Link to Original Source
Umail.net is specifically geared to those who need a dozen of email addresses without remembering a dozen of passwords. The service allows its users to create additional email addresses (aliases) that will forward messages to the main account. While email aliases are also available at some other webmail services, Umail.net developers took care to make this feature particularly convenient by adding a special Aliases menu. From this menu a user can create new aliases (email@example.com, where "alias" is any prefix) and delete them as they become redundant or compromised — all with one click of a mouse.
Being especially handy for registering with various websites, this one-click-alias feature can also be used to separate business contacts, friends and relatives. The smart service can automatically tag emails from different addresses and move them to specified folders to avoid mixing up business correspondence, personal life, and various notifications and newsletters. What's more, filtering rules can be customized independently for each alias.
For the main address Umail uses whitelist-based filtering, which means that only messages from those in the contact list will make it to the Inbox. All the other emails are stored in a separate Spam folder. If a contact is added to the whitelist the message is moved to Inbox, otherwise it is deleted after a certain deadline (3 days by default, but can be changed as required). However, a message from someone who is not on the whitelist has a chance of getting to the Inbox. The sender can pass antispam check to be added to the address book without waiting for confirmation from the account owner. This system renders antispam protection impenetrable for junk mail, yet ensures that messages from friends, colleagues and business partners easily get to the mailbox.
Most of Umail features described above are only one or two mouse clicks away, thanks to the intuitive interface being similar to that of popular email clients. A user can get familiar with Umail in no time and start efficiently managing correspondence.
Website address: http://umail.net/"
After I left the Finnish church (in Helsinki) some 15 years ago, nobody came to see me or anything. I have had the occasional Jehova's Witness ring my doorbell, but no-one from the state church.
The point is not that the GPL should enable end users to make easy modifications to things like firmware - the GPL doesn't say so anywhere, and it may not even be possible.
The GPL, version 3, does require this. See section 6: "If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, [...] the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM)."
"Installation Information" is defined to include "any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source".
But then you get a phone call every time they do want to install something. Better is to install sysresccd on a USB hard drive, configure the system just that once the way the users want it and use partimage to store an image of the computer's hard drive on the USB drive. When they get to trouble, restore the image and you've got a working system again - you could even set up a script to do this. In case of security updates, you of course need to restore the image, do the installation and create a new image, but this is much easier than hunting down all the spyware and whatever garbage the users have installed on the computer.
where users from all over (incl. Denmark, Israel, South Africa) are reporting the problem and commiserating. No one from Google seems to be listening — indeed, Google's Apps Status Dashboard
still reports "No Issues" with Gmail.
Scott Aaronson, MIT CSAIL
(temporary email address I created: firstname.lastname@example.org
my blog entry about this: http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=428)"
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
TFA is very sympathetic to the Executive branch, going on to depict ways in which we're all less safe because of this ruling. Personally, I feel safer with more rulings like this one. Just wish the process were a bit more transparent.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.""
From the article: "Krawetz was also able to determine that the writing on the banner behind al-Zawahiri's head was added to the image afterward. In the second picture above showing the results of the error level analysis, the light clusters on the image indicate areas of the image that were added or changed. The subtitles and logos in the upper right and lower left corners (IntelCenter is an organization that monitors terrorist activity and As-Sahab is the video production branch of al Qaeda) were all added at the same time, while the banner writing was added at a different time, likely around the same time that al-Zawahiri was added, Krawetz says." Why would Al-Qaeda add an IntelCenter logo to their video? Why would IntelCenter add an Al-Qaeda logo? Methinks we have bigger fish to fry than Gonzo and his fired attorneys... }:-) The article contains links to Krawetz's presentation and the source code he used to analyze the photos."
Full story at Lowyat.net
The poor guy used up all his bandwidth in just 4 days after publicly release the UI."
This policy memo was initialed due to the recent action by the U.S. Department of Transpertation placing a ban on these new Microsoft Products stating...
"there appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products. Furthermore, there appears to be specific reasons not to upgrade."
I think it makes sense for my company to do this. As the old saying goes "If it's not broke, don't fix it". So, are there other companies out there that are enacting a similar kind of policy?"