You don't like snail mail from AOL, Microsoft, and a few other American based companies. Therefore you decide to go around to everyone's house and take any mail, coming from any American address, out of their mail boxes and you put all of that mail into a pile. In order to receive the mail, the recipients need to go grab the mail from the pile.
Yes, yes, yes. I know. You don't have any obligation to carry the news yourself. I have read the UDP FAQ, I have been on USENET for many years, I even run a few news servers myself.
If you don't like it, decide to organize an OPT-IN boycott. Setting up cancelbots, etc, is an OPT-OUT boycott. If a news server admin doesn't want to participate in the UDP, they must specifically change their news server config to do so. I'm pretty sure that most news servers are set by default to accept ANY cancel message whatsoever.
Any UDP involving cancelbots is not analogous to a "I don't like 'X' network, so I will not carry their packets" situation, it is more similar to "I don't like 'X' network, so I will spoof their IP and send TCP Resets to any packets coming out of their network. If people don't like the TCP resets, they don't have to accept them." Of course, you know very well that most servers will accept TCP resets appearing to come from the host itself.
That being said, I support a non-invasive OPT-IN UDP (boycott) against @Home, because although some of the @Home affiliates/cable providers do a good job of abuse handling, some do not and @Home itself just plain sucks in handling abuse complaints.
It's too bad you missed out on interviewing Bennett Haselton of Peacefire.
Peacefire is a very unique organization in that it is the only organization fighting online censorship that I know of that is run by and for youth themselves.
The Peacefire web site gives some great information on why government censorship and censorware programs are bad, in a very youth-friendly way. It also gives out info on how to grab the list of sites blocked by much of the censorware and info on how to disable most censorware products.
Bennett, on behalf of all Peacefire members, was also one of the plaintiffs against the original CDA.
As someone who used to own a business and had the misfortunate of having to reply to RFPs on the small chance that we might have been that supplier PRESELECTED before the bid process began, I know that this happens all the time. It's not right.
Both governments, NGOs, and private business seem to often distort their RFPs for a supplier already chosen. You won't believe how often I saw RFPs that were very obviously titled towards a specific bidder.
Imagine being required to "show familiarity with the aims and objectives of the organization". When one of the bidders has worked with them in the past, they obviously have a definate advantage! I can mention countless other ones, but this having been several years ago, I forget most of the specific details.
Often government and NGOs send out RFPs only because they are REQUIRED to do so by either laws or internal policies. Most of the time, by the time the project requirements are made, they already are leaning towards a specific supplier.
I understand where Corel's lawyers are coming from here.
Disclaimer I'm biased; I now work for Corel. I don't always agree with our legal department (no one agrees with everyone all of the time), but in this case because of my own experiences I wholeheartedly agree.
Oh, yes, the U.S. government would never prosecute/persecute people based on pure speculation and rumour, and for something which should be perfectly legal.
Just ask the victims of the House Committee on Un-American Activites, victims of Senator Joseph McCarthy, or all those poor hippies who were investigated in the 60's for protesting peacefully against the war in Vietnam.
I'm afraid to break the news to you, but that would NOT mean China is only the third country to send austronauts to space. If they were successful, it would make China the third country to send astronauts to space in their own space shuttle. I'm absolutely positively sure that us Canadians have sent our own austronauts into space in NASA space shuttles, and it's possible that other countries also have similar partnerships between their space programs and either the U.S. or Russia.
With the Findings of Fact, I think this really turns out to be a dumb move on Microsoft's part. One of the things that Judge Jackson stressed the most in the decision (and I've read the entire thing) is that by attempting to control the Internet as a possible middleware platform, Microsoft was illegally protecting what he calls the applications barrier to entry.
This looks like yet another attempt for Microsoft to control the Internet, thus trying to keep as much of it as possible Internet Explorer/Windows-dependant, and thus control the applications barrier to entry in the Operating Systems market.
I found it very interesting that development of content was a part of this deal. I wonder how much of it will use "features" only found in Internet Explorer, like ActiveX. With the deals in the past that MS has made (with Disney, Pointcast, etc), I also wonder if there is actually a legal requirement in this deal for some Internet Explorer dependancy.
I wonder how the DOJ and Judge Jackson will react to this move when it comes time for the final decision in DOJ v. Microsoft. It definately doesn't look good to me. If anything, it seems to me that MS still feels they are invincible and can still do anything they want, even things that Judge Jackson specifically and expressly condemned. If Judge Jackson has any emotions, which with his being human is pretty likely, I wouldn't be surprised if he was pretty pissed off at MS right about now.
Technically that's true. If the minor wants to not follow the terms of the contract, she can. If he doesn't want to, he doesn't. The whole point to a contract is that both parties MUST follow it. So really it's as if a contract does not exist. It doesn't really matter anyways, because almost no one would enter into a contract with a minor and no one would ever pursue a minor in court on an alleged contract violation.
Another thing is.. if after you reach the age of majority, you re-validate a contract (for example, by continuing payments on a loan), it's as if the contract was entered into legally.
By the way, I'm speaking about common law in Canada. I would guess that common law is the same throughout Canada/U.S./U.K./Australia/some other commonwealth countries, but I'm not sure.
I wonder how contracts/minors works in Quebec (they run on France's written civil law).
You seem to imply that a contract is a contract no matter what. That's just plain wrong from a legal point of view.
Some notable exceptions in the common law: - A contract entered into for the purpose of committing an illegal act is null and void. - A contract entered into by a minor is null and void. - And especially... a contract which nullifies your ability to make a reasonable living is null and void.
Also know that the judge has wide discretion here since this is a common law case and no written law is involved. While he has to follow precedents from higher courts, the rest is up to his own judgement.
This kind of stuff really pisses me off, because this is nothing more than turning kids into scapegoats for all of society's problems. If it were politically correct to run this type of test for blacks, politicians would do it because they simply need someone to blame and put the focus off themselves. "There so many problems with kids today. They shoot each other. Sorry, we just don't have time to work on real problems like rising crime among baby boomers and poverty".
Statistics actually show that school is one of the safest places for a kid/teenager to be. They are much much much more likely to be killed by their parents in their homes than to be killed by another kid. Where is the standardized test to find violent parents? We couldn't do that; it would violate parents rights, wouldn't it? But kids don't have any rights; at least not in this society.
One of my favourite authors is Mike Males, and he has two very good books: Framing Youth and Scapegoat Generation: America's War Against Adolescents. I recommend both of the books to anyone who wants to find out the truth the media is too afraid to tell you about. Links lead to Chapters since I'm now boycotting Amazon.com.
After sending a relatively polite letter to them and receiving an inadequate form letter response back, I have sent them a "nasty" letter (nasty in the sense it has the tone of a cease-and-desist letter) that essentially says they are to remove my personal information from their database(s), and warning them that such information is my property and that if they don't remove it from their database(s) that "appropriate" legal action will be taken.
Hopefully they appreciate a dose of their own medicine (using the law just to piss off others you don't like).
I encourage others to do the same. Enough of those types of letters and Jeff Bezos will have to notice.
The great thing about the Internet is that it is a wonderful activism tool. You can organize thousands or even millions of people in a relatively short time.
Bash started to attack me! I was forced to kill it!
I guess that's what happens when you use that OpenSource stuff, huh?
Linux Myth: Bash, even though it sounds painful, is actually very safe.
Truth: Bash processes attack you when you don't expect it.
This message is copyright 1999 by Microsoft Corp. and paid for by Microsoft Corp. However, the research was conducted independantly by the Gartner Group.
You obviously don't live in Ottawa. Here, everyone knows who he is and they either hate him or love him. Him and his wife (especially his wife) are always in the papers for their famous "flamboyancy". The Corel Draw Gala's are always covered.
Most of the employees love him. They refer to him "Mike". It's really no different than the "CEO cult" in any other tech company.
Agree in some respects (flame repellant, please)
on
Gartner Slams Linux
·
· Score: 2
I'm going to be severely flamed for saying this, but here are my two Canadian cents (worth.01 American cents).
I have to admit I haven't read the report yet, but I have to agree with the premise that Linux is not ready for the average business user RIGHT NOW. There's definately a lack of standards -- from one Linux distribution to another, something as simple as the init files, runlevels, etc, can differ. There's no universal packaging system and there's no standard desktop system. If I'm a commercial developer, do I develop for KDE or GNOME, or develop just for plain old X and not get features like drag-and-drop and CORBA? Choice is good -- but not when it makes things more complicated for the user and IS dept.
Applications? They're hard to find for the average Joe -- they're out there, but they're not marketed well enough. Sure, Wordperfect and StarOffice are there. But, where's an easy to use graphical database package like Access or Paradox? Where are the RAD tools, like Delphi and C++ Builder? They're coming, but they're not here yet. Project management software? I understand there are some very good GUI ones out there -- but do corporate users know they can go to freshmeat.net to find it? Do they trust something that has no commercial support, even if it's 200x better than MS Project? Want good quality, commercial business graphics software? Fat chance now with Microsoft owning Visio! And good quality, commercial enterprise and small business accounting packages are on their way, but not quite as usable as the commercial solutions out there.
Enterprise customers need someone to blame when it's not working properly -- and while makers of distributions and companies like Linuxcare provide OS support, who do you turn to when you need help for your GPLed applications not included with / supported by your distribution?
I disagree, however, with the idea that Linux will NEVER catch up to Microsoft in the business world. I believe that we're starting to get there. Personally, I'm perfectly pleased using Linux at work -- but I'm a sys admin, not a typical user. All I want to be added is font smoothing in XFree, a clipboard that works universally, and a web browser that's not as crappy as Netscape 4.7. But, the typical business user wants alot more.
Because of the way the Open Source, geographically-dispersed development model works, it adapts very quickly to the demands of the users. I believe we'll be able to adapt enough to the demands of the business and home user to be accepted sometime -- when, I don't know. But we're not there yet.
Okay, here's what I had to do to install NT 4.0 and SQL Server 7.0, over the course of two days -- and I'm still working on it!
1. Try booting from the installation CD. Oops, kernel dump! "Inaccessible Boot Device". Need to reboot. 2. Partition the drive. Need to reboot. 3. Format the drive to a FAT partition. 4. Run winnt/b. Won't let me do that, DOS complains "you need to run LOCK. Rebooting now". It reboots for me without asking. 5. Run LOCK. Then run winnt/b. Reboot. 5. Try booting the installation. Kernel dump again! Reboot. 6. Go ask the service reps if they've ever seen the problem. Yep! Need to copy some updated Adaptec drivers to the installation directory on the HD for the installation to work. 7. Oops, my DOS bootup floppy is corrupted now! 8. Find a new bootup floppy. Put in drive and bootup. 9. Copy the drivers to the HD. 10. Now I can do the installation by rebooting again. 11. Installation finally finished after about 30 minutes. Reboot again. 12. Oops, forgot to configure networking. Log-in as administrator. Change TCP/IP settings and join a domain. Reboot. 13. Oops, I need some more partitions. Create partitions. 13. Install the SPs. Reboot several times (forced to). 14. Try installing SQL Server. Says that IE4 is a PREREQUISITE! Oh crap! 15. Install IE4 from the network. Forced to reboot. 16. Try installing SQL Server. Apparently, I need IE4 SP1! Oh crap. 17. Download and install IE4.01 SP2 from the Internet. Forced to reboot. 18. Install SQL Server.
With Redhat + PostgreSQL:
1. Create latest boot diskette from latest drive image on the web. Boot up. 2. Go through a few installation screens. 3. Choose PostgreSQL as a package. 4. Reboot. 5. Do security checks and make sure PostgreSQL is running properly. 5. Done!
My understanding is that trademarks typically only apply to the specific trade that it is associated with. For example, you might be able to use the term "FooBars", even if it's trademarked by a certain company, if the context you're using it in doesn't create confusion.
There are sometimes exceptions on very well known trademarks like "McDonalds". But I don't think that "Henley" or "Reznor" are very well known trademarks. I've never heard of either of them before.
Besides, these people have a legal right to use their names, unless their name happens to be McDonald and they're using it in the CONTEXT OF A TRADEMARK. The Henley site is a personal site. The Reznor site appears not to be, but I honestly don't think that matters because I doubt that Reznor is selling the same thing as whatever it is that Thomas & Betts sells.
I guess these companies are just hoping that the people won't be able to afford a lawyer to defend the proper use of their names.
I understand where they're coming from. Cracking (not hacking -- they should get the terminology right at least) is a very serious crime, and unfortunately, you see all too much of it today. In every IS department I've ever worked in, there has always been at least some attempts at breaking our information systems security.
But, what makes them think this program will work any better than the DARE program, or other attempts at government brainwashing in schools? If you treat people like idiots and constantly try to brainwash them, alot of them will eventually turn against you. I bet you most crackers and warez d00dz are just people pissed off at society and government. Doing things like this will not accomplish anything.
Why don't they attack the root of problems instead of operating stupid programs like this?
Where I work, we log all outgoing web traffic (via network monitoring, not via client-side logging). However, we only look at the logs if it is reasonable to suspect a certain employee, and we only look at the logs relating to that specific employee.
That way, the employees don't feel like Big Brother(tm) is watching their every move, but we also have the capability to monitor specific employees when necessary.
I understand that one or two people have been fired for viewing pornography at work. I don't see the problem with that. First of all, you should be doing work at work. That's what you're being paid for. But, more importantly, female employees can feel very uncomfortable when their male co-workers are viewing pornography at the office, and rightfully so. Many people consider it to be a form of sexual harrassment. Frankly, I don't see how it's harrassment, but I do see how it's extremely inappropriate.
Unfortunately, alot of newsgroups do suck now, because there wasn't a decent retro-moderation system in place when the NNTP protocol was first built. It's either nothing, or all the way. When it was first designed, NNTP really wasn't intended for use by the general public at all, like alot of the Internet protocols. Now look at what a haven for spam newsgroups are. Out of 30,000 of them, only several thousand are probably useful now.
So obviously it's important for Slashdot to have a good moderation system, otherwise we might end up with a SNR equal to that of newsgroups.
The good thing about Slashdot is that we can add and take away as many features as we want, because there's no protocol involved here, only code. So we can try one thing, see how it works, and if it doesn't work out, try something else. I think though, that we have to try not to make the moderation system *too* fancy. If we make moderation too difficult and subject to review after review after review, then I think moderators will begin to ask themselves "what is the point?". I would hate to see something like this, for example, become reality.
On another topic, I think that meta-moderation in the comments list itself is a bad idea. Let's say I'm person A, or a friend of person A. Person A gets their post moderated down. I might choose to meta-moderate that post. Even if we ban the poster themselves from meta-moderating where their own posts are involved, we can't stop them from telling all of their friend to go there and do it for them.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a user of ReiserFS and I'm in love with it. It *is* metadata logging only right now, but that's good enough for most non-enterprise purposes.
It's faster than ext2 too. It uses a b*tree and small files are packed together (less wasted space).
For my purposes, I'm very happy using the ReiserFS devel over the ext2 release. Especially since I have lost several entire partitions with ext2.
I have a mirror up at http://www.cyra.org/ticker/.
Please feel free to link to it.
Furthermore, I have sent an e-mail to the MPAA and DVD-CCA daring them to sue me. Frankly, they don't scare me.
Sorry, I forgot to click "No Score +1 Bonus" on the above post.
I thought the original deserved it, but this one didn't.
Please don't moderate me down. Thanks.
Taking your statement of "there's no right or wrong" to the extreme would mean it's also okay for me to hack into your system, right?
If somethings unethical, it's unethical. It's that simple. It has nothing to do with morality, it has to do with ethics.
To me, it seems analogous to the following:
You don't like snail mail from AOL, Microsoft, and a few other American based companies. Therefore you decide to go around to everyone's house and take any mail, coming from any American address, out of their mail boxes and you put all of that mail into a pile. In order to receive the mail, the recipients need to go grab the mail from the pile.
Yes, yes, yes. I know. You don't have any obligation to carry the news yourself. I have read the UDP FAQ, I have been on USENET for many years, I even run a few news servers myself.
If you don't like it, decide to organize an OPT-IN boycott. Setting up cancelbots, etc, is an OPT-OUT boycott. If a news server admin doesn't want to participate in the UDP, they must specifically change their news server config to do so. I'm pretty sure that most news servers are set by default to accept ANY cancel message whatsoever.
Any UDP involving cancelbots is not analogous to a "I don't like 'X' network, so I will not carry their packets" situation, it is more similar to "I don't like 'X' network, so I will spoof their IP and send TCP Resets to any packets coming out of their network. If people don't like the TCP resets, they don't have to accept them." Of course, you know very well that most servers will accept TCP resets appearing to come from the host itself.
That being said, I support a non-invasive OPT-IN UDP (boycott) against @Home, because although some of the @Home affiliates/cable providers do a good job of abuse handling, some do not and @Home itself just plain sucks in handling abuse complaints.
It's too bad you missed out on interviewing Bennett Haselton of Peacefire.
Peacefire is a very unique organization in that it is the only organization fighting online censorship that I know of that is run by and for youth themselves.
The Peacefire web site gives some great information on why government censorship and censorware programs are bad, in a very youth-friendly way. It also gives out info on how to grab the list of sites blocked by much of the censorware and info on how to disable most censorware products.
Bennett, on behalf of all Peacefire members, was also one of the plaintiffs against the original CDA.
Both governments, NGOs, and private business seem to often distort their RFPs for a supplier already chosen. You won't believe how often I saw RFPs that were very obviously titled towards a specific bidder.
Imagine being required to "show familiarity with the aims and objectives of the organization". When one of the bidders has worked with them in the past, they obviously have a definate advantage! I can mention countless other ones, but this having been several years ago, I forget most of the specific details.
Often government and NGOs send out RFPs only because they are REQUIRED to do so by either laws or internal policies. Most of the time, by the time the project requirements are made, they already are leaning towards a specific supplier.
I understand where Corel's lawyers are coming from here.
Disclaimer I'm biased; I now work for Corel. I don't always agree with our legal department (no one agrees with everyone all of the time), but in this case because of my own experiences I wholeheartedly agree.
Oh, yes, the U.S. government would never prosecute/persecute people based on pure speculation and rumour, and for something which should be perfectly legal.
Just ask the victims of the House Committee on Un-American Activites, victims of Senator Joseph McCarthy, or all those poor hippies who were investigated in the 60's for protesting peacefully against the war in Vietnam.
Democracy? Doublespeak!
I'm afraid to break the news to you, but that would NOT mean China is only the third country to send austronauts to space. If they were successful, it would make China the third country to send astronauts to space in their own space shuttle. I'm absolutely positively sure that us Canadians have sent our own austronauts into space in NASA space shuttles, and it's possible that other countries also have similar partnerships between their space programs and either the U.S. or Russia.
With the Findings of Fact, I think this really turns out to be a dumb move on Microsoft's part. One of the things that Judge Jackson stressed the most in the decision (and I've read the entire thing) is that by attempting to control the Internet as a possible middleware platform, Microsoft was illegally protecting what he calls the applications barrier to entry.
This looks like yet another attempt for Microsoft to control the Internet, thus trying to keep as much of it as possible Internet Explorer/Windows-dependant, and thus control the applications barrier to entry in the Operating Systems market.
I found it very interesting that development of content was a part of this deal. I wonder how much of it will use "features" only found in Internet Explorer, like ActiveX. With the deals in the past that MS has made (with Disney, Pointcast, etc), I also wonder if there is actually a legal requirement in this deal for some Internet Explorer dependancy.
I wonder how the DOJ and Judge Jackson will react to this move when it comes time for the final decision in DOJ v. Microsoft. It definately doesn't look good to me. If anything, it seems to me that MS still feels they are invincible and can still do anything they want, even things that Judge Jackson specifically and expressly condemned. If Judge Jackson has any emotions, which with his being human is pretty likely, I wouldn't be surprised if he was pretty pissed off at MS right about now.
Technically that's true. If the minor wants to not follow the terms of the contract, she can. If he doesn't want to, he doesn't. The whole point to a contract is that both parties MUST follow it. So really it's as if a contract does not exist. It doesn't really matter anyways, because almost no one would enter into a contract with a minor and no one would ever pursue a minor in court on an alleged contract violation.
Another thing is.. if after you reach the age of majority, you re-validate a contract (for example, by continuing payments on a loan), it's as if the contract was entered into legally.
By the way, I'm speaking about common law in Canada. I would guess that common law is the same throughout Canada/U.S./U.K./Australia/some other commonwealth countries, but I'm not sure.
I wonder how contracts/minors works in Quebec (they run on France's written civil law).
You seem to imply that a contract is a contract no matter what. That's just plain wrong from a legal point of view.
Some notable exceptions in the common law:
- A contract entered into for the purpose of committing an illegal act is null and void.
- A contract entered into by a minor is null and void.
- And especially... a contract which nullifies your ability to make a reasonable living is null and void.
Also know that the judge has wide discretion here since this is a common law case and no written law is involved. While he has to follow precedents from higher courts, the rest is up to his own judgement.
This kind of stuff really pisses me off, because this is nothing more than turning kids into scapegoats for all of society's problems. If it were politically correct to run this type of test for blacks, politicians would do it because they simply need someone to blame and put the focus off themselves. "There so many problems with kids today. They shoot each other. Sorry, we just don't have time to work on real problems like rising crime among baby boomers and poverty".
Statistics actually show that school is one of the safest places for a kid/teenager to be. They are much much much more likely to be killed by their parents in their homes than to be killed by another kid. Where is the standardized test to find violent parents? We couldn't do that; it would violate parents rights, wouldn't it? But kids don't have any rights; at least not in this society.
One of my favourite authors is Mike Males, and he has two very good books: Framing Youth and Scapegoat Generation: America's War Against Adolescents. I recommend both of the books to anyone who wants to find out the truth the media is too afraid to tell you about. Links lead to Chapters since I'm now boycotting Amazon.com.
They must make the source available to everyone who has the binaries, but they are not required to make the binaries publically available.
After sending a relatively polite letter to them and receiving an inadequate form letter response back, I have sent them a "nasty" letter (nasty in the sense it has the tone of a cease-and-desist letter) that essentially says they are to remove my personal information from their database(s), and warning them that such information is my property and that if they don't remove it from their database(s) that "appropriate" legal action will be taken.
Hopefully they appreciate a dose of their own medicine (using the law just to piss off others you don't like).
I encourage others to do the same. Enough of those types of letters and Jeff Bezos will have to notice.
The great thing about the Internet is that it is a wonderful activism tool. You can organize thousands or even millions of people in a relatively short time.
Bash started to attack me! I was forced to kill it!
I guess that's what happens when you use that OpenSource stuff, huh?
Linux Myth: Bash, even though it sounds painful, is actually very safe.
Truth: Bash processes attack you when you don't expect it.
This message is copyright 1999 by Microsoft Corp. and paid for by Microsoft Corp. However, the research was conducted independantly by the Gartner Group.
You obviously don't live in Ottawa. Here, everyone knows who he is and they either hate him or love him. Him and his wife (especially his wife) are always in the papers for their famous "flamboyancy". The Corel Draw Gala's are always covered.
Most of the employees love him. They refer to him "Mike". It's really no different than the "CEO cult" in any other tech company.
I'm going to be severely flamed for saying this, but here are my two Canadian cents (worth .01 American cents).
I have to admit I haven't read the report yet, but I have to agree with the premise that Linux is not ready for the average business user RIGHT NOW. There's definately a lack of standards -- from one Linux distribution to another, something as simple as the init files, runlevels, etc, can differ. There's no universal packaging system and there's no standard desktop system. If I'm a commercial developer, do I develop for KDE or GNOME, or develop just for plain old X and not get features like drag-and-drop and CORBA? Choice is good -- but not when it makes things more complicated for the user and IS dept.
Applications? They're hard to find for the average Joe -- they're out there, but they're not marketed well enough. Sure, Wordperfect and StarOffice are there. But, where's an easy to use graphical database package like Access or Paradox? Where are the RAD tools, like Delphi and C++ Builder? They're coming, but they're not here yet. Project management software? I understand there are some very good GUI ones out there -- but do corporate users know they can go to freshmeat.net to find it? Do they trust something that has no commercial support, even if it's 200x better than MS Project? Want good quality, commercial business graphics software? Fat chance now with Microsoft owning Visio! And good quality, commercial enterprise and small business accounting packages are on their way, but not quite as usable as the commercial solutions out there.
Enterprise customers need someone to blame when it's not working properly -- and while makers of distributions and companies like Linuxcare provide OS support, who do you turn to when you need help for your GPLed applications not included with / supported by your distribution?
I disagree, however, with the idea that Linux will NEVER catch up to Microsoft in the business world. I believe that we're starting to get there. Personally, I'm perfectly pleased using Linux at work -- but I'm a sys admin, not a typical user. All I want to be added is font smoothing in XFree, a clipboard that works universally, and a web browser that's not as crappy as Netscape 4.7. But, the typical business user wants alot more.
Because of the way the Open Source, geographically-dispersed development model works, it adapts very quickly to the demands of the users. I believe we'll be able to adapt enough to the demands of the business and home user to be accepted sometime -- when, I don't know. But we're not there yet.
Okay, here's what I had to do to install NT 4.0 and SQL Server 7.0, over the course of two days -- and I'm still working on it!
/b. Won't let me do that, DOS complains "you need to run LOCK. Rebooting now". It reboots for me without asking. /b. Reboot.
1. Try booting from the installation CD. Oops, kernel dump! "Inaccessible Boot Device". Need to reboot.
2. Partition the drive. Need to reboot.
3. Format the drive to a FAT partition.
4. Run winnt
5. Run LOCK. Then run winnt
5. Try booting the installation. Kernel dump again! Reboot.
6. Go ask the service reps if they've ever seen the problem. Yep! Need to copy some updated Adaptec drivers to the installation directory on the HD for the installation to work.
7. Oops, my DOS bootup floppy is corrupted now!
8. Find a new bootup floppy. Put in drive and bootup.
9. Copy the drivers to the HD.
10. Now I can do the installation by rebooting again.
11. Installation finally finished after about 30 minutes. Reboot again.
12. Oops, forgot to configure networking. Log-in as administrator. Change TCP/IP settings and join a domain. Reboot.
13. Oops, I need some more partitions. Create partitions.
13. Install the SPs. Reboot several times (forced to).
14. Try installing SQL Server. Says that IE4 is a PREREQUISITE! Oh crap!
15. Install IE4 from the network. Forced to reboot.
16. Try installing SQL Server. Apparently, I need IE4 SP1! Oh crap.
17. Download and install IE4.01 SP2 from the Internet. Forced to reboot.
18. Install SQL Server.
With Redhat + PostgreSQL:
1. Create latest boot diskette from latest drive image on the web. Boot up.
2. Go through a few installation screens.
3. Choose PostgreSQL as a package.
4. Reboot.
5. Do security checks and make sure PostgreSQL is running properly.
5. Done!
IANAL, but my father is.
My understanding is that trademarks typically only apply to the specific trade that it is associated with. For example, you might be able to use the term "FooBars", even if it's trademarked by a certain company, if the context you're using it in doesn't create confusion.
There are sometimes exceptions on very well known trademarks like "McDonalds". But I don't think that "Henley" or "Reznor" are very well known trademarks. I've never heard of either of them before.
Besides, these people have a legal right to use their names, unless their name happens to be McDonald and they're using it in the CONTEXT OF A TRADEMARK. The Henley site is a personal site. The Reznor site appears not to be, but I honestly don't think that matters because I doubt that Reznor is selling the same thing as whatever it is that Thomas & Betts sells.
I guess these companies are just hoping that the people won't be able to afford a lawyer to defend the proper use of their names.
I understand where they're coming from. Cracking (not hacking -- they should get the terminology right at least) is a very serious crime, and unfortunately, you see all too much of it today. In every IS department I've ever worked in, there has always been at least some attempts at breaking our information systems security.
But, what makes them think this program will work any better than the DARE program, or other attempts at government brainwashing in schools? If you treat people like idiots and constantly try to brainwash them, alot of them will eventually turn against you. I bet you most crackers and warez d00dz are just people pissed off at society and government. Doing things like this will not accomplish anything.
Why don't they attack the root of problems instead of operating stupid programs like this?
Where I work, we log all outgoing web traffic (via network monitoring, not via client-side logging). However, we only look at the logs if it is reasonable to suspect a certain employee, and we only look at the logs relating to that specific employee.
That way, the employees don't feel like Big Brother(tm) is watching their every move, but we also have the capability to monitor specific employees when necessary.
I understand that one or two people have been fired for viewing pornography at work. I don't see the problem with that. First of all, you should be doing work at work. That's what you're being paid for. But, more importantly, female employees can feel very uncomfortable when their male co-workers are viewing pornography at the office, and rightfully so. Many people consider it to be a form of sexual harrassment. Frankly, I don't see how it's harrassment, but I do see how it's extremely inappropriate.
How come you talk like yoda?
I thought it said International Federation of the Pornographic Industry
So obviously it's important for Slashdot to have a good moderation system, otherwise we might end up with a SNR equal to that of newsgroups.
The good thing about Slashdot is that we can add and take away as many features as we want, because there's no protocol involved here, only code. So we can try one thing, see how it works, and if it doesn't work out, try something else. I think though, that we have to try not to make the moderation system *too* fancy. If we make moderation too difficult and subject to review after review after review, then I think moderators will begin to ask themselves "what is the point?". I would hate to see something like this, for example, become reality.
On another topic, I think that meta-moderation in the comments list itself is a bad idea. Let's say I'm person A, or a friend of person A. Person A gets their post moderated down. I might choose to meta-moderate that post. Even if we ban the poster themselves from meta-moderating where their own posts are involved, we can't stop them from telling all of their friend to go there and do it for them.