Maybe this is my naive way of looking at things, but wouldn't a shortage in a job market INCREASE the average salary in said market? I mean, how do you get more people into a market when you're desperate for them, other than to offer more money (benefits)? I can think of no way a shortage of qualified applicants could be leveraged into an excuse to CUT wages, but maybe I'm missing something here.
Does MobiTV and Verizon have the right to send a cease and desist letter? Sure
Well, to the same degree that everybody always has the right to send such a letter, pretty much without restriction. The important question is, are these cease and desist letters legally reasonable? I would say, not in the slightest.
Here's my take. Is it ethical to avail yourself of their streams without paying for them? No, but under the circumstances, ONLY on account of the bandwidth you're costing them. Is it ethical for them to send C&D letters when they are CLEARLY doing nothing to limit free public access to their resource? No, the ethical response would have been to plug the security hole, and call it a day. I honestly can't see any legal ground for them to stand on here, and would guess that it would have been cheaper and faster to simply plug the hole rather than going the litigious bastard route.
I don't get it. I would assume anybody with the sophistication to actually manufacture such a chip would be able to just remove the locking mechanism from the design, no? Or is it so fundamentally integrated into the design that you'd have to totally redesign the chip to make it work after being removed? The article seems really light on details, but I just don't see how this would work. Then again, it's certainly not an area I have any expertise in.
This last item and its explanation are complete gibberish to me. About the only thing I can say for sure is that, yes, if you want to run packet sniffers on a corporate network, then you will get looked at like a criminal.
Just to clarify (and not take sides), I think what he's saying is that these people are foolish to assume just because they monitor standard installation procedures (Setup.exe or whatever), they can prevent a developer from running whatever software he wants. As such, their insistence on this particular precaution is nothing more than a "feel good" measure of security; it's effectively useless. At least, that's how I understand his point.
To put it another way, a programmer with access to a compiler can get whatever kind of illicit software he wants onto a computer without you knowing; they just program it themselves on the spot if necessary. Any precautions that presume otherwise are foolhardy and give a false sense of security, and can certainly seem foolish as an excuse to prohibit certain activities that would be otherwise harmless.
I've never worked in an environment where any of this applies though, so I may be misconstruing what's going on here.
A well designed abstraction layer should generally be able to take platform specific features into account and use them transparently if available. Of course, that takes a very sophisticated layer, and requires a lot of forethought and design before starting to work on it. Seems to me, though, that that's what makes the difference between an actual abstraction layer and just a simple code wrapper. Of course, it depends on the feature how easy (or nightmarishly difficult) it is to elegantly wrap it up in a transparent manner.
This is not even remotely the right solution. They may as well just disallow feedback altogether if they're going to make it so lopsided. I've spent only a little time on eBay (can't really stand the place myself), but even that was enough to see that there are a lot of people who are absolutely shameless with handing out totally inappropriate feedback. Buyer A wins an auction, then 30 minutes later posts negative feedback complaining about slow shipping. Excuse me? It happens though.
They either need to make the feedback process far more meaningful, or just do away with it altogether. Some way to allow sellers to respond to feedback, and list that feedback as "contested." Add in a feedback moderation system (like/. meta-moderation) to allow third parties to randomly investigate contested feedback. Anyway, that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure that somebody putting the effort in could think of something much more elegant.
So no, I don't think this was the right response, I think it was the LAZY response, and I think they're going to suffer for that when sellers no longer want to submit themselves to an unfairly lopsided system.
As I understand it, Flash pretty much fails at 64bit on EVERY platform. Maybe not Macs (my knowledge of them is quite limited), but I definitely have memories of Windows Vista 64 having a hard time of it. Pretty much it's 32bit wrapper'd version or bust.
They've gotten away with a lot, but I predict that the RIAA and their goons are about to receive a major legal smackdown on these issues. Whatever you may have against lawyers and courts, it seriously pisses them off if you try to fuck with their system like this. My guess, they're forced to disclose everything pertinent, and it will be shown in court that their methods are unsound as proof of what they're after. You heard it here first!
You seem to be very confused about the difference between secular and atheist. Secular mean, specifically, a concern with worldly things (as opposed to spiritual/supernatural/whatever). I think it's quite sound to claim that the founders of our country were EXTREMELY secular in their construction of our country. That is, they were very specific that their concern was with governance and not religion, and that never the twain should meet.
This is not to say they weren't religious people, or that religiously influenced morals didn't inform their decisions. Both may be true, but have nothing to do with the degree to which the specific system they set forth was secular. I would argue that it is was in fact highly and intentionally so, from the very beginning.
Do Macs not have the "Home" key? Because that'll get you to the beginning of the line in any Windows/Linux input field I've seen. I would hardly call it a major flaw that the "Up" key doesn't do this, to me that doesn't really even make sense (i.e. you are not moving up)--what happens when you are navigating the URL history drop-down? Does up then change its function to scrolling through the items instead of text navigation? Because when I do that on Linux/Windows, up/down scrolls the history, while home/end navigates to the beginning and end of a line. Now that I think about it that way, I'd say that Macs are the ones with the flawed interface.
And I have no idea what you're talking about with drop-down menus. It must be a Mac-centric problem, because I've never had any issues in either of the other operating systems I've mentioned.
Yes, I agree. Clearly only that which is personally received directly from the hand of God is credible evidence, and should in any way be used as a basis for opinion forming. Never mind this silly garbage Wikipedia likes to call "citations," from which they claim you can do "additional research." I'm onto them, and not buying it a bit!
My question is, if the economy gradually collapses throughout eight years of office, THEN can you blame the President? I mean, I can't really blame him for 9/11, but I can sure blame him for what's happened since. Maybe that's a bit of a stretched analogy...
Well, the day when there would be a point to supporting a 2560x1600 high def stream will be the day when there's fiber direct to every house. I think #3 is definitely a valid concern though. Google video certainly does just that, and I much prefer it.
The difference, though, is between watching it on the iPhone while connected to a WiFi network, and watching it on the iPhone on the Edge network. It's really a very noticeable difference in quality when I've tried the same video on both.
It's a noticeable difference to me. Specifically, edges are substantially less noisy in the high quality version, whereas in the low quality version there are some pretty obvious compression artifacts around edges.
It may cost billions to extend a large commuter light rail a dozen miles in a major metropolitan area in the United States. How much you want to bet in the developing world this is all about, and a cheaper less fancy setup, the cost would be a fraction of that? Really that's just apples to oranges.
Same applies to disabled people--in the United States where we have the resources to do so, we are able force people to see to their needs. Elsewhere, this really can't be a primary concern, and such things can honestly reasonably be overlooked in the short term for more important ends.
I've been reserving judgment against Intel in its battle against the XO, but after looking at that, it really seems that Intel is just using its market power to shove a pretty inferior product down people's throats. I mean, if I were going to spend money on one of those right now, I'd definitely go for the XO--it just seems cool. The Classmate just looks like a bulky XP box that brings nothing interesting to the table, and the Eee really isn't targeted at the same market anyway as I understand. Bias? Maybe, but it seems pretty clear to me which one had the most thought go into the design.
XO Resolution: 1200x900 (Grayscale), or 800x600 (Color)
Classmate/Eee Resolution: 800x480
Yes, four-freaking-eighty. Did you even look at all the pictures and read the related text? The third to the last at even a casual glance makes it painfully obvious how cramped looking the other two are in comparison to the XO, whether the specs make it seem that way or not. Doesn't seem even remotely biased to me; more like spot on.
As I understand it, neither the main service panel surge suppressor nor the power bar are sufficient alone. In other words, you're certainly right that you want one on your main service panel, but for smaller surges and as a backup on larger ones (Or hell, maybe the surge originates between the service panel and your appliance? Lightning striking your house? I know it's a stretch, but hey), you'll want one at the point of use too.
While a lot of people are complaining about the price and pointing out Power Squids, it seems to me that with this item it's a matter of getting what you pay for. It provides SUBSTANTIALLY more surge protection than the Squid, and seems to also cover all your common cables (Coax, CAT-5) and not just power. I'm inclined to say that if you're in a position where any of that would be important, this might be a solid piece of engineering to suit your needs. You just pay for it.
(Not that I've actually tested it--might turn out to be a cheap piece of crap that doesn't live up to its specs despite the price--but that's another matter really.)
Seems to me that if you stagger the rotated ones you could probably have enough room for a mid-sized wall wort on each one. One on the top, next one on the side, next one on the top, etc... effectively doubles the space between any consecutive two on a side.
I would bet good money too that the "warranties" are worded in such a way as to make it effectively impossible to ever collect anything. Just a hunch...
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, that's surprising. Sacramento, "Where Does This Place End?" California isn't exactly wanting for people.
Maybe this is my naive way of looking at things, but wouldn't a shortage in a job market INCREASE the average salary in said market? I mean, how do you get more people into a market when you're desperate for them, other than to offer more money (benefits)? I can think of no way a shortage of qualified applicants could be leveraged into an excuse to CUT wages, but maybe I'm missing something here.
I think the key word has always been talented. As in a shortage of talented IT people.
Here's my take. Is it ethical to avail yourself of their streams without paying for them? No, but under the circumstances, ONLY on account of the bandwidth you're costing them. Is it ethical for them to send C&D letters when they are CLEARLY doing nothing to limit free public access to their resource? No, the ethical response would have been to plug the security hole, and call it a day. I honestly can't see any legal ground for them to stand on here, and would guess that it would have been cheaper and faster to simply plug the hole rather than going the litigious bastard route.
Newton? Meet Leibniz.
I don't get it. I would assume anybody with the sophistication to actually manufacture such a chip would be able to just remove the locking mechanism from the design, no? Or is it so fundamentally integrated into the design that you'd have to totally redesign the chip to make it work after being removed? The article seems really light on details, but I just don't see how this would work. Then again, it's certainly not an area I have any expertise in.
To put it another way, a programmer with access to a compiler can get whatever kind of illicit software he wants onto a computer without you knowing; they just program it themselves on the spot if necessary. Any precautions that presume otherwise are foolhardy and give a false sense of security, and can certainly seem foolish as an excuse to prohibit certain activities that would be otherwise harmless.
I've never worked in an environment where any of this applies though, so I may be misconstruing what's going on here.
A well designed abstraction layer should generally be able to take platform specific features into account and use them transparently if available. Of course, that takes a very sophisticated layer, and requires a lot of forethought and design before starting to work on it. Seems to me, though, that that's what makes the difference between an actual abstraction layer and just a simple code wrapper. Of course, it depends on the feature how easy (or nightmarishly difficult) it is to elegantly wrap it up in a transparent manner.
Well, that's my experience at least.
This is not even remotely the right solution. They may as well just disallow feedback altogether if they're going to make it so lopsided. I've spent only a little time on eBay (can't really stand the place myself), but even that was enough to see that there are a lot of people who are absolutely shameless with handing out totally inappropriate feedback. Buyer A wins an auction, then 30 minutes later posts negative feedback complaining about slow shipping. Excuse me? It happens though.
/. meta-moderation) to allow third parties to randomly investigate contested feedback. Anyway, that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure that somebody putting the effort in could think of something much more elegant.
They either need to make the feedback process far more meaningful, or just do away with it altogether. Some way to allow sellers to respond to feedback, and list that feedback as "contested." Add in a feedback moderation system (like
So no, I don't think this was the right response, I think it was the LAZY response, and I think they're going to suffer for that when sellers no longer want to submit themselves to an unfairly lopsided system.
As I understand it, Flash pretty much fails at 64bit on EVERY platform. Maybe not Macs (my knowledge of them is quite limited), but I definitely have memories of Windows Vista 64 having a hard time of it. Pretty much it's 32bit wrapper'd version or bust.
They've gotten away with a lot, but I predict that the RIAA and their goons are about to receive a major legal smackdown on these issues. Whatever you may have against lawyers and courts, it seriously pisses them off if you try to fuck with their system like this. My guess, they're forced to disclose everything pertinent, and it will be shown in court that their methods are unsound as proof of what they're after. You heard it here first!
You seem to be very confused about the difference between secular and atheist. Secular mean, specifically, a concern with worldly things (as opposed to spiritual/supernatural/whatever). I think it's quite sound to claim that the founders of our country were EXTREMELY secular in their construction of our country. That is, they were very specific that their concern was with governance and not religion, and that never the twain should meet.
This is not to say they weren't religious people, or that religiously influenced morals didn't inform their decisions. Both may be true, but have nothing to do with the degree to which the specific system they set forth was secular. I would argue that it is was in fact highly and intentionally so, from the very beginning.
Do Macs not have the "Home" key? Because that'll get you to the beginning of the line in any Windows/Linux input field I've seen. I would hardly call it a major flaw that the "Up" key doesn't do this, to me that doesn't really even make sense (i.e. you are not moving up)--what happens when you are navigating the URL history drop-down? Does up then change its function to scrolling through the items instead of text navigation? Because when I do that on Linux/Windows, up/down scrolls the history, while home/end navigates to the beginning and end of a line. Now that I think about it that way, I'd say that Macs are the ones with the flawed interface.
And I have no idea what you're talking about with drop-down menus. It must be a Mac-centric problem, because I've never had any issues in either of the other operating systems I've mentioned.
Yes, I agree. Clearly only that which is personally received directly from the hand of God is credible evidence, and should in any way be used as a basis for opinion forming. Never mind this silly garbage Wikipedia likes to call "citations," from which they claim you can do "additional research." I'm onto them, and not buying it a bit!
My question is, if the economy gradually collapses throughout eight years of office, THEN can you blame the President? I mean, I can't really blame him for 9/11, but I can sure blame him for what's happened since. Maybe that's a bit of a stretched analogy...
Well, the day when there would be a point to supporting a 2560x1600 high def stream will be the day when there's fiber direct to every house. I think #3 is definitely a valid concern though. Google video certainly does just that, and I much prefer it.
The difference, though, is between watching it on the iPhone while connected to a WiFi network, and watching it on the iPhone on the Edge network. It's really a very noticeable difference in quality when I've tried the same video on both.
It's a noticeable difference to me. Specifically, edges are substantially less noisy in the high quality version, whereas in the low quality version there are some pretty obvious compression artifacts around edges.
It may cost billions to extend a large commuter light rail a dozen miles in a major metropolitan area in the United States. How much you want to bet in the developing world this is all about, and a cheaper less fancy setup, the cost would be a fraction of that? Really that's just apples to oranges.
Same applies to disabled people--in the United States where we have the resources to do so, we are able force people to see to their needs. Elsewhere, this really can't be a primary concern, and such things can honestly reasonably be overlooked in the short term for more important ends.
I've been reserving judgment against Intel in its battle against the XO, but after looking at that, it really seems that Intel is just using its market power to shove a pretty inferior product down people's throats. I mean, if I were going to spend money on one of those right now, I'd definitely go for the XO--it just seems cool. The Classmate just looks like a bulky XP box that brings nothing interesting to the table, and the Eee really isn't targeted at the same market anyway as I understand. Bias? Maybe, but it seems pretty clear to me which one had the most thought go into the design.
XO Resolution: 1200x900 (Grayscale), or 800x600 (Color)
Classmate/Eee Resolution: 800x480
Yes, four-freaking-eighty. Did you even look at all the pictures and read the related text? The third to the last at even a casual glance makes it painfully obvious how cramped looking the other two are in comparison to the XO, whether the specs make it seem that way or not. Doesn't seem even remotely biased to me; more like spot on.
As I understand it, neither the main service panel surge suppressor nor the power bar are sufficient alone. In other words, you're certainly right that you want one on your main service panel, but for smaller surges and as a backup on larger ones (Or hell, maybe the surge originates between the service panel and your appliance? Lightning striking your house? I know it's a stretch, but hey), you'll want one at the point of use too.
At least, that's the way I understand it.
While a lot of people are complaining about the price and pointing out Power Squids, it seems to me that with this item it's a matter of getting what you pay for. It provides SUBSTANTIALLY more surge protection than the Squid, and seems to also cover all your common cables (Coax, CAT-5) and not just power. I'm inclined to say that if you're in a position where any of that would be important, this might be a solid piece of engineering to suit your needs. You just pay for it.
(Not that I've actually tested it--might turn out to be a cheap piece of crap that doesn't live up to its specs despite the price--but that's another matter really.)
Seems to me that if you stagger the rotated ones you could probably have enough room for a mid-sized wall wort on each one. One on the top, next one on the side, next one on the top, etc... effectively doubles the space between any consecutive two on a side.
I would bet good money too that the "warranties" are worded in such a way as to make it effectively impossible to ever collect anything. Just a hunch...