If you take yourself seriously, you might want to grab a snap, even if it is technically illegal.....
No, it's not technically illegal, it's called fair use, keeping a copy for your personal use is certainly fine and dandy (at least in the US under current laws:) ). Granted, it doesn't really do you any good if you want to publish the page, but at least you'd have the original article to refer to when trying to find a replacement source. How many times have you looked at a URL and thought, "Gee, I wonder what the heck that is about?".
One such system, DOI, allows one to RENT a barcode of sorts for participating Web pages.
I've run into several diffent digital library schemes/solutions (dspace to name one) that depend on the Handle system. What always alarms me is that these Handles seem to operate just like domain names; they're good as long as you pay.
The Handles just add one more layer of complexity without really addressing the real problem: archiving digital documents. The system appears more to be a way to get into the "rent nothing for something" racket ala Verisign and domain names.
Note to all you domain name owners out there: You OWN nothing, you are leasing. Big difference!
The project's complaint would seem to be that Red Hat has made a clear statement that Red Hat will vigorously defend ALL of their trademarks. The discussion would then seem to be self defense on the project's part: "Hey, we have been using that for 5 years, are you going to leave us alone? Hello? Bueller?"
Red Hat is stuck, they can't let one trademark infringement slide if they intend to keep the trademark pure. I agree with a previous poster, Red Hat deserves a kick in the pants for not doing a simple google on Fedora!
No, the stopgaps won't work for the simple reason that spammers are looking for a 0.05% return rate. So even if 95% of the email boxes on the Net have perfect spam rejection, the spammers will still be broadcasting. And making their money. And using bandwidth, server resources, etc. The idiots buying stuff through SPAM are also not smart enough to employ stopgaps.
The stopgaps do NOT make it more expensive to send SPAM.
Until we actually make SPAM (defined as fraudulent headers and such) technically impossible, the SPAM problem will be there, affecting someone, be it the ISPs, the back bone providers, what have you.
There have been numerous proposals, none have really taken off.
How about: http://spf.pobox.com/ http://www.danisch. de/work/security/antispam.html (Yes, I'm too lazy to link those properly)
The problem is this: SMTP is standard with a lot of inertia, any changes to it are going to be either ignored or resisted by the majority of mail servers. All of these proposals fail UNLESS there is a majority buyin. The classic chicken and egg problem.
So, it's not that OSS isn't trying, it's that there isn't enough incentive for people to actually DO something. Yeah, we're steaming mad about SPAM, but not enough to hose the company mail server and get fired.
This doesn't really address SPAM, it only addresses YOUR SPAM. Meaning, SPAM sent to you is still taking up bandwidth, still being bounced around the Net.
Don't get me wrong, I like TMDA and qconfirm, but they aren't solutions, they are stopgap measures.
Perhaps my point should have been more about staying current on OS as opposed to the actual hardware living for a long time.
It would seem that Macs have become less reliable in the last 2-3 years, but I think that's more due to the use of ATA drives instead of SCSI; I know our local G4's have lost drives much more often than older models.
Who moderated this up? Did you actually read his comments?
Shitfire, if we were talking Windows I wouldn't be suprised.
A remote root exploit is very bad, my friend. Yes, you can hide with the "doesn't affect me, so no big deal" attitude, but to those you actually care about security, this is a serious bug that needs fixed pronto, I don't care what OS it is.
Any Mac user who thinks Mac last more than a year is a fool.
Why do you suppose the warranty is ONE year, when many of the components have longer warranties if bought direct?
You'll notice that getting AppleCare on a Mac extends the warranty to 3 years, yet that covers only hardware, not software.
How many times do we have to say it: Apple is all about selling Macs and their business is geared that way. Building machines that last forever runs counter to that goal.
Microsoft publishes this information for Windows: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecyc le.mspx
Redhat also publishes this information, for RHL: http://redhat.com/apps/support/errata/
Apple apparantly does not, I could not find the info via google or their site, though I was able to find out Apple is concerned about recycling its outdated HARDWARE(http://www.apple.com/about/environment/eo l/).
My time is precious, and I need to spend it using the application, not modifying the application.
I believe that was the offensive passage. Ignoring developers, demanding they make things better for you while not being willing to do any work yourself is a common attitude that is affecting a lot of projects (Note, you is a general y'all, not YOU).
If you're not willing to put in the time, then I guess you'll just have to put up with what others are willing to do for you. For no pay in many cases.
Consistency in a UI should not raise anybodies hackles.
Actually, for me it does raise hackles.:)
I'd rather an application allow me to configure it how I, the user, want to rather than have one static config.
Mozilla is a perfect example, though it still needs more work. By default, the CTRL-key is the modifier for commands. I don't like that, as using CTRL on my keyboard (I'm bad, I don't use the right CTRL like I should) cramps a lot when closing windows (Meta-W) a lot. So I changed that via user_prefs and friends to ALT, which makes Mozilla more comfortable for ME to use. This is but one example
Consistency to me is down the list from flexibility, features and customization sometimes fall prey to Consistency.
"Brand" is a word. In this context used, the indication is Marketing Speak. I don't care what the actual subject matter is, to my ear I hear "I am in Marketing".
To paraphrase the Old One:
"One you set to the path of Marketing, forever will it dominate your destiny...You will become an Agent of Evil"
This is an idea in the same vein as "Linux/Gnome/KDE needs to become User Friendly/Easy to Use/Dumbed Down for the Sheep". Fine, do the work, someone might use it, but leave the rest of us to make our own choice, thank you.
Perhaps I'm just missing something here (like the images from the article), but who gives a crap about what Mozilla looks like when it's very easy to make your own or modify a theme? The whole point of Open Source is "Do What You Want", not "Do what they let you".
Using the word "brand" of course raises my anti-marketing hackles, but that's just me.
Perhaps you missed the point. By using a non-privledged port, it is unlikely his mail server will EVER be blocked by an ISP. And the way this is configured, the port number is arbitary.
Any FILTERING is a non-solution, the spam still hits the mail server, still uses bandwidth and still takes up space in the user's mailspool. And the user still has to check the spam bucket now and again for false positives.
Now if spamassassin really worked like its name...:)
This is an important point. Many warranties (IBM for sure) specifically void if the small hole is covered. Easy to work around for a single drive, but those holes are not located in a standard place.
I wonder how much the silence/cooling effect would be reduced if small bars of aluminum were used, say 1/4 the length of the drive, instead of full sized plates...
I'm locate in the server room (10 servers, hot and noisy) and I've tried the Bose QuietComform 2 phones. They work for low frequency noise, but fail to block higher frequencies typically seen from hard drives and fans. I ended up with chainsaw-style ear muffs.:(
Look at the flip side of your statment: Why aren't folks using microfilm and such? Answer, it not the easiest way and therefore gets used in relation to it's ease of use.
This is important as new methods of information storage and retrivial are developed; ease of use is a consideration.
Note, though, I'm with you: folks are too lazy nowadays.
Slashdot Mirror
If you take yourself seriously, you might want to grab a snap, even if it is technically illegal.....
No, it's not technically illegal, it's called fair use, keeping a copy for your personal use is certainly fine and dandy (at least in the US under current laws :) ). Granted, it doesn't really do you any good if you want to publish the page, but at least you'd have the original article to refer to when trying to find a replacement source. How many times have you looked at a URL and thought, "Gee, I wonder what the heck that is about?".
Let's phrase this correctly:
One such system, DOI, allows one to RENT a barcode of sorts for participating Web pages.
I've run into several diffent digital library schemes/solutions (dspace to name one) that depend on the Handle system. What always alarms me is that these Handles seem to operate just like domain names; they're good as long as you pay.
The Handles just add one more layer of complexity without really addressing the real problem: archiving digital documents. The system appears more to be a way to get into the "rent nothing for something" racket ala Verisign and domain names.
Note to all you domain name owners out there: You OWN nothing, you are leasing. Big difference!
The project's complaint would seem to be that Red Hat has made a clear statement that Red Hat will vigorously defend ALL of their trademarks. The discussion would then seem to be self defense on the project's part: "Hey, we have been using that for 5 years, are you going to leave us alone? Hello? Bueller?"
Red Hat is stuck, they can't let one trademark infringement slide if they intend to keep the trademark pure. I agree with a previous poster, Red Hat deserves a kick in the pants for not doing a simple google on Fedora!
No, the stopgaps won't work for the simple reason that spammers are looking for a 0.05% return rate. So even if 95% of the email boxes on the Net have perfect spam rejection, the spammers will still be broadcasting. And making their money. And using bandwidth, server resources, etc. The idiots buying stuff through SPAM are also not smart enough to employ stopgaps.
The stopgaps do NOT make it more expensive to send SPAM.
Until we actually make SPAM (defined as fraudulent headers and such) technically impossible, the SPAM problem will be there, affecting someone, be it the ISPs, the back bone providers, what have you.
There have been numerous proposals, none have really taken off.
. de/work/security/antispam.html
How about:
http://spf.pobox.com/
http://www.danisch
(Yes, I'm too lazy to link those properly)
The problem is this: SMTP is standard with a lot of inertia, any changes to it are going to be either ignored or resisted by the majority of mail servers. All of these proposals fail UNLESS there is a majority buyin. The classic chicken and egg problem.
So, it's not that OSS isn't trying, it's that there isn't enough incentive for people to actually DO something. Yeah, we're steaming mad about SPAM, but not enough to hose the company mail server and get fired.
This doesn't really address SPAM, it only addresses YOUR SPAM. Meaning, SPAM sent to you is still taking up bandwidth, still being bounced around the Net.
Don't get me wrong, I like TMDA and qconfirm, but they aren't solutions, they are stopgap measures.
Yes, I am on crack.
Perhaps my point should have been more about staying current on OS as opposed to the actual hardware living for a long time.
It would seem that Macs have become less reliable in the last 2-3 years, but I think that's more due to the use of ATA drives instead of SCSI; I know our local G4's have lost drives much more often than older models.
Who moderated this up? Did you actually read his comments?
Shitfire, if we were talking Windows I wouldn't be suprised.
A remote root exploit is very bad, my friend. Yes, you can hide with the "doesn't affect me, so no big deal" attitude, but to those you actually care about security, this is a serious bug that needs fixed pronto, I don't care what OS it is.
Any Mac user who thinks Mac last more than a year is a fool.
Why do you suppose the warranty is ONE year, when many of the components have longer warranties if bought direct?
You'll notice that getting AppleCare on a Mac extends the warranty to 3 years, yet that covers only hardware, not software.
How many times do we have to say it: Apple is all about selling Macs and their business is geared that way. Building machines that last forever runs counter to that goal.
Microsoft publishes this information for Windows:c le.mspx
o l/).
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecy
Redhat also publishes this information, for RHL:
http://redhat.com/apps/support/errata/
Apple apparantly does not, I could not find the info via google or their site, though I was able to find out Apple is concerned about recycling its outdated HARDWARE(http://www.apple.com/about/environment/e
My time is precious, and I need to spend it using the application, not modifying the application.
I believe that was the offensive passage. Ignoring developers, demanding they make things better for you while not being willing to do any work yourself is a common attitude that is affecting a lot of projects (Note, you is a general y'all, not YOU).
You are assuming that once passed the government would actually bother to enforce the law.
Current FBI response to any claim of electronic tresspassing has to have a high dollar amount associated with it, otherwise they're not interested.
Ever read Cliff Stoll's "The Cuckoo's Egg"? I wouldn't expect much help from legal agencies.
If you're not willing to put in the time, then I guess you'll just have to put up with what others are willing to do for you. For no pay in many cases.
*sigh*
Consistency in a UI should not raise anybodies hackles.
:)
Actually, for me it does raise hackles.
I'd rather an application allow me to configure it how I, the user, want to rather than have one static config.
Mozilla is a perfect example, though it still needs more work. By default, the CTRL-key is the modifier for commands. I don't like that, as using CTRL on my keyboard (I'm bad, I don't use the right CTRL like I should) cramps a lot when closing windows (Meta-W) a lot. So I changed that via user_prefs and friends to ALT, which makes Mozilla more comfortable for ME to use. This is but one example
Consistency to me is down the list from flexibility, features and customization sometimes fall prey to Consistency.
"Brand" is a word. In this context used, the indication is Marketing Speak. I don't care what the actual subject matter is, to my ear I hear "I am in Marketing".
To paraphrase the Old One:
"One you set to the path of Marketing, forever will it dominate your destiny...You will become an Agent of Evil"
This is an idea in the same vein as "Linux/Gnome/KDE needs to become User Friendly/Easy to Use/Dumbed Down for the Sheep". Fine, do the work, someone might use it, but leave the rest of us to make our own choice, thank you.
Perhaps I'm just missing something here (like the images from the article), but who gives a crap about what Mozilla looks like when it's very easy to make your own or modify a theme? The whole point of Open Source is "Do What You Want", not "Do what they let you".
Using the word "brand" of course raises my anti-marketing hackles, but that's just me.
Perhaps you missed the point. By using a non-privledged port, it is unlikely his mail server will EVER be blocked by an ISP. And the way this is configured, the port number is arbitary.
Any FILTERING is a non-solution, the spam still hits the mail server, still uses bandwidth and still takes up space in the user's mailspool. And the user still has to check the spam bucket now and again for false positives.
Now if spamassassin really worked like its name...:)
To balance the silly AC...
This is an important point. Many warranties (IBM for sure) specifically void if the small hole is covered. Easy to work around for a single drive, but those holes are not located in a standard place.
I wonder how much the silence/cooling effect would be reduced if small bars of aluminum were used, say 1/4 the length of the drive, instead of full sized plates...
Which phones?
:(
I'm locate in the server room (10 servers, hot and noisy) and I've tried the Bose QuietComform 2 phones. They work for low frequency noise, but fail to block higher frequencies typically seen from hard drives and fans. I ended up with chainsaw-style ear muffs.
Don't forget that many times, sending the food doesn't mean it ends up with the hungry people.
Many times it just lines some "warlord"'s pocket instead of feeding anyone.
I'll plug register4less.com, no problems and they're running on Linux last I checked.
Anything that's part of OpenSRS works for me.
*sigh*
The problem with sitefinder is that it breaks DNS, not that you get directed to a particular domain.
WWW != Internet
DNS != marketing opportunity
Blocking IP != Correcting the Sitefinder problem
Normally I don't respond to AC, but hey, this really ticks me off.
Oh look, must be a slow news day, as yet another journalist reaches for a story.
...
Let's see, the list of Previous Things Declared Dead by a Bored Journalist are:
UNIX
Linux
VMS
SCSI
APPLE
FTP
telnet
Now we can add Bluetooth. Gee, thanks.
Look at the flip side of your statment: Why aren't folks using microfilm and such? Answer, it not the easiest way and therefore gets used in relation to it's ease of use.
This is important as new methods of information storage and retrivial are developed; ease of use is a consideration.
Note, though, I'm with you: folks are too lazy nowadays.