as does about 2/3rd's of the equipment one can install outdoors. seriously, try finding IP cam's that are rated down this low: there are only a handful or two that are rated for us: and they're often pretty shitty cameras overall.
(note: something rated TO -40 does not hold up in -40. the rating is the extreme end and the chances it will work after experiencing this for any length of time are low) with temperatures ranging from -5 to -40 with additional 5-10 degree drops with wind chill: equipment gets replaced a LOT out here.
I've got a grid of twenty four Vyatta Routers with dual core 2.2ghz procs encrypting at AES-192 and AES-256 over gigabit links, with Cisco 3845's on 100Mbps spokes.
I'm sorry to hear the implementation can't handle it, mine chugs along fine all the way to 100% usage on the pipes.
you're 3.4ghz cpu is broken then. an Intel Celeron 430 (at the stock 1.8ghz that was launched in Q2-2007) can almost sustain half of 1Gbps doing AES-256. (76MB/s in that case, while operating other applications)
also: the spectrum use is barely going to determine how these particles interact with you. it's the power that will make a difference. you can be bombarded with anything from K (18-26.5GHz) all the way to F band (90-140GHz) microwaves hours a day, by satellites that broadcast with SIGNIFICANTLY more power than these phones will be capable of.
The Q band (10-60GHz) is likely passing through your home right now. based on the primary use of Q to be military communications, I wonder how large countries will regulate the band, to prevent the noise floor from increasing.
Interesting that:
1) I'm ok with my information being given away freely,
2) posted this as a real user
3) not interested in overpopulating the world any further.
I'm guessing you're a conservative. One that holds the ideal that the "world should stay exactly the same all the time". As a Liberal Democrat, I'm of the view that people should be able to decide what happens around them, and to what extent.
Personally this whole case looks pretty cut and dry to me. If you don't like the terms of service a company maintains for a product/service, even if the terms seem unenforceable: don't use the product/service. When a judge declares that "you as the consumer were in the right, and the company didn't have the right to make the claim they had" who's going to end up getting burned?
that's right: you are. a service that you used prior may no longer be available to you due to the legal action you took.
people need to stop giving people their money/data/clicks/eyes away only to sue others to get it back, and start taking responsibilities for their actions. If you don't like something: don't support it. if you disagree with something: stop supporting it then trying to sue to get your contribution back. just spend some time and do your research ahead of time.
with the death of privacy: it's not like it's hard to find the information you're looking for.
Yes: "should". it's the legal term for what somebody must do when circumstances allow. commonly defined in contract law to mean: 'should': a mandatory obligation, to which an objection may be raised. ie: "If you do not agree to these legal terms, you should cease use of this [product/service], but you may contact [contact] for further information."
What law is it that states: "If you sniff username & password and log into an account, you are breaking the law."
Please quote it for me: because in the jurisdiction in which I live: it's not illegal for a person to sniff public wifi, as long as the data they gather is not used by a corporation and capturer does not release the data to others.
And none of that IANAL business. If you say something's illegal: you better be prepared to back it up. Otherwise you should stop telling people certainties and start prefacing your statements with "maybe:"
In New York, and most of America sniffing public WIFI is NOT illegal. Retaining any of the data you capture may be, and using the data for any sort of personal gain sure is.
In the case in question, because the person admits to logging into the users accounts there may be some privacy violations, however these would only be applicable if the user had logged in to knowingly capture or use the data they gathered. Any judge that has any idea of the law will admit that if you were to be told to your face a users login details: that would not "imply" that you "shouldn't" use/validate them.
One could even make the argument that the person in question felt it as their duty to inform the patrons that they were essentially leaving their user details on post-its on the door to the cafe. though he may be guilty of some privacy violations, he'd be acquitted of any wiretapping laws in a heartbeat. All he'd have to prove was that his intention was not financially motivated and that he only logged in to get contact information to warn these people.
if you go to a science shop and buy a "kilogram mass" what makes you think it will weigh one kilogram?
how do you measure it at home? likely you put it on a scale and trust whatever it tells you. but the scale is calibrated with a degree of error.
even the weight itself is manufactured with a degree of error. even if you take that mass and compare it directly against one of the standard masses, even if your weight WERE a perfect kilogram: it will be off due to the atomic decay of the materials used to make the originals.
we DO need to move away from using mass to define mass. it leads to circular logic arguments all day long!
formatting aside:
Great job. that pretty well sums the majority of the people I know.
the remainder: are having an affair/stealing money/doing something they shouldn't and keep hearing "people can get information about you!" in the news.
... you completely fail to understand how unencrypted WIFI works.
the analogy here would be him taking pictures in your open uncovered window of your couch, and sending you the picture in the mail. had he captured you having an affair and tried to ransom the image that you freely gave him back to you: that would be illegal.
never should it be illegal to INFORM SOMEBODY OF THE LACK OF SECURITY PROVIDED BY ANYTHING. it's one thing to go posting on the internet "this guy at 123 somewhere st never locks his door, and works from 9-5/m-f!!" but it should never be illegal to send him a pamphlet just inside the door stating how bad an idea it is to leave it unlocked.
if you give it to people that are storing it "free of charge":
then yes, I expect all information I provide in such a way to be sold to the highest bidder and traded like a commodity. if I didn't want that to happen: I'd not give it away for free.
If you imagine the internet as a billboard, a password is NOT a wall blocking that billboard.
the internet operates like a billboard. everything is accessible to anybody connecting to it. some of it may be in an envelope saying "don't read me!" and some of it may be in a code you don't understand. in the case of a "profile" like facebook, your data is not "password protected" but rather the username/password combination is instead your token for the guard standing watching one section of the billboard.
if you provide him a correct pair, he shows you some information that he thinks might be of interest to you. there's nothing stopping somebody else from lying to him and getting any information from him, and the billboard still has all your information on it.
THAT'S the internet. it's insecure by default, and unless you're paying somebody to encrypt all the traffic you move over it, you have to play by all the same rules. I assume you don't pay a monthly bill to keep the lights on for facebook, so they have to get revenue from you from other means.
Did you read the terms of service? did it say ANYWHERE in there that your profile is YOURS and that nobody can use the data that you provide them and they store for you free of charge to do with as they please?
if you don't like they way a system works: there's nobody making you use it.
on the other hand: maybe people should stop expecting that people are giving shit away for "free".
if you don't do the research to ensure yourself what the costs are: it's kinda too bad.
Seriously: if you want a social networking platform that is easy to use, provides entertainment, and is accessible to you and whatever friends/people you want:
start a company, build the product, market it, and reap the rewards. otherwise: shut up and keep using the shit for free and give up your rights to whatever data they ask for.
good luck measuring that to any degree of accuracy beyond three or four decimal places. just because you know how much of something you SHOULD have, does not mean you know how much you DO have.
One can easily argue this, simply based on the definitions behind each unit of measure. the Kilogram is based on a value anyone can determine (with enough equipment)
while the Troy Pound was: 5,760 Grains. most global pounds became based on troy pounds, defined by how each commodity was weighed against the troy pound.
if you didn't have a troy pound to compare against, it's not like you can just grow 5760 grains and assume you'll get the same weight. (though for the barter system, people would likely have assumed you pound to be of the same value as another's. the grains are just as useful!)
that has nothing to do with the argument: all materials, water included, expand when heated, so the density of 1cm^3 of water is a product of the temperature.
the weight of 1cc of water depends on the temperature.
Slashdot Mirror
as does about 2/3rd's of the equipment one can install outdoors. seriously, try finding IP cam's that are rated down this low: there are only a handful or two that are rated for us: and they're often pretty shitty cameras overall.
(note: something rated TO -40 does not hold up in -40. the rating is the extreme end and the chances it will work after experiencing this for any length of time are low) with temperatures ranging from -5 to -40 with additional 5-10 degree drops with wind chill: equipment gets replaced a LOT out here.
you just repeated what I typed. it must be an easy mistake to make. :P
I don't know about you crazy people, but staying alive is higher outdoors than using my touchscreen android. :P
here in Winnipeg Manitoba: we dip down as low as -42 degrees. (that's in Celsius, but it's the same temperature as fahrenheit.)
honestly, looking at my phone outdoors 8 months out of the year is the least of my concerns.
I've got a grid of twenty four Vyatta Routers with dual core 2.2ghz procs encrypting at AES-192 and AES-256 over gigabit links, with Cisco 3845's on 100Mbps spokes.
I'm sorry to hear the implementation can't handle it, mine chugs along fine all the way to 100% usage on the pipes.
you're 3.4ghz cpu is broken then. an Intel Celeron 430 (at the stock 1.8ghz that was launched in Q2-2007) can almost sustain half of 1Gbps doing AES-256. (76MB/s in that case, while operating other applications)
also: the spectrum use is barely going to determine how these particles interact with you. it's the power that will make a difference. you can be bombarded with anything from K (18-26.5GHz) all the way to F band (90-140GHz) microwaves hours a day, by satellites that broadcast with SIGNIFICANTLY more power than these phones will be capable of.
The Q band (10-60GHz) is likely passing through your home right now. based on the primary use of Q to be military communications, I wonder how large countries will regulate the band, to prevent the noise floor from increasing.
Interesting that:
1) I'm ok with my information being given away freely, 2) posted this as a real user 3) not interested in overpopulating the world any further.
I'm guessing you're a conservative. One that holds the ideal that the "world should stay exactly the same all the time". As a Liberal Democrat, I'm of the view that people should be able to decide what happens around them, and to what extent.
Personally this whole case looks pretty cut and dry to me. If you don't like the terms of service a company maintains for a product/service, even if the terms seem unenforceable: don't use the product/service. When a judge declares that "you as the consumer were in the right, and the company didn't have the right to make the claim they had" who's going to end up getting burned?
that's right: you are. a service that you used prior may no longer be available to you due to the legal action you took.
people need to stop giving people their money/data/clicks/eyes away only to sue others to get it back, and start taking responsibilities for their actions. If you don't like something: don't support it. if you disagree with something: stop supporting it then trying to sue to get your contribution back. just spend some time and do your research ahead of time.
with the death of privacy: it's not like it's hard to find the information you're looking for.
Not if I can avoid it. why anybody would willingly sign with or watch Fox owned material is beyond me.
... the existence of a law defines legality: the lack of one makes the process legal.
what a terrible world we would live in if everything was illegal unless otherwise mentioned in law.
Yes: "should". it's the legal term for what somebody must do when circumstances allow. commonly defined in contract law to mean:
'should': a mandatory obligation, to which an objection may be raised. ie: "If you do not agree to these legal terms, you should cease use of this [product/service], but you may contact [contact] for further information."
What law is it that states: "If you sniff username & password and log into an account, you are breaking the law."
Please quote it for me: because in the jurisdiction in which I live: it's not illegal for a person to sniff public wifi, as long as the data they gather is not used by a corporation and capturer does not release the data to others.
And none of that IANAL business. If you say something's illegal: you better be prepared to back it up. Otherwise you should stop telling people certainties and start prefacing your statements with "maybe:"
In New York, and most of America sniffing public WIFI is NOT illegal. Retaining any of the data you capture may be, and using the data for any sort of personal gain sure is.
In the case in question, because the person admits to logging into the users accounts there may be some privacy violations, however these would only be applicable if the user had logged in to knowingly capture or use the data they gathered. Any judge that has any idea of the law will admit that if you were to be told to your face a users login details: that would not "imply" that you "shouldn't" use/validate them.
One could even make the argument that the person in question felt it as their duty to inform the patrons that they were essentially leaving their user details on post-its on the door to the cafe. though he may be guilty of some privacy violations, he'd be acquitted of any wiretapping laws in a heartbeat. All he'd have to prove was that his intention was not financially motivated and that he only logged in to get contact information to warn these people.
the "bet against climate change" seemed pretty straightforward to me that it was a bet against the success of climate change
maybe it's just me, but I got what they were saying.
and by supervising: you mean controlling every action your child ever attempts? in about 12-15 years: you're in for one hell of a rude awakening.
if you go to a science shop and buy a "kilogram mass" what makes you think it will weigh one kilogram?
how do you measure it at home? likely you put it on a scale and trust whatever it tells you. but the scale is calibrated with a degree of error.
even the weight itself is manufactured with a degree of error. even if you take that mass and compare it directly against one of the standard masses, even if your weight WERE a perfect kilogram: it will be off due to the atomic decay of the materials used to make the originals.
we DO need to move away from using mass to define mass. it leads to circular logic arguments all day long!
formatting aside:
Great job. that pretty well sums the majority of the people I know.
the remainder: are having an affair/stealing money/doing something they shouldn't and keep hearing "people can get information about you!" in the news.
... you completely fail to understand how unencrypted WIFI works.
the analogy here would be him taking pictures in your open uncovered window of your couch, and sending you the picture in the mail. had he captured you having an affair and tried to ransom the image that you freely gave him back to you: that would be illegal.
never should it be illegal to INFORM SOMEBODY OF THE LACK OF SECURITY PROVIDED BY ANYTHING. it's one thing to go posting on the internet "this guy at 123 somewhere st never locks his door, and works from 9-5/m-f!!" but it should never be illegal to send him a pamphlet just inside the door stating how bad an idea it is to leave it unlocked.
quote me the law. please. after five minutes of googling for it, nothing's coming up.
if you give it to people that are storing it "free of charge":
then yes, I expect all information I provide in such a way to be sold to the highest bidder and traded like a commodity. if I didn't want that to happen: I'd not give it away for free.
If you imagine the internet as a billboard, a password is NOT a wall blocking that billboard.
the internet operates like a billboard. everything is accessible to anybody connecting to it. some of it may be in an envelope saying "don't read me!" and some of it may be in a code you don't understand. in the case of a "profile" like facebook, your data is not "password protected" but rather the username/password combination is instead your token for the guard standing watching one section of the billboard.
if you provide him a correct pair, he shows you some information that he thinks might be of interest to you. there's nothing stopping somebody else from lying to him and getting any information from him, and the billboard still has all your information on it.
THAT'S the internet. it's insecure by default, and unless you're paying somebody to encrypt all the traffic you move over it, you have to play by all the same rules. I assume you don't pay a monthly bill to keep the lights on for facebook, so they have to get revenue from you from other means.
Did you read the terms of service? did it say ANYWHERE in there that your profile is YOURS and that nobody can use the data that you provide them and they store for you free of charge to do with as they please?
if you don't like they way a system works: there's nobody making you use it.
on the other hand: maybe people should stop expecting that people are giving shit away for "free".
if you don't do the research to ensure yourself what the costs are: it's kinda too bad.
Seriously: if you want a social networking platform that is easy to use, provides entertainment, and is accessible to you and whatever friends/people you want:
start a company, build the product, market it, and reap the rewards. otherwise: shut up and keep using the shit for free and give up your rights to whatever data they ask for.
... I hope you didn't just mis-convert FA0 to 3967.
it's 4000^2. a simple test for a fourth grader that knows how to factor 4*4=16, 16*1,000*1,000 = 16,000,000.
the hex table for shifting factors of 16 are a pain. (IMHO)
this is flawed. you only know it's equal to 1 kg at an exact temperature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water#Density_of_water_and_ice
good luck measuring that to any degree of accuracy beyond three or four decimal places. just because you know how much of something you SHOULD have, does not mean you know how much you DO have.
One can easily argue this, simply based on the definitions behind each unit of measure. the Kilogram is based on a value anyone can determine (with enough equipment)
while the Troy Pound was: 5,760 Grains. most global pounds became based on troy pounds, defined by how each commodity was weighed against the troy pound.
if you didn't have a troy pound to compare against, it's not like you can just grow 5760 grains and assume you'll get the same weight. (though for the barter system, people would likely have assumed you pound to be of the same value as another's. the grains are just as useful!)
quick, 0xFA0^2 (shouldn't take more than 2 seconds. :P)
you want to patent a method to count exactly "3.40812408 gazillion photons" reliably and accurately?
if so, I'm sure the NIST may have an opening for you.
that has nothing to do with the argument: all materials, water included, expand when heated, so the density of 1cm^3 of water is a product of the temperature.
the weight of 1cc of water depends on the temperature.