Ok, I think I must've misunderstood your third point. I thought you were saying that for the whole time the ads were forced, AOL had full knowledge of the harm to consumers that was caused by charging for the time AOL was sending them ads... and AOL was purposely doing it. I don't believe that AOL purposely plotted to get two sources of income (one from the user, one from the advertiser) by showing ads to users paying per minute but at some point they did realize how it can be quite objectionable.
BTW I'm hardly libertarian but simply have an understanding of what a profit-oriented company like AOL should do if they are solely after money but still following the law. So my point about free choice is that if AOL is the only ISP in a small town, then there simply isn't enough demand for another ISP to make money there. If AOL is operating at a loss in those regions, from a purely economics point of view, they should simply leave. If they stick around, they really are being kind by providing a service to those subscribers that no other profit oriented business wants to provide. Even phone companies are subisidized by taxes to provide service to remote rural communities.
Do I have to spell it out for you? A month is about 43000 minutes. You (I) pay $60/month for digital cable. I therefore pay about a tenth of a penny for every minute that cable access is provided. The difference is exactly as I stated, that I cannot opt out of paying for the time which I do not use the service which is again, worse than what AOL is doing.
I guess you didn't read my whole post near the end where I explicitly stated: > If Cable TV was pay per time you actually use it. Cable companies would probably see revenue dropping through the floor unless they raised hourly rates to some incredible level.
What else did you miss from my post?
BTW revenue by cable TV providers is not made by ads. It is made by selling their service to consumers. Remember that whole Disney-Time Warner deal a few weeks back? Time-Warner PAYS Disney to carry Disney's channels (ABC et al.). Time-Warner is a cable provider.
Disney/ABC makes revenue by selling time on their network to advertisers. Get it now?
On the contrary, Cable TV is a monthly charge! So by definition it is equivalent to paying per minute. But what is different is that you pay for it even if you're NOT watching it. Isn't that WORSE than AOL? Also you're paying for the time that you "wait out the ads" exactly like you are with AOL.
If Cable TV was pay per time you actually use it. Cable companies would probably see revenue dropping through the floor unless they raised hourly rates to some incredible level.
a) irrelevant - is it bad for a business to charge for their services? Remember, this is a *SERVICE*.
b) irrelevant - internet access is not a basic life necessity (like some people say the telephone is). If you don't like the AOL monopoly in those parts of the country don't subscribe. In addition, an ISP is not one of the harder businesses to start up.
c) no - what twisted logic are you using? Seriously! First, ads couldn't be turned off. Second, a lawsuit is filed against the ads. Third, before the trial ads can be turned off. Therefore AOL knew they were doing something wrong and evil by not allowing ads to be disabled? What demonstrates AOL's prior knowledge of the ads evilness?
What is science but the statment of a theory (hypothesis), testing that theory by observations and rejecting the theory when no longer supported by evidence.
> If your predictions match reality, thats just a lucky guess.
Huh? If your prediction matches reality, that means your hypothesis has not yet been rejected by science. You may gain more confidence but until the theory is disproven or superceded, it'll always be a theory.
Care to offer comment on how physics, chemistry and biology differ?
I didn't think you would. Another one bites the dust.
182. (a) If two or more persons conspire: (1) To commit any crime. (2) Falsely and maliciously to indict another for any crime, or to procure another to be charged or arrested for any crime. (3) Falsely to move or maintain any suit, action or proceeding. (4) To cheat and defraud any person of any property, by any means which are in themselves criminal, or to obtain money or property by false pretenses or by false promises with fraudulent intent not to perform such promises. (5) To commit any act injurious to the public health, to public morals, or to pervert or obstruct justice, or the due administration of the laws. (6) To commit any crime against the person of the President or Vice President of the United States, the governor of any state or territory, any United States justice or judge, or the secretary of any of the executive departments of the United States. They are punishable as follows: When they conspire to commit any crime against the person of any official specified in paragraph (6), they are guilty of a felony and are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for five, seven, or nine years. ...
Maybe in your neck of the woods you don't see many Boxsters (note spelling) but that was certainly not a Boxster. It was actually a 911 Carrera Cabriolet.
Be careful with what you mean by "power" as the ARM is typically thought of as a lower power (as in P=IV) but high performance processor.
Now the ARM is also typical RISC with really not a whole lot on the die. Sure, you've got peripherals and misc but it's also been specifically optimized for lower power consumption. Does the crusoe need a heat sink? Probably not and given that it's supposedly as fast as and compatible with a PIII 500 , now that's a chip that we should be thinking about.
Close but no cigar. Chips are damaged by electromigration and electrostatic discharge but not electro-static migration. So..
Electromigration is basically electrons slamming at incredible velocities into the edge of the chip wiring and actually eroding the wires.
Electrostatic discharge is basically what happens when you zap chips with static electricity which destroys CMOS transistors which means all the Good Stuff (tm) inside most computer chips developed today. It's why almost all computer chips are packages in anti-static bags.
Ut oh.. another anti-security through obscurity ranter. It is absolutely correct in saying that having closed source does not make it secure. But the original question, does it make hacking harder? Yes. Without a doubt! Obscurity is a tool used to discourage less motivated opponents. Now what are the disadvantages of the lack of public viewing? Obvious or not so obvious holes is certainly the big one. This is what we should be looking at. Once a motivated opponent gets passed the obscurity, they have complete knowledge of the system and are able to exploit it in any way possible. Ways that John didn't even imagine.
How will the Quake client work and are we to assume that it won't have a bunch of holes that will certainly be exposed? Shouldn't we have a more elegant open source solution that is much more secure? This certainly is a very difficult problem and must be very seriously thought about.
Never hit a moose. The only times I've hit deer, I didn't technically run over them. I think the deer where I live are some wierd sort of deer extremists. One was running down a hill side and jumped onto the road... hit my car right smack in the middle at the roof support on the passenger side. The others did equally stupid things. They all lived so I'm sure the other deer are to this day still making fun of them.:)
Einstein had a bigger brain by a little bit, but the left and right hemispheres of his cortex (IIRC) was connected, where in normal people it generally isn't.
It is connected in normal people. You should read the case studies of people who have had that connection severed. It's incredible how much information flows throws that connection. Certainly Einstein might've had a larger connection between hemispheres than most people.
Totally wrong. Certification is on a per-configuration basis. So you get your specific installation of Linux and put it on a specific type of hardware... the original 3.51 NT was certified on a DEC and a Compaq system. The actual C2 final report even goes as far as listing every part number for the components like the floppy and cdrom, ram, hard drive in the computers.
You heard it here first! Slashdot is trying to become a rumor and gossip monger just like the fabulous production known as The Register.
The post by Hemos was the worst of the worst when it comes to news articles and I can't support any news source that allows itself to use this kind of trashy gossip. Roblimo should seriously think about what he wants Slashdot to be. A news source for nerds or just a message board for flaming and rumors. I think Hemos should have thought a little more about the post but Roblimo is trying to justify the post on/.??? Fuck You!
If you think you are just any other news source and don't have to check articles to see what the author really meant, I can get my news from somewhere else thank you. With such a close relationship with Bruce, why the hell didn't you just call him to see what he said on something that was as controversial as this? You guys don't want censorship and neither do I but WHEN YOU ARE WRONG, YOU MUST RETRACT THE ARTICLE!
You aren't quite aware of contract law and the fact that in most countries, minors are not legally bound to contracts. Since you apparently are not intelligent enough to figure that out (well, since you're 16, intelligence is not quite right, ignorance is a better description) you have to realize that they have simply explicitly stated what contracts in these countries inherently assume. So take offense from my comment, but don't take offense from the Corel EULA (especially if you believe it to be unintentional).
Can you give me a reference for this? From my recollection, any original work is automatically the intellectual property of the author and does not require explicit copyright.
The real problem is that alot of/.ers are anti-university in general and they feel threatened by the "ivory tower". Indeed you and I are probably exceptions but I have very high regard for most professors. I happened to go to a university very well known for high quality research yet all my professors were excellent resources for the students and were genuinely interested in helping the students learn the class material.
Just wait until you get to college. Maybe in college you'll learn to not speak about things you have no clue about and drop your attitude. I've seen many students like you that came to college and thought they would be again at the top of their class. What you did in high school simply won't cut it in college especially if you go to a nationally ranked university. What you probably are not realizing is that in high school, information is being hand fed to you. There simply is not enough time for that when you get to college. Good luck is all I can say.
Ok, game over Kenenth. I just saw your user info and it says you're in 9th grade??? You really ought to wait at least until you're a senior before making comments like that.
It's not an issue of whether the information the professors teach should be copyrighted. This information generally comes from any number of sources. The way in which they teach a class through slides, etc. is what the professors can and should copyright. It is an incredible amount of work to produce materials for a class. The format of the information which may be transfered into a students notebook can and should be copyrighted.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I think I must've misunderstood your third point. I thought you were saying that for the whole time the ads were forced, AOL had full knowledge of the harm to consumers that was caused by charging for the time AOL was sending them ads... and AOL was purposely doing it. I don't believe that AOL purposely plotted to get two sources of income (one from the user, one from the advertiser) by showing ads to users paying per minute but at some point they did realize how it can be quite objectionable.
BTW I'm hardly libertarian but simply have an understanding of what a profit-oriented company like AOL should do if they are solely after money but still following the law. So my point about free choice is that if AOL is the only ISP in a small town, then there simply isn't enough demand for another ISP to make money there. If AOL is operating at a loss in those regions, from a purely economics point of view, they should simply leave. If they stick around, they really are being kind by providing a service to those subscribers that no other profit oriented business wants to provide. Even phone companies are subisidized by taxes to provide service to remote rural communities.
Do I have to spell it out for you? A month is about 43000 minutes. You (I) pay $60/month for digital cable. I therefore pay about a tenth of a penny for every minute that cable access is provided. The difference is exactly as I stated, that I cannot opt out of paying for the time which I do not use the service which is again, worse than what AOL is doing.
I guess you didn't read my whole post near the end where I explicitly stated:
> If Cable TV was pay per time you actually use it. Cable companies would probably see revenue dropping through the floor unless they raised hourly rates to some incredible level.
What else did you miss from my post?
BTW revenue by cable TV providers is not made by ads. It is made by selling their service to consumers. Remember that whole Disney-Time Warner deal a few weeks back? Time-Warner PAYS Disney to carry Disney's channels (ABC et al.). Time-Warner is a cable provider.
Disney/ABC makes revenue by selling time on their network to advertisers. Get it now?
On the contrary, Cable TV is a monthly charge! So by definition it is equivalent to paying per minute. But what is different is that you pay for it even if you're NOT watching it. Isn't that WORSE than AOL? Also you're paying for the time that you "wait out the ads" exactly like you are with AOL.
If Cable TV was pay per time you actually use it. Cable companies would probably see revenue dropping through the floor unless they raised hourly rates to some incredible level.
a) irrelevant - is it bad for a business to charge for their services? Remember, this is a *SERVICE*.
b) irrelevant - internet access is not a basic life necessity (like some people say the telephone is). If you don't like the AOL monopoly in those parts of the country don't subscribe. In addition, an ISP is not one of the harder businesses to start up.
c) no - what twisted logic are you using? Seriously! First, ads couldn't be turned off. Second, a lawsuit is filed against the ads. Third, before the trial ads can be turned off. Therefore AOL knew they were doing something wrong and evil by not allowing ads to be disabled? What demonstrates AOL's prior knowledge of the ads evilness?
Try Ascend from CMU.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ascend
They have a very good (although very steep learning curve) nonlinear & differential equation optimizer. Handles thousands of variables.
This AC is obviously a flame. But...
What is science but the statment of a theory (hypothesis), testing that theory by observations and rejecting the theory when no longer supported by evidence.
> If your predictions match reality, thats just a lucky guess.
Huh? If your prediction matches reality, that means your hypothesis has not yet been rejected by science. You may gain more confidence but until the theory is disproven or superceded, it'll always be a theory.
Care to offer comment on how physics, chemistry and biology differ?
I didn't think you would. Another one bites the dust.
It's spelled Kalman. Kalman Filter should turn up many links.
You have confused the Metropolis Algorithm with the Metropolis Criterion (as used in Simulated Annealing)
The Orange, Green, Red books Pieter-Bas was talking about are the CD (as in Compact Disc) standards... not the security standards from the DoD.
Here's from the California Penal Code:
CALIFORNIA CODES
PENAL CODE
SECTION 182
182. (a) If two or more persons conspire: (1) To commit any
crime. (2) Falsely and maliciously to indict another for any
crime, or to procure another to be charged or arrested for any crime.
(3) Falsely to move or maintain any suit, action or proceeding.
(4) To cheat and defraud any person of any property, by any means
which are in themselves criminal, or to obtain money or property by
false pretenses or by false promises with fraudulent intent not to
perform such promises. (5) To commit any act injurious to the
public health, to public morals, or to pervert or obstruct justice,
or the due administration of the laws. (6) To commit any crime
against the person of the President or Vice President of the United
States, the governor of any state or territory, any United States
justice or judge, or the secretary of any of the executive
departments of the United States. They are punishable as follows:
When they conspire to commit any crime against the person of any
official specified in paragraph (6), they are guilty of a felony and
are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for five, seven,
or nine years.
...
Maybe in your neck of the woods you don't see many Boxsters (note spelling) but that was certainly not a Boxster. It was actually a 911 Carrera Cabriolet.
Be careful with what you mean by "power" as the ARM is typically thought of as a lower power (as in P=IV) but high performance processor.
Now the ARM is also typical RISC with really not a whole lot on the die. Sure, you've got peripherals and misc but it's also been specifically optimized for lower power consumption. Does the crusoe need a heat sink? Probably not and given that it's supposedly as fast as and compatible with a PIII 500 , now that's a chip that we should be thinking about.
Close but no cigar. Chips are damaged by electromigration and electrostatic discharge but not electro-static migration. So..
Electromigration is basically electrons slamming at incredible velocities into the edge of the chip wiring and actually eroding the wires.
Electrostatic discharge is basically what happens when you zap chips with static electricity which destroys CMOS transistors which means all the Good Stuff (tm) inside most computer chips developed today. It's why almost all computer chips are packages in anti-static bags.
Ut oh.. another anti-security through obscurity ranter. It is absolutely correct in saying that having closed source does not make it secure. But the original question, does it make hacking harder? Yes. Without a doubt! Obscurity is a tool used to discourage less motivated opponents. Now what are the disadvantages of the lack of public viewing? Obvious or not so obvious holes is certainly the big one. This is what we should be looking at. Once a motivated opponent gets passed the obscurity, they have complete knowledge of the system and are able to exploit it in any way possible. Ways that John didn't even imagine.
How will the Quake client work and are we to assume that it won't have a bunch of holes that will certainly be exposed? Shouldn't we have a more elegant open source solution that is much more secure? This certainly is a very difficult problem and must be very seriously thought about.
Never hit a moose. The only times I've hit deer, I didn't technically run over them. I think the deer where I live are some wierd sort of deer extremists. One was running down a hill side and jumped onto the road... hit my car right smack in the middle at the roof support on the passenger side. The others did equally stupid things. They all lived so I'm sure the other deer are to this day still making fun of them. :)
It is connected in normal people. You should read the case studies of people who have had that connection severed. It's incredible how much information flows throws that connection. Certainly Einstein might've had a larger connection between hemispheres than most people.
Totally wrong. Certification is on a per-configuration basis. So you get your specific installation of Linux and put it on a specific type of hardware... the original 3.51 NT was certified on a DEC and a Compaq system. The actual C2 final report even goes as far as listing every part number for the components like the floppy and cdrom, ram, hard drive in the computers.
Did you ever hear about the $150,000 Pentium II
-Someone else with a background in validation of (Intel) processors
The UN can interfere only if they can somehow overpower the violating country. If not by force, then they can try trade sanctions.
You heard it here first! Slashdot is trying to become a rumor and gossip monger just like the fabulous production known as The Register .
/.??? Fuck You!
The post by Hemos was the worst of the worst when it comes to news articles and I can't support any news source that allows itself to use this kind of trashy gossip. Roblimo should seriously think about what he wants Slashdot to be. A news source for nerds or just a message board for flaming and rumors. I think Hemos should have thought a little more about the post but Roblimo is trying to justify the post on
If you think you are just any other news source and don't have to check articles to see what the author really meant, I can get my news from somewhere else thank you. With such a close relationship with Bruce, why the hell didn't you just call him to see what he said on something that was as controversial as this? You guys don't want censorship and neither do I but WHEN YOU ARE WRONG, YOU MUST RETRACT THE ARTICLE!
You aren't quite aware of contract law and the fact that in most countries, minors are not legally bound to contracts. Since you apparently are not intelligent enough to figure that out (well, since you're 16, intelligence is not quite right, ignorance is a better description) you have to realize that they have simply explicitly stated what contracts in these countries inherently assume. So take offense from my comment, but don't take offense from the Corel EULA (especially if you believe it to be unintentional).
Can you give me a reference for this? From my recollection, any original work is automatically the intellectual property of the author and does not require explicit copyright.
The real problem is that alot of /.ers are anti-university in general and they feel threatened by the "ivory tower". Indeed you and I are probably exceptions but I have very high regard for most professors. I happened to go to a university very well known for high quality research yet all my professors were excellent resources for the students and were genuinely interested in helping the students learn the class material.
Just wait until you get to college. Maybe in college you'll learn to not speak about things you have no clue about and drop your attitude. I've seen many students like you that came to college and thought they would be again at the top of their class. What you did in high school simply won't cut it in college especially if you go to a nationally ranked university. What you probably are not realizing is that in high school, information is being hand fed to you. There simply is not enough time for that when you get to college. Good luck is all I can say.
Ok, game over Kenenth. I just saw your user info and it says you're in 9th grade??? You really ought to wait at least until you're a senior before making comments like that.
It's not an issue of whether the information the professors teach should be copyrighted. This information generally comes from any number of sources. The way in which they teach a class through slides, etc. is what the professors can and should copyright. It is an incredible amount of work to produce materials for a class. The format of the information which may be transfered into a students notebook can and should be copyrighted.