In real life, if your other half is yelling at you, you then yell back equally loudly, does it cancel the yelling altogether?:)
Having said that, this cancelling method is quite widely used in ancient China (not sure about the modern one). For instance, if you are bitten by a scorpion, just find something equally poisonous, or more, to bite at the same spot, and voila!
Truman Show
on
Retro Vision
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
To answer the question "So what do you do when they end", one only needs to look at the ending of Truman Show.
People just find the remote and switch channel.
Funny enough though, Truman Show itself has plenty of fan sites immortalizing the show.
According to the article, Conran wasn't really hiding, she did show it to her boss, Jon Avnet, who decided to fund the production until they can find some bigger investors. And they did find Jude Law, and later signed Gwyneth Paltrow and eventually Angelina Jolie.
So the moral of the story is, if you really want to do something like that, make sure you don't just sit there and wait to be discovered, it will never happen until someone see your work.
And as a side note, there are many similar productions with no initial sponsors and low budget, yet able to pull it through at a much faster pace than 10 years - like Blair Witch Project.
In my experience, it is important to have clearly defined, separate roles for each person, so that there will never be overlapping in terms of who does what.
One problem I had with family members is, it's actually more difficult to void your opinion because you still have a "outside" relationship with that person beyond work.
So the best way is to do different things in the business, as long as everybody has a common goal/mission.
If HP and StarBucks can get this going legally and without hassles from RIAA et al against them or customers, wouldn't the next logical step be offering downloads directly to your iPAQ?
My apology for the wrong use of LY, I should have said something like "what if that thing is moving at 1 million times the speed of light".
And all this goes back to my original point, which questioned our understanding on how things work beyond our environment.
Yes, everybody knows nothing can travel faster than light, that's our understanding, but that doesn't not necessarily mean that is how things are working on the other side of the universe.
The key point is, we didn't know anything else. It's pretty much like searching life on Mars, we are searching for water as that's the most commmon element found in life, and that's all we can do, but that doesn't mean water is the only thing that supports life.
And this lack of understanding may well render our technology useless.
The most disturbing message from the conference? 'It may take a celestial body hit to Earth' before governments take any meaningful steps to address this danger.'
Maybe this is the answer to such threats, I.E. Do nothing, and if we got hit, it is probably do late to do anything anyway.
I wonder with our current technology and understanding of the outer space (left alone our 'inner' space), can we really, reliably, detect a human-wiping asteroid?
For example, if we can only detect an object from 1,000 LightYears away, what if that thing is moving at 1 million LY? Wouldn't we be hit seconds after we 'saw' it?
This might be a joke now, but it may well happen in the future if we're really into this C/R thing.
At the moment spammers are already paying people to send emails from home, obviously it is profitable enough to pay someone to do the dirty job for you.
As a result, if recepients are less defensive against spams in a C/R system, those slipped spams might get a greater response rate. And this is good news to spammers, and they might very well be able to afford to outsource to deal with C/R.
According to this site, spammers are constantly changing tactics to deal with anti-spam filter. So the site is trying to use human to catch any changes in spammers' styles.
So, are spam filter changing at least as quickly as spammers?
If HP did receive the payment, but failed to deliver the goods, then isn't it clear who's to blame?
Imagine if your client mistakenly paid your company $2,000 extra, do you
(1) keep quiet? (2) ask what that $2K is for?
One of my clients has a habit of overpaying the bill, because it is always late in paying, thus when the next invoice (with 2 months balance) arrives, they then paid the 1st invoice, and the 2nd invoice. I have to tell them that, and hold the credit for the following month(s).
If my favourite site uses Flash for all the content, and I know there's a copied site out there, I might start visiting the offending site:) Who knows, that offending site might eventually evolve with its own content and overtake the former.
In the article: "We emailed them via the contact page, which was the same as our own, and heard nothing back," he said.
I was half expecting he said: "We emailed them via the contact page, which was the same as our own, and received our own message immediately in the mailbox."
You can't stop people from copying your design, especially where there is no appropriate laws to protect you. Even if there was, it wouldn't worth your time to sue those copycats. Only big companies can afford that, then again no one will be stupid enough to copycat a big company's website, except for scams and parodies.
Anyway, if your site's content-based, ie the attractiveness of your website is not about the look, but the content, then you may stand a chance.
For example, anyone can screen-scrap Slashdot to the fullest, but who is going to look at those copycat sites?
Yeah, spammers are also using HTML tags, eg viagra, which in a HTML-enabled email client will just show viagra, but this kills a lot of filter. these guys are trying out another approach to deal with this though.
Seeing that MS is sending out warning to those downloaders, it already knew who they are, thus it could be just a warning to those downloaders that if any exploits were out, they will be the first to be investigated.
In a way this is a good sign as this will deter companies which like to send out legal threats to "poorer" folks, who can't afford to prepare the case and surrender before the war begins.
On the other hand, this might actually push companies which like to send out legal threats to "poorer" folks to actually go to the court, in defence of being countersued.
Reading its philosophy, especially the part about "child porn, offensive content or terrorism", it sounds good. However further down in the security section, it's not real anonymity at all.
So if the government really wants to find out who posted what, it is still possible.
Can someone please enlighten me? Is Freenet a false sense of anonymity?
I am not sure if this only happens to Coke. Anyway, in one of a similar promotion (i.e. you win something if the cap says "Winner", otherwise "Again"), the message is in some sort of semi-transparent rubbery sheet, which is pushed into the cap, reversed.
So normally you cannot see anything thru this rubbery sheet, and the message is on the other side (i.e. facing the cap).
Slashdot Mirror
Does this method really work?
:)
In real life, if your other half is yelling at you, you then yell back equally loudly, does it cancel the yelling altogether?
Having said that, this cancelling method is quite widely used in ancient China (not sure about the modern one). For instance, if you are bitten by a scorpion, just find something equally poisonous, or more, to bite at the same spot, and voila!
To answer the question "So what do you do when they end", one only needs to look at the ending of Truman Show.
People just find the remote and switch channel.
Funny enough though, Truman Show itself has plenty of fan sites immortalizing the show.
According to the article, Conran wasn't really hiding, she did show it to her boss, Jon Avnet, who decided to fund the production until they can find some bigger investors. And they did find Jude Law, and later signed Gwyneth Paltrow and eventually Angelina Jolie.
So the moral of the story is, if you really want to do something like that, make sure you don't just sit there and wait to be discovered, it will never happen until someone see your work.
And as a side note, there are many similar productions with no initial sponsors and low budget, yet able to pull it through at a much faster pace than 10 years - like Blair Witch Project.
In my experience, it is important to have clearly defined, separate roles for each person, so that there will never be overlapping in terms of who does what.
One problem I had with family members is, it's actually more difficult to void your opinion because you still have a "outside" relationship with that person beyond work.
So the best way is to do different things in the business, as long as everybody has a common goal/mission.
Only until a grandpa accidentally burnt himself when the CD slipped onto his lap.
If HP and StarBucks can get this going legally and without hassles from RIAA et al against them or customers, wouldn't the next logical step be offering downloads directly to your iPAQ?
My apology for the wrong use of LY, I should have said something like "what if that thing is moving at 1 million times the speed of light".
And all this goes back to my original point, which questioned our understanding on how things work beyond our environment.
Yes, everybody knows nothing can travel faster than light, that's our understanding, but that doesn't not necessarily mean that is how things are working on the other side of the universe.
The key point is, we didn't know anything else. It's pretty much like searching life on Mars, we are searching for water as that's the most commmon element found in life, and that's all we can do, but that doesn't mean water is the only thing that supports life.
And this lack of understanding may well render our technology useless.
The most disturbing message from the conference? 'It may take a celestial body hit to Earth' before governments take any meaningful steps to address this danger.'
Maybe this is the answer to such threats, I.E. Do nothing, and if we got hit, it is probably do late to do anything anyway.
I wonder with our current technology and understanding of the outer space (left alone our 'inner' space), can we really, reliably, detect a human-wiping asteroid?
For example, if we can only detect an object from 1,000 LightYears away, what if that thing is moving at 1 million LY? Wouldn't we be hit seconds after we 'saw' it?
This might be a joke now, but it may well happen in the future if we're really into this C/R thing.
At the moment spammers are already paying people to send emails from home, obviously it is profitable enough to pay someone to do the dirty job for you.
As a result, if recepients are less defensive against spams in a C/R system, those slipped spams might get a greater response rate. And this is good news to spammers, and they might very well be able to afford to outsource to deal with C/R.
The linked article is part 2, Part 1 is here.
According to this site, spammers are constantly changing tactics to deal with anti-spam filter. So the site is trying to use human to catch any changes in spammers' styles.
So, are spam filter changing at least as quickly as spammers?
If HP did receive the payment, but failed to deliver the goods, then isn't it clear who's to blame?
Imagine if your client mistakenly paid your company $2,000 extra, do you
(1) keep quiet?
(2) ask what that $2K is for?
One of my clients has a habit of overpaying the bill, because it is always late in paying, thus when the next invoice (with 2 months balance) arrives, they then paid the 1st invoice, and the 2nd invoice. I have to tell them that, and hold the credit for the following month(s).
If my favourite site uses Flash for all the content, and I know there's a copied site out there, I might start visiting the offending site :) Who knows, that offending site might eventually evolve with its own content and overtake the former.
In the article: "We emailed them via the contact page, which was the same as our own, and heard nothing back," he said.
I was half expecting he said: "We emailed them via the contact page, which was the same as our own, and received our own message immediately in the mailbox."
You can't stop people from copying your design, especially where there is no appropriate laws to protect you. Even if there was, it wouldn't worth your time to sue those copycats. Only big companies can afford that, then again no one will be stupid enough to copycat a big company's website, except for scams and parodies.
Anyway, if your site's content-based, ie the attractiveness of your website is not about the look, but the content, then you may stand a chance.
For example, anyone can screen-scrap Slashdot to the fullest, but who is going to look at those copycat sites?
Yeah yeah, he can speak in Cantonese and English, but can he sing like the Sexual Harrassment Panda
Yeah, spammers are also using HTML tags, eg viagra, which in a HTML-enabled email client will just show viagra, but this kills a lot of filter. these guys are trying out another approach to deal with this though.
Now I start receiving spams that come with a nice big attached image which tells me that particular email is complied with the Can-Spam ACT.
But how many people are willing to install an anonymous patch? It is more risky than having the machine unpatched.
On top of that, most 'pa-and-ma' users will not find such patch - come on, they can't even find the official updates!
Seeing that MS is sending out warning to those downloaders, it already knew who they are, thus it could be just a warning to those downloaders that if any exploits were out, they will be the first to be investigated.
future World controlled by a computer? are Matrix and Terminator ideas from Paranoia?
In a way this is a good sign as this will deter companies which like to send out legal threats to "poorer" folks, who can't afford to prepare the case and surrender before the war begins.
On the other hand, this might actually push companies which like to send out legal threats to "poorer" folks to actually go to the court, in defence of being countersued.
I believe every employer appreciates a bit of honesty.
Reading its philosophy, especially the part about "child porn, offensive content or terrorism", it sounds good. However further down in the security section, it's not real anonymity at all.
So if the government really wants to find out who posted what, it is still possible.
Can someone please enlighten me? Is Freenet a false sense of anonymity?
I am not sure if this only happens to Coke. Anyway, in one of a similar promotion (i.e. you win something if the cap says "Winner", otherwise "Again"), the message is in some sort of semi-transparent rubbery sheet, which is pushed into the cap, reversed.
So normally you cannot see anything thru this rubbery sheet, and the message is on the other side (i.e. facing the cap).
I wonder why Pepsi didn't use a better solution.