There is, and This is True uses it, it's called the "List-Unsubscribe:" header.
While I'm not entirely sure how the "List-Unsubscribe:" header works, a few of the lists I'm on (and have asked to be removed from) have a "to be removed from this list, send a message with 'remove' in the subject line to a@list.com"
Unfortunately, most of these lists have me on one of the dozen or so aliases that points to my e-mail address, and I have no idea which one it is because it was a former recipient of that alias that subscribed.
Even the ones that encode the recipient e-mail address into the headers don't remove me from their list despite repeated requests--because they're too harebrained to understand that it's not my gmail address I want removed, it's one of the aliases.
TFA states that the JPL team met with "the Bush Administration's Presidential Science Advisor's office", not with Bush himself, as implied in the Summary. The headline's reference to meeting with the "White House" is more accurate.
Or maybe that's just a technical detail, like how the President always "writes his own speeches".
You managed to hit 1) snobbishness that makes otherwise-poor-form spelling flames acceptable and 2) an embarrassing spelling error in just one sentence!
I think the spelling error may have been intentional; i.e. to distinguish the critical thinking people from those who are merely critical.
TFA (the second one) says that not all pages will be indexed. That, and many pages are in other languages/scripts, as pointed out by other replies to your post.
Of course, if not all the pages are indexed, then the story kinda fizzles out.
While I'm not familiar with how Greenpeace came up with its ranking, I do know that the book "Paper or Plastic: Searching for Solutions to an Overpackaged World" by David Imhoff included an anecdote that HP reduced packaging and lowered supply-chain losses and costs all in one.
Instead of shipping printers (perhaps only a certain model or type) in individually-packaged boxes on skids, HP had a tray-like thing (like what you get at a fast food place for drinks) that held many printers. This was then wrapped with clear skid wrapping.
Because they weren't boxed individually, you could fit many more on each skid. Because the contents were visible from the outside, forklift operators were more careful and there was less damage in warehouses.
It is very likely that HP pre-packages its licenses in these boxes, and the economics of it probably works out that most of them are sent individually. It is thus simpler for them to send out many individually-packaged boxes to customers who purchase multiple licenses, than to have someone remove the papers from the boxes in the warehouse, find an appropriate envelope to put them in, and then do something with the box.
You, the customer, would no longer get the many boxes, but they would probably be used and discarded further up before they get to you, analogous to when recycling bins get emptied into the same dumpster as the trash.
- RG>
(the "idle" comment form is really weird in SeaMonkey)
In criminal law, crime is defined as something that happens between the offender and the state. The victim (including the family of the victim) has no formal place in the process, except possibly as a witness.
With no formal place in the process, there is no formal way for the victim to receive restitution--not just financial, but peace of mind, and being able to dialogue with the offender to understand why he did what he did, why that particular victim, etc.
So the closest thing the victim can do is vicariously seek revenge through the state. Unsurprisingly, this does not satisfy them or make them feel any better. So they argue for harsher punishment. Wash, rinse, repeat.
People keep saying that we need to consider the needs of the victims, but the only way they propose to do that focuses entirely on the offender. That's just broken.
PP did not put it properly. This is not technology to compensate for frailty; it's technology to compensate for judgement.
Glasses, windscreens, and headlights all provide the driver with the ability to better process the raw data. This technology seems to pre-select what the driver needs to look out for, which can lead to a dependence on it. What if the technology misses something important?
As an example, on a road with sidewalks, drivers do not look out for pedestrians (or similar) on the roadway, except at crosswalks. This allows the motorists to go faster, and thus increase risk because they are no longer thinking about pedestrians. The same goes for other traffic signs and signals. However, when you level off the road and strip off signs and pavement markings in urban areas, collisions are reduced significantly, because people are required to act for themselves--the government, through traffic signs and signals, is no longer telling them to behave uniformly (see Shared Space or this news video).
This new technology is another example of something that reduces the driver's perceived requirement to judge his or her surroundings, which will only make our roads more dangerous.
...you're really not wanting to edit what a person says, even if it makes them look better than what they originally said. Any edits to somebody else's words opens up liability both for lawsuits as well as ethics complaints.
This rings especially true for politicians. Particularly the part about not making them look better...
Slashdot Mirror
There is, and This is True uses it, it's called the "List-Unsubscribe:" header.
While I'm not entirely sure how the "List-Unsubscribe:" header works, a few of the lists I'm on (and have asked to be removed from) have a "to be removed from this list, send a message with 'remove' in the subject line to a@list.com"
Unfortunately, most of these lists have me on one of the dozen or so aliases that points to my e-mail address, and I have no idea which one it is because it was a former recipient of that alias that subscribed.
Even the ones that encode the recipient e-mail address into the headers don't remove me from their list despite repeated requests--because they're too harebrained to understand that it's not my gmail address I want removed, it's one of the aliases.
So *those* people I mark as spam.
- RG>
In Switzerland, does the cheese have windows?
- RG>
This is so beautiful. It looks like extra-terrestrial technology.
Close. It's subterranean.
- RG>
TFA states that the JPL team met with "the Bush Administration's Presidential Science Advisor's office", not with Bush himself, as implied in the Summary. The headline's reference to meeting with the "White House" is more accurate.
Or maybe that's just a technical detail, like how the President always "writes his own speeches".
- RG>
They should be taking this much more seriously. Filing bogus bug reports will only send the Mozilla brand down a slippery slope.
- RG>
...but what if this new discovery hearalds an age of wholesail water mining?
Intentional or not, that is a hilarious typo.
- RG>
Go try and use it. I looked for "aes zip linux" and got 0 results.
Proof that it works! None of those annoying ad-pages that get high search results through dubious means. No duplicate copycat pages.
Cuil really trims the fat to give you a stress-free searching experience!
- RG>
He wrote science fiction. What in SF does one need to "trust"?
- RG>
Nuclear ... still pollutes a little! omg we must stifle this!
My concern with Nuclear waste is not the small amount it pollutes in the spacial dimensions, but the length of time it must be monitored, stored, etc.
That, and safely extracting it from the ground without poisoning the local ecosystem.
- RG>
You managed to hit 1) snobbishness that makes otherwise-poor-form spelling flames acceptable and 2) an embarrassing spelling error in just one sentence!
I think the spelling error may have been intentional; i.e. to distinguish the critical thinking people from those who are merely critical.
- RG>
CLICK THUD TICK SSSS No FWWWW CLUNK CLICK
I'm sorry--what did you say?
- RG>
TFA (the second one) says that not all pages will be indexed. That, and many pages are in other languages/scripts, as pointed out by other replies to your post.
Of course, if not all the pages are indexed, then the story kinda fizzles out.
- RG>
No, it's from Arthur C Clarke's "The Nine Trillion URLs of God"
- RG>
social "revealing" ( would they even understand what that is? )
I dunno. Do they get "Extreme Makeover: Social Edition" on their planet?
- RG>
I have money in an offshore Blogger account left to me by...
I hate to see a good joke go off topic...
- RG>
Doesn't she realize it's not just the Earth, but the entire Universe that is on the line here?!!!
I don't care if the whole Universe is on the line; I'm on my break. Tell the Universe to leave a message!
- RG>
While I'm not familiar with how Greenpeace came up with its ranking, I do know that the book "Paper or Plastic: Searching for Solutions to an Overpackaged World" by David Imhoff included an anecdote that HP reduced packaging and lowered supply-chain losses and costs all in one.
Instead of shipping printers (perhaps only a certain model or type) in individually-packaged boxes on skids, HP had a tray-like thing (like what you get at a fast food place for drinks) that held many printers. This was then wrapped with clear skid wrapping.
Because they weren't boxed individually, you could fit many more on each skid. Because the contents were visible from the outside, forklift operators were more careful and there was less damage in warehouses.
It is very likely that HP pre-packages its licenses in these boxes, and the economics of it probably works out that most of them are sent individually. It is thus simpler for them to send out many individually-packaged boxes to customers who purchase multiple licenses, than to have someone remove the papers from the boxes in the warehouse, find an appropriate envelope to put them in, and then do something with the box.
You, the customer, would no longer get the many boxes, but they would probably be used and discarded further up before they get to you, analogous to when recycling bins get emptied into the same dumpster as the trash.
- RG>
(the "idle" comment form is really weird in SeaMonkey)
In criminal law, crime is defined as something that happens between the offender and the state. The victim (including the family of the victim) has no formal place in the process, except possibly as a witness.
With no formal place in the process, there is no formal way for the victim to receive restitution--not just financial, but peace of mind, and being able to dialogue with the offender to understand why he did what he did, why that particular victim, etc.
So the closest thing the victim can do is vicariously seek revenge through the state. Unsurprisingly, this does not satisfy them or make them feel any better. So they argue for harsher punishment. Wash, rinse, repeat.
People keep saying that we need to consider the needs of the victims, but the only way they propose to do that focuses entirely on the offender. That's just broken.
- RG>
PP did not put it properly. This is not technology to compensate for frailty; it's technology to compensate for judgement.
Glasses, windscreens, and headlights all provide the driver with the ability to better process the raw data. This technology seems to pre-select what the driver needs to look out for, which can lead to a dependence on it. What if the technology misses something important?
As an example, on a road with sidewalks, drivers do not look out for pedestrians (or similar) on the roadway, except at crosswalks. This allows the motorists to go faster, and thus increase risk because they are no longer thinking about pedestrians. The same goes for other traffic signs and signals. However, when you level off the road and strip off signs and pavement markings in urban areas, collisions are reduced significantly, because people are required to act for themselves--the government, through traffic signs and signals, is no longer telling them to behave uniformly (see Shared Space or this news video).
This new technology is another example of something that reduces the driver's perceived requirement to judge his or her surroundings, which will only make our roads more dangerous.
- RG>
In addition to trucks, other cases include:
* small motor vehicles, like old subcompacts or new electric-only subcompacts, which can't go that fast
* bicycles, which are legally considered vehicles across North America
* in poor weather, poor visibility, or construction zones, speed should be reduced.
- RG>
...you're really not wanting to edit what a person says, even if it makes them look better than what they originally said. Any edits to somebody else's words opens up liability both for lawsuits as well as ethics complaints.
This rings especially true for politicians. Particularly the part about not making them look better...
- RG>
Indeed. In Soviet Russia, joke longs for you!
- RG>
Contractors are not going to be happy.
Indeed. I bet they'll be pissed!
- RG>
What we need is an anti-bot bot that will flood the porn sites with WRONG text in the CAPTCHAs, reducing the average effectiveness of their strategy.
- RG>
$35 Billion in savings? How much is that in napkins?
Enough napkins to scribble half of the contents of the Library of Congress on the back of them.
- RG>