If NASA knew something might have been wrong, why did they try the re-entry?
the astronauts did not have jetpacks aboard.
WHY FUCKING NOT?
In any case, no spare tiles are carried aboard shuttle flights.
WHY FUCKING NOT?
Essentially, we're being told that an absolutely critical piece of the shuttle has no backup at all, no method of repair at all, and that NASA can't even be bothered to provide the means to assess the problem.
I know these are bright, dedicated people, but this just seems totally wrong.
Even if, for temperature or other environmental reasons, it's impossible to repair/replace tiles, why not at least know what you're dealing with and try alternatives? The russians had an unmanned ship going up on Monday or Tuesday to the ISS - maybe something could have been done using that to get the Columbia crew to the ISS.
They need some kind of failsafe to preserve these people's lives if disaster strikes.
good luck on that. They were traveling at 25,000 mph at >100,000 ft altitude. Not a lot of margin of error, and no conceivable bailout option.
Not everything can be protected against. I say this not to be callous - these were heroes who risked their lives to advance science and the space program and the gene pool is poorer for their loss - but to be realistic.
100% agreed here. Industry wants stuff that is "supported" (whatever this means) - if rhdhat isn't 'supported' after a year, that's just one more argument for the MS bigots to use.
NT 4.0 came out in '97 aor '98 and just went EOL in June, I think.
User interface responsiveness is easily 100% better on windows. Same machine, same disk, etc.
The natural result of MS making the GUI part of the kernel, or at least letting it run at kernel priority, as I understand it. X and KDE are separate and the system is fine without them. Let the Windows GUI get fluxed up and your machine is toast. I'll take slower and more reliable any day.
I have a friend who used it briefly on the machine it came preloaded on. But when he realized it was rigged so he couldn't use any source code without geting gcc, glib, and god-knows-what-else installed, he wiped it and went through several distributions before landing on (ugh) Caldera.
Dude, $time is increasing with distance, so a larger distance makes it more likely to exceed the threshold, with infinite distance exceeding any threshold. Clearly this is erroneous.
Not sure how far back 'back in the day' is, but I remember having pretty good luck with Trumpet tcp/dialer software in early 95 on winblows 3 or 3.1, and not too much effort either. But if you meant earlier than that, yeah, I suppose it was ugly.
The Internet has been around a long, long time. But, it was beyond even being unfriendly to the average Joe Enduser. It was the province of physicists and such.
Nonsense. A reasonable dialer/tcp stack and netscape >=3 was more than adequate - gives you email, web and usenet.
Yeah, I missed that little detail in the parenthetical.
Has anyone ever killed a spammer and claimed self-defense or justifiable homicide? Sure wqould be nice if Ralsky and other swine like him moved on to the next plane of existence.
I'm planning on putting up TMDA and some DNSRBL support on my server at home.
he spoofs the IPs of dialup systems from the servers.
Bzzzt! Thanks for playing, but you cannot send SPAM (or any other kind of email) using a spoofed IP address. SMTP rides over TCP, which requires a handshake prior to establishment of a session. And this requires a real IP address, because the initiator must reply to the reply, before any higher layer data can be sent. Nice try, though.
It's easy to do the following: View->Message Body As->Plain Text.
Violla, problem solved. Try that in Outlook, Hotmail, or Yahoo?
If using hotmail or yahoo on your browser, turn off images and javascript in email. This stops the client from acting on any URLs in the mail (i.e. 1x1 images), hence your address doesn't get verified.
But it's not stylesheets per se that are the problem. It's the way they're used by webmasturbators.
Also, tools-> internet options-> general-> accessibility, then check "ignore font sizes specified in web pages" allows the 'text size' option in the view menu to work in IE 5.5
It is just a matter of time before we have almost complete compliance of windows apps on Linux.
At which point, microsoft will immediately make some undocumented change to hte APIs that will break it all.
Even if this were not the case, running MS apps on Linux still gives money to MS and puts your data in their closed formats. MS apps on Linux (or any other freee OS) is a non-starter in my book - I'd much prefer to see the brains spent on WINE used in native apps instead.
There are numerous tools available out there for tracking error responses from the web server access logs,
Your server access logs aren't of much use if you're linking to something not on your server, and the link becomes invalid. linkcheck can help with this, but you have to actually give a damn to use that.
Don't use Style Sheets - it makes web pages unreadable in Microsoft Internet Explorer.
Yes, by all means - ignore accepted, documented, open standards in favor of some piece of crap software produced by a corrupt power-mad monopoly - that will make things so much better. What a load of crap.
..for anyone who buys anything as the result of receiving spam. (Though it's arguable that soneone who receives a spam, then buys it somewhere else, is not quite as guilty...)
but there are far to many serious sites where you MUST use MSIE or go away.
Sorry, but these are not serious sites. Going away from such sites, after a well-worded letter to the webmaster and anyone else in the domain you can find, via whois if nothing else) is the onlycorrect action.
This will probably drive more people to use browsers or other software that suppress ads and popups. (I hear that Netscape 7.01 has re-addedd popup suppression, which has been in Mozilla and Galeon forever.) I routinely browse with all images disabled and all popups suppressed (when I'm on machine where I control the browser). If your webpage doesn't work in that mode, (eg you did something stupid like using images for all your buttons, or usiing javascript to open a new window when a link would have done just as well), I typically won't be back.
Blame factor. Who do you blame if you choose a OSS solution? People like to make the provider responsible EVEN when it's their fault.
Which accomplishes exactly dick. I repeat my challenge: I defy anyone, anywhere, to show proof that a mass market software maker has ever paid up for problems caused a customer by bugs. Doesn't happen. This whole issue of 'accountability' is crapola - which is more or less what you go on to say, but I'm so tired of hearing this in any form.
So they like the fact that Windows is very easy to blame.
There's truth here, but wouldn't it be better to have software that works, doesn't crash, has fewer security holes, is more customizable and doesn't give the SPA a license to screw you?
Unfortunately, MS Office is like a virus: You might do the right thing(tm) but chances are your neighbor won't...
Simple solution:
Dear Sir or Madam:
You have sent a file to me in a format I can't read. Since the extension is (xls|doc|whatever), I assume this is a Microsoft office file. You can save this file in a format that is more useable to me and others by opening the file, using the File->SaveAs menus and selecting (text|RichTextFormat|HTML|whatever) and saving. Please send me the file that results.
While I regret any incovenience this may cause, it is necessary for our ongoing technology upgrade, part of which is to lessen our dependence on proprietery file formats which change at the whim of a single company, and require the use of expensive, insecure software.
Slashdot Mirror
From the article:
If NASA knew something might have been wrong, why did they try the re-entry?
the astronauts did not have jetpacks aboard.
WHY FUCKING NOT?
In any case, no spare tiles are carried aboard shuttle flights.
WHY FUCKING NOT?
Essentially, we're being told that an absolutely critical piece of the shuttle has no backup at all, no method of repair at all, and that NASA can't even be bothered to provide the means to assess the problem.
I know these are bright, dedicated people, but this just seems totally wrong.
Even if, for temperature or other environmental reasons, it's impossible to repair/replace tiles, why not at least know what you're dealing with and try alternatives? The russians had an unmanned ship going up on Monday or Tuesday to the ISS - maybe something could have been done using that to get the Columbia crew to the ISS.
They need some kind of failsafe to preserve these people's lives if disaster strikes.
good luck on that. They were traveling at 25,000 mph at >100,000 ft altitude. Not a lot of margin of error, and no conceivable bailout option.
Not everything can be protected against. I say this not to be callous - these were heroes who risked their lives to advance science and the space program and the gene pool is poorer for their loss - but to be realistic.
100% agreed here. Industry wants stuff that is "supported" (whatever this means) - if rhdhat isn't 'supported' after a year, that's just one more argument for the MS bigots to use.
NT 4.0 came out in '97 aor '98 and just went EOL in June, I think.
User interface responsiveness is easily 100% better on windows. Same machine, same disk, etc.
The natural result of MS making the GUI part of the kernel, or at least letting it run at kernel priority, as I understand it. X and KDE are separate and the system is fine without them. Let the Windows GUI get fluxed up and your machine is toast. I'll take slower and more reliable any day.
people who actually create things of value
Quick, name the last song written by the RIAA.
I have a friend who used it briefly on the machine it came preloaded on. But when he realized it was rigged so he couldn't use any source code without geting gcc, glib, and god-knows-what-else installed, he wiped it and went through several distributions before landing on (ugh) Caldera.
$time = $speed * $distance
if ($time > $emergency_trehold){
Dude, $time is increasing with distance, so a larger distance makes it more likely to exceed the threshold, with infinite distance exceeding any threshold. Clearly this is erroneous.
BZZZT! Thanks for playing.
Not sure how far back 'back in the day' is, but I remember having pretty good luck with Trumpet tcp/dialer software in early 95 on winblows 3 or 3.1, and not too much effort either. But if you meant earlier than that, yeah, I suppose it was ugly.
The Internet has been around a long, long time. But, it was beyond even being unfriendly to the average Joe Enduser. It was the province of physicists and such.
Nonsense. A reasonable dialer/tcp stack and netscape >=3 was more than adequate - gives you email, web and usenet.
Yeah, I missed that little detail in the parenthetical.
Has anyone ever killed a spammer and claimed self-defense or justifiable homicide? Sure wqould be nice if Ralsky and other swine like him moved on to the next plane of existence.
I'm planning on putting up TMDA and some DNSRBL support on my server at home.
he spoofs the IPs of dialup systems from the servers.
Bzzzt! Thanks for playing, but you cannot send SPAM (or any other kind of email) using a spoofed IP address. SMTP rides over TCP, which requires a handshake prior to establishment of a session. And this requires a real IP address, because the initiator must reply to the reply, before any higher layer data can be sent. Nice try, though.
It's easy to do the following: View->Message Body As->Plain Text.
Violla, problem solved. Try that in Outlook, Hotmail, or Yahoo?
If using hotmail or yahoo on your browser, turn off images and javascript in email. This stops the client from acting on any URLs in the mail (i.e. 1x1 images), hence your address doesn't get verified.
But it's not stylesheets per se that are the problem. It's the way they're used by webmasturbators.
Also, tools-> internet options-> general-> accessibility, then check "ignore font sizes specified in web pages" allows the 'text size' option in the view menu to work in IE 5.5
It is just a matter of time before we have almost complete compliance of windows apps on Linux.
At which point, microsoft will immediately make some undocumented change to hte APIs that will break it all.
Even if this were not the case, running MS apps on Linux still gives money to MS and puts your data in their closed formats. MS apps on Linux (or any other freee OS) is a non-starter in my book - I'd much prefer to see the brains spent on WINE used in native apps instead.
Grow up kid, you are not the center of the universe.
Most webmasters (>90%) don't use stylesheets as they were intended,
You grow up. And use more precision in your sig. By your own statment the problem is not use, but misuse, of the stylesheets.
Admittedly, anyone who uses absolute font sizes on a webpage is a hopeless, drooling idiot, who should be denied all computer access.
There are numerous tools available out there for tracking error responses from the web server access logs,
Your server access logs aren't of much use if you're linking to something not on your server, and the link becomes invalid. linkcheck can help with this, but you have to actually give a damn to use that.
Don't use Style Sheets - it makes web pages unreadable in Microsoft Internet Explorer.
Yes, by all means - ignore accepted, documented, open standards in favor of some piece of crap software produced by a corrupt power-mad monopoly - that will make things so much better. What a load of crap.
..for anyone who buys anything as the result of receiving spam. (Though it's arguable that soneone who receives a spam, then buys it somewhere else, is not quite as guilty...)
but there are far to many serious sites where you MUST use MSIE or go away.
Sorry, but these are not serious sites. Going away from such sites, after a well-worded letter to the webmaster and anyone else in the domain you can find, via whois if nothing else) is the onlycorrect action.
that your boss may set up your job the bomb!
And in English, that would be...?
This will probably drive more people to use browsers or other software that suppress ads and popups. (I hear that Netscape 7.01 has re-addedd popup suppression, which has been in Mozilla and Galeon forever.) I routinely browse with all images disabled and all popups suppressed (when I'm on machine where I control the browser). If your webpage doesn't work in that mode, (eg you did something stupid like using images for all your buttons, or usiing javascript to open a new window when a link would have done just as well), I typically won't be back.
and $800 for his enemies.
No, for your enemies, you install winblows for free. Serves 'em right.
Spammers would use 'em in the wrong way :(
Spammers can't use 'em the wrong way. How does a spammer know who's on your whitelist?
Blame factor. Who do you blame if you choose a OSS solution? People like to make the provider responsible EVEN when it's their fault.
Which accomplishes exactly dick. I repeat my challenge: I defy anyone, anywhere, to show proof that a mass market software maker has ever paid up for problems caused a customer by bugs. Doesn't happen. This whole issue of 'accountability' is crapola - which is more or less what you go on to say, but I'm so tired of hearing this in any form.
So they like the fact that Windows is very easy to blame.
There's truth here, but wouldn't it be better to have software that works, doesn't crash, has fewer security holes, is more customizable and doesn't give the SPA a license to screw you?
Simple solution: