I switched to Linux largely because using mice causes a lot of wrist problems for me. With Linux, I can do 90% of tasks from the keyboard, and moving to the mouse actually becomes a (somewhat) helpful break from typing. It would be more so if I didn't have to use Windows at work and get too much mouse time there. A supplemental touch screen would provide a third action, thus decreasing the strain on the muscles involved in mouse/keyboard use. However, I don't think that it would really be any better than the mouse from an ergonomic perspective. Might be better from a usability perspective, if someone redesigned my entire desktop with touchscreen / physical keyboard in mind. Still, I would prefer a redesign with keyboard only in mind, and maybe some touchscreen/mouse/stylus stuff tacked on for the unavoidable (image manipulation / gaming.)
It remains a pretty useless article for not specifying. I understand if it's a proprietary alloy or something, but how hard is it to say "it's a proprietary alloy"? It's hard to really say anything without something more specific than "liquid metal."
Aside from the obvious T-1000 jokes.
For those of us on university networks, it's another story though. If even like 10 people on a campus were watching a stream, they'd experience far better times than if they were streaming from a server. And of course, a sizable portion of the watchers could be on campus networks.
Also, though the majority of the internet is as you describe, the Internet 2 pipes running through universities mean that anyone on a college network effectively is living on the internet of the future.
So, though for fare appealing mostly to older viewers, yes, this isn't feasible. But if a reasonable number of students at a reasonably distributed number of universities are watching, they should have near real-time viewing, and anyone outside the network has a nearby server on a campus, which is far better than a single server farm that could be on the other side of the country. I don't know about the EU and Asian networks, or if those even would affect this too much.
Strictly speaking, that's why BitTorrent is a good thing: You only send duplicates to nearby nodes, who in turn send it to other nodes. In the broadcast model, huge amounts of bandwidth are eaten up by the host sending out the same data to every client, in its entirety. Making clients share the burden reduces the strain on the network, because clients can get the data from the nearest node. Unless that's what you meant, I'm not sure why you were modded insightful.
What we need is a more standardized system for storing certs locally. The centralized system is probably preferable for banks and such, but for most, a simple "Install this certificate" dialog would be sufficient. That reduces the man in the middle problem to just the first access, which is just as secure as ssh.
It also arguably has advantages over the centralized system, since you know exactly why you're trusting the site. With the centralized system, you're just assuming that the certificate provider is legit. Compromise or spoof a certificate provider, you potentially compromise many sites. Spoof one site that has provided certs to its users, users all get the nasty error message. And that's about as good as it can get.
Of course, every time I've gotten a key-mismatch error message of ssh, my response has been to delete my key file. So it may not allow much more security, but it gives the user more room to make an intelligent choice without reducing usability.
Also, I don't run my own DNS. But if I were paying someone to make sure my patches weren't idiotic, I'd be pretty pissed, whether the patch was for something I used or not.
Honestly, he's an 18 year old with Asperger's. In other words, he's a lonely teenage nerd, with a literal handicap in the personality department. The only thing to do is give the kid a job.
Asperger's, like autism, makes cause and effect a little difficult to process. That said, people with Asperger's also tend to be very methodical (as his computer expertise can attest.) Setting down a clear set of expectations for him about how to behave in the computing realm is difficult, but it's not the same thing as trying to reform a hardened hacker. He's young, and he's not entirely with it, at least not in terms of personal interaction. I imagine that's exactly why he hasn't been charged.
We're releasing regularly, it makes sense to tie it to the date. If we skipped a year, yeah, the jump from 2008.3 to 2010.1 might be a little confusing, but honestly, a year without a kernel release? If that happens I think we can safely say linux is either dead or perfect (security flaws always occur in widely used software, so I'd say the two are synonymous.)
It's my impression that a constant amount of development is going on, so it makes sense to tie it to years - between 2008 and 2009 a year's work of work was done. That's descriptive, and useful when comparing versions. Normal version numbers don't really tell you anything other than that someone decided to make a release, and I think saying how long the release took is the most clear way of saying how different the release is from the previous release. If oddities like different numbers of releases in a year throw you, just do hybrid version numbers. i.e.
2008.1_40 (First Release, 40th day of year)
2008.2_200 (Second Release, 170th day of year)
I'm not quite sure, I couldn't get it to work out. I did figure out that if the mirror plasmoid is running a terminal, and you run vrmswhile saying goatse three times, Stallman's laughing face appears in the plasmid, and it runs apt-get remove on all non-free software on your machine.
So far, it seems to be preventing me from reinstalling everything. So excuse me, I need to go rebuild my entire music collection in vorbis.
if the mother didn't want her daughter to post this information, she should have been a better parent.
And the mother being a better parent would have stopped her from posting this information... how?
Obviously, refusing to allow your children to have parties would solve the problem, but I'd hardly call that good parenting. Once you've hosted a party, what possible way do you have to stop your child from blogging on a computer outside the house and making outrageous claims? How exaggerated the claims might have been is irrelevant. You really can't hold parents responsible for their children doing stupid things online. Kids do stupid things, and today that means stupidly public things. Welcome to the information age.
I don't know if you've tried the IE8 beta, but it makes FF2 look like it was written in C. And unfortunately, IE* still owns the market, so we need to convert the world to firefox to make encryption a carbon-neutral affair.
Yeah, that's about my assessment. I appreciate that gnome tries to keep things to a minimum. However, GTK remains slow, which is why I run fluxbox and use a mix of Gnome and KDE apps. KDE I use when I really need the polish.
Of course, in some respects that's not true. Judging from my experience with Konqueror, KDE has some work to do on the polish front, even when compared just against Evolution, to speak nothing of Firefox.
But Amarok wins hands down. I'd like to see a full-fledged Linux media player that doesn't take a measurable amount of CPU cycles just to play music (Winamp handles this fine, so it is possible.) I guess that's the thing. Whatever they come to, and whatever one says about Vista, XP still beats both of them on polish and speed.
But then, that said, the underlying OS is rock-solid. So there are trade offs, but I know where I stand.
Granted, a lot of that is probably perfectly stable, patched, and just-retired Windows 3.11. Probably not quite the security problem he makes it out to be. But running a current desktop OS vulnerable to the same worms flying around in email is just negligent.
This article really doesn't say a lot of anything, except that fiber optics can automagically increase their speed 60 fold, which sounds, to say the least, suspect.
I'm no physicist, but I'd say we need at least a little more than this to merit a slashdot.
A friend of mine, a serious geek (and CS major) decided to buy the XP version because ABC has a proprietary video plugin not available on Linux (and that doesn't appear likely to become so.)
So there is a valid reason to use windows over Linux unfortunately. Although, when he was looking at it, he was trying to see if dual-booting was a possibility with 4 gigs of HD.
While going to specialists sounds reasonable, we've only just reached the stage where testing large numbers of people is feasible, and only really through DNA microarrays.
The idea that you could do it yourself using methods invented in the mid-90's methods is just silly.
No, flip the battery over. I don't want to take the thing out, I will lose it, and even if I don't, it will be damaged by sitting around in my pocket outside the phone. There's a protective casing for a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
I switched to Linux largely because using mice causes a lot of wrist problems for me. With Linux, I can do 90% of tasks from the keyboard, and moving to the mouse actually becomes a (somewhat) helpful break from typing. It would be more so if I didn't have to use Windows at work and get too much mouse time there. A supplemental touch screen would provide a third action, thus decreasing the strain on the muscles involved in mouse/keyboard use. However, I don't think that it would really be any better than the mouse from an ergonomic perspective. Might be better from a usability perspective, if someone redesigned my entire desktop with touchscreen / physical keyboard in mind. Still, I would prefer a redesign with keyboard only in mind, and maybe some touchscreen/mouse/stylus stuff tacked on for the unavoidable (image manipulation / gaming.)
It remains a pretty useless article for not specifying. I understand if it's a proprietary alloy or something, but how hard is it to say "it's a proprietary alloy"? It's hard to really say anything without something more specific than "liquid metal." Aside from the obvious T-1000 jokes.
For those of us on university networks, it's another story though. If even like 10 people on a campus were watching a stream, they'd experience far better times than if they were streaming from a server. And of course, a sizable portion of the watchers could be on campus networks.
Also, though the majority of the internet is as you describe, the Internet 2 pipes running through universities mean that anyone on a college network effectively is living on the internet of the future.
So, though for fare appealing mostly to older viewers, yes, this isn't feasible. But if a reasonable number of students at a reasonably distributed number of universities are watching, they should have near real-time viewing, and anyone outside the network has a nearby server on a campus, which is far better than a single server farm that could be on the other side of the country. I don't know about the EU and Asian networks, or if those even would affect this too much.
Strictly speaking, that's why BitTorrent is a good thing: You only send duplicates to nearby nodes, who in turn send it to other nodes. In the broadcast model, huge amounts of bandwidth are eaten up by the host sending out the same data to every client, in its entirety. Making clients share the burden reduces the strain on the network, because clients can get the data from the nearest node. Unless that's what you meant, I'm not sure why you were modded insightful.
What we need is a more standardized system for storing certs locally. The centralized system is probably preferable for banks and such, but for most, a simple "Install this certificate" dialog would be sufficient. That reduces the man in the middle problem to just the first access, which is just as secure as ssh.
It also arguably has advantages over the centralized system, since you know exactly why you're trusting the site. With the centralized system, you're just assuming that the certificate provider is legit. Compromise or spoof a certificate provider, you potentially compromise many sites. Spoof one site that has provided certs to its users, users all get the nasty error message. And that's about as good as it can get.
Of course, every time I've gotten a key-mismatch error message of ssh, my response has been to delete my key file. So it may not allow much more security, but it gives the user more room to make an intelligent choice without reducing usability.
Why would Microsoft transcode mp3's to Real Media?
I don't need to worry about that, I run Debian
Also, I don't run my own DNS. But if I were paying someone to make sure my patches weren't idiotic, I'd be pretty pissed, whether the patch was for something I used or not.
Actually, it's a known fact that they use Windows.
Honestly, he's an 18 year old with Asperger's. In other words, he's a lonely teenage nerd, with a literal handicap in the personality department. The only thing to do is give the kid a job.
Asperger's, like autism, makes cause and effect a little difficult to process. That said, people with Asperger's also tend to be very methodical (as his computer expertise can attest.) Setting down a clear set of expectations for him about how to behave in the computing realm is difficult, but it's not the same thing as trying to reform a hardened hacker. He's young, and he's not entirely with it, at least not in terms of personal interaction. I imagine that's exactly why he hasn't been charged.
We're releasing regularly, it makes sense to tie it to the date. If we skipped a year, yeah, the jump from 2008.3 to 2010.1 might be a little confusing, but honestly, a year without a kernel release? If that happens I think we can safely say linux is either dead or perfect (security flaws always occur in widely used software, so I'd say the two are synonymous.)
It's my impression that a constant amount of development is going on, so it makes sense to tie it to years - between 2008 and 2009 a year's work of work was done. That's descriptive, and useful when comparing versions. Normal version numbers don't really tell you anything other than that someone decided to make a release, and I think saying how long the release took is the most clear way of saying how different the release is from the previous release. If oddities like different numbers of releases in a year throw you, just do hybrid version numbers. i.e.
2008.1_40 (First Release, 40th day of year)
2008.2_200 (Second Release, 170th day of year)
The BBC's been doing the same thing with the BBC's online Hulu-type offering. So no, this happens everywhere there's online TV.
Tell Britain to give us Doctor Who online, then you can have Doctor Horrible. (The BBC's hulu-type service is Britain-only.)
You do realize how many grandmothers are under the control of the bad guys, right?
It needs to make the front page of the fucking Times so that people will realize what a joke the pricing on texting is.
I'm not quite sure, I couldn't get it to work out. I did figure out that if the mirror plasmoid is running a terminal, and you run vrms while saying goatse three times, Stallman's laughing face appears in the plasmid, and it runs apt-get remove on all non-free software on your machine.
So far, it seems to be preventing me from reinstalling everything. So excuse me, I need to go rebuild my entire music collection in vorbis.
Teaching does not guarantee learning. 15 year olds do not listen to their parents. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between.
And the mother being a better parent would have stopped her from posting this information... how?
Obviously, refusing to allow your children to have parties would solve the problem, but I'd hardly call that good parenting. Once you've hosted a party, what possible way do you have to stop your child from blogging on a computer outside the house and making outrageous claims? How exaggerated the claims might have been is irrelevant. You really can't hold parents responsible for their children doing stupid things online. Kids do stupid things, and today that means stupidly public things. Welcome to the information age.
I don't know if you've tried the IE8 beta, but it makes FF2 look like it was written in C. And unfortunately, IE* still owns the market, so we need to convert the world to firefox to make encryption a carbon-neutral affair.
Yeah, that's about my assessment. I appreciate that gnome tries to keep things to a minimum. However, GTK remains slow, which is why I run fluxbox and use a mix of Gnome and KDE apps. KDE I use when I really need the polish.
Of course, in some respects that's not true. Judging from my experience with Konqueror, KDE has some work to do on the polish front, even when compared just against Evolution, to speak nothing of Firefox.
But Amarok wins hands down. I'd like to see a full-fledged Linux media player that doesn't take a measurable amount of CPU cycles just to play music (Winamp handles this fine, so it is possible.) I guess that's the thing. Whatever they come to, and whatever one says about Vista, XP still beats both of them on polish and speed.
But then, that said, the underlying OS is rock-solid. So there are trade offs, but I know where I stand.
Granted, a lot of that is probably perfectly stable, patched, and just-retired Windows 3.11. Probably not quite the security problem he makes it out to be. But running a current desktop OS vulnerable to the same worms flying around in email is just negligent.
I think he's implying that Gnome has no features.
Which, while not entirely true, is not entirely unfair.
This article really doesn't say a lot of anything, except that fiber optics can automagically increase their speed 60 fold, which sounds, to say the least, suspect.
I'm no physicist, but I'd say we need at least a little more than this to merit a slashdot.
A friend of mine, a serious geek (and CS major) decided to buy the XP version because ABC has a proprietary video plugin not available on Linux (and that doesn't appear likely to become so.)
So there is a valid reason to use windows over Linux unfortunately. Although, when he was looking at it, he was trying to see if dual-booting was a possibility with 4 gigs of HD.
"Design and Order PCR primers and controls"
"You'll need a cloning kit"
"Copy the DNA with the PCR reaction"
"Sequence the amplified genetic material."
While going to specialists sounds reasonable, we've only just reached the stage where testing large numbers of people is feasible, and only really through DNA microarrays.
The idea that you could do it yourself using methods invented in the mid-90's methods is just silly.
No, flip the battery over. I don't want to take the thing out, I will lose it, and even if I don't, it will be damaged by sitting around in my pocket outside the phone. There's a protective casing for a reason.