Oh, nevermind, it actually makes sense because the top fans are supposed to heat the fluid circuit, which renders my point of air traveling throughout the case moot.

This is Slashsdot mate, not PhD Comics. Gaming is also geeky, and if you don't know and/or crave Alienware, I have good (bad) news for you... You need to get out of the lab more often :D

Despite the hype they make about the unencumbered airflow front and back, I seriously have my doubts on a system that has a pump-in fan so close to a pump-out fan.

I mean, look at the top triangle tip.

In their defense, there are 2 extra fans below, but some fluid dynamics graph would be nice for prooving good thermals exist there.

I personally like the idea of learning algorithms, through Mark as Spam or Add to Contacts. But as a sysop in a somewhat busy, mid-scale company MX, I find 2 big user-preference deterrents to its use:

• 1. wide email client preference, and thus flawed learning due to inconsistent behavior of Mark as Spam and Add to Contacts
• 2. user-specific enforcing of spam-to-inbox - older peers, usually managers, just prefer to get everything and filter manually, as they are allergic to new paradigms such as webmail (which interact well with learning algorithms, e.g. roundcube), and just panic to the possibility of getting an important mail not getting to their Outlook Inbox

My most used technique involves configuring amavis (spamassassin, amavis, etc) just like OP does, but then, and since I use ISPConfig with a plethora of configurable per-user Spam policies, I just tell everyone responsible for creating mailboxes to arbitrate between them, ad hoc. It works somewhat well: every month or so I get an unhappy camper, and I just accept the fact it happens.

I can really see some sense in your un-numbered paragraphs, because that's politics 101.

Except maybe here:

You can use whatever rhetoric you want. You can tell me there are endless loopholes that net neutrality sponsors can abuse. But unless the dictionary has changed, neutrality still relates to the disregard for censorship. Whoever says the contrary is, indeed, applying smokescreens to the concept.

Now, about your numbered topics: you keep talking money. I don't care about money. I know this is all about money and Netflix and yada yada. I DON'T CARE. As long as I'm not using my internet for something that is morally wrong, I am using my internet like it was (or at least should) meant to.

Some Definitions:
Morally Wrong - Pirating Copyrighted material; Getting illegal content such as child pornography; Hacking secure systems for illicit reasons.
Not Morally Wrong - Paying and downloading copyrighted content; downloading 08FU5C473D content (because you can't prove what it is); Hacking secure systems for proof of concept and recreational purposes.

Some opinions:
(1) It is the ISP's responsibility to get me the throughput I pay for without discrimination. If contracts allow discrimination the ISP is taking on someone else's responsability (read 3);
(2) It is the content provider's responsibility to have content in legal form and to protect it in an acceptable fashion;
(3) It is the governing regulatory bodies responsibility to scourge the content providers for bad content (and this includes bad content distribution form, such as, say, Netflix flooding the gates of the Internet to a point they are messing with a utility).

Are we really supposed to believe 814.000 Americans signed a petition to prevent them from using their internet as they see fit? Never mind the fact the triplicated the single signature purpose, this is flat out unbelievable.

So, if the government was the victim because some of its members decided to abuse power in order to get personal compensation (be it money or just public opinion), why would the government itself be penalized? It's true that the government is made by elected members of the people in a democracy, but these people did NOT represent the government's best interests with the deal, as the deal did not do justice to the government by breaking its law.

It might even have benefited the country overall, with new money getting in through other revenue from Apple keeping business there, but that is just a political illusion of benefit to the government - it is more of a treat to the elected political party, who managed to gain popularity to the eyes of the community by committing public taxes for it.

Deals like this can be done, as long as they are made under the guise of a solid investment and they do not break any trade policies without lawmakers consent, which does not appear to be the case.

I see your point, but 99% of the services anyone uses online instantiate a form of server. Any P2P network, such as torrents or TOR, can be considered setting up a server. If that is basis for establishing that the user is running a server, they could very well shut down their entire user base. Nowadays, even a very basic browser page can be considered a server, the page just needs an open socket for incoming connections. Anyone else creating an online multiplayer private match (thinking of counter-strike, UT, Age of Empires, among thousands of others) can also be incriminated for "providing internet services" if you follow that logic.

Now, this is a concept that even here in Europe we have to condone contractually, yet nobody abides to legally. If a com company is known to be doing something fishy like terminating contracts out of their own free-will, companies here get the hammer, be it from a lawsuit or from being dropped by their market. That's why you don't see any company doing it, even there in the US. Do you know of anyone having their service suspended out of the company not liking their usage patterns (and that don't go to jail)? All I hear is people getting their band throttled, but this happens on a mass scale and not to a singled out individual.

A company cannot just speculate, because that would be considered an abuse of power. The state can do that though, and that is why we have "piracy taxes" for hard disk drives and now even for flash-based built-in memory on our cells and tablets (yeah, we just got it approved in Portugal last month)... The state can say that if there is "massive, yet unidentifiable known use of copyrighted material", it can establish a generalized tax that applies even for people that do not infringe the copyright. It is even applied twice or three times for people that purchase digital/physical content. Companies can't do such type of generalization or speculation.

To whomever is getting calls like these, take the chance to install a call recorder. Ask for the operator name, and for a reference that proves the operator is really a Comcast representative such as "can you tell me my current service/plan?".

After all this, let them know you will continue using TOR, and sue them for breach of contract and intimidation if they go forth with their mischievous threats. You are allowed to use your internet connection according to their TOS, which does not bar TOR unless the FCC really let that slide. If Comcast themselves are trying to enforce the law-enforcement right to spy on you as approved by congress, they are infringing the law by abusing a right not theirs. Comcast can't also add policies ad-hoc unilaterally. Tell them you will not stop using the service, and that their communication to you is proof that you are most likely going to be targeted by law-enforcement agencies due to Comcast snooping and discriminating your internet usage.

You can sue them for discrimination out of the blue, just from that call, as they are probing your ability to be blacklisted.
You can sue them for breach of contract if they cut your line and/or suspend your contract like they said they would.

Nice typo, Anatoly Kucherena will be pleased :D.

Apparently the original source, among other sites, added the extra L, so poster has an excuse :D

You need to find better ways to cover your tracks after browsing them freshmen girls mobile photo. If boss asks about the name, just tell them it's a reference to Harry Potter, and the black hat is for wizardry

This is just another one of the recent MS gimmicks to get you to switch to the Metro version.

I just received a very official Skype Team email stating my desktop version would be automatically removed. That's exactly what it said: YOUR SKYPE VERSION WILL BE REMOVED. If a company would add such a trigger on an application (even one that highly depends on a single external cloud service to do anything at all), I would call that heavy persuasion.

Southwest policy appears to restrict entrance in this very specific case to JUST after all A-list passengers and before others. This is because his kids were older than 4 and NOT entitled to A-list boarding. If they were younger than 4, the hostess would be infringing policy. But she was actually enforcing policy strictly, doing her job as she is told to.

The real problem here is a conflict between the freedom of speech right and the defamation civil wrong (for which she can sue actually). I personally don't think there is real libel here, but some might argue that using the hostess's name on the tweet is reason enough for her to sue. What is impressive is the fact the guy had to go to the news after the incident to whine even more, and that gets me thinking he is a little more butthurt than he should for nothing important. He pretty much wanted the hostess fired from her job, which is her source of income. I think everybody gets defensive when their job is at stake. And all this for not indulging him in something he didn't have the right to, despite being "used to" have.

She wanted to avoided having defamation about her and the company wanted to avoid bad publicity. If the tweet was still up, he would have been left on the ground and he could be sued. If they let him fly without deleting the tweet, hostess would have been fired and both hostess and company could sue. This was the best scenario for both... Until he decided to strike back like a little girl. He could have never used the company again for the lack of poise but he just had to make the issue bigger. These are my two cents about it,