He could publish a signed certificate of "ComodoGateHackerOwnsDiginotar.com". Or he could sign a domain name consisting of e.g. a base64 encoded compressed message.
I've used (the paid version of) Spotify for a couple of years now and I absolutely love it. I can listen to an uninterrupted ocean of music all day long (both at work and at home), keep offline copies of playlists on my cellphone for running etc. and recently I've started to discover a lot of new music by simply browsing recommendations, different labels and so on inside Spotify. I'd say it's pretty rare to see a Party in Norway these days where the music doesn't come from Spotify. (They also have a native Linux client, which is a plus.)
The only complaints I have is: 1) Some music is not available. Sometimes single tracks, albums or even entire artists (e.g. metallica). 2) Some music switches between being available and not. It's annoying to see a part of a playlist I've made suddenly grayed out because "the artist or label has chosen not to make these songs available in your region". And suddenly they're available again for whatever reason.
If you do not think you will use Facebook again and would like your account deleted, we can take care of this for you. Keep in mind that you will not be able to reactivate your account or retrieve any of the content or information you have added. If you would like your account deleted, then click "Submit."
I know, I just thought it was nice that there's now a milestone pegged to the 3.0 release as opposed to "just the normal fixes and new drivers" kinda thing. I understand that it's a complete coincidence.
Just when Linus finally started convincing people that Linux 3.0 would be a "normal time based release" with "no major changes" they whip this milestone feature out from under the rug.
But if you know the backstory, it is perhaps not so difficult to imagine why. On 29 January was a manga translator sentenced for being in possession of child pornographic drawings, which has initiated a debate in Sweden about whether the laws are too strict.
A user on the Swedish forum Flashback spent Dead or Alive game as an example of a product that should go below what he considers to be an overly strict law, as the game according to the manual contains three characters who are all under 18, and in addition, shot and zoomed in on in all possible angles through the game mode Showcase. The plan was to report Bergsala for distribution of child pornography on launch day, not because he believed it was right, but to ridicule the law.
The problem is, according to a user on NeoGaf forum that another, hitherto unknown person decided to report them now, which in turn led to the Bergsala stopped the game to not only Sweden, Norway and Denmark as well. According to the user to chains such as Game and Gamestop have removed the game from their stores, giving customers who have paid the deposit for reservation of game money.
IANAL, but I believe this is the Norwegian law in question (translation courtesy of google):
204a. Whoever
a. produce, acquire, introduce, possess, leaving to another or for a fee or systematically familiarize themselves with the production of sexual abuse against children or representations sexualising children,
b. concerned with depictions of sexual abuse of children or representations as sexualising children, otherwise referred to in 204, first paragraph, or
c. misleads anyone under 18 to have himself photographed as part of the commercial production of motion and motionless pictures with adult content, or produce such representations where anyone under 18 is depicted,
punishable by fines or imprisonment for up to 3 years.
With children the purposes of this section, persons who are or appear to be under 18.
Anyone who negligently performs the action specified in the first paragraph, punished by fines or imprisonment for up to 6 months. At the same penalty the owner or parent who willfully or negligently fails to prevent it in a business is carried out actions described in the first paragraph.
The penalty can be eliminated for the taking and possessing an image of a person between 16 and 18, if it has given their consent and the two are roughly equal in age and development.
204 second paragraph, second and fourth paragraphs shall apply correspondingly.
Added by Act of May 20, 2005 No. 29
Emphasis (for what I think is relevant) mine. The law was probably written in good intent, but I think cartoons (which this basically is) being illegal is just crazy, it should count as free speech.
It does define children as persons though, so I would say it's not actually illegal (since a fictional character is not a person).
As stewbacca commented above, it's not easy to find out how someones learning skills are. There are several reasons why an applicant might not have a lot of useful knowledge related to the position. For example (in IT): Coming straight from school you might not know any of the latest technologies required by the current IT trend, but still know all the basic IT stuff taught in school. IT is a big field, perhaps the applicant is applying for a job outside his or her primary knowledge base (applying out of interest instead of acquired skill).
When I applied for my first full time job after college I listed Java as my primary skill (which it was), but said during the interview that I wanted to learn other programming languages and technologies. I was hired, and put on a perl assignment (a language that I had never touched before) at a client together with a mentor, and it was a very positive experience for me (I'd say my learning capabilities is probably average, but I was very enthusiastic at the time, which may have given me a mental boost).
I agree that "learning by understanding" as opposed to "learning by memorizing" is definitely the way to go. Asking a lot of questions (even about basic stuff) is no problem, as long as the same questions don't pop up again and again.
I usually say that it doesn't matter what you know, what matters is how fast you learn. Someone who you can teach and tell how to do things once, and they actually understand the message and do it right from then on is much more valuable in the long run then someone who has a (short and) static merit list in my opinion.
Yes, if you can, wean yourself off of Fossil & Nuclear. Recognize however that others cannot.
I was venting my frustration that little attention was given to renewable energy in the midst of the nuclear disaster debate. I realize now that my view on world energy politics was a little... naive.
Yeah I know since no one is dying everything must be just sweet and dandy in Japan right about now. I think that's what the article said too, level 7 = sweet and dandy, now and for all foreseeable future.
Measuring the nuclear crisis at Fukushima in deaths is missing the painfully obvious.
You cite scandinavian countries, they have the benefits of very low population densities, and can providing most of the power with hydro plants. Areas with denser population basically have a choice between coal and nuclear.
Yes, countries are starting to look into other alternatives, but the time between "looking into something" and having it generate 50% of the world's power takes a very long time. On the other hand, if we just stopped building coal plants and build nuclear instead, we would have significantly less pollution in ~10 years.
I agree that there's no quick fix here, but if people think that "coal vs. nuclear" is the only alternative, we'll simply never come to the point ever where 50% of the worlds energy is from renewable sources.
More attention needs to be diverted into renewable energy. It would be horrible if this accident went quietly into the history books and the world just continued on with "coal vs. nuclear" debates.
Perhaps after a few billion years the whole world might have plentiful fijords and geography suitable for large scale hydro, then we might all benefit from it in the same way that Norway and Sweden do. Until then they're a complete red herring.
Hydropower is our solution because we can, unlike e.g. solar energy which is (currently) infeasible for countries so far north. Other places the situation is reversed.
As for offshire wind, great; we just need to crack the whole energy demand - windy period mismatch, or the epic civil engineering challenge and power losses from having an intercontinental supergrid to even things out, then we're all set.
Energy can be stored in e.g. dams during low energy usage (use the excess power to pump water back up), which is perfect for countries that already have hydro power installations.
Scandinavia isn't going to solve the worlds energy problems, but we are actively trying to solve our own and we're setting an example in the process. We didn't have to go the renewable way, we could've gone all nuclear and coal and what not, but we chose renewable.
Attention should be focused on clean energy sources instead of living in a black and white world of "coal vs. nuclear", because it's possible to live in a world where the energy demand is met without using either.
In Norway nearly 100% of the electrical power used and produced is from renewable energy. The government of Sweden has started working on getting the country completely independent of oil (without building more nuclear power plants). Norway, England, Italy, the US and others have started to look into floating (deep water) offshore wind power as a future energy source.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Comparing nuclear to coal is fucking bullshit.
I had to pass english and swedish and I got no use for swedish at all.
Ahh come on, Swedish is your ticket into Scandinavia! Talk to Norwegians, Swedes and even Danes while letting them use their native tongue!
At my job during high school my boss was actually Finnish, but since he know Swedish he had no problem working here in Norway. At my current job we have a few Icelandic fellows who communicate very well in Norwegian (I believe they learn Danish as a second language in school over there).
So don't underestimate the usefulness of extra languages. I was taught German in high school, and I wish I paid more attention...
We have been hard at work on this and it is my pleasure to announce that effective today, developers from 20 more countries can now sell paid apps on Android Market. Additionally, over the next 2 weeks, users in 18 additional countries will be able to purchase paid apps from Android Market.
My point is that it's no wonder people aren't buying apps when they simple can't. But in October 2010 a lot of users across different countries were given access to buy apps, which should logically increase the app sale considerably in 2011 compared to 2010.
I can't see anyone else mentioning one important fact, so I'm wondering if people are not aware of it.
For 2010, Apple took in $1.78 billion in worldwide sales from its App Store, a leap of 132 percent from $769 million in 2009. And while it lost market share to some of its mobile rivals, Apple still captured 82.7 percent of the app store market last year, down from 92.8 percent the prior year.
We have been hard at work on this and it is my pleasure to announce that effective today, developers from 20 more countries can now sell paid apps on Android Market.
Emphasize mine. I live in Norway, and Android market sales here was effectively $0 until October 2010, because it wasn't available here until then.
So while Android might have the largest world wide user base, it clearly did not have the largest world wide app market user base. I think that pretty much explains the low numbers, and therefore I expect 2011 to bring a radical change for Android Market sales.
But Ruby? Its a mess. A wash. An over thought and inconsistent pile of -blarg!-. No matter how many places you try to stick it, you will never find the magical context where it isn't overblown and too ugly to mainstream.
You bash on Ruby, but it's hard to understand why since you don't explain what's so bad about it. For example, could you please explain to me what's inconsistent in Ruby?
I don't remember where I read it, but I read somewhere that Ruby works as a "programming skill amplifier." As in, if you're a great programmer, Ruby allows you to write beautiful code, but if you're a poor programmer, Ruby will allow you to write the most hideous thing that your processor has ever seen.
And I agree. For better or worse, I think it's a testimony to the power that lies in the language.
If you use a forward slash instead of backward in the folder name, you might trick your mail client to arrange the mail in a tree structure. I noticed this with GMail in Evolution on Ubuntu.
Instead you had to work around the default configuration with gnome's own command line configuration hacking. Then in the same breath you mention that Ubuntu is a "desktop" distro, meant for the masses while your CEO then takes the time to lambast the complaining user base that "free doesn't mean you get what you want, you get what we want".
Seriously, I cannot fathom why people are so hung up on this. It took me just two hours with the new button positions before my muscle memory had completely forgotten that they had ever existed anywhere else.
I just don't understand why people care. It such an unimportant detail, I wouldn't dream of thinking about it if it wasn't for the fact that people keep bringing it up over and over.
And we're supposed to be the smart guys. We're supposed to adapt to our reality, like evolution and "survival of the fittest" has taught us. Apparently we're all screwed, 'cause we can't adapt to some stupid buttons changing place in our computer interface. There's not even a disadvantage having it on the left side, it's just *change*. Just get over it all ready. We expect people to change their entire operating system and switch to Linux (or Mac or whatever) but we can't stand the fact that someone moved a couple of buttons from the right to the left side of the window decorations. That's... great.
Anecdote: When I was getting my driving license, the car had three rear view mirrors: One for me, one for the tutor, and a third one that the tutor directed at my eyes (so she could tell if I was looking for traffic at an intersection etc. without moving her head). At one time the third mirror had been moved to the bottom of the wind shield, and I asked her why. "We loaned the car away to another tutor, and he moved the mirror because he didn't like the way we position it. I'm making a point by not moving it back: I don't care where it's placed, I can adapt, and so should he."
Anecdote #2: I do support on my Mom's Ubuntu installation, and she has never complained that they moved the buttons. (And she's your average grandmother.) This leads me to believe the average Joe doesn't care (or is better at adapting to change than us).
(This is obviously not directed at the parent poster, just a general rant.)
[...] the cost of adapting and extending it, for example in writing printer and scanner drivers, and of training, have proved greater than anticipated.
Users have, it claims, also complained of missing functionality, a lack of usability and poor interoperability.
So basically they've painted themselves into a Microsoft corner and can't get out. (Although "writing drivers" sounds like complete bullshit.)
I do recommend they switch back to Windows, and then move to Apple products. It's a sure way of wasting even more money, if the current flip-flopping isn't doing it for them.
Slashdot Mirror
He could publish a signed certificate of "ComodoGateHackerOwnsDiginotar.com". Or he could sign a domain name consisting of e.g. a base64 encoded compressed message.
I've used (the paid version of) Spotify for a couple of years now and I absolutely love it. I can listen to an uninterrupted ocean of music all day long (both at work and at home), keep offline copies of playlists on my cellphone for running etc. and recently I've started to discover a lot of new music by simply browsing recommendations, different labels and so on inside Spotify. I'd say it's pretty rare to see a Party in Norway these days where the music doesn't come from Spotify. (They also have a native Linux client, which is a plus.)
The only complaints I have is:
1) Some music is not available. Sometimes single tracks, albums or even entire artists (e.g. metallica).
2) Some music switches between being available and not. It's annoying to see a part of a playlist I've made suddenly grayed out because "the artist or label has chosen not to make these songs available in your region". And suddenly they're available again for whatever reason.
But overall I'm very happy. Oh and it's also easy to share music. Example: For those who have Spotify, check out these playlists I've published (if the browser doesn't automatically open Spotify, just copy the spotify-url into the search bar of Spotify):
http://open.spotify.com/user/cronius/playlist/7yitDSr8e6uLORAkdA3mxm (Chilli)
http://open.spotify.com/user/cronius/playlist/3flYNN5Oe7dhW3Vths0D7J (Electronica)
http://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=delete_account
From the link above:
If you do not think you will use Facebook again and would like your account deleted, we can take care of this for you. Keep in mind that you will not be able to reactivate your account or retrieve any of the content or information you have added. If you would like your account deleted, then click "Submit."
Regarding fsck, from: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F16BtrfsDefaultFs#Recovery_strategy
fsck must work. It should be tested for a longer period to see if it's really working.
Would be nice if this speeds up the work on btrfs.fsck.
I know, I just thought it was nice that there's now a milestone pegged to the 3.0 release as opposed to "just the normal fixes and new drivers" kinda thing. I understand that it's a complete coincidence.
Just when Linus finally started convincing people that Linux 3.0 would be a "normal time based release" with "no major changes" they whip this milestone feature out from under the rug.
Xen out of the box? Linux 3.0.
More info here:
But if you know the backstory, it is perhaps not so difficult to imagine why. On 29 January was a manga translator sentenced for being in possession of child pornographic drawings, which has initiated a debate in Sweden about whether the laws are too strict.
A user on the Swedish forum Flashback spent Dead or Alive game as an example of a product that should go below what he considers to be an overly strict law, as the game according to the manual contains three characters who are all under 18, and in addition, shot and zoomed in on in all possible angles through the game mode Showcase. The plan was to report Bergsala for distribution of child pornography on launch day, not because he believed it was right, but to ridicule the law.
The problem is, according to a user on NeoGaf forum that another, hitherto unknown person decided to report them now, which in turn led to the Bergsala stopped the game to not only Sweden, Norway and Denmark as well. According to the user to chains such as Game and Gamestop have removed the game from their stores, giving customers who have paid the deposit for reservation of game money.
IANAL, but I believe this is the Norwegian law in question (translation courtesy of google):
204a. Whoever
a. produce, acquire, introduce, possess, leaving to another or for a fee or systematically familiarize themselves with the production of sexual abuse against children or representations sexualising children,
b. concerned with depictions of sexual abuse of children or representations as sexualising children, otherwise referred to in 204, first paragraph, or
c. misleads anyone under 18 to have himself photographed as part of the commercial production of motion and motionless pictures with adult content, or produce such representations where anyone under 18 is depicted,
punishable by fines or imprisonment for up to 3 years.
With children the purposes of this section, persons who are or appear to be under 18.
Anyone who negligently performs the action specified in the first paragraph, punished by fines or imprisonment for up to 6 months. At the same penalty the owner or parent who willfully or negligently fails to prevent it in a business is carried out actions described in the first paragraph.
The penalty can be eliminated for the taking and possessing an image of a person between 16 and 18, if it has given their consent and the two are roughly equal in age and development.
204 second paragraph, second and fourth paragraphs shall apply correspondingly.
Added by Act of May 20, 2005 No. 29
Emphasis (for what I think is relevant) mine. The law was probably written in good intent, but I think cartoons (which this basically is) being illegal is just crazy, it should count as free speech.
It does define children as persons though, so I would say it's not actually illegal (since a fictional character is not a person).
As stewbacca commented above, it's not easy to find out how someones learning skills are. There are several reasons why an applicant might not have a lot of useful knowledge related to the position. For example (in IT): Coming straight from school you might not know any of the latest technologies required by the current IT trend, but still know all the basic IT stuff taught in school. IT is a big field, perhaps the applicant is applying for a job outside his or her primary knowledge base (applying out of interest instead of acquired skill).
When I applied for my first full time job after college I listed Java as my primary skill (which it was), but said during the interview that I wanted to learn other programming languages and technologies. I was hired, and put on a perl assignment (a language that I had never touched before) at a client together with a mentor, and it was a very positive experience for me (I'd say my learning capabilities is probably average, but I was very enthusiastic at the time, which may have given me a mental boost).
I agree that "learning by understanding" as opposed to "learning by memorizing" is definitely the way to go. Asking a lot of questions (even about basic stuff) is no problem, as long as the same questions don't pop up again and again.
I usually say that it doesn't matter what you know, what matters is how fast you learn. Someone who you can teach and tell how to do things once, and they actually understand the message and do it right from then on is much more valuable in the long run then someone who has a (short and) static merit list in my opinion.
Yes, if you can, wean yourself off of Fossil & Nuclear. Recognize however that others cannot.
I was venting my frustration that little attention was given to renewable energy in the midst of the nuclear disaster debate. I realize now that my view on world energy politics was a little ... naive.
Yeah I know since no one is dying everything must be just sweet and dandy in Japan right about now. I think that's what the article said too, level 7 = sweet and dandy, now and for all foreseeable future.
Measuring the nuclear crisis at Fukushima in deaths is missing the painfully obvious.
You cite scandinavian countries, they have the benefits of very low population densities, and can providing most of the power with hydro plants. Areas with denser population basically have a choice between coal and nuclear.
Yes, countries are starting to look into other alternatives, but the time between "looking into something" and having it generate 50% of the world's power takes a very long time. On the other hand, if we just stopped building coal plants and build nuclear instead, we would have significantly less pollution in ~10 years.
I agree that there's no quick fix here, but if people think that "coal vs. nuclear" is the only alternative, we'll simply never come to the point ever where 50% of the worlds energy is from renewable sources.
More attention needs to be diverted into renewable energy. It would be horrible if this accident went quietly into the history books and the world just continued on with "coal vs. nuclear" debates.
Perhaps after a few billion years the whole world might have plentiful fijords and geography suitable for large scale hydro, then we might all benefit from it in the same way that Norway and Sweden do. Until then they're a complete red herring.
Hydropower is our solution because we can, unlike e.g. solar energy which is (currently) infeasible for countries so far north. Other places the situation is reversed.
As for offshire wind, great; we just need to crack the whole energy demand - windy period mismatch, or the epic civil engineering challenge and power losses from having an intercontinental supergrid to even things out, then we're all set.
Energy can be stored in e.g. dams during low energy usage (use the excess power to pump water back up), which is perfect for countries that already have hydro power installations.
Scandinavia isn't going to solve the worlds energy problems, but we are actively trying to solve our own and we're setting an example in the process. We didn't have to go the renewable way, we could've gone all nuclear and coal and what not, but we chose renewable.
Attention should be focused on clean energy sources instead of living in a black and white world of "coal vs. nuclear", because it's possible to live in a world where the energy demand is met without using either.
In Norway nearly 100% of the electrical power used and produced is from renewable energy. The government of Sweden has started working on getting the country completely independent of oil (without building more nuclear power plants). Norway, England, Italy, the US and others have started to look into floating (deep water) offshore wind power as a future energy source.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Comparing nuclear to coal is fucking bullshit.
only one foreign language?
Latin and Greek?
I had to pass english and swedish and I got no use for swedish at all.
Ahh come on, Swedish is your ticket into Scandinavia! Talk to Norwegians, Swedes and even Danes while letting them use their native tongue!
At my job during high school my boss was actually Finnish, but since he know Swedish he had no problem working here in Norway. At my current job we have a few Icelandic fellows who communicate very well in Norwegian (I believe they learn Danish as a second language in school over there).
So don't underestimate the usefulness of extra languages. I was taught German in high school, and I wish I paid more attention ...
Gah, I messed up the quote:
We have been hard at work on this and it is my pleasure to announce that effective today, developers from 20 more countries can now sell paid apps on Android Market. Additionally, over the next 2 weeks, users in 18 additional countries will be able to purchase paid apps from Android Market.
My point is that it's no wonder people aren't buying apps when they simple can't. But in October 2010 a lot of users across different countries were given access to buy apps, which should logically increase the app sale considerably in 2011 compared to 2010.
I can't see anyone else mentioning one important fact, so I'm wondering if people are not aware of it.
For 2010, Apple took in $1.78 billion in worldwide sales from its App Store, a leap of 132 percent from $769 million in 2009. And while it lost market share to some of its mobile rivals, Apple still captured 82.7 percent of the app store market last year, down from 92.8 percent the prior year.
Emphasize mine. From http://www.eurodroid.com/2010/09/android-market-expands-paid-app-support-32-countries-may-now-buy-apps/ :
We have been hard at work on this and it is my pleasure to announce that effective today, developers from 20 more countries can now sell paid apps on Android Market.
Emphasize mine. I live in Norway, and Android market sales here was effectively $0 until October 2010, because it wasn't available here until then.
So while Android might have the largest world wide user base, it clearly did not have the largest world wide app market user base. I think that pretty much explains the low numbers, and therefore I expect 2011 to bring a radical change for Android Market sales.
But Ruby? Its a mess. A wash. An over thought and inconsistent pile of -blarg!-. No matter how many places you try to stick it, you will never find the magical context where it isn't overblown and too ugly to mainstream.
You bash on Ruby, but it's hard to understand why since you don't explain what's so bad about it. For example, could you please explain to me what's inconsistent in Ruby?
I don't remember where I read it, but I read somewhere that Ruby works as a "programming skill amplifier." As in, if you're a great programmer, Ruby allows you to write beautiful code, but if you're a poor programmer, Ruby will allow you to write the most hideous thing that your processor has ever seen.
And I agree. For better or worse, I think it's a testimony to the power that lies in the language.
If you use a forward slash instead of backward in the folder name, you might trick your mail client to arrange the mail in a tree structure. I noticed this with GMail in Evolution on Ubuntu.
YMMV.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/361307/october-06-2010/rawesome-foods-raid
Instead you had to work around the default configuration with gnome's own command line configuration hacking. Then in the same breath you mention that Ubuntu is a "desktop" distro, meant for the masses while your CEO then takes the time to lambast the complaining user base that "free doesn't mean you get what you want, you get what we want".
Seriously, I cannot fathom why people are so hung up on this. It took me just two hours with the new button positions before my muscle memory had completely forgotten that they had ever existed anywhere else.
I just don't understand why people care. It such an unimportant detail, I wouldn't dream of thinking about it if it wasn't for the fact that people keep bringing it up over and over.
And we're supposed to be the smart guys. We're supposed to adapt to our reality, like evolution and "survival of the fittest" has taught us. Apparently we're all screwed, 'cause we can't adapt to some stupid buttons changing place in our computer interface. There's not even a disadvantage having it on the left side, it's just *change*. Just get over it all ready. We expect people to change their entire operating system and switch to Linux (or Mac or whatever) but we can't stand the fact that someone moved a couple of buttons from the right to the left side of the window decorations. That's ... great.
Anecdote: When I was getting my driving license, the car had three rear view mirrors: One for me, one for the tutor, and a third one that the tutor directed at my eyes (so she could tell if I was looking for traffic at an intersection etc. without moving her head). At one time the third mirror had been moved to the bottom of the wind shield, and I asked her why. "We loaned the car away to another tutor, and he moved the mirror because he didn't like the way we position it. I'm making a point by not moving it back: I don't care where it's placed, I can adapt, and so should he."
Anecdote #2: I do support on my Mom's Ubuntu installation, and she has never complained that they moved the buttons. (And she's your average grandmother.) This leads me to believe the average Joe doesn't care (or is better at adapting to change than us).
(This is obviously not directed at the parent poster, just a general rant.)
[...] the cost of adapting and extending it, for example in writing printer and scanner drivers, and of training, have proved greater than anticipated.
Users have, it claims, also complained of missing functionality, a lack of usability and poor interoperability.
So basically they've painted themselves into a Microsoft corner and can't get out. (Although "writing drivers" sounds like complete bullshit.)
I do recommend they switch back to Windows, and then move to Apple products. It's a sure way of wasting even more money, if the current flip-flopping isn't doing it for them.