Here's a hint: there's a big difference between "wanting to know something" and "being instantly informed about something". I have other ways besides a GPS tracker to figure out if my son is driving too fast.
Let me repeat: I would NEVER subscribe to a service lik this. If my kid's phone had a GPS tracker in it I'd be sure to teach him how to disable it. The only way my son's going to drive is if I *TRUST* him with that responsibility, and if I do trust him then spying on him is unnecessary and insulting.
Because if parents can track their kids, so can other people. YEs, I'd like to know if my son was speeding, but I *don't* want some for-profit company having access to that data and (for example) selling it to my insurance company or automatically calling the police.
That said, as a parent I'd NEVER subscribe to this service. When I allow my children to drive, it will because they've demonstrated to me that they are mature enough to handle the responsibilty of driving a car. If I don't trust them enough to let them go out on their own, then they're not going out. Inferring that I have to spy on my kids with an electronic beacon is insulting to both me and them.
And yet my university, among others, insists on blocking it. It's the only thing they block through the HTTP proxy.
They may have legitimate reasons for doing so which have nothing whatsoever to do with the nature of the content being shared. Bittorrent is a bandwith hog, and can interfere with other legitimate uses.
Is it fair for one student to suck down the full set of Fedora ISOs if it interferes with other students who are trying to (for example) research papers online, or some professor who's downloading research data? The managers of the network have the responsibility to contain costs and to ensure quality of service, and make sure that that the available resources are prioritized correctly. Blocking bittorrent completely may be a bit draconian, but consider that they may not have the time or resources necessary to implement a less intrusive rate-limiting solution.
Don't dismiss older women, sonny... they can teach you a thing or two. Plus, they tend not to be high-maintenance drama queens, either, which is always a good thing.
Not all problems are compute-bound. There are many situations (EG databases) where concurrency, latency, and throughput are FAR more important than raw processing speed.
An N-way SMP machine can service N threads simultaneously, whereas a uniprocessor machine can service one (or two, with hyperthreading). SMP machines stay more responsive under heavy load as well -- 16 processes sharing 4 processors tends run better than 4 processes competing for 1 processor because you have far fewer wait states.
I have to do this for my kids. Not only are the commercials annoying, but I'd feel much happier if the kids weren't scratching up the original disks and getting sticky fingerprints all over them.
Fine, you have someone "slice, snip, fold, and cauterize" your nuts. I'll keep mine intact, thankyouverymuch. I don't care if it hurts or not. Hell, it could feel better than getting a blowjob from Asia Carrera -- I still wouldn't do it.
I may not plan on fathering any more kids, but I want to still have the option if I change my mind at a future date.
To each his own... I'd rather wear a raincoat in the shower or risk another rugrat before I let anyone near the family jewels with a knife. UNIX, not EUNICHS.
Or, like all the other "Internet appliances" that came out and were hacked, allowing people to bypass the service that provides the subsidy will drive the company producing them out of (this) business
The smart man learns from his mistakes, but the wise man learns from other peoples' mistakes.
If a company adopts a business model that has repeatedly been demonstrated as being flawed and a guaranteed money-loser, then they're just being incredibly stupid and deserve to fail.
How does that "empower" the people who can't afford the up-front cost?
Because it gives them a piece of hardware that they wouldn't have had otherwise. Because the act of hacking the box is a LEARNING experience, and paves the way for more learning experiences, which might just open up a way to a better life. Knowledge is power.
A non-profit company could certainly license, build and sell these - so where does that leave your theory?
Why would a legitimate charity have any incentive or motivation to lock their beneficiaries in to a propriatary operating system? Why would a non-profit spend money on software licensing fees when it could help more people by using Free software? I can't think of any reason to do so unless they have ulterior motives -- like shilling for Microsoft.
No cryptographic algorithm is ever known to be strong
Half right. First off, "strong" isn't a binary state, it's a relative term. Any cypher except a properly implemented one-time pad can be broken, given enough time. A "strong" algorithm is one which will protect it's payload for enough time so that when it is eventually broken the information protected no longer has any value to the attacker. What constitutes "enough time" varies by application and the sensitivity of the data. DES might not be secure enough to protect your secret plans for world domination against the NSA, but it's more than adequate to keep your wife from reading your love letters to your mistress.
Secondly, you *can* prove that a crypto algorithm is secure against known attacks, which is good enough for most purposes. Any algorithm which resists all known attacks with no loss of effective key length is, for all practical purposes, "strong".
You fail basic reading comprehension. Put down the doobie and come out of your bleeding-heart fantasyland.
Did you RTFA, or did you just pull that out of your ass? The only subsidy mentioned in the article is a mention that THIRD PARTY companies can license the design from AMD and sell their own branded version at a subsidized price:
The chipmaker plans to go forward by essentially
licensing the PIC design to local companies, including telecommunications or Internet service providers, allowing them to use local contract manufacturers and control distribution, marketing and pricing of their PICs. Thus the companies will sell PICs under their own brand names and be free to subsidize the machines' cost to lower the price consumers pay. AMD is targeting companies in Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Russia, initially.
AMD is making a profit on this, guaranteed. Maybe not a huge profit per unit, but there are BILLIONS of people in their target market. They'll make money selling Geode processors to the licensees, and they'll make money off of licensing fees. The licensees (telcos and ISPs) aren't doing it for charity, either: they're doing it to expand their market and get more paying customers.
Trivialising it by suggesting it's some sort of geek toy is just pathetic
What's pathetic is your lack of touch with reality. This isn't some noble utopian project to bring the Internet to the starving masses for free. This is one megacorporation marketing a device to other megacorporations to help those megacorporations make a profit off of poor people.
Getting Linux to run on this isn't just a Geek Toy. Doing so will empower ALL people to use a cheap (possibly subsidized) general-purpose computing device in ways other than their corporate masters want them to use it. The telcos and ISPs who will be licensing this want nice obediant consumers who'll buy the device, subscribe to their service, and use it to buy stuff from their advertisers & partners.
[L]earning to write in a coherent and "correct" manner takes practice, and the best way to practice is to write well even where it might be unimportant to do so.
Outstanding advice, and universally applicable as well. Learning to do anything well requires practice, and the way to practice is to do it the right way every time. Furthermore, professionalism and self-pride should dictate that anything you do be done correctly and to the best of your ability, even if it isn't critical or if no one is watching.
why should you waste an extra 20 seconds checking your grammar
Because it makes you look like a drooling, subliterate moron.
Of course, if you want to be elected President of the United States, being seen as a drooling, subliterate moron obviously isn't a major impediment. However, if you have more realistic career goals, it does matter.
why do so christians believe that evolution contradicts the bible?
Because the popular (dominant?) charismatic/evangelical/fundimentalist Christian sects [You know, the ones who're currently running the country] belive that the Bible is the literal and inerrant Word of God, and that the King James Version is (a|the only) divinely-inspired translation thereof.
No amount of proof or logical argments will work on these people their minds are so infected by their superstition that the are unable to seperate fact from fantasy. They are unwilling, or unable, to accept or comprehend any evidence which might contridict their prejudices. Their belief system has poisoned their brains, leaving them incapable of critical thinking or rational thought processes.
Occasionally the courts bitch-slap the politicians and strike down the most egregious of these laws, but that cannot happen until AFTER some innocent person's life has already been turned upside down.
If he's the head of the company, and therefore responsible for the actions of the company. If he was unaware of the problems at the plant, then he was negligent in his duties and not supervising his subordinates properly.
He had probably never spoken to anyone at the site, ever.
He shouldn't have to, directly. The on-site head of operations reports to someone at headquarters, who in turn reports to the CEO. Someone in that chain of command made a policy decision to ignore the safety protocols. I see two possible scenerios:
He knew the conditions at the plant and did nothing to correct it (or, worse, authorized it). Either way, he's personaly responsible for the deaths.
He didn't know what was going on because someone underneath him falsified documents and didn't report conditions at the plant to executive management. His defense would be to find out who lied and finger them as the responsible party. However, he's still guilty of mismangement, because he should have made sure that there was an internal auditing system to catch lies like that. Even if no one had died, he should still have been made aware of conditions which could caused a major plant to be shut down.
If the CEO and Directors of a company are not aware of major policy decisions being made by their subordinates then they're not doing their jobs. It's a CEO's RESPONSIBILITY to be aware of any potential catastrophy which could impact the company's bottom line or which could severely damage the company's public image.
As long as there are users around to screw up the systems, they will need to pay geeks to fix them again. Human stupidity is the one true constant of the universe.
Al Qaida's plan to destroy America seems to be working pretty well, launch one spectacular attack and let brain dead politicians and law enforcement officers do the rest of the damage as they seek to make everyone "safe".
Glad to see that I'm not the only one who understands this. The correct response to terrorism is, generally, to do nothing. The *incorrect* response is to panic, which is what our leadership (and the majority of the public) has done.
Whaddya mean? I lost my virginity at AtlantiCon to a girl I met over a game of BattleTech.
If you have halfway decent personal hygene, some tiny modicum of social skills and manners, and a small dose of courage, gaming/sci-fi cons are a veritable smorgasboard of available horny geek girls.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a hint: there's a big difference between "wanting to know something" and "being instantly informed about something". I have other ways besides a GPS tracker to figure out if my son is driving too fast.
Let me repeat: I would NEVER subscribe to a service lik this. If my kid's phone had a GPS tracker in it I'd be sure to teach him how to disable it. The only way my son's going to drive is if I *TRUST* him with that responsibility, and if I do trust him then spying on him is unnecessary and insulting.
That said, as a parent I'd NEVER subscribe to this service. When I allow my children to drive, it will because they've demonstrated to me that they are mature enough to handle the responsibilty of driving a car. If I don't trust them enough to let them go out on their own, then they're not going out. Inferring that I have to spy on my kids with an electronic beacon is insulting to both me and them.
Is it fair for one student to suck down the full set of Fedora ISOs if it interferes with other students who are trying to (for example) research papers online, or some professor who's downloading research data? The managers of the network have the responsibility to contain costs and to ensure quality of service, and make sure that that the available resources are prioritized correctly. Blocking bittorrent completely may be a bit draconian, but consider that they may not have the time or resources necessary to implement a less intrusive rate-limiting solution.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that picture of Depp looks like Alex from A Clockwork Orange
I was thinking that he looks more like Alex in A Clockwork Orange
Don't dismiss older women, sonny... they can teach you a thing or two. Plus, they tend not to be high-maintenance drama queens, either, which is always a good thing.
An N-way SMP machine can service N threads simultaneously, whereas a uniprocessor machine can service one (or two, with hyperthreading). SMP machines stay more responsive under heavy load as well -- 16 processes sharing 4 processors tends run better than 4 processes competing for 1 processor because you have far fewer wait states.
I have to do this for my kids. Not only are the commercials annoying, but I'd feel much happier if the kids weren't scratching up the original disks and getting sticky fingerprints all over them.
I may not plan on fathering any more kids, but I want to still have the option if I change my mind at a future date.
To each his own... I'd rather wear a raincoat in the shower or risk another rugrat before I let anyone near the family jewels with a knife. UNIX, not EUNICHS.
If a company adopts a business model that has repeatedly been demonstrated as being flawed and a guaranteed money-loser, then they're just being incredibly stupid and deserve to fail.
Because it gives them a piece of hardware that they wouldn't have had otherwise. Because the act of hacking the box is a LEARNING experience, and paves the way for more learning experiences, which might just open up a way to a better life. Knowledge is power. Why would a legitimate charity have any incentive or motivation to lock their beneficiaries in to a propriatary operating system? Why would a non-profit spend money on software licensing fees when it could help more people by using Free software? I can't think of any reason to do so unless they have ulterior motives -- like shilling for Microsoft.Secondly, you *can* prove that a crypto algorithm is secure against known attacks, which is good enough for most purposes. Any algorithm which resists all known attacks with no loss of effective key length is, for all practical purposes, "strong".
Did you RTFA, or did you just pull that out of your ass? The only subsidy mentioned in the article is a mention that THIRD PARTY companies can license the design from AMD and sell their own branded version at a subsidized price:
AMD is making a profit on this, guaranteed. Maybe not a huge profit per unit, but there are BILLIONS of people in their target market. They'll make money selling Geode processors to the licensees, and they'll make money off of licensing fees. The licensees (telcos and ISPs) aren't doing it for charity, either: they're doing it to expand their market and get more paying customers. What's pathetic is your lack of touch with reality. This isn't some noble utopian project to bring the Internet to the starving masses for free. This is one megacorporation marketing a device to other megacorporations to help those megacorporations make a profit off of poor people.Getting Linux to run on this isn't just a Geek Toy. Doing so will empower ALL people to use a cheap (possibly subsidized) general-purpose computing device in ways other than their corporate masters want them to use it. The telcos and ISPs who will be licensing this want nice obediant consumers who'll buy the device, subscribe to their service, and use it to buy stuff from their advertisers & partners.
Of course, if you want to be elected President of the United States, being seen as a drooling, subliterate moron obviously isn't a major impediment. However, if you have more realistic career goals, it does matter.
No amount of proof or logical argments will work on these people their minds are so infected by their superstition that the are unable to seperate fact from fantasy. They are unwilling, or unable, to accept or comprehend any evidence which might contridict their prejudices. Their belief system has poisoned their brains, leaving them incapable of critical thinking or rational thought processes.
Politicians have always tried outlawing all sorts of things that people do in the privacy of their own homes and harm no one else. They regulate what plants you can grow or consume, what kind of toilet you can own, and even what you can use in your bedroom.
Occasionally the courts bitch-slap the politicians and strike down the most egregious of these laws, but that cannot happen until AFTER some innocent person's life has already been turned upside down.
- He knew the conditions at the plant and did nothing to correct it (or, worse, authorized it). Either way, he's personaly responsible for the deaths.
- He didn't know what was going on because someone underneath him falsified documents and didn't report conditions at the plant to executive management. His defense would be to find out who lied and finger them as the responsible party. However, he's still guilty of mismangement, because he should have made sure that there was an internal auditing system to catch lies like that. Even if no one had died, he should still have been made aware of conditions which could caused a major plant to be shut down.
If the CEO and Directors of a company are not aware of major policy decisions being made by their subordinates then they're not doing their jobs. It's a CEO's RESPONSIBILITY to be aware of any potential catastrophy which could impact the company's bottom line or which could severely damage the company's public image.I call them, respectively, "tissues", "green scrubbies", and "keep that damn thing away from my pans".
If you have halfway decent personal hygene, some tiny modicum of social skills and manners, and a small dose of courage, gaming/sci-fi cons are a veritable smorgasboard of available horny geek girls.