Most people around here probably haven't noticed or don't care, but Yahoo! Sports is one of the finest online sports outlets there is. When the rest of Yahoo! collapses, I hope its sports department gets scooped up and kept in tact by someone. In particular, Fox should buy that division and replace everything it has with the Yahoo! equivalent.
Going off of the 2011 tournament for any generalized method of picking games is a bad idea. It was a particularly chaotic tournament for a variety of reasons. Having a system that failed last year is potentially a good thing because last year didn't work like the majority of tournaments do.
Notably, four representatives on the committee—Darrell Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Jared Polis (D-CO)—are fighting against SOPA all the way. Issa proposed an amendment yesterday that would have gutted the worst parts of SOPA out of the bill, though it unfortunately failed. Chaffetz's appeals to the potential compromise of DNSSEC finally got the thing shelved until real Internet experts can testify before the committee.
As the chief opponents of the bill are equally split, it shows this isn't a partisan issue (for once) but largely a who-is-bought-and-paid-for issue. I've watched a fair amount of the committee's meetings. The actions and attitudes of the bill's proponents has been shameful. Lamar Smith (R-TX), SOPA's sponsor, appeared determined to railroad the thing through the committee as-is no matter what. That he accepted a temporary end to discussion on the bill is a minor miracle. Smith basically lives in Hollywood's back pocket.
iPhone OS 4 will not be supported on the original iPhones, which have basically hit EOL. If you want any more new software features for one of those, they won't be coming from Apple.
It's true that Apple often leaks things for PR, but it doesn't do it like this. It plants things in publications like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times by calling up journalists, giving pointed hints, and leaving no paper trail. That way, both Apple and the publication have plausible deniability about everything: for Apple, it was just some rumor, and for the papers, it could have been a misunderstanding.
Apple sure as hell leaks things, as every tech company does in some way, shape, or form. This, however, is not how it operates. Specs and price points get leaked, not actual hardware. The iPhone is its big baby, and Steve prefers to have a big reveal on stage in San Francisco when announcing his precious new devices.
If there's a company that stands to lose from having a non-standard input scheme, it's definitely not the one that has >90% of the desktop market. I mean, if you not only have to learn a new OS, new shortcuts, in some cases new applications, and now a new input scheme, it seems that Apple would be erecting a new barrier to Mac adoption, not encouraging Mac adoption. If Microsoft implements gestures of its own (like what it has said it'll do in Windows 7), I'd bet those are more likely to become the standard than Apple's gestures.
Spinal Tap did not exist before the movie. Due to the popularity of the movie, the actors who portrayed Spinal Tap actually went on tours and released albums. Because the members are actors, they do not remain together touring and recording albums, but they get together from time to time for things like this.
...it's our job to help DOT maximize the value of its Enterprise Agreement through the adoption of our technology. We are engaged with large, strategic customers across government at every level, and are working closely with them on these products through their participation in our Technical Adoption Programs.
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
(X) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(X) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
(X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
(X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
While I'm probably feeding a troll here, I will say that you're partly right.
You can get RHEL recompiled for free with things like CentOS and others. You can recompile it yourself with Red Hat's SRPMs. What costs money is support. I doubt any government outfit would use a purely community distro that doesn't have a corporation and paid support staff behind it. That limits them to Red Hat, Suse/Novell, and Ubuntu/Cannonical mostly, and only one of those is a US-based endeavor.
In addition, TFA has this: The K-10 runs Red Hat Linux, which NASA says was chosen for its large user base and application compatibility.
Say what you want about Microsoft and its management techniques (and plenty of jokes are already around) but I think this is a good thing. Whatever about Microsoft, they probably have better management techniques than most American school systems, and Bill Gates was right about schools essentially being obsolete.
There needs to be new ideas and new blood running things in the schools. Most administrators are former teachers, and just like good programmers don't always make good IT managers, so do good teachers have a spotty history at becoming good administrators. If this ushers in an era of trying new things to improve schools, then I'm all for it. Microsoft has the name recognition and technology chops to get its foot in the door, but other companies should give it a go. Imagine a GE-led school using Jack Welch's management techniques...
Are you a gamer? Are you someone who does intense multimedia work? If not, then a single-core chip is fine, much less a 4-core chip. For the vast majority of home and business desktops, chips that are considered old right now offer plenty of computing power. The Apartment Hunters across the street from the UF campus still use G3 iMacs at the front desk. These 4-core beasts will be niche things for a while, I think, unless a lot of weasely salesmen can (continue to?) convince people to buy more computer than they need.
I got an idea for the next big iPod accessory! It's called the Aquarium iHopper. It will be able to jump not just your home tank with your goldfish, but also the ones at Sea World filled with ferocious, man-eating sharks!
There has been a discussion partially about this before, and mentioned in the summary for that is about how Ellison has said does not intend to buy RedHat. As far as starting a distro, the consensus was that Oracle would be more likely to buy a distro that start one because it takes a long time to get a large and devoted community. Oracle certainly has the cash to do one, so don't rule it out, but it's probably not likely. Also, I think Ellison is too much of a control freak to support someone else's work for long if he doesn't have a say in it. I think he's probably got some backdoor channel with RedHat if he is going to support its products but not purchase the company.
"Net neutrality proponents worry that telecom, wireless and cable companies might one day favor their own content and applications over others."
He says this, but nowhere does he say that the ISPs won't do it. Normally when I make arguments, I try to refute the opposition's points, especially when I myself bring them up. Then he goes on to try to scare his audience about Big Bad Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo supporting net neutrality and then making up something about them getting a cut-rate deal while consumers pay a "competitive" price. Wait, didn't he just say he's "net competition" proponent?
Besides, if anyone has questions about net neutrality, they should just ask a ninja about it.
If you don't attach a license with your work anyone can do anything with it without you being able to do anything about it.
This is the exact opposite of what the law says. If you create an original work of any kind, whether or not you register it with the copyright office it is still copyrighted to you and no one can do anything with it without your permission. If you don't put a license on it, then it is assumed that you are reserving all of your rights not waiving all of your rights.
If you prove that you are in fact you, then we know who to prosecute if you try to do something illegal. Also, checking IDs can allow for a background check to see if you are a fugitive of some kind. Also, if you are found to be trying to fly with a fake ID, then you probably some kind of criminal because non-criminals don't tend to try to hide their identity (since using a fake ID is illegal in and of itself). Basically, if you're trying to slide by with a fake ID, you're probably up to something. I'm not saying whether that's right or wrong, I'm saying that's the thinking behind it all.
If you read the article more closely, you'll see that the author came to the conclusion that the company that owns googlecheckout.com is directly tied to the one that is known to work with Google. In that sense, googlecheckout.com is already owned by Google.
In any event, this may or may not happen. It may not be anything more than Google noticing online rumors about it possibly starting a PayPal-like service and then deciding to buy the domain either to keep its options open or to prevent phishers or squatters from getting it. Or it could be as the parent described. It certainly would fit in with some aspects of Google Base, but people have made many persuasive arguments for what Google should do and then not see the company do it. After all of the furor over GDrive.com a few months ago, there's still not anything up on that page. Maybe, maybe not. I'll believe it when I see it. Google is second only to Apple when it comes to unsubstatiated/bogus romors.
This is important. They want the installed base and the community. Oracle certainly has the resources to make a new distro from scratch if they wanted, but it takes time to build up a loyal following and by extension an installed base. Certainly a lot of people would try a brand-new Oracle distro, but who knows how many would stick with it if their favorite package(s) was/were not available? Larry likes control, so basing a new one off someone else's distro is right out.
1. Periodically visit and submit every story from this collection of all of this year's prank stories: http://aprilfools.urgo.org/
2. ???
3. Slashdot Hall of Fame!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Most people around here probably haven't noticed or don't care, but Yahoo! Sports is one of the finest online sports outlets there is. When the rest of Yahoo! collapses, I hope its sports department gets scooped up and kept in tact by someone. In particular, Fox should buy that division and replace everything it has with the Yahoo! equivalent.
Going off of the 2011 tournament for any generalized method of picking games is a bad idea. It was a particularly chaotic tournament for a variety of reasons. Having a system that failed last year is potentially a good thing because last year didn't work like the majority of tournaments do.
Notably, four representatives on the committee—Darrell Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Jared Polis (D-CO)—are fighting against SOPA all the way. Issa proposed an amendment yesterday that would have gutted the worst parts of SOPA out of the bill, though it unfortunately failed. Chaffetz's appeals to the potential compromise of DNSSEC finally got the thing shelved until real Internet experts can testify before the committee.
As the chief opponents of the bill are equally split, it shows this isn't a partisan issue (for once) but largely a who-is-bought-and-paid-for issue. I've watched a fair amount of the committee's meetings. The actions and attitudes of the bill's proponents has been shameful. Lamar Smith (R-TX), SOPA's sponsor, appeared determined to railroad the thing through the committee as-is no matter what. That he accepted a temporary end to discussion on the bill is a minor miracle. Smith basically lives in Hollywood's back pocket.
iPhone OS 4 will not be supported on the original iPhones, which have basically hit EOL. If you want any more new software features for one of those, they won't be coming from Apple.
It's true that Apple often leaks things for PR, but it doesn't do it like this. It plants things in publications like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times by calling up journalists, giving pointed hints, and leaving no paper trail. That way, both Apple and the publication have plausible deniability about everything: for Apple, it was just some rumor, and for the papers, it could have been a misunderstanding.
Apple sure as hell leaks things, as every tech company does in some way, shape, or form. This, however, is not how it operates. Specs and price points get leaked, not actual hardware. The iPhone is its big baby, and Steve prefers to have a big reveal on stage in San Francisco when announcing his precious new devices.
If there's a company that stands to lose from having a non-standard input scheme, it's definitely not the one that has >90% of the desktop market. I mean, if you not only have to learn a new OS, new shortcuts, in some cases new applications, and now a new input scheme, it seems that Apple would be erecting a new barrier to Mac adoption, not encouraging Mac adoption. If Microsoft implements gestures of its own (like what it has said it'll do in Windows 7), I'd bet those are more likely to become the standard than Apple's gestures.
Spinal Tap did not exist before the movie. Due to the popularity of the movie, the actors who portrayed Spinal Tap actually went on tours and released albums. Because the members are actors, they do not remain together touring and recording albums, but they get together from time to time for things like this.
Um, Mrs. Foley? Bingo, ma'am.
with apologies to Scott Adams
No, but it is still stupidity when you miss that "Post Anonymously" check box there above the submit button.
Your post advocates a
(X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based (X) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
(X) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(X) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
(X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
(X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
While I'm probably feeding a troll here, I will say that you're partly right.
You can get RHEL recompiled for free with things like CentOS and others. You can recompile it yourself with Red Hat's SRPMs. What costs money is support. I doubt any government outfit would use a purely community distro that doesn't have a corporation and paid support staff behind it. That limits them to Red Hat, Suse/Novell, and Ubuntu/Cannonical mostly, and only one of those is a US-based endeavor.
In addition, TFA has this:
The K-10 runs Red Hat Linux, which NASA says was chosen for its large user base and application compatibility.
Say what you want about Microsoft and its management techniques (and plenty of jokes are already around) but I think this is a good thing. Whatever about Microsoft, they probably have better management techniques than most American school systems, and Bill Gates was right about schools essentially being obsolete.
There needs to be new ideas and new blood running things in the schools. Most administrators are former teachers, and just like good programmers don't always make good IT managers, so do good teachers have a spotty history at becoming good administrators. If this ushers in an era of trying new things to improve schools, then I'm all for it. Microsoft has the name recognition and technology chops to get its foot in the door, but other companies should give it a go. Imagine a GE-led school using Jack Welch's management techniques...
Are you a gamer? Are you someone who does intense multimedia work? If not, then a single-core chip is fine, much less a 4-core chip. For the vast majority of home and business desktops, chips that are considered old right now offer plenty of computing power. The Apartment Hunters across the street from the UF campus still use G3 iMacs at the front desk. These 4-core beasts will be niche things for a while, I think, unless a lot of weasely salesmen can (continue to?) convince people to buy more computer than they need.
I got an idea for the next big iPod accessory! It's called the Aquarium iHopper. It will be able to jump not just your home tank with your goldfish, but also the ones at Sea World filled with ferocious, man-eating sharks!
:(
Okay, I think I tried too hard with that one...
There has been a discussion partially about this before, and mentioned in the summary for that is about how Ellison has said does not intend to buy RedHat. As far as starting a distro, the consensus was that Oracle would be more likely to buy a distro that start one because it takes a long time to get a large and devoted community. Oracle certainly has the cash to do one, so don't rule it out, but it's probably not likely. Also, I think Ellison is too much of a control freak to support someone else's work for long if he doesn't have a say in it. I think he's probably got some backdoor channel with RedHat if he is going to support its products but not purchase the company.
"Net neutrality proponents worry that telecom, wireless and cable companies might one day favor their own content and applications over others."
He says this, but nowhere does he say that the ISPs won't do it. Normally when I make arguments, I try to refute the opposition's points, especially when I myself bring them up. Then he goes on to try to scare his audience about Big Bad Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo supporting net neutrality and then making up something about them getting a cut-rate deal while consumers pay a "competitive" price. Wait, didn't he just say he's "net competition" proponent?
Besides, if anyone has questions about net neutrality, they should just ask a ninja about it.
This is the exact opposite of what the law says. If you create an original work of any kind, whether or not you register it with the copyright office it is still copyrighted to you and no one can do anything with it without your permission. If you don't put a license on it, then it is assumed that you are reserving all of your rights not waiving all of your rights.
If you prove that you are in fact you, then we know who to prosecute if you try to do something illegal. Also, checking IDs can allow for a background check to see if you are a fugitive of some kind. Also, if you are found to be trying to fly with a fake ID, then you probably some kind of criminal because non-criminals don't tend to try to hide their identity (since using a fake ID is illegal in and of itself). Basically, if you're trying to slide by with a fake ID, you're probably up to something. I'm not saying whether that's right or wrong, I'm saying that's the thinking behind it all.
Interesting... the main font used on the site is the title font from the Indiana Jones movies. I guess these computers belong in a museum?
Ignore the second link. The actual performance results are here.
If you read the article more closely, you'll see that the author came to the conclusion that the company that owns googlecheckout.com is directly tied to the one that is known to work with Google. In that sense, googlecheckout.com is already owned by Google.
In any event, this may or may not happen. It may not be anything more than Google noticing online rumors about it possibly starting a PayPal-like service and then deciding to buy the domain either to keep its options open or to prevent phishers or squatters from getting it. Or it could be as the parent described. It certainly would fit in with some aspects of Google Base, but people have made many persuasive arguments for what Google should do and then not see the company do it. After all of the furor over GDrive.com a few months ago, there's still not anything up on that page. Maybe, maybe not. I'll believe it when I see it. Google is second only to Apple when it comes to unsubstatiated/bogus romors.
This is important. They want the installed base and the community. Oracle certainly has the resources to make a new distro from scratch if they wanted, but it takes time to build up a loyal following and by extension an installed base. Certainly a lot of people would try a brand-new Oracle distro, but who knows how many would stick with it if their favorite package(s) was/were not available? Larry likes control, so basing a new one off someone else's distro is right out.
Since the summary did not provideth, here's a link to the actual site: http://port25.technet.com/
They will be nothing compared to mighty Trogdor! Those things wouldn't know majesty if it came up and bit 'em in the face.
1. Periodically visit and submit every story from this collection of all of this year's prank stories: http://aprilfools.urgo.org/
2. ???
3. Slashdot Hall of Fame!!!