Regardless of right or wrong, believing in something does not make it so.
While I do indeed believe in a creator God, that does not cause him to exist- while I am completely confident that I am correct, I may not be
While you do not believe in a creator God, that also does not cause his existence to be a false premise.
While I totally respect others who don't see things my way, I just find it ironic that most of the people whining about there being folks out there who believe in something are using the same "delusion" -if you will- to convince them that they are correct. No matter what you believe, there's never really a way to prove it by science alone in it's current state of study.
Either intellectual property is a physical good that can be legally acquired, owned, and resold as a used item, or it is not, in which case stop fucking calling it theft.
I couldn't agree more.
RIAA- Shit or get off the pot.
If they don't spam random addresses then why do I get spam at firstnamelastname@gmail.com when I signed up for firstname.lastname@gmail.com and have only ever used the latter?
According to google, if you have one, you get the other automatically.
giving it away? my data is encrypted with AES 256 encryption.
I also have my primary data, my backup local data on another hard Drive and for my very important stuff, I will be getting BD-R copies (family video and pictures)
Carbonite is insurance.
Certainly, but how many "Joe Home Users" are going to any effort to encrypt their data? Obviously, there's no excuse when we know the pitfalls, but the point is, look at how all these cloud services are marketed and see if any of these drawbacks are even mentioned. The 'cloud' is just talked up like it's the next wheel, but no one even knows what the hell they're talking about, or what the potential risks are!
It's irresponsibility like this that keeps me from embracing the cloud like I want to. I don't trust anyone, so I'm actually thinking of building my own personal cloud infrastructure to store my stuff offsite, email, etc.
Well, according to Wikipedia, "[private clouds]...have attracted criticism because users "still have to buy, build, and manage them" and thus do not benefit from lower up-front capital costs and less hands-on management, essentially "[lacking] the economic model that makes cloud computing such an intriguing concept"
Translation: Being smart and responsible with our data costs money- how can we make it cost less money.
At some point, you drop the 'smart', and 'responsibility' part in order to make room for the 'cost less money' part. If someone's moving to the cloud is driven by nothing but trying to cut costs, they're already in the soup.
I personally have found the idea of a private cloud to be a winner, and a number of organizations have joined up to create their own cloud. I'm currently working on a project called the "Metronet" in South Bend, IN http://www.metronetzing.org/ which does exactly this. I recommend you keep looking into the idea. There are some really cool opportunities out there.
Carbonite: endorsed by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. 'Nuff said.
But why? I think if either of them actually cared about rights to privacy, etc., they wouldn't be recommending this kind of shit to their listeners/viewers. We see once again that they are just puppets controlled by strings of money. It's not about actually recommending a good product to the consumer, but making sure that commission check is as large as possible.
Just solidifies my opinion that Carbonite is an irresponsible company, and I've been saying this for a while- this is just an example. You think that trusting all the data on your computer to a company who can't even keep your email address or other account information safe is a good idea?
Cloud backup is irresponsible to start with. Off-site MANAGED backups are fine, but just throwing all your data out into the ether and expecting it to be safe is asinine. What will it take for people to stop *giving* away their data?
It claims to "intelligently" determine what parts of the frame are important to the eye.... No thanks, I'll prefer the compressed video. I'm not too interested in a compressed compressed video.
from the FAQ on WHDI.org
How does the Video Modem Work?
The WHDI video modem takes the uncompressed HD video stream and breaks it into elements of visual importance. The various elements are then mapped onto the wireless channel in a way that gives elements with more visual importance a greater share of the channel resources, i.e. they are transmitted in a more robust manner. Elements that have less visual importance are allocated fewer channel resources. The result of this unique video-modem approach is that any errors in the wireless channel are not noticed as they only affect the less visually important bits. Very high rates of video information can be transmitted because the human eye can tolerate the errors that fall on the less important bits.
Traditional wireless technologies (such as WiFi) do not differentiate between the least important and most important information, and thus cannot deliver the bandwidth or robustness of WHDI
...wondering why the hell the federal reserve knows anything about our accounts? While I understand that the fact that this was, in fact a security breach, the problem isn't how the hacker got in, but why the data was there for him to steal in the first place!
I saw somewhere (I think maybe even here on/.) that world governments apparently buy more digital storage every year and it had a figure for what percent of produced storage governments bought. Does anyone have any doubts about what they are storing?
In addition, if we're going to indict some random malaysian hacker for stealing our data, let's go ahead and do the same for our own government, which seemingly saw fit to do the exact same thing by snooping on traffic at the telco level. How is that NOT stealing??
See, this is really intelligent, but the problem is that cops in general can say they prove anything and there's no accountability. Sadly, nobody really raises hell about that. That's the first problem. If they need you to be texting or drinking or have drugs in your car, they will. I mean, I see the usual blankets getting thrown on this, like "probable cause".
Just wait for the 'intent to send an SMS message' charges to get drawn up for the first time.
And I was really stoked about Moto coming back in and showing some new tech to market... this is exactly why I'm once again choosing someone else. I want to do whatever I want with hardware once I've paid for it. Now, if I could get the phone for free, I might not bitch, but really, people are paying for phones that cost what you can buy a netbook for these days... If I bought a netbook and was told "You can't install anything on here except what it comes with" do you really think I'd drop 300 dollars on it?? I guess most people don't care, but it will be interesting to see if this bites Moto in the ass.
Honestly, while I realize that there are some people out there using IE, I almost never make it a priority in development. "Oh, it doesn't work? What browser are you using? Internet explorer? Oh, that's the issue then." Why are we trying to fix something that is broken by design and is about as closed as a nun's c**t?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh how I wish I had mod points today. +5 Insightful
Regardless of right or wrong, believing in something does not make it so.
While I do indeed believe in a creator God, that does not cause him to exist- while I am completely confident that I am correct, I may not be
While you do not believe in a creator God, that also does not cause his existence to be a false premise.
While I totally respect others who don't see things my way, I just find it ironic that most of the people whining about there being folks out there who believe in something are using the same "delusion" -if you will- to convince them that they are correct. No matter what you believe, there's never really a way to prove it by science alone in it's current state of study.
What is TPC, googled it and come up with a bunch of different things.. Tablet press controller?
Trusted Platform Chip, I'm guessing. Just look at the context.
Either intellectual property is a physical good that can be legally acquired, owned, and resold as a used item, or it is not, in which case stop fucking calling it theft.
I couldn't agree more. RIAA- Shit or get off the pot.
NASA pretty much doesn't let anybody to be an astronaut unless he is both test pilot and has served army for at least 10 years.
GOATSE troll.
If they don't spam random addresses then why do I get spam at firstnamelastname@gmail.com when I signed up for firstname.lastname@gmail.com and have only ever used the latter?
According to google, if you have one, you get the other automatically.
giving it away? my data is encrypted with AES 256 encryption.
I also have my primary data, my backup local data on another hard Drive and for my very important stuff, I will be getting BD-R copies (family video and pictures)
Carbonite is insurance.
Certainly, but how many "Joe Home Users" are going to any effort to encrypt their data? Obviously, there's no excuse when we know the pitfalls, but the point is, look at how all these cloud services are marketed and see if any of these drawbacks are even mentioned. The 'cloud' is just talked up like it's the next wheel, but no one even knows what the hell they're talking about, or what the potential risks are!
It's irresponsibility like this that keeps me from embracing the cloud like I want to. I don't trust anyone, so I'm actually thinking of building my own personal cloud infrastructure to store my stuff offsite, email, etc.
Well, according to Wikipedia, "[private clouds] ...have attracted criticism because users "still have to buy, build, and manage them" and thus do not benefit from lower up-front capital costs and less hands-on management, essentially "[lacking] the economic model that makes cloud computing such an intriguing concept"
Translation: Being smart and responsible with our data costs money- how can we make it cost less money.
At some point, you drop the 'smart', and 'responsibility' part in order to make room for the 'cost less money' part. If someone's moving to the cloud is driven by nothing but trying to cut costs, they're already in the soup.
I personally have found the idea of a private cloud to be a winner, and a number of organizations have joined up to create their own cloud. I'm currently working on a project called the "Metronet" in South Bend, IN http://www.metronetzing.org/ which does exactly this. I recommend you keep looking into the idea. There are some really cool opportunities out there.
Carbonite: endorsed by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. 'Nuff said.
But why? I think if either of them actually cared about rights to privacy, etc., they wouldn't be recommending this kind of shit to their listeners/viewers. We see once again that they are just puppets controlled by strings of money. It's not about actually recommending a good product to the consumer, but making sure that commission check is as large as possible.
Just solidifies my opinion that Carbonite is an irresponsible company, and I've been saying this for a while- this is just an example. You think that trusting all the data on your computer to a company who can't even keep your email address or other account information safe is a good idea? Cloud backup is irresponsible to start with. Off-site MANAGED backups are fine, but just throwing all your data out into the ether and expecting it to be safe is asinine. What will it take for people to stop *giving* away their data?
You make armchair physicists look bad, go back to writing sloppy code with you're CS major.
"...you're" CS major... And what are you, my friend? An English major? I should hope not.
...wondering why the hell the federal reserve knows anything about our accounts? While I understand that the fact that this was, in fact a security breach, the problem isn't how the hacker got in, but why the data was there for him to steal in the first place! I saw somewhere (I think maybe even here on /.) that world governments apparently buy more digital storage every year and it had a figure for what percent of produced storage governments bought. Does anyone have any doubts about what they are storing?
In addition, if we're going to indict some random malaysian hacker for stealing our data, let's go ahead and do the same for our own government, which seemingly saw fit to do the exact same thing by snooping on traffic at the telco level. How is that NOT stealing??
Nailed it.
I threw up in my mouth a little bit upon reading this. God save us.
See, this is really intelligent, but the problem is that cops in general can say they prove anything and there's no accountability. Sadly, nobody really raises hell about that. That's the first problem. If they need you to be texting or drinking or have drugs in your car, they will. I mean, I see the usual blankets getting thrown on this, like "probable cause". Just wait for the 'intent to send an SMS message' charges to get drawn up for the first time.
Saw this on facebook. While I don't personally have a need for this, I know that down the line, I'll be glad I knew about it. Good post.
And I was really stoked about Moto coming back in and showing some new tech to market... this is exactly why I'm once again choosing someone else. I want to do whatever I want with hardware once I've paid for it. Now, if I could get the phone for free, I might not bitch, but really, people are paying for phones that cost what you can buy a netbook for these days... If I bought a netbook and was told "You can't install anything on here except what it comes with" do you really think I'd drop 300 dollars on it?? I guess most people don't care, but it will be interesting to see if this bites Moto in the ass.
Me either. But on those rare occasions when I'm not developing for unicorns, I have to consider the real world.
I get that... I just hate having to intentionally break things to make it appear to work.
Honestly, while I realize that there are some people out there using IE, I almost never make it a priority in development. "Oh, it doesn't work? What browser are you using? Internet explorer? Oh, that's the issue then." Why are we trying to fix something that is broken by design and is about as closed as a nun's c**t?