Slashdot Mirror

There is a solution to the exclamation:

http://grandstreamdreams.blogspot.com/2008/04/taming-avg-free-version-8.html

In short, run "avg_free_stf_*.exe /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSurf /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSearch" from a cmd box or the run box.

Sort of a ridiculous contortion to get to an option that should be more available, but it works.

So, WhyTF do they need usernames and IP's?

Well, ReadingTFA, I see:

The judge also turned Google's own defense of its data retention policies -- that IP addresses of computers aren't personally revealing in and of themselves, against it to justify the log dump.

So it appears Google just got served a nice big shovel load of their own bullshit.

They're arguing that YouTube gets more viewership from copyrighted materials than non-copyrighted stuff, and they want the viewer logs to prove that. Then they'll go after Google and others for more money because they're profiting more from it.

This argument doesn't justify the complete itemization of every viewer ID and IP address for every video on YouTube. The only reason that Viacom wants that information is to go on a fishing expedition to see who else they might sue.

Why didn't Google offer to provide the individual viewing records with the IP addresses and usernames removed? Wouldn't that still address the issue of the relative viewership of different types of materials while protecting the privacy of the millions of people around the world who have watched a video on YouTube?

Reading the decision tells me the judge is much more sympathetic to business concerns than to individual privacy matters. He often seems more concerned with protecting Google's trade secrets than he does with protecting the identities of the YouTube audience.

Notice that Google put themselves in this position, too. Judge Stanton uses this comment from a Google engineer as part of his argument for why privacy concerns are "speculative:"

(Decision, p. 14)
Google has elsewhere stated:

We . . . are strong supporters of the idea that data protection laws should apply to any data that could identify you. The reality is though that in most cases, an IP address without additional information cannot.

Google Software Engineer Alma Whitten, " Are IP addresses personal? [GOOGLE PUBLIC POLICY BLOG (Feb. 22, 2008]]

Now Google has a clear corporate interest in maintaining the notion that IP addresses are not personally revealing. Interestingly so do most filesharers and their attorneys. Of course, as a technical matter, IP addresses are not personally identifiable, but taken together with usernames they can provide an enormous amount of circumstantial evidence.

Suppose, for instance, I find a user named ILikeJonStewart who appears repeatedly over the course of many months watching a YouTube upload of The Daily Show. The connections come from a number of different IP addresses, but lets suppose 80% come from the IP ranges assigned to Comcast. If Viacom can legally compel Comcast to reveal the physical addresses associated with these IP addresses, aren't we pretty far down the road to finding specific households?

I realize there are many technical reasons why IP addresses alone are insufficient from a legal perspecitive. However I do think that Slashdotters overemphasize this argument for political reasons and often fail to consider just how revealing IP addresses are for the millions of Internet users who live in the same home with the same ISP for years.

However I don't think Viacom's goal is prosecuting thousands of individual suits against people who once watched Rugrats on YouTube. (Whether they choose to bring suit against the uploaders, for whom Google has already agreed to provide complete records, might be a different matter.)

I'll suggest a different future target for Viacom — Starbucks and other companies that offer Internet access in their establishments. Suppose that it turns out that millions of viewings of Viacom's works came from IP addresses used by Starbucks. Does that make Starbucks a "contributory infringer" because it profits from the infringement of Viacom's properties? Does your viewing of The Daily Show on your laptop in a Starbucks constitute a "public performance" of the work? Showing a copyrighted work in a public location like a Starbucks usually requires special licensing (think jukeboxes or sports bars).

If Viacom's first target was Google, what kinds of entities do you think Viacom would sue next? Individual infringers or other large entities?

I read the article and then read the actual ruling. Here it is:

But defendants cite no authority barring them from disclosing such information in civil discovery proceedings, and their privacy concerns are speculative. Defendants do not refute that the "login ID is an anonymous pseudonym that users create for themselves when they sign up with YouTube" which without more "cannot identify specific individuals" (Pls.' Reply 44), and Google has elsewhere stated: "We . . . are strong supporters of the idea that data protection laws should apply to any data that could identify you. The reality is though that in most cases, an IP address without additional information cannot." Google Software Engineer Alma Whitten, Are IP addressespersonal?, GOOGLE PUBLIC POLICY BLOG (Feb. 22, 2008), http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2008/02/are-ip-addresses-personal.html (Wilkens Decl. Ex. M).

Therefore, the motion to compel production of all data from the Logging database concerning each time a YouTube video has been viewed on the YouTube website or through embedding on a third-party website is granted.

It sounds to me like the judge is essentially saying that Google/YouTube didn't adequately demonstrate that privacy is being violated for such an order. Actually, from what I read I was fairly impressed with what the judge had to say and the rulings on some of the other issues involved (Viacom didn't get nearly as much as they were hoping for- source code), but it sounds like Google/YouTube did not do a very good job of demonstrating the privacy concerns.

Am I the only one that finds it ironic that we insist that an IP address is not sufficient for the RIAA but now we're terrified about YouTube giving out IP addresses? I guess the concern is that since the prevailing notion seems to be in the court that an IP address is a valid tool, that such will carry over to Google/YouTube as well.

In any case, I recommend you read the ruling for yourself.

Google's Blog claims that they started taking steps to anonymize their logs a year ago, keeping "only" 18 months worth of identifiable data, to be implemented "within a year's time".

It seems likely that this wouldn't have been soon enough for any of this material to have been anonymized before Viacom's suit, since it was filed the same month they made this announcement.

Did you seriously think this hadn't already been done?

The "founding fathers" were not for "small government"

"Jefferson attempted to eliminate the national debt because of his wish for small government. He also decreased the size of the military" ""While smaller governments are better adapted to the ordinary objects of society, larger confederations more effectually secure independence and the preservation of republican government." --Thomas Jefferson to the Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262. "Compare Alexander Hamilton's views of national government with those of Thomas Jefferson.?" "A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson. Also on that page a quote from James Madison, "The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." Now notice I did not say all of the Founding Fathers wanted small government, Alexander Hamilton was one of them that wanted a strong and powerful federal government.

those we traditionally call the founding fathers were almost all Federalists

Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison repudiated the Federalists positions. Thomas Paine wrote many books and essays in support of small government, his "Common Sense", yes I have and read it along with other writings of his, was a cry for small government.

The idea that the Federalists were for "small government" shows a laughable ignorance of the early history of the Republic

Can you show me where I said the Federalists were for small government, or where I said all of the Founding Fathers were federalists? Perhaps you don't know your history, or are you blowing smoke out of your ass?

Falcon

Oh, and while Thomas Paine wasn't a Founding Father like Hamilton, Jefferson, and Washington he wrote the line "These are the times that try men's souls" in "The Crisis" while serving under General Washington's command. It served to help keep the Continental Army from disintegrating.

I'm skeptical.

HIV is known to evolve affinity for new binding sites: http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-just-so-story-turns-into-just-so.html

Can it evolve around this change? I don't know, but it's very probable.

3D integration schemes, which IBM and Intel are both pursuing, help deal with this problem. As you noted, you can't put enough pins on a chip with traditional packaging to achieve a sufficient memory bandwidth. But with 3D integration, the memory chips are connected directly to the CPUs with "through-chip vias". You can have tens of thousands of these vias, and as a bonus, the distance to the memory is extremely short, so latency is reduced.

- Trevor -
[[self-construction]]: The autotherapeutic diary of a crazy geek's journey back to mental health

Compiler performance is important for development teams that have mountains of code and wish to implement continuous integration and automated builds (OS vendors for example). Apple's interest in LLVM appears to be based in part on a desire for improved compiler performance. (Obviously they're interested in LLVM for several other reasons, too.) See these starting points:
experimenting with LLVM
LLVM 2.0 (Google Tech Talk)
LLVM Project

Inelastic demand?

Not so much.

Peak oil a current reality? Perhaps, but you should look elsewhere for an explanation on why prices are sky high.

Sounds like you work for Verizon

$30.00/26000 = $0.00115 (that is 0.15 cents), not $0.15

http://wirelesscontractsinfo.blogspot.com/2008/02/cancel-your-wireless-contract-without.html
From Sprint Nextel contract:
We will provide you notice of material changes, and may provide you notice of non-material changes, in a manner consistent with this Agreement (see "Providing Notice To Each Other Under The Agreement" section). If a change we make to the Agreement is material and has a material adverse effect on Services under your Term Commitment, you may terminate each line of Service materially affected without incurring an Early Termination Fee only if you: (a) call us within 30 days after the effective date of the change; and (b) specifically advise us that you wish to cancel Services because of a material change to the Agreement that we have made. If you do not cancel Service within 30 days of the change, an Early Termination Fee will apply if you terminate Services before the end of any applicable Term Commitment.

So now that you know you are gaining important new rights that you didn't have before they raised the text message rates you can take advantage of that. You don't have to stop using the service, you can probably just cancel the agreement, though they may deny that. If they do just hang up and call back, it costs cellular carriers over $400 to acquire a customer, they don't want to lose you even month to month though they may deny that. So you're now month to month and can threaten to leave unless they give you another free phone. Heh.
FWIW I have done this. There was much gnashing of teeth at the cell carrier. Uh-oh. A customer who has actually read the contract!

I was recently reading about the whole George Vaccaro fiasco and did some calculations on how much the cost of transfer is over a T1 line vs. what companies like Verizon charge for data transfer. Its astonishing that people put up with this:

• Cost of a T1 line: $600 (Verizon's cost would be less and they probably have higher capacity lines in many places.)
  
• Monthly bandwidth capacity of a T1: 40,687,488,000 Kilobytes (86,400 sec. * 30.41 avg days * 197 KB/sec)
  
• Cost per KB over a T1 line: 60,000 cents / 40,687,488,000 KB = 0.0001159190 cents per KB = $0.000001159190 (for all those Verizon reps out there)
  
• Verizon's charge per KB to the customer: $0.02
  
• Verizon's markup on data transfer: x 17,253!!!!!
  
• Screwing generation Y & Z: Priceless
  

Why do people put up with this? Some people might say I'm comparing apples to oranges, but Apples dont' cost 17,000 times more than oranges. There should be a class action suit over this.

Why? The cost to produce a product has no bearing on price; it only determines wether or not a product will be produced based on teh demand - driven price.

The carriers should set prices to maximize their profits; which they try to do through offering teired and fixed rate plans. Given the marginal cost of extra traffic is virtually nil, the higher rates plans and flat rate bundles are probably mostly profit; by offering low usage plans you get the people who wouldn't own a cell phone if the paid $99/month while the all - in $99 captures people who are willing to pay alittle more than the highest capped plan per month to eliminate the chane they will go over their plan usage and get hit with a large bill every now and then.

Profit maximization, as long as their isn't collusion, is not illegal.

I was recently reading about the whole George Vaccaro fiasco and did some calculations on how much the cost of transfer is over a T1 line vs. what companies like Verizon charge for data transfer. Its astonishing that people put up with this:

• Cost of a T1 line: $600 (Verizon's cost would be less and they probably have higher capacity lines in many places.)
  
• Monthly bandwidth capacity of a T1: 40,687,488,000 Kilobytes (86,400 sec. * 30.41 avg days * 197 KB/sec)
  
• Cost per KB over a T1 line: 60,000 cents / 40,687,488,000 KB = 0.0001159190 cents per KB = $0.000001159190 (for all those Verizon reps out there)
  
• Verizon's charge per KB to the customer: $0.02
  
• Verizon's markup on data transfer: x 17,253!!!!!
  
• Screwing generation Y & Z: Priceless
  

Why do people put up with this? Some people might say I'm comparing apples to oranges, but Apples dont' cost 17,000 times more than oranges. There should be a class action suit over this.

To Amazon's credit, there seem to be some folks there who understand the limitations and are working to fix them. If they can handle the DRM issue and make some major tech changes I'd love to see this.

First, I agree that many textbooks are outrageously expensive. But is their expense really "inspiring" (i.e. justifying) p2p downloading? Or is it just that textbooks are now widely available in downloadable form? My guess is that the rate of piracy would not significantly diminish even if the price was reduced by 50% or even 75%. See, for example, the many computer-related ebooks you can find on the torrent sites. Most of those books have a fairly reasonable retail price but they are subject to widespread piracy.

Has there been any study of P2P networks that shows an increasing rate of piracy a given piece of media vs its price? (Comparisons would be difficult because popularity also plays a role).

- Trevor -
[[self-construction]]: The autotherapeutic diary of a crazy geek's journey back to mental health

So, here is a counter list:

http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/2007/04/some-thoughts-on-copyright-offensive.html

How about them apples?

all the best,

drew

For a start, "crawlable" does not mean it WILL be crawled.

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/06/improved-flash-indexing.html

More: Note that Mr. Solyanik's profile has a link to MSFT needs an extreme makeover.

Quote:

"It's sobering to realize that during Ballmer's term as CEO, MSFT has underperformed almost all of its top tech peers (including AAPL, IBM, HPQ, SAP, INTC, CSCO, SYMC, NOK, ORCL, ADBE, RIMM, QCOM, Ebay, and AMZN), and badly lagged the major averages. We may even see our third plunge to test the 2000 lows during his watch. Unbelievable. There may be another major technology CEO with an equivalent or worse track record who is still in power, but a name doesn't come readily to mind."

In my opinion, Microsoft depends for much of its profit on adversarial behavior.

the land used for solar generation can be and is placed in non-inhabited

Tell that to theGila Monsters who won't see the sun any more!

Oil leaks and tanker spills could leave billions of acres of prime ecological land destroyed in an instant.

Billions of acres is a bit of an overstatement. The largest on-land oil spill in Alaska covered 2 acres. Crude oil cools down pretty quickly and doesn't get far when it is cold outside. The tankers at the end of the pipeline are going to be there to transit North Slope oil anyway.

I can't write code for the sake of the technology alone - I need to know that the code is useful for others, and the only way to measure the usefulness is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work.

Sorry open source fanatics, your world is not for me!

It's so ironic... open source programmers work KNOWING that their code will be useful for others. And yet he goes because he wants to see how much money he earns from code.

I can't write code for the sake of the technology alone - I need to know that the code is useful for me, and the only way to measure the usefulness for me is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work.

There, fixed.

P.S. Has anyone noticed the Irony that his blog is owned by Google?
P.P.S. Read the blog people, the guy's being hammered by his readers :)
P.P.P.S. I tagged the article "troll".

Microsofts file format documentation is incomplete and no better than what we already knew from reverse engineering (Eg. codified in OOo-KOffice-Abiword etc.)

It might have been software state corruption unrelated to the file format, and so this might not help (I'm not asserting it does help either way).

If this is anything like their previous documentation it will be full of errors and omissions. Wait until this has been reviewed by engineers who reverse engineer their formats and then you'll know if this is more useful than (for example) the KOffice source code, or OpenOffice.org, Abiword, Gnumeric, etc.

A loooong time ago--we are talking early 90's here--I had a PC that came with a buckling spring keyboards. At the time I didn't think much of it because they were still fairly common. I had seen the membrane style keyboards that were becoming increasingly popular (or at least widespread) and didn't like their feel.

Then I went off to college and got shoved into a 120 sq. ft. dorm room that I had to share with a somewhat temperamental roommate.

I thought my roommate and I were getting along pretty well until I happened to spy a note he was writing to a friend about me... He basically said I was driving him crazy because I "typed like there was no tomorrow, i.e. loudly". I never considered myself a loud typist (and compared to other buckling spring keyboards I was pretty quiet) but my roommate was apparently unfamiliar with mechanical keyboards and thus assumed I was blasting away on a regular one! I can't say that our relationship improved very much after I bought a new keyboard, but I quickly learned that buckling spring keyboards are to be enjoyed in private :)

- Trevor -
[[self-construction]]: The autotherapeutic diary of a crazy geek's journey back to mental health

I am really tired of hearing from a guy who's main means of making a living is talking (and for which he makes a good living), telling me to work for free. I don't listen to the Tony Robinsons either... blah blah blah, try working instead of jawing for a living before you tell me I shouldn't be able to make money off what I produce. Talk is cheap.

He makes a good living telling people to give away their work so we can't pay our rent. In fact, I would bet he really doesn't have to work another day in his life. He is another version of Tony Robinson motivational speaker. Yes, Stallman wrote some programs before, but I doubt if there is anything really new he has done lately and he doesn't even make his main living from that anyway. He forgets that there are people who do make their main living from software development. I get paid for what I do because most other people cannot or won't do software development on their own. The majority of people can't or won't program computer applications. Why should I give away my work so that others who are too lazy or not intelligent enough to do it themselves, or are working on things that I can buy from them, can take it and take away my ability to eat. I understand the paradigm of selling support for the application you develop and give away for free. But that only works for large apps that are far too complex for even a small group of people to branch and modify. Many web sites and web apps are not so complex, aside from a few like Joomla. If everyone and their dog has your code for building a web site, your market share is killed and you are not going to be able to sell enough support... i.e. you are not going to be able to make a living.

I don't mind sharing tips and help people on forums if they show they are really stumped and not asking for a free ride. And I think that open source is pretty good in some respects but admire the BSD and Apache licenses far more than the GPL. To my mind they are really open source: 'Here is my code, do ANYTHING you want with it... use it, modify it, give it away, sell it, include your modifications, give away your modifications, hide your modifications, give away parts of your code, whatever you want... it is an open license.'

Just to add a bit of information to this post. I believe the RAID mode this poster is talking about is indeed RAID 10 and not RAID 1+0 or 0+1 -- stripped mirrors or mirrored stripes. This new RAID mode is supported by the linux md driver.

Linux MD RAID 10 driver page.

This RAID mode does not require an even number of discs. My understanding is that writes are much faster with RAID 10 than RAID 5 because parity checks are not necessary. However, this RAID10 mode gives you only half of your total RAID size, and RAID 5 gives you your total RAID size minus one drive in capacity.

Some useful, more detailed (and likely more accurate) information

Some performance comparison results to RAID 5. It would appear that the read performance is close to RAID 0, and the write performance is close to RAID 0 divided by two -- because every write has to be done twice. Furthermore, RAID10 can be more robust for drive failure.

Citysense
"CitySense is attempting to use real time location data from those who download its client software as well as GPS enabled cabs and other "sensors." The goal is a near real time thematic map of activity in the city."

Eg. go and download this application and we'll mash it up with some other data to tell you where people are.

Cool concept but the issue of "data access" is the real killer here. Getting access to "where handsets are" is the real problem....and carriers are stuck in the mud about sharing.

I've seen some really great web services but these all rely in some form of another from opt-in services which suffer from "inertia issues".

There have been some traffic related cell phone projects like http://www.physorg.com/news76178303.html and http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/audio/articles/123531/article.html

but none of these 'subsidised the end user'. So i think there needs to be a new solution the same way there is for Virgin SugarMama Minutes - so the proposal is this, allow your cell phone to be 'tracked' and data from this to be sold to anonymized data services like Citysense in return for a 10% reduction in your cell phone costs.

BUT the carriers cant sell your location data without you signing up for this program. I know that for $10-15 a month discount I dont care if you use my location data, but if you are selling it and I dont get anything from it then I'm pissed.

Just look at what happened with BT and Phorm, they could have got that adopted in like 1 month if they paid people for their data, lol wouldn't have cost more than a few glass beads like wallpapers or mp3 downloads etc. They just chose to take the easy route.

Lol I love this comment

http://www.citysense.com/moreInfo.php
"The company plans to profit primarily from business clients purchasing deeper data from the Macrosense platform; Citysense and all future consumer applications are intended to be strictly icing on the cake".

In other words we got some vc funding and we are going to work out later how to make money.

Cheers,
Dean

P.S. If location apps "float your boat" then you might also like to check out Cityware a bluetooth application I blogged about last year.
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/cityware-facebook-bluetooth-application.html

I agree. Microsoft's customers are typically big business which would have no hesitation in engaging Microsoft in expensive and protracted litigation were the Redmond company to abandon them with a backwards compatibility breaking OS the way that Apple did with OS X. I have blogged on this further.

On FreeBSD - http://www.taosecurity.com/bond.txt

#!/bin/sh
# I believe I originally heard of this here:
# http://seclists.org/lists/focus-ids/2003/Oct/0028.html
kldload ng_ether
ifconfig fxp1 promisc -arp up
ifconfig fxp2 promisc -arp up

ngctl mkpeer . eiface hook ether
ngctl mkpeer ngeth0: one2many lower one
ngctl connect fxp1: ngeth0:lower lower many0
ngctl connect fxp2: ngeth0:lower lower many1

ifconfig ngeth0 -arp up

OpenBSD has it also

http://geek00l.blogspot.com/2005/12/bond-interface-for-openbsd.html

The Ares V is certainly cool from a "bigger, shinier" perspective, but not so good from the perspective of wanting to reduce our immense launch costs to something even marginally more manageable. A big part of the (somewhat shoddy) reasoning for going with a shuttle-derived system was that it would be able to make use of currently-existing facilities and infrastructure. It's now looking like the Ares V is getting to be too large to use those facilities, so NASA will have to revamp its facilities, raising the cost even more.

In general, it was pretty peculiar of NASA to not devise a launch system which would take advantage of what we've learned (the hard way) from the ISS and use in-orbit assembly, which would've allowed NASA to use the already-existing launchers available from the private sector. Instead, NASA decided to compete against the private sector and create a new family of Ares boosters, basically from scratch.

Here's some interesting commentary from a couple of knowledgeable folks within the aerospace industry:

http://chairforceengineer.blogspot.com/2008/06/directly-seeing-light.html

In a recent post, I discussed the weight issues associated with Ares V (probably to be renamed Ares VI if the extra RS-68 engine is slipped in.) The rocket is growing to address performance shortfalls, but it has become too heavy for the existing crawlers, too heavy for the existing launch pad, and too heavy for the hard stand on which the mobile launcher sits. I suggested that NASA should have initially determined weight and size limits on their rocket, based on the existing infrastructure, and limited the weight and size of Ares V to fit within those requirements. If that rocket were insufficient to meet the lift requirements for Project Constellation, use two heavy-lifters instead of one heavy-lifter and one crew launcher.

http://www.transterrestrial.com/archives/2008/03/out_takes.html

As noted, the vehicle has come a long way from the originally advertised "Shuttle-derived" system that was supposed to save us so much money and time, and utilize the existing Shuttle infrastructure (though the latter was always a politically-induced pork-driven bug, not a feature, if one wanted to actually lower launch costs). It (like Ares I) is now essentially a new vehicle, including components, though if Ares I ever comes to fruition, Ares V will probably be at least in part derived from it. ...

So, they're going to launch the Orion, with crew, on an Ares I, and hope that they can get a successful Ares V mission off within four days, because they can't afford the duration. They build this mondo grosso launch vehicle to avoid having to do multiple launches, and yet, they not only have dual launch, but it's one on a tight window. And if they can't get the launch off on time, the lunar mission is scrubbed, and the crew comes back home from LEO, having wasted the cost of an Ares I launch (and an Orion, if they end up not making it reusable).

This is an affordable, resilient, sustainable infrastructure?

http://www.transterrestrial.com/archives/2008/06/thoughts_on_the.html

The rationale for the heavy lifter has always been to avoid the complication of orbital assembly (apparently, the false lesson learned from our success with assembling ISS is that we should throw away all that experience, and take an entirely different approach for VSE). But it's already a "launch and half" mission, needing both Ares 1 and Ares 56, so they're not even avoiding it--they're only minimizing it. And even if the lunar mission doesn't outgrow the Ares 6, it won't be able to do a Mars mission in a single launch. So if we need to learn to do orbital assembly (and long-term

Baldric: Sir Bedevere, there is a flaw in the regular expression used to match 11b/g days. "Saturday" will match early, just "A Minute Past" the end of Friday, when we decide which standard is more standard for the day.
Sir Bedevere: Can we use XML?
Baldric: I have a cunning plan. We will use UTF-8, and have our system include SÃturday, instead of Saturday, so that there won't be any ASCII 97 characters except in the penultimate position.
Sir Bedevere: Recall, Baldric, that I hired you away from Edmund Blackadder not to solve problems, but to maintain them. Your fix can go in, but you have to make sure that it ripples through the system and triggers at least twice as many problems, or we won't consume all our FTE.

The 1GB card limit is not for long - there is a Palm SDHC driver project by a PalmOS genius: Dmitry Grinberg, which supports TX T5 and LifeDrive. He said T3 is next. the project blog is at http://palmsdhc.blogspot.com/

But that's got to be supported by the provider. In the case of multiple T1s, that's common. Pretty unlikely from consumer cable and DSL connections though.

Most people have best effort services. If you want an SLA, you should get a T1.

Of course, that might be a little slow for this guy's needs.

http://wheelgun.blogspot.com/2007/01/crime-in-uk-versus-crime-in-us.html
Explanation of how the Home Office and BCS sweep an extraordinary amount of crime under the statistics rug.

It is true that there were some predictions of an "imminent ice age" in the 1970s, but a cursory comparison of those warnings and today's reveals a huge difference.

Today, you have a widespread scientific consensus, supported by national academies and all the major scientific institutions, solidly behind the warning that the temperature is rising, anthropogenic CO2 is the primary cause, and it will worsen unless we reduce emissions.

In the 1970s, there was a book in the popular press, a few articles in popular magazines, and a small amount of scientific speculation based on the recently discovered glacial cycles and the recent slight cooling trend from air pollution blocking the sunlight. There were no daily headlines. There was no avalanche of scientific articles. There were no United Nations treaties or commissions. No G8 summits on the dangers and possible solutions. No institutional pronouncements. You could find broader "consensus" on a coming alien invasion.

Quite simply, there is no comparison.

If you want some additional detail, Real Climate has discussed this, and William Connelly has made a hobby of gathering everything that was written about global cooling at the time.

(From: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/23/18534/222)

For those who distrust published science because of "conflicts of interest", if you'd like to analyze historic data yourself, it's not very difficult.

Considering many places are having record ice GROWTH
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/10/antarctica-ice-cap-growth-reaches.html

I agree, Tomato is a great firmware. Two important tips: 1) Do NOT set any of the "Prioritize small packets with these control flags" boxes. If a high/full speed torrent runs it will have a lot of those packets and it will kill any potential benefit of the QOS. 2) After trying Tomato, if you want to get even more speed out of your router try the speedmod: http://touristinparadise.blogspot.com/2008/04/linksys-wrt54gl-routers-improving.html More details there. PS: DD-WRT works fine too but the GUI of Tomato is so slick and user friendly that I don't want to miss it anymore.

Is Java faster? Yes. But the first dynamic language (AFAICT) in this benchmark is only 18% slower (SBCL). Not exactly compelling evidence that all those obsessive-compulsive type annotations buy you much

And if Lisps make your eyes glaze over, Python (+ Psycho) is only 3.4 times slower than the fastest Java in that benchmark. Hardly an order of magnitude.

And dynamic languages can get much faster.

in the 20th century. Gun enthusiasts are assholes? How so?

...and languages like SML or Haskell have this rigour within their type systems. Supposedly Scala (which uses the JVM) also has a rigorous type system but there's a language complexity price. Folks programming in Java can get around those problems by using "Good Engineering Principles" (see the "Static Typing's Paper Tigers" section) and if the Java folks don't need to go the whole hog on their type system...

Given that XP is at the end of life, I think Wine has an important role in keeping legacy software alive. One such app is Macromedia Freehand. This vector drawing program still has a dedicated following, even though it hasn't seen an update since Adobe bought Macromedia in 2005.

As far as I can tell there is no way to open Freehand documents in Linux. XP will not be available for much longer, and Freehand MX is not Vista compatible. There are a lot of graphic artists with a lot of data still in Freehand format, and they're going to need to access their art on modern operating systems.

Freehand almost works on Wine 1.0. It requires a dll download to run, then it works pretty well, except that the 'more fonts' menu doesn't work. It's 99% there. So my question is, is there going to be a push to get important legacy apps like Freehand 100% perfect? Or is the focus going to continue to be modern windows apps?

in user friendliness. You have someone at the top who has actual power to make sofware more userfriendly. In Linux if you have suggest some usability ideas, the author has the right to tell you screw you. this is my software and you don't pay me. check out http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/

You looking for something like this?

Oh come now, there's more to it than that!

(Yikes.)

Wow, I'm not sure if you did it intentially, but you linked to the C++ FQA, *not* the C++ FAQ. I'll assume from context that's what you meant, and just labeled it wrong.

In any case, both are very useful reads:

http://codemines.blogspot.com/2007/10/no-updates-for-6-months-then-two-in-day.html
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/index.html

If people were "fine" with it, why would the admin. be trying to keep their violations of NSLs secret? And be trying to grant retroactive immunity to the Telecoms?

going through the google blog search for "limitnone" i found this blog post. http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2007/11/past-present-and-future-of-email-with.html gMOVE or "MY GRATE" (horrible name) is just an implementation of the Google Email Migration API. Hence it's open for anyone to develop their own migration tools. I really doubt that the Plaintiff's complaint that Google could NOT implement their own perhaps superior product without the knowhow of limitnone's product is legitimate. As the poster tgd states it's really a "non-obvious" idea *wink wink. It sounds like a case of quasi-developers who are trying to squeeze out all the money it can from a middling products if you can call it that.