Technically, you could implement DRM rights management services on your end, so the user has to contact your organization's RMS server over HTTPS for a license every time the document is opened...
And to think that RMS would be involved in such an anti-freedom sort of scheme!
Agree with the previous posters. Grade inflation, yes. Broad admissions standards, yes.
But in a more general sense, it seems largely due to the (to me) bizarre notion that a good goal is for more people to attend university. U.S. culture nurtures the idea that if you don't get a college degree, you are worthless. Typical 'First World' wrongheaded thinking, the kind which Alexis de Tocqueville observed back in ~1835.
Which is kind of funny when you see many college graduates working (not by choice) at Starbucks or the like--just as you see see many non-graduates and even secondary school dropouts working quite ably and to great success in corporations or in businesses they themselves own.
The more I experience, the more I am convinced that--save for a relative few exceptions--people either have a basic grasp of thinking, writing, basic maths, etc., or they don't. Usually, this attainment or non-attainment preceeds the age at which one typically might attend college by approximately 10 years.
It's hard to tell whether you're being sarcastic. But, assuming that your comments are in earnest:
Sales and accounting can be outsourced, downsized, unfairly paid, etc., just like IT can.
Companies large enough to have middle management at all are usually overstaffed in general, and overstaffed in management in particular. Not just overstaffed in numbers of people, but in amount of money paid for value received.
There are toxic companies, and there are non-toxic companies. Maybe one of those categories is the majority, but the bottom line is that if you're in a toxic one - find a non-toxic one. It might require uncomfortable changes to do so; but isn't it more uncomfortable to hate your daily existence?
Now, you might think I am being anti-woman by calling you babe, but you are wrong. I am showing favoritism. If you were a man I would have called you a brain-dead retard. It's just another example of the favoritism women get in the industry: you get a compliment instead of an insult.
I wish my karma were not currently 'bad', so that I could mod up.
You obviously are not from that section of the U.S. which the "Coastal Elites" so eloquently refer to as "Flyover Country."
[Full Disclosure: I am from Flyover Country, but am now Coastal. Also, I make fun equally of those who call the Coastals "elite" and those who call anywhere east of Philly and west of L.A. "Flyover Country."]
Actually, you make a good point, even though I get that it was sarcastic. I often have wondered, why DO people move in the winter? It seems like a really poor choice.
When I lived in Kansas City (Missouri, not Kansas!!), back in 1993, my insurance cost $393 per month and the car payment was $250. This was for the cheapest new Honda Civic of that time. So, $7716 per year, 16 years ago, and that's not counting fuel or maintenance.
For those unacquainted with Kansas City, it's a city where you "must" have a car. It's the 20th largest city in the States by area; Dallas is 17th by this measure.*
*Figures taken from Wikipedia, and thus completely accurate.
Re:Warning: Gmail IMAP support is ASCII only!!!
on
Free IMAP On Gmail
·
· Score: 1
As a FastMail user (and NOT an employee or affiliate thereof), it seems to me that many, if not most, of FastMail's PAYING customers are a different target market overall. For example, many of us are heavy IMAP users and have been for a number of years. Also, some of us are more "agnostic" users of technology...we tend to choose "best-of-breed" applications/services as opposed to one vendor. Sometimes those are free--as in beer or as in freedom, or both--and sometimes not. Gmail has some nice features--some of which FastMail does not have, and vice versa. But to me, Gmail is still more of a mainstream-user thing, at least right now, and I'm not sure they'll ever get past the privacy issue for a lot of us, in spite of the "email is a postcard" argument.
So, to answer your question, as long as FastMail continues to appeal to its paying users, many of whom tend to be attracted by technical features as well as by "it's not Google/Yahoo/AOL, etc.", they should continue to do well.
You can use a tool such as IMAPSize (http://broobles.com). Some IMAP providers also provide a way of archiving a folder or folders into a downloadable tarball/zip file. Not sure whether Gmail does this yet, or whether they have plans to do so.
Yes. FastMail (http://fastmail.fm). Google it for some reviews, if you like. It costs money, but it gets around the Google problem, i.e., it is not Google.
But man, that bit about 'agnostic' being a religion because people put that in the forms that ask for their religion is seriously lacking in brain meats. And so for my grievous quoting of that site, I do say, to borrow a phrase made popular by a *certain* religion:
Ingemisco, tamquam reus:
culpa rubet vultus meus:
supplicanti parce Deus.
I understand that "agnostic" is often viewed as an evasion, as you say; however, each word has its distinct meaning, and I'm arguing that it would be *nice* if we could go back to using those distinct meanings. Is that unrealistic? Yes, I suppose so that it is. Anyhow, I am NOT advocating hiding behind "agnostic," but merely that the term has a meaning distinct from "atheist" and that the modern idea of one being somehow a cop-out is an unfortunate diversion from the initial meanings. I mean, not to split a hair or anything.:)
Well, I concede your point; I did pull that site out of the Google results somewhat lazily. Nevertheless, my main point (although I did not communicate it as such) is that the originator of the term "agnostic" (Huxley) himself applied the phrase "agnostic atheist" to mean what many people today refer to simply as an "atheist." You're right that atheism means "without god"; and "agnostic" means "without knowledge." You're right, the bit about Agnosticism being a religion was pretty far off the mark.
Nevertheless, "agnostic atheist" seems to make perfect sense to me. One can have an atheistic view, whilst still not being certain thereof. I'd posit that believers are "agnostic theists" and unbelievers are "agnostic atheists" EXCEPT for those who positively maintain (though I would disagree with them) that they can PROVE the existence, or non-existence, of god(s), respectively.
Please see http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm for one discussion of the issue. The person to whom you are replying is correct (in my view), in that atheism is the absence of belief, NOT an active, positive disbelief in god(s). However, as the article to which I've linked suggests, both terms have been disputed since their inception.
For the love of everything sacred, would you *please* learn how to spell "renege"? It's not "renig," it's "renege," and I don't care WHAT urbandictionary's opinion is. It's especially ironic that you actually make reference to Kaplan's errors when you make such a glaring and ignorant one as this, not just in your/. post but on your own site as well.
First, I am American. Second, I agree with most of your post. However, I have one comment. Most of the people who support the invasion of Iraq tend to be (more or less) laissez-faire free-market types. Those folks, except perhaps the really stupid^H^H^H^H^H^H ignorant ones, understand that Americans are not "victims" of oil companies, and that, in fact, oil usage in every form (food supply, cars, etc.) is highly subsidized in our society. Of course, so is public transit, but as you point out no one uses it since it is populated mainly with people from ghettos, whom most people not from ghettos wish to avoid--often for good reason. Some of us Americans may be the "victims" of actually buying into pre-fabricated fake version of the fabled "American Dream," often in the guise of "let's live in a suburb (with the advantages of neither the city nor the countryside and many of the disadvantages of both--in other words, mediocre), but I fail to see how we are the "victims" of high gas prices when gas prices are not high. By any measure, they are not high. Gas prices have not kept pace with inflation; they have not kept pace with the price of gas in other countries; they do not reflect the true costs in any sense; etc.
Of course, this is all just my completely uninformed opinion. After all, this is Slashdot.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Technically, you could implement DRM rights management services on your end, so the user has to contact your organization's RMS server over HTTPS for a license every time the document is opened...
And to think that RMS would be involved in such an anti-freedom sort of scheme!
Agree with the previous posters. Grade inflation, yes. Broad admissions standards, yes.
But in a more general sense, it seems largely due to the (to me) bizarre notion that a good goal is for more people to attend university. U.S. culture nurtures the idea that if you don't get a college degree, you are worthless. Typical 'First World' wrongheaded thinking, the kind which Alexis de Tocqueville observed back in ~1835.
Which is kind of funny when you see many college graduates working (not by choice) at Starbucks or the like--just as you see see many non-graduates and even secondary school dropouts working quite ably and to great success in corporations or in businesses they themselves own.
The more I experience, the more I am convinced that--save for a relative few exceptions--people either have a basic grasp of thinking, writing, basic maths, etc., or they don't. Usually, this attainment or non-attainment preceeds the age at which one typically might attend college by approximately 10 years.
It's hard to tell whether you're being sarcastic. But, assuming that your comments are in earnest:
Now, you might think I am being anti-woman by calling you babe, but you are wrong. I am showing favoritism. If you were a man I would have called you a brain-dead retard. It's just another example of the favoritism women get in the industry: you get a compliment instead of an insult.
I wish my karma were not currently 'bad', so that I could mod up.
You obviously are not from that section of the U.S. which the "Coastal Elites" so eloquently refer to as "Flyover Country." [Full Disclosure: I am from Flyover Country, but am now Coastal. Also, I make fun equally of those who call the Coastals "elite" and those who call anywhere east of Philly and west of L.A. "Flyover Country."]
Heh, as soon as I posted, this sort of scenario came to mind, yes. :-(
Actually, you make a good point, even though I get that it was sarcastic. I often have wondered, why DO people move in the winter? It seems like a really poor choice.
Oh, pshaw, Swift was just Yet Another Hierarchical Officious Oracle®!
When I lived in Kansas City (Missouri, not Kansas!!), back in 1993, my insurance cost $393 per month and the car payment was $250. This was for the cheapest new Honda Civic of that time. So, $7716 per year, 16 years ago, and that's not counting fuel or maintenance. For those unacquainted with Kansas City, it's a city where you "must" have a car. It's the 20th largest city in the States by area; Dallas is 17th by this measure.* *Figures taken from Wikipedia, and thus completely accurate.
If I had mod points I would mod you +100. So very true indeed. I wonder if, perhaps, this be considered true also for men?
Sadly, I see that now. :-) Stupid proxy!
Obligatory first comment. I win!
I humbly accept your reply and stand corrected. : )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause#Text ?
As a FastMail user (and NOT an employee or affiliate thereof), it seems to me that many, if not most, of FastMail's PAYING customers are a different target market overall. For example, many of us are heavy IMAP users and have been for a number of years. Also, some of us are more "agnostic" users of technology...we tend to choose "best-of-breed" applications/services as opposed to one vendor. Sometimes those are free--as in beer or as in freedom, or both--and sometimes not. Gmail has some nice features--some of which FastMail does not have, and vice versa. But to me, Gmail is still more of a mainstream-user thing, at least right now, and I'm not sure they'll ever get past the privacy issue for a lot of us, in spite of the "email is a postcard" argument.
So, to answer your question, as long as FastMail continues to appeal to its paying users, many of whom tend to be attracted by technical features as well as by "it's not Google/Yahoo/AOL, etc.", they should continue to do well.
You can use a tool such as IMAPSize (http://broobles.com). Some IMAP providers also provide a way of archiving a folder or folders into a downloadable tarball/zip file. Not sure whether Gmail does this yet, or whether they have plans to do so.
Yes. FastMail (http://fastmail.fm). Google it for some reviews, if you like. It costs money, but it gets around the Google problem, i.e., it is not Google.
Ingemisco, tamquam reus:
culpa rubet vultus meus:
supplicanti parce Deus.
There, I hope that fixes it.
I understand that "agnostic" is often viewed as an evasion, as you say; however, each word has its distinct meaning, and I'm arguing that it would be *nice* if we could go back to using those distinct meanings. Is that unrealistic? Yes, I suppose so that it is. Anyhow, I am NOT advocating hiding behind "agnostic," but merely that the term has a meaning distinct from "atheist" and that the modern idea of one being somehow a cop-out is an unfortunate diversion from the initial meanings. I mean, not to split a hair or anything. :)
Well, I concede your point; I did pull that site out of the Google results somewhat lazily. Nevertheless, my main point (although I did not communicate it as such) is that the originator of the term "agnostic" (Huxley) himself applied the phrase "agnostic atheist" to mean what many people today refer to simply as an "atheist." You're right that atheism means "without god"; and "agnostic" means "without knowledge." You're right, the bit about Agnosticism being a religion was pretty far off the mark. Nevertheless, "agnostic atheist" seems to make perfect sense to me. One can have an atheistic view, whilst still not being certain thereof. I'd posit that believers are "agnostic theists" and unbelievers are "agnostic atheists" EXCEPT for those who positively maintain (though I would disagree with them) that they can PROVE the existence, or non-existence, of god(s), respectively.
Please see http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm for one discussion of the issue. The person to whom you are replying is correct (in my view), in that atheism is the absence of belief, NOT an active, positive disbelief in god(s). However, as the article to which I've linked suggests, both terms have been disputed since their inception.
Obligatory Seinfeld reference: George: From where I was standing, I could see directly into the eye of the great fish. Jerry: Mammal.
Oh, I'm outraged by some of the other things I read; I just have not read enough of it to make an informed comment yet. : )
For the love of everything sacred, would you *please* learn how to spell "renege"? It's not "renig," it's "renege," and I don't care WHAT urbandictionary's opinion is. It's especially ironic that you actually make reference to Kaplan's errors when you make such a glaring and ignorant one as this, not just in your /. post but on your own site as well.
First, I am American. Second, I agree with most of your post. However, I have one comment. Most of the people who support the invasion of Iraq tend to be (more or less) laissez-faire free-market types. Those folks, except perhaps the really stupid^H^H^H^H^H^H ignorant ones, understand that Americans are not "victims" of oil companies, and that, in fact, oil usage in every form (food supply, cars, etc.) is highly subsidized in our society. Of course, so is public transit, but as you point out no one uses it since it is populated mainly with people from ghettos, whom most people not from ghettos wish to avoid--often for good reason. Some of us Americans may be the "victims" of actually buying into pre-fabricated fake version of the fabled "American Dream," often in the guise of "let's live in a suburb (with the advantages of neither the city nor the countryside and many of the disadvantages of both--in other words, mediocre), but I fail to see how we are the "victims" of high gas prices when gas prices are not high. By any measure, they are not high. Gas prices have not kept pace with inflation; they have not kept pace with the price of gas in other countries; they do not reflect the true costs in any sense; etc. Of course, this is all just my completely uninformed opinion. After all, this is Slashdot. :-)