Is it somehow morally necessary for a certain fraction of the population to have severe dandruff?
Unfortunately, yes. Many of the world's greatest artists, writers, and musicians had genetic "defects" of some kind. For these people, their problems are what drove them to greatness.
that's because the typical open source app is done by hackers for hackers.
I hate it when people say stuff like this. You make it sound as if hackers like software that's hard to install and use. I consider myself a hacker, and I always prefer a well-coded RPM to a tarball for any software I download. I would also much rather use a GUI interface than to decipher and modify a text configuration file.
I know I'm going to get modded down for this, but I really believe I'm making a valid point.
Frankly, I think you're asking the wrong crowd.
Of all computer users, the Linux crowd is the least qualified to comment about design. Oh sure, there are exceptions, both among Linux users and among Slashdot readers, but just read the comments that have already been posted. The common thread is that people wouldn't want to sacrifice content for a flashy web site, and that just shows their ignorance. These people don't realize that good design does not involve compromizes. Good design is about presenting the content in such a manner that the appearance enhances the content presentation, not distracts from it.
Besides, look at the state of 99% of Linux software, especially the open source stuff. User interfaces are the last concern of the developers. It's obvious to me that the majority of Linux developers and users really don't care, or just don't know anything about, good design. But, I guess I should cut them some slack, since it's very hard to be a good programmer and a good designer. Yet I'm disappointed that most developers don't try to get good design ideas from others.
So yes, Virginia, you can have your cake and eat it too, provided that the web site is designed by a real graphic designer. Such an individual has both training and experience in creating designs that work.
They don't need to go after all of them, just some of them. As soon as they start arresting some people for copyright infringement, 90% of the rest will stop out of fear.
Re:Please seperate Linux kernel from Linux OS topi
on
Linux 2.4.18 Released
·
· Score: 1
Then you can just subscribe to both Linux and Linux-Kernel stories.
It's meant to prevent post floods, and it's tracked by userid, not IP.
Re:Optionally publish valid mail servers for domai
on
Spam Slows AT&T Email
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, that will block people who use their own computer as a sendmail server. My From: line contains my correct email address, but I don't have a sendmail server running on that domain.
IMHO, the only real way to stop spam is when all ISPs worldwide adopt a policy that 1) validates a credit card when someone signs up, and 2) charges that credit card a fee if the user spams. Sure, this will mean that no one will be able to get Internet access in less than 24 hours, but so what?
From a Linux advocates point of view, there isn't much difference between Sun and Microsoft. Don't be fooled by the saying "My enemy's enemy is my friend", because it doesn't apply here.
Besides, Sun will attack IBM at any chance it gets.
Having the user run as root all the time, without a password, is more user-friendly than the alternative. Running as non-root makes it difficult to make configuration changes, because the GUI tools generally just fail instead of prompting you for the root password when needed. If you use Linux as a desktop OS, then running as root with no password is just like running Windows 98, which is what I presume most Chinese computer users are familiar with.
Go to a local university, and try to get as many Computer Science professors to sign a letter that says that your product is not software. Use these letters as evidence.
I think the reason why IBM embraces open source more than Sun is because IBM considers hardware and services to be more important (business strategy-wise) than software. Sun sees their OS as being a big part of the picture, whereas IBM sees their hardware and services as being the bigger part of the picture.
Is there any point to non-certified but highly compliant implementations?
Only if your customers care. Certification is a way of convincing people that something is compliant without making them find out for themselves whether it's really compliant. It's like the difference between having a diploma, and having a transcript that lists all the classes necessery for graduation with passing grades. The diploma is a simple way to show, "Yes, I've graduated".
You're comparing apples and oranges (pun not intended). The previous post, and my reply, talked about designing a new interface, comparable in quality to Apple's. You're talking about copying Apple's, which is orders of magnitude easier.
So, what company is going to pony up the millions of dollars it will take to hire the world's best interface designers (well, 2nd-best, since Apple has the best) and pay them to design it and code it? Oh, that's right - NO ONE WILL.
Of course, this whole thing assumes that the developers of GNOME and KDE will actually implement whatever the aforementioned designers come up with.
Open and secure relays would both respond to port 25 connections. Correctly secured relays would reject any message you tried to send through their mail server to another destination, whilst still accepting mail for local users (if it's not just an outgoing relay).
Ah, I get it now. Thanks.
It's possible to connect to the mail server for the address supplied and verify that the user exists, but in most cases, due to server configuration, that would require actually sending a message (thus putting you at risk of getting into a bizarre authentication loop).
Wouldn't it possible to initiate an SMTP transaction and then abort that transaction just before the email was actually sent, while still verifying that email could be sent?
It would also seriously add to the overhead of sending a message, something larger sites would not be able to cope with.
Well, yeah, but as a mail filter for your email client, it should work pretty well. Test each email as you receive it. No?
Um. That would list all mail servers, sparky.:) I think you are trying to say that your mail server should perform an open relay test on any IP that is connecting to your mail server.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say.
This would work but, it will be quite a performance hit on your mail-server (doing that kind of check is gonna take a lot of time) and you won't catch the open proxies or web-forms that spammers are starting to abuse.
Well, considering how little email I get in a day, I don't see how it could be a real problem. Plus, it could cache entries that have passed the test, so that email from mailing lists would only be tested once (per day/week/whatever).
And it should catch web forms, also, because web forms are just front-ends to smtp servers, aren't they?
Hmmm... I wonder if it's possible to write a script that scans the header of every email that arrives, does an open relay test on the sending IP, and if it fails, discard the email?
Wouldn't it just be a lot simple if the mail servers, when they receive a connection from an smtp server to deliver mail, make another connection back to the smtp server on port 25. If the connection can be made, then it means that it's an open port, and therefore the mail is rejected? Wouldn't this be a sort of "dynamic blacklist"? That way, mail from an open port is never accepted.
You know, it's quite possible to care about animals without being a "PETA-troll". For the record, I can't stand PETA. I think they do more harm than good. If anything, you're the troll, not me.
whine about your unadopted animals someplace else.
Sorry, I intend to make my opinion known when it's importiant, including this forum. I think it's important that people consider the ethical ramifications of cloning pets.
If you're so fired up about unadopted animals then go adopt some and leave the pet-cloners the hell alone.
Actually, I have adopted several cats. I currently have three. I also trap stray cats, neuter them, and release them into the wild, to help humanely control the stray cat population.
Resolve not to do it yourself and *stay out of concerns that aren't your business*.
How absurd. Are you saying that I'm no longer allowed to post my opinion on Slashdot? I think you just like flaming people because you have nothing better to do.
Your comparison is invalid. Millions of sheep around the world are not being killed every year because no one wants to adopt them. Besides, sheet aren't pets.
Not only that, but you're completely ignoring the thrust of my post as well as the article. Yes, learning how to clone a cat is a good idea. However, starting a business of cloning cats so that rich people who don't really care about animals can "bring their lost pet back" (which they aren't really doing) is a horrible idea.
In economics, the absence of gain when you should have gotten a gain is considered a loss and is called an "opportunity loss". This is standard Econ 101 stuff.
Of course it isn't. It's humane. The poster believes that destroying cats because we can't find owners for them is bad. Widespread cloning of cats would exacerbate that problem. Therefore widespread cloning of cats would be bad. The math is pretty simple.
Thank you. This is exactly what I was trying to say.
As I said before, the CopyCat project isn't about the widespread cloning of cats (I think)
This is where you are wrong. To quote:
Sperling plans to offer the technology first to wealthy individuals seeking to replace beloved pets, but he also envisions using it to replicate socially valuable animals, such as search-and-rescue dogs, he told the Journal.
The 2nd reason is bogus. There are plenty of animals already capable of being search-and-rescue dogs. The problem is not genetics, it's training. Cloning a search-and-rescue dog won't automatially make a new one. That new dog will have to be trained just like the original. If anything, breeding search-and-rescue dogs together would be more effective, and certainly much cheaper.
If you're going to question the morals of cloning in general, fine, argue that... but arguing that it's bad BECAUSE that species is already plentiful is just plain silly.
No, it's not. There are good reasons to clone mice and other small laboratory animals, for instance. Granted, I wish scientists wouldn't need to experiment on animals, but that's just the way it is these days. However, the only reason to clone a cat (besides learning how to do it) is to "recover" a lost pet. And most people I know agree with me that it's much better to adopt a new pet (so that you can save that animal's life) rather than make a new one from scratch.
Over the years, I've lost several cats (predators, old age, etc). Although some of them were very dear to me, I would never have considered cloning them to "bring them back". Instead, I went to the shelter and adopted a new cat. I took great comfort in knowing that I was able to save the lives of other animals. Any real pet lover would agree.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, yes. Many of the world's greatest artists, writers, and musicians had genetic "defects" of some kind. For these people, their problems are what drove them to greatness.
I hate it when people say stuff like this. You make it sound as if hackers like software that's hard to install and use. I consider myself a hacker, and I always prefer a well-coded RPM to a tarball for any software I download. I would also much rather use a GUI interface than to decipher and modify a text configuration file.
Frankly, I think you're asking the wrong crowd.
Of all computer users, the Linux crowd is the least qualified to comment about design. Oh sure, there are exceptions, both among Linux users and among Slashdot readers, but just read the comments that have already been posted. The common thread is that people wouldn't want to sacrifice content for a flashy web site, and that just shows their ignorance. These people don't realize that good design does not involve compromizes. Good design is about presenting the content in such a manner that the appearance enhances the content presentation, not distracts from it.
Besides, look at the state of 99% of Linux software, especially the open source stuff. User interfaces are the last concern of the developers. It's obvious to me that the majority of Linux developers and users really don't care, or just don't know anything about, good design. But, I guess I should cut them some slack, since it's very hard to be a good programmer and a good designer. Yet I'm disappointed that most developers don't try to get good design ideas from others.
So yes, Virginia, you can have your cake and eat it too, provided that the web site is designed by a real graphic designer. Such an individual has both training and experience in creating designs that work.
They don't need to go after all of them, just some of them. As soon as they start arresting some people for copyright infringement, 90% of the rest will stop out of fear.
Then you can just subscribe to both Linux and Linux-Kernel stories.
It's meant to prevent post floods, and it's tracked by userid, not IP.
IMHO, the only real way to stop spam is when all ISPs worldwide adopt a policy that 1) validates a credit card when someone signs up, and 2) charges that credit card a fee if the user spams. Sure, this will mean that no one will be able to get Internet access in less than 24 hours, but so what?
Besides, Sun will attack IBM at any chance it gets.
Having the user run as root all the time, without a password, is more user-friendly than the alternative. Running as non-root makes it difficult to make configuration changes, because the GUI tools generally just fail instead of prompting you for the root password when needed. If you use Linux as a desktop OS, then running as root with no password is just like running Windows 98, which is what I presume most Chinese computer users are familiar with.
Go to a local university, and try to get as many Computer Science professors to sign a letter that says that your product is not software. Use these letters as evidence.
I think the reason why IBM embraces open source more than Sun is because IBM considers hardware and services to be more important (business strategy-wise) than software. Sun sees their OS as being a big part of the picture, whereas IBM sees their hardware and services as being the bigger part of the picture.
Only if your customers care. Certification is a way of convincing people that something is compliant without making them find out for themselves whether it's really compliant. It's like the difference between having a diploma, and having a transcript that lists all the classes necessery for graduation with passing grades. The diploma is a simple way to show, "Yes, I've graduated".
Alas, these two projects only support Windows and (in the case of Folding) Linux. Oh well. I guess it's back to searching for aliens.
You're comparing apples and oranges (pun not intended). The previous post, and my reply, talked about designing a new interface, comparable in quality to Apple's. You're talking about copying Apple's, which is orders of magnitude easier.
Of course, this whole thing assumes that the developers of GNOME and KDE will actually implement whatever the aforementioned designers come up with.
Ah, I get it now. Thanks.
It's possible to connect to the mail server for the address supplied and verify that the user exists, but in most cases, due to server configuration, that would require actually sending a message (thus putting you at risk of getting into a bizarre authentication loop).
Wouldn't it possible to initiate an SMTP transaction and then abort that transaction just before the email was actually sent, while still verifying that email could be sent?
It would also seriously add to the overhead of sending a message, something larger sites would not be able to cope with.
Well, yeah, but as a mail filter for your email client, it should work pretty well. Test each email as you receive it. No?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say.
This would work but, it will be quite a performance hit on your mail-server (doing that kind of check is gonna take a lot of time) and you won't catch the open proxies or web-forms that spammers are starting to abuse.
Well, considering how little email I get in a day, I don't see how it could be a real problem. Plus, it could cache entries that have passed the test, so that email from mailing lists would only be tested once (per day/week/whatever).
And it should catch web forms, also, because web forms are just front-ends to smtp servers, aren't they?
Hmmm... I wonder if it's possible to write a script that scans the header of every email that arrives, does an open relay test on the sending IP, and if it fails, discard the email?
What's an open proxy?
Huh? I'm confused. I was trying to come up with a way of automatically rejecting mail from open servers.
Wouldn't it just be a lot simple if the mail servers, when they receive a connection from an smtp server to deliver mail, make another connection back to the smtp server on port 25. If the connection can be made, then it means that it's an open port, and therefore the mail is rejected? Wouldn't this be a sort of "dynamic blacklist"? That way, mail from an open port is never accepted.
You know, it's quite possible to care about animals without being a "PETA-troll". For the record, I can't stand PETA. I think they do more harm than good. If anything, you're the troll, not me.
whine about your unadopted animals someplace else.
Sorry, I intend to make my opinion known when it's importiant, including this forum. I think it's important that people consider the ethical ramifications of cloning pets.
If you're so fired up about unadopted animals then go adopt some and leave the pet-cloners the hell alone.
Actually, I have adopted several cats. I currently have three. I also trap stray cats, neuter them, and release them into the wild, to help humanely control the stray cat population.
Resolve not to do it yourself and *stay out of concerns that aren't your business*.
How absurd. Are you saying that I'm no longer allowed to post my opinion on Slashdot? I think you just like flaming people because you have nothing better to do.
Not only that, but you're completely ignoring the thrust of my post as well as the article. Yes, learning how to clone a cat is a good idea. However, starting a business of cloning cats so that rich people who don't really care about animals can "bring their lost pet back" (which they aren't really doing) is a horrible idea.
You never studied economics, didn't you?
In economics, the absence of gain when you should have gotten a gain is considered a loss and is called an "opportunity loss". This is standard Econ 101 stuff.
Thank you. This is exactly what I was trying to say.
As I said before, the CopyCat project isn't about the widespread cloning of cats (I think)
This is where you are wrong. To quote:
The 2nd reason is bogus. There are plenty of animals already capable of being search-and-rescue dogs. The problem is not genetics, it's training. Cloning a search-and-rescue dog won't automatially make a new one. That new dog will have to be trained just like the original. If anything, breeding search-and-rescue dogs together would be more effective, and certainly much cheaper.No, it's not. There are good reasons to clone mice and other small laboratory animals, for instance. Granted, I wish scientists wouldn't need to experiment on animals, but that's just the way it is these days. However, the only reason to clone a cat (besides learning how to do it) is to "recover" a lost pet. And most people I know agree with me that it's much better to adopt a new pet (so that you can save that animal's life) rather than make a new one from scratch.
Over the years, I've lost several cats (predators, old age, etc). Although some of them were very dear to me, I would never have considered cloning them to "bring them back". Instead, I went to the shelter and adopted a new cat. I took great comfort in knowing that I was able to save the lives of other animals. Any real pet lover would agree.
However, that's just my opinion, and I don't try to force it on anyone.