That seems to scream about what thinking caused this issue as well. The resources need to be there to handle the calls. If its not serious or life threatening make the caller pay for wasting the ambulance's time. Most people are rather competent for judging how serious the issue is. A person across the phone can't assume anything which is what the questions do. Like if he fell six feet onto a bed of razors. If your under shock it is easy to forget to mention these things when being questioned, but are able to realize how serious the issue is. You can't just prioritize the deficiency in resources away like this without sacrificing a lot of quality. Hell you could make a medical taxi service for people that are not seriously ill that charges for their service to reduce the demand on the ambulance service for low priority callers.
You are correct on so many levels then wrong on so many others. Every company has to pay to maintain their own network. It just happens that Google's network is massive and goes across the country as they share huge amounts of information between data centers. It costs them significant money to maintain, but hey every company has to do that at least in their buildings. Now when they want to hookup to the internet, like most other companies they should have to pay their provider(s) for the connections. They don't though because they can sell or contract out the extra bandwidth they have to their providers reducing their costs to connect to the internet to zero. Not the infrastructure costs.
It is like there are two parts to Google the tier 1 ISPs and the data center company. With a company like this the risk of running out of bandwidth budget is huge so it is safer for them to have a contract that in effect gives them unlimited bandwidth when they need it. Even if it does cost them more in the end then using providers for each site.
This kind of shenanigans is always done in the corporate world. You can buy servers that require a simple piece of paper to run more cores, but the components are already in place. The car example even covers this with the hooded gas tanks to change the amount of gas you can put in the car. The car company is actually physically adding something to the vehicle to place it in the "unupgraded" state. Companies do this all the time. What is ridiculous is that software would get special treatment under the law in these respects. I wonder if the license disallows cracking the DLC you have technically already purchased the code in a physical sense. The one that I think would stop that would be modification limitations, but maybe not?
Magnetic sensitive components are now usually shielded. Floppies and other magnetic media were the most susceptible so most people don't have to worry about it much now a days. Plus most shielding is just a faraday cage or iron like the outside of the computer case. HDD have the same issue and have a metal case. As well there are magnets anyways in the hard drives to move the IO head. This technology is actually exciting if you can get a consistent solder. It might even do away with microscopes for some soldering jobs.
Let me translate what he was saying to normal instead of Microsoft speak. "Making operating system is hard. We should get paid for our security holes that we fix ourselves." All he is promoting a possible revenue stream that Microsoft can get the government contract for or buy the company that gets it. This is really a Microsoft tax above and beyond the computer sale ones.
Meta analysis is misleading or at least that what has been claimed against of the VOC causing cancer in drinking water studies that I have read. I guess acceptable results justified an acceptable means.
That analog would mean that every time I type a url in the wrong way then I was hacking. They only picked the lock once really and that would be when they got it right and that doesn't make sense. Any possible analogy would be akin trespassing or mischief, but that would not make sense because that would suggest you can own parts of the internet. Any real world analogy does not absolutely relate to what they did because it involves information.
As a serious question when was the last time a ICBM was launched that wasn't a test? I can't think of one myself or find it with google and am curious to find out. The best I could find was the V2, but that's more intercountry then intercontinental
Its all about control of the subject. Society fears people that can't be controlled. Laws work for most of us, but it doesn't for some. Think about it you don't know if the person might spontaneously kill someone. Unlikely almost all of the time. You have no idea how they will react to situations so they are labeled dangerous. They used to dose people with insulin causing convulsions to make them more sedative. That can't be health no matter how you look at it. Most of the treatments are for society's benefit not the subjects.
Worse this condones and accepts the activity. I suspect this law will last all of five seconds in a court room because it suggests an acceptance of people committing other felonies. It is like the pot tax as it meant that the government recognized the people growing it if they paid the tax. It is nice to know that they are supporting the right to a government for and by the people by supporting the people to hold their government accountable, but I doubt that was their intention.
I realize that I am being pedantic with this, but you are incorrect. If the encryption has perfect entropy then it is for lack of a better word flawless. Mind you it is challenging to implement in most cases and has other security concerns beyond the encryption. One-time pads do this because the values used for encryption are never repeated so the output has no consistencies to work from. I think it was only significantly implemented once between the US and Russia during the cold war. The important part of this article is how proprietary designs allowed a company to sell its product for safer then they actually knew it was. Encryption should have tool time ratings just like safes do.
If they know how to DDoS I would feel comfortable saying that they understand proxies at least. You can't wall off chunks of the internet from certain groups. They will just reroute and find a way around it.
They call it packaged, or designed in the US. There are tonnes of loopholes in labeling that they could easily take advantage of without out right foraging the the origin of the product.
I think its more that the people that just want the book are heavily subsidizing the price of premium paper books. Once people move to e-books, paper will become more expensive or e-books will come down in price as the market establishes itself.
Could the public interest in the environment be used or emission regulations with penalties. It is just a created commodity. It will motivate people to reduce in the beginning, but not overall and with reduced returns as more companies upgrade so they can sell their artificial commodity instead of buying it depressing the value of upgrading. The only real benefit is that it motivates instead of forcing companies to adopt better policy. A carbon tax is a much better idea as it can be adjusted by the government and be used to fund green R&D while motivating companies to upgrade their facilities.
I usually just put the OS on a scsi and data on a separate drive(possible raid if desired). This is not really interesting news unless the guy does it at a hardware level.
Not very creative remember the old evil maid. Same thing people have been preaching about Linux too. Once the person has root access doesn't matter(or sufficient rights). You have been owned.
It is simple to dismiss it as pure rubbish in todays society, but I think the church has had a good overall effect on humanity. It laid the ground work for most of the government and legal institutions that protect us. If everyone could follow the ten commandments to some degree I think the world would be a better place. It really does not matter who made them if they are suggestions on how society can better itself. Of course there are problems with the people in power abusing their position in the church. Yet there are a lot of ministers that work hard and try to make differences in their community. They visit the sick and collect money for people in trouble. COS though is not a religion. Not in my eyes. They abduct and abuse the people that support them. They prey on the desperate and needy. They don't even support the values of making a better society. Society just does not need them.
It doesn't even matter if they want to be a corporate entity. I worked for an international company that came into close contact with US export laws all the time. You can't ship a product to one country in transit to another country so if they did move they would still have to enforce an export control on the data that was exported. Secondly, US export law also has this wicked "taint" rule to it. If a US corporation(or citizen, I think) provides technical knowledge towards the product then that product can come under US export laws. It made it really hard to tell the US what we were doing as we did not want to deal with US export law when possible. The physical location has no bearing on what the US can do to you if you want to deal with them. Just tell that to the "prince" of pot.
I think I am missing some part of the argument. What she is saying makes no sense.
The free and open dissemination of information and of literature, as it exists in our Public Libraries, can and should exist in the electronic media. All authors hope for that.
So she wants to share everyone to have access to her books and ideas. I think thats awesome and wonderful.
But we cannot have free and open dissemination of information and literature unless the use of written material continues to be controlled by those who write it or own legitimate right in it. We urge our government and our courts to allow no corporation to circumvent copyright law or dictate the terms of that control.
What? This so now sounds like the RIAA. Your in a catch 22. You can't control information once you free it from its box. It seems like you want your cake and eat it too.
That said I agree that the Google deal is not legit in any shape or form. You can't just force a party into an agreement especially how this one is worded. I hope this might be a turning point where Google is forcing the world to look back onto itself and realize how absurd the copyright laws are in their current state. And eventually copyright reform might occur, but I doubt that will ever happen.
I think this is more important then ensuring Linux becomes a household name. That people have choice in what products to use. That is why there are so many flavors of Linux. It is understandable that some people may like Microsoft and that is perfectly fine. Getting it rammed down our throats every time we buy a computer is just the annoying part.
A lot of people use the same password on multiple sites. Makes me wonder why a breach or phishing site is needed. All you need is their email and their password. Easily available on most sign up forms for websites. All you need is your own website people want to join...
This is a case of one of the most misleading abuses of statistics. If heart disease risk is 1% then an 18% increase means it is now 1.18%. Not as dire as it first sounds, but I still doubt that statistic. It sounds like the one where if you don't get 8 hours of sleep you lose brain cells. Someone that knows enough about one aspect of science is making conclusions of one they know nothing of.
I wouldn't worry about the terrorists. I would worry about health insurance companies. They can at least lobby the government. Sorry Timmy we can't insure you as you have a gene that indicates a predisposition to cancer and that would just hurt our bottom line.
What if he gave his friend or wife Alice the password. It is neat how this is viewed as a privacy concern. It only tracks the character not the account holder. It is like the argument that an ip address does not represent a person. It is not a perfect comparison, but it does draw some interesting parallels. Maybe defining identity on the internet is tricky and people make invalid assumptions and leaps of faith.
Slashdot Mirror
That seems to scream about what thinking caused this issue as well. The resources need to be there to handle the calls. If its not serious or life threatening make the caller pay for wasting the ambulance's time. Most people are rather competent for judging how serious the issue is. A person across the phone can't assume anything which is what the questions do. Like if he fell six feet onto a bed of razors. If your under shock it is easy to forget to mention these things when being questioned, but are able to realize how serious the issue is. You can't just prioritize the deficiency in resources away like this without sacrificing a lot of quality. Hell you could make a medical taxi service for people that are not seriously ill that charges for their service to reduce the demand on the ambulance service for low priority callers.
You are correct on so many levels then wrong on so many others. Every company has to pay to maintain their own network. It just happens that Google's network is massive and goes across the country as they share huge amounts of information between data centers. It costs them significant money to maintain, but hey every company has to do that at least in their buildings. Now when they want to hookup to the internet, like most other companies they should have to pay their provider(s) for the connections. They don't though because they can sell or contract out the extra bandwidth they have to their providers reducing their costs to connect to the internet to zero. Not the infrastructure costs.
It is like there are two parts to Google the tier 1 ISPs and the data center company. With a company like this the risk of running out of bandwidth budget is huge so it is safer for them to have a contract that in effect gives them unlimited bandwidth when they need it. Even if it does cost them more in the end then using providers for each site.
This kind of shenanigans is always done in the corporate world. You can buy servers that require a simple piece of paper to run more cores, but the components are already in place. The car example even covers this with the hooded gas tanks to change the amount of gas you can put in the car. The car company is actually physically adding something to the vehicle to place it in the "unupgraded" state. Companies do this all the time. What is ridiculous is that software would get special treatment under the law in these respects. I wonder if the license disallows cracking the DLC you have technically already purchased the code in a physical sense. The one that I think would stop that would be modification limitations, but maybe not?
Magnetic sensitive components are now usually shielded. Floppies and other magnetic media were the most susceptible so most people don't have to worry about it much now a days. Plus most shielding is just a faraday cage or iron like the outside of the computer case. HDD have the same issue and have a metal case. As well there are magnets anyways in the hard drives to move the IO head. This technology is actually exciting if you can get a consistent solder. It might even do away with microscopes for some soldering jobs.
Let me translate what he was saying to normal instead of Microsoft speak. "Making operating system is hard. We should get paid for our security holes that we fix ourselves." All he is promoting a possible revenue stream that Microsoft can get the government contract for or buy the company that gets it. This is really a Microsoft tax above and beyond the computer sale ones.
Meta analysis is misleading or at least that what has been claimed against of the VOC causing cancer in drinking water studies that I have read. I guess acceptable results justified an acceptable means.
That analog would mean that every time I type a url in the wrong way then I was hacking. They only picked the lock once really and that would be when they got it right and that doesn't make sense. Any possible analogy would be akin trespassing or mischief, but that would not make sense because that would suggest you can own parts of the internet. Any real world analogy does not absolutely relate to what they did because it involves information.
As a serious question when was the last time a ICBM was launched that wasn't a test? I can't think of one myself or find it with google and am curious to find out. The best I could find was the V2, but that's more intercountry then intercontinental
Its all about control of the subject. Society fears people that can't be controlled. Laws work for most of us, but it doesn't for some. Think about it you don't know if the person might spontaneously kill someone. Unlikely almost all of the time. You have no idea how they will react to situations so they are labeled dangerous. They used to dose people with insulin causing convulsions to make them more sedative. That can't be health no matter how you look at it. Most of the treatments are for society's benefit not the subjects.
Worse this condones and accepts the activity. I suspect this law will last all of five seconds in a court room because it suggests an acceptance of people committing other felonies. It is like the pot tax as it meant that the government recognized the people growing it if they paid the tax. It is nice to know that they are supporting the right to a government for and by the people by supporting the people to hold their government accountable, but I doubt that was their intention.
I realize that I am being pedantic with this, but you are incorrect. If the encryption has perfect entropy then it is for lack of a better word flawless. Mind you it is challenging to implement in most cases and has other security concerns beyond the encryption. One-time pads do this because the values used for encryption are never repeated so the output has no consistencies to work from. I think it was only significantly implemented once between the US and Russia during the cold war. The important part of this article is how proprietary designs allowed a company to sell its product for safer then they actually knew it was. Encryption should have tool time ratings just like safes do.
If they know how to DDoS I would feel comfortable saying that they understand proxies at least. You can't wall off chunks of the internet from certain groups. They will just reroute and find a way around it.
They call it packaged, or designed in the US. There are tonnes of loopholes in labeling that they could easily take advantage of without out right foraging the the origin of the product.
I think its more that the people that just want the book are heavily subsidizing the price of premium paper books. Once people move to e-books, paper will become more expensive or e-books will come down in price as the market establishes itself.
Could the public interest in the environment be used or emission regulations with penalties. It is just a created commodity. It will motivate people to reduce in the beginning, but not overall and with reduced returns as more companies upgrade so they can sell their artificial commodity instead of buying it depressing the value of upgrading. The only real benefit is that it motivates instead of forcing companies to adopt better policy. A carbon tax is a much better idea as it can be adjusted by the government and be used to fund green R&D while motivating companies to upgrade their facilities.
I usually just put the OS on a scsi and data on a separate drive(possible raid if desired). This is not really interesting news unless the guy does it at a hardware level.
Not very creative remember the old evil maid. Same thing people have been preaching about Linux too. Once the person has root access doesn't matter(or sufficient rights). You have been owned.
It is simple to dismiss it as pure rubbish in todays society, but I think the church has had a good overall effect on humanity. It laid the ground work for most of the government and legal institutions that protect us. If everyone could follow the ten commandments to some degree I think the world would be a better place. It really does not matter who made them if they are suggestions on how society can better itself. Of course there are problems with the people in power abusing their position in the church. Yet there are a lot of ministers that work hard and try to make differences in their community. They visit the sick and collect money for people in trouble. COS though is not a religion. Not in my eyes. They abduct and abuse the people that support them. They prey on the desperate and needy. They don't even support the values of making a better society. Society just does not need them.
It doesn't even matter if they want to be a corporate entity. I worked for an international company that came into close contact with US export laws all the time. You can't ship a product to one country in transit to another country so if they did move they would still have to enforce an export control on the data that was exported. Secondly, US export law also has this wicked "taint" rule to it. If a US corporation(or citizen, I think) provides technical knowledge towards the product then that product can come under US export laws. It made it really hard to tell the US what we were doing as we did not want to deal with US export law when possible.
The physical location has no bearing on what the US can do to you if you want to deal with them. Just tell that to the "prince" of pot.
The free and open dissemination of information and of literature, as it exists in our Public Libraries, can and should exist in the electronic media. All authors hope for that.
So she wants to share everyone to have access to her books and ideas. I think thats awesome and wonderful.
But we cannot have free and open dissemination of information and literature unless the use of written material continues to be controlled by those who write it or own legitimate right in it. We urge our government and our courts to allow no corporation to circumvent copyright law or dictate the terms of that control.
What? This so now sounds like the RIAA. Your in a catch 22. You can't control information once you free it from its box. It seems like you want your cake and eat it too.
That said I agree that the Google deal is not legit in any shape or form. You can't just force a party into an agreement especially how this one is worded. I hope this might be a turning point where Google is forcing the world to look back onto itself and realize how absurd the copyright laws are in their current state. And eventually copyright reform might occur, but I doubt that will ever happen.
I think this is more important then ensuring Linux becomes a household name. That people have choice in what products to use. That is why there are so many flavors of Linux. It is understandable that some people may like Microsoft and that is perfectly fine. Getting it rammed down our throats every time we buy a computer is just the annoying part.
A lot of people use the same password on multiple sites. Makes me wonder why a breach or phishing site is needed. All you need is their email and their password. Easily available on most sign up forms for websites. All you need is your own website people want to join...
This is a case of one of the most misleading abuses of statistics. If heart disease risk is 1% then an 18% increase means it is now 1.18%. Not as dire as it first sounds, but I still doubt that statistic. It sounds like the one where if you don't get 8 hours of sleep you lose brain cells. Someone that knows enough about one aspect of science is making conclusions of one they know nothing of.
I wouldn't worry about the terrorists. I would worry about health insurance companies. They can at least lobby the government. Sorry Timmy we can't insure you as you have a gene that indicates a predisposition to cancer and that would just hurt our bottom line.
What if he gave his friend or wife Alice the password. It is neat how this is viewed as a privacy concern. It only tracks the character not the account holder. It is like the argument that an ip address does not represent a person. It is not a perfect comparison, but it does draw some interesting parallels. Maybe defining identity on the internet is tricky and people make invalid assumptions and leaps of faith.