Point taken, still, I don't advocate calling him a slimebag judge just because he has an opinion. He should have recused himself in this case, but really I can't believe the defense didn't do any kind of research on this guy.
I'm no lawyer and hindsight is 20/20, but I would have thought a little research on the judge would be SOP. Unless they were angling for a mistrial because they knew they would lose, then who is the sleezy one in this case?
Just bypass the authentication and you get the key. I KNOW this is the case for Checkpoint WIL disk encryption.
Got any citations for this? I've tried to find cases where Checkpoint was bypassed in this manner, and failed.
I did find a case where some security professionals confused a single-boot bypass flag - which had to be set with cryptographic access to the system - with a "backdoor". It even popped up here on slashdot. In fact it is a necessary tool for remote administration of encrypted drives, and the only reason it is in place is because corporations purchasing the software demanded it. It puts the data at risk for a single boot, which means the risk of actually getting caught by this feature is absurdly low compared to the benefits. Someone would have to be sitting, waiting for the system to shut down from a remote-administration process which they knew in advance required such a reboot, then grab the system while it is powered down to take advantage of the bypass flag and access the system. Also, this bypass option can be completely disabled if that small risk is still too high.
I did a little reading on Checkpoint's WIL option (it is just an option, by the way), and as I suspected their WIL feature integrates with windows authentication, it doesn't rely on it. The disk is still encrypted 100% pre-OS boot, they simply structured the authentication in such a way that you don't have to enter your password twice. The documentation doesn't specify, but more than likely the WIL feature simply passes the Checkpoint logon information on to windows authentication (you can do that, you know).
This means that changing or bypassing the user's password is not possible without cryptographic access to the disk. If you attempt to boot to a CD to change the password, you simply won't be able to read the disk at all, let alone change anything. Changing the password would require you to have already authenticated, which means you've probably got a trojan on there, in which case why in the world are you bothering with breaking the encryption? Just move the data off over the nets! Obviously you have remote access, or there would be no trojan.
Also, Checkpoint assumes that a knowledgeable, trained security professional - who weighs the risks and rewards of each configuration option - is setting up the system. If it's just joe user configuring it, or even Bob "the IT guy", all bets are off.
Er, you realise that in order to download something, someone had to upload it, right?
If there are a million downloads, the material was distributed a million times. By definition, that's a million crimes. What makes it difficult to find and try the person commiting the crime, is that instead of one person commiting the crime a million times, it's more like a million people committing one crime each. To be even more accurate, it's more like one hundred million people working together to commit one million crimes.
The ones who are easy to track are the folks at TPB. Even if they didn't commit the crimes themselves, it would be hard to argue that they were not accomplices, facilitating those crimes, and doing so on purpose to make a lot of money. If you want to argue otherwise, you are either incredibly naive or are being intellectually dishonest.
They are dozens of ways they could have mitigated this from the get go, without changing any of the actual functionality. It could have been easy to argue that they were not attempting to assist copyright infringers, had they done simple things like posted blurbs about copyright law in their FAQ, or put up warnings at the bottom of the page when submitting a torrent saying copyright infringement is illegal, etc. Just fluff really, but intent is very important in law and it goes a long way to proving they didn't intend to assist infringers. That in turn would make it difficult to prove they were willing accomplices in the infringement.
I can't believe I'm defending him, but judges are also citizens. He should have the right to be a member of most any organization he chooses. There is only a problem when the judge attempts to manipulate court procedings in order to encourage a certain outcome.
Note that this is a serious problem NO MATTER what organization a judge may be a member of. This is a problem even if the judge is a recluse and recieves no outside influence because he doesn't do anything but study law. If he manipulates the court proceedings (and judges have a lot of ability to do this) he should be toast. End of story.
That said, it doesn't mean he can't be suspect, and you should certainly want people looking into whether or not he judged based on law, or was attempting to make law fit his own agenda.
If Swedish copyright is anything like US copyright, he probably didn't need to twist the law to come down hard on TPB. Most of their activities are technically illegal, and technically illegal is what a judge should rule on. They usually have the ability to grant a little mercy, but there is no reason they must.
It's apparently the #1 graphic novel of all time, something like that. I hadn't heard of it either until the movie came out.
As for the movie itself, the cinematography I thought was good, the fight choreography was pretty good, the acting was decent, the story and charactar development sucked.
Unfortunately those last two are more important than the rest combined for me.
Wow, drinks in all my local theaters are right around 4.50 for small, 4.75 for medium, and 5 for a large. Medium is almost double a small, and large is easilly triple a small.
A hot dog (or nachos or popcorn) and large soda would put you back around $10. Tickets are 6.75 to 10 depending on time of day.
Man I thought things were pricy here, I guess not, heh.
Ditto for me. Mostly it was the absurd violence and sex that just got in the way, and I'm a big fan of violence and sex. The whole time I was thinking "seriously?". It was almost like a spoof, only it obviously wasn't intended to be. And before you go saying "Watchmen the GN had lots of violence and sex", everybody I've heard from who has read it says the movie went way over the top on the violence.
Plus, the ending sucked. Again, I was just thinking "seriously?"
Ever notice that 99% of trojan and virus attacks require user intervention?
Social Engineering is the primary attack risk to a computer network once basic protection measures are taken (firewall, AV, and current updates), because users are the primary vulnerability. That's why it is usually worth the trouble to simply give the user bare minimum rights to their machines. It helps limit the damage they can cause.
This is, however, inconvenient, and so is not done universally. There are even reasons not to do it that are sound, though requiring any kind of security generally makes low user rights a necessity.
The screen technology, already one of the most expensive parts of a netbook, is significantly more expensive in an e-book reader.
E-ink is in no way similar to LCD technology, other than they both operate in a type of fluid to generate the pixels. How they do it is very different, and e-ink is much, much newer, and so more expensive. But the screens are getting better and the prices are falling, so it's a good thing. There is apparently even color coming some time soon. It's a good time to be a book lover.:)
Laptop batteries already do this. Each battery has a little chip that checks the battery health each time it is charged. When the max charge gets below acceptable levels, it sends a handy-dandy message via the laptop's bios that tells you it needs to be replaced.
I don't think it's any more difficult than tracking how much energy the battery takes when charged, but even if it is more complicated than that, they already have exactly what is needed in use.
Modular battery packs combined with some sort of battery ejection/installation system negates all of those issues.
Since you'd need the manufacturers on board anyway, voltages could be standardized for the batteries at the same time(they have these cool technologies that have been around for a hundred years now that step up and down voltages, you know).
I'm not even an engineer and I thought of that. You're putting up trivial engineering problems as a reason not to do this?
Seriously, the idea sounds really cool. We would probably want a little government regulation of these swap stations, to make sure bad batteries aren't being used and environmental protection systems are in place, but other than that this sounds brilliant to me.
Also wear and tear weasel words do not apply until after 100K or 10 years whichever comes first.
Actually, if you look at most warranties they put those weasle words into the agreement, something along the lines of "Except for regular wear and tear", effectively making the warranty a "catastrophic failure" deal instead of the "if it breaks we fix it" agreement that covers everything. Also, it is the dealer who determines what is a failure and what is "wear and tear", which means they rarely pay out under the warranty if it is anything but completely obvious that the part should not have broken under the circumstances. There are warranties that cover everything, but they are over and above the "10 year, 100k mile" warranty companies like to boast about. They are usually called service agreements (because they imply/require regular checkups for oil changes and replacement of covered wear and tear items), rather than warranties, and they tend to cost a lot.
Propane tanks are exactly the same, I don't use propane myself but I'm pretty sure you must get the tank certified, and the guy who fills the tank checks the tank's age or last certification date or something along those lines. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but I know periodically the tanks themselves have to be re-cycled. Usually at a gas station that does propane there is only one person who is permitted to fill propane.
UTP is what everybody knows, throwing in FTP (foiled twisted pair) is confusing for some, when basically it is just UTP shielded with foil. It's the same as UTP cable only it's shielded. Shielded UTP.
Now, isn't saying shielded UTP a much more concise and easy to understand explanation of what FTP is than writing out what I wrote?
What he did has the benefit of being understood by someone like you, who presumably knows the difference between FTP, STP, and UTP, and someone who doesn't even know what UTP means other than it's what they call network cables for some reason.
It's called communication. It seems his shielded unshielded twisted pair worked out great.:)
I didn't realize you were using this to support your argument at first, I thought you were agreeing with him and then trying to say it was better. I was confused.
My government maintained roads are terrible, always under repair, and even freshly laid they tend to only be decent. Highways are usually good for a year or two, though they'll be bad for the next 6 before they are replaced again.
Are you sure you aren't just an alternate login for BadAnalogyGuy?;)
What's not a myth is Copyright, which has exemptions for *drumroll* fair use!
Now, you have every right not to submit the paper, but if your school won't except your paper without a submission to a verification service, then you're pretty much screwed. It's a whole different lawsuit you've got there, and you could then actually make a case for your IP then, but even so I think you'd be on a weak leg with this ruling. You have to give them permission to keep it in order to complete the class (it's pretty fundamental), and fair use allows them to use a service like TurnItIn. If the school plays hardball the only way (that I see) to protect your "IP" is to not submit it, and probably fail the class and have to change to a school that doesn't use such a service.
I go to a small tech school, who's primary programs are IT and Medical Coding, and most all the labs are virtual. For the IT stuff they do have actual Cisco hardware to play with, but all the MS servers, etc were run on VM's and such, as well as most of the Cisco labs.
Anatomy and physics classes were done via simulations on the computers. This is fine for anything short of becoming an actual nurse or doctor, or physicist, none of which were even close to being thought about being offered by the school.
There are a very large number of programs that can be offered 100% remotely, without requiring physical labs or being physically in the room with the proffessor. I know a guy who got his advanced math degree over the internet, his class used collaberation software to hold classes and there was plenty of interaction. In fact, in that kind of environment people are a lot more likely to speak up than in a classroom with people watching.
I think it's foolish to think ALL degrees will be even possible online, let alone that they will replace brick-and-mortar schools. There are too many degrees that absolutely require a physical presence. However, there are a heck of a lot of degrees that really don't require a physical presence, and those may well be offered online-only at some point. I think 11 years is a little hopeful though.
If you're doing an online retail store targeting a global audience, you're probably not going to use Paypal for your sole means of accepting money.
You know that credit cards and the internet and buying things over the phone and internet have been around a long, long time. It's pretty trivial to set yourself up to be able to accept Visa, Mastercard, and American Express over the web - I think Visa is most expensive, taking 5% of your sale price but it's also the biggest. If you've got those three then you're covering 99% of the credit card market, which covers 99% of online sales.
Your pre-conditions can be met by most anybody with a couple thousand dollars and a computer, since the internet is 24x7, and so are computers, and so are automated purchasing/download systems. You don't think a person actually sits there and reviews each digital purchase before it is downloaded do you? It's all automated. One guy could easilly manage a relatively large system this way. It's not that hard.
I don't think anybody thinks bandwidth is free, they have to pay for it after all, but relatively speaking it's very cheap. It'll cost $5-10 to ship a little box with a program in it to your door (I'm talking the actual cost, not an online free shipping special here, where the retailer eats the cost). 2gb of bandwidth is going to cost at the most $5, and that's if you've got a crappy cap like mine. It's significantly cheaper on the retailer's side if they are actually selling copies and moving product. It's only expensive per-item if you aren't selling any. This is assuming you payed for a hosting company (or the bandwidth to host your own) and enough bandwidth to cover what you sell.
No, the hard part is getting product, negotiating prices, and staying competative. The internet makes delivery a heck of a lot easier and more accessible, not harder.
It's because it boosts the sales of all their works, especially the one they put up for free. Honestly. They do it because it makes them more money.
Books that make money tend to only make money in the first few quarters, after that sale of those books plummet. The same is true for even blockbuster monster hit books, the difference being the low point for those books is about the same as the high point for your average successful book.
By putting a book that has been out a year or two online, they draw new readership, and a good percentage of the people who read it online either buy the paperback/hardcover of it to keep and read again, or they buy other books by the same author.
Go check out the Baen Free Library http://www.baen.com/library/, the editor/co-creator of the site for Baen Books explains why it works, his Prime Palever is pretty interesting too.
It's all Sci-Fi books, and there is a pretty good selection.
Basically, sure there are folks like you and me who don't really care for paper books, but most people find paper much easier and more enjoyable to read, and so tend to sample the online book, decide they like it, and buy it and others in dead tree format. An author may not want to release a book for free, but really it just makes sense after as little as a year to start putting it up for free.
Of course, as eBook readers get better and better and more people use them this business model will be less effective, but then you just adjust and do things a little differently. Right now though it is a very effective way to boost an author's sales.
Why is this flamebait and not every other comment in this thread?
That's my very same objection to the anti-ID arguments that dismiss it out of hand as stupid "just because". When the best argument you have for the ultimate lack of a designer is a great big "well, just because, that's why", then there are problems with your argument.
Evolution and the Big-Bang do a good job of explaining how we got here - I'm actually a heck of a lot more impressed with the Big Bang than I have with Evolution - but they both still have a few big holes that have not been addressed. For Evolution, the biggest problem is the jump from non-life to life and the fact that you have a system going from less complex to more complex which, as far as I know, still defies the law of entropy. For those about to point me to genetic mutations that improve survival of a particular species, those mutations still remove information rather than add it; I've yet to hear of the opposite, though I'd love to be enlightened. That's not to say entropy is infallable, but it has a much longer history and is much more solidly proven than Evolution, and I don't think anything so far has managed to get around it yet.
The Big Bang has the problem the Parent pointed out and was modded flamebate for, and that is nobody knows why the Big Bang got Big and Banged. Sure there are theories about why that would happen, but just having a theory isn't science. In fact the only way I see scientists showing what happened pre-Big Bang is if they can observe evidence that shows the Universe is in a cycle and is heading back toward this. There is some interesting evidence for this, assuming other theories are correct - I believe Dark Matter is integral to this theory, but there are some theories about gravity that could prove Dark Matter false if they are more correct (which may or may not help the cyclical big bang idea).
Science is an ongoing process, even Newton's laws are still being updated and made more accurate. The idea that something you can't prove one way or the other yet is false just because you don't want it to be true, or you find it silly, is just as bad as when they branded Copernicus a heretic because he had the audacity to say the Sun didn't revolve around the Earth. It's also just as grounded in Faith and Belief as the earth-centrist proponents. In fact, they had the lions share of popular evidence on their side, you could WATCH the sun go around the earth on a daily basis. How could they be wrong?
All that said, I've seen a few ID proponents, and they do tend to seem like complete crackpots. The only way I see ID being accepted is if mainstream scientists beat their heads against the few fundamental problems that remain with modern Cosmic theory until they give up. Even then, it seems to be a "no other alternative" kind of idea, which pretty much can't be proven.
Just to point out to people who are wondering how anything will work with only 3 applications able to run, you're equating processes/tasks to applications and that is not accurate. Windows has been able to distinguish between the two since at least win98, and probably 95 also. I know MS likes to screw things up, but they usually don't forget how to use a technology they have implemented for (at least) a decade. Generally speaking anyway.
So no, Chrome and Firefox don't count as 4 applications, they each count as 1 application that would call multiple processes. Look in your own Task Manager if you don't believe it, Applications and Processes are on separate tabs. In fact it takes anywhere from 20-50 processes just to run the OS, so obviously those can't count as applications in this OS. An application must have at least one process to run, but it can have more than that while still being one application.
Now, harken back to the days of IE6, and those show up as separate applications. But apparently, MS has actually gotten better at this fancy schmancy "Application Detection" technology, and that would still only count as one application (and not even just because it is an MS application, I think they learned from their anti-trust losses, at least a little).
System processes and tools, like windows explorer, control panel apps (cmd line, network, etc), desktop widgets, none of those count as apps. Antivirus that runs as a service isn't an app either. I don't know if something like MSN Messenger counts as an App or not, it may count as a widget instead, but I know several alternatives to Messenger would count as an app, just because of how they are implimented. Switch those over to desktop widgets and you're probably not going to get dinged by the 3 app limit.
So you get to run everything OS related, plus as many instances of 3 applications that you want. Plus app developers targeting netbooks will probably start getting creative with their app designes to prevent them from being counted as an application.
That's actually not bad for a netbook. You're not supposed to be doing intense business applications on this thing, you probably wouldn't be able to run Outlook, Project, Word, and Powerpoint at the same time. Then again, your netbook would probably choke if you tried to anyway, especially the latest versions.
And the fact that they are doing this to justify selling it cheaply in order to compete with Linux is a bit of a compliment I think. They are taking Linux a little more seriously than they used to. Unfortunately MS still has a lot more muscle.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what he meant about the meat...
Point taken, still, I don't advocate calling him a slimebag judge just because he has an opinion. He should have recused himself in this case, but really I can't believe the defense didn't do any kind of research on this guy.
I'm no lawyer and hindsight is 20/20, but I would have thought a little research on the judge would be SOP. Unless they were angling for a mistrial because they knew they would lose, then who is the sleezy one in this case?
Just bypass the authentication and you get the key. I KNOW this is the case for Checkpoint WIL disk encryption.
Got any citations for this? I've tried to find cases where Checkpoint was bypassed in this manner, and failed.
I did find a case where some security professionals confused a single-boot bypass flag - which had to be set with cryptographic access to the system - with a "backdoor". It even popped up here on slashdot. In fact it is a necessary tool for remote administration of encrypted drives, and the only reason it is in place is because corporations purchasing the software demanded it. It puts the data at risk for a single boot, which means the risk of actually getting caught by this feature is absurdly low compared to the benefits. Someone would have to be sitting, waiting for the system to shut down from a remote-administration process which they knew in advance required such a reboot, then grab the system while it is powered down to take advantage of the bypass flag and access the system. Also, this bypass option can be completely disabled if that small risk is still too high.
I did a little reading on Checkpoint's WIL option (it is just an option, by the way), and as I suspected their WIL feature integrates with windows authentication, it doesn't rely on it. The disk is still encrypted 100% pre-OS boot, they simply structured the authentication in such a way that you don't have to enter your password twice. The documentation doesn't specify, but more than likely the WIL feature simply passes the Checkpoint logon information on to windows authentication (you can do that, you know).
This means that changing or bypassing the user's password is not possible without cryptographic access to the disk. If you attempt to boot to a CD to change the password, you simply won't be able to read the disk at all, let alone change anything. Changing the password would require you to have already authenticated, which means you've probably got a trojan on there, in which case why in the world are you bothering with breaking the encryption? Just move the data off over the nets! Obviously you have remote access, or there would be no trojan.
Also, Checkpoint assumes that a knowledgeable, trained security professional - who weighs the risks and rewards of each configuration option - is setting up the system. If it's just joe user configuring it, or even Bob "the IT guy", all bets are off.
Er, you realise that in order to download something, someone had to upload it, right?
If there are a million downloads, the material was distributed a million times. By definition, that's a million crimes. What makes it difficult to find and try the person commiting the crime, is that instead of one person commiting the crime a million times, it's more like a million people committing one crime each. To be even more accurate, it's more like one hundred million people working together to commit one million crimes.
The ones who are easy to track are the folks at TPB. Even if they didn't commit the crimes themselves, it would be hard to argue that they were not accomplices, facilitating those crimes, and doing so on purpose to make a lot of money. If you want to argue otherwise, you are either incredibly naive or are being intellectually dishonest.
They are dozens of ways they could have mitigated this from the get go, without changing any of the actual functionality. It could have been easy to argue that they were not attempting to assist copyright infringers, had they done simple things like posted blurbs about copyright law in their FAQ, or put up warnings at the bottom of the page when submitting a torrent saying copyright infringement is illegal, etc. Just fluff really, but intent is very important in law and it goes a long way to proving they didn't intend to assist infringers. That in turn would make it difficult to prove they were willing accomplices in the infringement.
I can't believe I'm defending him, but judges are also citizens. He should have the right to be a member of most any organization he chooses. There is only a problem when the judge attempts to manipulate court procedings in order to encourage a certain outcome.
Note that this is a serious problem NO MATTER what organization a judge may be a member of. This is a problem even if the judge is a recluse and recieves no outside influence because he doesn't do anything but study law. If he manipulates the court proceedings (and judges have a lot of ability to do this) he should be toast. End of story.
That said, it doesn't mean he can't be suspect, and you should certainly want people looking into whether or not he judged based on law, or was attempting to make law fit his own agenda.
If Swedish copyright is anything like US copyright, he probably didn't need to twist the law to come down hard on TPB. Most of their activities are technically illegal, and technically illegal is what a judge should rule on. They usually have the ability to grant a little mercy, but there is no reason they must.
It's apparently the #1 graphic novel of all time, something like that. I hadn't heard of it either until the movie came out.
As for the movie itself, the cinematography I thought was good, the fight choreography was pretty good, the acting was decent, the story and charactar development sucked.
Unfortunately those last two are more important than the rest combined for me.
Others liked it though.
Wow, drinks in all my local theaters are right around 4.50 for small, 4.75 for medium, and 5 for a large. Medium is almost double a small, and large is easilly triple a small.
A hot dog (or nachos or popcorn) and large soda would put you back around $10. Tickets are 6.75 to 10 depending on time of day.
Man I thought things were pricy here, I guess not, heh.
Ditto for me. Mostly it was the absurd violence and sex that just got in the way, and I'm a big fan of violence and sex. The whole time I was thinking "seriously?". It was almost like a spoof, only it obviously wasn't intended to be. And before you go saying "Watchmen the GN had lots of violence and sex", everybody I've heard from who has read it says the movie went way over the top on the violence.
Plus, the ending sucked. Again, I was just thinking "seriously?"
Ever notice that 99% of trojan and virus attacks require user intervention?
Social Engineering is the primary attack risk to a computer network once basic protection measures are taken (firewall, AV, and current updates), because users are the primary vulnerability. That's why it is usually worth the trouble to simply give the user bare minimum rights to their machines. It helps limit the damage they can cause.
This is, however, inconvenient, and so is not done universally. There are even reasons not to do it that are sound, though requiring any kind of security generally makes low user rights a necessity.
Not really.
The screen technology, already one of the most expensive parts of a netbook, is significantly more expensive in an e-book reader.
E-ink is in no way similar to LCD technology, other than they both operate in a type of fluid to generate the pixels. How they do it is very different, and e-ink is much, much newer, and so more expensive. But the screens are getting better and the prices are falling, so it's a good thing. There is apparently even color coming some time soon. It's a good time to be a book lover. :)
So by that definition, George W. "They hate us for our freedoms" Bush is the worst terrorist of them all?
That's irony so delicious you can slice it and put it in a cake ;-)
Wow, you have an absurdly low threshold for fear. Do you get nervous when someone walks up to you and says such potentialy scary things like "Hello"?
Laptop batteries already do this. Each battery has a little chip that checks the battery health each time it is charged. When the max charge gets below acceptable levels, it sends a handy-dandy message via the laptop's bios that tells you it needs to be replaced.
I don't think it's any more difficult than tracking how much energy the battery takes when charged, but even if it is more complicated than that, they already have exactly what is needed in use.
Modular battery packs combined with some sort of battery ejection/installation system negates all of those issues.
Since you'd need the manufacturers on board anyway, voltages could be standardized for the batteries at the same time(they have these cool technologies that have been around for a hundred years now that step up and down voltages, you know).
I'm not even an engineer and I thought of that. You're putting up trivial engineering problems as a reason not to do this?
Seriously, the idea sounds really cool. We would probably want a little government regulation of these swap stations, to make sure bad batteries aren't being used and environmental protection systems are in place, but other than that this sounds brilliant to me.
Also wear and tear weasel words do not apply until after 100K or 10 years whichever comes first.
Actually, if you look at most warranties they put those weasle words into the agreement, something along the lines of "Except for regular wear and tear", effectively making the warranty a "catastrophic failure" deal instead of the "if it breaks we fix it" agreement that covers everything. Also, it is the dealer who determines what is a failure and what is "wear and tear", which means they rarely pay out under the warranty if it is anything but completely obvious that the part should not have broken under the circumstances. There are warranties that cover everything, but they are over and above the "10 year, 100k mile" warranty companies like to boast about. They are usually called service agreements (because they imply/require regular checkups for oil changes and replacement of covered wear and tear items), rather than warranties, and they tend to cost a lot.
Propane tanks are exactly the same, I don't use propane myself but I'm pretty sure you must get the tank certified, and the guy who fills the tank checks the tank's age or last certification date or something along those lines. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but I know periodically the tanks themselves have to be re-cycled. Usually at a gas station that does propane there is only one person who is permitted to fill propane.
It's the thrill of tempting danger, I think.
Trolls bite you know!
Max bandwidth is also 1/40th what it is here.
Jcom has no bandwidth cap. Either you got that mixed up, or you have an interesting way of reading. It's 160mb/s uncapped for $60 a month.
That's about 16 times faster than the fastest I can get where I am, for $20 less, AND I have a 20gb cap.
Internet sucks in Alaska.
UTP is what everybody knows, throwing in FTP (foiled twisted pair) is confusing for some, when basically it is just UTP shielded with foil. It's the same as UTP cable only it's shielded. Shielded UTP.
Now, isn't saying shielded UTP a much more concise and easy to understand explanation of what FTP is than writing out what I wrote?
What he did has the benefit of being understood by someone like you, who presumably knows the difference between FTP, STP, and UTP, and someone who doesn't even know what UTP means other than it's what they call network cables for some reason.
It's called communication. It seems his shielded unshielded twisted pair worked out great. :)
Have you ever driven down a road?
I didn't realize you were using this to support your argument at first, I thought you were agreeing with him and then trying to say it was better. I was confused.
My government maintained roads are terrible, always under repair, and even freshly laid they tend to only be decent. Highways are usually good for a year or two, though they'll be bad for the next 6 before they are replaced again.
Are you sure you aren't just an alternate login for BadAnalogyGuy? ;)
IP is a myth.
What's not a myth is Copyright, which has exemptions for *drumroll* fair use!
Now, you have every right not to submit the paper, but if your school won't except your paper without a submission to a verification service, then you're pretty much screwed. It's a whole different lawsuit you've got there, and you could then actually make a case for your IP then, but even so I think you'd be on a weak leg with this ruling. You have to give them permission to keep it in order to complete the class (it's pretty fundamental), and fair use allows them to use a service like TurnItIn. If the school plays hardball the only way (that I see) to protect your "IP" is to not submit it, and probably fail the class and have to change to a school that doesn't use such a service.
I go to a small tech school, who's primary programs are IT and Medical Coding, and most all the labs are virtual. For the IT stuff they do have actual Cisco hardware to play with, but all the MS servers, etc were run on VM's and such, as well as most of the Cisco labs.
Anatomy and physics classes were done via simulations on the computers. This is fine for anything short of becoming an actual nurse or doctor, or physicist, none of which were even close to being thought about being offered by the school.
There are a very large number of programs that can be offered 100% remotely, without requiring physical labs or being physically in the room with the proffessor. I know a guy who got his advanced math degree over the internet, his class used collaberation software to hold classes and there was plenty of interaction. In fact, in that kind of environment people are a lot more likely to speak up than in a classroom with people watching.
I think it's foolish to think ALL degrees will be even possible online, let alone that they will replace brick-and-mortar schools. There are too many degrees that absolutely require a physical presence. However, there are a heck of a lot of degrees that really don't require a physical presence, and those may well be offered online-only at some point. I think 11 years is a little hopeful though.
If you're doing an online retail store targeting a global audience, you're probably not going to use Paypal for your sole means of accepting money.
You know that credit cards and the internet and buying things over the phone and internet have been around a long, long time. It's pretty trivial to set yourself up to be able to accept Visa, Mastercard, and American Express over the web - I think Visa is most expensive, taking 5% of your sale price but it's also the biggest. If you've got those three then you're covering 99% of the credit card market, which covers 99% of online sales.
Your pre-conditions can be met by most anybody with a couple thousand dollars and a computer, since the internet is 24x7, and so are computers, and so are automated purchasing/download systems. You don't think a person actually sits there and reviews each digital purchase before it is downloaded do you? It's all automated. One guy could easilly manage a relatively large system this way. It's not that hard.
I don't think anybody thinks bandwidth is free, they have to pay for it after all, but relatively speaking it's very cheap. It'll cost $5-10 to ship a little box with a program in it to your door (I'm talking the actual cost, not an online free shipping special here, where the retailer eats the cost). 2gb of bandwidth is going to cost at the most $5, and that's if you've got a crappy cap like mine. It's significantly cheaper on the retailer's side if they are actually selling copies and moving product. It's only expensive per-item if you aren't selling any. This is assuming you payed for a hosting company (or the bandwidth to host your own) and enough bandwidth to cover what you sell.
No, the hard part is getting product, negotiating prices, and staying competative. The internet makes delivery a heck of a lot easier and more accessible, not harder.
It's because it boosts the sales of all their works, especially the one they put up for free. Honestly. They do it because it makes them more money.
Books that make money tend to only make money in the first few quarters, after that sale of those books plummet. The same is true for even blockbuster monster hit books, the difference being the low point for those books is about the same as the high point for your average successful book.
By putting a book that has been out a year or two online, they draw new readership, and a good percentage of the people who read it online either buy the paperback/hardcover of it to keep and read again, or they buy other books by the same author.
Go check out the Baen Free Library http://www.baen.com/library/, the editor/co-creator of the site for Baen Books explains why it works, his Prime Palever is pretty interesting too.
It's all Sci-Fi books, and there is a pretty good selection.
Basically, sure there are folks like you and me who don't really care for paper books, but most people find paper much easier and more enjoyable to read, and so tend to sample the online book, decide they like it, and buy it and others in dead tree format. An author may not want to release a book for free, but really it just makes sense after as little as a year to start putting it up for free.
Of course, as eBook readers get better and better and more people use them this business model will be less effective, but then you just adjust and do things a little differently. Right now though it is a very effective way to boost an author's sales.
Why is this flamebait and not every other comment in this thread?
That's my very same objection to the anti-ID arguments that dismiss it out of hand as stupid "just because". When the best argument you have for the ultimate lack of a designer is a great big "well, just because, that's why", then there are problems with your argument.
Evolution and the Big-Bang do a good job of explaining how we got here - I'm actually a heck of a lot more impressed with the Big Bang than I have with Evolution - but they both still have a few big holes that have not been addressed. For Evolution, the biggest problem is the jump from non-life to life and the fact that you have a system going from less complex to more complex which, as far as I know, still defies the law of entropy. For those about to point me to genetic mutations that improve survival of a particular species, those mutations still remove information rather than add it; I've yet to hear of the opposite, though I'd love to be enlightened. That's not to say entropy is infallable, but it has a much longer history and is much more solidly proven than Evolution, and I don't think anything so far has managed to get around it yet.
The Big Bang has the problem the Parent pointed out and was modded flamebate for, and that is nobody knows why the Big Bang got Big and Banged. Sure there are theories about why that would happen, but just having a theory isn't science. In fact the only way I see scientists showing what happened pre-Big Bang is if they can observe evidence that shows the Universe is in a cycle and is heading back toward this. There is some interesting evidence for this, assuming other theories are correct - I believe Dark Matter is integral to this theory, but there are some theories about gravity that could prove Dark Matter false if they are more correct (which may or may not help the cyclical big bang idea).
Science is an ongoing process, even Newton's laws are still being updated and made more accurate. The idea that something you can't prove one way or the other yet is false just because you don't want it to be true, or you find it silly, is just as bad as when they branded Copernicus a heretic because he had the audacity to say the Sun didn't revolve around the Earth. It's also just as grounded in Faith and Belief as the earth-centrist proponents. In fact, they had the lions share of popular evidence on their side, you could WATCH the sun go around the earth on a daily basis. How could they be wrong?
All that said, I've seen a few ID proponents, and they do tend to seem like complete crackpots. The only way I see ID being accepted is if mainstream scientists beat their heads against the few fundamental problems that remain with modern Cosmic theory until they give up. Even then, it seems to be a "no other alternative" kind of idea, which pretty much can't be proven.
Just to point out to people who are wondering how anything will work with only 3 applications able to run, you're equating processes/tasks to applications and that is not accurate. Windows has been able to distinguish between the two since at least win98, and probably 95 also. I know MS likes to screw things up, but they usually don't forget how to use a technology they have implemented for (at least) a decade. Generally speaking anyway.
So no, Chrome and Firefox don't count as 4 applications, they each count as 1 application that would call multiple processes. Look in your own Task Manager if you don't believe it, Applications and Processes are on separate tabs. In fact it takes anywhere from 20-50 processes just to run the OS, so obviously those can't count as applications in this OS. An application must have at least one process to run, but it can have more than that while still being one application.
Now, harken back to the days of IE6, and those show up as separate applications. But apparently, MS has actually gotten better at this fancy schmancy "Application Detection" technology, and that would still only count as one application (and not even just because it is an MS application, I think they learned from their anti-trust losses, at least a little).
System processes and tools, like windows explorer, control panel apps (cmd line, network, etc), desktop widgets, none of those count as apps. Antivirus that runs as a service isn't an app either. I don't know if something like MSN Messenger counts as an App or not, it may count as a widget instead, but I know several alternatives to Messenger would count as an app, just because of how they are implimented. Switch those over to desktop widgets and you're probably not going to get dinged by the 3 app limit.
So you get to run everything OS related, plus as many instances of 3 applications that you want. Plus app developers targeting netbooks will probably start getting creative with their app designes to prevent them from being counted as an application.
That's actually not bad for a netbook. You're not supposed to be doing intense business applications on this thing, you probably wouldn't be able to run Outlook, Project, Word, and Powerpoint at the same time. Then again, your netbook would probably choke if you tried to anyway, especially the latest versions.
And the fact that they are doing this to justify selling it cheaply in order to compete with Linux is a bit of a compliment I think. They are taking Linux a little more seriously than they used to. Unfortunately MS still has a lot more muscle.