Microsoft wants everyone on the planet to pay it every month for the right to use a computer. Who wouldn't, really? Microsoft has proven it cannot be trusted maintaining interoperability with formal or other standards or even previous versions of their own software. Why would you trust that every update to Office 365 will be in your best interest when Microsoft has proven time and again that they'll make major changes just to shift the goal posts on competitors trying to interoperate with them? If a large majority of people get on board with this it will put Microsoft in an incredible position of power to keep them locked in and competitors locked out.
SPF's great benefit is protecting your users against phishing attacks. Common phishing targets such as Paypal, eBay and Gmail, as well as banks and other finance organisations have very well managed SPF records. The onus for ensuring SPF records are correct falls on the sender, not the recipient. If someone inputs an SPF record for their server, then sends an e-mail via a different server you're doing exactly as requested by blocking the message. Problems of misconfigured SPF records will ease once more organizations implement it aggressively so that administrators will not be able to assume their mail is flowing correctly when delivery is initially successful to a few lax servers.
So you'd be saying the same thing if the Internet were censored by government? Or if any company could sue you for a blog post criticizing their products? Freedom doesn't just need protection, it needs to be built in to systems from the ground up. HTTP is open so anyone can have a web server, SMTP is open so anyone can have a mail server, social networking? Facebook.
Facebook stole social networking from the Internet.The concept is locked up on private servers held by a private company. He who giveth can also taketh away.
Maybe I'm living in a bubble here but Microsoft's surface seems like a *competitive* product. It runs on ARM which puts it in the tablet space for power consumption whilst doing most of the things Windows users want to do (Exchange, Office etc) with a real keyboard. I won't be buying one but I would imagine that a smart company like Apple would want to offer an iWhatever alternative, or at least plan for one in this market which has just been given prod by M$.
Have a few of your past happy clients write you a reference and offer to have them call your prospective clients. You can also add some testimonials to your website. If you're good people will also refer you to their associates. Build a reputation.
I agree with the comments above. I think what gets me about this is that they're selling it as a benefit to drivers when in reality it's the insurance companies that have the most to gain.
How long before the insurance company succumbs to the temptation of penalizing those who use their cars too much? The more time you spend on the road the higher the chance that you'll be involved in an incident, regardless of how well you drive. You can see how such information could be used to discriminate against people living in rural areas and those living further from their place of work.
If the technology has been proven I think it will get out there eventually regardless of whether it's deployed commercially in the west or not. Even if it's through a fresh development effort which would not have been undertaken had the technology not been previously proven. It seems to me that the best chance we have at detecting any future clandestine SILEX lab would be to use the technology now under a well established regulatory system and gain experience which may be valuable in detecting labs in the future. Do we really want to let someone else be first to build these things?
Not a fan of Occam's razor, are we?
Are you saying we shouldn't investigate because the simplest answer is good enough?
If you want to know more about the origin of life, try investing in biology, not NASA
Yes, astrobiology;-)
Neil is arguing for a bigger space program not to answer questions, but to inspire 'dreams'
Wouldn't you consider the possibility of answers to some of life’s most fundamental questions inspirational?
I'm reminded of that Shakespeare quote "I could be bounded in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space...". We're so primitive as a culture and know so little about the universe that all we can really do is choose a belief that fits comfortably within our realm of knowledge, or accept the fact that we don't know and that any logical theory is as valid as another in the absence of evidence.
We don't know what amount of time is required for life to spontaneously form in a given set of conditions. If we found it to be one day, in ideal conditions then yes, it's very likely it spontaneously formed here, daily. If it required several billion years for it to spontaneously form and take hold then I would say it's more likely it evolved elsewhere and that the primary form of creation is transmition.
We don't know how much other life is out there. If our Milky Way galaxy was found to be primary sterile?
There are many questions, and that's why Neil deGrasse Tyson is arguing for a bigger space program. We'd like answers.
Argh, to the extent of face saving permitted in Slashdot commentry I'd like to retract my use of the terms "creation" and "intelligent design" in that context. Those terms are clearly identified with religion but my argument wasn't intended to be.
My point is that the two theories are compatible. Natural selection will be effective in any system where multiple species compete for resources regardless of where the species originated. My argument is constrained to the origin of life on earth, not in the universe. I'm trying to say that by distancing themselves from creation people inadvertently distance themselves from the possibility that life originated elsewhere in the universe prior to earth and may have found its way here.
As we can't travel back in time to the origin of life on earth perhaps we can seek out life elsewhere in the galaxy to see how it evolved there, or if we find intelligent life, perhaps a culture more mature than our own, we can simply ask them how we got here as their culture may be old enough to have recorded this. Yes it's impossible to prove that life doesn't exist elsewhere in the universe, that's my point, even though I had constrained that argument to life in the galaxy as it's reasonable to consider each galaxy as an island since the big bang, excepting those which have merged since.
Great video. I'm not sure what it has to do with Intelligent Design though. It strikes me that Intelligent Design is compatible with Natural Selection. The two theories diverge when it comes to the ultimate source of life which Natural Selection says evolved spontaneously as a single cell life form from which all other life evolved, and ID suggesting that our DNA may have come from elsewhere. It seems to me that expanding the exploration of space is key to discoving where we come from and the answer may be something which would be considered very unscientific at this point in time. Until we encounter other intelligent life in the galaxy or prove there is none and that under the right conditions life can evolve spontaneously in a previously sterile environment it would be short sighted to deny that life may have originated elsewhere.
I agree with Sergey. Facebook and other such sites represent the opposite of what the Internet was meant to be. Instead of creating an open facebook or twitter protocol for anyone to implement, they've closed it off and put a wall around their own little internet. Imagine the same was done in the early days; instead of SMTP we'd just have Hotmail. Instead of HTTP we'd have AOL.
Eeeewww
I too can hear very high pitched sounds. Back in the CRT days I could tell a cheap or faulty monitor from a few metres away while others were oblivious. In this case however, the kHz refers to the rate at which the audio signal is sampled, not the frequency of the audible signal.
Slashdot Mirror
At least it wasn't the cellular network interfering with the beer fridge. Could have been a disaster.
Microsoft wants everyone on the planet to pay it every month for the right to use a computer. Who wouldn't, really? Microsoft has proven it cannot be trusted maintaining interoperability with formal or other standards or even previous versions of their own software. Why would you trust that every update to Office 365 will be in your best interest when Microsoft has proven time and again that they'll make major changes just to shift the goal posts on competitors trying to interoperate with them? If a large majority of people get on board with this it will put Microsoft in an incredible position of power to keep them locked in and competitors locked out.
SPF's great benefit is protecting your users against phishing attacks. Common phishing targets such as Paypal, eBay and Gmail, as well as banks and other finance organisations have very well managed SPF records. The onus for ensuring SPF records are correct falls on the sender, not the recipient. If someone inputs an SPF record for their server, then sends an e-mail via a different server you're doing exactly as requested by blocking the message. Problems of misconfigured SPF records will ease once more organizations implement it aggressively so that administrators will not be able to assume their mail is flowing correctly when delivery is initially successful to a few lax servers.
"Do more Microsoft GIT+" tomorrow.
So you'd be saying the same thing if the Internet were censored by government? Or if any company could sue you for a blog post criticizing their products? Freedom doesn't just need protection, it needs to be built in to systems from the ground up. HTTP is open so anyone can have a web server, SMTP is open so anyone can have a mail server, social networking? Facebook.
Facebook stole social networking from the Internet .The concept is locked up on private servers held by a private company. He who giveth can also taketh away.
Maybe I'm living in a bubble here but Microsoft's surface seems like a *competitive* product. It runs on ARM which puts it in the tablet space for power consumption whilst doing most of the things Windows users want to do (Exchange, Office etc) with a real keyboard. I won't be buying one but I would imagine that a smart company like Apple would want to offer an iWhatever alternative, or at least plan for one in this market which has just been given prod by M$.
But Apple may want something in between a tablet and a full blown laptop to compete with Microsoft's Surface. Makes sense to me.
Have a few of your past happy clients write you a reference and offer to have them call your prospective clients. You can also add some testimonials to your website. If you're good people will also refer you to their associates. Build a reputation.
But starting over with a new name was the easier way to fix the damaged reputation of Windows.
And to get them to pay for the "service pack"
I agree with the comments above. I think what gets me about this is that they're selling it as a benefit to drivers when in reality it's the insurance companies that have the most to gain.
How long before the insurance company succumbs to the temptation of penalizing those who use their cars too much? The more time you spend on the road the higher the chance that you'll be involved in an incident, regardless of how well you drive. You can see how such information could be used to discriminate against people living in rural areas and those living further from their place of work.
If the technology has been proven I think it will get out there eventually regardless of whether it's deployed commercially in the west or not. Even if it's through a fresh development effort which would not have been undertaken had the technology not been previously proven. It seems to me that the best chance we have at detecting any future clandestine SILEX lab would be to use the technology now under a well established regulatory system and gain experience which may be valuable in detecting labs in the future. Do we really want to let someone else be first to build these things?
Power supply maybe. Perhaps your external chassis provides cleaner, better power than your PC PSU?
Don't forget that China has successfully completed two orbital lunar missions with Chang'e 1 and 2.
Not a fan of Occam's razor, are we?
;-)
Are you saying we shouldn't investigate because the simplest answer is good enough?
If you want to know more about the origin of life, try investing in biology, not NASA
Yes, astrobiology
Neil is arguing for a bigger space program not to answer questions, but to inspire 'dreams'
Wouldn't you consider the possibility of answers to some of life’s most fundamental questions inspirational?
I'm reminded of that Shakespeare quote "I could be bounded in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space...". We're so primitive as a culture and know so little about the universe that all we can really do is choose a belief that fits comfortably within our realm of knowledge, or accept the fact that we don't know and that any logical theory is as valid as another in the absence of evidence.
We don't know what amount of time is required for life to spontaneously form in a given set of conditions. If we found it to be one day, in ideal conditions then yes, it's very likely it spontaneously formed here, daily. If it required several billion years for it to spontaneously form and take hold then I would say it's more likely it evolved elsewhere and that the primary form of creation is transmition.
We don't know how much other life is out there. If our Milky Way galaxy was found to be primary sterile?
There are many questions, and that's why Neil deGrasse Tyson is arguing for a bigger space program. We'd like answers.
Prometheus was a bit of a dissapointment - it had so much potential!
Argh, to the extent of face saving permitted in Slashdot commentry I'd like to retract my use of the terms "creation" and "intelligent design" in that context. Those terms are clearly identified with religion but my argument wasn't intended to be.
My point is that the two theories are compatible. Natural selection will be effective in any system where multiple species compete for resources regardless of where the species originated. My argument is constrained to the origin of life on earth, not in the universe. I'm trying to say that by distancing themselves from creation people inadvertently distance themselves from the possibility that life originated elsewhere in the universe prior to earth and may have found its way here. As we can't travel back in time to the origin of life on earth perhaps we can seek out life elsewhere in the galaxy to see how it evolved there, or if we find intelligent life, perhaps a culture more mature than our own, we can simply ask them how we got here as their culture may be old enough to have recorded this. Yes it's impossible to prove that life doesn't exist elsewhere in the universe, that's my point, even though I had constrained that argument to life in the galaxy as it's reasonable to consider each galaxy as an island since the big bang, excepting those which have merged since.
Great video. I'm not sure what it has to do with Intelligent Design though. It strikes me that Intelligent Design is compatible with Natural Selection. The two theories diverge when it comes to the ultimate source of life which Natural Selection says evolved spontaneously as a single cell life form from which all other life evolved, and ID suggesting that our DNA may have come from elsewhere. It seems to me that expanding the exploration of space is key to discoving where we come from and the answer may be something which would be considered very unscientific at this point in time. Until we encounter other intelligent life in the galaxy or prove there is none and that under the right conditions life can evolve spontaneously in a previously sterile environment it would be short sighted to deny that life may have originated elsewhere.
I agree with Sergey. Facebook and other such sites represent the opposite of what the Internet was meant to be. Instead of creating an open facebook or twitter protocol for anyone to implement, they've closed it off and put a wall around their own little internet. Imagine the same was done in the early days; instead of SMTP we'd just have Hotmail. Instead of HTTP we'd have AOL. Eeeewww
You were referring to the audio frequency. Sorry, my bad. Should have read the article above properly.
I too can hear very high pitched sounds. Back in the CRT days I could tell a cheap or faulty monitor from a few metres away while others were oblivious. In this case however, the kHz refers to the rate at which the audio signal is sampled, not the frequency of the audible signal.
As mentioned above truckers, delivery van drivers etc can use jammers to hide thier location inadvertantly disrupting critical systems.
"An event last year at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey showed that it only takes one jammer to cause disruption. Airport controllers had installed a new GPS-based landing system, so that aircraft could approach in bad visibility. But it was shutting itself down once or twice a day. It took several months to find the culprit: a driver on the nearby New Jersey Turnpike using a portable GPS jammer to avoid paying the highway toll."