All you people out there that are anti-Cyber Patrol because your employer or parents or whatever uses it are just not cool.
Red herring.
The truth is that I've never actually even seen a machine that had this stuff installed on it. I'm anti-Cyber Patrol because of what this guy is reporting: that it is indiscriminately censoring his entire ISP. That's wrong, and suggests that Cyber Patrol is not a very good product. If they're that sloppy about who they censor, who's to say how much stuff *isn't* getting censored?
I also don't like the fact that many of these products (perhaps Cyber Patrol, perhaps not) block material based on political motives, or because a web site is critical of their product, or censorware in general. That is wrong, wrong, wrong.
But mostly, I jumped into this discussion because I saw a guy whose site was blocked by a poorly-programmed censorware package, and he was attempting to blame the *ISP*. Argh. It's *not* the ISPs fault that some bozo at that headhunter agency is relying on a piece of (Windows) software to improve productivity rather than paying his employees a decent wage, or otherwise motivating them.
I don't think anyone should be able to get away with the kind of sloppiness these censorware vendors engage in, as it amounts to libel. Is it too difficult to program the thing to do its job correctly? Perhaps. Tough. They still shouldn't be able to get away with libeling people.
Although it isn't the ISP's fault that Cyber Patrol is blocking my site, it is my ISP's fault that they KNEW ABOUT IT and didn't tell me, or any of their users!
Sorry, but I disagree. How is it the ISP's job to keep track of which censorware packages are currently blocking their customer's sites indiscriminately? So, they may have found out that Cyber Patrol is blocking their server; considering the tiny percentage of people using ridiculous software like that, it would seem rather silly to me for them to inform every customer ("currently the following censorware is blocking our site: Cyber Patrol, Net Nanny, etc.").
It's not the ISP's fault. They're not the one's falsely suggesting that your content is not suitable for general consumption.
I hope someone goes after Cyber Patrol or one of these other censorware vendors for libel eventually.
I disagree. Cyber Patrol is, in essence, libeling the fellow's content. They are falsely suggesting that his content is not suitable for all ages, because of their rather imprecise methodology.
This kind of thing should not be tolerated. If you ran a technical book store in a medium size town, and because there is one adult book store in your town, someone in another town started running ads in the newspaper that said "DON'T VISIT THE BOOK STORES IN HAPPYVILLE; THEY PEDDLE FILTH," don't you think that might be improper, and possibly actionable?
CyberPatrol is knowingly selling a faulty product, since, by their own admission (apparently) their product blocks non-obscene content rather indiscriminately. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that your case is weaker than someone who has purchased CyberPatrol, and has discovered that it blocks non-obscene material.
Yes, I imagine it's difficult to segregate the 'adult' stuff from the non-adult stuff, but blocking whole multiuser servers? That seems a bit sloppy.
In short, I think the ISP is in the right; there is no reason why they should run separate servers (after all, whose definition of 'bad, evil content' would they use to separate the web sites?). CyberPatrol is the one libeling your content; your beef is with them, as I see it.
I noticed that after I posted it, but had never really noticed it before. Of course, for those who are unfamiliar, it is part of the KDE project: i.e., "K"-"Illustrator.":-)
BTW. someone else in this thread suggested that I had obviously never used FreeHand or Illustrator. Actually, I have used both. And I wasn't saying that KIllustrator is a plug-in replacement for either of those two programs. It clearly isn't ready for use by graphics professionals (keep in mind, though, that most people aren't graphics professionals; I can assure you I'm not). But I will say that for version 0.7 of a free software project, it has the potential to become such a replacement eventually.
Regarding vector drawing programs, just FYI: in addition to xfig, there is also KIllustrator, which is up to version 0.7, and will be part of the KDE 2.0/KOffice release.
Of course, if you're primarily doing graphics for a living, you're better off sticking with your Mac for that, as I don't imagine there will be Pantone support in any Free Unix anytime soon.
I can understand using a relatively smaller font for the subcategories, but the proper way to do that is not SIZE=2. It should be SIZE=-1. That way, someone who has limited vision or a high-resolution display can set their fonts to a large size, and the subcategories will still be relatively smaller, but remain large enough to see.
Absolute font sizing is a Bad Thing. Unfortunately, it is still done quite often.
Microsoft, after releasing ?MSN Messenger?, would like to see AOL?s ?Instant Messenger? protocol standardized so that Microsoft?s new entry into the field can interoperate.
?Standards are important,? said an unnammed Microsoft spokesman. ?It?s important that Instant Messaging be standardized, just like the world wide web is.?
TiK is GPLd, so anyone interested can continue development, distribution, etc.
TiK still functions, I have it up right now.
That said, I am disturbed by TiK's absence, although the fact that the links are still there indicates to me the absence may be unintentional.
Back to the subject at hand: *Microsoft* whining about *AOL* not following standards is surreal. Still, agreeing upon a common standard, regardless of who proposes it, would be a very good thing for instant messaging as a whole.
Yes, any "public performance" of ASCAP- or BMI-licensed music (SECAM in Canada, I believe) requires a licensing agreement with the appopriate thugs^H^H^H^H^Horganization. I think you can also license "per performance," but I imagine that would requre a lot of ongoing paperwork.
You generally pay a flat fee that I think is indexed to your gross earnings, and you must occasionally (I think we did it once a year at the radio station I PDd) do a two- or three-day "survey" where you fill out every artist/song/label, so that ASCAP/BMI have a fairly representative view of what's being played nationwide.
They can't do this themselves by listening the radio, because they're busy hassling auto mechanics and barbers who play the radio in their shops.
Keep in mind, though, that there is a growing body of music not controlled by ASCAP/BMI, and that there are other forms of broadcast content than music programming.
I do hope they allow LPFM to proceed. It's needed now more than ever, due to the oppressive sameness imposed by the national radio companies and their consultants.
486i Processor(s): 80486 Notes: Code-named "Apache". A very limited quantity of these were supposedly built and shipped to customers just before the Intel-based line was cancelled.
Actually, Sun briefly sold the 386i, which was definitely x86 based. I've actually seen one. We used to have one sitting around the office as a conversation piece.
Preferences -> Exclude Stories from the Homepage -> BSD
Sad to say, I'm seriously considering this. Not because I'm disinterested in BSD, necessarily. It's just that every BSD story on Slashdot precipitates a roaring flame-fest. I'm not placing blame; I'm sure there's plenty to go around. But this really is getting ridiculous.
Now that my 'on topic' stuff is over and done with, what'd you say about Canada? Dare you to say that in person (if you could). I'd kick your ass - eh.
...it's still an important, valid point. Microsoft has lost and is losing mindshare in the most important market: developers. Oh, there's plenty of Windows developers today, but if this trend continues, enough may be "sucked" over to Linux that the massive Windows userbase may become irrelevant; the quantity and quality of Windows software will decline (I know, I know, how can it get worse?), and the platform will start losing users.
Despite the fact that this is largely a bogus argument in the here and now (that Microsoft is not a monopoly because of this *potential* threat), over the long term, I think this is Microsoft's greatest fear, and constitutes a threat that is very, very real.
I think this article indicates that it is currently "top of mind" at Microsoft.
I don't know how they are going to keep developers away from Linux/BSD/etc., but they sure as hell are going to try.
Amiga wants apps for their new platform. Corel has apps, but perhaps doesn't want to deal with porting to QNX (although you would think it would be a relatively easy task). So, Amiga drops QNX and goes with Linux.
It really sounds more and more like the new Amiga will in actuality be a Linux distribution.
The bottom line is that BeOS is just too good to go away.
That's what we thought about OS/2. But OS/2, like BeOS, was closed-source, and its future controlled by the whims of a single company.
Now look at where OS/2 is. To this day, no better GUI has been introduced (IMHO), and there's still quite a bit of OS/2 software available, but OS/2 is pretty much dead as a desktop OS.
BeOS fans: we're not trying to tear down your OS; we're just trying to point out that Be's business plan is perhaps not all that well-though-out.
In fact, the QPL is a pretty good license, if you like the GPL. It's essentially GPL plus right to link to all other Open source code minus right to do 'closed' in-house development.
Now, I *like* the QPL, but...I wouldn't go that far.
The GPL is the best license, bar none, because it is the *only* license that grants *equal* rights to all users *and* keeps software from becoming closed. No one has special rights. That is the only problem I have with the QPL: it grants special rights. Otherwise, it's a great license, and discourages closed software like the GPL.
Slashdot Mirror
Red herring.
The truth is that I've never actually even seen a machine that had this stuff installed on it. I'm anti-Cyber Patrol because of what this guy is reporting: that it is indiscriminately censoring his entire ISP. That's wrong, and suggests that Cyber Patrol is not a very good product. If they're that sloppy about who they censor, who's to say how much stuff *isn't* getting censored?
I also don't like the fact that many of these products (perhaps Cyber Patrol, perhaps not) block material based on political motives, or because a web site is critical of their product, or censorware in general. That is wrong, wrong, wrong.
But mostly, I jumped into this discussion because I saw a guy whose site was blocked by a poorly-programmed censorware package, and he was attempting to blame the *ISP*. Argh. It's *not* the ISPs fault that some bozo at that headhunter agency is relying on a piece of (Windows) software to improve productivity rather than paying his employees a decent wage, or otherwise motivating them.
I don't think anyone should be able to get away with the kind of sloppiness these censorware vendors engage in, as it amounts to libel. Is it too difficult to program the thing to do its job correctly? Perhaps. Tough. They still shouldn't be able to get away with libeling people.
--
Sorry, but I disagree. How is it the ISP's job to keep track of which censorware packages are currently blocking their customer's sites indiscriminately? So, they may have found out that Cyber Patrol is blocking their server; considering the tiny percentage of people using ridiculous software like that, it would seem rather silly to me for them to inform every customer ("currently the following censorware is blocking our site: Cyber Patrol, Net Nanny, etc.").
It's not the ISP's fault. They're not the one's falsely suggesting that your content is not suitable for general consumption.
I hope someone goes after Cyber Patrol or one of these other censorware vendors for libel eventually.
--
This kind of thing should not be tolerated. If you ran a technical book store in a medium size town, and because there is one adult book store in your town, someone in another town started running ads in the newspaper that said "DON'T VISIT THE BOOK STORES IN HAPPYVILLE; THEY PEDDLE FILTH," don't you think that might be improper, and possibly actionable?
--
Yes, I imagine it's difficult to segregate the 'adult' stuff from the non-adult stuff, but blocking whole multiuser servers? That seems a bit sloppy.
In short, I think the ISP is in the right; there is no reason why they should run separate servers (after all, whose definition of 'bad, evil content' would they use to separate the web sites?). CyberPatrol is the one libeling your content; your beef is with them, as I see it.
--
BTW. someone else in this thread suggested that I had obviously never used FreeHand or Illustrator. Actually, I have used both. And I wasn't saying that KIllustrator is a plug-in replacement for either of those two programs. It clearly isn't ready for use by graphics professionals (keep in mind, though, that most people aren't graphics professionals; I can assure you I'm not). But I will say that for version 0.7 of a free software project, it has the potential to become such a replacement eventually.
--
Now, in 1999, they are suing someone for allegedly cloning them.
--
Tell me again how the private sector is a greater threat...
I'm no big fan of big business, but big government is not *my* friend. It is the friend of that very same big business.
--
Of course, if you're primarily doing graphics for a living, you're better off sticking with your Mac for that, as I don't imagine there will be Pantone support in any Free Unix anytime soon.
--
I can understand using a relatively smaller font for the subcategories, but the proper way to do that is not SIZE=2. It should be SIZE=-1. That way, someone who has limited vision or a high-resolution display can set their fonts to a large size, and the subcategories will still be relatively smaller, but remain large enough to see.
Absolute font sizing is a Bad Thing. Unfortunately, it is still done quite often.
--
http://www.aim.aol.com/tik/tik-0.74.tar. gz
--
Obviously, I failed to get my point across. :-(
--
?Standards are important,? said an unnammed Microsoft spokesman. ?It?s important that Instant Messaging be standardized, just like the world wide web is.?
--
Someone posted a patch already. Check the thread.
--
- TiK is GPLd, so anyone interested can continue development, distribution, etc.
- TiK still functions, I have it up right now.
That said, I am disturbed by TiK's absence, although the fact that the links are still there indicates to me the absence may be unintentional.Back to the subject at hand: *Microsoft* whining about *AOL* not following standards is surreal. Still, agreeing upon a common standard, regardless of who proposes it, would be a very good thing for instant messaging as a whole.
--
You generally pay a flat fee that I think is indexed to your gross earnings, and you must occasionally (I think we did it once a year at the radio station I PDd) do a two- or three-day "survey" where you fill out every artist/song/label, so that ASCAP/BMI have a fairly representative view of what's being played nationwide.
They can't do this themselves by listening the radio, because they're busy hassling auto mechanics and barbers who play the radio in their shops.
Keep in mind, though, that there is a growing body of music not controlled by ASCAP/BMI, and that there are other forms of broadcast content than music programming.
I do hope they allow LPFM to proceed. It's needed now more than ever, due to the oppressive sameness imposed by the national radio companies and their consultants.
--
Sun 386i Models
---------------
386i/150
Processor(s): 80386 @ 20MHz, 80387
Speed ratings: 3 MIPS, 0.17 MFLOPS
CPU: 501-1241/1414
Chassis type: tower
Bus: 4 32-bit slots; ISA (3 16-bit, 1 8-bit)
Memory: 8M (documented) physical
Notes: Shared code name "Roadrunner" with the
3.5" floppy. A variant of the 150 had the 250's
external cache(?).
386i/250
Processor(s): 80386 @ 25MHz, 80387
Speed ratings: 5 MIPS, 0.2 MFLOPS
CPU: 501-1324/1413
Chassis type: tower
Bus: 4 32-bit slots; ISA (3 16-bit, 1 8-bit)
Memory: 16M (documented) physical
Cache: 32K
Notes: Shared code name "Roadrunner" with the
3.5" floppy.
486i
Processor(s): 80486
Notes: Code-named "Apache". A very limited quantity of
these were supposedly built and shipped to
customers just before the Intel-based line was
cancelled.
--
Actually, Sun briefly sold the 386i, which was definitely x86 based. I've actually seen one. We used to have one sitting around the office as a conversation piece.
--
Sad to say, I'm seriously considering this. Not because I'm disinterested in BSD, necessarily. It's just that every BSD story on Slashdot precipitates a roaring flame-fest. I'm not placing blame; I'm sure there's plenty to go around. But this really is getting ridiculous.
--
South Park reference. Haven't you seen it yet?
--
Someone hires you to write stuff for them. Most software is not written for the purpose of distributing binaries.
--
Despite the fact that this is largely a bogus argument in the here and now (that Microsoft is not a monopoly because of this *potential* threat), over the long term, I think this is Microsoft's greatest fear, and constitutes a threat that is very, very real.
I think this article indicates that it is currently "top of mind" at Microsoft.
I don't know how they are going to keep developers away from Linux/BSD/etc., but they sure as hell are going to try.
--
It really sounds more and more like the new Amiga will in actuality be a Linux distribution.
--
That's what we thought about OS/2. But OS/2, like BeOS, was closed-source, and its future controlled by the whims of a single company.
Now look at where OS/2 is. To this day, no better GUI has been introduced (IMHO), and there's still quite a bit of OS/2 software available, but OS/2 is pretty much dead as a desktop OS.
BeOS fans: we're not trying to tear down your OS; we're just trying to point out that Be's business plan is perhaps not all that well-though-out.
--
Now, I *like* the QPL, but...I wouldn't go that far.
The GPL is the best license, bar none, because it is the *only* license that grants *equal* rights to all users *and* keeps software from becoming closed. No one has special rights. That is the only problem I have with the QPL: it grants special rights. Otherwise, it's a great license, and discourages closed software like the GPL.
--
I'm working on an open source project, but I haven't got very far yet. :-(
I have done some documentation before, though, but I don't think the maintainer has used it yet...
--