Keep in mind the roundabout forces people to slow down well before the intersection, especially on ice. With a traditional stop light people tend to go the speed limit while it's green, assuming it'll stay that way. It can easily switch to red fast enough that it's impossible to stop on ice. This should translate to people driving slower so they can stop but that's often not the case.
With a roundabout it's a certainty that you'll need to slow down to 10ish miles per hour to make the tight turns without sliding onto the curb so people always slow down. Even in the worst case scenario you have a reckless driver who only slows down to 20mph and strikes a car from the side. That's much better than the stoplight's worst case.
If a solar flare leaves the star Sol at 8:55am traveling at 540 miles/second and a plane takes off from Houston 9 days later, will the flight be affected by the solar flare?
Actually, roundabouts have become very popular in my hometown (Fargo, ND) because they are much safer when roads are icy. At a 4-way stop or a traffic light, if your car slides it goes into traffic. Our roundabouts have a small hill in the middle so if the car slides it hits a curb and eventually some dirt to stop it. It's much safer. And most are designed to be beautiful as well as functional.
I am also a part of the "haven't bought one single copy of music cd for the past 5 years" crowd. I've found that while the quality of radio has gone down, the quality of radio alternatives has gone up. Pandora, Grooveshark, imeem, and (cringing as I type this) MySpace have covered my music needs so perfectly that I haven't felt the need to pirate or purchase music in years. I still listen to music daily and that music is almost exclusively tracks that wouldn't be played on any of my area's radio stations. I contribute money in the ads that display in the services I use, in the merchandise I buy from my band's websites, from attending concerts, and recommending them to others.
Is it the old model of listening to what I'm fed on the radio, buying the CD for the one track I've heard, hoping the rest is of the same or better quality, and (usually) selling it on a garage sale for a $1 the next summer? Thankfully, no. That's the constant stream of let-down that disillusioned people enough to fight back. At first the only popular alternative was pirating the CDs but we're starting to see some better compromises.
This doesn't have to be the illegally-free vs legal-ripoff battle it's made out to be. The issue is complicated and full of shades of gray. There are ways to legally listen to quality music at no cost and still support the artists who produced it. As a culture, we're still working out the details on what's fair and what will work in the long run but we've come a long way in a short amount of time. Be hopeful:)
You may want to check the exact wording of the franchise agreement. Depending on how it's worded, if they are required to provide you free access to basic cable and they no longer offer that option, you may have some leverage with them. If nothing else, you may persuade them to give you the hardware at no cost.
You missed the point, AC. Parent's point was that the Kno isn't competing well - especially on price.They don't appear to have any special hardware or software that would set them apart from the rest of the Linux tablets. Given Apple's history for greasing their products with "cool" and given their current stance as the market leader in the tablet category, I can't imagine many students opting for the Kno over the iPad. Lets face it, college freshmen care a lot about looking cool and establishing a sense of belonging. The Kno will be a hard sell without a unique selling point. (Other than a hinge)
That being said, I've no use for a tablet and generally avoid Apple products because I switch between Linux, Mac, and Windows enough that I need devices that play nice on all. But that doesn't concern most people.
If you'd have read the article, you'd know that home networks are the new frontier for hackers and a big reason why security experts are giving up the desktop fight to focus on the network instead. From the article: "... it won’t matter if PCs are disinfected, swapped out, or replaced with iPads, the bad guys are still control because they own the network below." So the old Blame Windows standard won't work in this case.
I wonder if anyone has ever hired a celebrity for a personal appearance to read them a book. I'm adding this to my "if I ever get rich" list. "#14 - Hire Sir Patrick Stewart to read me a bedtime story"
A better analogy would be if you were an adequate programmer but afraid of computers and couldn't type when in front of one. I'm sure there's a niche for this hypothetical person and with enough creativity he or she could make it work. But would you want to restructure the market and laws to guarantee them a programming job when they couldn't perform one of the main functions of the job?
Sure they do. That's the main reason I won't buy Apple devices anymore. I once purchased an iPod and it would not work with any of the Linux tools until it had first been connected to iTunes, activated, and updated. Until that happened, it would just play a sound clip saying to update it. A brand new mp3 player should not need to be connected to the Apple network before it can ever be used. They forced an update that was impossible for me to perform on my computer. Eventually I sold it and went to an alternate vendor that actually wanted my business.
That being said, Sony has a reputation for abusing their customers and that's why I avoid their products. I learned my lesson a few years ago when I owned a Sony Palm that had half of its functionality crippled when there wasn't a memory stick in it. (Despite the addl memory being completely unnecessary - it was just an attempt to sell more MS) They tend to do pretty well with an initial release of a product then follow it up with increasingly restricted copies until they become completely undesirable or unusable. It's too bad, really, because I could afford and would enjoy many of their products but they're not worth the associated costs in dealing with their policies.
Agreed. We should all collectively agree to start claiming we need to be naked while repairing computers to avoid static build-up. That's why it really should go to a shop: they have special rooms for that.
The article suggests it's time for a radical shift in how we make security recommendations based on cost-benefit analysis, rather than just reporting each possible attack and recommending to fix it. The argument is that when you flood users with too many recommendations, they begin to reject any security recommendations that cost they too much time, hastle, or resources. The more warnings you throw at them, the more accustomed they become to rejecting them and eventually they get a mentality where they deny all recommendations and wait for an attack to happen, then learn their lesson for that one attack only.
In this case, the cost was $50 up front but the indirect cost would be needing to learn how to add new devices to the secured wireless, store yet another password somewhere, possibly change the password as problems occurred: all of which would likely lead to having network outages and having your team come back to fix it when it breaks. The benefit in their mind was that someone in the parking lot couldn't check their facebook. So instead they leave it open and run a small risk of viruses from people sharing the connection, an even smaller risk of their Internet connection being used for illegal activity, and an even smaller risk of being attacked for their data. It isn't that they're dumb, it's that the security industry hasn't given them enough return for their investment. Most business users I've ever known are used to making snap judgements on worth/value. They know they don't have to be perfect, just slightly better than their competition and they're always asking themselves if the company next door went to "all this trouble." They're just applying that same logic to the security industry. If we made it less costly, they'd buy in because it'd be an easy way to get ahead of their competitors. For a little while.
Slashdot Mirror
That's Captain Sweatpants to you!
Keep in mind the roundabout forces people to slow down well before the intersection, especially on ice. With a traditional stop light people tend to go the speed limit while it's green, assuming it'll stay that way. It can easily switch to red fast enough that it's impossible to stop on ice. This should translate to people driving slower so they can stop but that's often not the case.
With a roundabout it's a certainty that you'll need to slow down to 10ish miles per hour to make the tight turns without sliding onto the curb so people always slow down. Even in the worst case scenario you have a reckless driver who only slows down to 20mph and strikes a car from the side. That's much better than the stoplight's worst case.
If a solar flare leaves the star Sol at 8:55am traveling at 540 miles/second and a plane takes off from Houston 9 days later, will the flight be affected by the solar flare?
No.
Actually, roundabouts have become very popular in my hometown (Fargo, ND) because they are much safer when roads are icy. At a 4-way stop or a traffic light, if your car slides it goes into traffic. Our roundabouts have a small hill in the middle so if the car slides it hits a curb and eventually some dirt to stop it. It's much safer. And most are designed to be beautiful as well as functional.
Agreed. That was a near miss.
And someone accuses God of statutory rape. That's got to be worth 3 Godwins and a strawman. Thread over!
ROFL. Classic! Thanks for the nugget of joy, AC :D
You know who else misrepresented his opponents positions? Hitler. >:)
I am also a part of the "haven't bought one single copy of music cd for the past 5 years" crowd. I've found that while the quality of radio has gone down, the quality of radio alternatives has gone up. Pandora, Grooveshark, imeem, and (cringing as I type this) MySpace have covered my music needs so perfectly that I haven't felt the need to pirate or purchase music in years. I still listen to music daily and that music is almost exclusively tracks that wouldn't be played on any of my area's radio stations. I contribute money in the ads that display in the services I use, in the merchandise I buy from my band's websites, from attending concerts, and recommending them to others.
:)
Is it the old model of listening to what I'm fed on the radio, buying the CD for the one track I've heard, hoping the rest is of the same or better quality, and (usually) selling it on a garage sale for a $1 the next summer? Thankfully, no. That's the constant stream of let-down that disillusioned people enough to fight back. At first the only popular alternative was pirating the CDs but we're starting to see some better compromises.
This doesn't have to be the illegally-free vs legal-ripoff battle it's made out to be. The issue is complicated and full of shades of gray. There are ways to legally listen to quality music at no cost and still support the artists who produced it. As a culture, we're still working out the details on what's fair and what will work in the long run but we've come a long way in a short amount of time. Be hopeful
hey-oh!
this
You may want to check the exact wording of the franchise agreement. Depending on how it's worded, if they are required to provide you free access to basic cable and they no longer offer that option, you may have some leverage with them. If nothing else, you may persuade them to give you the hardware at no cost.
why not get two iPads
You missed the point, AC. Parent's point was that the Kno isn't competing well - especially on price.They don't appear to have any special hardware or software that would set them apart from the rest of the Linux tablets. Given Apple's history for greasing their products with "cool" and given their current stance as the market leader in the tablet category, I can't imagine many students opting for the Kno over the iPad. Lets face it, college freshmen care a lot about looking cool and establishing a sense of belonging. The Kno will be a hard sell without a unique selling point. (Other than a hinge)
That being said, I've no use for a tablet and generally avoid Apple products because I switch between Linux, Mac, and Windows enough that I need devices that play nice on all. But that doesn't concern most people.
http://sadtrombone.com/
First they came for the panda...
Well if you'd read the article you'd... erm... no, sorry, I've got nothing.
If you'd have read the article, you'd know that home networks are the new frontier for hackers and a big reason why security experts are giving up the desktop fight to focus on the network instead. From the article: "... it won’t matter if PCs are disinfected, swapped out, or replaced with iPads, the bad guys are still control because they own the network below." So the old Blame Windows standard won't work in this case.
I don't know about pants but 5.11 Tactical has some pretty convincing shirts with hidden pockets
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I'd give ya a +1 funny if I had one :D
I wonder if anyone has ever hired a celebrity for a personal appearance to read them a book. I'm adding this to my "if I ever get rich" list. "#14 - Hire Sir Patrick Stewart to read me a bedtime story"
This.
A better analogy would be if you were an adequate programmer but afraid of computers and couldn't type when in front of one. I'm sure there's a niche for this hypothetical person and with enough creativity he or she could make it work. But would you want to restructure the market and laws to guarantee them a programming job when they couldn't perform one of the main functions of the job?
Sure they do. That's the main reason I won't buy Apple devices anymore. I once purchased an iPod and it would not work with any of the Linux tools until it had first been connected to iTunes, activated, and updated. Until that happened, it would just play a sound clip saying to update it. A brand new mp3 player should not need to be connected to the Apple network before it can ever be used. They forced an update that was impossible for me to perform on my computer. Eventually I sold it and went to an alternate vendor that actually wanted my business. That being said, Sony has a reputation for abusing their customers and that's why I avoid their products. I learned my lesson a few years ago when I owned a Sony Palm that had half of its functionality crippled when there wasn't a memory stick in it. (Despite the addl memory being completely unnecessary - it was just an attempt to sell more MS) They tend to do pretty well with an initial release of a product then follow it up with increasingly restricted copies until they become completely undesirable or unusable. It's too bad, really, because I could afford and would enjoy many of their products but they're not worth the associated costs in dealing with their policies.
Agreed. We should all collectively agree to start claiming we need to be naked while repairing computers to avoid static build-up. That's why it really should go to a shop: they have special rooms for that.
The article suggests it's time for a radical shift in how we make security recommendations based on cost-benefit analysis, rather than just reporting each possible attack and recommending to fix it. The argument is that when you flood users with too many recommendations, they begin to reject any security recommendations that cost they too much time, hastle, or resources. The more warnings you throw at them, the more accustomed they become to rejecting them and eventually they get a mentality where they deny all recommendations and wait for an attack to happen, then learn their lesson for that one attack only.
In this case, the cost was $50 up front but the indirect cost would be needing to learn how to add new devices to the secured wireless, store yet another password somewhere, possibly change the password as problems occurred: all of which would likely lead to having network outages and having your team come back to fix it when it breaks. The benefit in their mind was that someone in the parking lot couldn't check their facebook. So instead they leave it open and run a small risk of viruses from people sharing the connection, an even smaller risk of their Internet connection being used for illegal activity, and an even smaller risk of being attacked for their data. It isn't that they're dumb, it's that the security industry hasn't given them enough return for their investment. Most business users I've ever known are used to making snap judgements on worth/value. They know they don't have to be perfect, just slightly better than their competition and they're always asking themselves if the company next door went to "all this trouble." They're just applying that same logic to the security industry. If we made it less costly, they'd buy in because it'd be an easy way to get ahead of their competitors. For a little while.