You can then retrieve the exact number of tabs the last editor to that block/line of code had in mind when they wrote it. This does add a bit of overhead, mind you, such as needing a pint of goat's blood every time you run the program.
I'm done buying LeGuin books, and yes, I do buy books new, and that has included several of hers.
I find books to be actually worth the paper they're printed on, particularly for good books. There's just something about a real, properly printed/bound book that's worth $10-$15 to me, no matter if I can acquire the text freely elsewhere or not. I enjoy also having an electronic version of the text, but I prefer to not exclusively have an electronic version for most (particularly fiction) books.
If you worked in a chair factory all your life, why don't your family own every chair you made? That's a bit more apt an analogy (but still suffering greatly) than comparing a singular physical object with rights to a particular sequence of words that is printed, reprinted, and copies are sold millions of times.
Yes, but he is still bound by that law. He changed it to the bare minimum the jury was allowed to award, under the circumstances they'd decided happened (24 cases of infringement happened, and it was all wilful).
Infringement minimum is stated, in the law, at $750 per instance. The jury decided there were 24 instances of infringement. They also decided all 24 were wilful, tripling the damages (as also stated by the law). $750 (minimum per instance) * 3 (tripled for wilfulness) * 24 (song count) = $54000 -- the newly-reduced amount. There were mentions elsewhere in the comments that the judge, personally, still felt it was too high -- but he is legally bound as being unable to reduce it any further due to the jury's decision and the minimums in the current law.
So even if I offer a legitimate service online -- advertising it via e-mail is subject to the CAN-SPAM act.
Unsolicited advertising by e-mail, yes, is. For good reason, as that's exactly what spam is -- unsolicited advertising by e-mail.
The whois 'privacy mode' (the only thing this article is discussing) has not been ruled illegal in the States for any other reason than spamming. Your anonymising internet service example is perfectly safe from this ruling, unless you start spamming too -- sorry 'advertising it by e-mail'.
Maybe you should consider just not spamming everyone about your "WONDERFUL NEW ANONYMISING SERVICE (free trial!)", and advertise through less intrusive, less obnoxious methods than unsolicited e-mail (probably violation of this CAN-SPAM act even without whois 'privacy mode'), such as word-of-mouth, normal internet ads, getting a good Google page rank, etc.
So it harms individuals and small businesses who wish to solicit business that may be controversial.
Yeah, okay -- It harms individuals and small businesses who think it's a great idea to spam me! Why do I find myself not caring?
It may make more sense, as long as that reference to bytes (not bits) is accurate, to refer to this as a 16 kilobit key instead, as public key encryption is usually referenced in bits. While RSA of this length can be done (even using GPG, though you have to modify the source to bypass the compatibility restrictions), it's quite a bit of overkill. The other algorithms used (since RSA is almost always only used for signing/encrypting something smaller -- like signing an SHA256 hash or encrypting an AES key) would almost certainly be much weaker.
...Mind you, in this instance, weaker still means "likely not in any danger of being broken for 20+ years".
Sounds more like an IRC network than a torrent site to me, but it certainly would be a valid defence for some cases (particularly those hosted in the UK). I'm not sure where they're drawing the line on 'providing connection between people' vs. 'facilitating copyright infringement', and it also probably depends heavily on who's drawing the line in which jurisdiction.
Arciemowicz said the vulnerability could be remotely exploited using booby-trapped PHP code on a website, among other methods.
What? How would 'booby-trapped PHP code' on a website crash a machine? PHP is executed on the server, not on the client. If it can be exploited with JavaScript and HTML, I'd be interested in seeing an example of that -- as opposed to a C program... yeah, okay, an exploit, but I'd have to, oh, run a program I don't trust, which is always a security flaw...
Judging by some other comments further down the page, that may actually be very warranted here. A better block than the on I initially found is as follows: http://*.tynt.com/javascripts/
They appear to be using multiple subdomains and at least two different script names...
From my experience playing with dm-crypt under Linux (on a greater-than three year old laptop, nonetheless), the speed and battery impact is surprisingly negligible for anything that doesn't constantly access the disk. Even with constant disk access, it was often less than a 'full core' of CPU utilisation. The only circumstance I can see full disk encryption, even done entirely in software, being a significant drain on performance is with a single core system or an extremely fast hard drive setup. A number of business-oriented laptops come with dedicated hardware disk encryption these days, such as some of the Lenovo offerings.
Of course, I did tweak the system I used to a fairly significant degree -- for example, most compilation (it was running Gentoo) was done fully in RAM, thanks to tmpfs, as well as using some other laptop-mode tweaks that reduced frequency of writes. It wasn't even that I needed the data on the disk encrypted... I just did it because I could, with few downsides and the upside being some more experience with that sort of security setup (which has come in handy since).
Impossible, unless all apps are required to be open source (which would not be popular with many commercial developers). I'd even bet a large number of commercial developers would even be annoyed enough to stop developing for Android's app store if required to turn over their complete source code only to Google employees for review -- Apple doesn't even require this for their app store.
Really? Can you cite that somewhere? Last I recall seeing (a few months ago, only) is that 2048-bit was the recommended number (likely secure to somewhere around 2030, I believe), and 4096-bit was the maximum without source modification, due to compatibility issues with some older GPG/PGP implementations for anything larger.
There couldn't even be copyright infringement, unless they were using much more than just a name. They'd have to get into a Nexus One phone with a similar appearance, personality,... and name to this barely-/not-mentioned-in-the-novel nexus-1 before copyright infringement would even become a possibility.
I'm only a couple hours in and that was already a given for me... Of COURSE you're going to kill the archdemon eventually...
The real spoiler is what happens at Ostagar... I didn't know about Return to Ostagar when I first played that, and the twist actually surprised me a little.
Though I agree that battery life could be much better, if people are indeed running into such problems so easily. My BlackBerry can go, during light usage (such as the just-past holiday!) for up to a week and a half on a single charge.
more than a few kids decided not to do their homework
Hardly surprising, given it's a newer excuse than "dog ate it". Maybe someone will believe they were actually afraid and cut them a break for going out and getting drunk instead of doing their work...
And hasn't that been patched in most, if not all, modern Unix systems? It's also a very well-known problem, so I'd think it would be patched on legacy systems sometime in the next 28 years...
Maybe those other people gave permission for Facebook to examine their account, and made suggestions to both of you based on that. The scary part about Facebook isn't what you tell them, since that is easily controlled. The scary part is what other people tell them, since you have no control over what information others give away about you.
There is some usage tracking going on no matter how your options are set. We only have Google's word that this contains 'non-identifying' information, which they've often defined, in the past, to include IP address, OS version,... which is sent every 24 hours, on searching for anything with Google, and other 'significant events' which don't seem to be defined.
Slashdot Mirror
import psychic
You can then retrieve the exact number of tabs the last editor to that block/line of code had in mind when they wrote it. This does add a bit of overhead, mind you, such as needing a pint of goat's blood every time you run the program.
I'm done buying LeGuin books, and yes, I do buy books new, and that has included several of hers.
I find books to be actually worth the paper they're printed on, particularly for good books. There's just something about a real, properly printed/bound book that's worth $10-$15 to me, no matter if I can acquire the text freely elsewhere or not. I enjoy also having an electronic version of the text, but I prefer to not exclusively have an electronic version for most (particularly fiction) books.
If you worked in a chair factory all your life, why don't your family own every chair you made? That's a bit more apt an analogy (but still suffering greatly) than comparing a singular physical object with rights to a particular sequence of words that is printed, reprinted, and copies are sold millions of times.
Yes, but he is still bound by that law. He changed it to the bare minimum the jury was allowed to award, under the circumstances they'd decided happened (24 cases of infringement happened, and it was all wilful).
Infringement minimum is stated, in the law, at $750 per instance. The jury decided there were 24 instances of infringement. They also decided all 24 were wilful, tripling the damages (as also stated by the law). $750 (minimum per instance) * 3 (tripled for wilfulness) * 24 (song count) = $54000 -- the newly-reduced amount. There were mentions elsewhere in the comments that the judge, personally, still felt it was too high -- but he is legally bound as being unable to reduce it any further due to the jury's decision and the minimums in the current law.
So even if I offer a legitimate service online -- advertising it via e-mail is subject to the CAN-SPAM act.
Unsolicited advertising by e-mail, yes, is. For good reason, as that's exactly what spam is -- unsolicited advertising by e-mail.
The whois 'privacy mode' (the only thing this article is discussing) has not been ruled illegal in the States for any other reason than spamming. Your anonymising internet service example is perfectly safe from this ruling, unless you start spamming too -- sorry 'advertising it by e-mail'.
Maybe you should consider just not spamming everyone about your "WONDERFUL NEW ANONYMISING SERVICE (free trial!)", and advertise through less intrusive, less obnoxious methods than unsolicited e-mail (probably violation of this CAN-SPAM act even without whois 'privacy mode'), such as word-of-mouth, normal internet ads, getting a good Google page rank, etc.
So it harms individuals and small businesses who wish to solicit business that may be controversial.
Yeah, okay -- It harms individuals and small businesses who think it's a great idea to spam me! Why do I find myself not caring?
last one I saw was 2048 BYTES
It may make more sense, as long as that reference to bytes (not bits) is accurate, to refer to this as a 16 kilobit key instead, as public key encryption is usually referenced in bits. While RSA of this length can be done (even using GPG, though you have to modify the source to bypass the compatibility restrictions), it's quite a bit of overkill. The other algorithms used (since RSA is almost always only used for signing/encrypting something smaller -- like signing an SHA256 hash or encrypting an AES key) would almost certainly be much weaker.
...Mind you, in this instance, weaker still means "likely not in any danger of being broken for 20+ years".
Half the time my mind decodes it as "Free/Lossless Open So--" before screeching to a halt and restarting the acronym reading...
which may have been identical in the default Monaco.
1, l, I, 0, and O are all distinct characters in Monaco.
As long as they can get a good DM, wholehearted agreement. Much more engaging than most MMOs, if done right.
Sounds more like an IRC network than a torrent site to me, but it certainly would be a valid defence for some cases (particularly those hosted in the UK). I'm not sure where they're drawing the line on 'providing connection between people' vs. 'facilitating copyright infringement', and it also probably depends heavily on who's drawing the line in which jurisdiction.
Arciemowicz said the vulnerability could be remotely exploited using booby-trapped PHP code on a website, among other methods.
What? How would 'booby-trapped PHP code' on a website crash a machine? PHP is executed on the server, not on the client. If it can be exploited with JavaScript and HTML, I'd be interested in seeing an example of that -- as opposed to a C program... yeah, okay, an exploit, but I'd have to, oh, run a program I don't trust, which is always a security flaw...
Which is more than reasonable, of course!
Judging by some other comments further down the page, that may actually be very warranted here. A better block than the on I initially found is as follows:
http://*.tynt.com/javascripts/
They appear to be using multiple subdomains and at least two different script names...
The specific URL to block, in case you don't want to block absolutely everything from a domain, is:
http://tcr.tynt.com/javascripts/Tracer.js
From my experience playing with dm-crypt under Linux (on a greater-than three year old laptop, nonetheless), the speed and battery impact is surprisingly negligible for anything that doesn't constantly access the disk. Even with constant disk access, it was often less than a 'full core' of CPU utilisation. The only circumstance I can see full disk encryption, even done entirely in software, being a significant drain on performance is with a single core system or an extremely fast hard drive setup. A number of business-oriented laptops come with dedicated hardware disk encryption these days, such as some of the Lenovo offerings.
Of course, I did tweak the system I used to a fairly significant degree -- for example, most compilation (it was running Gentoo) was done fully in RAM, thanks to tmpfs, as well as using some other laptop-mode tweaks that reduced frequency of writes. It wasn't even that I needed the data on the disk encrypted... I just did it because I could, with few downsides and the upside being some more experience with that sort of security setup (which has come in handy since).
Then what is a "Linux-distro style vetting process", if not relating to the hundreds of eyes on the source of most programs?
How about "Linux-distro style vetting process"?
Impossible, unless all apps are required to be open source (which would not be popular with many commercial developers). I'd even bet a large number of commercial developers would even be annoyed enough to stop developing for Android's app store if required to turn over their complete source code only to Google employees for review -- Apple doesn't even require this for their app store.
Really? Can you cite that somewhere? Last I recall seeing (a few months ago, only) is that 2048-bit was the recommended number (likely secure to somewhere around 2030, I believe), and 4096-bit was the maximum without source modification, due to compatibility issues with some older GPG/PGP implementations for anything larger.
There couldn't even be copyright infringement, unless they were using much more than just a name. They'd have to get into a Nexus One phone with a similar appearance, personality, ... and name to this barely-/not-mentioned-in-the-novel nexus-1 before copyright infringement would even become a possibility.
I'm only a couple hours in and that was already a given for me... Of COURSE you're going to kill the archdemon eventually...
The real spoiler is what happens at Ostagar... I didn't know about Return to Ostagar when I first played that, and the twist actually surprised me a little.
Because it's IN THE THIRD DIMENSION!
Also, it's a shame HTML doesn't have a <reverb> tag.
Insane...where is the time for such attention?
When you're asleep?
Though I agree that battery life could be much better, if people are indeed running into such problems so easily. My BlackBerry can go, during light usage (such as the just-past holiday!) for up to a week and a half on a single charge.
more than a few kids decided not to do their homework
Hardly surprising, given it's a newer excuse than "dog ate it". Maybe someone will believe they were actually afraid and cut them a break for going out and getting drunk instead of doing their work...
And hasn't that been patched in most, if not all, modern Unix systems? It's also a very well-known problem, so I'd think it would be patched on legacy systems sometime in the next 28 years...
Maybe those other people gave permission for Facebook to examine their account, and made suggestions to both of you based on that. The scary part about Facebook isn't what you tell them, since that is easily controlled. The scary part is what other people tell them, since you have no control over what information others give away about you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Usage_tracking
There is some usage tracking going on no matter how your options are set. We only have Google's word that this contains 'non-identifying' information, which they've often defined, in the past, to include IP address, OS version, ... which is sent every 24 hours, on searching for anything with Google, and other 'significant events' which don't seem to be defined.