... the new layout.
The thinner top nav (and generally slimmer design elements) give much more room to why I'm really here: the text of the summaries and comments.
Simply put, text editors (including IDEs, etc) and document viewers (PDF readers and similar) should support two columns per page.
As to webpages, layouts will move to optimize for support of 16:9/16:10 when 4:3 dies out more completely.
A family member who is a Phd had to resubmit a journal article for that reason (one of his co-authors did something similar to the article). Binary blobs (in this case, screenshots and the ilk) are never your friend!
How is an unsecured server any different than an unlocked door? If the owner of the property finds that you've been there without permission, you're still trespassing.
I'd argue that unsecured HTTP (e.g. no authentication in place and on the public internet) is akin to trespassing on unsecured property, or entering an unlocked door. Entering a secured system without authorization (e.g. through some hack, social engineering, etc) would be more like breaking and entering.
I understand the distinction you're making, implicitly, between entering virtual space and physical space, but stand by my analogy.
Unsecured systems (HTTP or otherwise) are like doors left open, and secured systems are like locked doors. It should be, I argue, left to the possessor of the space (e.g. physical place or network host) to determine whether access is (or was) acceptable.
There are standards in some localities surrounding posting notices of "No Trespassing" to indicate private space that is not open to the public (even if it is not physically restricted, such as with a fence or wall). Perhaps a similar requirement would be suitable in these cases, and without such, hosts of unsecured HTTP sites might then have no right to "cry when somebody reads it".
It kept MMS off the iPhone, caused the stagnation in Windows Mobile, and is forcing this. Regulatory (or legislative) intervention in the form of forcing carriers to decouple phone provision from the network (following from Carterphone in the wired telco world) is one solution. Perhaps there are others?
We do a very poor job, globally, of distinguishing between electronic trespass and electronic breaking and entering. In the rush to criminalize computer use deigned anti-social, bedrock concepts such as the above were not well-translated to electronic paradigms. As such, bizarrely disproportionate legal sanctions are often applied to those convicted of these acts, and with little reason beyond knee-jerk technophobia.
... is the lack of digital rebroadcast of most channels in most markets. On Comcast in Indianapolis, for example, only premium channels (not just movie stations, but tiered offerings like MTVs >2, BBC America, extra History channels, et cetera) are carried over QAM. Basic cable is still simply analog, and is just tuned over analog by the converter boxes.
The MSOs are being miserly with their spectrum, from what I've seen, and probably won't switch to all QAM until they're mandated to do so. I think they may have been thus-required, but the ruling in question escapes ready recall.
Here's to hoping that "in the clear" QAM basic cable is coming soon to head-end near you.
CableCARD is a kludge, at best. CableLABS was allowed by its owners to poorly implement something, conveniently providing an excuse for the MSOs to complain to FCC et al about supposedly difficult to implement interoperability requirements. Yes, DVB would have been much better. Sadly, it isn't what has come to market, many thanks to Time Warner, Viacom and their ilk.
Read the Wiki article, where it is succinctly stated:
The physical CableCARD that is inserted into the host device is a PCMCIA type II card which handles decryption of video, and making sure that only people that have paid for the channel may view it. This is also known as "conditional access module" function.
Slashdot Mirror
... much of his own creation.
... the new layout. The thinner top nav (and generally slimmer design elements) give much more room to why I'm really here: the text of the summaries and comments.
"Obamabots"; it has less weird religious cult connotations, while still being critical.
Simply put, text editors (including IDEs, etc) and document viewers (PDF readers and similar) should support two columns per page. As to webpages, layouts will move to optimize for support of 16:9/16:10 when 4:3 dies out more completely.
A family member who is a Phd had to resubmit a journal article for that reason (one of his co-authors did something similar to the article). Binary blobs (in this case, screenshots and the ilk) are never your friend!
OpenLeft.org, FireDogLake, the list goes on.
How is an unsecured server any different than an unlocked door? If the owner of the property finds that you've been there without permission, you're still trespassing.
I'd argue that unsecured HTTP (e.g. no authentication in place and on the public internet) is akin to trespassing on unsecured property, or entering an unlocked door. Entering a secured system without authorization (e.g. through some hack, social engineering, etc) would be more like breaking and entering. I understand the distinction you're making, implicitly, between entering virtual space and physical space, but stand by my analogy. Unsecured systems (HTTP or otherwise) are like doors left open, and secured systems are like locked doors. It should be, I argue, left to the possessor of the space (e.g. physical place or network host) to determine whether access is (or was) acceptable. There are standards in some localities surrounding posting notices of "No Trespassing" to indicate private space that is not open to the public (even if it is not physically restricted, such as with a fence or wall). Perhaps a similar requirement would be suitable in these cases, and without such, hosts of unsecured HTTP sites might then have no right to "cry when somebody reads it".
It kept MMS off the iPhone, caused the stagnation in Windows Mobile, and is forcing this. Regulatory (or legislative) intervention in the form of forcing carriers to decouple phone provision from the network (following from Carterphone in the wired telco world) is one solution. Perhaps there are others?
We do a very poor job, globally, of distinguishing between electronic trespass and electronic breaking and entering. In the rush to criminalize computer use deigned anti-social, bedrock concepts such as the above were not well-translated to electronic paradigms. As such, bizarrely disproportionate legal sanctions are often applied to those convicted of these acts, and with little reason beyond knee-jerk technophobia.
There's also WinCacheGrind (http://wincachegrind.sourceforge.net).
... predicts their death; news at 11. I, for one, will not be welcoming any new, RISC-speaking overlords.
... is the lack of digital rebroadcast of most channels in most markets. On Comcast in Indianapolis, for example, only premium channels (not just movie stations, but tiered offerings like MTVs >2, BBC America, extra History channels, et cetera) are carried over QAM. Basic cable is still simply analog, and is just tuned over analog by the converter boxes. The MSOs are being miserly with their spectrum, from what I've seen, and probably won't switch to all QAM until they're mandated to do so. I think they may have been thus-required, but the ruling in question escapes ready recall. Here's to hoping that "in the clear" QAM basic cable is coming soon to head-end near you.
CableCARD is a kludge, at best. CableLABS was allowed by its owners to poorly implement something, conveniently providing an excuse for the MSOs to complain to FCC et al about supposedly difficult to implement interoperability requirements. Yes, DVB would have been much better. Sadly, it isn't what has come to market, many thanks to Time Warner, Viacom and their ilk.