How do you know that they put the DSL circuit on the wrong box? Did you find this out from Verizon? Or in Covad tell you that this was what happened. If Covad told you that this was the problem, it might not have been, Covad may have blamed Verizon to cover there own mistake. How do you know that the circuit from Verizon was ordered correctly?
Having worked in the telecomm field for many years, I have found that the techs and engineering staff for the circuits at the ILECs are generally good. Its the tech support and sales staff that are wholly incompetent. If you can get through the maze of tech support to talk to the install tech or engineer you can usually get stuff done quickly and correctly.
It has to do with the expectation of privacy. I expect people to be able to see through my windows, I don't expect people to be able to see through my walls.
Why would you need Irridium for this? You could do this with an ordinary cell phone with a data port. Believe it or not, most dense urban areas have good cell phone coverage.
Let's say I have a computer, and for whatever reason a law enforcement agency is told that my computer may have something they want. They could storm into my home and take my personal posessions, and there is nothing I could do about it, since they have not viewed the data yet.
This isn't anything new. If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to suspect a crime has been commited and the evidence needs to be collected or will be destroyed that law enforcement officer can seize the evidence without a warrent. If the seizure was without probable cause then the evidence would be thrown out of court during the trial. At this point it become the job of the officer to prove that there was not time to get a warrent.
I used to work at IBM in poughkeepsie where we developed the S/390 machines. I was in a test group, and one of the things we used to do was play a variation of CoreWars on the machines. I had a 10 byte program that would kick ass.
Actually that was the subject of my PhD dissertation in Electrical Engineering. I proved that any warkmark that doesn't interfere with the user's perception of the watermarked work can be filtered out.
If radio stations are getting more money from advertisers when they stream on-line, then the on air talent should be paid more. If they radio station doesn't get more money for the ads, then the talent shouldn't either.
Let's look at what would happen if every exam, every homework, etc. were to be posted on the Internet.
Students would be able to view previous examinations, learn exactly what questions professors ask, and learn only those questions. This will lead to focused studying instead of the broad studying necessary for a real education.
If students are only going to do the bare minimum, and don't want to learn anything, just pass this might be true. But in that case they probably were finding and using alot of this material, i.e. previous exams, before. If professors are so lazy that they can't change examine questions once a year, they needed to change. Don't restrict information because people are lazy.
Professors will have extra work to do in keeping the web page up-to-date.
I really doubt this will be anymore work for professors. They will have a TA or grad student do it for them.
Students would grow mad at professors who do not keep their site up-to-date, leading to lawsuits pertaining to fair education, etc.
Oh come on. Are you a Troll or what? Suing because a teacher doesn't keep a website upto date? That would get laughed out of court so fast your head would spin.
Students with computers at home (i.e., financially stable students) will have access at all times, while others (minorities, etc) will not, leading to an even bigger gap between upper- and middle-class.
Even without course material being on the web. At a university as competive as MIT if you don't have a computer at home, you are already way behind. Does anybody know if MIT requires students to buy a computer? I now where I went to school undergrad we students have been required to by a computer since 1988. A lot of tech school started requiring this in the mid 80s and I would really doubt if anyone attending MIT doesn't have a computer.
Tim Newsham, senior research scientist at Guardent Inc., said that although the vulnerability he found in the Transmission Control Protocol is quite similar to one identified in 1985 by another researcher, it differs in several important ways.
The original problem, discovered by AT&T Corp.'s Robert Morris, was that ISNs (Initial Sequence Numbers) generated at the beginning of TCP sessions to authenticate subsequent packets were predictable and could be used to create a forged connection between an attacker and a remote host.
It is interesting that the author lists Robert Morris as working for AT&T. At the time that the orignal ISN vulnerability was found Robert Morris was working for the NSA not AT&T. At the time Robert Morris was the head of the NSA's computer security division. A few years later, he left the NSA after his son released a worm which took out a large portion of the Internet at that time.
This is actually part of a bigger AAAS Fellowship program. The fellowships, which will start next Academic Year, are the Science Justice and Public Policy fellowships.
AAAS currently supplies technical fellows to the Executive branch and the Legislative branch. I am quite friendly with several of the fellows as my SO is here in Washington, D.C. on a fellowship.
More information about the fellowships is availible here.
If you have a Doctorate (or a Master's in Engineering) you should apply for one. You really get to influence public policy.
By having things break, however, jobs are created, and improvements are made - it is far better overall to have a rolling replacement cycle than to persist with the same crappy machinery forever.
This must be the reason microsoft can't be broken up.
Microsoft Lawyer: Your honor, we can't be broken up. Other companies which produce code which works the first time will ruin the economy.
Judge: What do you mean?
Microsoft Lawyer: Your honor, Microsoft keeps the economy healthy by causing everybody to replace their software every two years.
Re:What is wrong with US DSL?
on
DSL Woes
·
· Score: 1
I have a partial answer to this. US companies are very tied to providing short term profit, at all costs.
In business situations where you need a long time period to ramp up production or deployment, US companies have real problems.
A lot of the Asian companies that have taken over semiconductor and electronics manufactoring have a longer term profit horizon, and are willing to wait many years for an investment in a manufactoring plant to pay off. US companies aren't willing to wait for profit.
Now, school and county officials are squabbling about whether they are obliged to pay her legal costs or not. In considering the implications of student informing, one has only to think about the fear, anger, and humiliation, the court, school and legal time expended, and the overall cost and implications of this single remark. Then multiply it by millions of kids informing on millions of other kids, as is now seemingly national educational policy.
If schools say that it is their obligation to pay the legal costs for all cases, this would lead to potential abuse and fraud.
A lawyer and two students could conspire to abuse the system and get money from the schools. Student A acuses Student B of something and reports it to the school system. Student B sues Student A, and Lawyer defends Student A. School pays Student A's legal fees, Lawyer give kickback to Students. Settles out of court, with a gag order, no actual settlement need take place.
First off, these listed companies try to sell the most software possible. Thats the goal. The slashdot crowd is that half of one percent of computer users who want it all - free as in source code, free as in beer, elegant design, customization, ability to run on out of the ordinary hardware, interoperability and stellar community involvement. The majority of the rest of the world though, doesn't care much at all for these things. The ninety-nine and half perfect of computer users want free as in beer, and a product that works good enough, and someone definite they can talk to get help.
Corel, and Microsoft, and lots of other companies see this large majority as the goal, the target to be acquired. Why spend 90% of your resources to satisfy one percent of the audience? It doesn't make logical sense. Instead, they spend 100% of their resources to satisfy 90% of audience. Commerically successfuly OS's like Windows are popular and profitable not because they are the best, but because its good enough. Most people dont care that a better, cheaper product is available. Whats more, most people don't care that a more free, more elegant, and more interoperable product is available.
Generally this is true, however one area where this isn't is one area where Linux has really taken off, that this the server market. In this market the one-half of one percent control the majority of the spending power, and thing like source code, elegant design, customization, ability to run on out of the ordinary hardware, and interoperability are some of the most important features of an operating system.
Re:Yeah but, chip making isn't as easy as writing
on
Open-Source Processors
·
· Score: 4
There are no higher language equivalents like Perl or VB for chip making, it's just tedious gate and run after gate and run.
Um....no.
There are many high level design languages for chip design, VHDL and simulators for testing designs prior to fab.
So that what that grey fuzzy stuff inside my computer case is, it's my memory. They must be stealing it while I sleep, I guess I need better computer security.
That is why if you are running a secure network you should be using managed switches and have unused ports disabled. It's not fool proof, but would make something like this much more difficult.
I would contact Columbia University Medical Center. Six years ago Columbia established a interdepartmental research lab to investigate the use of computers in helping treat patients. I was a Doctoral Candidate in Electrical Engineering at the time and was working with the Department of Radiology to help them use computers and high-speed networks to work on telemedicine and remote diagnoses. The hospital was interested in setting up networks in Doctor's offices and facilitating electronic consultation between the experts at the hospital and the family physican working with the patient.
I never was able to solve the data integrity issue in a satisfactory way, though. Rogue clients in this scheme could always submit bogus results to the server. That's not catestrophic, but it means that the distributed platform could not be used in an uncontrolled environment like the Internet. If anyone has some ideas on how to solve this problem, feel free to post or email me. (Or you could go patent them and maybe make yourself some money.)
One way to solve this is to submit the same work unit to multiple clients, each client chosen at random from the pool of availible clients. The results of all the clients are then compared and only if they all return the same result then do you accept the result. This way a small number of rogue clients will be unlikely to produce wrong results. (This of course assumes that the rouge clients are not wide spread, and doesn't ensure that bad data won't be returned.)
Additionally, you could have the work unit itself perform computations which are unique to each work unit. This is mixed with the actual work you care about in such a way as to make it very difficult to perform one computation without the other. For example, you toss in some data, at random, which when processed returns a known result. This data is mixed with data on which you actually want to have some computation performed. Since the client (and the server for that matter) won't know what part of the data is what, if any of the computation is not performed correctly then it will be detected by the server.
With all the bugfixes we have now, 2.96 is more stable than 2.95.3. Almost all of the compiler "bugs" reported in the last couple of months were actually buggy code that older gccs accepted because they are not standards compliant.
But according to the gcc website 2.95.2 is the lastest stable release NOT 2.95.3. Why is RH shipping any unstable code in the mainstream installs?
Another thing in the article I found amusing was the "information warfare" aspect. Come on, does anyone seriously think key military command
and control computers are going to be vulnerable to state-sponsored script kiddies, for God's sake? What worries me more than battles in space is
the absolute clulessness of our elected officials and the gullible nature of the population at large who will be hoodwinked into thinking that these
things are even possible. Should we be concerned abuout protecting our assets in space? Yes, absolutely. Should we study these things? Yes,
absolutely. But we shouldn't devote huge resources to a pie-in-the-sky project that will never work
The point of intormation warfare is not to attack the "military", but the infrastructure which allow the US to make war. For example GM and other automakers have an online, internet based purchasing system. If this was attacked and knocked out, it might take several months to switch back to a manual system. During wartime, GM and other automakers would be building troop transports, tanks, jeeps, etc... This could drastically affect the outcome of the war.
Financial markets would be another place, havoc could be wrought. If you destroy a country's economy, you have destroyed that country's ability to fight a sustained war.
Slashdot Mirror
Having worked in the telecomm field for many years, I have found that the techs and engineering staff for the circuits at the ILECs are generally good. Its the tech support and sales staff that are wholly incompetent. If you can get through the maze of tech support to talk to the install tech or engineer you can usually get stuff done quickly and correctly.
It has to do with the expectation of privacy. I expect people to be able to see through my windows, I don't expect people to be able to see through my walls.
Why would you need Irridium for this? You could do this with an ordinary cell phone with a data port. Believe it or not, most dense urban areas have good cell phone coverage.
Let's say I have a computer, and for whatever reason a law enforcement agency is told that my computer may have something they want. They could storm into my home and take my personal posessions, and there is nothing I could do about it, since they have not viewed the data yet. This isn't anything new. If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to suspect a crime has been commited and the evidence needs to be collected or will be destroyed that law enforcement officer can seize the evidence without a warrent. If the seizure was without probable cause then the evidence would be thrown out of court during the trial. At this point it become the job of the officer to prove that there was not time to get a warrent.
I used to work at IBM in poughkeepsie where we developed the S/390 machines. I was in a test group, and one of the things we used to do was play a variation of CoreWars on the machines. I had a 10 byte program that would kick ass.
Actually that was the subject of my PhD dissertation in Electrical Engineering. I proved that any warkmark that doesn't interfere with the user's perception of the watermarked work can be filtered out.
An another article discusses how an AI researcher is developing bot's with cutting edge AI.
If radio stations are getting more money from advertisers when they stream on-line, then the on air talent should be paid more. If they radio station doesn't get more money for the ads, then the talent shouldn't either.
- Students would be able to view previous examinations, learn exactly what questions professors ask, and learn only those questions. This will lead to focused studying instead of the broad studying necessary for a real education.
If students are only going to do the bare minimum, and don't want to learn anything, just pass this might be true. But in that case they probably were finding and using alot of this material, i.e. previous exams, before. If professors are so lazy that they can't change examine questions once a year, they needed to change. Don't restrict information because people are lazy.- Professors will have extra work to do in keeping the web page up-to-date.
I really doubt this will be anymore work for professors. They will have a TA or grad student do it for them.- Students would grow mad at professors who do not keep their site up-to-date, leading to lawsuits pertaining to fair education, etc.
Oh come on. Are you a Troll or what? Suing because a teacher doesn't keep a website upto date? That would get laughed out of court so fast your head would spin.- Students with computers at home (i.e., financially stable students) will have access at all times, while others (minorities, etc) will not, leading to an even bigger gap between upper- and middle-class.
Even without course material being on the web. At a university as competive as MIT if you don't have a computer at home, you are already way behind. Does anybody know if MIT requires students to buy a computer? I now where I went to school undergrad we students have been required to by a computer since 1988. A lot of tech school started requiring this in the mid 80s and I would really doubt if anyone attending MIT doesn't have a computer.Tim Newsham, senior research scientist at Guardent Inc., said that although the vulnerability he found in the Transmission Control Protocol is quite similar to one identified in 1985 by another researcher, it differs in several important ways.
The original problem, discovered by AT&T Corp.'s Robert Morris, was that ISNs (Initial Sequence Numbers) generated at the beginning of TCP sessions to authenticate subsequent packets were predictable and could be used to create a forged connection between an attacker and a remote host.
It is interesting that the author lists Robert Morris as working for AT&T. At the time that the orignal ISN vulnerability was found Robert Morris was working for the NSA not AT&T. At the time Robert Morris was the head of the NSA's computer security division. A few years later, he left the NSA after his son released a worm which took out a large portion of the Internet at that time.
If its a single cell the size of a football stadium, how big is the nucleus?
AAAS currently supplies technical fellows to the Executive branch and the Legislative branch. I am quite friendly with several of the fellows as my SO is here in Washington, D.C. on a fellowship.
More information about the fellowships is availible here.
If you have a Doctorate (or a Master's in Engineering) you should apply for one. You really get to influence public policy.
This must be the reason microsoft can't be broken up.
Microsoft Lawyer: Your honor, we can't be broken up. Other companies which produce code which works the first time will ruin the economy.
Judge: What do you mean?
Microsoft Lawyer: Your honor, Microsoft keeps the economy healthy by causing everybody to replace their software every two years.
I have a partial answer to this. US companies are very tied to providing short term profit, at all costs.
In business situations where you need a long time period to ramp up production or deployment, US companies have real problems.
A lot of the Asian companies that have taken over semiconductor and electronics manufactoring have a longer term profit horizon, and are willing to wait many years for an investment in a manufactoring plant to pay off. US companies aren't willing to wait for profit.
If schools say that it is their obligation to pay the legal costs for all cases, this would lead to potential abuse and fraud.
A lawyer and two students could conspire to abuse the system and get money from the schools. Student A acuses Student B of something and reports it to the school system. Student B sues Student A, and Lawyer defends Student A. School pays Student A's legal fees, Lawyer give kickback to Students. Settles out of court, with a gag order, no actual settlement need take place.
Corel, and Microsoft, and lots of other companies see this large majority as the goal, the target to be acquired. Why spend 90% of your resources to satisfy one percent of the audience? It doesn't make logical sense. Instead, they spend 100% of their resources to satisfy 90% of audience. Commerically successfuly OS's like Windows are popular and profitable not because they are the best, but because its good enough. Most people dont care that a better, cheaper product is available. Whats more, most people don't care that a more free, more elegant, and more interoperable product is available.
Generally this is true, however one area where this isn't is one area where Linux has really taken off, that this the server market. In this market the one-half of one percent control the majority of the spending power, and thing like source code, elegant design, customization, ability to run on out of the ordinary hardware, and interoperability are some of the most important features of an operating system.
Um....no.
There are many high level design languages for chip design, VHDL and simulators for testing designs prior to fab.
Designed chips is very much like programing.
Would that be Canadian Dollars? If so, it would make sense since they are only worth about that.
So that what that grey fuzzy stuff inside my computer case is, it's my memory. They must be stealing it while I sleep, I guess I need better computer security.
That is why if you are running a secure network you should be using managed switches and have unused ports disabled. It's not fool proof, but would make something like this much more difficult.
The new trading floor being built at 30 Broad St. in New York will have wireless (802.11) connection from the POSTs and trading terminals.
I would contact Columbia University Medical Center. Six years ago Columbia established a interdepartmental research lab to investigate the use of computers in helping treat patients. I was a Doctoral Candidate in Electrical Engineering at the time and was working with the Department of Radiology to help them use computers and high-speed networks to work on telemedicine and remote diagnoses. The hospital was interested in setting up networks in Doctor's offices and facilitating electronic consultation between the experts at the hospital and the family physican working with the patient.
One way to solve this is to submit the same work unit to multiple clients, each client chosen at random from the pool of availible clients. The results of all the clients are then compared and only if they all return the same result then do you accept the result. This way a small number of rogue clients will be unlikely to produce wrong results. (This of course assumes that the rouge clients are not wide spread, and doesn't ensure that bad data won't be returned.)
Additionally, you could have the work unit itself perform computations which are unique to each work unit. This is mixed with the actual work you care about in such a way as to make it very difficult to perform one computation without the other. For example, you toss in some data, at random, which when processed returns a known result. This data is mixed with data on which you actually want to have some computation performed. Since the client (and the server for that matter) won't know what part of the data is what, if any of the computation is not performed correctly then it will be detected by the server.
But according to the gcc website 2.95.2 is the lastest stable release NOT 2.95.3. Why is RH shipping any unstable code in the mainstream installs?
The point of intormation warfare is not to attack the "military", but the infrastructure which allow the US to make war. For example GM and other automakers have an online, internet based purchasing system. If this was attacked and knocked out, it might take several months to switch back to a manual system. During wartime, GM and other automakers would be building troop transports, tanks, jeeps, etc... This could drastically affect the outcome of the war.
Financial markets would be another place, havoc could be wrought. If you destroy a country's economy, you have destroyed that country's ability to fight a sustained war.