Where does phishtank keep stats on webserver used and OS its run on? I didn't see that data anywhere on their site. Are you going to netcraft and looking up all 1,429 online phishing websites? If so, do you have a breakdown by OS and webserver?
I don't think its as much about dropping novell's distro (since its ostensibly safe from MS), but to stop taking any contributions from novell altogether. It might also not be a bad idea to certify that a program pr project has no contributions from novell of any kind.
And, given the lengths to which MS will go, it's not a bad idea to only accept code into any given codebase from someone after they sign an affidavit or agreement that they don't work for novell or microsoft, and the code they contribute did not come from commercial, non-gpl sources. I wouldn't put it past MS to hire someone to try and sneak some of their code into the linux kernel.
I, on the other hand, am thinking patenting FUD, and charging SB for his use (per recipient) of my idea. That would give him an easy choice - pay me or go to jail.
For every "contradiction" that people claim can be found in the Bible, there has been a repudiation;
All those repudiations involve alternate interpretations. Suppose I feel that the account that jesus died for my sins is nothing more than a metaphor or a story? The very method used to repudiate theological contradictions found in the bible can also be just as useful as a way to repudiate christian doctrine. Also, under the notion that the OT laws still hold, its still wrong for people with poor eyesight and damaged stone to go to church under the notion the the bible is a unified authority inspired by the hand of a not-so all powerful and not-so all-knowing spirit. Under biblical law, I would be perfectly excused from attending church due to bad eyesight or a hunched back.
The OT 'laws' have nothing at all to do with what is 'sin' - they are just social and political laws and rules that existed at the time those books were written. People who were sick were not wanted in a church because the would spread disease in a crowded place, not because god somehow dictated it. People in those days didn't understand germ theory, but knew that when the sick mixed with the healthy, the healthy became ill. Hence the ban not only of the sick in temples, but also of those who looked sick.
The god depicted in the bible is just an anthropomorphization of all the things people didn't understand about the universe around them. That's why god kills people as a favor to his friends, throws temper tantrums, on one had is all powerful and the next minute is powerless against iron chariots, makes lying a sin, and then puts 'lying spirits' into people he doesn't like.
Alternate interpretations also don't account for purely textual inconsistencies, where one part of the bible tells a story with one account, and another describes the same story with a different set of circumstances. That list is too long to be compiled here, but would include:
baby jesus taken to egypt - Matt 2:14,15,19,21,23;
baby jesus not taken to egypt - Luke 2:22, 39;
Christ preached his first sermon on the side of a mountain - Matt 5:1,2;
Christ preached his first sermon on the plain - Luke 6:17,20;
Of course, the fact that a story get told so differently in multiple instances is because the books were written by human hands, and contain natural errors. As such, all the literature found in the roman empirical compendium christians call the bible has the kinds of inaccuracies intrinsic to all human communication. That's why using the bible to interpret the bible requires alternating interpretive methods when needed to maintain the appearance that its one complete book rather than an eclectic. Its also logically fallacious to use a book to prove itself. That's a logical fallacy called 'appeal to authority'.
Think about life in the present: when do you know to interpret things literally versus figuratively?
Of course things like a story about someone coming back to life to satisfy the needs of a god requiring sacrifice for sins would be and example of something taken figuratively. The bible is more useful for what it really is - a diverse collection of literature from the ancient middle east. Its no more useful as a guide to living or what to believe or what 'god' is like than are the writings of confucius, lao tzu, mohamed, or the buddha. Those at least are works that don't pretend to be something they are not. I'm not saying the bible is bad, its just not what christians claim it is.
There's this book that really easy to get, you can read it for yourself, and draw your own conclusions. The trick is to really just read it and see what it says
I did.
deut 22:11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, as of woolen and linen together.
deut 22:12 Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself.
I guess god does fashion - kind of like queer eye for the straight guy, but with eternal consequences...
deut 23:1 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
deut 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
So I can't go to church if I've been kicked in the balls, had my long john bobbed, or if my mom fooled around with the dominos pizza delivery guy, or if any of my ancestors had little bastards who had little bastards.
Oh wait - those are old testament things and are superseded by Christ (Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6).
Oh wait again - no they're not, according to Jesus (Matt 5:17-19).
Claiming that the bible is some kind of authority on anything at all is pure religious fantasy. Its just a bunch of books written by dozens of disparate authors separated by hundreds and in some cases thousands of years, not some kind of all-powerful (or not - Judg 1:19) all-knowing (or not - Gen 11:5; Gen 18:20,21; Gen 3:8) anthropomorphized super-spirit. That doesn't mean there aren't good things to be found in it, just that claiming it as a unified authority is at best inconsistent.
Christians take some parts literally, like Jesus being the only way to heaven/god, and other parts not literally, like banning people with damaged testicles from church. The reason given? Nothing consistent (even within new testament literature) or reasonable. I invite you to offer a consistent and reasonable criteria for when to interpret the bible as a literal authority and when to interpret it not literally. And if you try the 'new testament supersedes the old', you have to admit that Matt 5:17-19 is wrong, or not interpret it literally. Then come up with a new criteria as to when to take what Jesus says literally and when not to - maybe he didn't die for your sins after all, since we can take Matt 5:17-19 not literally and maybe other parts too. This, it seems to be the most common thread in the bible, and perhaps the religions which use it for their foundation.
"Indeed, if manufacturers can meet the challenges of ramping up production and selling, distributing, and installing the systems, their prices could easily meet prices for electricity from the grid, says solar-industry analyst Michael Rogol, managing director of Photon Consulting, in Aachen, Germany."
"We will love to put that kind of agreement in place with anyone[everyone] who distributes Linux software, Red Hat, whoever[everyone] else," Steve Ballmer told India's Economic Times.
Way too obvious.
"Mr Ballmer, on a visit to India, said that while he believed software would be increasingly downloaded and managed off the internet,"
As in apt-get?
""I would say we are moving to a world where there is a lot more electronic distribution. It is a new style of software, not the old-style distributed electronically.""
He's obviously not taking his meds - as in the 'raise my IQ above that of a carot' pill he must need each morning to get out the door.
"The next frontier for us is to embrace a new business model. And if we embrace it well and that business model is subscription and advertising,"
Curious that he left out 'make good software' and 'support'...
Viruses are found at 'work only' environments as well. About the only way to keep windows - work or not - free of malware is never to do anything new with it. If all you need are a bunch of people typing form letters, doing data entry, or answering phones, why are you even using windows workstations at all - why don't you have farms of citrix terms, X terms, or dumb terminals?
Also, as any programmer knows codebases mature with time, and as new as vista is its going to be significantly riddled with buffer overflows, permission snafus, and failed memory protection issues for some time to come. Most of windows problems come from sloppy programming and poor QA from MS - period.
Blaming all your problems on porn is reserved for preachers and politicians.
Let us pray for these open-minded people whose software we are rue to use, that they may avoid eternal damnation for the path to hell is wide and 'open'. Let us be thankful we avoid damnation by avoiding their damn software.
Especially in the EU, where a software patent must be negotiated in each member nation separately. This entire deal is such an obvious sucker, you'd need a lobotomy not to see it. MS is harboring some kind of puerile fantasy that this 'deal' (read 'protection scheme') will enable it to pull a patent rug out from under GPL'd software - except there is no rug. Repeat: there is no rug. The entire deal is complete vaporware.
Buying SUSE to feel safe only supports the scheme - it doesn't seem to legitimize any vaporous MS patent claims. I do agree that someone should slam novel for violation of the GPL, though.
I think a key issue to watch is going to be Rumsfeld. It's clear his strategies
Rummy's got strategies? Oh yeah, put a stop to sectarian violence going back nearly 1500 years with a few years of grossly undermanned occupation.
Heckuva job, Rummy!
God, the bush admin crew is retarded (apologies to the mentally challenged). At least by voting in democrats, we can show the world the rest of the USA isn't filled with a bunch of pin-headed shrub-lovers. Now we've got democratic retards, instead of bush retards.
"but I spend three hours getting a $50 refund on some purchase,"
FTA:"Mitchell ordered his Dell laptop on Oct. 21, and it arrived on Oct. 27. He sent a postal letter requesting a refund to Dell's Bracknell, UK office on Nov. 1, received a phone call two days later, and his refund today, he says."
It doesn't sound as though he spent three hours to get his refund ($89). If it took him 15 minutes to compose a letter and mail it, that roughly comes to $356 per hour, less the expense of paper and postage.
Co-wrote as in how he co-wrote a portion of the bootloader for DOS. Which meant started.
Calling everyone who has typed in a few lines of code a programmer really lowers the definition of what a programmer is.
I really don't see what the fuss is. People are always trying to paint bg as some kind of 'computer genius' or geek. He's good at making money, not writing code.
A series of words, phrases, and sentences assembled in a manner such that communication to a participant listener in any form causes a humorous response from a said participant listener.
'A fly approaches an attractive woman in a bar and says, "Nice Stool".'
Bill: No way! Remember, Steve, I used to write software
Total myth. bg knows what lines of code look like on a piece of paper, and that's pretty much it. He hasn't ever coded anything to functional completion.
This is just another lame, half-thought, and half-assed attempt at divide and 'conquer'. If users really want peace, they'll quit having anything to do with a vendor that screws them as a matter of policy.
Why only include countries? Why not include companies as well? Some of them are gunning for 'the Internet' either intentionally, or just as a side-effect of unethical practices.
FTA:"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history
that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission.
If these regulations go into effect, you can add the United States to
this list."
Respectfully, one of the links you offered is dead, and the other is a forum with mostly entries defending the smart ship concept. From the links, its not clear that its a 'myth' or not. Either way, it'd be interesting to know if one app crashed the systems and causing another app used for propulsion control to fail, or if the database and propulsion control were part of one system that crashed on its own without help from NT.
Maybe they could just ask to see the source code and audit it themselves, or just use software with the source code available. Its not as though they need to write it themselves, just be able to examine the source code. If they don't want to, well, they get what they deserve.
"Worse yet, the less spam you filter, the more you should be paranoid about false positives"
Do you mean, "the more spam you filter, the more you should be paranoid about false positives"?
I do scan the subject lines and email addresses of the spam that makes it past spamcop, and I have had a false positive in the last year that I know about. The person appealed to spamcop, they asked me, and I confirmed the mistake, and the person got their email account back to normal. Also, any ISP, webhost, or anyone for that matter can use the spamcop blacklist to cut down on spam received. And, its maintained by individual people confirming reported spam. I'm not putting blacklists out there at the best solution, but it they're built and driven by enough people reporting and contributing, they can make a big difference. Every bit helps insofar as I can tell.
Even so, such a human effort can still be overwhelmed by sheer volume. I still think enough people pitching in to some kind of collaborative effort can make a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
almost all run Apache on Linux
Where does phishtank keep stats on webserver used and OS its run on? I didn't see that data anywhere on their site. Are you going to netcraft and looking up all 1,429 online phishing websites? If so, do you have a breakdown by OS and webserver?
I don't think its as much about dropping novell's distro (since its ostensibly safe from MS), but to stop taking any contributions from novell altogether. It might also not be a bad idea to certify that a program pr project has no contributions from novell of any kind.
And, given the lengths to which MS will go, it's not a bad idea to only accept code into any given codebase from someone after they sign an affidavit or agreement that they don't work for novell or microsoft, and the code they contribute did not come from commercial, non-gpl sources. I wouldn't put it past MS to hire someone to try and sneak some of their code into the linux kernel.
I, on the other hand, am thinking patenting FUD, and charging SB for his use (per recipient) of my idea. That would give him an easy choice - pay me or go to jail.
I have to wonder - did /. get paid for this ad?
All those repudiations involve alternate interpretations. Suppose I feel that the account that jesus died for my sins is nothing more than a metaphor or a story? The very method used to repudiate theological contradictions found in the bible can also be just as useful as a way to repudiate christian doctrine. Also, under the notion that the OT laws still hold, its still wrong for people with poor eyesight and damaged stone to go to church under the notion the the bible is a unified authority inspired by the hand of a not-so all powerful and not-so all-knowing spirit. Under biblical law, I would be perfectly excused from attending church due to bad eyesight or a hunched back.
The OT 'laws' have nothing at all to do with what is 'sin' - they are just social and political laws and rules that existed at the time those books were written. People who were sick were not wanted in a church because the would spread disease in a crowded place, not because god somehow dictated it. People in those days didn't understand germ theory, but knew that when the sick mixed with the healthy, the healthy became ill. Hence the ban not only of the sick in temples, but also of those who looked sick.
The god depicted in the bible is just an anthropomorphization of all the things people didn't understand about the universe around them. That's why god kills people as a favor to his friends, throws temper tantrums, on one had is all powerful and the next minute is powerless against iron chariots, makes lying a sin, and then puts 'lying spirits' into people he doesn't like.
Alternate interpretations also don't account for purely textual inconsistencies, where one part of the bible tells a story with one account, and another describes the same story with a different set of circumstances. That list is too long to be compiled here, but would include:
- baby jesus taken to egypt - Matt 2:14,15,19,21,23;
- baby jesus not taken to egypt - Luke 2:22, 39;
- Christ preached his first sermon on the side of a mountain - Matt 5:1,2;
- Christ preached his first sermon on the plain - Luke 6:17,20;
Of course, the fact that a story get told so differently in multiple instances is because the books were written by human hands, and contain natural errors. As such, all the literature found in the roman empirical compendium christians call the bible has the kinds of inaccuracies intrinsic to all human communication. That's why using the bible to interpret the bible requires alternating interpretive methods when needed to maintain the appearance that its one complete book rather than an eclectic. Its also logically fallacious to use a book to prove itself. That's a logical fallacy called 'appeal to authority'.Think about life in the present: when do you know to interpret things literally versus figuratively?
Of course things like a story about someone coming back to life to satisfy the needs of a god requiring sacrifice for sins would be and example of something taken figuratively. The bible is more useful for what it really is - a diverse collection of literature from the ancient middle east. Its no more useful as a guide to living or what to believe or what 'god' is like than are the writings of confucius, lao tzu, mohamed, or the buddha. Those at least are works that don't pretend to be something they are not. I'm not saying the bible is bad, its just not what christians claim it is.
There's this book that really easy to get, you can read it for yourself, and draw your own conclusions. The trick is to really just read it and see what it says
I did.
deut 22:11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, as of woolen and linen together.
deut 22:12 Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself.
I guess god does fashion - kind of like queer eye for the straight guy, but with eternal consequences...
deut 23:1 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
deut 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
So I can't go to church if I've been kicked in the balls, had my long john bobbed, or if my mom fooled around with the dominos pizza delivery guy, or if any of my ancestors had little bastards who had little bastards.
Oh wait - those are old testament things and are superseded by Christ (Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6).
Oh wait again - no they're not, according to Jesus (Matt 5:17-19).
Claiming that the bible is some kind of authority on anything at all is pure religious fantasy. Its just a bunch of books written by dozens of disparate authors separated by hundreds and in some cases thousands of years, not some kind of all-powerful (or not - Judg 1:19) all-knowing (or not - Gen 11:5; Gen 18:20,21; Gen 3:8) anthropomorphized super-spirit. That doesn't mean there aren't good things to be found in it, just that claiming it as a unified authority is at best inconsistent.
Christians take some parts literally, like Jesus being the only way to heaven/god, and other parts not literally, like banning people with damaged testicles from church. The reason given? Nothing consistent (even within new testament literature) or reasonable. I invite you to offer a consistent and reasonable criteria for when to interpret the bible as a literal authority and when to interpret it not literally. And if you try the 'new testament supersedes the old', you have to admit that Matt 5:17-19 is wrong, or not interpret it literally. Then come up with a new criteria as to when to take what Jesus says literally and when not to - maybe he didn't die for your sins after all, since we can take Matt 5:17-19 not literally and maybe other parts too. This, it seems to be the most common thread in the bible, and perhaps the religions which use it for their foundation.
"Christianity states"
Christianity says pretty much whatever any given sect wants it to say, by listening to them. One thing for one, something else for another.
If you believe the newly appointed Defense Secretary, cyberterrorism is legit term and is tantamount to using WMDs.
"Indeed, if manufacturers can meet the challenges of ramping up production and selling, distributing, and installing the systems, their prices could easily meet prices for electricity from the grid, says solar-industry analyst Michael Rogol, managing director of Photon Consulting, in Aachen, Germany."
I've heard that Photon Consulting is really fast.
"We will love to put that kind of agreement in place with anyone [everyone] who distributes Linux software, Red Hat, whoever [everyone] else," Steve Ballmer told India's Economic Times.
Way too obvious.
"Mr Ballmer, on a visit to India, said that while he believed software would be increasingly downloaded and managed off the internet,"
As in apt-get?
""I would say we are moving to a world where there is a lot more electronic distribution. It is a new style of software, not the old-style distributed electronically.""
He's obviously not taking his meds - as in the 'raise my IQ above that of a carot' pill he must need each morning to get out the door.
"The next frontier for us is to embrace a new business model. And if we embrace it well and that business model is subscription and advertising,"
Curious that he left out 'make good software' and 'support'...
Try using windows for what it is intended - work.
Viruses are found at 'work only' environments as well. About the only way to keep windows - work or not - free of malware is never to do anything new with it. If all you need are a bunch of people typing form letters, doing data entry, or answering phones, why are you even using windows workstations at all - why don't you have farms of citrix terms, X terms, or dumb terminals?
Also, as any programmer knows codebases mature with time, and as new as vista is its going to be significantly riddled with buffer overflows, permission snafus, and failed memory protection issues for some time to come. Most of windows problems come from sloppy programming and poor QA from MS - period.
Blaming all your problems on porn is reserved for preachers and politicians.
Let us pray for these open-minded people whose software we are rue to use, that they may avoid eternal damnation for the path to hell is wide and 'open'. Let us be thankful we avoid damnation by avoiding their damn software.
"Software Patents are Insane."
Especially in the EU, where a software patent must be negotiated in each member nation separately. This entire deal is such an obvious sucker, you'd need a lobotomy not to see it. MS is harboring some kind of puerile fantasy that this 'deal' (read 'protection scheme') will enable it to pull a patent rug out from under GPL'd software - except there is no rug. Repeat: there is no rug. The entire deal is complete vaporware.
Buying SUSE to feel safe only supports the scheme - it doesn't seem to legitimize any vaporous MS patent claims. I do agree that someone should slam novel for violation of the GPL, though.
Actually, I said this in another thread, but its worth saying again:
Heckuva Job, Rummy.
I think a key issue to watch is going to be Rumsfeld. It's clear his strategies
Rummy's got strategies? Oh yeah, put a stop to sectarian violence going back nearly 1500 years with a few years of grossly undermanned occupation.
Heckuva job, Rummy!
God, the bush admin crew is retarded (apologies to the mentally challenged). At least by voting in democrats, we can show the world the rest of the USA isn't filled with a bunch of pin-headed shrub-lovers. Now we've got democratic retards, instead of bush retards.
"but I spend three hours getting a $50 refund on some purchase,"
FTA:"Mitchell ordered his Dell laptop on Oct. 21, and it arrived on Oct. 27. He sent a postal letter requesting a refund to Dell's Bracknell, UK office on Nov. 1, received a phone call two days later, and his refund today, he says."
It doesn't sound as though he spent three hours to get his refund ($89). If it took him 15 minutes to compose a letter and mail it, that roughly comes to $356 per hour, less the expense of paper and postage.
You're right - so not worth it.
co-written by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.
Co-wrote as in how he co-wrote a portion of the bootloader for DOS. Which meant started.
Calling everyone who has typed in a few lines of code a programmer really lowers the definition of what a programmer is.
I really don't see what the fuss is. People are always trying to paint bg as some kind of 'computer genius' or geek. He's good at making money, not writing code.
Maybe we should start patenting jokes.
Here's my application:
A series of words, phrases, and sentences assembled in a manner such that communication to a participant listener in any form causes a humorous response from a said participant listener.
'A fly approaches an attractive woman in a bar and says, "Nice Stool".'
I bet the morloks at the USPTO grant it a patent.
Bill: No way! Remember, Steve, I used to write software
Total myth. bg knows what lines of code look like on a piece of paper, and that's pretty much it. He hasn't ever coded anything to functional completion.
This is just another lame, half-thought, and half-assed attempt at divide and 'conquer'. If users really want peace, they'll quit having anything to do with a vendor that screws them as a matter of policy.
Why only include countries? Why not include companies as well? Some of them are gunning for 'the Internet' either intentionally, or just as a side-effect of unethical practices.
For this non-believing devil fish, so obviously bound for hell.
FTA:"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission. If these regulations go into effect, you can add the United States to this list."
They left out North Korea.
Respectfully, one of the links you offered is dead, and the other is a forum with mostly entries defending the smart ship concept. From the links, its not clear that its a 'myth' or not. Either way, it'd be interesting to know if one app crashed the systems and causing another app used for propulsion control to fail, or if the database and propulsion control were part of one system that crashed on its own without help from NT.
"The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
FTA:"We're happy to use Microsoft"
Some people never learn.
Maybe they could just ask to see the source code and audit it themselves, or just use software with the source code available. Its not as though they need to write it themselves, just be able to examine the source code. If they don't want to, well, they get what they deserve.
"Worse yet, the less spam you filter, the more you should be paranoid about false positives"
Do you mean, "the more spam you filter, the more you should be paranoid about false positives"?
I do scan the subject lines and email addresses of the spam that makes it past spamcop, and I have had a false positive in the last year that I know about. The person appealed to spamcop, they asked me, and I confirmed the mistake, and the person got their email account back to normal. Also, any ISP, webhost, or anyone for that matter can use the spamcop blacklist to cut down on spam received. And, its maintained by individual people confirming reported spam. I'm not putting blacklists out there at the best solution, but it they're built and driven by enough people reporting and contributing, they can make a big difference. Every bit helps insofar as I can tell.
Even so, such a human effort can still be overwhelmed by sheer volume. I still think enough people pitching in to some kind of collaborative effort can make a difference.