Loads of people are naively happy about reducing consumption. We need not to do so. Instead reducing the rate our consumption growth is what we want to awaken at. We need to have zero growing. Yes: zero growth. Pretty unconventional amongst all those liberal idiots claiming the economical growth is the way, isn't it ? The way sure, straight into the wall.
Good point. Also, AFAIU the system described in the article do not need grouding: the two systems do not use the same principles. One is based on electromagnetisme, the other on earth conductivity. So, I was a bit hasty at meaning they are similar. That is also the reason why one is limited to 500 feet range while the other can reach through up to 3000 thick rock.
You better check that out : systeme Nicola. I don't put a hand on publishing date, but some folks in Europe are developing such a system for a while. They are aiming at caving rescue activities. In specific conditions they got the communication through 1000 m of rock. Interesting. Funny as well to get a feeling on how polluted can be our environment in the low frequencies realm.
In my opinion, you are making a good point about _no_drm_ cheapo 5 bucks copies. That would even have me buy DVD's. (I never baught one, way too expensive for entertainment)
Where I don't follow you is when you say the IPod so popular? Affordable tracks and... Sorry but legally downloadable tunes are not at all affordable. In Europe they are charge 1 Euro each. That's a monumental rip off. Consider the retail price of a 15 tracks CD : 15 to 22 euros. 1 Euro, affordable ? It's actually the fact of coughing up, in absolut, a small amount of money, which makes it feel like affordable. Like buying a small 10g plain chocolate sweet 1 Euro: not a lot?! Well, "only" 100 Euro kg : this is not what I consider affordable. To me 15 Euros / Cd is not at all affordable. This is already a rip off. But now consider the major's savings at selling online tunes : how many middle men are gone, no sending, no CD pressing... An online tune may start being no a rip off at.30 Euro each. Affordable would be.20 Euro.
It works the other way around as well. A naive enough very dedicated contributor can drive users litteraly nuts. With persistent contribs not bad enough to qualify for gross misbehaving it is hardly believable the havock such a user can cast. I ran once a request for comments. The RFC subject was so dumb that even after 10's of people telling him he could/should change manners, he still felt it was against him personnaly. After that RFC, not only the subject self-banned, but I also reduced drastically my contribs: way too expensive to explain idiots utterly basic rules. (Yes: there are some idiots. Don't be afraid to say it simply if there are some! I know: MO only.)
I take an exemple. The famous school subject got hammered so hard by the millions of kids claiming their's is really important that... it became unofficial policy to let high school exists in WP. Indeed ! Remove it once, and wait for the 10 next idiots. So basically: WP litteraly gave up, having practically no other choice but to let the idiots advertise their petty personal private space. I am biased: I believe high schools are not intrinsiqualy good WP subject.
That is the reason why I think WP could cope with even stricter rules than today. That is why I think from time to time, someone having a vision for the project should just say: shut a fuck up, wait, and let's talk it over later. I do think it's good.
My policy in WP ? The more heated an interaction, the slower I contribute. This gives me time to really consider one's other opinion. This cuts the noise in a pretty efficient manner. And... give up that article you are after: it's not your article, neither your bayby. Don't get burned out as I have been. The comunity will work for you: nice isn't it ?
I had a look at the so called "Wikipedia Truth stuff web site". I am happy this bunch found a space where to expose The truth. The web is wide, for the better.
One of the recurrent issues with Wikipedia, is some users consider WP like a kind of MySpace.com : put up whatever you fancy just because you can. May I encourage those users to create as many spin-off sites with lots of hurting Truth as possible, and have as much fun as they can. Alternatively one can create a space on MySpace: little censorship there. You can even claim the moon is made out of chocolate should you fancy it.
On a more "serious" tone, I often wonder what makes WP different from MySpace. How comes I feel so certain that WP contains some sense as opposed to (again just for the example) the (MO) "rubbish" lying on MySpace ? Probably because some folks, including Mr. J.W., have a vision for Wikipedia... and heroically sticks to it. Thanks Mr. Wales (and others) for doing the right thing: taking the risk from time to time of claiming something is not really worthy in WP. I guess that is the very reason why Wikipedia is not one-more-an-other-web-site.
I worked in a team trying to adapt XP to their work. I cared especially about nightlies automation. About the process, what I kind of remember ( a bit fuzy though) is: yes do have a theoretical process pretty clear in mind but trying to build the real solution without an "experimenting game" with the developpers is pretty hard. We had regulars meeting in order to change the process we where following. My point: I agree with previous post, start simple, and expend. The tools : ClearCase + a bug/service_request tracking system I don't remember the name. Some issues : both where not integrated. Not easy to track changing causes. We where using a file as a flag for mainline merges, and as a chage log. It worked ok, though was relying on good will. The bug tracking system was traditional heavy client : developpers hated it for it was providing a lot of things but not the essential in an easy manner. Some other point: we had the nightlies to automaticaly label everything ( all sources, test material *and* all the built material ). Great ! ( We were building middleware stuff which has to be compiled on combination of OS versions, compilers versions, JDK versions... about 15 platforms) I'd say yes: label well and strive for the "single label" for one release, even for multi components, multi team, apps. And automate evrything.
Now. I started 3 weeks ago a new job as ConfigMAnager. I am faced with Dimension tool from Serena. This tool aim at version control _and_ change management. Theoreticaly possible to track things up and down, as well as providing lifecycle for items, delegation, co/ci... I never heard about this tool before. And the thread here does not mention it. It gets me a bit more uncomfortable. Seeing so little in terms of forums, community. Hum. Any opinions on that tool ?
In general, one thing I am concerned of, is I feel some people imagine change tracking comes for free (not speaking about tool here). But if you do want to follow procedures, it actually _is_ complex, it takes some time and can not be done as a side task. Let me rephrase that: it _will_ somehow come in the way of the developpers. Painfull but real. How else could it be ? Obviously, we can make it easier, more comfy...
An other point. I would like to have more opinions on version tracking system + change tracking system. Any worked on real scenarios here ? Any integrated solutions ? Or integratable ones ? Subversion + JIRA for example ? I don't know Subversion. I liked JIRA.
I feel the amount of time/effort put into dispute resolution could be a reason to many for leaving the project. I am thinking about requests for comment, mediation, arbitration. I feel some users are gaming the project by trying to play smart ass during discussions. As an example, a recent RFC saw it's subject try to define gently the term fuck-off. No joke here. (No link because my point now is not to have fun).
I reduced drastically my contributions to WP for this very reason. It is exhausting having to work around cruft/fun/gamers.
My question. Is there any plan to have somehow more restrictive policies during disputes ? It would not be about a higher price to enter the WP "game" (need to show credits for example...), but a higher one to stay in the "game". Something like any strong words or any one caught at disrespecting the consensus (as an example re-creation of an AFD'ed article) will immediately trigger a short term block, or a way to slow down hot contributions. The goal would be to alleviate the burden by stopping at once what I identify as noise. Give every one a real chance at thinking within a collaborative spirit. Indeed, to my opinion there is a lack of understanding from some user that WP is not a forum or a game where one scores points.
I have seen recent new policies (no anonymous creation, semi protection...) with interest. A next step seems needed.
Note: I am well aware of things like consensus is not necessarily right. This is not the point of my question now.
For less WP aware people, a quick analogy : If one plays chess game, one have to abide by the chess game rules. There is no other way. The difference being if one wants to change WP rules, well... there are rules and processes to do so. It _IS_ possible. Yet, one still have to abide by the rules.
Thanks for this tool. Thanks for time and consideration.
From the article: He [Chirac] said the government will set up this year an independent authority to oversee the safety and security of France's nuclear power industry.
Probably a little off-topic but...
Europe warms to Nuke ? C'mon who's surprised ?That we are all gonna rely on nuclear power is no news, no surprise because simply said we (western folks) are too energy greedy to have any alternative providing sufficient power. This last statement is exemplified by Germany position: one of the most radical decision was made about getting rid of all nuclear power plant by 2020. Here we are (2006): there is no choice but to have nuclear, because it is today the only way to satisfy our sick demand. And Germany says "well maybe..."
The hijacking toward weapons... Chirac's statement is IMO *the* thing to be noticed because it relates to nuclear safety. Indeed today the main problem with nuclear power plant is human hijacking with goals of producing nuclear weapons. Mr. Charpak (physics Nobel price), Garwin and Journé explains well that the priority for now (I mean Monday 9 Jan 2006) is to set up an independent international authority with all powers: zero delay, unplanned inspections in all plants; no exceptions in every country. The priority is really to control precisely what happens with all nuclear fuel materials as well as waist materials.
Mr. Chirac wants to create a national authority ? Good. Not enough. Let's go for this international one which so much needed.
Go and read this book De Techernobyl en Tchernobyls (fr) (ref below). Pretty amazing things to be learned. To get a picture of how serious the problem is see the old The Russell-Einstein Manifesto. BTW discover the little known Pugwash organisation.
About availability of nuclear fuel. In the same book it is explained that sea water contains uranium. Precisely (page 195): Estimated 2.10^9 tones are available in sea water. By 1998 the Japanese estimated extraction cost at 100 USD per Kg. That could supply 2000 traditional nuclear power plant for 5000 years. So... it seams there is some FUD about fuel availability.
Reference: (fr) - "De Techernobyl en Tchernobyls" - September 2005 - G. Charpak, R.L Garwin, V. Journé - Edition Odile Jacob - ISBN 2-7381-1374-5.
I see here (SlashDot) and other source of information recurrent incorrect statements about Wikipedia. The summary is: there IS training, there IS responsibility, there IS watchdog system, this is not anarchy. Let's walk some statements.
* And the admins have developed a knee-jerk culture.
Incorrect. A persistent bad contribution needs to be slowed down quickly for it's damaging quickly. This will happen only if a user repeatedly contribute badly, after several attempt of communication and explanations on the nature of the problem. The feeling which could lead to this belief of "knee-jerk reaction is probably due to the common belief that "I" as a new contributor, can immediately do what "I" think is the best... Unfortunately, as a new user you may know plenty of things, you may be a genius, but you haven't a clue about the system your arriving on! If a new user does not realise that, he must be quickly slowed down. If this new user can not understand that he needs to learn, that is when the so called knee-jerk reaction will be felt.
Most slowing down actions in WP, complies to suggested procedures. Like: talk, explain, warn once, warn twice. If strong disagreement comes in, slow down both parties, get some external views and keep going. So... the "knee-jerk" reaction is not, by a very long shoot, the standard reaction.
* There's no real training for admins
This is plainly incorrect. A minimum of 5k edits are required. Involvement in different tasks is required like: recent changes patrol, articles for deletion, requests for comment, minor fix, major contributions.... All those things are verifiable. All admins will be subject to community scrutiny before being appointed admins. So... there is a serious bit of training for becoming an admin! It is quite thoroughly checked out.
* And I've never seen one yet apologize for abusing their authority
Then... go back to Wikipedia. This interesting statement of yours, is the key explanation, telling us how you can do so blatantly incorrect statements.
*...it's impossible to get literally every one of them to agree on anything,...
Note, that is precisely why in human communities we have, judges, tribunals and so on... Because humans do mistakes, are biased, are fraudsters and so on... Nothing very new. I'd say void'ish point ?
* Because of the one-sided nature of a debate in which one party can totally silence the other...
Precisely no. Except if one is a vandal, no one in WP can really be silenced arbitrarily. That is IMO one extraordinary aspect of WP: No one can slam the door shut. That is precisely the reason why some debates go on for so long in WP. See requests-for-comment or requests-for-arbitration: the talks can be heated, exhausting, over weeks... But no one can shout once for all. Decisions are collegial, not the result of one free-rider. That does not mean they are necessarily just, for sure. Only Mr. JW has absolut power which could be exerced limitlessly... Obvioussly he can not do that on about 800K articles!
*...noise is introduced into the system.
I also see signal-to-noise ratio as a major issue in WP. But not for the reason you identify here. Wikipedia risks to be noisy because of it's openness, not because of it's admins. That's is precisely the reason why some new technical solutions are introduced in WP: semi-protection, no anonymous article creation.
I think you have it all wrong on this one.:-)
Don't get me wrong: there are loads of issues with WP. Definitely not a simple experiment.
Intelligent Design is a point of view. Here is how. It expresses how amazed we, human beings, are in front of what we see. It says "how could it be possible that so many things works, so precisely without a pre-conceived plan ?"
But... What is conveniently forgotten by this view are the many many many other "attempts" of the evolution... which failed. It's a bit like looking at the top three winners of a race, and wonder at how perfect is this world, in which there is only winners. It does not make sense. So ID does not make rational sense.
How come then, that ID is tempting ? Well, because even though evolution theory is consistent, precise, predictive, provides more, better and verifiable explanations (in one world: it makes logical sense) it lakes one thing: it does not create the sense we human beings are craving for.
(Some) folks: forget about the nationalistic/risk/fight tone of TFA. This is sensationalism to get the article through. This does not help. It misses the point. It mis-reports the essential.
Folks, just think technically. Q: What gets to be used by a majority ? A: The most exposed stuff. Discussion: There should be no convincing work needed there (I hope.) That's the basic of advertisement. This is independent of nation/subject/topic/culture.
Getting English literature digitalised is fantastic. This will lead mechanically to more exposure, thus more use. There is no need to be French (or whatever you name it) to realise that. There is no agressivity involved in saying so. It is only being clear-minded about it to say "well we may want to gain exposure as well in order to not be forgotten on the long term". It is only fair. There is no question of imperialism here. Just relax! This is gentle and nice point. Ultimately, as mentioned above, Google will reference all and that's exactly what we (well... me) want? Isn't it?
Z.
PS: I am tired about the ranters: starting flames as soon as a French stuff comes on/. scene. Pretty much repetitive, always orientated toward fight...( yaaaaarning ), missing the point,not funny. Just please: relax, look and write about the interesting stuff. Just please. Can I beg?
When they see things trolled, they immediately fix it and thus, the integrity of the article is preserved. At that point, it's their baby, and they want it accurate!
I guess this contribution is from a kind-of-not-too-regular Wikipedia contributor. When you see an article trolled once, twice... 10 times you get tired quite quick with reverting. No to say that you don't have time to face your screen 7/24 ! In that case the best thing you can do is leave it. (See below) So... I don't think this is a correct reason of WP resistance to troll. I'd suggest the following. The mere idea of open-right-now-edition is likely to trigger enthusiasm... in both direction: destruction/construction. BUT did you ever play at destructing things ? Well the outcome is pretty much inevitable: one get quickly bored of it! One just don't get any fun/credit out of it. Now, just imagine the following: you Mr. nothing write a two liner Wikipedia article (i.e. sub-stub). Leave it a week and come back. You discover it got formatted, expended... That gives a feekin kick of pleasure: even a "ridiculous" "small" contribution started a much better one within 7 days! WHAT A JOY ! (No joke! Real experience there.)
My point: troller get tired. I imagine there are more "good" contributors because it's more fun and exiting. I guess trolling is getting caught because "lots of eyes scrutinising WP, eventually catch errors". Here it sounds a lot like bazaar model. It is not because one contributor is passionate about one topic that WP is resisting to troll, but because a lot of people are displeased by it.
Not so much of a "natural" process.
...Wikipedia is the perfect example of how a "natural unregulated process" can regulate itself.
AFAIU, the whole point of the memoir is to say that it was not so natural. Especially: the success of WP may be due to it's insistence on the aim at being an encyclopaedia (no a dictionary, not an essay publication bench)... There *were* and *are* some rules. (maybe a rta is needed here?)
A social experiment?
WP is an amazing social experiment. I guess what will be learned out of it won't be limited to it's (quite good) content, but from the way people interact almost real time, from radically different cultures (thus necessarily leading to culture shock). To me, it is a true wonder to be confronted with thoughts or behaviours so radically different to mine, that they have me jump... When later, I get to understand, appreciate and collaborate well, that's good. Again: it is a true wonder to see a very hot article being aggressively edited (not to say defaced) for later discovering a new version inclusive of all views... Leading to a stunning quality.
About the memoir. Maybe a little too much orientated at claiming credit... So what? Interesting? Definitely.
Let's go colonise space/planets/solar system/[you name it]
It seams we, human species are not able to build a long term sustainable system on earth. I don't see (yet) why we could do better in space/planets/solar system/[you name it]. So, to me, this go-to-space frenzy looks like pushing the dust under the carpet.
I also keep in mind an other aspect. We, as human species, are growing exponentially. Let's word it an other way just for the sake of clarity: our growth rate is growing. Doesn't it struck some people that the solution of such a problem is not by augmenting the resources? By doing so, we are barely adding an extra floor for us to fall a little longer. It looks to me a little blind to claim we need more resource. I'd say we need less consumption.
AFAIR, the Stephen Bakster Deep Future book is a good example of this growth scenario. He goes through a sequence of expansion steps until no black hole / neutron stare /... is left to provide energy. He then draws a picture like living beings sucking energy very slowly off the void and living over zillion years, veeery slowly. After last page, I still had the same silly question: why expand ?
Surviving catastrophic event ?
OK, could be a reason. But a fundamental reason is still missing. Just go one step after the survival: so what then? Maybe we could invent a philanthropic reason. Like: sustainable - descent life for all wherever we happen to be. But could that be challangy enough for a bunch-o-geek-on-da-move?
Yes, that would mean disabling tags with the target pointing to _new and such, but I think it's worth it
FYI, maybe that is what you are looking after,
about:config
browser.tabs.showSingleWindowModePrefs
That does not disable url specifying target. That forces the open into same application window.
From (dead) medialab Europe
MindGames section, the Relax to Win game.
Philip McDarby, Daragh McDonnell, Rob Burke
A racing game in which each person controls a dragon that moves quicker as they relax. The race is competitive and stressful however the person most relaxed wins. Possible applications of this research are in the treatment of stress, anxiety disorder and attention deficit disorder.
AFAIR, their aim was to actually provides games for teaching humans how to control some physiological signals, in order to enable better (simpler, more natural,... ?) Human/machine interfaces in the future.
C'mon guys. Spam is not a problem if you don't give your email addresses to spammers - and better, have a few email addresses to use when you don't trust someone. Hi hi: this one statement is so gently naive. Smile...
We are hit every day with a minimum of 900,000 distributed dictionary attacks, Hum.. the harsh reality. Made me think of the following:
Was posted a while ago... but IMO worth new mention.
No one is claiming this would be the definitive-all-purpose-magic-solution to spam but the scenario described at ISACS looked very interesting to me.
Basically it's an application of CAPTCHA to spam filtering. Any "unknown" sender is sent back with a randomly generated picture. This pics is never the same, is not based on text only. Once the test is passed, it is not submitted any more. Nothing too new here. The originality of the solution lies in the picture generation. In short, ask a computer to recognise a letter: easy. Ask a computer to recognise a banana: harder. Ask a computer to recognise several non letter symboles: hard enough to be not feasible by standard CPU power.
There are drawbacks with the described scenario: many email addresses, how about lists etc. But seams worth consideration.
Hope to see it deployed here and there for observing real usage.
She has something important to lose. It's called "freedom of expression".
Here we go... An other me-me-me. Because you have the freedom does not mean you are right. Because you can dump anything on the web, doesn't mean it is justified to do so. So many people believe naively they are entitled to have their word because they can have it. It is slightly subtler: because you have something smart to say/expose, then you may consider voicing it. The net has now an infinite amount of garbage (like blogs) just because the technical means exists. That is the reason I use the word vanity. Freedom of expression is not only the ability to have a voice, but the duty of making sense.
I mentioned the arguments of colours to point out the fact that some aspect of this dispute are rather petty. She was discussing about slight variations of shades... Using fuzzy qualifier.
In our case, let's face it : she was probably put into buying a domain just because of fashion. Fair enough. But when it comes to a two years fight: that motivation is thin. This woman just did not identify where her priorities are. Regarding what she claims she does, it does not make sense to me. Now: I will not take a stick and blame or force MO onto someone else. I do not promote dictatorship.:-) I just see a the end of the day: this story brings nothing to no one, and the content of the fight is actually void.
An early post in the thread said it: she should appeal, and settle with the (too late and hypocrite but welcomed) proposition of Kraft. As it could have been done at an early stage. All that for that... It's indeed a storm in a hot milka chocolate pot.
I see here we want to defend the small one against the big greedy one. Fair enough. I did not not make myself clear enough: Milka chocolate & co were 1) aggressive 2) too late with Ms Milka Tailor. Too bad for them. No questioning that.
My question is "is all that hassle worth it ?" Here is an insight from http://www.milka.fr/
Premierement, la societe KRAFT FOODS pretend que la page de garde de
mon site etait à l'origine de couleur mauve. Cette affirmation est sans
pertinence car la société KRAFT FOODS est titulaire d'une marque de
couleur mauve lilas et non mauve.
She tells us seriously that it is not fair to claim that her website could be confused with milk choc one because the colour is purple... bright not medium. No joking. Do you realise Ms Milka went through a 2 years legal procedures for that ?! Oh vanity we love you! (Ironic)
Really think about it. Is it worth it? Her business is local, her business is tailoring not PR-ing, she is not intending to expend market so... wtf fight for a shit web site with all that hassle ? What does she have to loose by changing to milkacouture.fr ? (ok: milka chocolate should pay the migration)
Someone who's ready to waste two years of life for that, makes me think... I become sceptical. I feel there could be a genuine attempt from her to abuse a well known brand name, or to get a bit of noise done.
I don't defend the small one because he is small, but because he is right. I don't feel (only MO) she is that right. I feel Kraft was just one more big wrong bully. Everyone's a loser in this story.
I read the claims of Mme. Milka, who is just a tailor in a city. I also saw articles in http://www.liberation.fr. This is all together a bit ridiculous. The Mme Milka web site is a teen-ager web site, the potential customers are ultra-local only.
She claims I am known by my customers as "Milka" not "Milka Couture", so I can not change my domain name to milkacouture. People will look for "milka" not "milka couture"... She explains later web site rank at a far 41 in a search...
Summary: She is unknown, probably does not need visibility on the net for customers are ultra-locals, her site is anyway badly ranked. And she is fighting for that? I name that a time-waster! She wasting her, my, milka folks time.
Don't get me wrong, I also read the summon sent by Kraft to her. It is was highly aggressive, legaly speaking, with ultimatom and all the legal BS. I'd say the legal advise was very bad for more likely, a gentle phone call could have solved the problem. The lawyer used heavy artillery for nothing ! And now... it back-fires on the brand. Well done mister-legal: you got ++bucks in your pocket and annoyed everyone.
Avoiding flash. If you ue FireFox.
For example edit C:\Documents and Settings\user.name\Application
Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\default.nsy\chrome\u serContent.css
Translation: zero flash - zero iframe - no exception. May be a little too drastic.
Personaly I don't beleive in viability of adding a little rule from time to time for such and such add which makes it's way through. I am lazy: no feature = no problem.
On a more general aspect It is quite concerning to see abuse of "floating" stuff because this one, we won't be able to filter... Yes, I believe it's a question of day advertising site will proxy to advertisers, so we won't be able to filter urls, or ip's. Supposing divs are named, we could filter on names ? Arg: the advertising site will mangle it's own legtimate div's name just to let adv divs goes through.
I am afraid there won't be solution but to turn off JavaScript completely... Once again we'll have the conclusion no feature = good feature. The lynx evengelist may have the ultimate answer. Aaarg!
For advertisers. Please just have nice text adv on the side of the page. ( no blink, flash, move,...). Just 5 words bold + 10 words descr. I don't care of this one. But there is more: because I don't find them annoying I read them ( some of them). But wait there is more: I even clicked recently on one.
Well I just dealt recently "simple" backups via rsync + ssh. If you can rsync something from remote onto target with no special protection regarding rsync... If target is compromised, a malicious user can run arbitrary commands through rsync. And rsync server provides full read access to FS. (Well, within user permissions though.) Isn't it a bit the same problem that this software has? I would not be surprised to hear that you can customize the backup server to limit access/actions for better sefety. Which is exactly what you have to do with ssh on remote server: filter commands passed through ssh before running them. I mean: each remote you want to back up will have to be worked on a little.
It's off topic but FYI: Rsync server can take as a file list an arbitrary unix command.
rsync user@remote:'`\rm -rf/`'.
Pretty efficient isn't it ? (unix file perm will limit the damage though).
Hi there. Actually that is the only theoretical weakness I see there. So a good post. Note as mentioned, that would involve a few millions email being sent for tests... un-practicle.
But also: wouldn't it be enough to add "noise" to the picture. I mean just 3 extra letters over the pic and you multiply potential combinations by at the very least 46^3 (26 + 10 digit + 10 punctuation )
Practically, add 4 random letters to the pics and you have a 4 M factor. Could be a little cluttered but still practical for humans, and dead end for brute force. That is why I don't think your critic hold.:-)
I keep well in mind author does not claim his system to be a "one stop" solution for spam. The point being, if you start receiving 10's of attempts from a single server or on a single address: just disable addresses. And the game is over for spammer, whatever number of combinations.
Slashdot Mirror
Moderate parent up
Thank you llZENll
Loads of people are naively happy about reducing consumption. We need not to do so. Instead reducing the rate our consumption growth is what we want to awaken at. We need to have zero growing. Yes: zero growth. Pretty unconventional amongst all those liberal idiots claiming the economical growth is the way, isn't it ? The way sure, straight into the wall.
Moderate parent up
bye.
Good point. Also, AFAIU the system described in the article do not need grouding: the two systems do not use the same principles. One is based on electromagnetisme, the other on earth conductivity. So, I was a bit hasty at meaning they are similar. That is also the reason why one is limited to 500 feet range while the other can reach through up to 3000 thick rock.
Bye. Z.
Hi there.
You better check that out : systeme Nicola. I don't put a hand on publishing date, but some folks in Europe are developing such a system for a while. They are aiming at caving rescue activities. In specific conditions they got the communication through 1000 m of rock. Interesting. Funny as well to get a feeling on how polluted can be our environment in the low frequencies realm.
Bye. Z.
Hi.
In my opinion, you are making a good point about _no_drm_ cheapo 5 bucks copies. That would even have me buy DVD's. (I never baught one, way too expensive for entertainment)
Where I don't follow you is when you say the IPod so popular? Affordable tracks and ... Sorry but legally downloadable tunes are not at all affordable. In Europe they are charge 1 Euro each. That's a monumental rip off. Consider the retail price of a 15 tracks CD : 15 to 22 euros. 1 Euro, affordable ? It's actually the fact of coughing up, in absolut, a small amount of money, which makes it feel like affordable. Like buying a small 10g plain chocolate sweet 1 Euro: not a lot?! Well, "only" 100 Euro kg : this is not what I consider affordable. To me 15 Euros / Cd is not at all affordable. This is already a rip off. But now consider the major's savings at selling online tunes : how many middle men are gone, no sending, no CD pressing... An online tune may start being no a rip off at .30 Euro each. Affordable would be .20 Euro.
Bye
It works the other way around as well. A naive enough very dedicated contributor can drive users litteraly nuts. With persistent contribs not bad enough to qualify for gross misbehaving it is hardly believable the havock such a user can cast. I ran once a request for comments. The RFC subject was so dumb that even after 10's of people telling him he could/should change manners, he still felt it was against him personnaly. After that RFC, not only the subject self-banned, but I also reduced drastically my contribs: way too expensive to explain idiots utterly basic rules. (Yes: there are some idiots. Don't be afraid to say it simply if there are some! I know: MO only.)
I take an exemple. The famous school subject got hammered so hard by the millions of kids claiming their's is really important that... it became unofficial policy to let high school exists in WP. Indeed ! Remove it once, and wait for the 10 next idiots. So basically: WP litteraly gave up, having practically no other choice but to let the idiots advertise their petty personal private space. I am biased: I believe high schools are not intrinsiqualy good WP subject.
That is the reason why I think WP could cope with even stricter rules than today. That is why I think from time to time, someone having a vision for the project should just say: shut a fuck up, wait, and let's talk it over later. I do think it's good.
My policy in WP ? The more heated an interaction, the slower I contribute. This gives me time to really consider one's other opinion. This cuts the noise in a pretty efficient manner. And... give up that article you are after: it's not your article, neither your bayby. Don't get burned out as I have been. The comunity will work for you: nice isn't it ?
Bye. Z.
I had a look at the so called "Wikipedia Truth stuff web site". I am happy this bunch found a space where to expose The truth. The web is wide, for the better.
One of the recurrent issues with Wikipedia, is some users consider WP like a kind of MySpace.com : put up whatever you fancy just because you can. May I encourage those users to create as many spin-off sites with lots of hurting Truth as possible, and have as much fun as they can. Alternatively one can create a space on MySpace: little censorship there. You can even claim the moon is made out of chocolate should you fancy it.
On a more "serious" tone, I often wonder what makes WP different from MySpace. How comes I feel so certain that WP contains some sense as opposed to (again just for the example) the (MO) "rubbish" lying on MySpace ? Probably because some folks, including Mr. J.W., have a vision for Wikipedia... and heroically sticks to it. Thanks Mr. Wales (and others) for doing the right thing: taking the risk from time to time of claiming something is not really worthy in WP. I guess that is the very reason why Wikipedia is not one-more-an-other-web-site.
Z.
Hi.
I worked in a team trying to adapt XP to their work. I cared especially about nightlies automation. About the process, what I kind of remember ( a bit fuzy though) is: yes do have a theoretical process pretty clear in mind but trying to build the real solution without an "experimenting game" with the developpers is pretty hard. We had regulars meeting in order to change the process we where following. My point: I agree with previous post, start simple, and expend. The tools : ClearCase + a bug/service_request tracking system I don't remember the name. Some issues : both where not integrated. Not easy to track changing causes. We where using a file as a flag for mainline merges, and as a chage log. It worked ok, though was relying on good will. The bug tracking system was traditional heavy client : developpers hated it for it was providing a lot of things but not the essential in an easy manner. Some other point: we had the nightlies to automaticaly label everything ( all sources, test material *and* all the built material ). Great ! ( We were building middleware stuff which has to be compiled on combination of OS versions, compilers versions, JDK versions... about 15 platforms) I'd say yes: label well and strive for the "single label" for one release, even for multi components, multi team, apps. And automate evrything.
Now. I started 3 weeks ago a new job as ConfigMAnager. I am faced with Dimension tool from Serena. This tool aim at version control _and_ change management. Theoreticaly possible to track things up and down, as well as providing lifecycle for items, delegation, co/ci... I never heard about this tool before. And the thread here does not mention it. It gets me a bit more uncomfortable. Seeing so little in terms of forums, community. Hum. Any opinions on that tool ?
In general, one thing I am concerned of, is I feel some people imagine change tracking comes for free (not speaking about tool here). But if you do want to follow procedures, it actually _is_ complex, it takes some time and can not be done as a side task. Let me rephrase that: it _will_ somehow come in the way of the developpers. Painfull but real. How else could it be ? Obviously, we can make it easier, more comfy...
An other point. I would like to have more opinions on version tracking system + change tracking system. Any worked on real scenarios here ? Any integrated solutions ? Or integratable ones ? Subversion + JIRA for example ? I don't know Subversion. I liked JIRA.
Z.
Hello.
I feel the amount of time/effort put into dispute resolution could be a reason to many for leaving the project. I am thinking about requests for comment, mediation, arbitration. I feel some users are gaming the project by trying to play smart ass during discussions. As an example, a recent RFC saw it's subject try to define gently the term fuck-off. No joke here. (No link because my point now is not to have fun).
I reduced drastically my contributions to WP for this very reason. It is exhausting having to work around cruft/fun/gamers.
My question. Is there any plan to have somehow more restrictive policies during disputes ? It would not be about a higher price to enter the WP "game" (need to show credits for example...), but a higher one to stay in the "game". Something like any strong words or any one caught at disrespecting the consensus (as an example re-creation of an AFD'ed article) will immediately trigger a short term block, or a way to slow down hot contributions. The goal would be to alleviate the burden by stopping at once what I identify as noise. Give every one a real chance at thinking within a collaborative spirit. Indeed, to my opinion there is a lack of understanding from some user that WP is not a forum or a game where one scores points.
I have seen recent new policies (no anonymous creation, semi protection...) with interest. A next step seems needed.
Note: I am well aware of things like consensus is not necessarily right. This is not the point of my question now.
For less WP aware people, a quick analogy : If one plays chess game, one have to abide by the chess game rules. There is no other way. The difference being if one wants to change WP rules, well... there are rules and processes to do so. It _IS_ possible. Yet, one still have to abide by the rules.
Thanks for this tool. Thanks for time and consideration.
Zijus.
From the article: He [Chirac] said the government will set up this year an independent authority to oversee the safety and security of France's nuclear power industry.
Probably a little off-topic but...
Europe warms to Nuke ? C'mon who's surprised ?That we are all gonna rely on nuclear power is no news, no surprise because simply said we (western folks) are too energy greedy to have any alternative providing sufficient power. This last statement is exemplified by Germany position: one of the most radical decision was made about getting rid of all nuclear power plant by 2020. Here we are (2006): there is no choice but to have nuclear, because it is today the only way to satisfy our sick demand. And Germany says "well maybe..."
The hijacking toward weapons... Chirac's statement is IMO *the* thing to be noticed because it relates to nuclear safety. Indeed today the main problem with nuclear power plant is human hijacking with goals of producing nuclear weapons. Mr. Charpak (physics Nobel price), Garwin and Journé explains well that the priority for now (I mean Monday 9 Jan 2006) is to set up an independent international authority with all powers: zero delay, unplanned inspections in all plants; no exceptions in every country. The priority is really to control precisely what happens with all nuclear fuel materials as well as waist materials.
Mr. Chirac wants to create a national authority ? Good. Not enough. Let's go for this international one which so much needed.
Go and read this book De Techernobyl en Tchernobyls (fr) (ref below). Pretty amazing things to be learned. To get a picture of how serious the problem is see the old The Russell-Einstein Manifesto. BTW discover the little known Pugwash organisation.
About availability of nuclear fuel. In the same book it is explained that sea water contains uranium. Precisely (page 195): Estimated 2.10^9 tones are available in sea water. By 1998 the Japanese estimated extraction cost at 100 USD per Kg. That could supply 2000 traditional nuclear power plant for 5000 years. So... it seams there is some FUD about fuel availability.
Reference: (fr) - "De Techernobyl en Tchernobyls" - September 2005 - G. Charpak, R.L Garwin, V. Journé - Edition Odile Jacob - ISBN 2-7381-1374-5.
Bye. Z.
Hi.
I see here (SlashDot) and other source of information recurrent incorrect statements about Wikipedia. The summary is: there IS training, there IS responsibility, there IS watchdog system, this is not anarchy. Let's walk some statements.
* And the admins have developed a knee-jerk culture.
Incorrect. A persistent bad contribution needs to be slowed down quickly for it's damaging quickly. This will happen only if a user repeatedly contribute badly, after several attempt of communication and explanations on the nature of the problem. The feeling which could lead to this belief of "knee-jerk reaction is probably due to the common belief that "I" as a new contributor, can immediately do what "I" think is the best... Unfortunately, as a new user you may know plenty of things, you may be a genius, but you haven't a clue about the system your arriving on! If a new user does not realise that, he must be quickly slowed down. If this new user can not understand that he needs to learn, that is when the so called knee-jerk reaction will be felt.
Most slowing down actions in WP, complies to suggested procedures. Like: talk, explain, warn once, warn twice. If strong disagreement comes in, slow down both parties, get some external views and keep going. So... the "knee-jerk" reaction is not, by a very long shoot, the standard reaction.
* There's no real training for admins
This is plainly incorrect. A minimum of 5k edits are required. Involvement in different tasks is required like: recent changes patrol, articles for deletion, requests for comment, minor fix, major contributions.... All those things are verifiable. All admins will be subject to community scrutiny before being appointed admins. So... there is a serious bit of training for becoming an admin! It is quite thoroughly checked out.
* And I've never seen one yet apologize for abusing their authority
Then... go back to Wikipedia. This interesting statement of yours, is the key explanation, telling us how you can do so blatantly incorrect statements.
* ...it's impossible to get literally every one of them to agree on anything,...
Note, that is precisely why in human communities we have, judges, tribunals and so on... Because humans do mistakes, are biased, are fraudsters and so on... Nothing very new. I'd say void'ish point ?
* Because of the one-sided nature of a debate in which one party can totally silence the other...
Precisely no. Except if one is a vandal, no one in WP can really be silenced arbitrarily. That is IMO one extraordinary aspect of WP: No one can slam the door shut. That is precisely the reason why some debates go on for so long in WP. See requests-for-comment or requests-for-arbitration: the talks can be heated, exhausting, over weeks... But no one can shout once for all. Decisions are collegial, not the result of one free-rider. That does not mean they are necessarily just, for sure. Only Mr. JW has absolut power which could be exerced limitlessly... Obvioussly he can not do that on about 800K articles!
* ...noise is introduced into the system.
I also see signal-to-noise ratio as a major issue in WP. But not for the reason you identify here. Wikipedia risks to be noisy because of it's openness, not because of it's admins. That's is precisely the reason why some new technical solutions are introduced in WP: semi-protection, no anonymous article creation.
I think you have it all wrong on this one. :-)
Don't get me wrong: there are loads of issues with WP. Definitely not a simple experiment.
Bye. Zijus.
Hello.
Intelligent Design is a point of view. Here is how. It expresses how amazed we, human beings, are in front of what we see. It says "how could it be possible that so many things works, so precisely without a pre-conceived plan ?"
But... What is conveniently forgotten by this view are the many many many other "attempts" of the evolution... which failed. It's a bit like looking at the top three winners of a race, and wonder at how perfect is this world, in which there is only winners. It does not make sense. So ID does not make rational sense.
How come then, that ID is tempting ? Well, because even though evolution theory is consistent, precise, predictive, provides more, better and verifiable explanations (in one world: it makes logical sense) it lakes one thing: it does not create the sense we human beings are craving for.
Bye. Z.
(Some) folks: forget about the nationalistic/risk/fight tone of TFA. This is sensationalism to get the article through. This does not help. It misses the point. It mis-reports the essential.
Folks, just think technically. Q: What gets to be used by a majority ? A: The most exposed stuff. Discussion: There should be no convincing work needed there (I hope.) That's the basic of advertisement. This is independent of nation/subject/topic/culture.
Getting English literature digitalised is fantastic. This will lead mechanically to more exposure, thus more use. There is no need to be French (or whatever you name it) to realise that. There is no agressivity involved in saying so. It is only being clear-minded about it to say "well we may want to gain exposure as well in order to not be forgotten on the long term". It is only fair. There is no question of imperialism here. Just relax! This is gentle and nice point. Ultimately, as mentioned above, Google will reference all and that's exactly what we (well... me) want? Isn't it?
Z.
PS: I am tired about the ranters: starting flames as soon as a French stuff comes on /. scene. Pretty much repetitive, always orientated toward fight...( yaaaaarning ), missing the point ,not funny. Just please: relax, look and write about the interesting stuff. Just please. Can I beg?
Resistance to destruction.
When they see things trolled, they immediately fix it and thus, the integrity of the article is preserved. At that point, it's their baby, and they want it accurate!
I guess this contribution is from a kind-of-not-too-regular Wikipedia contributor. When you see an article trolled once, twice... 10 times you get tired quite quick with reverting. No to say that you don't have time to face your screen 7/24 ! In that case the best thing you can do is leave it. (See below) So... I don't think this is a correct reason of WP resistance to troll. I'd suggest the following. The mere idea of open-right-now-edition is likely to trigger enthusiasm... in both direction: destruction/construction. BUT did you ever play at destructing things ? Well the outcome is pretty much inevitable: one get quickly bored of it! One just don't get any fun/credit out of it. Now, just imagine the following: you Mr. nothing write a two liner Wikipedia article (i.e. sub-stub). Leave it a week and come back. You discover it got formatted, expended... That gives a feekin kick of pleasure: even a "ridiculous" "small" contribution started a much better one within 7 days! WHAT A JOY ! (No joke! Real experience there.)
My point: troller get tired. I imagine there are more "good" contributors because it's more fun and exiting. I guess trolling is getting caught because "lots of eyes scrutinising WP, eventually catch errors". Here it sounds a lot like bazaar model. It is not because one contributor is passionate about one topic that WP is resisting to troll, but because a lot of people are displeased by it.
Not so much of a "natural" process.
AFAIU, the whole point of the memoir is to say that it was not so natural. Especially: the success of WP may be due to it's insistence on the aim at being an encyclopaedia (no a dictionary, not an essay publication bench) ... There *were* and *are* some rules. (maybe a rta is needed here?)
A social experiment?
WP is an amazing social experiment. I guess what will be learned out of it won't be limited to it's (quite good) content, but from the way people interact almost real time, from radically different cultures (thus necessarily leading to culture shock). To me, it is a true wonder to be confronted with thoughts or behaviours so radically different to mine, that they have me jump... When later, I get to understand, appreciate and collaborate well, that's good. Again: it is a true wonder to see a very hot article being aggressively edited (not to say defaced) for later discovering a new version inclusive of all views... Leading to a stunning quality.
About the memoir. Maybe a little too much orientated at claiming credit... So what?
Interesting? Definitely.
Z.
Let's go colonise space/planets/solar system/[you name it]
It seams we, human species are not able to build a long term sustainable system on earth. I don't see (yet) why we could do better in space/planets/solar system/[you name it]. So, to me, this go-to-space frenzy looks like pushing the dust under the carpet.
I also keep in mind an other aspect. We, as human species, are growing exponentially. Let's word it an other way just for the sake of clarity: our growth rate is growing. Doesn't it struck some people that the solution of such a problem is not by augmenting the resources? By doing so, we are barely adding an extra floor for us to fall a little longer. It looks to me a little blind to claim we need more resource. I'd say we need less consumption.
AFAIR, the Stephen Bakster Deep Future book is a good example of this growth scenario. He goes through a sequence of expansion steps until no black hole / neutron stare / ... is left to provide energy. He then draws a picture like living beings sucking energy very slowly off the void and living over zillion years, veeery slowly. After last page, I still had the same silly question: why expand ?
Surviving catastrophic event ? OK, could be a reason. But a fundamental reason is still missing. Just go one step after the survival: so what then? Maybe we could invent a philanthropic reason. Like: sustainable - descent life for all wherever we happen to be. But could that be challangy enough for a bunch-o-geek-on-da-move?
Ciao. Z.
Yes, that would mean disabling tags with the target pointing to _new and such, but I think it's worth it
FYI, maybe that is what you are looking after,
about:config
browser.tabs.showSingleWindowModePrefs
That does not disable url specifying target. That forces the open into same application window.
Bye. Z.
From (dead) medialab Europe MindGames section, the Relax to Win game.
Philip McDarby, Daragh McDonnell, Rob Burke A racing game in which each person controls a dragon that moves quicker as they relax. The race is competitive and stressful however the person most relaxed wins. Possible applications of this research are in the treatment of stress, anxiety disorder and attention deficit disorder.
AFAIR, their aim was to actually provides games for teaching humans how to control some physiological signals, in order to enable better (simpler, more natural, ... ?) Human/machine interfaces in the future.
Z.
I can spot posts on the net at least from year 2000 about Mexico city running taxis and public buses on compressed air.
Am I missing the point ?
Z.
C'mon guys. Spam is not a problem if you don't give your email addresses to spammers - and better, have a few email addresses to use when you don't trust someone.
Hi hi: this one statement is so gently naive. Smile...
We are hit every day with a minimum of 900,000 distributed dictionary attacks,
Hum.. the harsh reality. Made me think of the following:
Was posted a while ago... but IMO worth new mention.
No one is claiming this would be the definitive-all-purpose-magic-solution to spam but the scenario described at ISACS looked very interesting to me.
Basically it's an application of CAPTCHA to spam filtering. Any "unknown" sender is sent back with a randomly generated picture. This pics is never the same, is not based on text only. Once the test is passed, it is not submitted any more. Nothing too new here. The originality of the solution lies in the picture generation. In short, ask a computer to recognise a letter: easy. Ask a computer to recognise a banana: harder. Ask a computer to recognise several non letter symboles: hard enough to be not feasible by standard CPU power.
There are drawbacks with the described scenario: many email addresses, how about lists etc. But seams worth consideration.
Hope to see it deployed here and there for observing real usage.
Z.
She has something important to lose. It's called "freedom of expression".
Here we go... An other me-me-me. Because you have the freedom does not mean you are right. Because you can dump anything on the web, doesn't mean it is justified to do so. So many people believe naively they are entitled to have their word because they can have it. It is slightly subtler: because you have something smart to say/expose, then you may consider voicing it. The net has now an infinite amount of garbage (like blogs) just because the technical means exists. That is the reason I use the word vanity. Freedom of expression is not only the ability to have a voice, but the duty of making sense.
I mentioned the arguments of colours to point out the fact that some aspect of this dispute are rather petty. She was discussing about slight variations of shades... Using fuzzy qualifier.
In our case, let's face it : she was probably put into buying a domain just because of fashion. Fair enough. But when it comes to a two years fight: that motivation is thin. This woman just did not identify where her priorities are. Regarding what she claims she does, it does not make sense to me. Now: I will not take a stick and blame or force MO onto someone else. I do not promote dictatorship. :-) I just see a the end of the day: this story brings nothing to no one, and the content of the fight is actually void.
An early post in the thread said it: she should appeal, and settle with the (too late and hypocrite but welcomed) proposition of Kraft. As it could have been done at an early stage. All that for that... It's indeed a storm in a hot milka chocolate pot.
Z.
You're a manager of something...
Nope.
And nope again.
I see here we want to defend the small one against the big greedy one. Fair enough. I did not not make myself clear enough: Milka chocolate & co were 1) aggressive 2) too late with Ms Milka Tailor. Too bad for them. No questioning that.
My question is "is all that hassle worth it ?" Here is an insight from http://www.milka.fr/
She tells us seriously that it is not fair to claim that her website could be confused with milk choc one because the colour is purple... bright not medium. No joking. Do you realise Ms Milka went through a 2 years legal procedures for that ?! Oh vanity we love you! (Ironic)
Really think about it. Is it worth it? Her business is local, her business is tailoring not PR-ing, she is not intending to expend market so... wtf fight for a shit web site with all that hassle ? What does she have to loose by changing to milkacouture.fr ? (ok: milka chocolate should pay the migration)
Someone who's ready to waste two years of life for that, makes me think... I become sceptical. I feel there could be a genuine attempt from her to abuse a well known brand name, or to get a bit of noise done.
I don't defend the small one because he is small, but because he is right. I don't feel (only MO) she is that right. I feel Kraft was just one more big wrong bully. Everyone's a loser in this story.
A storm in hot milka chocolate pot. Bye bye. Z.
The web site looks like a (bad) teenager one. /. has a worldwide potential audience.
Milka Couture has a breath taking round-the-corner audience.
I maintain: Storm in a hot milka pot.
Z.
I read the claims of Mme. Milka, who is just a tailor in a city. I also saw articles in http://www.liberation.fr. This is all together a bit ridiculous. The Mme Milka web site is a teen-ager web site, the potential customers are ultra-local only.
She claims I am known by my customers as "Milka" not "Milka Couture", so I can not change my domain name to milkacouture. People will look for "milka" not "milka couture"... She explains later web site rank at a far 41 in a search...
Summary: She is unknown, probably does not need visibility on the net for customers are ultra-locals, her site is anyway badly ranked. And she is fighting for that? I name that a time-waster! She wasting her, my, milka folks time.
Don't get me wrong, I also read the summon sent by Kraft to her. It is was highly aggressive, legaly speaking, with ultimatom and all the legal BS. I'd say the legal advise was very bad for more likely, a gentle phone call could have solved the problem. The lawyer used heavy artillery for nothing ! And now... it back-fires on the brand. Well done mister-legal: you got ++bucks in your pocket and annoyed everyone.
Z.
Avoiding flash. If you ue FireFox. For example edit C:\Documents and Settings\user.name\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\default.nsy\chrome\u serContent.css
Translation: zero flash - zero iframe - no exception. May be a little too drastic.
Personaly I don't beleive in viability of adding a little rule from time to time for such and such add which makes it's way through. I am lazy: no feature = no problem.
On a more general aspect It is quite concerning to see abuse of "floating" stuff because this one, we won't be able to filter... Yes, I believe it's a question of day advertising site will proxy to advertisers, so we won't be able to filter urls, or ip's. Supposing divs are named, we could filter on names ? Arg: the advertising site will mangle it's own legtimate div's name just to let adv divs goes through.
I am afraid there won't be solution but to turn off JavaScript completely... Once again we'll have the conclusion no feature = good feature. The lynx evengelist may have the ultimate answer. Aaarg!
For advertisers. Please just have nice text adv on the side of the page. ( no blink, flash, move, ...). Just 5 words bold + 10 words descr. I don't care of this one. But there is more: because I don't find them annoying I read them ( some of them). But wait there is more: I even clicked recently on one.
Z.
Hi there.
Well I just dealt recently "simple" backups via rsync + ssh. If you can rsync something from remote onto target with no special protection regarding rsync... If target is compromised, a malicious user can run arbitrary commands through rsync. And rsync server provides full read access to FS. (Well, within user permissions though.) Isn't it a bit the same problem that this software has? I would not be surprised to hear that you can customize the backup server to limit access/actions for better sefety. Which is exactly what you have to do with ssh on remote server: filter commands passed through ssh before running them. I mean: each remote you want to back up will have to be worked on a little.
It's off topic but FYI: Rsync server can take as a file list an arbitrary unix command.
Pretty efficient isn't it ? (unix file perm will limit the damage though).
Bye bye.
Z.
Hi there.
:-)
Actually that is the only theoretical weakness I see there. So a good post. Note as mentioned, that would involve a few millions email being sent for tests... un-practicle.
But also: wouldn't it be enough to add "noise" to the picture. I mean just 3 extra letters over the pic and you multiply potential combinations by at the very least 46^3 (26 + 10 digit + 10 punctuation )
Practically, add 4 random letters to the pics and you have a 4 M factor. Could be a little cluttered but still practical for humans, and dead end for brute force. That is why I don't think your critic hold.
I keep well in mind author does not claim his system to be a "one stop" solution for spam. The point being, if you start receiving 10's of attempts from a single server or on a single address: just disable addresses. And the game is over for spammer, whatever number of combinations.
Z.