If only there was a way to encrypt the contents of a hard drive...If there was such a thing, I might go so far as to call it something like...."Full Disk Encryption".
There is actually a trial taking place in southern New South Wales for exactly that. The only thing that can be said for the idea is that its bound to be more effective than legislation for tougher rules.
There's a big difference between owning a computer and owning a laptop/notebook/portable computer. I've owned a computer for my entire time at uni, but it wasn't till halfway into my fourth year that I managed to buy myself a laptop. For thos first 3 years I was totally dependant on the computer labs for pretty much all my coursework that I did on campus, with my own computer being of service only while I was at home.
Once we have 90+% of students owning their own PORTABLE computers, then getting rid of provided computers on campus would be a much more realistic option, and much less of a blow to those that use the resources.
I'm tired and I'm low on coffee, so these thoughts aren't fully formed yet, but the GPL doesn't restrict the end-user.
If you want to use the linux kernel in a closed-source program, then go ahead! Just don't expect to be able to distribute your project.
A good example of this is the nvidia module, which is of course, closed-source, mostly. Theres the open source part (which might be GPL'd), and theres the binary blob, which you couldn't distribute as part of a precompiled kernel. Instead, you distribute it as a seperate module. The user is allowed to insert it into the kernel, despite the fact that it isn't GPL'd.
DRM is just a little different, and I can see where people might get a little confused as to weather its a good thing or not. Ultimately, I define a failed DRM scheme as one that stops me from doing anything legit. If implemented perfectly, then DRM on things like music would be acceptable to me. A big problem is how "legit" is defined. However, just as 100% efficient transformer is impossible, i beleive that a perfect DRM scheme is also impossible, and thus unacceptable.
Copyright is not bad. Copyright enforcement is not necessarily bad. But DRM is a far cry from being good.
No, that doesn't sound right. A small variation on that statment does, though. "I'm going collaborate with the trial that determines if [insert oppressive regime here] is viable or not, just to prove that the regime is not viable." Any better?
At my uni, public terminals were orchestral instruments, and servers were composors. They were grouped into domains called "orchestra" and "staff" respectively.
Printers were a bit different, but I always did like the theme used for them the most. Since most of the computers used linux, most people used 'lpr -Pprinter ' to print. The printers were named such that when the letter 'p' was added to the front, it was still a dictionary word. For instance 'light', 'ants', 'lump', 'raise', 'ear', etc.
Thus the final command would be 'lpr -Plight printme.ps'
I agree with you on most counts, however one thing I notice about traffic enforcement is that way too much emphasis is put on speeding. A speed camera is an advantage in many ways, yes. But it does nothing to stop drivers who, like you mentioned, cut in and out of traffic without any concern for the disturbances they leave in their wake.
Everyone needs to stop pretending that speed is the main contributing factor in traffic incidents in the cases where it isn't. The fact is that many speed limits are not set based on what the maximum safe speed is, but what raod policy says it should be.
That being said, I understand the need, from a legal perspective, to tell people what the limit is before they attract enforcement attention.
All things told, I don't like them, but I view the speed cameras as a necessary evil. As long as they're well advertised and placed in safety trouble-zones, I support their existence.
I've now just listened to it. It did provoke many a 'WTF'. That speech is ridiculous on so many fronts. At least it did give us that humorous quote, though.
I've never quite understood what is so bad about calling the internet "a series of tubes". Granted, its not the term I'd use. I'd probably say pipes.
Maybe its because I've never heard anything except that tiny little quote, but it seems to be a rather good analogy, easy for the layman to understand.
It annoys me that people view this sort of thing as 'beating the system'. The police know the score, at least. The more people know about where the speed traps are, the more likely they are to slow down for them.
Speed traps are there primarily as a safety thing (at least they are here). They're very annoying and I'd love to pretend that they're just revenue-raisers, but they're not.
In such a circumstance, the best thing to do is give as much exposure as possible to the locations of them. A better way than putting it on iPhones would of course be to have warning signs on the road. Give people enough warning and they'll slow down for the danger-area (if they weren't already observing the limit), and your goal is acheived.
Now they've become so perverted that they seem to only exist in many places as a revenue source for local towns, and in causing drivers to spend more time looking at signs on the side of the road and their speedometer, they actually cause the roads to be LESS safe.
Agreed. My favourites are "school zones", an area around a primary or secondary school with a speed limit of 40km/h between 0800-0930 and 1430-1600. That's 40 no matter what the usual limit is. I've seen open highways with a school zone on it, and the limit going from 110 to 40.
They've just started putting in speed cameras that can enforce these variable speed limits, and they're making a fortune.
All the while, the traffic keeps it eyes on their speedos, and off the roads with the unpredictable kidlets running around, the ones that you need to keep a close eye on.
Don't get carried away here. The filtering effort requires you to tell the ISP WHAT you want. Not why, not for what reason.
The filtering is based solely on content, not the reason for obtaining said content.
To fit the example, the shoe company would ask you what pair of shoes you wanted, and from that they could INFER why you want them and what you plan to do with them, and based on that inference, they would refuse/allow the sale.
All things told, its most rediculous. But I'm not too worried that we'll get the wrong result.
I've always wanted to know how to sort them if you use the -h switch ("du -hs"). The -h appends 'K', 'M', or 'G' to the size, making it buttload easier to read. You get 80G instead of 82871652.
There are plenty of phones that perform better the Mr iPhone that have all those things (except the lightsaber app, though that isn't necessarily a deal-breaker). Web browsing, email, maps, chat, video, music, YouTube...they're all data. GPS is hardly a cutting-edge feature either, though it is far from standard. Same goes for WiFi. What sets the iPhone apart in my eyes is the looks and the touch-screen, both of which are impressive.
Don't misunderstand me, I think its a decent phone. Its just not as revolutionary as all the hype would have you believe.
I have been saved by RAID5 before, when one of my drives died a horrible death. A few hours later, I was back up and running. I am very glad I did that.
However, I once accidentally did chown -R user:users / instead of on *. the RAID didn't help with that at all, and I consider it quite lucky that I was able to recover from it at all.
My current ISP will endevour to keep giving you the same IP as long as it can. But they don't guarantee it, and on occasion its given me a new one out of the blue. It confused my iptables rules for a while, but now I simply have it reload the ruleset everytime the DHCP lease is renewed.
All in all, I think the internet here is a lot better than it used to be. It mostly suits my needs as they are at the moment. It could be better though.
I almost went with iinet once. They seemed like pretty reasonable plans, and good prices, but then they stopped offering static IPs and started metering uploads.
If my PC is always on (and it is), then giving me a dynamic IP isn't saving any from the pool, from what I can tell.
The problem with metering the uploads is that its so much harder to account for them. I'm not sure if that's by the nature of uploads or simply my inability to think properly, but either way, I'd much prefer unlimited uploads.
Is it not possible that this organisation was meant to receive an email that basically said "Don't fly here on this day like you normally do"? Obviously, such an email would not need to be encrypted, and its not too big a stretch to imagine someone typing the wrong email address on the wrong email.
Its interesting, but they've always forced a credit card on me - thank god i'm not too bad at managing my funds. I first applied for a credit card when I had no job, and was just entering my first year of university. It was approved, and a limit of $5,000 was put on it.
A few years later, as I started to cut back my shifts at work so I could make more time to study, they offered a limit increase - to $9,500. I can't beleive that someone would think that I am so good a risk, that they would let me have access to almost 10 grand at a moments notice... Still, I guess they were right, because I've never missed a payment, but neither have I ever owed anything more than 1500...
I always thought that the booze laws here were pretty awful, but from what I'm hearing, they aren't.
Anyone who sells alcohol must have a liquor license, that come in either on- or off-licenses. In order to get a license, you've got to do a 2-year "social impact study", and of course pay the administration fee, which I can only imagine would be considerable. Only bottleshops, hotels, pubs, clubs, casinos, restaurantes may sell booze, and even then, there are restrictions on who can buy it, and at what times. For instance, off-licence sales are limited to 8am-12am. The good news, i guess, is that pubs can be 24-hour.
This is pretty off-topic, so I won't go into it further. I had to learn all these nasty intricacies in order to be allowed to work as a bartender.
My point is that if someone wants to sell booze, then they should be able to do it. No restrictions on when or where. Now that I've written that, I'm not sure I agree with my own statement...
The telecast is licensed for "private home viewing" that means no public display, no church, no sports bars no Dr. offices waiting room np public display. But that wasn't the problem that they mentioned. The problem was that the screen was too big.
Clearly, we can assume that public screenings are ok, provided you don't show them on too big a screen.
Slashdot Mirror
If only there was a way to encrypt the contents of a hard drive...If there was such a thing, I might go so far as to call it something like...."Full Disk Encryption".
There is actually a trial taking place in southern New South Wales for exactly that. The only thing that can be said for the idea is that its bound to be more effective than legislation for tougher rules.
There's a big difference between owning a computer and owning a laptop/notebook/portable computer. I've owned a computer for my entire time at uni, but it wasn't till halfway into my fourth year that I managed to buy myself a laptop. For thos first 3 years I was totally dependant on the computer labs for pretty much all my coursework that I did on campus, with my own computer being of service only while I was at home.
Once we have 90+% of students owning their own PORTABLE computers, then getting rid of provided computers on campus would be a much more realistic option, and much less of a blow to those that use the resources.
I'm tired and I'm low on coffee, so these thoughts aren't fully formed yet, but the GPL doesn't restrict the end-user.
If you want to use the linux kernel in a closed-source program, then go ahead! Just don't expect to be able to distribute your project.
A good example of this is the nvidia module, which is of course, closed-source, mostly. Theres the open source part (which might be GPL'd), and theres the binary blob, which you couldn't distribute as part of a precompiled kernel. Instead, you distribute it as a seperate module. The user is allowed to insert it into the kernel, despite the fact that it isn't GPL'd.
DRM is just a little different, and I can see where people might get a little confused as to weather its a good thing or not. Ultimately, I define a failed DRM scheme as one that stops me from doing anything legit. If implemented perfectly, then DRM on things like music would be acceptable to me. A big problem is how "legit" is defined.
However, just as 100% efficient transformer is impossible, i beleive that a perfect DRM scheme is also impossible, and thus unacceptable.
Copyright is not bad. Copyright enforcement is not necessarily bad. But DRM is a far cry from being good.
No, that doesn't sound right. A small variation on that statment does, though.
"I'm going collaborate with the trial that determines if [insert oppressive regime here] is viable or not, just to prove that the regime is not viable."
Any better?
At my uni, public terminals were orchestral instruments, and servers were composors. They were grouped into domains called "orchestra" and "staff" respectively.
Printers were a bit different, but I always did like the theme used for them the most. Since most of the computers used linux, most people used 'lpr -Pprinter ' to print. The printers were named such that when the letter 'p' was added to the front, it was still a dictionary word.
For instance 'light', 'ants', 'lump', 'raise', 'ear', etc.
Thus the final command would be 'lpr -Plight printme.ps'
I agree with you on most counts, however one thing I notice about traffic enforcement is that way too much emphasis is put on speeding. A speed camera is an advantage in many ways, yes. But it does nothing to stop drivers who, like you mentioned, cut in and out of traffic without any concern for the disturbances they leave in their wake.
Everyone needs to stop pretending that speed is the main contributing factor in traffic incidents in the cases where it isn't. The fact is that many speed limits are not set based on what the maximum safe speed is, but what raod policy says it should be.
That being said, I understand the need, from a legal perspective, to tell people what the limit is before they attract enforcement attention.
All things told, I don't like them, but I view the speed cameras as a necessary evil. As long as they're well advertised and placed in safety trouble-zones, I support their existence.
I've now just listened to it. It did provoke many a 'WTF'.
That speech is ridiculous on so many fronts.
At least it did give us that humorous quote, though.
I've never quite understood what is so bad about calling the internet "a series of tubes". Granted, its not the term I'd use. I'd probably say pipes.
Maybe its because I've never heard anything except that tiny little quote, but it seems to be a rather good analogy, easy for the layman to understand.
It annoys me that people view this sort of thing as 'beating the system'. The police know the score, at least. The more people know about where the speed traps are, the more likely they are to slow down for them.
Speed traps are there primarily as a safety thing (at least they are here). They're very annoying and I'd love to pretend that they're just revenue-raisers, but they're not.
In such a circumstance, the best thing to do is give as much exposure as possible to the locations of them. A better way than putting it on iPhones would of course be to have warning signs on the road. Give people enough warning and they'll slow down for the danger-area (if they weren't already observing the limit), and your goal is acheived.
Now they've become so perverted that they seem to only exist in many places as a revenue source for local towns, and in causing drivers to spend more time looking at signs on the side of the road and their speedometer, they actually cause the roads to be LESS safe.
Agreed. My favourites are "school zones", an area around a primary or secondary school with a speed limit of 40km/h between 0800-0930 and 1430-1600. That's 40 no matter what the usual limit is. I've seen open highways with a school zone on it, and the limit going from 110 to 40.
They've just started putting in speed cameras that can enforce these variable speed limits, and they're making a fortune.
All the while, the traffic keeps it eyes on their speedos, and off the roads with the unpredictable kidlets running around, the ones that you need to keep a close eye on.
It makes me sick to my stomach
Don't get carried away here. The filtering effort requires you to tell the ISP WHAT you want. Not why, not for what reason.
The filtering is based solely on content, not the reason for obtaining said content.
To fit the example, the shoe company would ask you what pair of shoes you wanted, and from that they could INFER why you want them and what you plan to do with them, and based on that inference, they would refuse/allow the sale.
All things told, its most rediculous.
But I'm not too worried that we'll get the wrong result.
I've always wanted to know how to sort them if you use the -h switch ("du -hs"). The -h appends 'K', 'M', or 'G' to the size, making it buttload easier to read. You get 80G instead of 82871652.
But it does break the ability to sort.
There are plenty of phones that perform better the Mr iPhone that have all those things (except the lightsaber app, though that isn't necessarily a deal-breaker).
Web browsing, email, maps, chat, video, music, YouTube...they're all data. GPS is hardly a cutting-edge feature either, though it is far from standard. Same goes for WiFi.
What sets the iPhone apart in my eyes is the looks and the touch-screen, both of which are impressive.
Don't misunderstand me, I think its a decent phone. Its just not as revolutionary as all the hype would have you believe.
I have been saved by RAID5 before, when one of my drives died a horrible death. A few hours later, I was back up and running. I am very glad I did that.
However, I once accidentally did
chown -R user:users /
instead of on *. the RAID didn't help with that at all, and I consider it quite lucky that I was able to recover from it at all.
My current ISP will endevour to keep giving you the same IP as long as it can. But they don't guarantee it, and on occasion its given me a new one out of the blue. It confused my iptables rules for a while, but now I simply have it reload the ruleset everytime the DHCP lease is renewed.
All in all, I think the internet here is a lot better than it used to be. It mostly suits my needs as they are at the moment. It could be better though.
meh.
I almost went with iinet once. They seemed like pretty reasonable plans, and good prices, but then they stopped offering static IPs and started metering uploads.
If my PC is always on (and it is), then giving me a dynamic IP isn't saving any from the pool, from what I can tell.
The problem with metering the uploads is that its so much harder to account for them. I'm not sure if that's by the nature of uploads or simply my inability to think properly, but either way, I'd much prefer unlimited uploads.
Should a company be allowed to patent a mode of operation that some cell phones already do?
no
Is it not possible that this organisation was meant to receive an email that basically said "Don't fly here on this day like you normally do"?
Obviously, such an email would not need to be encrypted, and its not too big a stretch to imagine someone typing the wrong email address on the wrong email.
Its interesting, but they've always forced a credit card on me - thank god i'm not too bad at managing my funds.
I first applied for a credit card when I had no job, and was just entering my first year of university. It was approved, and a limit of $5,000 was put on it.
A few years later, as I started to cut back my shifts at work so I could make more time to study, they offered a limit increase - to $9,500.
I can't beleive that someone would think that I am so good a risk, that they would let me have access to almost 10 grand at a moments notice...
Still, I guess they were right, because I've never missed a payment, but neither have I ever owed anything more than 1500...
I always thought that the booze laws here were pretty awful, but from what I'm hearing, they aren't.
Anyone who sells alcohol must have a liquor license, that come in either on- or off-licenses. In order to get a license, you've got to do a 2-year "social impact study", and of course pay the administration fee, which I can only imagine would be considerable. Only bottleshops, hotels, pubs, clubs, casinos, restaurantes may sell booze, and even then, there are restrictions on who can buy it, and at what times.
For instance, off-licence sales are limited to 8am-12am. The good news, i guess, is that pubs can be 24-hour.
This is pretty off-topic, so I won't go into it further. I had to learn all these nasty intricacies in order to be allowed to work as a bartender.
My point is that if someone wants to sell booze, then they should be able to do it. No restrictions on when or where.
Now that I've written that, I'm not sure I agree with my own statement...
Oh dear, Oh dear, oh dear...
Need I say more?
I was previously of the opinion that European countries made (generally) good decisions about MAFIAA-related things.
There goes that theory.
I believe xkcd has come up with the best captcha to date
http://xkcd.com/233/