Really the first thing I thought reading this article was "I didn't know pop-ups are still being used". It's been so long since I've seen any!
I don't use AdBlock on my main PC, only on the EEE because that one often connects over a slow 3G connection. Only FlashBlock, and that does wonders against irritating floaters and flashing banners.
The rest of the advertising is generally non-intrusive so I don't care about it. I don't even realise the difference between/. browsing with and without ads.
I'm sure MS is well capable of changing their Linux distribution in a way that their applications are only compatible with their version, or even crash on other distributions.
I am sure that companies will try to use the very cheapest lowest cost hardware they can find to run their businesses.
All prudent companies will do so: lower the cost of doing business. Cutting unnecessary expenses is one, this includes replacing computers that still work.
This includes no fancy graphics cards for the secretary, only for people that really need it. Basically any hardware released since five years ago or so can manage normal office work, maybe even older.
Many small businesses (most of my customers are small: no more than five people in the company) that I know are using the hardware they bought when they needed a computer: maybe eight years ago, and are using it as long as it works. Only when it breaks down they replace it with something new, which is then again used for many years to come.
Without an IT department (no SME has that) replacing computers is a hassle, interrupts work, and does not bring any improvements anymore. Hardware is fast enough since the late 1990s. Software is more than powerful enough for 99% of small business tasks (not counting custom applications) since about the same time.
We have really moved into the "it ain't broke so don't fix it" realm for business computers, and for many people home computers as well. Upgrading doesn't bring anything anymore for anyone except high-end users doing heavy movie editing (photo editing is not even heavy duty anymore), large simulations, and who wants to play the latest games at maximum image resolutions.
The mitochondrial DNA used to create the new egg and with that the "clone" is from a different, albeit related species. So the end-result I think is actually yet another species. Mitochondrial DNA has serious influence on the outcome. Maybe that is even what caused the death of the baby immediately after birth. Too much of a DNA mismatch.
Computers automatically cause monocultures. Even if there would be like 50 equally prevalent operating systems that are totally different, this would mean there would be 50 monocultures of each about 20 million computers, assuming about 1 billion computers in this world.
If we would have like 40 different Linux distributions included, all of them based on the same sets of source code, each vulnerability would be present in easily 10% of those distributions. Then we would have monocultures of 80 million computers already: 80 million potential targets.
With all these computers linked to each other ovre the Internet, they can all reach one another.
It just means a worm has to look a little longer to find infectable hosts, but that doesn't really matter as it is all automatic anyway.
It may make it a bit harder to infect, but it is no holy grail. Computers are copied identically, not like e.g. humans who are all slightly different from each other.
I have a technical university degree, and actually some later exams we were allowed to bring "anything" we liked. Reference books, notes, whatever.
Indeed you need basic understanding, and then dig in the reference books. One of the main parts of knowledge is where to find things.
But don't forget that you must memorise a lot of stuff to be able to know where to start looking in the first placeï¼ And that is what they teach you in secondary schools and the earlier years of college/university. Without all that memorised factual knowledge you have no clue on what to start looking for, let alone where to find it.
I wish you weren't modded flamebait, that's a little unfair.
I would of course be the first to agree to that:) But re-reading my post I'm not too surprised. It's thought provoking (my comment is supposed to be), and it really is a tough subject. Those posts often get modded down here on/. unfortunately.
I don't know really about this army manual (having never been in the army or even having set foot in the US), refusing orders remains a very difficult issue for a soldier that has been trained to follow orders: "when I say jump, you ask 'how high', not 'why'!"
Obama is giving me hope already. Today I read he is going to close Gitmo: a very good step. Now I do hope they can find a good solution for the individuals actually held there - the best option imho would be to bring them into the US and put them through a trial. Civil or military I don't mind really as long as it is open and fair.
Criminal charges before or after a judge has ruled on them? It would become quite scary if being arrested for some crime and later released for being not guilty to that crime would still have your name connected to the case in a public record.
Identities of criminals should be released only AFTER conviction, if only because before conviction, they are not criminals (or at least not found guilty to that particular crime). These videos are mere evidence, not convictions. A judge will have to decide on that first.
The repercussions for a soldier of not following orders may be severe (in wartime this may be execution, and the US is formally at war against terror, drugs, and some other wars here and there).
Furthermore, how can a soldier judge which orders are illegal? In case of torture: there is the fine line between allowed interrogation techniques and torturous interrogation techniques. Some say water boarding is OK, others say it is torture. How can a simple soldier judge this? Should he? He's a soldier after all, not a judge. His superiors are supposed to judge for him what is allowed or not, and based on their superiorness give orders. Until it goes to the obvious illegal (shooting defenceless people, rape) - it is not that easy.
The superiors giving the orders are at least as much as fault as the soldier following them, maybe even more. Those superiors got into their jobs for being supposedly better at making decisions, knowing what is right (legal) or not.
In my company (just two people) my assistant didn't realise she was working with OOo instead of Word until I told a month or two after she started working for me.
Our documents are simple: mainly invoices or a short letter and the like. I can imagine a large number of companies don't use anything fancy in their word processing: we are not in the writing/reporting business after all. We're traders. And no, that is not on the stock market or so.
Mind you: getting 10% of an 8-digit profit figure is still a 7-digit figure. That's still really a lot of money, especially as the band takes very little financial risk by themselves. Not many bands go bankrupt, even if they don't take off the musicians just go back in the amateur circuit and take up a day job.
The problem is that artists tend to get 1% or less. 1% of an 8-digit number is still a 6-digit number, still nice, but getting a bit pathetic.
Add on top of that that the record companies will inflate all of their cost to decrease the profit on a certain band, so they have to pay out even less.
And there you have the core of the problem.
Taking most of a profit is OK if you do most of the investment. It's getting not OK anymore if that share gets close to 100%, when the other party is also making a significant investment (time, effort, creativity, even if not financially it's still a major contribution).
Reading that letter: can it be that they are simply after the domain names stated in this letter? That is quite a list of domain names which resemble the name of their client. To me it sounds just like a way to try to get you to give them those domains. Adding some claims about possible libel and so to soften you up.
Vista was compared to XP, which thanks to its long long long lifetime has become a standard, fairly polished, with known and mostly manageable security issues.
Vista comes along, does things different, breaks a lot, and is considered shitty.
Then Win7 is released, and it is now being compared to it's direct parent, Vista. Not XP. So MS only has to put a product in the market that appears better than Vista (reviewers won't complain too hard about drivers and other compatibility I suppose, it's beta after all), not better than the old and trusted XP.
That said I doubt Win7 will work on netbooks, so I won't be surprised that XP will be with us for a long long time to come.
I'd really like to not care about the name of the browser I'm using, but the mental cost of switching could be high for someone used to particular Firefox extensions, unless or until they can all be expected to work seamlessly with Chrome.
And we are wondering why so many people refuse to switch from Windows.... "...someone used to particular Windows extensions (i.e. applications), unless or until they can all be expected to work seamlessly with Linux/OSX/BSD."
The A380 can land and take off from any landing strip a 747 can use (this is by design). So it can land at any airport where the current presidential craft can land. It needs the dimensions of the runway a 747 needs, and even though it has a higher total weight, it also has more wheels so the pressure per wheel is less than a 747. The tarmac won't be damaged by the A380 if it can handle a 747.
What it can not do (and in case of Air Force One doesn't need) on all those airports is connecting to the gates. The presidential plane will always be parked on a safe location in the airport, not at a gate.
It is quite interesting and impressive though that Apple, a newcomer in the mobile phone scene, simply seems to set the standard against which virtually any smartphone is measured these days.
I don't think many companies ever managed to pull that off. Enter a new market, and become the reference point for the competition.
True, this is a major disadvantage of NAT. At home I don't use it (my ISP uses PPPoE, so I can connect two computers to their router and get two different IP addresses that are not only dynamic, but actually changing roughly by the day), no need for that.
In office I do use NAT, and have portforwarding configured so my server is DMZ, and my server port-forwards incoming bittorrent and bittorrent only to a single client. The rest of the office is not supposed to be reachable from the Internet in the first place. The server should be, and is reachable. I wouldn't want it any other way.
You (with most of the crowd, me included) are a techie that wants to connect multiple computers to the Internet over a single connection.
I don't have statistics, but I do suspect that most households even in the USA have only one computer. No need for NAT at home. Or, see my other post, like my ISP where I happily get multiple IP addresses at home.
And - don't forget, at least that was the situation in The Netherlands where I lived until seven years ago - in case you don't agree with a withdrawal, a single phone call to the bank will reverse it. And then the bank leaves it to you versus your creditor to settle the issue.
I have had this a few times, once was because I closed an account with an ISP but they continued drawing money from my account. One phone call lasting a few minutes and they were blocked from doing so again, and next day I had the money returned.
A great system indeed. Very convenient.
In Hong Kong we have autopay, where you allow a company to withdraw money up to a certain amount per month from your account, but if this company makes a mistake then you have to ask them to refund it to you. Much more of a hassle. As a result a lot of automatic payments are by credit card, and I'm using lots of cheques.
see subject: spoken as a consumer/end-user/Joe Sixpack.
Looking at my Internet connection: it works fine.
Looking at my small office network: it works fine.
Does ipv6 bring any improvement in this? Not that I am aware of!
From a consumer pov there is no reason for the change. It's purely technical. And even technical there are obviously very few reasons (at least at the moment) to move to ipv6. It ain't broke, so why fix it? Why should I really care anyway? NAT works fine, and anyway I really don't want my networked printer to be reachable from the outside world, unless I very very specifically say so.
Look through the function starting at line 249: this causes the infinite loop.
Assuming proper code management and version control they will probably branch off a release sometime for release in 2007, and in the meantime continue writing the next version, which may have been mostly finished in 2007 already but maybe only pass quality control in 2008 for release then.
And this piece of code had not been tested/reviewed properly apparently.
Good winter tires are great in more moderate climates, where most of the roads are clear. When there is no snow or ice on the road the road surface is torn apart by the hammering of the studs. On a good snow pack or on ice however a winter tire is no match for a studded tire.
Slashdot Mirror
Really the first thing I thought reading this article was "I didn't know pop-ups are still being used". It's been so long since I've seen any!
I don't use AdBlock on my main PC, only on the EEE because that one often connects over a slow 3G connection. Only FlashBlock, and that does wonders against irritating floaters and flashing banners.
The rest of the advertising is generally non-intrusive so I don't care about it. I don't even realise the difference between /. browsing with and without ads.
I'm sure MS is well capable of changing their Linux distribution in a way that their applications are only compatible with their version, or even crash on other distributions.
I am sure that companies will try to use the very cheapest lowest cost hardware they can find to run their businesses.
All prudent companies will do so: lower the cost of doing business. Cutting unnecessary expenses is one, this includes replacing computers that still work.
This includes no fancy graphics cards for the secretary, only for people that really need it. Basically any hardware released since five years ago or so can manage normal office work, maybe even older.
Many small businesses (most of my customers are small: no more than five people in the company) that I know are using the hardware they bought when they needed a computer: maybe eight years ago, and are using it as long as it works. Only when it breaks down they replace it with something new, which is then again used for many years to come.
Without an IT department (no SME has that) replacing computers is a hassle, interrupts work, and does not bring any improvements anymore. Hardware is fast enough since the late 1990s. Software is more than powerful enough for 99% of small business tasks (not counting custom applications) since about the same time.
We have really moved into the "it ain't broke so don't fix it" realm for business computers, and for many people home computers as well. Upgrading doesn't bring anything anymore for anyone except high-end users doing heavy movie editing (photo editing is not even heavy duty anymore), large simulations, and who wants to play the latest games at maximum image resolutions.
Well technically it's "homo sapiens sapiens" assuming you are talking about modern humans, a subspecies of the now extinct "homo sapiens".
The mitochondrial DNA used to create the new egg and with that the "clone" is from a different, albeit related species. So the end-result I think is actually yet another species. Mitochondrial DNA has serious influence on the outcome. Maybe that is even what caused the death of the baby immediately after birth. Too much of a DNA mismatch.
Computers automatically cause monocultures. Even if there would be like 50 equally prevalent operating systems that are totally different, this would mean there would be 50 monocultures of each about 20 million computers, assuming about 1 billion computers in this world.
If we would have like 40 different Linux distributions included, all of them based on the same sets of source code, each vulnerability would be present in easily 10% of those distributions. Then we would have monocultures of 80 million computers already: 80 million potential targets.
With all these computers linked to each other ovre the Internet, they can all reach one another.
It just means a worm has to look a little longer to find infectable hosts, but that doesn't really matter as it is all automatic anyway.
It may make it a bit harder to infect, but it is no holy grail. Computers are copied identically, not like e.g. humans who are all slightly different from each other.
I have a technical university degree, and actually some later exams we were allowed to bring "anything" we liked. Reference books, notes, whatever.
Indeed you need basic understanding, and then dig in the reference books. One of the main parts of knowledge is where to find things.
But don't forget that you must memorise a lot of stuff to be able to know where to start looking in the first placeï¼ And that is what they teach you in secondary schools and the earlier years of college/university. Without all that memorised factual knowledge you have no clue on what to start looking for, let alone where to find it.
I wish you weren't modded flamebait, that's a little unfair.
I would of course be the first to agree to that :) But re-reading my post I'm not too surprised. It's thought provoking (my comment is supposed to be), and it really is a tough subject. Those posts often get modded down here on /. unfortunately.
I don't know really about this army manual (having never been in the army or even having set foot in the US), refusing orders remains a very difficult issue for a soldier that has been trained to follow orders: "when I say jump, you ask 'how high', not 'why'!"
Obama is giving me hope already. Today I read he is going to close Gitmo: a very good step. Now I do hope they can find a good solution for the individuals actually held there - the best option imho would be to bring them into the US and put them through a trial. Civil or military I don't mind really as long as it is open and fair.
Criminal charges before or after a judge has ruled on them? It would become quite scary if being arrested for some crime and later released for being not guilty to that crime would still have your name connected to the case in a public record.
Identities of criminals should be released only AFTER conviction, if only because before conviction, they are not criminals (or at least not found guilty to that particular crime). These videos are mere evidence, not convictions. A judge will have to decide on that first.
The repercussions for a soldier of not following orders may be severe (in wartime this may be execution, and the US is formally at war against terror, drugs, and some other wars here and there).
Furthermore, how can a soldier judge which orders are illegal? In case of torture: there is the fine line between allowed interrogation techniques and torturous interrogation techniques. Some say water boarding is OK, others say it is torture. How can a simple soldier judge this? Should he? He's a soldier after all, not a judge. His superiors are supposed to judge for him what is allowed or not, and based on their superiorness give orders. Until it goes to the obvious illegal (shooting defenceless people, rape) - it is not that easy.
The superiors giving the orders are at least as much as fault as the soldier following them, maybe even more. Those superiors got into their jobs for being supposedly better at making decisions, knowing what is right (legal) or not.
In my company (just two people) my assistant didn't realise she was working with OOo instead of Word until I told a month or two after she started working for me.
Our documents are simple: mainly invoices or a short letter and the like. I can imagine a large number of companies don't use anything fancy in their word processing: we are not in the writing/reporting business after all. We're traders. And no, that is not on the stock market or so.
Rifle rounds won't wipe a hard disk. They will make sure it's technically unreadable though.
No, the problem is that many artists get nothing.
Mind you: getting 10% of an 8-digit profit figure is still a 7-digit figure. That's still really a lot of money, especially as the band takes very little financial risk by themselves. Not many bands go bankrupt, even if they don't take off the musicians just go back in the amateur circuit and take up a day job.
The problem is that artists tend to get 1% or less. 1% of an 8-digit number is still a 6-digit number, still nice, but getting a bit pathetic.
Add on top of that that the record companies will inflate all of their cost to decrease the profit on a certain band, so they have to pay out even less.
And there you have the core of the problem.
Taking most of a profit is OK if you do most of the investment. It's getting not OK anymore if that share gets close to 100%, when the other party is also making a significant investment (time, effort, creativity, even if not financially it's still a major contribution).
Reading that letter: can it be that they are simply after the domain names stated in this letter? That is quite a list of domain names which resemble the name of their client. To me it sounds just like a way to try to get you to give them those domains. Adding some claims about possible libel and so to soften you up.
I would phase that slightly different.
The bar has been lowered.
Vista was compared to XP, which thanks to its long long long lifetime has become a standard, fairly polished, with known and mostly manageable security issues.
Vista comes along, does things different, breaks a lot, and is considered shitty.
Then Win7 is released, and it is now being compared to it's direct parent, Vista. Not XP. So MS only has to put a product in the market that appears better than Vista (reviewers won't complain too hard about drivers and other compatibility I suppose, it's beta after all), not better than the old and trusted XP.
That said I doubt Win7 will work on netbooks, so I won't be surprised that XP will be with us for a long long time to come.
I'd really like to not care about the name of the browser I'm using, but the mental cost of switching could be high for someone used to particular Firefox extensions, unless or until they can all be expected to work seamlessly with Chrome.
And we are wondering why so many people refuse to switch from Windows.... "...someone used to particular Windows extensions (i.e. applications), unless or until they can all be expected to work seamlessly with Linux/OSX/BSD."
The A380 can land and take off from any landing strip a 747 can use (this is by design). So it can land at any airport where the current presidential craft can land. It needs the dimensions of the runway a 747 needs, and even though it has a higher total weight, it also has more wheels so the pressure per wheel is less than a 747. The tarmac won't be damaged by the A380 if it can handle a 747.
What it can not do (and in case of Air Force One doesn't need) on all those airports is connecting to the gates. The presidential plane will always be parked on a safe location in the airport, not at a gate.
It is quite interesting and impressive though that Apple, a newcomer in the mobile phone scene, simply seems to set the standard against which virtually any smartphone is measured these days.
I don't think many companies ever managed to pull that off. Enter a new market, and become the reference point for the competition.
True, this is a major disadvantage of NAT. At home I don't use it (my ISP uses PPPoE, so I can connect two computers to their router and get two different IP addresses that are not only dynamic, but actually changing roughly by the day), no need for that.
In office I do use NAT, and have portforwarding configured so my server is DMZ, and my server port-forwards incoming bittorrent and bittorrent only to a single client. The rest of the office is not supposed to be reachable from the Internet in the first place. The server should be, and is reachable. I wouldn't want it any other way.
You (with most of the crowd, me included) are a techie that wants to connect multiple computers to the Internet over a single connection.
I don't have statistics, but I do suspect that most households even in the USA have only one computer. No need for NAT at home. Or, see my other post, like my ISP where I happily get multiple IP addresses at home.
And - don't forget, at least that was the situation in The Netherlands where I lived until seven years ago - in case you don't agree with a withdrawal, a single phone call to the bank will reverse it. And then the bank leaves it to you versus your creditor to settle the issue.
I have had this a few times, once was because I closed an account with an ISP but they continued drawing money from my account. One phone call lasting a few minutes and they were blocked from doing so again, and next day I had the money returned.
A great system indeed. Very convenient.
In Hong Kong we have autopay, where you allow a company to withdraw money up to a certain amount per month from your account, but if this company makes a mistake then you have to ask them to refund it to you. Much more of a hassle. As a result a lot of automatic payments are by credit card, and I'm using lots of cheques.
see subject: spoken as a consumer/end-user/Joe Sixpack.
Looking at my Internet connection: it works fine.
Looking at my small office network: it works fine.
Does ipv6 bring any improvement in this? Not that I am aware of!
From a consumer pov there is no reason for the change. It's purely technical. And even technical there are obviously very few reasons (at least at the moment) to move to ipv6. It ain't broke, so why fix it? Why should I really care anyway? NAT works fine, and anyway I really don't want my networked printer to be reachable from the outside world, unless I very very specifically say so.
Look through the function starting at line 249: this causes the infinite loop.
Assuming proper code management and version control they will probably branch off a release sometime for release in 2007, and in the meantime continue writing the next version, which may have been mostly finished in 2007 already but maybe only pass quality control in 2008 for release then.
And this piece of code had not been tested/reviewed properly apparently.
Netherlands: about 132 bln km/yr
USA: about 4800 bln km/yr
Dead, per km, Netherlnads scaled up to USA: 791*4800/132 = 28,800. Actual USA: 39,200.
Wounded, per km, Netherlands scaled up to USA: 18,190*4800/132 = 661,000. Actual USA: almost 2.5 mln.
These kilometres driven are taken from various web sites, not sure how accurate they are but the numbers sound reasonable to me.
Good winter tires are great in more moderate climates, where most of the roads are clear. When there is no snow or ice on the road the road surface is torn apart by the hammering of the studs. On a good snow pack or on ice however a winter tire is no match for a studded tire.