What do we use to rebuild civilization after a couple generations of this send us back to the dark ages? This thing! It's PERFECT.
Yeah, I wouldn't gather a handful of books on biology, physics, electronics, etc., written by the world's foremost experts. I'd rather hand down an incredibly complicated device which our ancestors would assume to be a cheap picture frame, with 4GBs of bio's of one-off B-celebs, internet trends, and all the politically expedient biased misinformation I can find... Huzzah!
I'd can't imagine what the future generations would think of us if they based it entirely on Wikipedia... Or maybe I just don't want to.
That's fine. But if you are saying that as a worker, you have freedom to not choose, than in all fairness that right extends directly to your employer as to who works for them,
You can't use that argument until you've explicitly defined the extent and limits of an employer's rights to 1) Know about all their employee's private affairs, and 2) Discriminate against individuals based on that information.
Your sexual activities would also be highly relevant to your employer in a health care environment... Do you think that should mean your boss gets to fire all the Homos, and/or all the unmarried, and/or the antisocial asexual eunuchs?
You misunderstand vaccination's main benefit as protecting the vaccinated individual
No, but in the case of the flu, there has never, anywhere, been high enough vaccination figures to come close to offering herd immunity for a population.
If most people get the appropriate vaccinations, all of society is better off, since even if non-vaccinated individuals get sick the illness will have a more difficult time propagating.
You're assuming the flu vaccine is effective in the first place. The links I've posted firmly indicate it is not. In fact you may have a more difficult time fighting the flu because you've been vaccinated.
So, does being vaccinated make you responsible for "putting not just yourself but also other people at risk"?
No. In fact NOTHING you've said contradicts my statement IN ANY WAY.
With a sufficient number of vaccinated individuals in a population, an effect call heard immunity comes into play. This protects people who cannot get the vaccine (people allergic to it, etc.) or who the vaccine does not work on.
This is bull. There are a MINUSCULE number of people in the world which would chose to get vaccinated, but CAN'T for various reasons. So for the sake of the 0.01% of the population, you believe we should compel EVERYONE ELSE to get vaccinated, and thereby CAUSE many MORE health issues? It's idiotic.
There has been a 4 year study done in Ontario on this with respect to seasonal flu vaccines and found favorable results.
That article is missing the huge disclaimer on that study: "The authors point out that one of the major drawbacks of the study was random variation which limits the abilities of small vaccine trials to assess the real relationship between vaccination and influenza."
I find most interesting this combination of quotes:
And TWO of the 3 links I posted include studies in Alberta and Ontario, explaining why the vaccine is scarcely effective, and why many flu studies greatly exaggerate results...
He made a statement. It's no more a "claim" than your assumption that flu vaccinations DON'T cause any harm... And you certainly can't back-up your claim either.
Incredibly low side effect rate, very effective, and a guarantee that you're going to get a mild version of the flu before everybody else does.
The reality is quite different.
The flu vaccine has to be produced several months before flu season. So, if the experts pick the wrong strains, or even if they pick the right ones and the flu mutates in that time, you're no better off.
In fact, you are worse off, as your immune system is likely to be worse off, trying to fight this new strain of the flu that is similar, but not exactly the same: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoskins_effect
For the last 18 years getting a flu shot has been a federally mandated condition of my employment and I don't even work in a health care related field--what the heck is the big deal with getting a flu shot?
Freedom to make one's own decisions about medical treatment is a big thing in the US, and people dislike when they are compelled against their will. I'm no exception.
Just about all the improvements in public health over the past few centuries has been from an understanding of disease spread, and modern nutrition. Most people can and will like out the overwhelming majority of their lives without requiring any form of medical assistance. Being cognizant of the spread of the virus has a much higher success rate in preventing infection than does immunization.
but how do you go about testing CPU, motherboard and graphics card trio to find which is to blame? Replacing them one by one isn't really an option. Do you know any software that would help the way memtest helps with RAM?
There is no way to tell, with software, whether your PSU, CPU, or motherboard is to blame, in the overwhelming majority of cases.
It's just idiotic to say "Replacing them one by one isn't really an option". In fact, that's by far the best option. I don't run memtest for a week to find out I have bad RAM, I take 30 seconds to swap it, and find out, for certain, in no time. PSUs are equally easy to swap, AND are the more likely component to fail, so that's the best place to start.
If you don't know whether it's CPU or the MoBo, buy a new motherboard... Vastly more likely to be the cause, and pretty damn cheap just as soon as they're no longer brand new. Of course CPUs fail, but it's likely to be obvious from a visual inspection if they've been installed wrong, or otherwise abused.
So lets scale these up and replace the power pakcs on cars!
I priced it out once... If you use RTGs, you can't afford the Pu-238 alone. If you base your estimates instead on SRG (Sterling engine, rather than a Peltier), it will only cost you your house to buy the much smaller amount of Pu-238 (don't have the write-up in front of me, but it was well-over $100,000USD).
Most people are unlikely to spend that much on fuel, or electricity in their lifetimes, particularly when you compare it to putting that amount of cash in an interest-bearing account and letting it accrue for 80 years.
Still, it might be worthwhile in some cases, so it is a shame that we don't have the option available to us.
So, here's the trick. FreeBSD only has one branch in ports, so even if you use an older -STABLE release branch of the FreeBSD core system you still get the newest releases of third-party applications via ports. That's why my *most* stable OS (FreeBSD) had caused me the most headaches lately, because it upgrades me to the newest Xorg *first*, not last like it should.
Ummm. WHAT?
Why are you installing all your software from the latest CVS snapshot of FreeBSD ports?
You're supposed to use the RELEASE-tagged ports tree for your version of the OS (the tar.gz file on every FTP mirror server, everywhere). Then, install portaudit, and only when portaudit complains about security issues in a specific version of a specific port, should you CVS-UP that single port, and build the latest and greatest.
Even if the package in question is dependant on 20 other packages, and 20 packages in-turn depend on it, it will work just fine.
So I'll ask again, why do you think you need to CVS-UP the entire ports tree, and build all these new, presumably incompatible and/or buggy newer version of all the software you use?
Well haven't Google always used thousands and thousands of normal pc's in their server farms instead of powerful, actual premium server-grade hardware.
No, Google has always used servers. The trademark of Google, which you're misquoting, is the fact that they use clusters of x86 hardware, rather than big iron (mainframes).
Compared to proprietary hardware, x86 servers are dirt cheap.
A project to add one lane in each direction to the 91 freeway between the 71 (a freeway) and 241 (a tollway) is nearly $100 million for a mere five miles, and that's in an area where not much has to happen in the way of eminent domain.
No, not much eminent domain... Just a damn mountain that needs to be removed...
The biggest difference is that industry standards like postscript and pdf are supported on business printers and proprietary ones are used on personal printers
If there's an open source driver for it, you'll be able to keep using it forever. Hence my comment about any idiot being able to convert Postscript into any proprietary language. However, they result in extraordinary amount of overhead, which is the real problem.
Yeha, I can't think of anything else that could have been a contributing factor there...
I see, so your economic policy is fewer public programs... MORE WAR! Great idea.
And on that has been thoroughly discredited, again and again, BTW.
that era marks the start of steep increases in the national debt which have nevr been reversed
What kind of an idiot are you? The graphic at the very top of the page shows the national debt sharply declining as a percentage of GDP from the 50s on. It's nowhere near as large, today, as it was after WWII, reconstruction, and the start of the cold war.
If you're stupidly fixated on the first graph, go ask your Granddad how much a candy bar cost when he was a kid. If you can't understand something as simple as inflation, you probably shouldn't open your mouth in public, lest you want to demonstrate what a moron you are.
It took a couple of years before the OpenBSD folks had developed the open source SSH v1 code to the point where it supported all features of the SSH v2 protocol.
OpenSSH had the bulk of SSHv2 features in no time. Yes, it took quite some time for the final bits and pieces. But NOBODY was using SSHv2 at that point, anyhow. See above for the reasons.
The two implementations of v2 still aren't fully compatible on client-side stuff like key storage,
That goes back to the SSL thing. OpenSSH keys are really OpenSSL keys, as found on the many millions of Apache servers. Frankly, I think it was stupid of SSH.com to go in the incompatible direction (just one of many), and I wouldn't expect OpenSSH to follow them down that dead end.
but nowadays it is the proprietary SSH that is considered the odd one out.
That's one hell of an understatement. SSH.com/Tectica would hardly even appear on a graph of SSH protocol versions. It was below 3% market share quite some time ago, and has been on a long decline. It's market share may well be statistically insignificant noise at this point. (Yeah, I'm a bit pissed-off dealing with Tectica's quirks and bugs).
On top of that he has managed to make a living off of the SSH v2 code, and he certainly has the right to do that.
Yes, but I was pointing out that it was *in spite of him*, most certainly not because of him, that SSH has taken the world by storm. Just as I wouldn't want to see Microsoft praised for giving us a great piece of software like Samba...
However I must say that I, for one, am much happier with modern HP machines, where a neatly printed sheet of paper emerges within a few short seconds of clicking "print" than any of the lumbering antiques that morons like yourself seem to have always worshiped as time marches on.
While you provide a very much needed counterpoint to the rose-colored glasses, you, too, are greatly mistaken.
The latest and greatest printers don't print substantially faster than the laser printers of 15 years ago. For print time, you're probably referring to first-page-out times. Once your printer has gone into sleep mode, it can take quite some time to run through the hardware checks and start printing again. This has improved in the past few years... Print times really have not.
The latest and greatest laser printers don't produce a picture that is substantially better than that of 15 years ago. DPI doesn't mean anything... Chances are, a 2400x2400DPI laser printer won't look any better than a 600x600 laser printer. Toner hasn't changed much, and we were pretty close to practical maximum at the very start. Better dithering helps, but that can be done in software quite well, rather than leaving it up to the printer, and it's probably the software that's really at fault for your old laser printouts looking lousy.
And the expense is still justifiable today. You can buy a dozen cheap "personal" laser printers, but with the endless service calls for trivial nonsense, you might end up better off paying the $4k up-front. In reality, business-class laser printers aren't drastically cheaper these days than your old unit.
I second the samsung printers. We purchased a ML-2851ND for work and have been very happy with it. For a laser printer it is relatively small
I will have to veto this vote right here. Samsung seemed like a good way to go, but I've had nightmarish paper feeding problems with mine. From brand new, I'd be pulling out paper jams every dozen pages, and it only got worse. Containing Samsung was a huge waste of time, as they recommended every off the wall thing they could... Different types of paper, cleaning the rollers in the most ineffective ways they could come up with, etc. A few months later, I couldn't get a single sheet through the damn thing.
I finally figured out some decent ways to revitalize rollers that won't grab paper anymore, through much pain and suffering, and I can now tolerate my Samsung printer. However, it still has feed problems after a few dozen pages, and the proprietary protocol, though supported by open source software, is brutally CPU-intensive.
And for those still reading, even with all of that said, it's vastly better than any inkjet printer I've had the misfortune of using. At least it actually prints pages in approximately the amount of time listed on the box, and I don't need to throw it away if I don't print anything for a couple weeks...
In short, Samsung, like everyone else, has succumbed to the "Personal" laser printer fad. Where manufacturers stopped believing in value, and now sell the biggest piece of crap they can make, to the hordes of uninformed cattle...
I have two rules for buying a printer:
1) Actually SHOP for refills (toner/fusers) on the internet, for each model of printer you are at all considering. Its amazing how often the unit branded as having cheap operating costs are actually more expensive than most others out there. Some combination of printer design and mass popularity is to blame, and isn't something that can be predicted.
2) Don't consider anything that doesn't have full Postscript support. Sure, anybody with a brain can convert postscript into whatever other printer language quite easily, but that's not the point. Postscript is the major differentiator between cheap consumer crap (they don't know nor care what PS is) and business-level equipment. Businesses have the resources and the motivation to shop around, and test out numerous brands and model of printers, before buying any in real quantities, so business printers are designed to be as high quality as possible.
It was my understanding that the primary issue is that they couldn't trademark Sci-Fi b/c it was a generic term.
No, you can't trademark "Sci-Fi" any more than you could trademark a "Red Hat".
Never-the-less, a trademark on "The Sci-Fi Channel" would be just fine, and anyone coming along creating a channel with "Sci-Fi" in its name would be sued into oblivion for causing "consumer confusion".
We'll see a short-term improvement, perhaps, but in the long term we're just building it up to be worse than it ever would have without government "stimulus", tarp, and other such foolishness.
Yes, indeed. Does everyone remember "The Second Great Depression"? You know, the one that was larger than the first? How FDR's New Deal in the 1930's was such a failure, and as a result, the economy just got worse in the 40s and 50s? Sure you do! It happened, I tell you!
If you have a dish antenna in the front of your house in Columbia, Maryland they can fine you and harrass you into moving. There are a lot of new areas where a no-condo assocoiation has more power than one would think.
No. You need to file a complaint with the FCC. Federal regulations override everything else. If you take the HOA or anyone else to court, you'll EASILY win. The FCC has put the rules in black and white.
you can't use satellite (your house faces the wrong way, live in an apartment, etc.).
Was M.C. Escher the architect for your house, per-chance? Every house I've ever seen happens to have 4 walls, each facing a different compass orientation. And you know, you don't really have to embed a satellite dish into your house. Once you bolt it to the building, you can aim it 360 degrees... You can do crazy stuff, like mounting it to the north side of your house, and aim it south, pointing over the roof!
In my city, if you don't go Comcast for broadband, the only other option is AT&T DSL (which is limited to a measly 3 Mbps in this city).
Oh horror of horrors! A mere 3Mbps!? Better to live in a cave!
Where I live, I'm desperately trying to find ANY option for non-dial-up service. I'd almost be happy to pay $50/mo for 128k DSL. Dial-up is terribly expensive, due to maintaining both an ISP and a phone-line, and has the unfortunate drawback of not being always-on. Cellular starts at $60/mo., for a seriously limited speed, major lag, and worst of all, being down in a valley, I literally can't get a cell signal on my phone at all. Satellite internet service is the recommended alternative, which is the most expensive and unresponsive option of all.
The original OpenSSH implementation was based on Tatu's code.
Yes it was. But Tatu's SSH was the old, insecure protocol.
And there were many secure remote access tools before it. kerberized telnet, telnet/ftp over SSL, and limitless others.
It's not the magical protocol (which is quite similar to SSL plus RSH/RCP), or the initial few lines of code that got it started. It's the fact that it was open, secure, widely available, and being pushed by the OpenSSH folks to be used as the default form of remote access on Unix systems.
Tatu didn't have anything to do with it. He was too busy commercializing it, and repeatedly threatened, and then suing the OpenSSH project for all their hard work. If he had chosen to keep SSH open, we'd have been a LOT further along. As other posters correctly remember, support for SSH very nearly died with that step. Many programs included SSHv1 support, and then just stagnated and let the code rot. If not for OpenSSH, it would be another relic of secure telnet protocols tried and failed, not having gone anywhere, and we'd go merrily along, using telnet and rsh, bemoaning the fact that it's so insecure, and that nothing better ever came along.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I wouldn't gather a handful of books on biology, physics, electronics, etc., written by the world's foremost experts. I'd rather hand down an incredibly complicated device which our ancestors would assume to be a cheap picture frame, with 4GBs of bio's of one-off B-celebs, internet trends, and all the politically expedient biased misinformation I can find... Huzzah!
I'd can't imagine what the future generations would think of us if they based it entirely on Wikipedia... Or maybe I just don't want to.
You can't use that argument until you've explicitly defined the extent and limits of an employer's rights to 1) Know about all their employee's private affairs, and 2) Discriminate against individuals based on that information.
Your sexual activities would also be highly relevant to your employer in a health care environment... Do you think that should mean your boss gets to fire all the Homos, and/or all the unmarried, and/or the antisocial asexual eunuchs?
No, but in the case of the flu, there has never, anywhere, been high enough vaccination figures to come close to offering herd immunity for a population.
You're assuming the flu vaccine is effective in the first place. The links I've posted firmly indicate it is not. In fact you may have a more difficult time fighting the flu because you've been vaccinated.
So, does being vaccinated make you responsible for "putting not just yourself but also other people at risk"?
No. In fact NOTHING you've said contradicts my statement IN ANY WAY.
This is bull. There are a MINUSCULE number of people in the world which would chose to get vaccinated, but CAN'T for various reasons. So for the sake of the 0.01% of the population, you believe we should compel EVERYONE ELSE to get vaccinated, and thereby CAUSE many MORE health issues? It's idiotic.
That article is missing the huge disclaimer on that study: "The authors point out that one of the major drawbacks of the study was random variation which limits the abilities of small vaccine trials to assess the real relationship between vaccination and influenza."
I find most interesting this combination of quotes:
"the researchers found that the mortality decreases in Ontario compared with the other provinces were statistically significant only in those aged 85 or older." http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/general/news/oct2908ontario.html
&
"The results also indicated that increasing immunization rates were not as clearly associated with a reduction in mortality and health care need in older people, especially older than 75 years, in comparison with younger people." http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/126891.php
And TWO of the 3 links I posted include studies in Alberta and Ontario, explaining why the vaccine is scarcely effective, and why many flu studies greatly exaggerate results...
He made a statement. It's no more a "claim" than your assumption that flu vaccinations DON'T cause any harm... And you certainly can't back-up your claim either.
I wouldn't waste my time googling something so straight-forward for you to find, either. I will, however, point you to my previous post: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1400169&threshold=3&commentsort=1&mode=nested&cid=29707043
Unlikely. Look-up "herd immunity". Smallpox was eradicated with less than 70% of the affected populations (in Africa mostly) vaccinated against it.
Still, if it gets much higher, there could be a major outbreak.
Vaccination is NEVER "all or nothing".
If the vaccination works, you won't get sick, no matter what the rest of the world does. So why do you believe forcing it on everyone is a good idea?
It's easy to "call bullshit" when you're completely ignorant of a subject, and just insist on enforcing your dogma on everyone else...
On the off chance that you do actually want an opportunity to edify yourself:
Do flu shots for the elderly save lives? Just washing hands works better, says study.
http://blog.nj.com/njv_thurman_hart/2007/12/a_useless_vaccine_mandated.html
http://www.globalhandwashing.org/health_impact.htm
The reality is quite different.
The flu vaccine has to be produced several months before flu season. So, if the experts pick the wrong strains, or even if they pick the right ones and the flu mutates in that time, you're no better off.
In fact, you are worse off, as your immune system is likely to be worse off, trying to fight this new strain of the flu that is similar, but not exactly the same: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoskins_effect
Freedom to make one's own decisions about medical treatment is a big thing in the US, and people dislike when they are compelled against their will. I'm no exception.
Just about all the improvements in public health over the past few centuries has been from an understanding of disease spread, and modern nutrition. Most people can and will like out the overwhelming majority of their lives without requiring any form of medical assistance. Being cognizant of the spread of the virus has a much higher success rate in preventing infection than does immunization.
There is no way to tell, with software, whether your PSU, CPU, or motherboard is to blame, in the overwhelming majority of cases.
It's just idiotic to say "Replacing them one by one isn't really an option". In fact, that's by far the best option. I don't run memtest for a week to find out I have bad RAM, I take 30 seconds to swap it, and find out, for certain, in no time. PSUs are equally easy to swap, AND are the more likely component to fail, so that's the best place to start.
If you don't know whether it's CPU or the MoBo, buy a new motherboard... Vastly more likely to be the cause, and pretty damn cheap just as soon as they're no longer brand new. Of course CPUs fail, but it's likely to be obvious from a visual inspection if they've been installed wrong, or otherwise abused.
I priced it out once... If you use RTGs, you can't afford the Pu-238 alone. If you base your estimates instead on SRG (Sterling engine, rather than a Peltier), it will only cost you your house to buy the much smaller amount of Pu-238 (don't have the write-up in front of me, but it was well-over $100,000USD).
Most people are unlikely to spend that much on fuel, or electricity in their lifetimes, particularly when you compare it to putting that amount of cash in an interest-bearing account and letting it accrue for 80 years.
Still, it might be worthwhile in some cases, so it is a shame that we don't have the option available to us.
Ummm. WHAT?
Why are you installing all your software from the latest CVS snapshot of FreeBSD ports?
You're supposed to use the RELEASE-tagged ports tree for your version of the OS (the tar.gz file on every FTP mirror server, everywhere). Then, install portaudit, and only when portaudit complains about security issues in a specific version of a specific port, should you CVS-UP that single port, and build the latest and greatest.
Even if the package in question is dependant on 20 other packages, and 20 packages in-turn depend on it, it will work just fine.
So I'll ask again, why do you think you need to CVS-UP the entire ports tree, and build all these new, presumably incompatible and/or buggy newer version of all the software you use?
No, Google has always used servers. The trademark of Google, which you're misquoting, is the fact that they use clusters of x86 hardware, rather than big iron (mainframes).
Compared to proprietary hardware, x86 servers are dirt cheap.
Let's see... It's a single paper, hasn't been peer-reviewed yet, and runs contrary to every expectation...
Yeah, we should broadcast it far and wide.
You mean the casino with the big white birds out the window?
No, not much eminent domain... Just a damn mountain that needs to be removed...
If there's an open source driver for it, you'll be able to keep using it forever. Hence my comment about any idiot being able to convert Postscript into any proprietary language. However, they result in extraordinary amount of overhead, which is the real problem.
I see, so your economic policy is fewer public programs... MORE WAR!
Great idea.
And on that has been thoroughly discredited, again and again, BTW.
What kind of an idiot are you? The graphic at the very top of the page shows the national debt sharply declining as a percentage of GDP from the 50s on. It's nowhere near as large, today, as it was after WWII, reconstruction, and the start of the cold war.
If you're stupidly fixated on the first graph, go ask your Granddad how much a candy bar cost when he was a kid. If you can't understand something as simple as inflation, you probably shouldn't open your mouth in public, lest you want to demonstrate what a moron you are.
OpenSSH had the bulk of SSHv2 features in no time. Yes, it took quite some time for the final bits and pieces. But NOBODY was using SSHv2 at that point, anyhow. See above for the reasons.
That goes back to the SSL thing. OpenSSH keys are really OpenSSL keys, as found on the many millions of Apache servers. Frankly, I think it was stupid of SSH.com to go in the incompatible direction (just one of many), and I wouldn't expect OpenSSH to follow them down that dead end.
That's one hell of an understatement. SSH.com/Tectica would hardly even appear on a graph of SSH protocol versions. It was below 3% market share quite some time ago, and has been on a long decline. It's market share may well be statistically insignificant noise at this point. (Yeah, I'm a bit pissed-off dealing with Tectica's quirks and bugs).
Yes, but I was pointing out that it was *in spite of him*, most certainly not because of him, that SSH has taken the world by storm. Just as I wouldn't want to see Microsoft praised for giving us a great piece of software like Samba...
While you provide a very much needed counterpoint to the rose-colored glasses, you, too, are greatly mistaken.
The latest and greatest printers don't print substantially faster than the laser printers of 15 years ago. For print time, you're probably referring to first-page-out times. Once your printer has gone into sleep mode, it can take quite some time to run through the hardware checks and start printing again. This has improved in the past few years... Print times really have not.
The latest and greatest laser printers don't produce a picture that is substantially better than that of 15 years ago. DPI doesn't mean anything... Chances are, a 2400x2400DPI laser printer won't look any better than a 600x600 laser printer. Toner hasn't changed much, and we were pretty close to practical maximum at the very start. Better dithering helps, but that can be done in software quite well, rather than leaving it up to the printer, and it's probably the software that's really at fault for your old laser printouts looking lousy.
And the expense is still justifiable today. You can buy a dozen cheap "personal" laser printers, but with the endless service calls for trivial nonsense, you might end up better off paying the $4k up-front. In reality, business-class laser printers aren't drastically cheaper these days than your old unit.
I will have to veto this vote right here. Samsung seemed like a good way to go, but I've had nightmarish paper feeding problems with mine. From brand new, I'd be pulling out paper jams every dozen pages, and it only got worse. Containing Samsung was a huge waste of time, as they recommended every off the wall thing they could... Different types of paper, cleaning the rollers in the most ineffective ways they could come up with, etc. A few months later, I couldn't get a single sheet through the damn thing.
I finally figured out some decent ways to revitalize rollers that won't grab paper anymore, through much pain and suffering, and I can now tolerate my Samsung printer. However, it still has feed problems after a few dozen pages, and the proprietary protocol, though supported by open source software, is brutally CPU-intensive.
And for those still reading, even with all of that said, it's vastly better than any inkjet printer I've had the misfortune of using. At least it actually prints pages in approximately the amount of time listed on the box, and I don't need to throw it away if I don't print anything for a couple weeks...
In short, Samsung, like everyone else, has succumbed to the "Personal" laser printer fad. Where manufacturers stopped believing in value, and now sell the biggest piece of crap they can make, to the hordes of uninformed cattle...
I have two rules for buying a printer:
1) Actually SHOP for refills (toner/fusers) on the internet, for each model of printer you are at all considering. Its amazing how often the unit branded as having cheap operating costs are actually more expensive than most others out there. Some combination of printer design and mass popularity is to blame, and isn't something that can be predicted.
2) Don't consider anything that doesn't have full Postscript support. Sure, anybody with a brain can convert postscript into whatever other printer language quite easily, but that's not the point. Postscript is the major differentiator between cheap consumer crap (they don't know nor care what PS is) and business-level equipment. Businesses have the resources and the motivation to shop around, and test out numerous brands and model of printers, before buying any in real quantities, so business printers are designed to be as high quality as possible.
No, you can't trademark "Sci-Fi" any more than you could trademark a "Red Hat".
Never-the-less, a trademark on "The Sci-Fi Channel" would be just fine, and anyone coming along creating a channel with "Sci-Fi" in its name would be sued into oblivion for causing "consumer confusion".
Yes, indeed. Does everyone remember "The Second Great Depression"? You know, the one that was larger than the first? How FDR's New Deal in the 1930's was such a failure, and as a result, the economy just got worse in the 40s and 50s? Sure you do! It happened, I tell you!
No. You need to file a complaint with the FCC. Federal regulations override everything else. If you take the HOA or anyone else to court, you'll EASILY win. The FCC has put the rules in black and white.
Was M.C. Escher the architect for your house, per-chance? Every house I've ever seen happens to have 4 walls, each facing a different compass orientation. And you know, you don't really have to embed a satellite dish into your house. Once you bolt it to the building, you can aim it 360 degrees... You can do crazy stuff, like mounting it to the north side of your house, and aim it south, pointing over the roof!
Oh horror of horrors! A mere 3Mbps!? Better to live in a cave!
Where I live, I'm desperately trying to find ANY option for non-dial-up service. I'd almost be happy to pay $50/mo for 128k DSL. Dial-up is terribly expensive, due to maintaining both an ISP and a phone-line, and has the unfortunate drawback of not being always-on. Cellular starts at $60/mo., for a seriously limited speed, major lag, and worst of all, being down in a valley, I literally can't get a cell signal on my phone at all. Satellite internet service is the recommended alternative, which is the most expensive and unresponsive option of all.
Yes it was. But Tatu's SSH was the old, insecure protocol.
And there were many secure remote access tools before it. kerberized telnet, telnet/ftp over SSL, and limitless others.
It's not the magical protocol (which is quite similar to SSL plus RSH/RCP), or the initial few lines of code that got it started. It's the fact that it was open, secure, widely available, and being pushed by the OpenSSH folks to be used as the default form of remote access on Unix systems.
Tatu didn't have anything to do with it. He was too busy commercializing it, and repeatedly threatened, and then suing the OpenSSH project for all their hard work. If he had chosen to keep SSH open, we'd have been a LOT further along. As other posters correctly remember, support for SSH very nearly died with that step. Many programs included SSHv1 support, and then just stagnated and let the code rot. If not for OpenSSH, it would be another relic of secure telnet protocols tried and failed, not having gone anywhere, and we'd go merrily along, using telnet and rsh, bemoaning the fact that it's so insecure, and that nothing better ever came along.