Another thing to consider: will your "whole house" surge protector protect you from internal surges? The only surge that I have ever had blow out electronic equipment in my home was caused internally by an electrician who was supposedly fixing my wiring, not by an external lightning strike.
Telnet (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt) and RPC (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1831.txt) are standard protocols that anyone can implement. "Facebook" is not. "Facebook" is a closed propriety system completely controlled by a single individual who can for any reason eliminate anyone's account or use their data for any purpose that suits him.
None of the article say when it's going to happen. They only say, "could occur between March 14 and April 4". Eh.... Not quite specific enough to be useful.
All the data that is placed on facebook could be placed on servers in peoples own homes. You could regulate who could view your web pages using OpenID or equivalent. People could have web apps that would go out to their friends servers, and get their latest posts and info and put them together into a single page. Facebook does not do anything that people could not do on their own, if they were smart enough.
As someone who works in radiation safety for the government, I can tell you that studies on these scanners have been done. There is virtually no risk from the scanners. You get far more additional radiation from flying in the airplane than you do from the scanner. The risk from these scanners is not the unknown value. The unknown value is the benefit from the scanners. As far as I know, no study has ever shown that these scanners provide any benefit. Therefore even though risk is very small, benefit is even smaller, and the risk-benefit tradeoff is lopsided against the scanners.
The original poster thinks that IPsec is more secure, but has he ever seen case of other VPN's encryption being cracked? The answer is no. All data does not need to be encrypted. If either end of the VPN connection does not have the correct key the game is up. IPsec is less convenient and only provides additional security to an already uncrackable system.
I played around with a palm phone w/ webOS for a while. Its fatal flaw was not webkit, but that everything was web based. It assumed that you had unlimited wireless data. I could not even be boot up the phone without a cell data plan. It would not even use my wifi access point. The palm web site strongly recommended purchasing an unlimited data plan because it used so much data. Then all the carriers dropped or heavily restricted their unlimited data plans. Ouch.
1. You didn't even suggest, hardly demonstrate,that Linux techs get 450k more than windows techs, and 2. The 450k does not go out of the country to Microsoft Bill. That 450k goes to people who are employed in Munich, who pay taxes in Munich, and patronize businesses in Munich.
The point is that these numbers are better than the numbers that justify the existence of the scanners. What cost/risk/benefit analysis has been done to demonstrate that these scanners are useful? The answer is none.
So, will this cause more cancer, yes.
So will these scanners save any lives? No. End of analysis.
The game would not be regulated as a "drug", but rather a "medical device." Software falls in the medical device category. Why might this game be a regulated device? It depends on what the company claims. If the company wants to claim that the game "helps people with schizophrenia improve the deficits in attention and memory that are often associated with the disorder," then it is a medical device used to treat a health condition, and therefore falls under the Food & Drug Act. Before the company could sell the game with that claim, they would have to present scientific evidence to the FDA that the claim is actually true. If the company does not want to make a specific health related claim, they can sell the game however they darn well please.
their Linux OS isn't really anything special, compared to other distros or even [gasp!] Windows server,
What are you talking about? It's unfakeable.
Seriously though, it is a very solid distribution with great support for far less money than you would pay for other *nix. And your "Windows server" comparison made me laugh.
I have had laptop hard drives fail on me because of the hits they take in my bicycle carrier or on my lap as I bounce along in the shuttle on city roads. My SSDs have yet to fail. Never again will I get a hard drive in my laptop, because of reliability.
I really really wanted to try out a WebOS phone. It's Linux, you can get root without cracking or jailbreaking, there are development tools for Linux, the form factor is nice. BUT to use one you HAVE to have a data plan through your cell phone provider. I do not have a data plan. I get wireless for my N900 for free at home, work, the church, the pool, my favorite restaurant, starbucks, the library, my friend's homes, etc. On top of that HP strongly recommends that you get an unlimited data plan because WebOS chews so much data. Great, especially now that providers are dropping their unlimited plans. Oh well. My next plan is to offer someone an absurd amount of money for a N950.
The most energy efficient way to cool people is to pour ice directly into them. Give each person an styrofoam cup of crushed ice to eat. The low temperature of the ice plus the heat of fusion will pull a lot of heat.
No, OpenLDAP is NOT "just as good" or any of that jazz.
You're right! LDAP is much _better_ than "Active Directory" because LDAP has plugins for many pieces of software that people use in backend servers, for example virtually every scripting language out there. When I search for LDAP related packages in my standard repository, I get 62 packages. "Active Directory" is useful for desktop Lookout users, but that's about it. If you're developing a web app (as most apps are now) and you want a standard ID database, LDAP is easy and works well.
At my work we used to use the RSA token and a 4 number PIN that never changed to log into the network (as well as the regular username and password). Five failures to log in would get your account locked out. Now we have to use our RSA token and an 8 letter/number PIN that changes every 30 days(!) to log into the network (as well as the regular username and password), and the system locks out accounts after only 3 failed log-ins. They are obviously relying _much_ more heavily on the user selected PIN than before, almost to the point that the token output is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Subject says it all
Another thing to consider: will your "whole house" surge protector protect you from internal surges?
The only surge that I have ever had blow out electronic equipment in my home was caused internally by an electrician who was supposedly fixing my wiring, not by an external lightning strike.
Witopia good.
Many servers around world.
Cheap.
Openvpn.
Witopia good.
Telnet (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt) and RPC (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1831.txt) are standard protocols that anyone can implement. "Facebook" is not. "Facebook" is a closed propriety system completely controlled by a single individual who can for any reason eliminate anyone's account or use their data for any purpose that suits him.
None of the article say when it's going to happen. They only say, "could occur between March 14 and April 4". Eh.... Not quite specific enough to be useful.
I have a 1.5 Mbs DSL line to Cavalier telephone. Pretty slow throughput-wise, but my pings to 8.8.8.8 are 10ms.
It's pretty good for gaming.
All the data that is placed on facebook could be placed on servers in peoples own homes. You could regulate who could view your web pages using OpenID or equivalent. People could have web apps that would go out to their friends servers, and get their latest posts and info and put them together into a single page.
Facebook does not do anything that people could not do on their own, if they were smart enough.
As someone who works in radiation safety for the government, I can tell you that studies on these scanners have been done. There is virtually no risk from the scanners. You get far more additional radiation from flying in the airplane than you do from the scanner. The risk from these scanners is not the unknown value.
The unknown value is the benefit from the scanners. As far as I know, no study has ever shown that these scanners provide any benefit. Therefore even though risk is very small, benefit is even smaller, and the risk-benefit tradeoff is lopsided against the scanners.
The original poster thinks that IPsec is more secure, but has he ever seen case of other VPN's encryption being cracked? The answer is no. All data does not need to be encrypted. If either end of the VPN connection does not have the correct key the game is up. IPsec is less convenient and only provides additional security to an already uncrackable system.
I played around with a palm phone w/ webOS for a while. Its fatal flaw was not webkit, but that everything was web based. It assumed that you had unlimited wireless data. I could not even be boot up the phone without a cell data plan. It would not even use my wifi access point. The palm web site strongly recommended purchasing an unlimited data plan because it used so much data.
Then all the carriers dropped or heavily restricted their unlimited data plans. Ouch.
Individuals often are wanting handouts, not loans.
Honk! bullshit! I'm an individual. I'd go for a no interest loan any time. Are you offering?
There is a lot of difference between a loan and a handout.
Honk! bullshit! The difference is in name only. They both save you money.
The only difference between the banks and individuals is that rich powerful people run the banks, so they got the freebie loans.
1. You didn't even suggest, hardly demonstrate,that Linux techs get 450k more than windows techs, and
2. The 450k does not go out of the country to Microsoft Bill. That 450k goes to people who are employed in Munich, who pay taxes in Munich, and patronize businesses in Munich.
Even the iPhone and iPad have a non-standard port.
I know. Therefore they fall in the "dumb" category.
This is also known as "I'm too dumb to buy a smart phone with a standard USB connector."
The point is that these numbers are better than the numbers that justify the existence of the scanners. What cost/risk/benefit analysis has been done to demonstrate that these scanners are useful? The answer is none.
So, will this cause more cancer, yes.
So will these scanners save any lives? No.
End of analysis.
Richard Stallman has no merits to basically say he's glad Steve Jobs is dead.
He didn't say that. He said, 'I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone.'
Linux geeks ... are happy to see people die.
He did not say that. He said, 'I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone.'
apart from the a few geeks, people in the real world really don't care about his views or what he is trying to promote.
Maybe you don't know what web site this is.
Ubuntu has tried to fix that with Linux, but it's still far from Mac OSX or even Windows. ... I'm not exactly fan of Apple
Again, I think you're not on the right web site, and you probably really are an Apple fan.
The game would not be regulated as a "drug", but rather a "medical device." Software falls in the medical device category.
Why might this game be a regulated device? It depends on what the company claims. If the company wants to claim that the game "helps people with schizophrenia improve the deficits in attention and memory that are often associated with the disorder," then it is a medical device used to treat a health condition, and therefore falls under the Food & Drug Act. Before the company could sell the game with that claim, they would have to present scientific evidence to the FDA that the claim is actually true.
If the company does not want to make a specific health related claim, they can sell the game however they darn well please.
their Linux OS isn't really anything special, compared to other distros or even [gasp!] Windows server,
What are you talking about? It's unfakeable.
Seriously though, it is a very solid distribution with great support for far less money than you would pay for other *nix. And your "Windows server" comparison made me laugh.
I have had laptop hard drives fail on me because of the hits they take in my bicycle carrier or on my lap as I bounce along in the shuttle on city roads. My SSDs have yet to fail. Never again will I get a hard drive in my laptop, because of reliability.
I really really wanted to try out a WebOS phone. It's Linux, you can get root without cracking or jailbreaking, there are development tools for Linux, the form factor is nice.
BUT to use one you HAVE to have a data plan through your cell phone provider. I do not have a data plan. I get wireless for my N900 for free at home, work, the church, the pool, my favorite restaurant, starbucks, the library, my friend's homes, etc.
On top of that HP strongly recommends that you get an unlimited data plan because WebOS chews so much data. Great, especially now that providers are dropping their unlimited plans.
Oh well. My next plan is to offer someone an absurd amount of money for a N950.
The most energy efficient way to cool people is to pour ice directly into them. Give each person an styrofoam cup of crushed ice to eat. The low temperature of the ice plus the heat of fusion will pull a lot of heat.
We use RHEL/Scientific Linux & Perceus (http://www.perceus.org/). It is solid and easy to add new nodes.
As someone who works for the MPAA, likes using IE6 and having my junk touched by the TSA, I find slashdot very one sided.
No, OpenLDAP is NOT "just as good" or any of that jazz.
You're right! LDAP is much _better_ than "Active Directory" because LDAP has plugins for many pieces of software that people use in backend servers, for example virtually every scripting language out there. When I search for LDAP related packages in my standard repository, I get 62 packages. "Active Directory" is useful for desktop Lookout users, but that's about it. If you're developing a web app (as most apps are now) and you want a standard ID database, LDAP is easy and works well.
At my work we used to use the RSA token and a 4 number PIN that never changed to log into the network (as well as the regular username and password). Five failures to log in would get your account locked out.
Now we have to use our RSA token and an 8 letter/number PIN that changes every 30 days(!) to log into the network (as well as the regular username and password), and the system locks out accounts after only 3 failed log-ins.
They are obviously relying _much_ more heavily on the user selected PIN than before, almost to the point that the token output is irrelevant.