Bad analogy. By Federal law it is ok to receive signals for personal use. You can legally listen in on what your neighbor is doing on the net. But when you transmit back and use his system to send your signals is when you cross the line.
Call me a troll, but all the people saying it is ok to use an unsecured wireless signal are full of crap. It's not. No matter how you slice it, what analogy you want to use, whatever.
The point is that you are using someone's bandwidth without permission. That someone is not only the person actually paying for it, but also the ISP providing it (who is also paying for bandwidth).
If someone did not give you permission to use their access point, you do not have permission to use their access point. What about that is so hard to understand?
There is not implied permission and there is not legal permission. There is not permission.
Can the person who leaves their access point unsecured be held responsible for other people's illegal activities? Yes. That has also been settled in a court of law. The person who leaves their access point unsecured and who does not take reasonable steps to secure it is guilty of aiding the illegal activity through negligence.
Is the person who does not secure their wireless network also liable for the extra bandwidth a leech uses? Yes.
The take home message is that people need to learn how to secure their wireless networks. If you don't secure it, you are partially responsible for any illegal activity over it and for any bandwidth that is lost because of it. But the people who leech bandwidth and/or do illegal things are also guilty and will also be held responsible.
That is just how it is and how the courts have decided it. And it is fair.
One of the big issues with education in the USA is poor preparation by parents. Kids go into school not knowing how to read at even a basic level, not able to pay attention, disrespectful of teachers, and in general are just shoved onto schools for them to babysit the little angels.
I know it sounds harsh, but the kids already in school are pretty much a lost cause. This country needs to focus on getting parents to perform the roles they are supposed to - socialize and prepare their children to be productive members of society.
Sitting them in front of the TV to watch the same DVDs over and over again, or to play Grand Theft Auto and shoot the homies doesn't count. That produces the misfits that are coming out of the schools in droves.
If this country wants educated people, we need to approach this problem differently than just offering free degrees in math and science. They are crap degrees now anyway. Kids get passed up the ladder from grade to grade because the teachers don't want to get dinged for flunking a bunch of illiterates and the classes have been marginalized to the lowest common denominator.
The problem right now is with parents. They are too interested in their own little universes to properly care for their kids. They need to know and act like kids are the responsibility they really are. They need to show interest in their kids. Not just plop them in front of anything that will keep them occupied while they watch American Idol or some Monday night footbal game.
Almost my story exactly. I started into computers with a shiny new Apple ][ and progressed up the tree. Now I am a systems admin on some pretty big systems.
I have been the resource for friends and in college ran a business on the side helping people with their Windows computers. I did the full run up through the different DOS versions, Windows 3.0, 3.1, 95, and XP. I didn't bother with Vista.
I switched to Linux with Red Hat 9 but now run SuSe 10.1. I run dual-boot with XP on a couple of systems and XP sees the light of day when I want to play some game. For any office stuff I either use Open Office or use Microsoft Office with Crossover Office. I never surf or buy anything online under Windows - that is just too risky.
I have a three-seat XP license and that was the last thing I'll probably ever buy from Microsoft. Linux is so much better for almost everything most want to do. It's the gamers and a few niche programs that are the only Windows draws. But for e-mail, surfing, and most office stuff, Linux and Open Office will do everything just fine and for free, with better security, and less headaches.
That's just how it is. People can even dual-boot if they need to keep XP around for those gaming sessions or whatever.
There is nothing keeping the Vista-abused from trying Linux but their own reluctance to try something new. If they don't want to, that's their problem. As for me, I am not helping anyone with Vista. I have no experience with it, refuse to pay $250 for the pro version, and my free time is now a lot more free. And I don't even have to make any excuses not to help them. With no Vista install, I can't walk people through setting up their network connections, restoring their registry, through menus, or whatever other things people have trouble with. It's kind of nice.
The only thing is Linux is ready for prime time. And users can run it dual-boot if they still need their wondows training wheels.
There is a really good GUI interface for configuration and the stuff isn't that hard. Really. The fact that Linux allows people to customize and configure doesn't mean they have to or have to know all about it. Microsoft hides that stuff from users and makes it hard to do your own configuration. There was another thread here about how all the ad servers slow down web page loading and it was mentioned there that Vista won't let you add offending sites into the hosts file. I did it on a Linux machine and an Apple laptop running OSX - and it was easy. now I don't have any more offending popups or ad junk and my pages load really fast - just with blank spaces where the ads would have been otherwise.
But people don't need to know how to do that stuff but they can if they want. Lots of stuff comes with step by step instructions. People can go with the stock setup - which right out of the box is much more secure and capable than windows - or they can *if they want* learn more and actually administer and configure their own computer. I will take the path of choice rather than have my hands tied by Bill and Steve.
But the windows crowd needs to take a powder. Their fav OS is getting knocked because it sucks. They need to accept that and get on with their lives.
I wonder if the poster's IP traces back to Redmond. I've now seen this post a number of times -- on articles that say anything bad or point out anything bad about Microsoft and Vista.
Maybe a certain VP has traded chair throwing for?....
Mi - Wonko and SMNW are both right and know their Carnot cycle, thermodynamics, etc.
If you want to continue to beat this dead horse, I think your best bet would be to educate yourself about thermodynamics, the Carnot cycle, and what it means to have inifinite temperature reservoirs.
Just as real world efficiencies can only approach the Carnot cycle, your answers can only approach the previous postings as you learn more about what you are talking about.
I hadn't heard of this before now but can see how it can really be a problem. It takes temperature differences to make heat energy flow and without that, or without enough of one, it doesn't. This will also affect regular power plants too.
Looks like future plants - nuclear or conventional (coal/natural gas) will need to be engineered to carry more of the work of cooling their water. It can be done. It's just less efficient as there are more parasitic loads on the system.
Just remember - there is no such thing as global warming. Hurricanes blasting up to category 5 in a few days, droughts, floods, etc. - all of it is just coincidence and would happen whether we pumped billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere or not.
That is making things difficult for Vista. Vista is making things difficult for Vista.
Just about every day there are stories of how it can't do something important, or has some kind of security flaw, or won't work with this or that hardware, or needs even more system resources to even run.
What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP. It's that Vista has so many faults. This isn't unlike the Microsoft even versions of DOS that sucked too.
Fusion reactors produce a whole lot less radioactive material as they run. Fission reactors make lots and lots of really hot stuff. Also, as people should take away from the article, fusion is really hard to keep going. If things get out of hand, it will just go out. No melted cores. No burning reactors dumping tons of highly radioactive material into the atmosphere and into the surrounding environment. And the whole process of refining reactor fuel does not create mega-tons of radioactive mine tailings, tons and tons of radioactive waste, and it doesn't have to be guarded because you cannot make a bomb out it (unless you already have a fission bomb to set it off).
Fusion reactors will be many many times safer than fission reactors. Hands down. I know the American public won't appreciate the above points, but if enough people explain this stuff to them, they might gradually get the upshot - fusion reactors are pretty damn safe.
I think the point here is that a little itty bitty laser diode doesn't seem intrinsically dangerous to a lot of people. A knife, for some reason, is easier to understand that it can and will cut you if it is mishandled. But a little self-education on the dangers of a knife generally doesn't result in blindness.
The only saving grace in this article and video is that the beam will hopefully not be that well collimated over a longer distance and when idiots shine it at other people, the damage will be less and the people will have time to look away before they get serious damage.
Also, a laser like this would probably leave lines or dots burned into the retina. It isn't as bad as a pulsed laser that can literally rip the retina off the back wall of the eye because of what are essentially sonic booms in the eye due to the fast rise times and heating pulses. But if it can burn a hole in a piece of paper, imagine what it can do to all your rods and cones when your eye focusses the beam into an even smaller and more intense spot in your eye.
I agree with all the other posters who say the video should be removed and that this article should be pulled.
I've about had it with Google's spying, Microsoft's spying/interference, Yahoo's spying, and pretty much everything and everyone else that is working to profile ad nauseum.
"reasonably believed to be outside the United States" = wild ass guess or just in case they might disagree with the Bush administration because everyone knows that anyone who disagrees with "C-average" Georgie is obviously not a patriot and could reasonably be suspected to be a "terr'ist".
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot: -shoot you in the head for acting against the motherland and then charging your family for the bullet
Bad analogy. By Federal law it is ok to receive signals for personal use. You can legally listen in on what your neighbor is doing on the net. But when you transmit back and use his system to send your signals is when you cross the line.
But anything to justify theft, huh?
Call me a troll, but all the people saying it is ok to use an unsecured wireless signal are full of crap. It's not. No matter how you slice it, what analogy you want to use, whatever.
The point is that you are using someone's bandwidth without permission. That someone is not only the person actually paying for it, but also the ISP providing it (who is also paying for bandwidth).
If someone did not give you permission to use their access point, you do not have permission to use their access point. What about that is so hard to understand?
There is not implied permission and there is not legal permission. There is not permission.
Can the person who leaves their access point unsecured be held responsible for other people's illegal activities? Yes. That has also been settled in a court of law. The person who leaves their access point unsecured and who does not take reasonable steps to secure it is guilty of aiding the illegal activity through negligence.
Is the person who does not secure their wireless network also liable for the extra bandwidth a leech uses? Yes.
The take home message is that people need to learn how to secure their wireless networks. If you don't secure it, you are partially responsible for any illegal activity over it and for any bandwidth that is lost because of it. But the people who leech bandwidth and/or do illegal things are also guilty and will also be held responsible.
That is just how it is and how the courts have decided it. And it is fair.
Just put "Free Access Point" in the network name and broadcast the station ID. Simple enough.
One of the big issues with education in the USA is poor preparation by parents. Kids go into school not knowing how to read at even a basic level, not able to pay attention, disrespectful of teachers, and in general are just shoved onto schools for them to babysit the little angels.
I know it sounds harsh, but the kids already in school are pretty much a lost cause. This country needs to focus on getting parents to perform the roles they are supposed to - socialize and prepare their children to be productive members of society.
Sitting them in front of the TV to watch the same DVDs over and over again, or to play Grand Theft Auto and shoot the homies doesn't count. That produces the misfits that are coming out of the schools in droves.
If this country wants educated people, we need to approach this problem differently than just offering free degrees in math and science. They are crap degrees now anyway. Kids get passed up the ladder from grade to grade because the teachers don't want to get dinged for flunking a bunch of illiterates and the classes have been marginalized to the lowest common denominator.
The problem right now is with parents. They are too interested in their own little universes to properly care for their kids. They need to know and act like kids are the responsibility they really are. They need to show interest in their kids. Not just plop them in front of anything that will keep them occupied while they watch American Idol or some Monday night footbal game.
And can you make a beowulf cluster out of them? ;-)
Thanks for the information. My TV has a cable card slot but we don't use it. Probably never will unless they get this sorted out.
It seems like satellite is the way to go. I like my Dish Network and an IR blaster lets me tune channels, etc.
If the card even works, why can't they put together a manual that would allow users to get the things running? Do they not even work? What's the deal?
Almost my story exactly. I started into computers with a shiny new Apple ][ and progressed up the tree. Now I am a systems admin on some pretty big systems.
I have been the resource for friends and in college ran a business on the side helping people with their Windows computers. I did the full run up through the different DOS versions, Windows 3.0, 3.1, 95, and XP. I didn't bother with Vista.
I switched to Linux with Red Hat 9 but now run SuSe 10.1. I run dual-boot with XP on a couple of systems and XP sees the light of day when I want to play some game. For any office stuff I either use Open Office or use Microsoft Office with Crossover Office. I never surf or buy anything online under Windows - that is just too risky.
I have a three-seat XP license and that was the last thing I'll probably ever buy from Microsoft. Linux is so much better for almost everything most want to do. It's the gamers and a few niche programs that are the only Windows draws. But for e-mail, surfing, and most office stuff, Linux and Open Office will do everything just fine and for free, with better security, and less headaches.
That's just how it is. People can even dual-boot if they need to keep XP around for those gaming sessions or whatever.
There is nothing keeping the Vista-abused from trying Linux but their own reluctance to try something new. If they don't want to, that's their problem. As for me, I am not helping anyone with Vista. I have no experience with it, refuse to pay $250 for the pro version, and my free time is now a lot more free. And I don't even have to make any excuses not to help them. With no Vista install, I can't walk people through setting up their network connections, restoring their registry, through menus, or whatever other things people have trouble with. It's kind of nice.
Well, consider that each "device" may have anywhere from dozens of 8 bit registers, to hundreds of 32 bit registers
Gosh, and at 1.whatever GHz, (or even at 333 MHz) that should take all of how long to grab the state before power down and restore on wake up?
Funny posts!
Poor little windows users must feel so trod upon.
The only thing is Linux is ready for prime time. And users can run it dual-boot if they still need their wondows training wheels.
There is a really good GUI interface for configuration and the stuff isn't that hard. Really. The fact that Linux allows people to customize and configure doesn't mean they have to or have to know all about it. Microsoft hides that stuff from users and makes it hard to do your own configuration. There was another thread here about how all the ad servers slow down web page loading and it was mentioned there that Vista won't let you add offending sites into the hosts file. I did it on a Linux machine and an Apple laptop running OSX - and it was easy. now I don't have any more offending popups or ad junk and my pages load really fast - just with blank spaces where the ads would have been otherwise.
But people don't need to know how to do that stuff but they can if they want. Lots of stuff comes with step by step instructions. People can go with the stock setup - which right out of the box is much more secure and capable than windows - or they can *if they want* learn more and actually administer and configure their own computer. I will take the path of choice rather than have my hands tied by Bill and Steve.
But the windows crowd needs to take a powder. Their fav OS is getting knocked because it sucks. They need to accept that and get on with their lives.
I wonder if the poster's IP traces back to Redmond. I've now seen this post a number of times -- on articles that say anything bad or point out anything bad about Microsoft and Vista.
Maybe a certain VP has traded chair throwing for?....
Mi - Wonko and SMNW are both right and know their Carnot cycle, thermodynamics, etc.
If you want to continue to beat this dead horse, I think your best bet would be to educate yourself about thermodynamics, the Carnot cycle, and what it means to have inifinite temperature reservoirs.
Just as real world efficiencies can only approach the Carnot cycle, your answers can only approach the previous postings as you learn more about what you are talking about.
It would sure be nice if more people had a better grasp of basic scientific principles, wouldn't it?
They are already red states. Might as well make them glowing red.
It would give a whole new meaning to Louisiana Hot Sauce...
You mean like a cooling tower already does?
I hadn't heard of this before now but can see how it can really be a problem. It takes temperature differences to make heat energy flow and without that, or without enough of one, it doesn't. This will also affect regular power plants too.
;-)
Looks like future plants - nuclear or conventional (coal/natural gas) will need to be engineered to carry more of the work of cooling their water. It can be done. It's just less efficient as there are more parasitic loads on the system.
Just remember - there is no such thing as global warming. Hurricanes blasting up to category 5 in a few days, droughts, floods, etc. - all of it is just coincidence and would happen whether we pumped billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere or not.
That is making things difficult for Vista. Vista is making things difficult for Vista.
Just about every day there are stories of how it can't do something important, or has some kind of security flaw, or won't work with this or that hardware, or needs even more system resources to even run.
What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP. It's that Vista has so many faults. This isn't unlike the Microsoft even versions of DOS that sucked too.
Seeing how you have no privacy left, you might as well let them look up your most personal of orifices.
Ahhh, isn't cold metallic technology wonderful? Especially in the hands of those who want to know everything you might be up to....
Fusion reactors produce a whole lot less radioactive material as they run. Fission reactors make lots and lots of really hot stuff. Also, as people should take away from the article, fusion is really hard to keep going. If things get out of hand, it will just go out. No melted cores. No burning reactors dumping tons of highly radioactive material into the atmosphere and into the surrounding environment. And the whole process of refining reactor fuel does not create mega-tons of radioactive mine tailings, tons and tons of radioactive waste, and it doesn't have to be guarded because you cannot make a bomb out it (unless you already have a fission bomb to set it off).
Fusion reactors will be many many times safer than fission reactors. Hands down. I know the American public won't appreciate the above points, but if enough people explain this stuff to them, they might gradually get the upshot - fusion reactors are pretty damn safe.
STELLLAAAAAA!!!!!
I think the point here is that a little itty bitty laser diode doesn't seem intrinsically dangerous to a lot of people. A knife, for some reason, is easier to understand that it can and will cut you if it is mishandled. But a little self-education on the dangers of a knife generally doesn't result in blindness.
The only saving grace in this article and video is that the beam will hopefully not be that well collimated over a longer distance and when idiots shine it at other people, the damage will be less and the people will have time to look away before they get serious damage.
Also, a laser like this would probably leave lines or dots burned into the retina. It isn't as bad as a pulsed laser that can literally rip the retina off the back wall of the eye because of what are essentially sonic booms in the eye due to the fast rise times and heating pulses. But if it can burn a hole in a piece of paper, imagine what it can do to all your rods and cones when your eye focusses the beam into an even smaller and more intense spot in your eye.
I agree with all the other posters who say the video should be removed and that this article should be pulled.
I've about had it with Google's spying, Microsoft's spying/interference, Yahoo's spying, and pretty much everything and everyone else that is working to profile ad nauseum.
"reasonably believed to be outside the United States" = wild ass guess or just in case they might disagree with the Bush administration because everyone knows that anyone who disagrees with "C-average" Georgie is obviously not a patriot and could reasonably be suspected to be a "terr'ist".
Perfect. They decide to code something that people have always tried to hack (voting) with the most insecure operating system on the planet.
And people wonder how in the last election the exit polls somehow didn't agree with the final vote counts.
It's not a democracy when the people don't actually get a say in the outcome of an election.