One thing I do not understand about this guy, however, is why he didn't predict the backlash his actions have given. In scandinavia at least, there are a lot of eyes on the right wing, both extremist and otherwise. The political party that he attacked has had a huge surge in popularity. He must have known that his actions would not be approved by the public, so why didn't he see this?
Even if you did get four drives into a bay and used this new drive then you would still only be getting 4TB compared to the 3TB you would get by using a single 3.5 inch drive.
Or 3 TB in raid 5. Anyway you put it, you'd get a massive increase in throughput and/or redundance.
As far as I can see, the files themselves were not read, only the metadata (who has access, modification time, position on the spinning platter, etc.).
There is an aditional factor: distribution. On iOS devices you can pretty much only get executable code from one source: the app store. On android it's a bit easier, but potential victims still have to enable sideloading.
Cramming could be crammed. Phone companies are under no obligation to pass these charges along, and they can stop working with any third-party biller they wish; many of the payment processors have racked up mountains of complaints. Given that such charges are so often fraudulent, why don't the phone companies cut them off? Committee investigators suggest it's because the legitimate operators like AT&T and Verizon benefit from the scams.
Patents and copyrights are designed from the beginning to restrict the transfer and sharing of knowledge.
Do you have any references or speculations as to why that was the design goal of copyright and patents? Seems to me that would be quite counter-productive to any society.
You don't go directly to the big ones, they have enough money to defend themselves. Go after a small company, win a case, and point to that case as you work your way up to the bigger fish.
A lot of Joe sixpacks have given up on parsing URLs completely, and I don't see that changing, with or without URL bars. And I don't really blame them when site managers often spew all kinds of organizational nonsense and useless query names into it. So the security argument of keeping the URL bar is mostly moot. Those who knows how to parse an URL are going to enable the url bar anyway, and those who don't notice it's gone could not use it to spot phising anyway. I'd recommend a bar with only the two top levels of the domain name visible - no http, no path and no query params. Now regular people can actually see what is going on, and perhaps even recognize the name from a commercial.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing I do not understand about this guy, however, is why he didn't predict the backlash his actions have given. In scandinavia at least, there are a lot of eyes on the right wing, both extremist and otherwise. The political party that he attacked has had a huge surge in popularity. He must have known that his actions would not be approved by the public, so why didn't he see this?
Wow, you are good at remembering words. By the way, what's that sound when something passes really close by your ear? Swosh? Wiih?
Even if you did get four drives into a bay and used this new drive then you would still only be getting 4TB compared to the 3TB you would get by using a single 3.5 inch drive.
Or 3 TB in raid 5. Anyway you put it, you'd get a massive increase in throughput and/or redundance.
With that many customers leaving, where are they going?
Outside?
When did Apple do something similar? Did the iView-cars drive over my hole in the ground without me noticing?
+1 predates Google+
March 30th: http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/03/google-1.html
As far as I can see, the files themselves were not read, only the metadata (who has access, modification time, position on the spinning platter, etc.).
There is an aditional factor: distribution. On iOS devices you can pretty much only get executable code from one source: the app store. On android it's a bit easier, but potential victims still have to enable sideloading.
Phone companies are required by law to allow third party charges even if they are bogus.
Not according to this Ars article.
Cramming could be crammed. Phone companies are under no obligation to pass these charges along, and they can stop working with any third-party biller they wish; many of the payment processors have racked up mountains of complaints. Given that such charges are so often fraudulent, why don't the phone companies cut them off? Committee investigators suggest it's because the legitimate operators like AT&T and Verizon benefit from the scams.
You are contradicting yourself: If people are looking at the SPE for things not to do, something relevant must have come out of it.
OK, followup question: do you think any "Tough-on-drivers"-law (as Lumpy suggested) would have helped here?
Yeah, because until now the worst thing about killing people has been cleaning the blood off of the car.
You think people do this on purpose?
Yes yes, the restriction on sharing is their method for getting people to share their knowledge. It is certainly not their goal, quite the opposite.
Patents and copyrights are designed from the beginning to restrict the transfer and sharing of knowledge.
Do you have any references or speculations as to why that was the design goal of copyright and patents? Seems to me that would be quite counter-productive to any society.
But - How do you get Windows 7 with only one disk?
Um, GPS sends the GPStime/UTC offset.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS#Timekeeping_and_leap_seconds
My first thought on yours is: "Who would want to spend all their time on a plane using Skype?" Then I saw your sig, and got puzzled.
Ask the MS Word team
You don't go directly to the big ones, they have enough money to defend themselves. Go after a small company, win a case, and point to that case as you work your way up to the bigger fish.
iPhone already is the only credible smartphone on the market.
Does that make their competitors incredible?
A lot of Joe sixpacks have given up on parsing URLs completely, and I don't see that changing, with or without URL bars. And I don't really blame them when site managers often spew all kinds of organizational nonsense and useless query names into it.
So the security argument of keeping the URL bar is mostly moot. Those who knows how to parse an URL are going to enable the url bar anyway, and those who don't notice it's gone could not use it to spot phising anyway.
I'd recommend a bar with only the two top levels of the domain name visible - no http, no path and no query params. Now regular people can actually see what is going on, and perhaps even recognize the name from a commercial.
And you know who else? Hitler! There wasn't even one Location bar in the whole third reich.
A 15" widescreen has less area than a 15" 4:3 screen. But Joe S. sees that both are 15", and goes for the cheaper one.
AFAIK, one of the proprietary apps is Android Market. Without that, you don't get buyers. Without buyers, no profit, no phone.
One more commonality: The media industry hates when you use it.