And it already impacts the quality of the devices. I have a plasma TV (bought a plasma because of better black levels) and it limits the white level if there is too much white on the screen, I guess to reduce the power consumption (whichi s actually very similar to a LCD TV of the same size). The thing is, I do not really care about the power consumption - as long as the breaker does not trip, I'm fine, after all, I do not watch TV that often. That, combined with some other quirks (huge input lag, unless set to game mode for example) makes me wish my car was bigger so I could have bought a used TV of older model - while that would have used twice (or more) the power, it would have most likely had better image quality.
But if company A is honest and company B cheats, then company A will be at a disadvantage until company B gets caught. If everyone cheats, then they are at a level playing field, even after getting caught (what if it turns out that all car and TV manufacturers cheat?).
Also, this will most likely extend the life of Windows 7. If people disable updates, then who is going to care when Microsoft stops providing new updates? Updates will be disables anyway.
Do you think individuals should be doing their own emissions tests on their cars?
Depends. Before getting my car to the inspection, I measure the CO level and adjust it so it is below the allowed maximum. I guess with newer cars you do not need to do that, they adjust themselves automatically (well, most of the time, anyway).
I am usually only making one copy ever. Doing it on a perfboard (for hole mounted stuff) or etching my own PCB is much faster than ordering a PCB (and actually having the layout in a format that the company accepts) and waiting a few weeks for it to arrive.
Yes, however, a lot of those differences are for the average men and women. On average, men are stronger than women. However, there are quite a few women who are stronger than a lot of men, for example, this lady.
So, those differences are on an individual basis, the only mandatory difference is the dangly bits. The problem is that the current society model is still trying to fit everyone into roles based on the existence (or lack) of the dangly bits.
Just look at movies etc. A fat guy is OK, an ugly guy is OK, an old guy is OK as the main character. But if the main character is a woman, no matter if she is portrayed to be physically strong or not, she is always slim, young and pretty. Even if the character is supposed to be a nerd. A nerdy guy, who looks nerdy is OK, but a nerdy girl still has to look like a supermodel, and if she doesn't, then it means that she should change her appearance to look pretty. Now, I'm not saying that supermodels cannot be nerds, just that variety is good, but we get variety only with male characters.
Recently, a drunk (0.2%) lorry driver killed a policewoman (one month after graduation from the academy) in my country (hit her and did not even notice, dragging her for about a kilometer until other cops managed to stop him). One comment for this story said that this is why women should not be allowed to be cops. Yea, because a man would have fared better against a lorry.
Of course not everyone can be the next Marie Curie. There will always be people who are smarter and people who are less smart. Just like with appearance. However, I still think that if we are going to latch onto a single trait (not a good thing, but it's probably harder to change that as opposed to changing the trait of choice), then intelligence is better than appearance. If girls (and boys) start reading and learning with the same effort and sacrifice that they now put into appearance, we just might be better off because more intelligent people will be allowed to utilize their potential. And the less intelligent ones will also utilize more of their potential instead of accepting that if you have a pretty face and the body of a concentration camp prisoner then you do not need any brains and you should even be proud of being stupid (I heard a few people being proud that they do not know something).
As opposed to now, when some girls are actively discouraged from pursuing science or technology, because "it's no place for a woman". And then we get the kinda-compensation effort of trying to attract women into technology fields or companies having quotas for male and female employees (meaning that usually a woman with lower abilities will get hired over a man with higher abilities because of the quota). I'd rather everyone got hired based on their abilities and not some quota based on their genitalia (unless the job requires the employee to be of certain gender).
"I know this girl who is into electronics - can you imagine - _a girl_, who's into electronics?" - one guy said this to me - I replied that while I solder some things now and again, I have never needed to use my dick for any part of the process, so I guess it's not really required for the job.
Everyone being themselves is (to me) the goal, but most likely not really achievable.
Well, if girls (ant not only girls) try to be more inteligent, then it would be for the better. Compared to girls eating cotton wool, not eating anything or throwing up after eating to conform to the beauty standard of "concentration camp prisoner".
The next time the Jihadis want to plan something, they can just get a kid like Ahmed to do the same thing, but this time w/ a real time bomb or similar contraption.
And not make the real bomb look like a movie bomb. And not take it out of the backpack or wherever.
In that case, a piece of wire is half a bomb. Plug one end to the detonator, the other end to the mains outlet and boom. Will not give the terrorist time to escape, but then again, terrorists are not known for their concern for self-preservation.
Which means that any device that has a power cord is half a bomb. The average home has how many of them? Arrest everyone!!!!
Or maybe the device without explosives is not a bomb or even half a bomb? I mean you can build a bomb that doe not need electricity at all (just put the bomb down, light the fuse and (optional) run).
OK OK, maybe a PC can be a bomb, the capacitors in the PC power supplies are known to explode sometimes...
Well, maybe because I live in a country where people are not as afraid of bombs or terrorists as people in the US, but I would expect a "bomb hoax" to involve 1) saying it's a bomb and 2) sounding serious about it. But it seems that Ahmed built a clock, said it's a clock and still got arrested for a "bomb hoax". What did he have to do to avoid being arrested? What if, say, I wanted to build a "prop bomb" and show it off? Would I be arrested even if I explicitly said that this was a prop bomb and not a real one?
In my country, a bomb hoax usually involves somebody calling the cops and saying that there is a bomb in some store or wherever (causing the special forces to evacuate the building and look for the bomb), while there is no such bomb.
Then again, the elevator in the building where I work started beeping for some reason, we joked that it was a bomb and talked how stupid it would be to build a bomb that beeps (or that maybe it's an alarm that the elevator is about to fall down). While being in said elevator. I guess this thing in the US would cause somebody to crap their pants.
I have two cellphones. It is possible (and has been done) to use a cellphone to trigger a bomb. ALERT ALERT! I also have a car. It is possible (and has been done) to fill the car with explosives and then explode it when needed. You can even fit a small nuke in something like a lorry. I saw a lorry, it must be the terrorists! ALERT ALERT! I have a piece of wire. It is possible to use the wire to strangle someone (if the wire is long enough) or to use it to ignite gasoline to cause a fire. ALERT ALERT! I have a big book. A book can be used to bash someone in the head, potentially killing them. ALERT ALERT! I have some cigarettes. You can extract nicotine from cigarettes and then use it to poison someone. ALERT ALERT! I have clothes on. I can take off my T-shirt and use it to strangle someone. ALERT ALERT!
So, we need to arrest: all cellphone owners, all car drivers, all smokers and everyone who has a piece of wire or even a string and everyone wearing clothes.
Determining whether something could be a bomb by whether it looks like a bomb from a movie? Which means that if someone really did build a bomb but did not make it look like a movie bomb would be able to explode it. The authorities would then explain that the device did not look like a bomb because it did not beep and did not have blinking lights...
I would expect more from teachers and police officers.
Well, take the device and check whether it's a bomb if you are so paranoid.
Also - note to others - if you make a bomb, do not make it look like a bomb. Or just keep it in your backpack etc. Contrary to what movies show, a bomb does not have to beep, have blinking lights, a countdown display and it actually can be hidden in a box or a backpack or some other object.
In Lithuania you are supposed to go into the middle of the intersection (I guess the reason is that then you need a smaller interval to be able to go), but not if there is already a car there (this part gets ignored by everyone).
Here you probably won't get a ticket for being in an intersection when the light turns red if other cars prevented you from leaving the intersection.
If you want to turn left, you have to drive into the intersection, begin to turn, then stop and wait until everyone who is going straight in the opposite direction has passed. If some of them go into the intersection when the light is yellow or red (breaking the law) you have no other option but to stay in the intersection and wait until the road is clear for you.
Yes, but because they are very difficult to prove without a dashcam, if you do not have a dashcam, you'd better hope the other guy is drunk or is honest and accepts the responsibility.
Depends on the location. In my country, a yellow light means you can legally drive out of an intersection (for example, if you are turning left), but not into it, unless you need to brake suddenly, in which case you can go.
Now, "brake suddenly" is a subjective thing. If I see the light some distance away and do not need to slam on the brakes to stop, then I stop. It may cause an inattentive driver to hit me from behind (happened recently when I stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross as required by law).
However, it is also the law to leave a safe distance between you and the car in front so you can stop without hitting it if the car in front of you suddenly stops. If you hit another car from behing, you will almost always be found guilty (pretty much the only hope for you is for the other driver to be drunk - drunk drivers are always guilty for an accident even if they did not cause it - this is done to discourage people from driving drunk).
Electricity rate going up as you use more - that seems weird as the company should be happy that you use more (and pay more in total since some costs of delivering the electricity are fixed, no matter how much you use).
In my country, all companies usually have their own loyalty rewards, discounts etc - grocery store A gives discount for shipping in grocery store A, grocery store B gives discounts for shopping in grocery store B etc. The logical extension of that is fuel stations - fuel station A gives discount for buying gas in fuel station A etc.
I have 600Mbps (that was upgraded from 500Mbps at no cost - the 500Mbps was an upgrade from 300Mbps - again at no cost, the 300Mbps was an upgrade from 80Mbps - and at that time my cost actually went down - all this from the same ISP) up and down with no limits.
Interesting. In my country it's the opposite - the more you use the cheaper (per unit) it gets, at worst, the unit price stays the same. For example, the electricity provider has multiple plans, for example you can choose a higher fixed fee but a lower kWh cost which only makes sense if you are using more power.
Some gas stations have loyalty cards that lower the price for gas the more you buy.
Depends on the system. If you tried to do that on a PC without installing the certificate - you would get a warning every time you tried to visit a HTTPS site. Your alarm system may be set up to only accept the real certificate and not accept your self-signed one, however, there is no real way to find out except to test it.
Set up transparent proxy, redirect all connections to outside server ports 443 to the transparent proxy server. Set the proxy (squid can do this) so it generates a certificate on connection using your own self-signed CA certificate to sign it. Install the CA certificate on your PC.
Now your proxy server is the man-in-the-middle - having encrypted connection from it to you and from it to the origin server, but also having access to the unencrypted content. This is exactly like a MITM attack, except you are doing it on yourself.
I have set this up for one client - in that case the proxy is there to 1)log what sites are visited and 2)block some sites (like facebook and youtube). Doing it with the proxy is better than just having a blocked IP list, because those IPs change and sites like youtube or facebook have lots of ips. I can not parse the access log, find what other sites I should block and block them.
You can use your own proxy to essentially do a MITM attack on your own connection and remove the ads or do anything else you would like and still have encrypted connecteion over the public internet.
No, the automatic choke in my car is just a bimetal spring that, when cold, opens a valve in the carburetor allowing extra fuel to be drawn into the intake manifold. The spring is heated by the antifreeze from the engine and an electrical heating element.
No netwoek necessary. No computer necessary. Or any electronic components except a piece of nichrome wire as a heating element.
Slashdot Mirror
And it already impacts the quality of the devices. I have a plasma TV (bought a plasma because of better black levels) and it limits the white level if there is too much white on the screen, I guess to reduce the power consumption (whichi s actually very similar to a LCD TV of the same size). The thing is, I do not really care about the power consumption - as long as the breaker does not trip, I'm fine, after all, I do not watch TV that often. That, combined with some other quirks (huge input lag, unless set to game mode for example) makes me wish my car was bigger so I could have bought a used TV of older model - while that would have used twice (or more) the power, it would have most likely had better image quality.
But if company A is honest and company B cheats, then company A will be at a disadvantage until company B gets caught. If everyone cheats, then they are at a level playing field, even after getting caught (what if it turns out that all car and TV manufacturers cheat?).
Also, this will most likely extend the life of Windows 7. If people disable updates, then who is going to care when Microsoft stops providing new updates? Updates will be disables anyway.
Do you think individuals should be doing their own emissions tests on their cars?
Depends. Before getting my car to the inspection, I measure the CO level and adjust it so it is below the allowed maximum. I guess with newer cars you do not need to do that, they adjust themselves automatically (well, most of the time, anyway).
I am usually only making one copy ever. Doing it on a perfboard (for hole mounted stuff) or etching my own PCB is much faster than ordering a PCB (and actually having the layout in a format that the company accepts) and waiting a few weeks for it to arrive.
Yes, however, a lot of those differences are for the average men and women. On average, men are stronger than women. However, there are quite a few women who are stronger than a lot of men, for example, this lady.
So, those differences are on an individual basis, the only mandatory difference is the dangly bits. The problem is that the current society model is still trying to fit everyone into roles based on the existence (or lack) of the dangly bits.
Just look at movies etc. A fat guy is OK, an ugly guy is OK, an old guy is OK as the main character. But if the main character is a woman, no matter if she is portrayed to be physically strong or not, she is always slim, young and pretty. Even if the character is supposed to be a nerd. A nerdy guy, who looks nerdy is OK, but a nerdy girl still has to look like a supermodel, and if she doesn't, then it means that she should change her appearance to look pretty. Now, I'm not saying that supermodels cannot be nerds, just that variety is good, but we get variety only with male characters.
Recently, a drunk (0.2%) lorry driver killed a policewoman (one month after graduation from the academy) in my country (hit her and did not even notice, dragging her for about a kilometer until other cops managed to stop him). One comment for this story said that this is why women should not be allowed to be cops. Yea, because a man would have fared better against a lorry.
Of course not everyone can be the next Marie Curie. There will always be people who are smarter and people who are less smart. Just like with appearance. However, I still think that if we are going to latch onto a single trait (not a good thing, but it's probably harder to change that as opposed to changing the trait of choice), then intelligence is better than appearance. If girls (and boys) start reading and learning with the same effort and sacrifice that they now put into appearance, we just might be better off because more intelligent people will be allowed to utilize their potential. And the less intelligent ones will also utilize more of their potential instead of accepting that if you have a pretty face and the body of a concentration camp prisoner then you do not need any brains and you should even be proud of being stupid (I heard a few people being proud that they do not know something).
As opposed to now, when some girls are actively discouraged from pursuing science or technology, because "it's no place for a woman". And then we get the kinda-compensation effort of trying to attract women into technology fields or companies having quotas for male and female employees (meaning that usually a woman with lower abilities will get hired over a man with higher abilities because of the quota). I'd rather everyone got hired based on their abilities and not some quota based on their genitalia (unless the job requires the employee to be of certain gender).
"I know this girl who is into electronics - can you imagine - _a girl_, who's into electronics?" - one guy said this to me - I replied that while I solder some things now and again, I have never needed to use my dick for any part of the process, so I guess it's not really required for the job.
Everyone being themselves is (to me) the goal, but most likely not really achievable.
Well, if girls (ant not only girls) try to be more inteligent, then it would be for the better. Compared to girls eating cotton wool, not eating anything or throwing up after eating to conform to the beauty standard of "concentration camp prisoner".
The next time the Jihadis want to plan something, they can just get a kid like Ahmed to do the same thing, but this time w/ a real time bomb or similar contraption.
And not make the real bomb look like a movie bomb. And not take it out of the backpack or wherever.
In that case, a piece of wire is half a bomb. Plug one end to the detonator, the other end to the mains outlet and boom. Will not give the terrorist time to escape, but then again, terrorists are not known for their concern for self-preservation.
Which means that any device that has a power cord is half a bomb. The average home has how many of them? Arrest everyone!!!!
Or maybe the device without explosives is not a bomb or even half a bomb? I mean you can build a bomb that doe not need electricity at all (just put the bomb down, light the fuse and (optional) run).
OK OK, maybe a PC can be a bomb, the capacitors in the PC power supplies are known to explode sometimes...
Well, maybe because I live in a country where people are not as afraid of bombs or terrorists as people in the US, but I would expect a "bomb hoax" to involve 1) saying it's a bomb and 2) sounding serious about it. But it seems that Ahmed built a clock, said it's a clock and still got arrested for a "bomb hoax". What did he have to do to avoid being arrested? What if, say, I wanted to build a "prop bomb" and show it off? Would I be arrested even if I explicitly said that this was a prop bomb and not a real one?
In my country, a bomb hoax usually involves somebody calling the cops and saying that there is a bomb in some store or wherever (causing the special forces to evacuate the building and look for the bomb), while there is no such bomb.
Then again, the elevator in the building where I work started beeping for some reason, we joked that it was a bomb and talked how stupid it would be to build a bomb that beeps (or that maybe it's an alarm that the elevator is about to fall down). While being in said elevator. I guess this thing in the US would cause somebody to crap their pants.
I have two cellphones. It is possible (and has been done) to use a cellphone to trigger a bomb. ALERT ALERT!
I also have a car. It is possible (and has been done) to fill the car with explosives and then explode it when needed. You can even fit a small nuke in something like a lorry. I saw a lorry, it must be the terrorists! ALERT ALERT!
I have a piece of wire. It is possible to use the wire to strangle someone (if the wire is long enough) or to use it to ignite gasoline to cause a fire. ALERT ALERT!
I have a big book. A book can be used to bash someone in the head, potentially killing them. ALERT ALERT!
I have some cigarettes. You can extract nicotine from cigarettes and then use it to poison someone. ALERT ALERT!
I have clothes on. I can take off my T-shirt and use it to strangle someone. ALERT ALERT!
So, we need to arrest: all cellphone owners, all car drivers, all smokers and everyone who has a piece of wire or even a string and everyone wearing clothes.
Determining whether something could be a bomb by whether it looks like a bomb from a movie? Which means that if someone really did build a bomb but did not make it look like a movie bomb would be able to explode it. The authorities would then explain that the device did not look like a bomb because it did not beep and did not have blinking lights...
I would expect more from teachers and police officers.
Well, take the device and check whether it's a bomb if you are so paranoid.
Also - note to others - if you make a bomb, do not make it look like a bomb. Or just keep it in your backpack etc. Contrary to what movies show, a bomb does not have to beep, have blinking lights, a countdown display and it actually can be hidden in a box or a backpack or some other object.
In Lithuania you are supposed to go into the middle of the intersection (I guess the reason is that then you need a smaller interval to be able to go), but not if there is already a car there (this part gets ignored by everyone).
And there are no sensors on the ground.
Here you probably won't get a ticket for being in an intersection when the light turns red if other cars prevented you from leaving the intersection.
If you want to turn left, you have to drive into the intersection, begin to turn, then stop and wait until everyone who is going straight in the opposite direction has passed. If some of them go into the intersection when the light is yellow or red (breaking the law) you have no other option but to stay in the intersection and wait until the road is clear for you.
Yes, but because they are very difficult to prove without a dashcam, if you do not have a dashcam, you'd better hope the other guy is drunk or is honest and accepts the responsibility.
Depends on the location. In my country, a yellow light means you can legally drive out of an intersection (for example, if you are turning left), but not into it, unless you need to brake suddenly, in which case you can go.
Now, "brake suddenly" is a subjective thing. If I see the light some distance away and do not need to slam on the brakes to stop, then I stop. It may cause an inattentive driver to hit me from behind (happened recently when I stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross as required by law).
However, it is also the law to leave a safe distance between you and the car in front so you can stop without hitting it if the car in front of you suddenly stops. If you hit another car from behing, you will almost always be found guilty (pretty much the only hope for you is for the other driver to be drunk - drunk drivers are always guilty for an accident even if they did not cause it - this is done to discourage people from driving drunk).
Electricity rate going up as you use more - that seems weird as the company should be happy that you use more (and pay more in total since some costs of delivering the electricity are fixed, no matter how much you use).
In my country, all companies usually have their own loyalty rewards, discounts etc - grocery store A gives discount for shipping in grocery store A, grocery store B gives discounts for shopping in grocery store B etc. The logical extension of that is fuel stations - fuel station A gives discount for buying gas in fuel station A etc.
8Gbps - no.
1Gbps - some countries have that.
I have 600Mbps (that was upgraded from 500Mbps at no cost - the 500Mbps was an upgrade from 300Mbps - again at no cost, the 300Mbps was an upgrade from 80Mbps - and at that time my cost actually went down - all this from the same ISP) up and down with no limits.
Interesting. In my country it's the opposite - the more you use the cheaper (per unit) it gets, at worst, the unit price stays the same.
For example, the electricity provider has multiple plans, for example you can choose a higher fixed fee but a lower kWh cost which only makes sense if you are using more power.
Some gas stations have loyalty cards that lower the price for gas the more you buy.
Natural gas is the same.
Depends on the system. If you tried to do that on a PC without installing the certificate - you would get a warning every time you tried to visit a HTTPS site. Your alarm system may be set up to only accept the real certificate and not accept your self-signed one, however, there is no real way to find out except to test it.
Set up transparent proxy, redirect all connections to outside server ports 443 to the transparent proxy server. Set the proxy (squid can do this) so it generates a certificate on connection using your own self-signed CA certificate to sign it. Install the CA certificate on your PC.
Now your proxy server is the man-in-the-middle - having encrypted connection from it to you and from it to the origin server, but also having access to the unencrypted content. This is exactly like a MITM attack, except you are doing it on yourself.
I have set this up for one client - in that case the proxy is there to 1)log what sites are visited and 2)block some sites (like facebook and youtube). Doing it with the proxy is better than just having a blocked IP list, because those IPs change and sites like youtube or facebook have lots of ips. I can not parse the access log, find what other sites I should block and block them.
You can use your own proxy to essentially do a MITM attack on your own connection and remove the ads or do anything else you would like and still have encrypted connecteion over the public internet.
No, the automatic choke in my car is just a bimetal spring that, when cold, opens a valve in the carburetor allowing extra fuel to be drawn into the intake manifold. The spring is heated by the antifreeze from the engine and an electrical heating element.
No netwoek necessary. No computer necessary. Or any electronic components except a piece of nichrome wire as a heating element.