In most places, it's an offense to obscure your license plates, intentionally or otherwise. That includes putting shiny stuff on them (or whatever) so that red-light cameras and radar cameras can't properly image them.
No, there isn't. grep it if you don't believe it. There is no "-whatKIDNofspamdoyoutakemefor-" in your posted email address. You should have copied-and-pasted, rather than retyping.:)
I think I read on the nVidia FAQ page (which now appears to be broken, so I can't check or quote it) that the 3Dfx shareholders will have to approve the transaction before it can go through.
Of course, if 3Dfx feel that they're in such bad shape that they have to do this, then you may be worse off without the deal.
Ehrrm, it isn't a spammer, it is a seller of spamware.
Fine.
You don't need to. Just block the spamware seller's website. This still cuts off the money - the spamware seller will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and if the spamware seller goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money...
If MAPS blocked the website, spammers could still reach the website, buy the spamware
If that is the case, then why does MAPS even bother with spamware sellers? If they were only going to block the seller's site, then as you say, that doesn't stop the spammers from getting their spamware, so would acheive very little. MAPS goes after these sites because they want to see the sites taken down, so that noone can access them (not just MAPS subscribers). They can't do that by just blocking the site, so instead they're unjustly blocking whole sections of the ISP, in an effort to submit and remove the sites. Make no mistake, these are bullying tactics.
MAPS is not censoring, subscribers to MAPS have chosen not to spend their money for the transport of packets send to or from Media3.
MAPS is doing more than this. They are trying to abuse their influence to get the site itself shut down. You appear to have completely missed that point. My point is that MAPS isn't "merely blocking for MAPS subscribers", as you claim, but they are trying to get the site removed altogether, which is entirely different.
A newspaper that doesn't put your opinion on its frontpage isn't censoring either.
No, but if the newspaper were to reject stories based on content, then that would be censoring. Similarly, if some agency were applying pressure to get the newspaper to not print particular stories, then that agency would be attempting to censor those stories. In this case, the 'newspaper' is Media3 and the 'agency' is MAPS. The analogy's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than yours.
The real evil thing will happen when it will be ILLEGAL to report a security flaw to lists such as Bugtraq.
Could you really plausibly see this happening? I mean, I know there's some stupid laws around, and I know they have a habit of getting stupider, but the inability to point out software flaws? It's so easy to make comparisons to traditional industries like appliances, cars, food, and so on, and show how if you disallow software flaw reports, then you'd also have to disallow reports (including safety reports) in these traditional areas. Government agencies themselves will often produce these reports, consumer watch groups in particular. And the free speech is clear, the same as if you wrote a letter to a newspaper describing how some car can malfunction and kill you.
Sorry, but I just can't see this particular crazy thing happening, no matter how hard I try.
Fine. Put Media3 on the list. But what about PeaceFire? How would you feel if your site was RBL'd by MAPS simply for having an IP next to someone MAPS didn't like?
The fact that that few spams are caught in the RBL is... a testament to... the success of MAPS of driving spam support services off of the web.
BZZZT!
10 years ago I wrote this program which stops elephants from walking down the highway. Since there's only been a couple of elephants found walking on the highway since then, my program must work.
Sorry, but few emails caught by MAPS is evidence both for and against the success of MAPS. You can't use it for one or the other.
It is, however, evidence to restraint on their part.
The difference between DeCSS and spam software is that it's easy to find geniunely good uses for DeCSS, whereas you'll struggle to find good uses for the spam software.
It's okay to go after tools which can ONLY do "bad things", particularly if that's all they're designed to do. But if there's significant "good things" which can also be done with the tool, such as with DeCSS, then it's wrong to stop those good uses, and so instead you go after those who choose to use the tool to do "bad things".
Then, as always, you just have to worry about your definition of "good things" and "bad things".:/
So, what do you do to get Media3 to close down the spammer?
You don't need to. Just block the spammer's website. This still cuts off the money - the spammer will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and if the spammer goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money - but not at the (unnecessary) expense of other customers. Repeat the process with wherever the spammer goes next.
That's how MAPS should work, by blocking the bad stuff so that RBL users just don't see it. There isn't any need to punish innocent sites who happen to be on the same class C. MAPS should concentrate on blocking spammers and their sites, not trying to twist ISPs arms.
If MAPS successfully got Media3 to shut down the spammer's site, then MAPS WOULD be dealing in censorship, wouldn't they? They'd no longer be this optional advisory guide you could use, rather, they'd be going around getting websites they don't like shut down. If that's not censorship, I don't know what is.
MAPS seems to want to have it both ways - to the public: "Oh, we're not censoring anyone", but to M3: "Shut this site down now, or we'll punish you by blocking lots of your sites". I'm sorry, but to me, that's just terrible.
Best of all is that even if plex86 wasn't to support MIDI, you could always add it yourself (or get someone to add it for you).
If VMware tells you that MIDI's not supported in WMware and will never be, no matter how much you rant or offer to pay them, then you're Just Plain Fucked.
Free software removes the user's dependance on the vendor, a point which IMHO is of high importance, but too often forgotten.
Of course, anyone can add this themselves just by hacking the kernel. You wouldn't even need to go to much effort, since you could just make the uptime start at whatever value you want, rather than 0.
The better solution is to ignore the uptime-dick contests and get on with your life, rather than lowering the kernel's quality as a piece of software.
Hell, a moderately useful feature would be to make the uptime start at what it was last time the system was up, keeping a cumulative uptime as well as a standard one. If you also store when the cumulative uptime started, then you could store uptime as a percentage of real time. This would put some meat behind the 99.9% uptime claims. You could also have dick-size contests about how much your machine is up, rather than the longest particular consecutive stretch. Kernel upgrading reboots are then less of a problem, because you can still say things like "My machine was only down for 60 seconds last month!".
I see. So, you selfishly wish to further your own genes and traits as a method of continuing your own existence past your death, and this somehow makes you better than RMS? RMS has done a substantial amount for the good of all people in his GNU software, but somehow anyone who can have kids is doing more than that?
Let me ask, how many people are aware of your work in producing offspring? How many aware of RMS's work? What has your producing offspring achieved, for the good of humanity? What was your 6th generation gradnfather's name? Was he anything like you? Will your 6th generation grandchildren know who you were? Will they know what you did? Will they find that you had children in any way remarkable? Will any of your traits be recognizable in them, or will they be diluted from all your descendants mixing to produce more descendants? Your descendants may be huge in number, but they're also a lot of other people's descendants.
Those who wish their lines to end with their deaths are free to do so. For what purpose did their ancestors live, though?
Same as you, to selfishly propagate their genes. Perhaps you should be so lucky that a descendant of yours may do something worthwhile with their life, rather than just sustaining and reproducing.
Indeed, for what purpose do they live?
To make a difference, to help people other than those directly related to them. To do something with their lives, rather than just try to be "remembered" by reproducing. Just about anyone can reproduce (as evidenced by the large number doing exactly that), but not just anyone can change the world.
Millions of years of evolution leading to a dead end: a selfish, miserable, pewling wretch.
How is *your* end any better than his?
I find it highly ironic that RMS is fighting to secure the freedoms and rights of society, for people just like your kids.
Aim to find meaning in your life through yourself, and your own actions, not your offspring. Don't worry about being remembered because in the end, everyone and everything will be forgotten, and those who count will be the ones who made good use of their time here.
And of course, I have no objections to anyone having kids, only to those who think doing so makes them better than people who choose not to. Congrats to the Torvald family.
1) Unlace your shoe (either is fine).
2) Take off your shoe (the one you unlaced).
3) Take a firm grip of your shoe (the one you took off).
4) Smack yourself in the face with the heel of your shoe (the one you're firmly grasping).
5) Repeat step 4 until you pass out.
The thing that worries me about this text is that "Southern Cross" means a very different thing down here in the Carolinas
I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'll set your mind at ease. The Southern Cross is a prominent constellation in the southern sky, and is in fact the group of 5 stars on the Australian flag. (The other star under the union jack has 7 points to symbolise the 7 states and territories of Australia.) So lots of stuff down here has the name of "Southern Cross", including this particular company and cable.
How much has Djikstra's algorithm changed in the last 4 years? Floyd's? What about dynamic programming in general? Integer programming? Let's go even simpler - how much has recursion changed in the last 4 years? Or even object oriented programming? What about regular expressions or formal language specification methods like EBNF? What about the various bit operations, like shifting, and, or, two's complement, and what they're good for? How has the basic maths behind perspective transforms changed recently? What about the major standard Unix development tools, like gcc, make, and cvs?
These are just the things that I can think of, off the top of my head, which I've learnt in my CS degree, which will be applicable for a long time to come. The most valuable thing you get out of any degree is not knowledge, but methods and ways of thinking.
Don't say "Computer Science" when you mean "Technology". Technology outdates, Computer Science matures.
Actually, he said "Can you see that I am serious?!", or, more accurately, "I am indeed serious!". Check out the 4F18 episode capsule and search for 'disrespectful'.
But it doesn't 'call' the same 'function' (webpage). This makes it which makes it just a normal call, not a recursive one. Recursion isn't the right word.
I'll tell you exactly why. Latency. Noone ever seems to stop and think about the latency in these kinds of systems.
It takes radio waves travelling at the speed of light (the speed limit of the univese) several minutes (can't remember exactly) to get from Earth to Mars and back. Now every time you do any action, your poor brain has to wait several minutes for feedback on that. You try putting your foot down to take a step, but don't feel the pressure of the ground on the sole of your foot until a few minutes later. I'm sorry, but that's just not going to work, no matter how much you want it to.
You know those fun things they have at science expos, where you speak into the microphone and it plays it back to you with a 1 second or so delay? Those things are really hard to use, because your brain is used to near-instantaneous feedback. With practice, you can train it to ignore the feedback and just speak.
But this is just speech, you don't really need that feedback (eg. deaf people can speak, particularly if they weren't born deaf). For anything requiring a vague level of dexterity, such as walking, looking, playing sport, music, and doing just about anything with your hands and fingers, I suspect that even 500ms of latency is too much for your brain to handle. Thus it might just work for halfway-round-the-world comms (landline only, no satellites)... maybe.
Telepresence is a nice idea, but should be thought of more as an extension to videoconferencing than as the elaborate setup you're envisaging.
Since you are 'here', communicating with 'there' takes some unavoidable time... The only way to beat that is to go there.
What about a nice middle ground, where moderators get access to the submission queue? Then give them a few 'submission points' to use there (as well as their standard 5 mod points), and let them work their magic?
This should stop junk/troll submissions, since not all of/. sees the queue, but it should also help the truly good, non-repeat stories float to the top of the queue, where the/. guys can then deal with them better/easier.
Imagine being a 'submission moderator' for a few days with a few points, and being able to mark things as '-1 Repeat' or '+1 Geeky'... Hell, I'd love to be able to correct the grammar/spelling in some of the submissions!:)
But think of all the CPU time required to repeatedly compress/decompress all that stuff!
I suspect it may cost more for the extra CPU power for the compression/decompression, than it would for the extra storage to store it all uncompressed.
Slashdot Mirror
In most places, it's an offense to obscure your license plates, intentionally or otherwise. That includes putting shiny stuff on them (or whatever) so that red-light cameras and radar cameras can't properly image them.
No, there isn't. grep it if you don't believe it. There is no "-whatKIDNofspamdoyoutakemefor-" in your posted email address. You should have copied-and-pasted, rather than retyping. :)
I think I read on the nVidia FAQ page (which now appears to be broken, so I can't check or quote it) that the 3Dfx shareholders will have to approve the transaction before it can go through.
Of course, if 3Dfx feel that they're in such bad shape that they have to do this, then you may be worse off without the deal.
Ehrrm, it isn't a spammer, it is a seller of spamware.
Fine.
You don't need to. Just block the spamware seller's website. This still cuts off the money - the spamware seller will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and if the spamware seller goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money...
If MAPS blocked the website, spammers could still reach the website, buy the spamware
If that is the case, then why does MAPS even bother with spamware sellers? If they were only going to block the seller's site, then as you say, that doesn't stop the spammers from getting their spamware, so would acheive very little. MAPS goes after these sites because they want to see the sites taken down, so that noone can access them (not just MAPS subscribers). They can't do that by just blocking the site, so instead they're unjustly blocking whole sections of the ISP, in an effort to submit and remove the sites. Make no mistake, these are bullying tactics.
MAPS is not censoring, subscribers to MAPS have chosen not to spend their money for the transport of packets send to or from Media3.
MAPS is doing more than this. They are trying to abuse their influence to get the site itself shut down. You appear to have completely missed that point. My point is that MAPS isn't "merely blocking for MAPS subscribers", as you claim, but they are trying to get the site removed altogether, which is entirely different.
A newspaper that doesn't put your opinion on its frontpage isn't censoring either.
No, but if the newspaper were to reject stories based on content, then that would be censoring. Similarly, if some agency were applying pressure to get the newspaper to not print particular stories, then that agency would be attempting to censor those stories. In this case, the 'newspaper' is Media3 and the 'agency' is MAPS. The analogy's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than yours.
The real evil thing will happen when it will be ILLEGAL to report a security flaw to lists such as Bugtraq.
Could you really plausibly see this happening? I mean, I know there's some stupid laws around, and I know they have a habit of getting stupider, but the inability to point out software flaws? It's so easy to make comparisons to traditional industries like appliances, cars, food, and so on, and show how if you disallow software flaw reports, then you'd also have to disallow reports (including safety reports) in these traditional areas. Government agencies themselves will often produce these reports, consumer watch groups in particular. And the free speech is clear, the same as if you wrote a letter to a newspaper describing how some car can malfunction and kill you.
Sorry, but I just can't see this particular crazy thing happening, no matter how hard I try.
Fine. Put Media3 on the list. But what about PeaceFire? How would you feel if your site was RBL'd by MAPS simply for having an IP next to someone MAPS didn't like?
The fact that that few spams are caught in the RBL is ... a testament to ... the success of MAPS of driving spam support services off of the web.
BZZZT!
10 years ago I wrote this program which stops elephants from walking down the highway. Since there's only been a couple of elephants found walking on the highway since then, my program must work.
Sorry, but few emails caught by MAPS is evidence both for and against the success of MAPS. You can't use it for one or the other.
It is, however, evidence to restraint on their part.
The difference between DeCSS and spam software is that it's easy to find geniunely good uses for DeCSS, whereas you'll struggle to find good uses for the spam software.
:/
It's okay to go after tools which can ONLY do "bad things", particularly if that's all they're designed to do. But if there's significant "good things" which can also be done with the tool, such as with DeCSS, then it's wrong to stop those good uses, and so instead you go after those who choose to use the tool to do "bad things".
Then, as always, you just have to worry about your definition of "good things" and "bad things".
So, what do you do to get Media3 to close down the spammer?
You don't need to. Just block the spammer's website. This still cuts off the money - the spammer will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and if the spammer goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money - but not at the (unnecessary) expense of other customers. Repeat the process with wherever the spammer goes next.
That's how MAPS should work, by blocking the bad stuff so that RBL users just don't see it. There isn't any need to punish innocent sites who happen to be on the same class C. MAPS should concentrate on blocking spammers and their sites, not trying to twist ISPs arms.
If MAPS successfully got Media3 to shut down the spammer's site, then MAPS WOULD be dealing in censorship, wouldn't they? They'd no longer be this optional advisory guide you could use, rather, they'd be going around getting websites they don't like shut down. If that's not censorship, I don't know what is.
MAPS seems to want to have it both ways - to the public: "Oh, we're not censoring anyone", but to M3: "Shut this site down now, or we'll punish you by blocking lots of your sites". I'm sorry, but to me, that's just terrible.
Best of all is that even if plex86 wasn't to support MIDI, you could always add it yourself (or get someone to add it for you).
If VMware tells you that MIDI's not supported in WMware and will never be, no matter how much you rant or offer to pay them, then you're Just Plain Fucked.
Free software removes the user's dependance on the vendor, a point which IMHO is of high importance, but too often forgotten.
Of course, anyone can add this themselves just by hacking the kernel. You wouldn't even need to go to much effort, since you could just make the uptime start at whatever value you want, rather than 0.
The better solution is to ignore the uptime-dick contests and get on with your life, rather than lowering the kernel's quality as a piece of software.
Hell, a moderately useful feature would be to make the uptime start at what it was last time the system was up, keeping a cumulative uptime as well as a standard one. If you also store when the cumulative uptime started, then you could store uptime as a percentage of real time. This would put some meat behind the 99.9% uptime claims. You could also have dick-size contests about how much your machine is up, rather than the longest particular consecutive stretch. Kernel upgrading reboots are then less of a problem, because you can still say things like "My machine was only down for 60 seconds last month!".
That would only be if RMS was allowed to *ahem* "help" in the creation of Celeste... ;)
I see. So, you selfishly wish to further your own genes and traits as a method of continuing your own existence past your death, and this somehow makes you better than RMS? RMS has done a substantial amount for the good of all people in his GNU software, but somehow anyone who can have kids is doing more than that?
Let me ask, how many people are aware of your work in producing offspring? How many aware of RMS's work? What has your producing offspring achieved, for the good of humanity? What was your 6th generation gradnfather's name? Was he anything like you? Will your 6th generation grandchildren know who you were? Will they know what you did? Will they find that you had children in any way remarkable? Will any of your traits be recognizable in them, or will they be diluted from all your descendants mixing to produce more descendants? Your descendants may be huge in number, but they're also a lot of other people's descendants.
Those who wish their lines to end with their deaths are free to do so. For what purpose did their ancestors live, though?
Same as you, to selfishly propagate their genes. Perhaps you should be so lucky that a descendant of yours may do something worthwhile with their life, rather than just sustaining and reproducing.
Indeed, for what purpose do they live?
To make a difference, to help people other than those directly related to them. To do something with their lives, rather than just try to be "remembered" by reproducing. Just about anyone can reproduce (as evidenced by the large number doing exactly that), but not just anyone can change the world.
Millions of years of evolution leading to a dead end: a selfish, miserable, pewling wretch.
How is *your* end any better than his?
I find it highly ironic that RMS is fighting to secure the freedoms and rights of society, for people just like your kids.
Aim to find meaning in your life through yourself, and your own actions, not your offspring. Don't worry about being remembered because in the end, everyone and everything will be forgotten, and those who count will be the ones who made good use of their time here.
And of course, I have no objections to anyone having kids, only to those who think doing so makes them better than people who choose not to. Congrats to the Torvald family.
Doh!
At least I remembered that the star is 7-pointed, even if I forgot that there's 6 states and the last point is for the territories (ie. ACT and NT).
Here's how in 5 easy steps:
1) Unlace your shoe (either is fine).
2) Take off your shoe (the one you unlaced).
3) Take a firm grip of your shoe (the one you took off).
4) Smack yourself in the face with the heel of your shoe (the one you're firmly grasping).
5) Repeat step 4 until you pass out.
The thing that worries me about this text is that "Southern Cross" means a very different thing down here in the Carolinas
I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'll set your mind at ease. The Southern Cross is a prominent constellation in the southern sky, and is in fact the group of 5 stars on the Australian flag. (The other star under the union jack has 7 points to symbolise the 7 states and territories of Australia.) So lots of stuff down here has the name of "Southern Cross", including this particular company and cable.
Computer sciences: Whoa, has this stuff changed.
How much has Djikstra's algorithm changed in the last 4 years? Floyd's? What about dynamic programming in general? Integer programming? Let's go even simpler - how much has recursion changed in the last 4 years? Or even object oriented programming? What about regular expressions or formal language specification methods like EBNF? What about the various bit operations, like shifting, and, or, two's complement, and what they're good for? How has the basic maths behind perspective transforms changed recently? What about the major standard Unix development tools, like gcc, make, and cvs?
These are just the things that I can think of, off the top of my head, which I've learnt in my CS degree, which will be applicable for a long time to come. The most valuable thing you get out of any degree is not knowledge, but methods and ways of thinking.
Don't say "Computer Science" when you mean "Technology". Technology outdates, Computer Science matures.
Actually, he said "Can you see that I am serious?!", or, more accurately, "I am indeed serious!". Check out the 4F18 episode capsule and search for 'disrespectful'.
But it doesn't 'call' the same 'function' (webpage). This makes it which makes it just a normal call, not a recursive one. Recursion isn't the right word.
Someone should port DeCSS to this. :)
hell, why not the Moon or Mars?
I'll tell you exactly why. Latency. Noone ever seems to stop and think about the latency in these kinds of systems.
It takes radio waves travelling at the speed of light (the speed limit of the univese) several minutes (can't remember exactly) to get from Earth to Mars and back. Now every time you do any action, your poor brain has to wait several minutes for feedback on that. You try putting your foot down to take a step, but don't feel the pressure of the ground on the sole of your foot until a few minutes later. I'm sorry, but that's just not going to work, no matter how much you want it to.
You know those fun things they have at science expos, where you speak into the microphone and it plays it back to you with a 1 second or so delay? Those things are really hard to use, because your brain is used to near-instantaneous feedback. With practice, you can train it to ignore the feedback and just speak.
But this is just speech, you don't really need that feedback (eg. deaf people can speak, particularly if they weren't born deaf). For anything requiring a vague level of dexterity, such as walking, looking, playing sport, music, and doing just about anything with your hands and fingers, I suspect that even 500ms of latency is too much for your brain to handle. Thus it might just work for halfway-round-the-world comms (landline only, no satellites)... maybe.
Telepresence is a nice idea, but should be thought of more as an extension to videoconferencing than as the elaborate setup you're envisaging.
Since you are 'here', communicating with 'there' takes some unavoidable time... The only way to beat that is to go there.
What about a nice middle ground, where moderators get access to the submission queue? Then give them a few 'submission points' to use there (as well as their standard 5 mod points), and let them work their magic?
/. sees the queue, but it should also help the truly good, non-repeat stories float to the top of the queue, where the /. guys can then deal with them better/easier.
:)
This should stop junk/troll submissions, since not all of
Imagine being a 'submission moderator' for a few days with a few points, and being able to mark things as '-1 Repeat' or '+1 Geeky'... Hell, I'd love to be able to correct the grammar/spelling in some of the submissions!
Yeah, it sucks when people make general statements from only a single example.
Yeah, you're right. We can't have large companies building high-quality products.
Yeah, you're right. Large companies always make better products than individuals and other small groups.
But think of all the CPU time required to repeatedly compress/decompress all that stuff!
I suspect it may cost more for the extra CPU power for the compression/decompression, than it would for the extra storage to store it all uncompressed.