...when a big American corporation feels that they can go ahead and issue warnings to the freakin' government of China, that might just inadvertently send the signal that the government is doing the right thing in attempting to prevent becoming beholden to "standards" that are largely controlled by big American corporations...
Then what you need to do is to sterilize the cell-phone covers every day. Almost every Nokia phone can have its covers taken off completly.
Yeah, if the cell phone cover prevents contacts with the buttons and display -- that is, if there's no surface at all that isn't covered by a removable cover -- then that would indeed work. A plastic bag sort of solution would work for a wider variety of phones.
Then we'd see the/. headline "Plastic Bags May Spread Infections." The infections aren't coming from the cellphone itself, but from whoever touches it, therefore the same problem will exist however the cellphone is covered.
But you're not getting what the problem is. The same plastic surface is used constantly, so stuff gets on it one day, and grows, and is still there the next day, and grows, and that's the problem. Plastic bags that are replaced every day would indeed be at least a partial solution to the problem.
So how long before someone develops a cell phone that can be dunked in alcohol or run through the autoclave to sterilize it?
Not necessary. Get a bluetooth cell phone, and seal it in a sterile plastic bag while at work. Then develop a bluetooth headset that can be sterilized. You can push the buttons on the phone through the plastic bag.
Heck, come to think of it, the plastic bag would let sound through without a problem. Just get a cell phone that you don't need to fold or unfold to use, and heat-seal it in a fresh sterile plastic bag every time you enter the hospital, and remove the plastic bag every time you leave. That would do the trick, wouldn't it?
For example, slavery is illegal no matter what you sign.
That's not in fact true. Read the amendment in question. Slavery is illegal without due process. If due process is involved, slavery is permitted by the constitution. The government has, pretty explicitly, reserved the right to sell convicts into slavery. So, just sign one thing that can get you arrested...
Just who do these people at the RIAA think they are?
Oh, I don't know, maybe just the people who actually own the intellectual property that's being routinely pirated...?
My hope is that they succeed at this. My hope is that they manage to squash file sharing, and build up a huge amount of ill will from the public, and end up destroying the popularity of all the material that they own. In the best of all worlds they'll succeed at this until they drive themselves utterly out of business.
I don't actually agree that games should be challenging.
They should seem challenging, without actually having to be challenging.
A drooling moron with no motor skills should be able to beat a game. But whenever anybody beats it, it should feel to them like it took skill, like they accomplished something.
You need to create the illusion that the game is challenging, but without denying the rewarding experience of overcoming the challenge to any of your players.
If a game is too hard for me, I'll get frustrated with it and won't play it. If a game seems too easy for me, I'll get bored with it and won't play it. But if I beat every challenge and don't realize that there's almost no way to lose, I'll have fun.
This is my opinion regarding computer games, D&D, card games, pretty much any game. Everyone should be able to have fun playing. Everyone should have the illusion that they just barely had enough skill to win.
(I think Warcraft 3 probably nails this perfectly. It felt to me like I only overcame it through skill. But personally, I totally suck at RTS games -- I mostly just have fun pushing the buttons and watching the little blinkenlights. However, all sorts of people who are more skilled than me at RTS games also enjoyed it. I conclude that they must have gotten the illusion down right.)
The announcement made no mention of this release being x86-specific. Is it in fact x86-specific? I'm trying to figure out what OS to put on a new Alpha motherboard I just got, and if FreeBSD will get me a working Sun-based Java on it, then I'll install FreeBSD.
(Significantly different uncertified versions of Java need not apply. I am not going to use an open source JVM, and I am not going to do without the JDK 1.3 class libraries. Those are just not realistic options for what I want to do.)
They do? I missed that part. I thought they did it by administering lie detector tests to people without knowing whether they were innocent or not.
Do you think administering a lie detector test as a part of an insurance investigation is always harassment? I'm not sure why you would think that.
Bottom line: if permitting them to do this to me will make my insurance company more immune to fraud, thereby lowering my insurance premiums, well, bring on that harassment!
This is just being used to scare people into thinking they can't lie.
Well then, if that strategy works, it's a good thing.
I don't see any downside to this -- they're not using a positive result on the test to deny claims, they're using a positive result on the test as a clue to dig deeper into the veracity of the claim. If it's a legit claim, that should come out no matter whether you pass or fail the lie detector test.
Are they allowed to send the mail at all? I don't have much doubt that this is legal in most jurisdictions.
Are they allowed to forge the "From:" header, though? I'm less sure of that. If they do that and a dialup user downloads the mail message, might that not be a case of wire fraud? Especially if they lie about giving you accurate unsubscribe mechanisms?
So, let's see. The case may not ultimately be decided until 2006 or later.
The case applies to kernel version 2.4 or later. If you're using 2.2, you're okay. Right?
In order to hedge one's bets, maybe a distinct fork of 2.2 is called for? If we want to be utterly over-the-top paranoid, we need to make sure that if we're called upon to roll back to 2.2, we can do that, even four years from now. Which means we need to make sure device drivers written for new hardware up until then can be made to work with the 2.2-series kernel architecture.
It'd also be good if distributions continued to give the option to use a 2.2-series kernel up until this is resolved. The current stable Debian distribution does; I hope the next two or three do as well.
Probably not, at least not in all of these cases. In at least some of these cases, "inconsiderate gits who want something for free and don't care about the consequences" may be the cause.
Nonstandard ports dos not have to mean "develop a new controller from the ground up". Heck, the camera might not have any ports.
They might take the thing apart when you send it in, remove the chips, put them in some other system to read them, and then put them in a camera case again when they send it out. Sticking the flash chips directly on some strange card and slapping that card into some strange slot and doing plain IDE directly over that wouldn't cost very much to develop at all.
I guess none of us will know until someone gets one of these things and posts a report. Which, at this cost, I expect someone to do really soon.
I'm trying to figure out what keeps the user from permanently "renting" this camera (downloading the pics to the computer and then deleting them off camera).
My bet: a complete lack of any standard ports for downloading pics, and a complete lack of any standard protocol for doing the downloading even if you can find a way to get to the ports, and maybe even an unusual format for that data on the internal flash media.
They can verify that you don't use the service from outside the US. That has little to do with using the songs outside the US. As long as I live in the US, and only use the serivce from within the US, what have I got to worry about? Playing back the songs I've purchased does not invlolve using the service at all.
The 12" PowerBook does not have a PCMCIA slot or other expansion slot at all (must be expanded via USB or FireWire, except for the one entirely-internal CompactPCI slot that can only be used for an AirPort Extreme card).
Does this thing have an expansion slot other than memory stick? Even if it's memory stick only, that's more than the 12" PowerBook, but if it has PCMCIA as well, that's nifty.
People have been doing this for ages, at least out here in the "really real world".
Mapmakers put fake cities on their maps in obscure places, so that they can tell whether another mapmaker just copied their maps (illegal) or whether they went out and compiled their own information.
Folks who put together directories (like phone books) that forbid their use by telemarketers put fake people (with real phone numbers) in there to identify telemarketers that are illegally using the directory as a basis for telemarking calls.
There's even a sort-of-backwards example from cryptography, that I believe Schneier came up with. You are all probably familiar with the basic concept that if you crack someone's crypto, you can't use the info you get from cracking their crypto unless you can plausibly explain how you got that info by another mechanism. There are big chunks of Cryptonomicon dedicated to this idea, and it's a real idea. Well, one way to tell if your crypto has been hacked is to find a really funny joke and to transmit it only by your crypto mechanism. Most folks who'd crack your crypto would have a hard time believing that the cleartext of the joke was never transmitted anywhere, so they see less reason to be anal about the normal procedures. So, you watch to see if the joke "leaks out" into the world. If so, and if you maintained other security, then your crypto has been broken.
You'll find all sorts of examples of this basic idea, going back for centuries.
Reminds me of the old trick used to test the type of salesdroid who's working with you -- ask them if the thing they're trying to sell you has "LRF support".
On the other hand, this makes it far more likely that I, personally, will choose to purchase things via eBay. I am more concerned with personally being protected from fraud than I am with seeing the privacy of sellers being protected.
Now, if they started doing the same thing with buyers, I'd probably stop using eBay. But as things stand, I only make purchases and never sell anything via eBay anyway.
Yes, one of the main uses, because the phone number without any context is not useful, and the name is not enough context (for me at least -- maybe it's a symptom of my ADD).
I mean, apart from this, I can't see much use for text messaging other than my wife sending me a reminder to pick something up on the way home, including the spelling of the name of the thing I'm to pick up.
What do other folks use text messaging for? Maybe I'm just missing whole categories of use.
Slashdot Mirror
...when a big American corporation feels that they can go ahead and issue warnings to the freakin' government of China, that might just inadvertently send the signal that the government is doing the right thing in attempting to prevent becoming beholden to "standards" that are largely controlled by big American corporations...
Heck, come to think of it, the plastic bag would let sound through without a problem. Just get a cell phone that you don't need to fold or unfold to use, and heat-seal it in a fresh sterile plastic bag every time you enter the hospital, and remove the plastic bag every time you leave. That would do the trick, wouldn't it?
My hope is that they succeed at this. My hope is that they manage to squash file sharing, and build up a huge amount of ill will from the public, and end up destroying the popularity of all the material that they own. In the best of all worlds they'll succeed at this until they drive themselves utterly out of business.
Then we can start over.
I don't actually agree that games should be challenging.
They should seem challenging, without actually having to be challenging.
A drooling moron with no motor skills should be able to beat a game. But whenever anybody beats it, it should feel to them like it took skill, like they accomplished something.
You need to create the illusion that the game is challenging, but without denying the rewarding experience of overcoming the challenge to any of your players.
If a game is too hard for me, I'll get frustrated with it and won't play it. If a game seems too easy for me, I'll get bored with it and won't play it. But if I beat every challenge and don't realize that there's almost no way to lose, I'll have fun.
This is my opinion regarding computer games, D&D, card games, pretty much any game. Everyone should be able to have fun playing. Everyone should have the illusion that they just barely had enough skill to win.
(I think Warcraft 3 probably nails this perfectly. It felt to me like I only overcame it through skill. But personally, I totally suck at RTS games -- I mostly just have fun pushing the buttons and watching the little blinkenlights. However, all sorts of people who are more skilled than me at RTS games also enjoyed it. I conclude that they must have gotten the illusion down right.)
The announcement made no mention of this release being x86-specific. Is it in fact x86-specific? I'm trying to figure out what OS to put on a new Alpha motherboard I just got, and if FreeBSD will get me a working Sun-based Java on it, then I'll install FreeBSD.
(Significantly different uncertified versions of Java need not apply. I am not going to use an open source JVM, and I am not going to do without the JDK 1.3 class libraries. Those are just not realistic options for what I want to do.)
Do you think administering a lie detector test as a part of an insurance investigation is always harassment? I'm not sure why you would think that.
Bottom line: if permitting them to do this to me will make my insurance company more immune to fraud, thereby lowering my insurance premiums, well, bring on that harassment!
I don't see any downside to this -- they're not using a positive result on the test to deny claims, they're using a positive result on the test as a clue to dig deeper into the veracity of the claim. If it's a legit claim, that should come out no matter whether you pass or fail the lie detector test.
My office-mate keeps a rifle that fires ping-pong balls in the office. I keep a Zero Fog Blaster. This means I always win in the intimidation battle.
Why?
I don't mind being pelted with ping-pong balls. But he absolutely can't stand to be subjected to the awful artificial cherry scent of the fog rings...
Are they allowed to send the mail at all? I don't have much doubt that this is legal in most jurisdictions.
Are they allowed to forge the "From:" header, though? I'm less sure of that. If they do that and a dialup user downloads the mail message, might that not be a case of wire fraud? Especially if they lie about giving you accurate unsubscribe mechanisms?
So, let's see. The case may not ultimately be decided until 2006 or later.
The case applies to kernel version 2.4 or later. If you're using 2.2, you're okay. Right?
In order to hedge one's bets, maybe a distinct fork of 2.2 is called for? If we want to be utterly over-the-top paranoid, we need to make sure that if we're called upon to roll back to 2.2, we can do that, even four years from now. Which means we need to make sure device drivers written for new hardware up until then can be made to work with the 2.2-series kernel architecture.
It'd also be good if distributions continued to give the option to use a 2.2-series kernel up until this is resolved. The current stable Debian distribution does; I hope the next two or three do as well.
Interesting to see something that hadn't been moderated up at all get moderated down as "overrated"...
Probably not, at least not in all of these cases. In at least some of these cases, "inconsiderate gits who want something for free and don't care about the consequences" may be the cause.
Nonstandard ports dos not have to mean "develop a new controller from the ground up". Heck, the camera might not have any ports.
They might take the thing apart when you send it in, remove the chips, put them in some other system to read them, and then put them in a camera case again when they send it out. Sticking the flash chips directly on some strange card and slapping that card into some strange slot and doing plain IDE directly over that wouldn't cost very much to develop at all.
I guess none of us will know until someone gets one of these things and posts a report. Which, at this cost, I expect someone to do really soon.
This actually has something in common with the Stephenson novel "Zodiac". Everyone should go read it. You can buy it here
They can verify that you don't use the service from outside the US. That has little to do with using the songs outside the US. As long as I live in the US, and only use the serivce from within the US, what have I got to worry about? Playing back the songs I've purchased does not invlolve using the service at all.
The 12" PowerBook does not have a PCMCIA slot or other expansion slot at all (must be expanded via USB or FireWire, except for the one entirely-internal CompactPCI slot that can only be used for an AirPort Extreme card).
Does this thing have an expansion slot other than memory stick? Even if it's memory stick only, that's more than the 12" PowerBook, but if it has PCMCIA as well, that's nifty.
People have been doing this for ages, at least out here in the "really real world".
Mapmakers put fake cities on their maps in obscure places, so that they can tell whether another mapmaker just copied their maps (illegal) or whether they went out and compiled their own information.
Folks who put together directories (like phone books) that forbid their use by telemarketers put fake people (with real phone numbers) in there to identify telemarketers that are illegally using the directory as a basis for telemarking calls.
There's even a sort-of-backwards example from cryptography, that I believe Schneier came up with. You are all probably familiar with the basic concept that if you crack someone's crypto, you can't use the info you get from cracking their crypto unless you can plausibly explain how you got that info by another mechanism. There are big chunks of Cryptonomicon dedicated to this idea, and it's a real idea. Well, one way to tell if your crypto has been hacked is to find a really funny joke and to transmit it only by your crypto mechanism. Most folks who'd crack your crypto would have a hard time believing that the cleartext of the joke was never transmitted anywhere, so they see less reason to be anal about the normal procedures. So, you watch to see if the joke "leaks out" into the world. If so, and if you maintained other security, then your crypto has been broken.
You'll find all sorts of examples of this basic idea, going back for centuries.
Reminds me of the old trick used to test the type of salesdroid who's working with you -- ask them if the thing they're trying to sell you has "LRF support".
On the one hand, there are privacy concerns here.
On the other hand, this makes it far more likely that I, personally, will choose to purchase things via eBay. I am more concerned with personally being protected from fraud than I am with seeing the privacy of sellers being protected.
Now, if they started doing the same thing with buyers, I'd probably stop using eBay. But as things stand, I only make purchases and never sell anything via eBay anyway.
Yes, one of the main uses, because the phone number without any context is not useful, and the name is not enough context (for me at least -- maybe it's a symptom of my ADD).
I mean, apart from this, I can't see much use for text messaging other than my wife sending me a reminder to pick something up on the way home, including the spelling of the name of the thing I'm to pick up.
What do other folks use text messaging for? Maybe I'm just missing whole categories of use.