That's only for the General GRE. The Subject tests (such as this one) go up to 990. But I believe in both cases the minimum score is 200 (don't ask me why), so 100 would be exceptionally poor.
But if I'm already going to edit the movie, why not help my customers a little more and go out and buy the movie for them as well, saving them the trouble of going to the store? And if I think a lot of people will want this, why not buy and edit a bunch of movies in advance?
The line between editing as a service and sales of edited movies seems extremely thin to me, and I don't think you can legitimately draw it there.
They can simply buy your rights away from you, even if you don't want to sell.
What rights are those? If you don't want someone cutting up your movie, and possibly reselling it, don't sell them a copy. That goes whether "them" is Joe Blow or Microsoft.
Not exactly easy, if you want your movie to enjoy a large market. Best Buy doesn't exactly check the antecedents of people before selling them movies.
Exploiting a cell phone remotely bears a MUCH lower chance of getting caught than does physical assault and robbery. The chances of getting hurt are much less (what if the victim or a bystander fights back, or has a knife?) as are the likely punishments. I think you'll find a lot of people who'd do one but wouldn't risk the other.
By your argument, you shouldn't worry about your credit card number being stolen online. Someone could shoot you and take your card anyway.
That said, if properly designed, the shared files could be isolated from other data in the phone. I still don't see how the power requirements aren't a killer, though.
They aren't mutually exclusive. Here at Harvey Mudd, there are several pinball machines in the dorm lounges (especially Pin-Bot) which also host wild parties. There is even a Pin-Bot drinking game.
Sure they can justify it. They want to maximize their profits. In fact they have a responsibility to their shareholders to do so. If they can get enough takers at that price, why shouldn't they?
Also, what do you mean by offering "network capacity"? Remember that there may be a large area sharing a single pipe; how do you propose to share it fairly?
The sum of the users' bandwidth caps is probably much more than the capacity of the pipe as it is, since they assume not everyone will hit the cap at once.
Just because you wish you could have more bandwidth for less money, doesn't mean those who won't give it to you are evil.
My system runs GPL and other free software, where the license contains none of these things. Am I still in trouble if I try to find vulnerabilities in it?
"Remain" illegal? I wasn't aware that looking for security problems in code was illegal for ordinary people. Can't I audit my own system?
Re:Economic reasons to scare John Q. Public
on
What, Me Worry?
·
· Score: 1
I'm not an economist, but consider this.
Say you want to start a business, or make an investment, or something. You might want to borrow money to do so. You will go into debt, but you hope that your venture will make you enough money to pay off the debt and turn a profit.
Most people agree that this is a good thing. It allows more businesses to be started, and some of them succeed, producing lots of goods, services, and capital.
Now suppose you are the government, and you have some project in mind. Government projects (supposedly) are intended to benefit the citizenry. Whether it makes them richer, or keeps them from dying, or avoids a destructive war, whatever, it means they'll be paying more taxes. So if the eventual gain is more than the amount to be spent plus interest, the government should borrow to do it; in other words, deficit spending.
I'm not saying this is always how things work, or even that it's always consciously intended, but it's a reasonable case in which deficit spending is justified.
It's a good point. I feel like I know and understand Unix pretty well. I don't know much about Windows, but I haven't used it much in recent years.
I wonder sometimes if I had stuck with Windows, whether I would understand it in the same depth I understand Unix. In fact, I'm curious as to just how many people there are who do (I haven't met one yet). For instance, can you look at a Windows process listing and be able to explain what every process is and what it's for? Do you have a general idea of how the basic system tools work, such that you could rewrite them yourself in a pinch?
Also, are there any diagnostic tools? When I'm faced with strange Unix behavior, I usually reach for strace, lsof, tcpdump, gdb, etc. These at least will tell me exactly what the system is doing, and with that I can try to find out where it goes wrong. (And in the long run, they will teach you a lot.) Does Windows have tools that are as useful, and where do I get them?
Does Windows log noteworthy events somewhere like the Unix syslog? If so, where is it?
If I do figure out what is going wrong, what do I do about it? Documentation is important here: how do I find which weird check box, which has a name like "Increased Performance (yes/no)," affects the behavior I'm seeing? I need a more complete description of the options. Unix programs sometimes have this; Windows ones rarely do. And if it is a bug, how can I fix it without source code?
So this is what frustrates me, as a Unix user, when I try to deal with Windows. I don't have a good understanding of how the system works underneath, I don't have the tools to figure out exactly what is going on, and I don't know whether I'd be able to fix the problem if I found it. And worst of all, I don't know anyone who does. I'm honestly curious: do you?
The reason a fsck of reiser is fast is because it doesn't do anything. It assumes that the journal has worked properly and says "yep, the fs is fine". This assumption may break down in the face of software bugs or hardware failure.
Try running "reiserfsck --check/dev/hdwhatever" sometime, to actually check the filesystem, and notice that it takes a while longer.
As a Debian user, I have to say "overcomplicated webs of dependencies" have never posed a problem. Sure, there are dependencies between packages. I think this is unavoidable; the alternative is uber-packages which contain much more than you want. But all it means for me is: I say "I want to install package X". dselect resolves the dependencies and says "you will also need packages Y and Z". I say "Great" and it downloads and installs them.
The lack of a standard doesn't bother me either, because Debian produces packages for damn near every piece of software there is. The few I've found for which they don't, I just dump in/usr/local, but I understand making your own package is quite easy.
I guess the main people it affects are developers. They might have to produce a few different types of packages if they want to please everyone. But if their software is popular enough, a Debian maintainer will probably step up and take care of the Debian packaging for them.
Re:Cool project resulting from a big problem?
on
RPM Dependency Graph
·
· Score: 1
Debian provides something much like this by having meta-packages called "tasks". You might have an office-suite package that contains no files of its own, but depends on (say) kword, gnumeric, etc.
Re:Software Compatability is the key, not OS
on
AMD's 64-Bit Chip
·
· Score: 1
Why not games? You might note that most of the modern console game systems are 64-bit. Now maybe that's only for buzzword reasons, but I'd imagine there's some advantage...
(Note that there are other advantages to a 64-bit system besides the ability to address more memory. Game consoles don't have 2GB of RAM either. Fast wide arithmetic is a more likely guess, though I don't really know.)
It's not part of the family in the sense that newer chips are backwards-compatible with it, but the heritage is definitely there. The 8086 had a very similar instruction set and architecture to the 8080. In fact, you could reassemble 8080 code for the 8086. I think the 8080 is absolutely a direct ancestor of all the x86's.
Well, sure. Take a small force (from a flying plastic shard), divide it by an extremely small area (the point of the shard), and you get a very large pressure.
Note also that metals are probably stronger when force is applied uniformly over the entire thing than when it's applied only in a single place.
I don't understand why Mr. Gilmore thinks the ID rule is secret. All he knows is that an airline official told him the rules were communicated verbally to the airline staff. Even if he was right, that doesn't mean the rules aren't also available publically in other ways. If you're pulled over for speeding, and ask the officer to show you the law against speeding, they won't be able to do it (in fact, they may never have read the law themselves), but that doesn't mean the law is secret.
I strongly suspect that if Mr. Gilmore had contacted the FAA, they would have directed him to the appropriate issue and page of the Federal Register with all the details.
I have a Northgate OmniKey 102 keyboard (a true classic, dating to 1990) which has a * key on the lower right, between Ctrl and Alt. It's very convenient being able to type "rm -r *" without needing the Shift key:) Also nice for writing C when you are throwing pointers around everywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
That's only for the General GRE. The Subject tests (such as this one) go up to 990. But I believe in both cases the minimum score is 200 (don't ask me why), so 100 would be exceptionally poor.
But if I'm already going to edit the movie, why not help my customers a little more and go out and buy the movie for them as well, saving them the trouble of going to the store? And if I think a lot of people will want this, why not buy and edit a bunch of movies in advance?
The line between editing as a service and sales of edited movies seems extremely thin to me, and I don't think you can legitimately draw it there.
What rights are those? If you don't want someone cutting up your movie, and possibly reselling it, don't sell them a copy. That goes whether "them" is Joe Blow or Microsoft.
Not exactly easy, if you want your movie to enjoy a large market. Best Buy doesn't exactly check the antecedents of people before selling them movies.
Magnitude 4.8 (yeah, that would be a nice jolt), in Dudley, W. Midlands, at 23:53 GMT on 22 Sep.
But a 12-gauge shotgun is a lot more likely to put a pellet in your head, or somewhere else that's unprotected.
The tobacco industry will also take care of itself. Nobody will smoke a cigarette that is known to hurt people.
Oh wait.
Well, only if you consider 18000 rpm a modest speed. But yes, that idea works.
That's bogus.
Exploiting a cell phone remotely bears a MUCH lower chance of getting caught than does physical assault and robbery. The chances of getting hurt are much less (what if the victim or a bystander fights back, or has a knife?) as are the likely punishments. I think you'll find a lot of people who'd do one but wouldn't risk the other.
By your argument, you shouldn't worry about your credit card number being stolen online. Someone could shoot you and take your card anyway.
That said, if properly designed, the shared files could be isolated from other data in the phone. I still don't see how the power requirements aren't a killer, though.
If you have further questions, please ask me. I've played it a lot and have a good understanding of the game. See my home page for my email address.
They aren't mutually exclusive. Here at Harvey Mudd, there are several pinball machines in the dorm lounges (especially Pin-Bot) which also host wild parties. There is even a Pin-Bot drinking game.
Sure they can justify it. They want to maximize their profits. In fact they have a responsibility to their shareholders to do so. If they can get enough takers at that price, why shouldn't they?
Also, what do you mean by offering "network capacity"? Remember that there may be a large area sharing a single pipe; how do you propose to share it fairly?
The sum of the users' bandwidth caps is probably much more than the capacity of the pipe as it is, since they assume not everyone will hit the cap at once.
Just because you wish you could have more bandwidth for less money, doesn't mean those who won't give it to you are evil.
My system runs GPL and other free software, where the license contains none of these things. Am I still in trouble if I try to find vulnerabilities in it?
"Remain" illegal? I wasn't aware that looking for security problems in code was illegal for ordinary people. Can't I audit my own system?
I'm not an economist, but consider this.
Say you want to start a business, or make an investment, or something. You might want to borrow money to do so. You will go into debt, but you hope that your venture will make you enough money to pay off the debt and turn a profit.
Most people agree that this is a good thing. It allows more businesses to be started, and some of them succeed, producing lots of goods, services, and capital.
Now suppose you are the government, and you have some project in mind. Government projects (supposedly) are intended to benefit the citizenry. Whether it makes them richer, or keeps them from dying, or avoids a destructive war, whatever, it means they'll be paying more taxes. So if the eventual gain is more than the amount to be spent plus interest, the government should borrow to do it; in other words, deficit spending.
I'm not saying this is always how things work, or even that it's always consciously intended, but it's a reasonable case in which deficit spending is justified.
It's a good point. I feel like I know and understand Unix pretty well. I don't know much about Windows, but I haven't used it much in recent years.
I wonder sometimes if I had stuck with Windows, whether I would understand it in the same depth I understand Unix. In fact, I'm curious as to just how many people there are who do (I haven't met one yet). For instance, can you look at a Windows process listing and be able to explain what every process is and what it's for? Do you have a general idea of how the basic system tools work, such that you could rewrite them yourself in a pinch?
Also, are there any diagnostic tools? When I'm faced with strange Unix behavior, I usually reach for strace, lsof, tcpdump, gdb, etc. These at least will tell me exactly what the system is doing, and with that I can try to find out where it goes wrong. (And in the long run, they will teach you a lot.) Does Windows have tools that are as useful, and where do I get them?
Does Windows log noteworthy events somewhere like the Unix syslog? If so, where is it?
If I do figure out what is going wrong, what do I do about it? Documentation is important here: how do I find which weird check box, which has a name like "Increased Performance (yes/no)," affects the behavior I'm seeing? I need a more complete description of the options. Unix programs sometimes have this; Windows ones rarely do. And if it is a bug, how can I fix it without source code?
So this is what frustrates me, as a Unix user, when I try to deal with Windows. I don't have a good understanding of how the system works underneath, I don't have the tools to figure out exactly what is going on, and I don't know whether I'd be able to fix the problem if I found it. And worst of all, I don't know anyone who does. I'm honestly curious: do you?
The reason a fsck of reiser is fast is because it doesn't do anything. It assumes that the journal has worked properly and says "yep, the fs is fine". This assumption may break down in the face of software bugs or hardware failure.
/dev/hdwhatever" sometime, to actually check the filesystem, and notice that it takes a while longer.
Try running "reiserfsck --check
As a Debian user, I have to say "overcomplicated webs of dependencies" have never posed a problem. Sure, there are dependencies between packages. I think this is unavoidable; the alternative is uber-packages which contain much more than you want. But all it means for me is: I say "I want to install package X". dselect resolves the dependencies and says "you will also need packages Y and Z". I say "Great" and it downloads and installs them.
/usr/local, but I understand making your own package is quite easy.
The lack of a standard doesn't bother me either, because Debian produces packages for damn near every piece of software there is. The few I've found for which they don't, I just dump in
I guess the main people it affects are developers. They might have to produce a few different types of packages if they want to please everyone. But if their software is popular enough, a Debian maintainer will probably step up and take care of the Debian packaging for them.
Debian provides something much like this by having meta-packages called "tasks". You might have an office-suite package that contains no files of its own, but depends on (say) kword, gnumeric, etc.
Why not games? You might note that most of the modern console game systems are 64-bit. Now maybe that's only for buzzword reasons, but I'd imagine there's some advantage...
(Note that there are other advantages to a 64-bit system besides the ability to address more memory. Game consoles don't have 2GB of RAM either. Fast wide arithmetic is a more likely guess, though I don't really know.)
It's not part of the family in the sense that newer chips are backwards-compatible with it, but the heritage is definitely there. The 8086 had a very similar instruction set and architecture to the 8080. In fact, you could reassemble 8080 code for the 8086. I think the 8080 is absolutely a direct ancestor of all the x86's.
Well, sure. Take a small force (from a flying plastic shard), divide it by an extremely small area (the point of the shard), and you get a very large pressure.
Note also that metals are probably stronger when force is applied uniformly over the entire thing than when it's applied only in a single place.
Those aren't actually the laws. I'm talking about California Vehicle Code Section 4237.23 Paragraph (c) and such.
I don't understand why Mr. Gilmore thinks the ID rule is secret. All he knows is that an airline official told him the rules were communicated verbally to the airline staff. Even if he was right, that doesn't mean the rules aren't also available publically in other ways. If you're pulled over for speeding, and ask the officer to show you the law against speeding, they won't be able to do it (in fact, they may never have read the law themselves), but that doesn't mean the law is secret.
I strongly suspect that if Mr. Gilmore had contacted the FAA, they would have directed him to the appropriate issue and page of the Federal Register with all the details.
Actually, airports are usually built by a municipal airport authority. So the government does own them (though maybe not the federal government).
I have a Northgate OmniKey 102 keyboard (a true classic, dating to 1990) which has a * key on the lower right, between Ctrl and Alt. It's very convenient being able to type "rm -r *" without needing the Shift key :) Also nice for writing C when you are throwing pointers around everywhere.