Slashdot Mirror

HIPAA? HIPPA has nothing to do with FIPS. way to pull some stuff out your ass there. What's next? OSHA? UL? IBC? CE/EN?

just because you throw a name doesn't mean you have anything to show for it.

Lazy example 1 or how about lazy example 2.

Now shut the fuck up and stop trolling.

That was first couple results on google. No phone is secure. Storing anything company, corporate, etc is not going to be secure on any mobile device. Duh.

Youtube has nothing to do with how legitimate or not cracking is, if the first result for (device name)+(encryption cracking) shows up for every device in every search engine, which it does. If you're relying on youtube, maybe you should try checking out /b/ or any CEH website that shows the pitfalls of modern encryption done to governmental standards. Real encryption is higher grade than government allows.

TFA links to 7 programming languages on the rise, print version.

"I'm going to write this whole thing in Python or Ruby" simply because it's the latest "cool" language.

TFA above has this piece: "There seems to be two sorts of people who love Python [7]: those who hate brackets, and scientists. The former helped create the language by building a version of Perl [8] that is easier to read and not as chock-full of opening and closing brackets as a C descendant."

You should choose the language based on what will best do the job, not based on what's popular today, and you should choose one language for the entire project before you start writing the first line of code.

But what if a project is large and different sections are best written in different languages? With modularity a project can be broken down into different modules then the appropriate language can be used for each module.

Falcon

TFA links to 7 programming languages on the rise, print version.

"I'm going to write this whole thing in Python or Ruby" simply because it's the latest "cool" language.

TFA above has this piece: "There seems to be two sorts of people who love Python [7]: those who hate brackets, and scientists. The former helped create the language by building a version of Perl [8] that is easier to read and not as chock-full of opening and closing brackets as a C descendant."

You should choose the language based on what will best do the job, not based on what's popular today, and you should choose one language for the entire project before you start writing the first line of code.

But what if a project is large and different sections are best written in different languages? With modularity a project can be broken down into different modules then the appropriate language can be used for each module.

Falcon

And now for the printable version with all the tips on one page:

http://infoworld.com/print/145292

Y

/. and any forum will be flooded with Iran war news, cute personal attack distractions and other psyops like tricks.
The tech real gem is http://www.infoworld.com/t/regulation/wikileaks-intel-threatened-move-russian-jobs-india-621
The US gov, a US company and the joy of getting "cryptographically secure hardware into the country". When was the last US gov encryption deal mentioned?

But instead we limit the H1-B quota to 65000 a year, and offer 50000 visas a year through a lottery program.

That's simple to get around. Enroll them in a US university and get them a student visa. A 'graduate' can work in the US for 29 months without a work visa. All you need to do is have a university that 're-certifies' them and issues a diploma. Just one more degree paper mill.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/dhs-extends-time-foreign-students-can-stay-in-us-087

that's the one that actually contain the table your are looking for.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/the-strange-unpredictable-pricing-3g-data-plans-485?page=0,2

The responses in this thread blow me away. You all trust the antivirus option from Microsoft... the people that make the software which gets owned by the most exploits (IE, Outlook, Word, etc.)?

On the browser side actually FireFox and Opera has the most vulnarebilities.

Internet Explorer deemed least vulnerable browser

Report: Firefox is the world's most vulnerable browser

Firefox most vulnerable browser, Safari close second

Has anyone tried Office 365? Is it any good?

I've played around with it, and my impression is that it is indeed "pretty good," but not necessarily any better than Google Docs or an adequate replacement for the way people do things now.

One thing that bothered me that I don't think I was adequately able to articulate in the article is that it just doesn't feel as good to be doing all my work "in the cloud," i.e. over an Internet connection, as doing it the old-fashioned way. Sure, you can save a document directly to your SharePoint site from within Microsoft Word. But there's no kind of feedback that acknowledges "hey, I'm attempting to save this over the Internet, and anything could happen between here and the server, so sit tight and we'll try to make this work." Instead it just acts like it's the same thing as saving to your local drive, or even to a local server, which it's not. So every now and then I'd experience some unexplained delay and I'd find myself going to the SharePoint site and refreshing things in my browser to make sure everything worked right. And because I was using the same software I'd use to do things "the old-fashioned way," I kept asking myself, "Why do I have to do this on the stupid 'cloud'? Why can't I just save this to my drive and then copy my final draft to the server?" (Of course you can, but then using a "cloud solution" starts to have diminishing returns.)

I think the biggest advantage of Office 365, like BPOS before it, is not having to maintain your own Exchange server. SharePoint can be pretty useful too, but it seems to me that the learning curve required to get it into a form that your company can actually use productively is pretty high. And as far as using the Web-based versions of the Office apps, I I don't rate them very highly at all; they certainly aren't much better than Google Docs, unless you really, really need a way to view complex Office documents on the Web (as opposed to using Office).

Has anyone tried Office 365? Is it any good?

I've played around with it, and my impression is that it is indeed "pretty good," but not necessarily any better than Google Docs or an adequate replacement for the way people do things now.

One thing that bothered me that I don't think I was adequately able to articulate in the article is that it just doesn't feel as good to be doing all my work "in the cloud," i.e. over an Internet connection, as doing it the old-fashioned way. Sure, you can save a document directly to your SharePoint site from within Microsoft Word. But there's no kind of feedback that acknowledges "hey, I'm attempting to save this over the Internet, and anything could happen between here and the server, so sit tight and we'll try to make this work." Instead it just acts like it's the same thing as saving to your local drive, or even to a local server, which it's not. So every now and then I'd experience some unexplained delay and I'd find myself going to the SharePoint site and refreshing things in my browser to make sure everything worked right. And because I was using the same software I'd use to do things "the old-fashioned way," I kept asking myself, "Why do I have to do this on the stupid 'cloud'? Why can't I just save this to my drive and then copy my final draft to the server?" (Of course you can, but then using a "cloud solution" starts to have diminishing returns.)

I think the biggest advantage of Office 365, like BPOS before it, is not having to maintain your own Exchange server. SharePoint can be pretty useful too, but it seems to me that the learning curve required to get it into a form that your company can actually use productively is pretty high. And as far as using the Web-based versions of the Office apps, I I don't rate them very highly at all; they certainly aren't much better than Google Docs, unless you really, really need a way to view complex Office documents on the Web (as opposed to using Office).

Notice that the dispute is not between Comcast and Netflix -- it's between Comcast and Level3, which doesn't create content, only owns pipes. Level3 and Comcast have a "peer" agreement; they generate a similar amount of traffic, so they accept each others' traffic for free. That's a typical arrangement. However, this was before Netflix changed CDN from Akamai to Level3. Akamai sends much more traffic to Comcast than it receives, so it pays Comcast for receiving the traffic. That's also a typical arrangement. Now that Neflix will be going over Level3 instead, Comcast is just trying to negotiate the same deal w/ Level3 as with Comcast:

What is more, back in 2005 the shoe was on the other foot. Level3 and Cogent had a settlement-free peering agreement, but Level3 was complaining that too much traffic was coming from Cogent so they should get payed to carry it. After several months of failed negotiations, Level3 unilaterally de-peered Cogent.

The store has DRMed movies, but you can be sure they are trying to get rid of that - just as they did for music when it became clear to the content providers (who demand the DRM) that a DRM-free model would work.

Agree with your entire post except this. He's on record - Jobs said: "Video is pretty different from music right now because the video industry does not distribute 90 percent of their content DRM free. Never has. So I think they are in a pretty different situation, and I wouldn't hold it to a parallel at all."

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/jobs-unlikely-push-lift-video-drm-329

If history is your guide, let's see what history has to say about the launch of the first Android device.

I'm not saying I agree with this, but you certainly should. After all, even TFA doesn't compare WP7 launch numbers to G1 numbers; it compares WP7 launch numbers to six months of G1 numbers, which averages to only 8,000 units a day.

If history is your guide, you should have predicted Android to be a flop, leaving only the iPhone to dominate

You can't release a new phone that lacks device encryption for secure Exchange connections, static IP for WiFi, multitasking, cut and paste, and Flash support in the current market.

Why not, Android is still getting away with it?

You better bring something that no one else has.

Exactly. You can't release a new phone that lacks device encryption for secure Exchange connections, static IP for WiFi, multitasking, cut and paste, and Flash support in the current market. Two or three years ago? Sure. But not now.

http://infoworld.com/print/142761

No "next page" needed.

I know the internet sometimes behaves like a memoryless system (odd, since google caches "everything") but this is a bit absurd.

At stake isn't Java, but Java ME. This was thrashed out days ago. People like Gosling observed that Oracle is "right" in that Google misbehaved, and did it knowingly and over Sun's objections.

One summary is available at: http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/why-oracle-was-right-sue-google-392-1?page=0,1

They got hardware which is what they've wanted for a long time. Sun has a wide range of great hardware and a very solid OS.

While Oracle got an OS, Solaris, Solaris like many other unices is losing marketshare to Linux, which may be why Oracle used Red Hat Linux as a basis for it's own distro.

Falcon

...and the example for Lynx shows it looking at Slashdot

All on one page.

...when there's a print option available!

As a bonus by selecting the print link you avoid much of the other crap and have a full screen paragraph width instead of the tiny one you get on the now linked page... Thinking is allowed, even encouraged.

I reviewed the Web-based versions of Office a while ago for InfoWorld. I was pretty underwhelmed, but browser support wasn't really a problem. Microsoft is officially supporting IE, Firefox, and Safari. In practice, I found Chrome and even Konqueror worked pretty much fine. You get better document rendering and maybe some other goodies if you have Silverlight installed, but it's not necessary.

On the other hand, the functionality you get from Web-based Office is a far cry from what you can do with the desktop versions. The Web-based document viewers are top notch and they render Office docs better than anything else on the market, for any platform (other than Windows Office, obviously). But the editors are completely separate from the viewers and they don't offer much more functionality than Google Docs does.

According to the story on InfoWorld , Ballmer says: "Ray has played a critical role in helping us to assume the leadership position in the cloud, and [he] positioned us well for future success." So I guess that's a vote of confidence for at least some version of cloud computing for Microsoft, and I suspect whatever form it takes it's likely to keep the Windows Azure branding.

I'd like to add some recent history to your timeline and hopefully shed some light on what happened

For months there was absolutely no news from Oracle as to what their plan was for OOo. (fact) They saw what was happening to other Sun projects and forked it. (my opinion)
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2010/09/28/243059/OpenOffice.org-claims-independence-from-Oracle.htm

2 weeks later, Oracle came out and said "Heck no, we love OOo and will continue to develop it"
http://www.infoworld.com/d/applications/oracle-pledges-support-openofficeorg-593

So, there you go. I'd have done the same thing TDF did. I can't sit next to the phone forever

Google collects a license fee from Java ME installs. Android isn't a Java ME implmenetation, obviously, and you can argue that Android is hindering the adoption of Java ME in the next generation smartphone world by absorbing the energies of the huge pool of Java programmers who might want to do mobile development. (You could also argue that Java ME was failing to catch on quite well on its own before Android showed up due to its own limitations.)

If you're interested in the background, here's an article I wrote about it a couple of months ago. (I'm the guy who wrote the article that got slashdotted, for what it's worth.)

Do you really think so?

I wouldn't judge it to be a failure by any means, but clearly the market hasn't wholeheartedly embraced it either.

I'd say that without the forced factory installs, the current 17-18% would be much lower, and that must be a disappointing "voluntary" take-up rate for Microsoft.

When the draft spec for a technology that moves so fast and has so much widespread adoption is still deemed several years off I don't know how anyone can take their recommendations seriously. We're already at a level of fairly good interoperability amongst the core browser engines for the base features we need. If developers and designers took any notice of this then we'd probably all be still building sites with tables.

This is why the WHATWG – the body that originally developed HTML5, and which still develops a version in parallel to the W3C – abandoned the idea of rating the stability of the spec as a whole. The WHATWG spec version (which is edited by the same person as the W3C spec, contains everything the W3C spec does plus more, and has useful JavaScript annotations like a feedback form) is perpetually labeled "Draft Standard", and per-section annotations in the margins tell you the implementation status of each feature.

The W3C Process, on the other hand, requires everything to proceed through the Candidate Recommendation stage, where it gets feature-frozen, and therefore becomes rapidly obsolete. It's quite backwards, but doesn't seem likely to change soon. So for sanity's sake, you can just ignore the W3C and follow the WHATWG instead.

(I really doubt that Philippe Le Hegaret actually said anything like what he was quoted as saying in TFA, though. It doesn't match what I've heard from him or the W3C before – no one seriously thinks authors shouldn't use widely-implemented things like canvas or video with suitable fallback. It sounds more like an anti-HTML5 smear piece. Paul Krill has apparently written other anti-HTML5 articles.)

And that has nothing to do with it.

MS had the Quicklaunch and task bar. Apple took these, merged them, added some polish and got the Dock. I think CDE had a Quicklaunch equivalent first.

In folder displays, MS had document info displays/panes before Apple. Same thing with the location bar. Apple later copied those.

It's small stuff like that, but in some cases, quite useful stuff.

About half of these I remember seeing in some *NIX before Windows, but there's still some good examples.
http://www.infoworld.com/d/windows/top-10-features-apple-stole-windows-966

Here is a Link to the print version of the article (that convenientily fits on 1 page instead of 3).

Providing a great GUI for complex routers or Linux admin is hard. Of course there has to be a CLI, that's how pros get the job done. But a great GUI is one that teaches a new user to eventually graduate to using CLI.

A bad GUI with no CLI is the worst of both worlds, the author of the article got that right. The 80/20 rule applies: 80% of the work is common to everyone, and should be offered with a GUI. And the 20% that is custom to each sysadmin, well use the CLI.
--
dead simple alternative to incorporating for web startups

And one who provides one single page: http://www.infoworld.com/print/137701

And on this very site the exact article you linked to was dismissed as being pro-Microsoft FUD.

You are kidding, right? On this site everything remotely positive to Microsoft is routinely dismissed as pro-Microsoft FUD and paid astroturfing.

Not that it will matter, but here is another report, this time from Secunia: http://blogs.computerworld.com/report_firefox_is_the_worlds_most_vulnerable_browser

and a newer one from Secunia: http://www.infoworld.com/t/browsers/internet-explorer-deemed-least-vulnerable-browser-593

All talk, and no action. It doesn't matter what they said - it was five years ago and nothing has happened so what was the point of bringing that up?

It DOES matter what they say, because if they find it will increase their profits, they most certainly WILL do it. If they SAY it, it is that much more likely that they will DO it.

The point in bringing it up is that it illustrates the controlling mindset that the ISPs have, and that they are ACTIVELY considering how to go about making it happen. I would be MORE worried if they weren't saying it, though, because I *KNOW* they are making plans for it.

And you are saying Network Neutrality would make that happen? In fact it would not since they are blocking all VOIP traffic, so there's yet another REAL problem the regulation doesn't do anything about.

In fact, it most certainly would, since, as an ISP, they would be required not to interfere in legitimate IP traffic, INCLUDING VOIP. Now, if they want to charge YOU more for aggregate packet data usage as a result, that's perfectly fine. What they CAN'T do is charge you more for VOIP traffic, specifically.

Maybe what you see as network neutrality regulation is different from what I see it as, but I most certainly see it stopping these very kinds of abuses.

BTW I can do Skype from a 3G iPad or iPhone just fine, are those rules specific to some service?

Wait, which is it, you just said they are blocking ALL VOIP traffic, but now they aren't?

Here's one article on it; Google for more

Right, but they do not serve you directly. If you cannot control how they go about performing that task they do not serve you. The mandate they have is distinct from who they serve - it's like a mission statement for a company that tells you what the goals are - it's the equivalent of Google's "Don't be evil".

They serve me a HELLUVA lot more directly than AT&T, Comcast, etc ever will. Their mandate is to serve the people, of which I am a concerned constituent that they actually do listen to, even if only in aggregate most of the time. The ISPs mandate is to server their bottom line. It is more than a simple "mission statement" from a company, who has NO incentive to follow it, heh, just like your example -- "Don't be evil" Google. They sure as hell haven't lived up to that motto, now have they?

Besides, how does "Don't be evil" even remotely mention serving "the people"? The fact that government agencies at least TRY to fulfill their missions and mandates (and have SIGNIFICANT incentive to do so) leads me to believe that they have a much better chance of doing a good job of righting the applecart than any corporation ever will.

And it's an excellent example of your dangerous level of naiveté.

Hardly. Your complete refusal to see of the dangers of corporate-only stewardship of the Internet betrays quite a depth of ignorance on your part.

As noted, not in ways Network Neutrality would have stopped. So it doesn't fix the only problem you can find.

We can play this game all day. It most certainly would have stopped it, and it isn't the only problem I have given. Nice try, though. :)

Another problem it doesn't fix. So what's the point of the regulation again?

It most certainly would have fixed it, as that is the POINT of network neutrality. Go back and read the goddamn mandate of the FCC again.. here.. allow me:

"ensure that the American people have available, at reasonable costs and without discrimination, rapid, efficient, Nation- and world-wide communication services; whether by radio, television, wire, satellite, or cable"

What part of "without discrimination" do you not understand? Blocking VOIP over wireless is discrimination of the kind which should not be allowed.

I see little need to respond to anything else you wrote

http://infoworld.com/print/135570 ... You're welcome! :)

"But seriously folks. Bashing McAfee? Are you ignorant to exactly what McAfee is? The largest AV player in the Government/Military sector. They have very large banks as customers too." - by arch (20455) on Thursday August 19, @10:11AM (#33301128)

Aren't those the same large entities that usually (mostly) give jobs to the cheapest bidders typically also (not counting the Bushby/Darth Cheney no bid Haliburton scam that is)? Sure are!

----

"I know it is more fun to joke about their AV performance, which is in fact on par with most AV products." - by arch (20455) on Thursday August 19, @10:11AM (#33301128)

Which generally blows overall for most AV products anyways, & as to some evidence to that which is recent? See here, August 17, 2010 & "hot off the presses" no less (which has been the same general result for oh, years now):

Testing shows most antivirus suites fail against exploits

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/testing-shows-most-antivirus-suites-fail-against-exploits-171

APK

FYI that this is not the original story. The original is at http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/infoworld-review-microsoft-silverlight-4-vs-adobe-flash-101-260

Which one should you choose?

HTML 5. Until that's finalized, I luckily don't require any of the features these two hold as RIAs (like Video). And, if I had the need for video, I would only evaluate these two on their video capabilities and only use it for that component on my content. And since neither of them list Ogg Theora in their codecs on this review and that's what browsers I care about support so far in HTML 5, I'd have to weigh storing videos in multiple codecs ... everyone's really done such a good job of making me just not want to think about video right now as a web developer. I guess I suffer from video anxiety.

Side note: Anyone else find that these *world sites release similar yet different articles daily?

"Childs eventually handed over the passwords to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom" is very different from the claim that he refused to give them to anyone else.

Are you serious? Seriously? What, exactly, do you think the holdup was? Do you think he was waiting on pins and needles for someone to wander by his cell, and Newsom just happened to be the first person he found?

Well, how's this article work for you? (It summarizes Newsom's testimony.) How's this article? It features this passage:

On Monday afternoon, he handed the passwords over to Mayor Newsom, who was "the only person he felt he could trust," according to a declaration filed in court by his attorney, Erin Crane.

Childs isn't a hero. He was a putz who was drunk on power and his own (inflated) sense of self-importance.

Umm, why not make the WP7 actually useful for being used on a phone first? It's cool to have a mobile gaming console in the pocket, but then I would probably buy a PSP and not Windows smartphone ...

He's getting punished for conspiring to and eventually holding the cities network hostage. It was very clear during the trial that he planned to do what he did. It wasn't just one of those days where everything went wrong and he is being made out to be the bad guy.

That's right. If he had been smart he would have just "deleted all company email, caused the email servers to spew out spam, and intentionally crippled at least some servers, rendering them inoperable" like Stephen Barnes did and been out of jail a year ago. Or perhaps he could have "deliberately and painstakingly attempted to sabotage the company he worked for, intentionally writing scripts to destroy valuable data" like Yung-Hsun Lin did and he would be out of jail in three more months.

But he got a much harsher sentence despite having not caused a single minute of outages on the network he was accused of conducting a denial of service attack on. Maybe someone ought to write (or read) an article comparing these widely disparate sentences.

He's getting punished for conspiring to and eventually holding the cities network hostage. It was very clear during the trial that he planned to do what he did. It wasn't just one of those days where everything went wrong and he is being made out to be the bad guy.

That's right. If he had been smart he would have just "deleted all company email, caused the email servers to spew out spam, and intentionally crippled at least some servers, rendering them inoperable" like Stephen Barnes did and been out of jail a year ago. Or perhaps he could have "deliberately and painstakingly attempted to sabotage the company he worked for, intentionally writing scripts to destroy valuable data" like Yung-Hsun Lin did and he would be out of jail in three more months.

But he got a much harsher sentence despite having not caused a single minute of outages on the network he was accused of conducting a denial of service attack on. Maybe someone ought to write (or read) an article comparing these widely disparate sentences.

"Printable version". TFS's link is to a two page version with six paragraphs per page.

Worse offenders -- even murderers -- get less jail time than Childs
Consider then, the case of Steven Barnes, the former IT manager for Blue Falcon Networks in San Mateo, Calif. Barnes was convicted of sabotaging Blue Falcon's IT infrastructure in 2008 [4], receiving a sentence of one year and one day in prison and $54,000 in restitution to the company. While Childs' actions caused no disruptions, Barnes deleted all company email, caused the email servers to spew out spam, and intentionally crippled at least some servers, rendering them inoperable. He received a much lighter sentence than Childs -- and in the same court district.

It's a little confusing, but "the current user of the name" isn't quite right. There is this guy about whom we're talking here, who goes by the name Cringely, and even though that's not his real name you know who he is and recognize him as Cringely, so that might as well be his real name for most intents and purposes. And then there is "the current user of the name," who writes an insider gossip column for InfoWorld under an assumed name, just as the other Cringely used to do. These two Cringelys are not the same person. It's an old story and it involves a lawsuit.

But there's no indication that he's a thief or a scumbag.

This is actually not quite true. Check out Terry Childs juror explains why he voted to convict:

IDG News: Going back, what was the one step he could have done to avoid prison?
Chilton: If he would have simply said, "I will create you an account and you can go in and you can remove my access if you want." If he had created access for someone else, I think that would have resolved it. If he had not decided to leave and go to Nevada a few days later and withdraw US$10,000 in cash, [Childs did this the day before his arrest, while under police surveillance] I think the police may have let it continue on as an employment issue and not a criminal matter.

As some have already suggested, the languages you know are still in use today. Just remember the news about California's COBOL-system http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/californias-cobol-conundrum-067

As to learning languages, I would go about it as I go about learning any new language. I read the first few pages of some manual for it (which you really can just read if it's not your first language), and then start some kind of project.
Also, try to read code by renowned programmers, as they oven write great code and you can pick up one or two things from them.

Vocational schools would only produce people with skills industry cannot use. Until the US has an effective industrial base again, those vocational schools will only be creating trained, debt laden students -- just like the university students.

Well according to this Wikipedia source toshiba have already developed a prototype laptop battery although they siad it will be along time before it becomes available if ever.

After reading this article i guess 90.000 people will cry out in pain once they get to know their phone. Its far beyond repair unless Microsofts postpone the launch by years.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/windows-phone-7-dont-bother-disaster-211?page=0,0

From http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/windows-phone-7-dont-bother-disaster-211?

From http://www.zdnet.com/blog/cell-phones/microsoft-windows-phone-7-technical-preview-a-definitive-guide/4286?pg=8&tag=mantle_skin;content

Gosh, I wonder who would win in a "which is the most stupid waste of bandwidth for a supposed technology journalism site" smack-down; ZDnet or InfoWorld? We may never know.

http://www.infoworld.com/author-bios/galen-gruman?page=1

Not exactly an unbiased source. Apple fanboy all the way.

From http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/windows-phone-7-dont-bother-disaster-211?page=0,0

There's no kind way to say it: Windows Phone 7 will be a failure. Announced to much bravado in February as the platform that would breathe life into Microsoft's mobile ambitions, Windows Phone 7 looked based on very early previews as if it might bring something new and exciting to the table. Back then, I noted that I was impressed by what I saw -- with the caveat "so far."

No caveats now: Windows Phone 7 is a waste of time and money. It's a platform that no carrier, device maker, developer, or user should bother with. Microsoft should kill it before it ships and admit that it's out of the mobile game for good. It is supposed to ship around Christmas 2010, but anyone who gets one will prefer a lump of coal. I really mean that.