Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Ask Slashot: Looking For Alternatives To Gmail 3

Submitted by noims
noims (23711) writes "I've been moving away from google for some time now, and am now looking for a gmail alternative for webmail and POP/IMAP. Not surprisingly, I'm having trouble finding another provider that's cheap/free, has reasonable security, and includes the features I've grown used to. My minimum feature requirements are decent search and filtering, customisable addresses (user+whatever@gmail is equivalent to user@gmail), and confidence that it won't suddenly disappear.

Does such a provider exist? What's the best out there, or do I need to roll my own?"

Comment: Re:I've known a solution for this for years (Score 1) 219

by noims (#43280097) Attached to: Scientists Study Getting an Unwanted Tune Out of Your Head

I keep a pet earworm.

I have the tune to Bubble Bobble (most addictive song I could think of) stuck in my head permanently. I use it as my alarm in the morning, and various sound alerts through the day. It's permanently stuck in my head, but I'm so used to it that it doesn't bother me.

If I get another tune stuck and I decide I don't want it in there, I just hum a few bars of Bubble Bobble, and they fight it out. Nothing's ever survived.

Comment: Pro-helmet studies please (Score 1) 1651

by noims (#41523173) Attached to: To Encourage Biking, Lose the Helmets

As a cyclist I've seen a fair few arguments and studies like this one against wearing a helmet, but most people just use the 'common sense' argument for wearing one.

I don't wear a helmet, and in general I'd rather learn the arguments for changing my behaviour. Does anyone have a good link to well conceived arguments or studies that say you should wear one?

Comment: Predictability (Score 2) 143

by noims (#35779190) Attached to: EU About To Vote On Copyright Extension

If copyright is supposed to encourage the arts by providing future financial security, then surely varying the rate for past works decreases that security by putting across the message that the timeframe may change in the future.

If this is the case, then I can see an argument for increasing copyright term on new works (not that I agree with it), but surely older works should go into the public domain on schedule, as the artists have received what was promised.

It's the equivalent of saying you'd pay an artist $1000 every year for the next 60 years. They can decide that yes, 60k is worth this amount of work. If you then start changing this around, the artist might be getting 95k or, in a possible future backlash, 40k. They then can't use this as a basis for viability. This, then, at least partially invalidates this incentive.

Of course, this is all based on the assumption that this is the purpose of copyright, which I think is a pretty big assumption these days. I'd be interested in seeing a list of other justifications for it.

Noims.

Your program is sick! Shoot it and put it out of its memory.

Working...