconvenience, but I think free speech is a little bit more important than that.
While Free Speech is important commercial speech is not nearly as important. In Kasky v. Nike California's Supreme Court set up a 3 part test on "when a court must decide whether particular speech may be subjected to laws aimed at preventing false advertising or other forms of commercial deception. . . ." While the majority voted this way some Justices rejected it.
Findlaw has much more on Commercial speech.
FalconI'm free to buy my own house and spray-paint the side of it.
Actually that depends on where you live. In some neighborhoods the Home owner's association has bylaws that prevent people from painting the exterior of their homes however they want. Here's what Copper Creek Association has to say.
FalconWhat we need is an acceptable definition of spamming, that's better than "I know it, when I see it", which is the current standard. Maybe, a cool and well publicized X-prize would result in somebody coming up with one?..
That's easy, spam is unsolicited commercial e-mail. I apply it to snail mail as well.
FalconNo I think yours is faulty.
Just because the flyers go at a cheaper rate does not mean that without them first class prices would be higher.
You're right, instead of being higher they'd be lower.
A large proportion of the mail costs are essentially fixed: the cost of delivering it from your local post office to your door. Flyers contribute to revenue without increasing this fixed cost.
Weight and volume are not fixed, and bulk mail increases both. As these increase either more tyme is needed to deliver the mail or more people are needed to deliver them, both of which increase costs.
In addition, don't you have to do some of the post office's work to get those bulk rate? They have to be pre-sorted, I think.
Yes, in order to qualify for bulk mail what's mailed has to be sorted by zip code. Almost all of my tyme doing bulk mail was sorting it. That however does not decrease either the volume or the weight.
FalconNo, the First doesn't cover ads, see Free speech v commercial speech. After 1971 Supreme Court rulings whittled away at the separation of commercial speech and free speech. Whereas SC rulings before then maintained the separation. If that isn't enough, for instance if you don't accept that website, then try Findlaw. Julie Hilden writes that commercial speech should have the same First Amendment rights, rights it didn't have in 2001.
FalconUntil they start locking up the directors of capital-one and other similar companies (that do snail mail spam), what right do they have to lock up email spammers? I hate spam as much as the next person, but it is no different.
It takes some research but you can opt out of at least some of those offers. For instance OptOutPrescreen.com let's you opt out of credit card offers.
FalconIn fact, if there weren't any junk mail, first class postage rates would be higher.
Actually first class mail would be cheaper as those commercial flyers are mailed at a lower bulk rate. I used to mail them as part of a job I had as an assistant to a gallery curator. If I recall right we paid less than half the cost of a first class stamp.
And no we didn't send ads out to everyone. In the gallery we had a visitors' guest book which visitors could sign and provide an address if they wanted to be notified of shows.
FalconNo, the First Amendment doesn't apply in this case. In this case the speech used is commercial speech and it's only been recently that commercial speech has even been considered. The phrase "commercial speech" first appears in a Supreme Court ruling in 1971. Prior to then the First was never applied to commercial advertizing.
FalconTrue, in extreme cases rich people do go to jail, but it takes almost overwhelming evidence for it to happen.
That's how it's supposed to be, for a criminal trial it requires the jury to believe beyond a reasonable doubt to vote guilty. Only in civil cases does "guilty" only require guilty based on a preponderance of evidence. That's why OJ won the criminal case but lost the civil case. As Thomas Jefferson said, "Better one hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man be condemned."
FalconSo either Darl is the world's biggest idiot of a CEO, or he perjured himself, or SCO lied in their SEC filing.
The The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires the CEO, in this case Darl, sign that all accounting the corporation files is truthful so 2 and 3 are the same.
FalconBut is he really all that rich now? I'm assuming most of his money was probably tied into company stock that's worth less than toilet paper at this point.
Though I disagree about the "plutocracy" statement Darl could have unloaded a lot of stock before the company tanked.
FalconAh, but it's not a lie if you believe it.
See, he can be misinformed, stupid, confused, or just plain wrong ... none of which gets you convicted for perjury. He just has to believe what he's saying.
However he said "When you go to the bookstore and look in the UNIX section, there's books on 'How to Program UNIX' but when you go to the Linux section and look for 'How to Program Linux' you're not gonna find it, because it doesn't exist" which would seem to indicate he has been to bookstores lately. I know I have and I see the opposite, I see books on how to program for Linux but hardly any for Unix. Actually when it comes to books on any *nix, most deal with Linux (quite a few are Ubuntu books) while a small number of others are about Solaris, BSD, FreeBSD and such. There might be one or two about "Unix".
You'd have to show that he deliberately lied -- I bet any half-way decent lawyer could convince a jury that Darl doesn't really understand half of what he says,
Yeap, that's the hard part, proving he knew what he said was wrong.
I can't see McBride getting thrown into the clink for perjury.
He should be introduced to Bubba, his new room mate, for driving stockholders' value into the toilet.
FalconThis is based on the mistaken assumption that markets always grow and go up, never contract.
BS, investing in growth when young is based on the fact that if a growth stock crashes there's still plenty of tyme before retirement to rebuild an investment portfolio. And stats back this up. Over any given 20 year period, maybe even 10 year period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Standard & Poor's 500 index, and other composite indexes beat inflation. An 18 year old can invest $2000 a year until the age of 25, that's 7 years, and not invest anymore money and by the tyme they reach 65 they can have more than $750,000 invested. It's simple math, have a look at Wiki's page on Future value, you could say compound interest does wonders. Heck I learned that in intro to algebra.
it is hard to see a time when they wouldn't contract or expand. Most people don't even know how to work this out when the market is "growing" nevermind when it is contracting.
Dollar cost averaging, or in Europe Euro cost averaging, helps here. By consistently investing periodically, say once a month, the ups and downs of the market are evened out. Say you invest $1000 monthly, on the first day stocks are bought a stock being bought may sell for $50. So ignoring transaction fees, which many brokers charge $10 or under, 20 stocks can be bought. The next month the stock price has increased to $55 so only 18 shares are bought. The third month the price had gone down to $45 so 22 shares are bought.
FalconMy in-laws' cattle get one scoop of corn a day in the winter, every other day in the summer. The scoop's an old Folger's coffee can, so call it two pounds. The rest of the time, they're eating grass or hay. I've never followed them around, but I'm told that a 1,200 lb cow eats 28 lbs of hay/day.
Not knowing the stats I googled for them and came across TFA "Film 'King Corn' goes to roots of food system problems". It says "80 million acres of corn are grown each year to feed cows". There's even a genetically engineered corn that's isn't approved for human consumption but is for cows, Starlink. According to an article in the "New York Times" "Most cattle feed is yellow corn, while white corn is grown almost exclusively for food."
The water that the cattle drink all comes from stream-fed ponds. Climate change might be a problem, but historically this area was forest, so the only well is for the house, not the livestock.
So they've got enough water then, but if they have a lot of cattle I wonder what all that manure does to the water quality.
Down in the flatlands, however, the rice farmers are complaining about the water table dropping, and they're sitting next to major rivers.
In the Klamath Basin of Oregon?
FalconHmm. That's interesting. Unfortunately, as I said before, LA is a cesspool, plus it's also very expensive to live there unless you live in the ghetto. Pilots don't usually get paid a lot.
It's a cesspool and expensive, because of all the oil there.
I don't know where the oil drilling is in Africa
Nigeria is one place oil is pumped, and it's a dangerous place. Angola, Cameroon and Gabon also produce oil. While Cameroon and Gabon are relatively safe Angola isn't. South Africa also has some oil. allAfrica.com has more articles on Africa countries with oil.
Even Kenya, which used to be a safe place for tourists to visit and see wild animal parks, has lately become violent and dangerous.
Many African countries are no longer safe because of the natural resources they have in abundance and the wealth generated from them are not shared by the ruling clicks. Take for instance Nigeria, the Niger Delta is rich in oil yet those than live there live in squalor because they are from different ethnic groups than those that make up the government. In the Congo the conflict and fighting is over the control of mining for coltan, diamonds, and gold as well as logging. Sadly when the European colonizers went to Africa they set national borders that ignored the different ethnic groups. Latin America didn't have as many colonizers there, basically it was just the Portuguese and Spanish, and for a while Portugal was ruled by Spain. Portugal controlled South America east of the Andes while Spain did the west. While the language in Colombia used is Spanish, it's Portuguese in Brazil.
FalconIf only they worked. Kibbutz is failing in Israel as more and more people move away from them. However spreading throughout the world are Intentional Communities and Communitarianism. I wonder how long these will last though.
FalconSocialism is the principle that everyone gets as much as they need and works as much as they can.
No, socialism is the economic, or political, principle that everyone owns the means of production.
FalconYou know its funny that you say that because I often think that people don't realize how close Open Source is to communism.
There's a hugh difference between Open Source and communism, "choice". With OS people have a choice whereas under communism they don't. Well they do but it's between doing what you're ordered to do, being sent to the Gulags, or being shot and having your family billed for the cost of the bullet.
FalconIt would be amusing to see Dell or HP in talks with Apple. They both need something better than Vista. It would actually make sense for Apple to sell off the desktop market to another vendor
It would be a mistake for Apple to sell off their desktop market. Apple seel hardware as much as software. Actually Apple is a systems integrator, they design whole systems so they "just work".
Falcon