People that use msn and yahoo are lovers not haters and people that use gmail have a strange interest in cheese. On a side note, shouldn't the passwords be salted so they can't be brute-forced this easily. That is really the only thing that scares me. Everyone gets hacked. It just happens, but not having active damage mitigation beyond encrypting is just stupid especially simple ones like salting.
I don't even see the military as a huge market for it because they would use a plane or set up their own towers anywhere where they will be operating because it is cheaper. And then if they did use satellites they would want to own them or would tack it onto other satellites they are launching to mitigate costs. They are nice to have when you are working in the middle of no where. Like on an oil rig or a mine. Even then most operations will setup infrastructure and use traditional satellite communications because they will be around for a couple months. The issue is that cost is prohibitive considering the gains over existing technology.
That is the same reason why fair trade coffee bothers me. If it is not economically viable, why are they still producing it? Are there infrastructure issues that force them to produce coffee instead of food? Maybe those issues need to be addressed by people instead of just paying more for coffee. Fair trade is basically giving the coffee farms an allowance. They are better off day to day, but in the long run they are dependent on us and our demands. They should be supporting their own economy first so in the long run they will be able to function without our support.
That makes so much more sense then the other explanations. I hate it when people talk about bandwidth in this situation as if it is a fixed commodity being traded.. What I don't get is why isn't Level 3 and Comcast both willing to pay for the upgrading costs. Why should level 3 pay to increase the backbone of another network? They do need to find a new peering agreement, but what Comcast is asking for is abusive. Comcast should be interested in promoting service access to its consumers which it obviously is not happening in this case. I don't think net neutrality could even fix a system that is this fubar from companies abusing monopolies. Government regulation would be much more effective.
A lot of the older laws actually articulate this(not so much recently). Giving someone the means to commit a crime is not a crime until the crime is committed. I can break and enter a building as long as it is not with the intention of committing a crime. It protects people that hear screaming in a house or see a burning house and break in to provide assistance.Same with lock pick equipment is in most places. Ownership is not a crime unless you are intending to use them to commit a crime. I really think the change in how the laws are written is warning of how much countries are becoming parental states(kinda like police states).
Advertisers love internet ads for one reason. They are able to measure the effectiveness of the advertisements and pay for the advertising accordingly. Advertisers are going to like this because if someone isn't interested in the ad they are only paying for a five second ad instead of the minute that they would normally always have to pay for. Users like it because they can skip most of the ads so it is a win-win. The only party that loses out is Google because they won't make as much revenue, but they probably figure the increase in traffic will off set the loss. In that case its a win-win-win.
Have you ever watched Munich? When a vacuum (hole) forms it is filled naturally. Killing someone no matter how brutally does not mean no one else is going to fill it. And about the rest of your ramblings. Everyone should be playing with their hands above the table. This is why the UN was created. The US has shown repeatedly to ignore the UN and this just shows that it is not interested in respecting what the UN means. These cabals would be meaningless if the US was actually interested in creating peace in the world. Not their current directive of believe what I believe because my club is bigger.
It was called internic and it could easily come back because of this. Especially for sites the government is trying to block. The next most likely thing would be multiple DNS networks and everyone just gets used to having to switch depending on what they want to go to. Could easily be rectified at the browser level by "dialing in" that session's DNS ip. Eventually the most bipartisan DNSs would get used the most. ISPs would actively pursue an effective DNS system to maintain their consumer base in areas with no monopoly. There is nothing limiting there being many DNSs other then the fact that consumers would have to learn more about how the internet actually makes the magic happen and the general confusion that would ensue from that. Plus all the phishing of domain names.
You are providing a service being a programmer and that makes sense. The company needs you to develop the software so they have to motivate you to do it for them somehow. The trouble is that they are trying to sell the software afterward as a commodity. It doesn't make any sense economically(see infinite supply arguments). And saying that the only way that software would be developed is if it was copyrighted is misleading and insulting. Look at FOSS and the number of companies that employ people to develop software for it. They are motivated to do this because supporting a closed/license based system costs more then building onto FOSS to meet their needs.
I just have to say that to be ruled by pure fact then you must have an open mind. Understanding that what you know now is most likely wrong. The bible I was given as a gift has the passage as 616. Quoting the passage doesn't work because that proves nothing at all as misprints have been repeatedly mentioned. The best proof I have is this; http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk/POxy/beast616.htm. It is important to know that this is most likely wrong, but should be sufficient evidence until better evidence is found. And please don't assume I am Christian.
They never changed it. If you read the bible it references 616 for the mark of the beast. I have no idea where the 666 ever came from, but it is usually referenced with Satan not the beast so they could be different things entirely.
I think he is referring to the difficulty of maintaining control. You are misdirecting the argument to focus on the wording, "want" and "free". Any person that hesitates at posting their account and pin proving the op's point. They don't know how the information is going to be used and distributed. There is a huge number of anti fraud laws and people still get taken for a trip everyday. I would say that makes it hard to lock up information. It gets worse for people that want to sell the information as the more people that know the more likely it is to get distributed. It is like a spontaneous entropic process that is irreversible. Distribution and reuse is going to happen, you are fighting an uphill battle if you want to control it, and it is never going to be like before when the information didn't exist.
I don't understand why he didn't use that as his defense. It is used consistently in other instances. As much as the system is broken. It is considered that the law must be applied as evenly as possible even if that means it can not be applied. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause. I don't want to get into if it was legal or not. It would be nice to see people charged for account hacking. I'm just saying that it is a defense.
The one thing I can think of was that they were hoping to sell a more expensive, but more functional(artificially) parallel system to people that want to plug into the computer. Once they know there is demand for the technology.
Thanks for the reply. I don't mind providing an article. Please note I wasn't saying that it is incorrect to use SLBM as a descriptor. I was merely defending the right to describe it as an ICBM. The two descriptions are not mutually exclusive so fas describing it one way does not prove that it can not be described the other way, as well.
Here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_ballistic_missile#Modern_ICBMs; uses the Trident as an example for ICBMs and SLBMs.
And just to be fair if you consider wikipedia as an unreliable source; http://www.jstor.org/stable/2538595?seq=2; describes the Trident as a ICBM-range SLBM, which is what I am trying to explain.
The Trident missile is an ICBM that is launched from a Submarine(it is used as an example on wikipedia). ICBM categorization defines the distance(greater than 5,500 km or 3,500 miles) where SLBM categorization defines the launching platform. If you are going to BTW someone at least know what you are talking about. The categories are not discreet separate groups. Although you are correct in calling it an SLBM before an ICBM as the range of the missile was never defined.
I don't think they should even have the ability to have a browser. You need something dumb enough to meet your needs and thats it. I would buy a system that runs on solaris. It's a SCADA system not a personal computer. You don't even have to air gap it. It should be considered a device and not a computer then. You can send the DAQ information to the computer and have a seperate terminal for control.
I don't think that uninterrupted is as significant as you make it seem. HDMI being a digital signal benefits from the cliff effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliff_effect). Basically that means that as long as you can get all the packets you need before the picture is rendered on the screen you are safe. That is how it works when you are watching youtube on your laptop. The only difference is that rendering occurs on your lap with the computer so less packets are transmitted over wireless. The trick here is that the rendering occurs before transmission which just means you have more packets transmitted over wireless. The same effect is created with a gpu and wireless card in the television. Which is just a DLNA enabled television.
I am not arguing that it should be placed in the water, but at least I can recognize where my knowledge is deficient and decision should be given to a more knowledgeable body. That is what I mean by push. They are trying to force voters into making an uninformed decisions.
This was probably caused by the same idiots that are trying to push non fluoridated water on us (http://www.waterloowatch.com/). Ontario for some reason seems inundated with quacks and people that think they know whats best for us recently regardless of their education.
Call the police. Seriously. You don't know what the thing is why the fuck would you drive around in the car once you know it is there. You don't have to fiddle with the courts where no one hears your story instead journalists will start asking the questions that the FBI won't like hearing the answers to.
They don't have to do anything that drastic. They can lock you up without laying charges and don't have to release you. It happened when the government disabled habeas corpus from being effective.
I didn't know they made servers either. I looked it up and almost choked on my laughter when the specs are a 2.66 duo and 4 GB of RAM at $1000 for the Mac Mini. They definitely just shoehorned the server software onto the hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
People that use msn and yahoo are lovers not haters and people that use gmail have a strange interest in cheese. On a side note, shouldn't the passwords be salted so they can't be brute-forced this easily. That is really the only thing that scares me. Everyone gets hacked. It just happens, but not having active damage mitigation beyond encrypting is just stupid especially simple ones like salting.
I don't even see the military as a huge market for it because they would use a plane or set up their own towers anywhere where they will be operating because it is cheaper. And then if they did use satellites they would want to own them or would tack it onto other satellites they are launching to mitigate costs. They are nice to have when you are working in the middle of no where. Like on an oil rig or a mine. Even then most operations will setup infrastructure and use traditional satellite communications because they will be around for a couple months. The issue is that cost is prohibitive considering the gains over existing technology.
That is the same reason why fair trade coffee bothers me. If it is not economically viable, why are they still producing it? Are there infrastructure issues that force them to produce coffee instead of food? Maybe those issues need to be addressed by people instead of just paying more for coffee. Fair trade is basically giving the coffee farms an allowance. They are better off day to day, but in the long run they are dependent on us and our demands. They should be supporting their own economy first so in the long run they will be able to function without our support.
That makes so much more sense then the other explanations. I hate it when people talk about bandwidth in this situation as if it is a fixed commodity being traded.. What I don't get is why isn't Level 3 and Comcast both willing to pay for the upgrading costs. Why should level 3 pay to increase the backbone of another network? They do need to find a new peering agreement, but what Comcast is asking for is abusive. Comcast should be interested in promoting service access to its consumers which it obviously is not happening in this case. I don't think net neutrality could even fix a system that is this fubar from companies abusing monopolies. Government regulation would be much more effective.
I am getting a growing concerned about PETA people having children for some reason right now.
A lot of the older laws actually articulate this(not so much recently). Giving someone the means to commit a crime is not a crime until the crime is committed. I can break and enter a building as long as it is not with the intention of committing a crime. It protects people that hear screaming in a house or see a burning house and break in to provide assistance.Same with lock pick equipment is in most places. Ownership is not a crime unless you are intending to use them to commit a crime. I really think the change in how the laws are written is warning of how much countries are becoming parental states(kinda like police states).
Advertisers love internet ads for one reason. They are able to measure the effectiveness of the advertisements and pay for the advertising accordingly. Advertisers are going to like this because if someone isn't interested in the ad they are only paying for a five second ad instead of the minute that they would normally always have to pay for. Users like it because they can skip most of the ads so it is a win-win. The only party that loses out is Google because they won't make as much revenue, but they probably figure the increase in traffic will off set the loss. In that case its a win-win-win.
Have you ever watched Munich? When a vacuum (hole) forms it is filled naturally. Killing someone no matter how brutally does not mean no one else is going to fill it. And about the rest of your ramblings. Everyone should be playing with their hands above the table. This is why the UN was created. The US has shown repeatedly to ignore the UN and this just shows that it is not interested in respecting what the UN means. These cabals would be meaningless if the US was actually interested in creating peace in the world. Not their current directive of believe what I believe because my club is bigger.
It was called internic and it could easily come back because of this. Especially for sites the government is trying to block. The next most likely thing would be multiple DNS networks and everyone just gets used to having to switch depending on what they want to go to. Could easily be rectified at the browser level by "dialing in" that session's DNS ip. Eventually the most bipartisan DNSs would get used the most. ISPs would actively pursue an effective DNS system to maintain their consumer base in areas with no monopoly. There is nothing limiting there being many DNSs other then the fact that consumers would have to learn more about how the internet actually makes the magic happen and the general confusion that would ensue from that. Plus all the phishing of domain names.
You are providing a service being a programmer and that makes sense. The company needs you to develop the software so they have to motivate you to do it for them somehow. The trouble is that they are trying to sell the software afterward as a commodity. It doesn't make any sense economically(see infinite supply arguments). And saying that the only way that software would be developed is if it was copyrighted is misleading and insulting. Look at FOSS and the number of companies that employ people to develop software for it. They are motivated to do this because supporting a closed/license based system costs more then building onto FOSS to meet their needs.
You would be surprised how often engineer and computer programmer are not synonymous.
I just have to say that to be ruled by pure fact then you must have an open mind. Understanding that what you know now is most likely wrong. The bible I was given as a gift has the passage as 616. Quoting the passage doesn't work because that proves nothing at all as misprints have been repeatedly mentioned. The best proof I have is this; http://www.csad.ox.ac.uk/POxy/beast616.htm. It is important to know that this is most likely wrong, but should be sufficient evidence until better evidence is found. And please don't assume I am Christian.
They never changed it. If you read the bible it references 616 for the mark of the beast. I have no idea where the 666 ever came from, but it is usually referenced with Satan not the beast so they could be different things entirely.
Post your Bank Account & PIN and find out ... ;-)
I think he is referring to the difficulty of maintaining control. You are misdirecting the argument to focus on the wording, "want" and "free". Any person that hesitates at posting their account and pin proving the op's point. They don't know how the information is going to be used and distributed. There is a huge number of anti fraud laws and people still get taken for a trip everyday. I would say that makes it hard to lock up information. It gets worse for people that want to sell the information as the more people that know the more likely it is to get distributed. It is like a spontaneous entropic process that is irreversible. Distribution and reuse is going to happen, you are fighting an uphill battle if you want to control it, and it is never going to be like before when the information didn't exist.
I don't understand why he didn't use that as his defense. It is used consistently in other instances. As much as the system is broken. It is considered that the law must be applied as evenly as possible even if that means it can not be applied. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause. I don't want to get into if it was legal or not. It would be nice to see people charged for account hacking. I'm just saying that it is a defense.
The one thing I can think of was that they were hoping to sell a more expensive, but more functional(artificially) parallel system to people that want to plug into the computer. Once they know there is demand for the technology.
Thanks for the reply. I don't mind providing an article. Please note I wasn't saying that it is incorrect to use SLBM as a descriptor. I was merely defending the right to describe it as an ICBM. The two descriptions are not mutually exclusive so fas describing it one way does not prove that it can not be described the other way, as well.
Here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_ballistic_missile#Modern_ICBMs; uses the Trident as an example for ICBMs and SLBMs.
And just to be fair if you consider wikipedia as an unreliable source; http://www.jstor.org/stable/2538595?seq=2; describes the Trident as a ICBM-range SLBM, which is what I am trying to explain.
The Trident missile is an ICBM that is launched from a Submarine(it is used as an example on wikipedia). ICBM categorization defines the distance(greater than 5,500 km or 3,500 miles) where SLBM categorization defines the launching platform. If you are going to BTW someone at least know what you are talking about. The categories are not discreet separate groups. Although you are correct in calling it an SLBM before an ICBM as the range of the missile was never defined.
I don't think they should even have the ability to have a browser. You need something dumb enough to meet your needs and thats it. I would buy a system that runs on solaris. It's a SCADA system not a personal computer. You don't even have to air gap it. It should be considered a device and not a computer then. You can send the DAQ information to the computer and have a seperate terminal for control.
I don't think that uninterrupted is as significant as you make it seem. HDMI being a digital signal benefits from the cliff effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliff_effect). Basically that means that as long as you can get all the packets you need before the picture is rendered on the screen you are safe. That is how it works when you are watching youtube on your laptop. The only difference is that rendering occurs on your lap with the computer so less packets are transmitted over wireless. The trick here is that the rendering occurs before transmission which just means you have more packets transmitted over wireless. The same effect is created with a gpu and wireless card in the television. Which is just a DLNA enabled television.
I am not arguing that it should be placed in the water, but at least I can recognize where my knowledge is deficient and decision should be given to a more knowledgeable body. That is what I mean by push. They are trying to force voters into making an uninformed decisions.
This was probably caused by the same idiots that are trying to push non fluoridated water on us (http://www.waterloowatch.com/). Ontario for some reason seems inundated with quacks and people that think they know whats best for us recently regardless of their education.
Call the police. Seriously. You don't know what the thing is why the fuck would you drive around in the car once you know it is there. You don't have to fiddle with the courts where no one hears your story instead journalists will start asking the questions that the FBI won't like hearing the answers to.
They don't have to do anything that drastic. They can lock you up without laying charges and don't have to release you. It happened when the government disabled habeas corpus from being effective.
I didn't know they made servers either. I looked it up and almost choked on my laughter when the specs are a 2.66 duo and 4 GB of RAM at $1000 for the Mac Mini. They definitely just shoehorned the server software onto the hardware.