The Spanish Flu pandemic occurred, what? 95 years ago give or take? The flu base protein (M2) hasn't changed in approximately 100 years. Any guesses as to what happened the last time the flu altered itself at the fundamental level?
I can't say that every cop is dirty. One of my good friends is a cop. A very good cop, in that he polices the police. He's not IA, but he does help them when he can.
The screwed up part is that he can never stay in one place for long. It doesn't take long for the force to realize that he's not going to stand idly by. It also doesn't take long for judges to realize he's not going to bend to their will.
My favorite story of his is when he pulled over a state cop.
Cop:(gets out of the car to go back to my friend's cruiser)"What the hell..."
Friend:"Get back in your car, sir."
Cop: (goes back to his car and waits)
Friend: (walks up to the window) "Do you know why I pulled you over?"
Cop: "What the f..k do you think you're doing?"
Friend: "You were doing 78 in a 55 zone."
Cop: (just looks at him)
Friend: "I've been sitting here for 20 minutes, there were no other speeders, nothing on the scanner, and you're lights weren't on... Can you tell me why you needed to go that fast?"
Cop: "You're a local and you're gonna pull me over for speeding? You arrogant..."
Friend: "You want me to write you up for harassing a police officer, too?"
Webster's definition of Especially:
2 a : in particular : PARTICULARLY b : for a particular purpose ...and Particular:
4 a : distinctive among other examples or cases of the same general category
So yes, "Especially in America" is entirely appropriate.
Next time, try to understand the meaning of words a bit more before you attack a comment.:)
Perhaps Blue should consider a promotional education package at signup... You have to make it economically unfeasible for the spammers to continue. To do that, you'd have to have an enormous number of "aware" people actively working against them.
As always needs mentioned, Spam would not exist if it didn't have a market. The base problem is, as it has always been, that people respond to this.
People could stop clicking, but that is unlikely to happen. Especially in America, people are always looking for the easier path: be it cheaper medication, promises of enhanced "performance," tales of rapid weight loss while sitting on your couch, or the constant get-rich-quick scheme.
If people actually thought... yes, used higher brain functions... they may realize that it is virtually all just BS.
It could also be that the general masses don't realize that everytime they click on a link or reply to an email, someone is making money. And that is a problem with awareness of how the internet works. Most seem happy to just know that it works.
I heartily agree with you on this. We all joke about giving something a good/.'ing, but when it happens to something we don't like or is a secuity risk, then it's a DDoS.
I, for one though, try never to check on a site that is said to be down. Simple IT concept: If the bandwidth is overloaded, checking it remotely is not going to help the problem.
And yes, let me be the first to acknowledge that this comment was a little off topic as far Wiki is concerned. My intention was state that it is really an unneccessary dispute.
The Piper
I couldn't think of a better title at the moment...
So Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Intel may have had completely different origins and intentions, but they all strangely arrived at the same place: Near-absolute market dominance. It took a while, but they all became giants.
But here's my "opinion" on the matter. Microsoft may have dominated the industry for a couple of decades, but take a look at what we're witnessing now. IE is losing some ground to upstarts like Firefox and Opera. Windows is being challeneged on a number of fronts from Apple to FreeBSD. A titan like IBM has moved their contract to Linux.
Intel, a former defacto answer to what processor you should buy, is being challenged/attacked by AMD. Large companies, such as Acer and Dell, are shifting to AMD.
Wal-Mart, while it has grown exponentially over the past decade and a half, has actually seen a decrease in overall sales growth. Think of it like the RIAA posting decreased sales of albums... they omit the fact that it is referencing sales "growth" because the attorneys feel the average consumer won't know the difference. Wal-Mart is slowing, if ever so marginally.
Wal-Mart is reaching a point of market saturation... which usually precedes a paradigm shift in the business structure. While I was in Florida (just outside of St. Cloud,) I encountered the Starbuck's Effect: a super-center across the street from a super-center. Now, to be perfectly fair, they were closer to a mile apart, but the basic idea remains. Just like having two coffee shops of the same name with identical offerings is problematic, so too is having two enormous discount department stores nearly side by side with identical offerings.
At some point, building additional stores loses any semblance cost-effectiveness. I personally believe that Wal-Mart is in the beginning stages of this paradigm. Best Buy has not lost any market share to Wal-Mart. Target has gained ground. Bed, Bath & Beyond has seen sales increase. OfficeMax and Staples both cater to a higher standard.
I know that only time will tell us, but this is why I believe what I believe about Wal-Mart. But please do not misunderstand me: As a former employee (5-month stint after a lay-off from an IT department,) I can't stand the place. A store that has a wide selection for specific type of product, i.e. boutiques, are far more to my liking.
One word... Spambayes (http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/) In 5 months at 250+ messages per day, it hasn't made a single error. And this was done with training only 20 messages as good or bad. My brother has been using it for over 8 months on two domains to the tune of 1500+ per day... and not one error.
But in response to the article, yes spam is a problem. And no, you're not the only that has noticed.
Run a trace to find the originating IP, attempt to confirm identity, try to isolate an address, then send the contents of the spam folder to them (auto mail can be useful.) Nobody likes getting 8000 spam in one day.
Exactly. It's an opinion. That's the beauty of editorial protocol.
Of course, we're both assuming that the poster(s) knew enough not to use a statement format on a public message board that could possibly be monitored.
I fail to see how making a negative or derogatory comment on a message board is any different than the statement made in conversation. If these people are posting, then these thoughts are making themselves heard around the watercooler, in the restaurant at lunch, and at the bar after work.
If JNPR knew what was going on, they'd realize that a great deal of internet commentaries are just personal opinion, and frequently not given much credence if at at all.
The last time I checked, stating your opinion was still legal. We're not living in 1984 just yet.
Personally, I'll continue to rely on Trillian. Encryption options, video, stability, and global attributes.:) I tried GAIM for a while, but spontaneous reconnects were driving me nuts, and there has always been an instability issue with it.
I will say right from the start that I'm a Christian (hard to be a Scot-Irish and not be.) But I will also say that I fully believe in evolution. I simply don't believe it happens on the scale that current modern interpretations of Darwinism dictate.
What you end up seeing in nearly every clash is this: extremists. Two sides that are so vehemently dedicated to their cause and so single-minded in their pursuit, that anything contrary or questioning of their belief is absolute heresy. And rather than try to prove their own side, they attack the others weaknesses. To effectively debate a topic you must not only clearly state your position's strengths and weaknesses, but also acknowledge and cite the oppositions strengths and weaknesses.
I find several things very odd about the current controversy. Many (not all by any means,)evolutionists refuse to accept any aspects of the Christian bible as historically accurate, even those proven by archeology or tradition. Numerous other texts that would support biblical history are ignored (i.e. ancient Egyptian, Syrian, and Babylonian texts on the Flood.)
A large number of creationists refuse to acknowledge evolution on any scale. They maintain that the very concept ridicules their understanding of Divine creation. This adamacy is maintained in light of scientific proof that evolution occurs (i.e. bacteria and viruses)
Few evolutionists have read the bible in its entirety as well as all supporting texts. Few creationists have.
Few creationists have read all six editions of "The Origin of the Species," let alone the countless research papers on evolution. For that matter, neither have many evolutionists.
The bible states that those who do not believe will not understand it. From Psalms 82:5:
They know not, neither will they understand. (KJV)
Darwin has several chapters (4) dedicated to trying to explain the problems with evolution. From the introduction to Chapter 6 Difficulties of the Species:
Long before the reader has arrived at this part of my work, a crowd of difficulties will have occurred to him. Some of them are so serious that to this day I can hardly reflect on them without being in some degree staggered; but, to the best of my judgment, the greater number are only apparent, and those that are real are not, I think, fatal to the theory. 6th ed.
Both sides of the argument are not completely understood. There are many unanswered, and possibly unanswerable, questions. And rather than acknowledge this, both sides blindly attack the other. Neither side will accept the other, which is concerning since there is nothing in either side that indicates a disavowment of the other.
Both beliefs have an equal right to be taught as theories. Without complete and unequivocal proof, both are just theories. So where's the problem?
You could also look at it as low prices being a good thing. If you're just looking around for some new sounds, what are you going to consider buying? The cheap stuff of course. For me it's a moot point... iTunes isn't worth it as far as I'm concerned.
Beyond the ads, pop-ups, and the host of other typical web app annoyances... what about security and specifically privacy? Google tends toward rather ambiguous TOS, but Sun likes to clad their TOS in iron armor. Any thoughts?
Slashdot Mirror
The Spanish Flu pandemic occurred, what? 95 years ago give or take? The flu base protein (M2) hasn't changed in approximately 100 years. Any guesses as to what happened the last time the flu altered itself at the fundamental level?
I can't say that every cop is dirty. One of my good friends is a cop. A very good cop, in that he polices the police. He's not IA, but he does help them when he can.
The screwed up part is that he can never stay in one place for long. It doesn't take long for the force to realize that he's not going to stand idly by. It also doesn't take long for judges to realize he's not going to bend to their will.
My favorite story of his is when he pulled over a state cop.
Cop:(gets out of the car to go back to my friend's cruiser)"What the hell..."
Friend:"Get back in your car, sir."
Cop: (goes back to his car and waits)
Friend: (walks up to the window) "Do you know why I pulled you over?"
Cop: "What the f..k do you think you're doing?"
Friend: "You were doing 78 in a 55 zone."
Cop: (just looks at him)
Friend: "I've been sitting here for 20 minutes, there were no other speeders, nothing on the scanner, and you're lights weren't on... Can you tell me why you needed to go that fast?"
Cop: "You're a local and you're gonna pull me over for speeding? You arrogant..."
Friend: "You want me to write you up for harassing a police officer, too?"
As if that were a comment that even needs said.
...and Particular:
:)
Webster's definition of Especially:
2 a : in particular : PARTICULARLY b : for a particular purpose
4 a : distinctive among other examples or cases of the same general category
So yes, "Especially in America" is entirely appropriate.
Next time, try to understand the meaning of words a bit more before you attack a comment.
Perhaps Blue should consider a promotional education package at signup... You have to make it economically unfeasible for the spammers to continue. To do that, you'd have to have an enormous number of "aware" people actively working against them.
As always needs mentioned, Spam would not exist if it didn't have a market. The base problem is, as it has always been, that people respond to this.
People could stop clicking, but that is unlikely to happen. Especially in America, people are always looking for the easier path: be it cheaper medication, promises of enhanced "performance," tales of rapid weight loss while sitting on your couch, or the constant get-rich-quick scheme.
If people actually thought... yes, used higher brain functions... they may realize that it is virtually all just BS.
It could also be that the general masses don't realize that everytime they click on a link or reply to an email, someone is making money. And that is a problem with awareness of how the internet works. Most seem happy to just know that it works.
I heartily agree with you on this. We all joke about giving something a good /.'ing, but when it happens to something we don't like or is a secuity risk, then it's a DDoS.
I, for one though, try never to check on a site that is said to be down. Simple IT concept: If the bandwidth is overloaded, checking it remotely is not going to help the problem.
And yes, let me be the first to acknowledge that this comment was a little off topic as far Wiki is concerned. My intention was state that it is really an unneccessary dispute. The Piper
I couldn't think of a better title at the moment...
So Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Intel may have had completely different origins and intentions, but they all strangely arrived at the same place: Near-absolute market dominance. It took a while, but they all became giants.
But here's my "opinion" on the matter. Microsoft may have dominated the industry for a couple of decades, but take a look at what we're witnessing now. IE is losing some ground to upstarts like Firefox and Opera. Windows is being challeneged on a number of fronts from Apple to FreeBSD. A titan like IBM has moved their contract to Linux.
Intel, a former defacto answer to what processor you should buy, is being challenged/attacked by AMD. Large companies, such as Acer and Dell, are shifting to AMD.
Wal-Mart, while it has grown exponentially over the past decade and a half, has actually seen a decrease in overall sales growth. Think of it like the RIAA posting decreased sales of albums... they omit the fact that it is referencing sales "growth" because the attorneys feel the average consumer won't know the difference. Wal-Mart is slowing, if ever so marginally.
Wal-Mart is reaching a point of market saturation... which usually precedes a paradigm shift in the business structure. While I was in Florida (just outside of St. Cloud,) I encountered the Starbuck's Effect: a super-center across the street from a super-center. Now, to be perfectly fair, they were closer to a mile apart, but the basic idea remains. Just like having two coffee shops of the same name with identical offerings is problematic, so too is having two enormous discount department stores nearly side by side with identical offerings.
At some point, building additional stores loses any semblance cost-effectiveness. I personally believe that Wal-Mart is in the beginning stages of this paradigm. Best Buy has not lost any market share to Wal-Mart. Target has gained ground. Bed, Bath & Beyond has seen sales increase. OfficeMax and Staples both cater to a higher standard.
I know that only time will tell us, but this is why I believe what I believe about Wal-Mart. But please do not misunderstand me: As a former employee (5-month stint after a lay-off from an IT department,) I can't stand the place. A store that has a wide selection for specific type of product, i.e. boutiques, are far more to my liking.
One word... Spambayes (http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/) In 5 months at 250+ messages per day, it hasn't made a single error. And this was done with training only 20 messages as good or bad. My brother has been using it for over 8 months on two domains to the tune of 1500+ per day... and not one error.
But in response to the article, yes spam is a problem. And no, you're not the only that has noticed.
Run a trace to find the originating IP, attempt to confirm identity, try to isolate an address, then send the contents of the spam folder to them (auto mail can be useful.) Nobody likes getting 8000 spam in one day.
Exactly. It's an opinion. That's the beauty of editorial protocol.
Of course, we're both assuming that the poster(s) knew enough not to use a statement format on a public message board that could possibly be monitored.
I fail to see how making a negative or derogatory comment on a message board is any different than the statement made in conversation. If these people are posting, then these thoughts are making themselves heard around the watercooler, in the restaurant at lunch, and at the bar after work. If JNPR knew what was going on, they'd realize that a great deal of internet commentaries are just personal opinion, and frequently not given much credence if at at all. The last time I checked, stating your opinion was still legal. We're not living in 1984 just yet.
Personally, I'll continue to rely on Trillian. Encryption options, video, stability, and global attributes.:) I tried GAIM for a while, but spontaneous reconnects were driving me nuts, and there has always been an instability issue with it.
What you end up seeing in nearly every clash is this: extremists. Two sides that are so vehemently dedicated to their cause and so single-minded in their pursuit, that anything contrary or questioning of their belief is absolute heresy. And rather than try to prove their own side, they attack the others weaknesses. To effectively debate a topic you must not only clearly state your position's strengths and weaknesses, but also acknowledge and cite the oppositions strengths and weaknesses.
I find several things very odd about the current controversy. Many (not all by any means,)evolutionists refuse to accept any aspects of the Christian bible as historically accurate, even those proven by archeology or tradition. Numerous other texts that would support biblical history are ignored (i.e. ancient Egyptian, Syrian, and Babylonian texts on the Flood.)
A large number of creationists refuse to acknowledge evolution on any scale. They maintain that the very concept ridicules their understanding of Divine creation. This adamacy is maintained in light of scientific proof that evolution occurs (i.e. bacteria and viruses)
Few evolutionists have read the bible in its entirety as well as all supporting texts. Few creationists have.
Few creationists have read all six editions of "The Origin of the Species," let alone the countless research papers on evolution. For that matter, neither have many evolutionists.
The bible states that those who do not believe will not understand it. From Psalms 82:5: Darwin has several chapters (4) dedicated to trying to explain the problems with evolution. From the introduction to Chapter 6 Difficulties of the Species: Both sides of the argument are not completely understood. There are many unanswered, and possibly unanswerable, questions. And rather than acknowledge this, both sides blindly attack the other. Neither side will accept the other, which is concerning since there is nothing in either side that indicates a disavowment of the other.
Both beliefs have an equal right to be taught as theories. Without complete and unequivocal proof, both are just theories. So where's the problem?
You could also look at it as low prices being a good thing. If you're just looking around for some new sounds, what are you going to consider buying? The cheap stuff of course. For me it's a moot point... iTunes isn't worth it as far as I'm concerned.
Beyond the ads, pop-ups, and the host of other typical web app annoyances... what about security and specifically privacy? Google tends toward rather ambiguous TOS, but Sun likes to clad their TOS in iron armor. Any thoughts?