This is hardly a "Gmail bug", but rather Google indexing a direct link to Gmail with the To: field filled out with some random email address.
The linkbait-y title of this post made me think that some of my private emails were getting sent to the wrong person.
I bought Linux-Mandrake 6.0 ("Red Hat Linux 6.0 with enhancements"; I still have the box and everything) back in 1999-2000, and it was my first attempt at Linux. I installed it, and when I booted up my computer the only thing that appeared on the screen were the letters "LI_", with the underscore flashing. That scared me. I never managed to install it, so I went back to Windows (after also trying BeOS). It wasn't until 2-3 years ago that I installed Slackware 9.0 that I could actually get Linux working. Then I installed Ubuntu, and that's where I stayed. Maybe I'll give Mandriva another try, after all these years.
That was great, thanks for pointing this website out.
I can't help but wonder, though, why is it that we are provided with high-resolution imagery from another planet, but not of our own moon... It really pushes me to believe all those website that talk about moon structures.
Yes, you are completely right. They have no obligation with you or me or anyone else.
But they have an obligation with themselves, and that's their reputation. So if our data were only that, data, they wouldn't care about it that much (we don't even pay for their services!) But our data is something more important: it's a token of trust that we have given them. And if they lose it, they're losing our trust, and thus their reputation. And in the long term, losing that is a lot worse than losing some ones and zeros that specify the placement of my Slashdot widget on my homepage.
Are we supposed to be cheering because Diebold got rejected? From here:
Thom Hartmann stated in CommonDreams.org (Nov 4 2004, [32]):
"About two years ago [Jan 2003], I wrote a story for these pages, "If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines," that exposed how Senator Chuck Hagel had, before stepping down and running for the U.S. Senate in Nebraska, been the head of the voting machine company (now ES&S) that had just computerized Nebraska's vote. The Washington Post (1/13/1997) said Hagel's "Senate victory against an incumbent Democratic governor was the major Republican upset in the November election." According to Bev Harris, Hagel won virtually every demographic group, including many largely black communities that had never before voted Republican. Hagel was the first Republican in 24 years to win a Senate seat in Nebraska, nearly all on unauditable machines he had just sold the state."
As we would say here, ES&S is the same shit with different flies. Until the law changes, it doesn't matter if you vote on a Diebold machine or on an ES&S machine, you will still have not idea what really happened to your vote.
How small is small? There are 604.349 Mapuches (2002, http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapuche) in Chile, which translates to 4% of the population.
There are quite a few Mapudungun dictionaries (I own one) and many, many places in Chile have Mapudungun names (Puyehue, Llanquihue, etc.). It is only spoken by the Mapuches (I don't remember the last time I heard someone speaking Mapudungun), but it is widespread, even if us chileans don't realize it.
From reading local newspapers, the reason that this "tribe" (as many people here are calling it) does not like that Microsoft has invented a written version of a language that is originally only spoken. The way it is currently written is by a "spanishization", meaning that latin letters are arranged so that when you read the word in spanish it sounds like the original word in Mapudungun (there are some Mapudungun sounds that don't exist in spanish, thus they had to "invent" letters like the umlaut). Anyway, I digress. The point is that Microsoft had to invent a way of writing Mapudungun, and since this language isn't modern, they also had to invent new words (email, configuration, etc). I think that they are complaining that this was not done in a public manner.
So if 50 people got a song from me, they would charge me 50 times whatever the fine is? If those 50 people had no way of getting an illegal copy of the song, would they have bought the CD that contained it? Probably not. Then, how are labels damaged "50 times" when only a fraction of those people would have actually spent money on the original?
What the article does not make clear is WHY they have to search laptops. The article says something about the "U.S. government need[ing] to protect its borders"... from what? What are they looking for? Jüri Lina or Noam Chomsky ebooks? Bookmarks to rense.com or to whatreallyhappened.com? Software to remotely activate Russian nuclear weapons? I mean, you can't import cocaine or weapons in a laptop! (Unless, of course, you put them IN the laptop, but then it's the X-Rays' job to find them in this case, and there would be no reason to even boot the computer...) And I don't think it's the TSA's job to be looking for pirated media (which can be very hard to prove that are illegal; what if those Buddha Bar mp3's you have are a backup of the CD you left back home?)
I don't understand.
I'd say that, the way kdawson phrased it, it means that someone didn't certify it illegally... which doesn't make sense. In any case, the article that he points to makes sense: "Documents show Maryland held election, primary on uncertified, illegal Diebold voting machines."
Slashdot Mirror
This is hardly a "Gmail bug", but rather Google indexing a direct link to Gmail with the To: field filled out with some random email address. The linkbait-y title of this post made me think that some of my private emails were getting sent to the wrong person.
I guess there's something for everyone. I really like Gnome 3. It just stays out of the way lets me get my work done.
What is Kaleidescape and why should I care?
(Yes, I know there's Google. But a bit of context would be nice.)
On my PC running Fedora 16 & Gnome 3:
1. Open the directory where the ISO file is.
2. Double click it.
3. ISO is mounted.
No root required.
Good thing they won a victory! They'd be in a lot of trouble if they had lost a defeat!
Start worrying... http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=131741
I bought Linux-Mandrake 6.0 ("Red Hat Linux 6.0 with enhancements"; I still have the box and everything) back in 1999-2000, and it was my first attempt at Linux. I installed it, and when I booted up my computer the only thing that appeared on the screen were the letters "LI_", with the underscore flashing. That scared me. I never managed to install it, so I went back to Windows (after also trying BeOS). It wasn't until 2-3 years ago that I installed Slackware 9.0 that I could actually get Linux working. Then I installed Ubuntu, and that's where I stayed. Maybe I'll give Mandriva another try, after all these years.
That was great, thanks for pointing this website out. I can't help but wonder, though, why is it that we are provided with high-resolution imagery from another planet, but not of our own moon... It really pushes me to believe all those website that talk about moon structures.
Yes, you are completely right. They have no obligation with you or me or anyone else. But they have an obligation with themselves, and that's their reputation. So if our data were only that, data, they wouldn't care about it that much (we don't even pay for their services!) But our data is something more important: it's a token of trust that we have given them. And if they lose it, they're losing our trust, and thus their reputation. And in the long term, losing that is a lot worse than losing some ones and zeros that specify the placement of my Slashdot widget on my homepage.
How small is small? There are 604.349 Mapuches (2002, http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapuche) in Chile, which translates to 4% of the population. There are quite a few Mapudungun dictionaries (I own one) and many, many places in Chile have Mapudungun names (Puyehue, Llanquihue, etc.). It is only spoken by the Mapuches (I don't remember the last time I heard someone speaking Mapudungun), but it is widespread, even if us chileans don't realize it. From reading local newspapers, the reason that this "tribe" (as many people here are calling it) does not like that Microsoft has invented a written version of a language that is originally only spoken. The way it is currently written is by a "spanishization", meaning that latin letters are arranged so that when you read the word in spanish it sounds like the original word in Mapudungun (there are some Mapudungun sounds that don't exist in spanish, thus they had to "invent" letters like the umlaut). Anyway, I digress. The point is that Microsoft had to invent a way of writing Mapudungun, and since this language isn't modern, they also had to invent new words (email, configuration, etc). I think that they are complaining that this was not done in a public manner.
So if 50 people got a song from me, they would charge me 50 times whatever the fine is?
If those 50 people had no way of getting an illegal copy of the song, would they have bought the CD that contained it?
Probably not. Then, how are labels damaged "50 times" when only a fraction of those people would have actually spent money on the original?
What the article does not make clear is WHY they have to search laptops. The article says something about the "U.S. government need[ing] to protect its borders"... from what? What are they looking for? Jüri Lina or Noam Chomsky ebooks? Bookmarks to rense.com or to whatreallyhappened.com? Software to remotely activate Russian nuclear weapons? I mean, you can't import cocaine or weapons in a laptop! (Unless, of course, you put them IN the laptop, but then it's the X-Rays' job to find them in this case, and there would be no reason to even boot the computer...) And I don't think it's the TSA's job to be looking for pirated media (which can be very hard to prove that are illegal; what if those Buddha Bar mp3's you have are a backup of the CD you left back home?) I don't understand.
Well, the Bush administration has their own Fourth Amendment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGhcECnWRGM
I'd say that, the way kdawson phrased it, it means that someone didn't certify it illegally... which doesn't make sense. In any case, the article that he points to makes sense: "Documents show Maryland held election, primary on uncertified, illegal Diebold voting machines."
How do you "illegally uncertify" something?
Well, this is the last comment we'll ever read from Paua Fritter....
Judging from this list, choosing the right Windows version will be harder than choosing the right Linux distribution...