* Trixie, one of the best Greasemonkey-like plug-ins for Internet Explorer
* SIMBL and GreaseKit for Safari
* no additional software for Opera, but you need to enable the feature from Opera’s interface
* Konqueror Userscript for Konqueror
I’ve never seen a seller that insists on credit cards / cheques / etc, but refuses Paypal. To me… this is a huge red flag, despite their 100% happiness rating.
In this particular instance, the seller only accepts credit cards from Canadians, and as I don’t have one (and don’t plan on getting one) I had to ask the seller to cancel the transaction.
Too bad it didn’t work out. Lesson learned – Always filter by “Accepts Paypal”.
Anyone else out there run into this and it turned out well?
[Edit] With a few emails, the guy applied for a mutual cancellation of the whole thing, which was nice as he could have dragged it out and been a jerk about it. From now on I make a point of filtering by Paypal, and usually by BuyItNow. (I hate auctions)
SAN CARLOS – A man who claims to have reduced his waste to nearly nothing out of concern for the environment now faces a lawsuit from San Carlos for cancelling his garbage-collection service.
The lawsuit, filed by San Carlos Deputy City Attorney Linda Noeske in San Mateo Superior Court on Jan. 22, seeks a permanent injunction forcing House to maintain garbage service. City officials are also seeking to recoup from House the costs of the lawsuit.
I think this is a misunderstanding – the city thinks he’s using a different service, which is against their contract with the garbage collection company, while he maintains that he just doesn’t make that much trash.
I, personally, think that in this time and age, unless he lives in a very special area that has farmer’s markets, etc. that it’s impossible to not create trash. A couple on Discovery TV tried it and got it down to minimal, but they couldn’t quite manage it.
The ideal solution to this is to have the cost based on the amount of trash someone creates – and heavy fees for those who create more trash than Pigpen. We only have one world, after all. How? Cameras with passive recording, on which the collectors could make digital marks to point out the large amounts of trash. I’m sure that with today’s technology and facial recognition, they can make trash recognition – trash cans only come in a few different shapes after all.
But companies are lazy, and won’t do it because the income potential could be risky and as we’re all becoming more aware, people would end up paying less over time. Won’t happen, but it should.
On a side note, this is the first and only post I’ve ever had a complaint about “theft” of “paid services”. Most sites like having links and mentionings. So… I’ve cut out the middle man from the content of this post, because I realized I was sending hits to a [enter your favourite insult here].
Clue: ads are blocked more and more, didn’t you notice that? Get out of the 90’s.
I nearly fainted and then turned bright red when I got this email:
I’m assisting Richard M Stallman of the GNU project. He has asked me to find the email address of the author of
Because there was no address posted on the blog itself, I looked on the web and found this address (my email address here) in an Ubuntu forum post. Are you the author of the blog?
If you are not the author, I apologize for taking your time.
Ok, perhaps a bit of background… I know who Richard Stallman is, I read a very interesting ebook about him and I’ve admired him ever since. (it’s odd that I didn’t blog about that, but I must have been busy) The very, very short version? He started the GNU project. That’s huge!
I did a bit of checking, and this looks legit, so it should be interesting to see where this goes!
I replied with the very short:
Hi Michael, yep, I’m the author of that post. What are you looking for?
To which I got a quick reply of:
I was just asked to find your address; I think RMS wants to know more about what happened when your post was deleted. He’ll probably be in touch in the next few days.
I… well, at the risk of sounding like a teenager… I think this is sooo fucking cool!
[Edit] Ok, update time:
This is the email I got from RMS (Richard M. Stallman):
I saw your blog about the censored Yahoo post, and I get the
impression that you appreciate the freedom aspect of free software.
Would you perhaps like to support the free software movement publicly?
Well, as my friends know, I tend to get ticked off at limits, so duh I’m a supporter of free and open source software.
I replied with:
Quite true, what did you have in mind? Most of the people I talk to on a regular basis (both online and locally) have been persuaded to switch to various open source programs; usually Firefox and GNU/Linux.
I’m wondering about the scope / scale of what you have in mind,
The message I got back was an auto-reply (I’ll include it if anyone’s interested), then:
The easiest thing that you could do, that would help us substantially,
is simply to say “free software”. Often our movement is hidden and
forgotten behind the very different idea of “open source”.
for more explanation of the difference.
It’s useful occasionally to add a little text to clarify that it’s
free as in freedom, not gratis. For instance, to say “free
(freedom-respecting) software”, “free/libre software”, etc. You might
do this for the first mention of “free software” in any article or
If you want to help more, you could do things such as join the FSF,
start a GNU/Linux User Group, start a Free Software Activist Group,
organize anti-DRM protests for DefectiveByDesign.org, become a free
software movement speaker, etc.
Up until this point I had read about the free software / open source debate, but didn’t really grasp the difference. I had assumed that they had a huge amount of overlap (they do, right now), and it was a purple / indigo kind of debate.
After reading the linked article, I see the difference, and I’ll more than willingly go on record to state I’m in favour of free (freedom respecting) software.
Here’s the difference: It’s possible to create an open source version of a limiting technology (activex, drm, etc), but it’s against what free (freedom respecting) software is focused on.
The similarities between the two camps are too numerous to list at the moment, but the underlying values are different. Open source is, as RMS says in his article, purely practical. There are no values, no right or wrong, in open source. The focus is to get software that works. Right, wrong or sideways, if it works, anyone can look at the source, contribute to it, etc it’s open source.
Free (freedom respecting) software ventures into the “is this a good idea” or “is this limiting” areas – to some it’s essentially “is this being written for the right reasons”.
I believe in the radical (apparently) idea that each person is responsible for his / her actions, and that putting limits that are illegal to break only stops the people who have good intentions from doing it – and just succeeds in taking away their rights. People who are determined to do what they want, will do it.
This is why DRM on music is very short sighted – it only limits those who don’t have the interest to get around it, which admittedly is a lot of people. It doesn’t stop the official target – people that want to go around DRM will. But then we get into the next question: is DRM really for the people who “steal” music?
I see us being marched towards a Microsoft version of music – you don’t ever get to buy it, you rent it. You “license” it. You get to “rent” a song for each type of media player you want to play it on, which always has a “renewal” date – when you pay again to be able to play the same music as before. You don’t pay? You lose the music.
Am I the only person who sees something wrong with this? (They’re already doing it by the way, it’s just not systematic right now.)
Ok, there seems to be a renewal of interest over my posts regarding a deleted answer from Yahoo! Answers I blogged about over half a year ago.
As far as I can see this whole thing was a domino effect of:
All in all, do I think it’s a systematic bias against open source? No, I don’t see firm proof of this. Do I think it was malevolent / a conspiracy? No.
 But, do I think that Yahoo’s without it’s biases? No, it’s guaranteed to have it’s priorities in some areas that would lend it to being biased. It’s logically impossible to not be biased in some way.
I think it was a culmination of a few people with not enough info and not enough time. It happens.
So why did I blog about this? Like I’ve said before, I wanted to see if this was a one-off or if it was a systematic policy that no one talked about. I also wanted to see if making a small fuss about something I disagree with would make a difference. It did, but not in the ways I was aiming for – I wanted to provoke a change in Yahoo, not be a tipping point for people to boycott Yahoo.
Don’t get me wrong, Yahoo’s got a lot of issues; for example their chat has a nasty habit of kicking people off for no reason or just not working properly. I personally object to the blending of the Yahoo and MSN chat networks, but they’re not my companies, not my choice. I’d just use Pidgin for this “problem”.
Looking back, I think the things that still annoy me are:
So what’s the result? A few people are ticked off at Yahoo, a few people are ticked off at me. People are now discussing whether open source should be censored, people are talking about whether open source is a viable replacement for Windows. I got my little bit of time in the spotlight.
Beyond that, I can’t see the ripples that my pebble caused in the lake of the world, but I flatter myself that the ripples will continue in their own way for a while.
On a tangent: a few people have said I’m too patient, too idealistic and too forgiving. What do you think?
I’m writing this quick note from a computer I’m fixing – the previous owner had various things installed, and one of them was the Google Toolbar.
Now, I’ve always thought of Google in a positive light, but after today… there will always be that thread of frustration tainting the view.
Ok, short version: The computer had Google Toolbar installed, and I tried to uninstall it. It uninstalled fine on the Admin account, but on a different account with near admin privileges it just wouldn’t get lost!
I tried a total of 7 times (uninstall, restart, check to see if it’s there) to get rid of it and it wouldn’t get the f—- off the computer, so I went into the folder on the harddrive that holds the extensions and found the folder that held the Google Toolbar. Hit the delete key and check? Gone…. FINALLY!
Details: I tried to uninstall it from the add-ons area as well as the uninstall option hidden in the toolbar itself. Each time it promised me that it would be gone, and each time I came back it was in my face insisting I set the search engine, etc etc etc.
Extra annoyance factor: it wouldn’t go away by clicking on the close button. Google: sometimes I have better things to do than to answer your stupid questions about which search engine I want and if I want to “help” you with stuff.
These are the OneTonTomato scripts I can see myself using, ymmv.
Please note that some, but not all, are on the wiki so there may be duplicates to my previous post.