You're assuming the device is going to stop immediately when it hits the ground. That would only be true if the black box was duct taped onto the nose of the plane. If it's back even a few feet, the plane will absorb some of the impact. I'm also assuming that the black box is going to have something (foam?) to absorb some of the vibrations.
It's like the difference between landing feet first and head first from a 3 story fall. Same initial speed, same final speed, different acceleration.
"Except for military ones" is the important phrase there. If manufacturers are capable of making plane crash-proof electronic devices for the military, then they can certainly make plane crash-proof electronic devices for the FAA.
One big difference between Windows/Mac and Linux is the idea of a package manager.
When Windows users want free software, they google, go to a usually ad-ridden website and download it. Often times, the software is available from many different mirrors, which makes it easy for malware writers to create a mirror which provides infected software.
A Linux user, on the other hand, will install using a package manager, run by reasonably trusted people. Ideally, only software that has been tested makes it into the package manager.
A Windows package manager could solve many problems. Whitelisted software would make it into the package manager. When a user wants to install software, they would find it in their package manager instead of finding it on the web, then click "install". Make it simple and fast enough, and it would save time for the user. Blacklisted software would also be entered into the package manager, but when a user tries to install it, they would receive a warning that tells them that all known versions of this software are infected.
Another advantage is that updates for 3rd party software can be installed automatically. Since a significant number of vulnerabilities are in 3rd party software, this increases security.
Comcast could almost as easily have their routers stop forwarding packets to/from offending hosts.
They see a bunch of BT traffic from foo to bar on UDP port 12345, they just add a routing rule to drop those packets. Once BT changes and starts randomizing ports, the ISP simply drops all UDP traffic between foo and bar. This also applies to the previously mentioned IPSec solution.
In order to effectively trace the music back to the original purchaser, the RIAA would have to track who purchases each song or CD. Without a database of CD serial vs. customer, finding a watermark in a song does nothing to help track down the original sharer. This means that they're either going to:
1. Move to an entirely online system, requiring credit cards, which have a fairly positive ID
2. Have record stores keep track of names from credit cards, and take names when a customer uses cash.
Neither of these methods would work effectively against someone who is trying. A simple fake ID or having a friend working behind the counter would circumvent the record store measure. I can't say as much about the credit card system, but I'm sure there are easy ways to remain anonymous.
This means that the RIAA could then track all legitimate users, knowing what kinds of music they buy, when, and where. However, it will not prevent or help fight piracy in any way.
Or maybe they won't implement such a system, and this whole watermarking thing will be even more useless.
I should hope you're protecting your network with something in addition to MAC filtering. MAC filtering will not prevent intruders from eavesdropping on your network traffic, and it won't prevent anybody who can spoof MAC addresses (trivial) from joining your network.
My iPod has 3489 songs on it, that's 19.49 gigs, which means about 5.5 megs per song. Until they come out with a 250 gig iPod, I disagree that it would cost $40,000 to fill one.
Who says that just because you talk to someone frequently means that their message is important to you? In fact, for me it's nearly the opposite.
I don't need to reply immediately to a conversational email from a family member or friend. On the other hand, more important emails come from people you don't necessarily talk with frequently:
A professor reminding me of the upcoming paper My boss telling me that I don't have to go to work tomorrow due to weather The credit card company/power company/landlord telling me that I have a bill due soon
There are only a few groups of people who want wireless everywhere:
College students. Most colleges already have wireless for their students, and students spend most of their time on campus. Time off-campus is typically spent working or finding some other form of entertainment.
People who need internet for work who already have blackberries or cell data cards.
People who want wireless where they hang out, but many of these places (coffee shops, etc) already have wireless.
Most other people might have a slight interest in being able to get on the internet anywhere, but not enough to pay for it.
My math teacher once told me that the number 2 was "somewhere between" 1 and 3. Now, I'm all for having a range of numbers. But isn't 2, by definition, BOTH non-1 and non-3? How can it fall on a spectrum between them?
You've obviously never seen a spoiled brat. Some parents don't seem to have the ability to deprive their child of anything, even if it is for their own good.
Slashdot Mirror
This will become the new "Vaporware" list.
You're assuming the device is going to stop immediately when it hits the ground. That would only be true if the black box was duct taped onto the nose of the plane. If it's back even a few feet, the plane will absorb some of the impact. I'm also assuming that the black box is going to have something (foam?) to absorb some of the vibrations. It's like the difference between landing feet first and head first from a 3 story fall. Same initial speed, same final speed, different acceleration.
"Except for military ones" is the important phrase there.
If manufacturers are capable of making plane crash-proof electronic devices for the military, then they can certainly make plane crash-proof electronic devices for the FAA.
One big difference between Windows/Mac and Linux is the idea of a package manager.
When Windows users want free software, they google, go to a usually ad-ridden website and download it. Often times, the software is available from many different mirrors, which makes it easy for malware writers to create a mirror which provides infected software.
A Linux user, on the other hand, will install using a package manager, run by reasonably trusted people. Ideally, only software that has been tested makes it into the package manager.
A Windows package manager could solve many problems. Whitelisted software would make it into the package manager. When a user wants to install software, they would find it in their package manager instead of finding it on the web, then click "install". Make it simple and fast enough, and it would save time for the user. Blacklisted software would also be entered into the package manager, but when a user tries to install it, they would receive a warning that tells them that all known versions of this software are infected.
Another advantage is that updates for 3rd party software can be installed automatically. Since a significant number of vulnerabilities are in 3rd party software, this increases security.
Comcast could almost as easily have their routers stop forwarding packets to/from offending hosts.
They see a bunch of BT traffic from foo to bar on UDP port 12345, they just add a routing rule to drop those packets. Once BT changes and starts randomizing ports, the ISP simply drops all UDP traffic between foo and bar.
This also applies to the previously mentioned IPSec solution.
My friends pirate the $60 games too.
In order to effectively trace the music back to the original purchaser, the RIAA would have to track who purchases each song or CD. Without a database of CD serial vs. customer, finding a watermark in a song does nothing to help track down the original sharer. This means that they're either going to:
1. Move to an entirely online system, requiring credit cards, which have a fairly positive ID
2. Have record stores keep track of names from credit cards, and take names when a customer uses cash.
Neither of these methods would work effectively against someone who is trying. A simple fake ID or having a friend working behind the counter would circumvent the record store measure. I can't say as much about the credit card system, but I'm sure there are easy ways to remain anonymous.
This means that the RIAA could then track all legitimate users, knowing what kinds of music they buy, when, and where. However, it will not prevent or help fight piracy in any way.
Or maybe they won't implement such a system, and this whole watermarking thing will be even more useless.
I should hope you're protecting your network with something in addition to MAC filtering. MAC filtering will not prevent intruders from eavesdropping on your network traffic, and it won't prevent anybody who can spoof MAC addresses (trivial) from joining your network.
My iPod has 3489 songs on it, that's 19.49 gigs, which means about 5.5 megs per song. Until they come out with a 250 gig iPod, I disagree that it would cost $40,000 to fill one.
Who says that just because you talk to someone frequently means that their message is important to you? In fact, for me it's nearly the opposite.
I don't need to reply immediately to a conversational email from a family member or friend. On the other hand, more important emails come from people you don't necessarily talk with frequently:
A professor reminding me of the upcoming paper
My boss telling me that I don't have to go to work tomorrow due to weather
The credit card company/power company/landlord telling me that I have a bill due soon
Shouldn't the zoom go the other way, as if you're stretching or shrinking the image?
Most other people might have a slight interest in being able to get on the internet anywhere, but not enough to pay for it.
My math teacher once told me that the number 2 was "somewhere between" 1 and 3. Now, I'm all for having a range of numbers. But isn't 2, by definition, BOTH non-1 and non-3? How can it fall on a spectrum between them?
When mutations occur, offspring are different than their parents.
The only difference between genetically superior humans and robots that outlast and overpower humans is the method of creation.
You've obviously never seen a spoiled brat. Some parents don't seem to have the ability to deprive their child of anything, even if it is for their own good.