The problem in the USA is that many corporations have government contracts. This results in a requirement to have a "drug-free workplace" and many other requirements. Anyone who gets money from the government is subject to a long list of federal regulations. This is a favorite technique of social engineering by the government.
Re:Okay, so I was wrong - now I know I'm REALLY wr
on
Disposable Cell Phones
·
· Score: 1
What stops someone from doing the same thing from a pay phone?
That was the technique of choice when I was in high school.
There is a great demand for the UHF spectrum for other services such as public safety and commercial two-way radio. The current frequency allocations for UHF TV waste a great deal of valuable spectrum. The FCC has forced other spectrum users to move to more efficient technologies in the past. Why should television be immune?
Intentional incompatibility with existing standards is not restricted to the USA. Europe has a long history of ignoring American technical standards in order to protect European companies from American competition.
If you examine all of the things that Microsoft is able to do with its monopoly, you will notice that none of them really affect free software developers.
I would disagree with that. Microsoft can influence hardware developers to go in directions that are detrimental to free operating systems and software. My nightmare is a world where every computer has a WinModem, WinPrinter, WinDVD, WinSoundCard etc.
When I started using V7 UNIX there were several things that were new and nice.
1. The CLI (command language interpreter) was a separate, user-mode program that could be easily replaced. I was used to DEC operating systems where the CLI was an integral part of the operating system, sort of like the baby alien that attachs to your face in the movie Alien. It couldn't be removed without major surgery on the OS and its tentacles were firmly embedded in the kernel.
2. The shell didn't hardwire the command set like most CLIs of the day. You didn't have to modify the shell to add new commands, just write a new user-mode program. The shell was light on command line policy, leaving most things up to the interpretation of the user program.
Disarmament can be good or bad, it depends on the circumstances. Disarmament is not a panacea. The naval disarmament treaties of the 1930s did not stop World War II.
I don't regard nuclear disarmament as a worthy goal, in and of itself. Nuclear weapons often serve useful purposes. They can deter conventional war, the use of biological and chemical weapons, and provide a cost effective defense.
Scientific American has been very one-sided in the articles that they have published. That is their right but people should be aware of their bias.
You are probably thinking of the Air Force Maui Optical Station on Haleakala. They have lasers for a number of missions, see http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/track/amos .htm. The presence of lasers does not mean they have anti-missile capabilities. It would be a useless location for that type of facility.
I would be wary of accepting anything written in Scientific American as truth. The magazine has pushed a consistent pro-disarmament line for many years. Their articles on nuclear issues have been very one-sided.
That any programmer worth their salt is voting for VB when Delphi is around totally baffles me. Seriously, I think that most people don't even realise that this tool exists.
I used to be a big fan of Borland products, but I've been burned too many times. Too many products that were buggy and never fixed or just discontinued.
They also have the problem that the company has been struggling, changing direction and has lost too many of their best people.
If I commit to Delphi, what guarantee do I have that the product will exist and be actively supported in N years?
Years ago I had a TEMPEST certified PC in my office for a software development project.
The PC was in a heavy duty metal case with no openings. Their was an RF filter (metal mesh) over the opening for the power supply fan. All of the cables were thick, high quality, shielded cables. The monitor was in a special shielded enclosure. The keyboard looked normal but it was noticably heavier than a normal keyboard.
All mechanical joints in the case had RF gasketing material where the parts fit together. Every part in the system or attached to the system had to be TEMPEST certified. You couldn't install a normal I/O board, cable or peripheral without voiding the certification.
I've forgotten the price but it was two or three times the price of a non-TEMPEST equivalent.
When you starting implying that "The Government" (Justice Dept.) knowing murdered innocent people, you blow a great deal credibility. Widespread conspiracies are myth.
Why don't you ask Vicky Weaver about it. Oh, you can't, she was killed by FBI sniper Len Horiuchi. She was holding her ten-month old baby, obviously a deadly threat to the federal agents.
IBM was in a no-win situation with Win32. They did not have access to Microsoft source code for Windows 95. Their source code license only covered Windows 3.1.
Microsoft was deliberately adding features to their software to break OS/2 and to make it difficult to emulate Windows 95.
IBM already had a problem with the Windows 3.1 emulation in that vendors were not developing native OS/2 applications because their Windows version would run (poorly) on OS/2.
Microsoft had control of the Win32 APIs and source code. If IBM could have waved a magic wand and produced a perfect Win32 emulator, Microsoft would have just added new features/APIs and used them in their software. IBM had no chance of remaining compatible with the latest version of Windows.
DOS (PC-DOS to be exact) wasn't the best OS for the IBM PC. It was the cheapest. CP/M-86 was much better but it was very expensive (~$300) compared to PC-DOS. The UCSD p-System was also available for the IBM PC and I wrote a lot of software with it. PC-DOS was cheap and "good enough". Microsoft's software development tools (MASM, FORTRAN, Pascal) for PC-DOS were unbelievably bad.
The nice thing about an Ethernet MAC address is that it is guaranteed to be globally unique, although I've heard that isn't true for certain very cheap, brain damaged Ethernet cards made in Taiwan.
That is the reason that it was included as part of GUIDs and UUIDs by Microsoft and many other software developers. It wasn't a global conspiracy to track computer usage.
A 64 bit random number would work for IPV6, the trick is generating it. Linux has/dev/random but it might be more difficult on other operating systems.
John Mashey of MIPS/SGI has written a good description of the differences between RISC and CISC architectures. It is posted to comp.arch on an irregular basis and is available on the web here.
My suspicion is that the NSA doesn't care about most of the words on the list. That is the FBI's territory and the NSA has never been that interested in cooperating with the FBI, except on espionage cases.
I would suggest using words related to weapons of mass destruction, classified military programs and foreign political/military leaders.
I think I will mix up another batch of O-ethyl-S-(2-iisopropylaminoethyl) methyl phosphonothiolate for the party Kim Jung Il is throwing at the Aquacade bar and grill,
I believe there is a legal requirement that the contest be a "contest of skill" as opposed to a "contest of chance". A lame test is sufficent to make it a "contest of skill".
How do you think the small inventor makes money from an invention? He/she licenses it to companies that are interested in using the patented invention. My Uncle is an inventor and that is exactly what he does with his inventions. If he invents a new widget for photocopy machines, he shops it around to the companies that make photocopy machines. He doesn't build his own factory to manufacture photocopy machines.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem in the USA is that many corporations have government contracts. This results in a requirement to have a "drug-free workplace" and many other requirements. Anyone who gets money from the government is subject to a long list of federal regulations. This is a favorite technique of social engineering by the government.
That was the technique of choice when I was in high school.
There is a great demand for the UHF spectrum for other services such as public safety and commercial two-way radio. The current frequency allocations for UHF TV waste a great deal of valuable spectrum. The FCC has forced other spectrum users to move to more efficient technologies in the past. Why should television be immune?
The FCC does not want to see a repeat of the AM Stereo disaster. The free market isn't always the best solution to a problem.
Intentional incompatibility with existing standards is not restricted to the USA. Europe has a long history of ignoring American technical standards in order to protect European companies from American competition.
I would disagree with that. Microsoft can influence hardware developers to go in directions that are detrimental to free operating systems and software. My nightmare is a world where every computer has a WinModem, WinPrinter, WinDVD, WinSoundCard etc.
That may have been true of VMS. Most of my experience was with PDP-11 operating systems such as RT-11 and RSX-11M.
AT&T designed the CRISP microprocessor to efficiently run C programs.
Western Digital made a CPU from the original LSI-11 chip set that directly executed p-code (UCSD p-System Pascal pseudocode).
I have a vague memory of a FORTRAN machine, I don't remember who built it.
I believe the first operating system for the Cray (CTSS?) was written in FORTRAN. It was later replaced with UNICOS (Cray Unix).
1. The CLI (command language interpreter) was a separate, user-mode program that could be easily replaced. I was used to DEC operating systems where the CLI was an integral part of the operating system, sort of like the baby alien that attachs to your face in the movie Alien. It couldn't be removed without major surgery on the OS and its tentacles were firmly embedded in the kernel.
2. The shell didn't hardwire the command set like most CLIs of the day. You didn't have to modify the shell to add new commands, just write a new user-mode program. The shell was light on command line policy, leaving most things up to the interpretation of the user program.
Disarmament can be good or bad, it depends on the circumstances. Disarmament is not a panacea. The naval disarmament treaties of the 1930s did not stop World War II.
I don't regard nuclear disarmament as a worthy goal, in and of itself. Nuclear weapons often serve useful purposes. They can deter conventional war, the use of biological and chemical weapons, and provide a cost effective defense.
Scientific American has been very one-sided in the articles that they have published. That is their right but people should be aware of their bias.
You are probably thinking of the Air Force Maui Optical Station on Haleakala. They have lasers for a number of missions, see http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/track/amos .htm. The presence of lasers does not mean they have anti-missile capabilities. It would be a useless location for that type of facility.
I would be wary of accepting anything written in Scientific American as truth. The magazine has pushed a consistent pro-disarmament line for many years. Their articles on nuclear issues have been very one-sided.
How do you build a reliable system from thousands of CPU boards? There will be plenty of hard and soft faults in a system with that many components.
I used to be a big fan of Borland products, but I've been burned too many times. Too many products that were buggy and never fixed or just discontinued.
They also have the problem that the company has been struggling, changing direction and has lost too many of their best people.
If I commit to Delphi, what guarantee do I have that the product will exist and be actively supported in N years?
The PC was in a heavy duty metal case with no openings. Their was an RF filter (metal mesh) over the opening for the power supply fan. All of the cables were thick, high quality, shielded cables. The monitor was in a special shielded enclosure. The keyboard looked normal but it was noticably heavier than a normal keyboard.
All mechanical joints in the case had RF gasketing material where the parts fit together. Every part in the system or attached to the system had to be TEMPEST certified. You couldn't install a normal I/O board, cable or peripheral without voiding the certification.
I've forgotten the price but it was two or three times the price of a non-TEMPEST equivalent.
If I remember correctly, the holes in the shielding material must be smaller than a quarter wavelength of the highest frequency to be blocked.
Why don't you ask Vicky Weaver about it. Oh, you can't, she was killed by FBI sniper Len Horiuchi. She was holding her ten-month old baby, obviously a deadly threat to the federal agents.
Microsoft was deliberately adding features to their software to break OS/2 and to make it difficult to emulate Windows 95.
IBM already had a problem with the Windows 3.1 emulation in that vendors were not developing native OS/2 applications because their Windows version would run (poorly) on OS/2.
Microsoft had control of the Win32 APIs and source code. If IBM could have waved a magic wand and produced a perfect Win32 emulator, Microsoft would have just added new features/APIs and used them in their software. IBM had no chance of remaining compatible with the latest version of Windows.
DOS (PC-DOS to be exact) wasn't the best OS for the IBM PC. It was the cheapest. CP/M-86 was much better but it was very expensive (~$300) compared to PC-DOS. The UCSD p-System was also available for the IBM PC and I wrote a lot of software with it. PC-DOS was cheap and "good enough". Microsoft's software development tools (MASM, FORTRAN, Pascal) for PC-DOS were unbelievably bad.
That is the reason that it was included as part of GUIDs and UUIDs by Microsoft and many other software developers. It wasn't a global conspiracy to track computer usage.
A 64 bit random number would work for IPV6, the trick is generating it. Linux has /dev/random but it might be more difficult on other operating systems.
John Mashey of MIPS/SGI has written a good description of the differences between RISC and CISC architectures. It is posted to comp.arch on an irregular basis and is available on the web here.
I would suggest using words related to weapons of mass destruction, classified military programs and foreign political/military leaders.
I think I will mix up another batch of O-ethyl-S-(2-iisopropylaminoethyl) methyl phosphonothiolate for the party Kim Jung Il is throwing at the Aquacade bar and grill,
I believe there is a legal requirement that the contest be a "contest of skill" as opposed to a "contest of chance". A lame test is sufficent to make it a "contest of skill".
How do you think the small inventor makes money from an invention? He/she licenses it to companies that are interested in using the patented invention. My Uncle is an inventor and that is exactly what he does with his inventions. If he invents a new widget for photocopy machines, he shops it around to the companies that make photocopy machines. He doesn't build his own factory to manufacture photocopy machines.