CAN I BE OF ASSISTANCE?
Shut it!
Sunday, March 28
I Saw The Sign
(Ted < J-Walk < LetterJames)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
12:59 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Susie at Sunday, March 28 2004 01:06 AM (YFpJP)
2
TOO cool signage!
I would like to know what I need to do to get my name (or pseudonym) up in THOSE lights. Heh.
Posted by: margi at Sunday, March 28 2004 02:09 AM (kpNlZ)
3
Ah! At last! Fame! My name in lights! (My plan for Total World Dominations is...out of chocolate.)
Aieeee!
Posted by: Linda at Tuesday, March 30 2004 08:19 PM (mmKG+)
4
Hello. Where you are born?
Posted by: Martin at Friday, November 26 2004 08:31 AM (O+3RY)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Friday, March 26
The History of Munuvia, Part 1
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
11:04 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Jennifer at Friday, March 26 2004 12:29 PM (DdBLw)
2
Kewl.......more! More, I say!
Posted by: Susie at Friday, March 26 2004 01:35 PM (9PzdO)
3
"And there was much rejoicing."
Hoorayyy!
Posted by: Linda at Friday, March 26 2004 01:56 PM (ktJme)
4
And lo the fertile soil became a haven for refugees of Blogspot and other technological wastelands. And all who came there were happy and free.
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at Friday, March 26 2004 05:52 PM (UquFN)
5
Excellent. More.... More....
Posted by: Ozguru at Friday, March 26 2004 09:23 PM (/acvO)
6
And I even get a broomstick. That's tapestry weavers knew their stuff. Bravo.
Posted by: Simon at Saturday, March 27 2004 12:48 AM (UKqGy)
7
But where's the cheese???
Posted by: Da Goddess at Saturday, March 27 2004 02:01 AM (+f6gY)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Thanks A Lot, Sitemeter!
I'd noticed that of late my Sitemeter numbers hadn't been growing very fast. I put it down to my writing being less scintillating that I'd like.
Apparently, though, scintillation is not the issue here:
Grr! Grr, I say!
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
12:52 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.
1
That looks like one of those programs you get on exercise bikes at gyms. Or so I've been told.
Posted by: Simon at Friday, March 26 2004 02:00 AM (FUPxT)
2
Now that's just WRONG! I stop by EVERY day, so obviously there's a problem with sitemeter...
Posted by: Susie at Friday, March 26 2004 02:18 AM (9PzdO)
3
Heck, one of your March 16th posts got 7 comments--between the 16th and the 19th, when you had NO visitors! You must be magic...
Posted by: Susie at Friday, March 26 2004 02:20 AM (9PzdO)
4
I'm using four different site tracking services (2 of which came with my site host), and all four have different figures. So don't feel too bad.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg at Friday, March 26 2004 06:21 AM (YEkGz)
5
Even when it's working "correctly" it only picks up about 2/3 of the actual visits. It also doesn't snag aggregator hits so anybody reading you off of xml (um...like me) won't count. Plus, if you're loading slow and that graphic never gets loaded the visit doesn't count. And they go through periodic periods of crap in unexplained and mysterious manners.
Then again, it's free.
Posted by: Jim at Friday, March 26 2004 08:29 AM (saeHM)
6
Been goin' thru the same shit.
Stat Counter kicks butt.
You should try it.
In the last five days (since I had it installed), it has counted 560 hits, compared to Site Meters 246, in the same amount of time.
Another lady I have blogrolled (My b/f is a Twat) has had the same problem. Site Meter dropped 4000 hits off her total.
What is UP with them, anyway?
Posted by: Stevie at Friday, March 26 2004 11:26 PM (BXUKM)
7
Cool. I've put Statcounter on as well. Let's see how it goes!
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Saturday, March 27 2004 03:44 AM (kOqZ6)
8
I seem to have pretty good consistency usin' SiteMeter, but unlike most, I have it way up at the top of my page, so that is is one of the first things to load. Besides, I know that I get like 1700 people a minute readin' me on aggregators anyway, so those numbers are just for show to the hometown folks. ;)
Posted by: notGeorge at Tuesday, March 30 2004 04:05 PM (JCxVY)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Thursday, March 25
Ignorance::Excuse::No
Microsoft claims that it should not be fined at all because it did not know its behaviour would breach EU law.
I weep.
Hang on, no I don't.
Microsoft has been slapped with a 497-million Euro fine (that's US$613m, £331m, AU$810m) by the EU. Now I loathe the EU at least as much as I loathe Microsoft, but Microsoft has a history of blatant abuse of their effective monopoly position and they've had this coming for years.
It won't stop them, of course. No financial remedy that doesn't bankrupt the company will do that. What will stop them is open source software, a triumph of Marxism over Capitalism. Only in a good way.
Because things are different when your incremental cost (Is that the right term? The cost for producing another copy of something?) is effectively zero. Our first taste of post-scarcity economics. It isn't really post-scarcity economics, and in a finite universe you can't have pure post-scarcity economics, but it's close.
(Article on BBC. Yeah, I know, one bunch of weasels reporting on a legal action by a second bunch of weasels against a third bunch of weasels. But what am I to do? It's weasels all the way down.)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
11:53 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 202 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The only good weasel is a dead weasel...
Posted by: Susie at Thursday, March 25 2004 01:45 PM (9PzdO)
2
the EU used article 82 of the EC treaty to hang Microsoft.
Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market insofar as it may affect trade between Member States.
Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:
(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.
my assumption is that section c. is the one they used to hang Microsoft. however, it is very vague don't you think? so i think that a case could be made that Microsoft didn't know they were breaking any rules. i can't find any warnings issued by the EU either. i doubt very seriously that this judgment will stand up in court.
Posted by: Captain Scarlet at Thursday, March 25 2004 04:51 PM (l+gJ0)
3
It is a bit vague, yes. Now
Intel is certainly known for that c sort of thing. But Microsoft has been known to do a, b, c and d when it suits them.
i doubt very seriously that this judgment will stand up in court.
What court?
Can Microsoft appeal this anywhere?
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 09:49 PM (+S1Ft)
4
"It won't stop them, of course. No financial remedy that doesn't bankrupt the company will do that."
And what's wrong with bankrupting those criminals? I had some hope (vain, I guess) that the EU would shut them down, or at least ban them from Europe. $613-million is a drop in the bucket.
Posted by: JRW at Friday, March 26 2004 12:07 AM (0BPZ/)
5
I didn't say that there was anything wrong with bankrupting them. :) Just that anything less in the way of financial remedy wouldn't work. I don't
quite advocate bankrupting them...
I do think Bill Gates should have been hit with jail time for contempt of court for his behaviour during the U.S. antitrust case.
That would have been interesting.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Friday, March 26 2004 12:57 AM (kOqZ6)
6
The one thing that hasn't been tried yet to 'fix' Micro$oft is to revoke thier corporate charter
Posted by: skipjack at Friday, March 26 2004 09:45 AM (9h1sW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Ack! Erk! Eek!
I just looked at my credit card statement.
It seems that when you buy two computers, plus various extra bits and pieces, plus a bunch of anime, and a printer and a couple of office chairs and then some more bits and pieces, that they actually want you to pay for it. Damn!
Now, my latest pay cheque will take care of it all, but still. The nerve of them, expecting me to pay for things I've bought.
On the other hand: I dropped by the CX computer store in Pitt St just now. I can get 50 DVD-Rs for $59, or 25 for $29. Um, guys...
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
12:57 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Why don't you ask CX if they buy their 50 DVD-R for the same price?
Damn credit card companies have a funny way of catching up with you.
Posted by: Simon at Thursday, March 25 2004 02:32 AM (GWTmv)
2
Where on Pitt St. I need some more DVD-R's and $59 sounds OK (but $58 sounds even better)..... I am up near Pitt & Bathurst.
Posted by: Ozguru at Thursday, March 25 2004 10:54 PM (/acvO)
3
Up the other end of town, unfortunately - between Martin Place and Hunter St.
But they have another store on York St behind the QVB.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 10:57 PM (+S1Ft)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Wednesday, March 24
Oh, That's Just Lovely
My mail server just died. The one completely reliable box I've had, kerflooie.
Well, let's reboot. Uh, Kernel panic: Aiee stopping interrupt handler is a bad sign, right?
Let's power off, and... Uh oh.
Try the Fedora rescue mode and... Nope.
Well, let's check the BIOS settings, maybe put it in a safe mode and -
580MB of memory? How can you possibly have 580MB of memory? Let me pull those bad old DIMMs for you.
256MB? Yes? Feeling better now? What's that? You're going to spend the next twenty minutes recovering your journal?
Fine. That's fine. Whatever.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
03:56 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I really didn't understand much of it, but it sounds scary. And complex. Scarily complex.
Posted by: LeeAnn at Wednesday, March 24 2004 05:39 PM (HxCeX)
2
A dead server is a scary thing. I went through that a few months back. Unfortunately, I was not as lucky as you. The powersupply died and must have surged big time, because both hard drives were completely dead. To make matters worse, I never did get my tape drive to work reliably, so the data loss was rather substantial.
Posted by: Rossz at Thursday, March 25 2004 12:34 AM (n5Jbg)
3
Yeah, I remember that. I've never had a power supply go like that. Not yet...
I am slowly burning every file I have onto DVD-R. It's time consuming, but I think it's well worth it.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 01:47 AM (kOqZ6)
4
Ahh, journal recovery ... nearly as much fun as watching paint dry!
Posted by: Rob at Thursday, March 25 2004 06:50 AM (kXZI6)
5
From the time it took, I think it was doing a full fsck - though it didn't say so. The only errors it found were on /tmp, so I'm not too worried.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 07:04 AM (+S1Ft)
6
Is the
Aieee part of the actual error message, or was that reaction on your part?
Posted by: Victor at Thursday, March 25 2004 12:13 PM (L3qPK)
7
No, the Aiee was part of the error message.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 12:28 PM (+S1Ft)
8
As guard against kernel panics, I keep a rubber chicken, a plastic frog, and a picture.
The picture depicts the last server that kernel panicked on me, right after it was kicked down a flight of stairs. All my systems at home behave much better, now.
:P
--Linda
Posted by: Linda at Friday, March 26 2004 02:02 PM (ktJme)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
I'm An Idiot (Again)
I screwed up the secondary DNS for my pixymisa.net domain when I changed ISPs recently. So if you've emailed me recently and it bounced, or I didn't reply, that might be why.
(I just got 15 delayed emails through, but fortunately none of them are from people waiting for a response.)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
12:52 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Susie at Thursday, March 25 2004 02:03 AM (9PzdO)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 02:18 AM (kOqZ6)
3
How many were SPAM?
Last time I stuffed my mail server (on MacOS X) - I sweated day and night trying to recover it (and add virus filtering). Brought it back up, 80 messages came in according to the logs. None in the mailbox. Spent another 4 hours trying to track them down before remembering to check in the virus/spam reject directory.....
All that effort just so I could receive (and discard) virii and spam?
Posted by: Ozguru at Thursday, March 25 2004 11:00 PM (/acvO)
4
2, I think.
pixymisa dot net does not seem to have caught the spammers' attention just yet. pixymisa dot com, on the other hand, is about one-third spam. Dealt with very effectively by SpamAssassin.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, March 25 2004 11:12 PM (+S1Ft)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
72kb generated in CPU 0.0235, elapsed 0.2238 seconds.
57 queries taking 0.2082 seconds, 402 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
