You don't know what you're blathering (at length, I might add) about.
Operating systems and browsers come with the public keys of the OS distributor and Certificate Authorities built-in. Unless the responses of the spoofer/MITM system can be validated with these crypto keys, then the user will be warned that the remote site is trying to use an invalid cert. But the spoofer doesn't have the private key of the OS Distro or CAs, so they can't generate responses that jibe with the client's crypto.
If you take over my DNS and try to direct me to false HTTPS sites then its a no-go. If the spoofing starts with HTTP then so what? You can't control the browser's address bar and make HTTPS://sitename + the Lock symbol appear.
Gee! What you all say to get in a political dig. Keeping track of your bits is a solved problem for the customer. You all just have to use them. As for "pretending"? Well if you can go up to your limit? Then there's no "pretend", any more than there's "pretend" in your checking account.
Um, excuse you! In this case we get a "checking account" with NO available statements or receipts to track the balance. Its just the customer's word against the bank's.
They are setting up their operations managers for an opportunity to fraudulently keep trimming the higher-usage customers off their bell curve.
... the Chinese press would not attempt to provoke wars on an almost bi-annual basis the way the USA press has done. I don't think its possible to surpass that level of nefarious activity.
Hmm. Most of the US press I have read/heard/watched has been stridently anti-war pretty much since the war in Iraq started.
Even the NY Times was roundly criticized in the international press for contributing to war fever. I suggest you read up on reporter Judith Miller in particular.
None of the major USA media outlets criticized the "evidence" that was presented, despite the fact that major news bureaus in Europe and elsewhere had reported on the falsity of Bush's and Blair's claims. From the aluminum tubes to the forged yellowcake documents to the supposed WMD factories, it was all known to be false 3 months before the invasion of Iraq.
The USA media did not allow these facts to be reported until they got their embedding windfall and a reason to keep viewers hanging on their every word. Then, like Hillary Clinton and the rest, they grew big puppy-dog eyes and said "we were lied to".
I suppose when we are at war with Russia and/or Iran, they'll do the same.
You need to ask yourself right now, why aren't the USA networks reporting that Russia was attacked first when they were stationed in S. Ossetia by international agreement? Why don't they challenge McCain or Palin when the latter claim Russia was "unprovoked", and that we may get involved militarily?
I am guessing that it is a new type of 'nova' produced by a stellar collision. Perhaps a white dwarf tearing open a faint main-sequence star (or a gas giant) like a bursting soap bubble.
The failed starbirth idea is interesting too. What if a very large 'planet' with a lot of heavy elements reached some sort of critical mass and began to fuse for a short time before running out of fuel?
So what? The USA govt, sponsored and largely run by corporate interests (of which media corporations are subsidiary) isn't any more credible.
I don't think any government's words should be taken at face value, but I also don't believe for a moment that the Chinese government is on par with the US government in credibility and transparency. there are shades of gray, and I see the US and China in much different areas of the spectrum.
I have to disagree these days. They are both sick in their own right, but for whatever reason the Chinese press would not attempt to provoke wars on an almost bi-annual basis the way the USA press has done. I don't think its possible to surpass that level of nefarious activity.
You haven't read those Tiananmen reports very closely. The unrest occurring outside the square was unrelated to the students. It was also reported that Chinese troops were attacked first. Who am I supposed to believe: the nakedly state-run media (with national prestige on the line) and some eye witnesses, or a surreptitious state-running media known for an unsurpassed bloodthirst?
The USA conglomerates and their media divisions not only promote wars abroad, but have wantonly fueled the explosion of the country's prison industry with hysteria and worse. Now one out of one hundred Americans is currently behind bars, with about 17% of the adult population having been put through the penal system. No other country comes close to those miserable statistics.
The country's institutions are obsessed with exacting punishment at home and abroad.
Some. I'll make no apologies or excuses for heavy-handed police action, whether it is here or over there, but the difference between the RNC / DNC protests and Tiananmen Square is mind-boggling.
I didn't compare the convention protests with Tiananmen Sq. I meant to compare them with the treatment of protesters outside the olympics.
"Reasonable grounds" and "exigent circumstances" seem to be the key.
Which seems to be a catch-all excuse for the political and legal class when confronting some of their worst fears about the man off the street's ability to form a crowd with an agenda.
However you are being overly optimistic about the resistance to such a change. The tech community has done a rotten job of protecting users against online criminals, with phishing being the most egregious example: Every time I suggest that we all teach users to protect themselves by A) knowing what a domain name is, B) hovering over links and looking at domain in status bar before clicking, C) practicing a complete SSL "ritual" of looking at domain name in address bar at the same time you look for the lock........ every time I suggest this I am met with derisive comments that users would not remember or use these (simple) tips. They are too "stupid" so why even try?
And you know what? None of you even try. In fact, about 80% of you don't even understand how SSL works or the minimum necessary actions for the end-user to make it work. CCNAs, MCSEs, RHCEs: charlatans.
So the putrid IT culture has led to this situation where online crime is needlessly running rampant, and users have become very fearful of Internet insecurity.
Now the powers-that-be in China and the USA can move in and dictate security "solutions" that maximize surveillance. The sad thing is they can do this and actually feel good about it.
I see. Is this the official Chinese description of what happened? I'm willing to admit that I might be less than fully informed, but I'm reluctant to give credibility to what the Chinese government says.
So what? The USA govt, sponsored and largely run by corporate interests (of which media corporations are subsidiary) isn't any more credible.
The USA establishment is pushing the lie that Russia was the aggressor against Georgia (which Russia was policing S. Ossetia by international agreement when they were attacked), and Presidential candidates are using that story as a call to arms against Russia!
- How many requests for permission to protest were made? My latest sources say about 77.
- Of those, how many were granted permission to protest during the Games?
- Of those, how many actually protested during the Games?
- Learning Chinese would be great, but is more than I can do right now. What reliable and trustworthy (ie, non-government related) sources of information are there for an English-speaker like myself?
Have you paid attention to what's been done with protesters at the DNC and RNC events? The cops even arrested Amy Goodman and her staff; journalists from Salon.com were also threatened. Police surrounded protesters homes (no warrants, you see) and later charged them with intent to throw feces at convention-goers because they owned composting toilets; or that they were planning to make bombs because protesters had "chemicals" which turned out to be common cleaning and gardening products in their homes.
To the original topic: If it were in my power to grant or withhold, I would never entrust China (or any government - even my own) with tools that would help it roll back the shield of anonymity that protects the natural right of people to speak freely.
The purpose of the UN is not to serve your fantasy desire for sanctioning governments operating differently from what you are conditioned to approve of. The purpose of the UN is to facilitate communication and avoid war by providing a venue for that communication. The UN is a success.
The parent is essentially correct. The fact that the UN votes on many of these international conflicts tends to throw the positions of member states into a higher relief than would occur otherwise. The interaction within the UN body forces states to at least arrive at some common language and conditions for resolving their conflicts.
Without that dynamic of dialog and debate, conflict between nations becomes much more a process of wielding pure force.
I cannot believe the pipedreams being purveyed in this thread. One would think after all these years that people would learn there is no where for Linux per-se to go on the desktop. It is a kernel (or kernel + GNU toolchain).
Other than that, there is very little that an application developer can easily grab onto and then maintain a solid footing. i.e. there is no defined platform encompassing desktop functionality.
Thus application developers try a Linux-based distro out for a while and go back to Apple or MS because those companies offer platforms that engender a certain kind of confidence and peace of mind (and simplicity). Let's say you're contracted to write an app. and can choose "Linux" because its easily obtained - If you write the app for "Linux" how do you even know if it'll run on your client's distro of choice?? How about writing a Linux-native app for class? Oops, the teacher and classmates' distros don't come with the same set of libraries, or even package-naming.
The fluidity and fragmentation with all this higher-level Linux-ish desktop software is repelling 3rd party application developers (ISVs). How do you tell a user to install your software?? How does your tech support staff cope with providing troubleshooting and instructions for distros A-Z in an efficient manner?
Applications are all-important for selling a platform. Its not so much a chicken-and-egg problem, because budding new authors and startups will code some great apps for their favorite platform regardless. In this case, the chickens simply have no stable place to lay their eggs.
Linux itself only really matters to sysadmins and system-level coders and hobbyists. Even web authors are mainly concerned with the "AMPP" in LAMPP; they have a platform that matters to them. For nearly everyone else, what you are trying to sell is just a mirage.
With that said:
Ubuntu has a chance. They actually paid attention to autopackage's platform concerns, they have reorganized their development around real use-cases (instead of going "use case-what?"), and they have gotten a clue that a simple UI is worthless without plenty of vertical integration (UI complexity is a balancing act).
What they still don't have is an SDK or a portal for application developers. Nor do they have an easy way for hardware shoppers to check compatibility. Nor can they really attract 3rd party hardware vendors to write drivers, unless FOSS drivers become industry standard (and I'm betting they won't).
Well, that's scary is that, if this passes, the DoJ becomes the enforcement arm for private industry.
Yes... just happens to be an industry with an immense and proven capacity for propagandizing the public about (corporate) freedom, private property, respect for the American legal system and foreign policy.
Oh, so he's just a holocaust denier instead? Well, let's start shipping him some uranium! What could possibly go wrong?
I should have known better than to use a US news outlet to make my point. FWIW, I've only read about him expressing a brief skepticism toward the holocaust, and later on acknowledging that the holocaust was real on a number of occasions.
That said, I don't like Ahmadinejad or many of his policies. But the false hysteria being drummed up to justify war is even worse.
You realize that the article you linked ends by saying that he did say Israel should be wiped off the map, right?
I'll grant you that he didn't say that his country should be the one doing the wiping. There's still a huge difference between a stable democracy (India) and a country where the religious leadership holds a veto over everything (including who can run for office) and which denies the right of one of it's neighbors to exist.
I don't think that such a dramatic dichotomy exists. FWIW, Israel plays the democracy card too, though about half of its population isn't represented.
As for the quote, yes I realize what the author said at the end. It is also blatantly dishonest squirming to reach a conclusion that is palletable to the US establishment. Given that the USA supported Saddam's invasion of Iran, resulting in about 1 million dead, and then began to play both sides, I'd say the author's attempt to save face for NYT by providing "context" is extremely misguided.
Now on to those civilized Indian quotes about Pakistan...
I also have had very good experience with ReiserFS v3. No mishaps at all under intensive use for over 7 years.
There was also a period of 6 months when I ran Reiser4 (system and data) with no mishaps either. This was after Reiser4 had gone "1.0".
Ext3 hasn't been quite as good to me. It is less flexible and I had one episode of data loss that I'm not sure whether to blame on Ext3 or sharing the disk with Win2000 NTFS partitions (Windows partition table handling is idiosyncratic such that non-Windows partitions on the same disk are at risk).
I did briefly use XFS back before it was "maturely" integrated into Linux. Quickly lost data (files dropping like flies).
Miro makes it pretty easy for people to browse for and download video that is distributed via bittorrent.
Public Relations industry
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 1
...already uses those methods (such as the survey and the focus group), and they are employed by various degrees to control populations through their desires and fears. We're talking about propaganda masters who have a working relationship with government psy-ops. This Adam Curtis documentary on this subject is excellent.
One doesn't interact with a web page, nor even entering most 'commands' (links), at the bottom of the window.
The standard browser configuration is excellent for showing the user the context of what's on-screen: User provides address and direction at the top, and looks for status at the bottom. Each of those two zones draws a border showing where the page cannot render, meaning the user can easily separate the web page from the rest of the desktop. Security-related information about pages and links can be seen there while generally not having to worry that its being faked.
In recent years browsers like Firefox have strengthened this layout; its been quite a while since I've seen a pop-up window not having a status bar and address bar. The benefit it that I know where the web page is really supposed to be coming from, and hovering over links allows me to see them at the bottom before clicking.
Or about 0.5 HD movies per day, or around 0.2 if you torrent.
Get off the couch and go outside!
Get a life and a household occupied by more than one person. A five-person household is going to start bumping up against such a cap if more than 2 of them regularly get HD news and entertainment from P2P.
Why should news shows distributed on the net take a backseat to the hysterical shite pushed out by "traditional" info-tainment networks? A: None, let them rot. TV's demographic recently changed such that the average viewer is over 50... they can't even hold much of their target demographic, much as Comcast tries to force us.
Electronic processors and media are designed to come as close to infinitely malleable as possible, so they cannot be trusted authenticate transactions that are both critical and anonymous.
As for the promise of direct electronic democracy, it's laudable except that the voters would have to be identified in order to maintain accountability with error/fraud rates close to what we've had with paper ballots.
The computers are essentially "black boxes", and even trained technicians (like an MCSE) would be clueless about addressing determined fraud. It takes accomplished computer scientists specializing in security research to make sense of what went wrong in each local podunk locality -- not gonna happen.
Consider that currency is essentially anonymous. And that Wall St. and other financial sectors deal in a lot of transactions electronically. Never EVER are they performed anonymously! Have them remove identities from electronic transactions, and their whole business falls to pieces - why ask that democracy do such a thing with our political capital??
The essential logic of the vote transaction must be audit-able by a councilmember, poll worker or sherrif. So a computer-printed ballot passes muster, while an electro-magnetic digital one does not.
dismissing electronic voting off the bat when it's been successfully implemented in other countries is very shortsighted.
I am dimissing "1+1=4" here. The only countries I'm aware of started years after we did, which means they have almost no experience thus far (and even so, much of it bad).
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know what you're blathering (at length, I might add) about.
Operating systems and browsers come with the public keys of the OS distributor and Certificate Authorities built-in. Unless the responses of the spoofer/MITM system can be validated with these crypto keys, then the user will be warned that the remote site is trying to use an invalid cert. But the spoofer doesn't have the private key of the OS Distro or CAs, so they can't generate responses that jibe with the client's crypto.
If you take over my DNS and try to direct me to false HTTPS sites then its a no-go. If the spoofing starts with HTTP then so what? You can't control the browser's address bar and make HTTPS://sitename + the Lock symbol appear.
If I operate a node (give back) it's fair, isn't it? And if not, why not?
I won't say its unfair when you also contribute.
Its just too bad that Tor doesn't yet require contributing as a relay by default. That would kind of resolve the 'abuse' stigma.
Gee! What you all say to get in a political dig. Keeping track of your bits is a solved problem for the customer. You all just have to use them. As for "pretending"? Well if you can go up to your limit? Then there's no "pretend", any more than there's "pretend" in your checking account.
Um, excuse you! In this case we get a "checking account" with NO available statements or receipts to track the balance. Its just the customer's word against the bank's.
They are setting up their operations managers for an opportunity to fraudulently keep trimming the higher-usage customers off their bell curve.
At 120 Watts, it should be called the "Energy Gobbler" instead.
He's waiting for you to give up your remotes and mouse first, Mr. Manly-man.
Hmm. Most of the US press I have read/heard/watched has been stridently anti-war pretty much since the war in Iraq started.
Even the NY Times was roundly criticized in the international press for contributing to war fever. I suggest you read up on reporter Judith Miller in particular.
None of the major USA media outlets criticized the "evidence" that was presented, despite the fact that major news bureaus in Europe and elsewhere had reported on the falsity of Bush's and Blair's claims. From the aluminum tubes to the forged yellowcake documents to the supposed WMD factories, it was all known to be false 3 months before the invasion of Iraq.
The USA media did not allow these facts to be reported until they got their embedding windfall and a reason to keep viewers hanging on their every word. Then, like Hillary Clinton and the rest, they grew big puppy-dog eyes and said "we were lied to".
I suppose when we are at war with Russia and/or Iran, they'll do the same.
You need to ask yourself right now, why aren't the USA networks reporting that Russia was attacked first when they were stationed in S. Ossetia by international agreement? Why don't they challenge McCain or Palin when the latter claim Russia was "unprovoked", and that we may get involved militarily?
Google could threaten to defect to another country if D.C. makes too many further moves toward repressive policies.
I am guessing that it is a new type of 'nova' produced by a stellar collision. Perhaps a white dwarf tearing open a faint main-sequence star (or a gas giant) like a bursting soap bubble.
The failed starbirth idea is interesting too. What if a very large 'planet' with a lot of heavy elements reached some sort of critical mass and began to fuse for a short time before running out of fuel?
So what? The USA govt, sponsored and largely run by corporate interests (of which media corporations are subsidiary) isn't any more credible.
I don't think any government's words should be taken at face value, but I also don't believe for a moment that the Chinese government is on par with the US government in credibility and transparency. there are shades of gray, and I see the US and China in much different areas of the spectrum.
I have to disagree these days. They are both sick in their own right, but for whatever reason the Chinese press would not attempt to provoke wars on an almost bi-annual basis the way the USA press has done. I don't think its possible to surpass that level of nefarious activity.
You haven't read those Tiananmen reports very closely. The unrest occurring outside the square was unrelated to the students. It was also reported that Chinese troops were attacked first. Who am I supposed to believe: the nakedly state-run media (with national prestige on the line) and some eye witnesses, or a surreptitious state-running media known for an unsurpassed bloodthirst?
The USA conglomerates and their media divisions not only promote wars abroad, but have wantonly fueled the explosion of the country's prison industry with hysteria and worse. Now one out of one hundred Americans is currently behind bars, with about 17% of the adult population having been put through the penal system. No other country comes close to those miserable statistics.
The country's institutions are obsessed with exacting punishment at home and abroad.
Some. I'll make no apologies or excuses for heavy-handed police action, whether it is here or over there, but the difference between the RNC / DNC protests and Tiananmen Square is mind-boggling.
I didn't compare the convention protests with Tiananmen Sq. I meant to compare them with the treatment of protesters outside the olympics.
"Reasonable grounds" and "exigent circumstances" seem to be the key.
Which seems to be a catch-all excuse for the political and legal class when confronting some of their worst fears about the man off the street's ability to form a crowd with an agenda.
Interesting insight about IPv6.
However you are being overly optimistic about the resistance to such a change. The tech community has done a rotten job of protecting users against online criminals, with phishing being the most egregious example: Every time I suggest that we all teach users to protect themselves by A) knowing what a domain name is, B) hovering over links and looking at domain in status bar before clicking, C) practicing a complete SSL "ritual" of looking at domain name in address bar at the same time you look for the lock.... .... every time I suggest this I am met with derisive comments that users would not remember or use these (simple) tips. They are too "stupid" so why even try?
And you know what? None of you even try. In fact, about 80% of you don't even understand how SSL works or the minimum necessary actions for the end-user to make it work. CCNAs, MCSEs, RHCEs: charlatans.
So the putrid IT culture has led to this situation where online crime is needlessly running rampant, and users have become very fearful of Internet insecurity.
Now the powers-that-be in China and the USA can move in and dictate security "solutions" that maximize surveillance. The sad thing is they can do this and actually feel good about it.
I see. Is this the official Chinese description of what happened? I'm willing to admit that I might be less than fully informed, but I'm reluctant to give credibility to what the Chinese government says.
So what? The USA govt, sponsored and largely run by corporate interests (of which media corporations are subsidiary) isn't any more credible.
The USA establishment is pushing the lie that Russia was the aggressor against Georgia (which Russia was policing S. Ossetia by international agreement when they were attacked), and Presidential candidates are using that story as a call to arms against Russia!
Even the Tiananmen Square "Massacre" is a myth.
The Chinese government speaks not just though its state-controlled press, but through its actions as well, and their actions speak louder to me than their words. Members of the press from abroad have been intimidated and had pictures of protests confiscated by the Chinese government.
- How many requests for permission to protest were made? My latest sources say about 77.
- Of those, how many were granted permission to protest during the Games?
- Of those, how many actually protested during the Games?
- Learning Chinese would be great, but is more than I can do right now. What reliable and trustworthy (ie, non-government related) sources of information are there for an English-speaker like myself?
It seems that Beijing has gone out of its way to squash free speech, intimidate critics, and to imprison dissidents. Are all these sources willfully libeling China?
Have you paid attention to what's been done with protesters at the DNC and RNC events? The cops even arrested Amy Goodman and her staff; journalists from Salon.com were also threatened. Police surrounded protesters homes (no warrants, you see) and later charged them with intent to throw feces at convention-goers because they owned composting toilets; or that they were planning to make bombs because protesters had "chemicals" which turned out to be common cleaning and gardening products in their homes.
To the original topic: If it were in my power to grant or withhold, I would never entrust China (or any government - even my own) with tools that would help it roll back the shield of anonymity that protects the natural right of people to speak freely.
I can certainly agree with that.
The purpose of the UN is not to serve your fantasy desire for sanctioning governments operating differently from what you are conditioned to approve of. The purpose of the UN is to facilitate communication and avoid war by providing a venue for that communication. The UN is a success.
The parent is essentially correct. The fact that the UN votes on many of these international conflicts tends to throw the positions of member states into a higher relief than would occur otherwise. The interaction within the UN body forces states to at least arrive at some common language and conditions for resolving their conflicts.
Without that dynamic of dialog and debate, conflict between nations becomes much more a process of wielding pure force.
I cannot believe the pipedreams being purveyed in this thread. One would think after all these years that people would learn there is no where for Linux per-se to go on the desktop. It is a kernel (or kernel + GNU toolchain).
Other than that, there is very little that an application developer can easily grab onto and then maintain a solid footing. i.e. there is no defined platform encompassing desktop functionality.
Thus application developers try a Linux-based distro out for a while and go back to Apple or MS because those companies offer platforms that engender a certain kind of confidence and peace of mind (and simplicity). Let's say you're contracted to write an app. and can choose "Linux" because its easily obtained - If you write the app for "Linux" how do you even know if it'll run on your client's distro of choice?? How about writing a Linux-native app for class? Oops, the teacher and classmates' distros don't come with the same set of libraries, or even package-naming.
The fluidity and fragmentation with all this higher-level Linux-ish desktop software is repelling 3rd party application developers (ISVs). How do you tell a user to install your software?? How does your tech support staff cope with providing troubleshooting and instructions for distros A-Z in an efficient manner?
Applications are all-important for selling a platform. Its not so much a chicken-and-egg problem, because budding new authors and startups will code some great apps for their favorite platform regardless. In this case, the chickens simply have no stable place to lay their eggs.
Linux itself only really matters to sysadmins and system-level coders and hobbyists. Even web authors are mainly concerned with the "AMPP" in LAMPP; they have a platform that matters to them. For nearly everyone else, what you are trying to sell is just a mirage.
With that said:
Ubuntu has a chance. They actually paid attention to autopackage's platform concerns, they have reorganized their development around real use-cases (instead of going "use case-what?"), and they have gotten a clue that a simple UI is worthless without plenty of vertical integration (UI complexity is a balancing act).
What they still don't have is an SDK or a portal for application developers. Nor do they have an easy way for hardware shoppers to check compatibility. Nor can they really attract 3rd party hardware vendors to write drivers, unless FOSS drivers become industry standard (and I'm betting they won't).
Well, that's scary is that, if this passes, the DoJ becomes the enforcement arm for private industry.
Yes... just happens to be an industry with an immense and proven capacity for propagandizing the public about (corporate) freedom, private property, respect for the American legal system and foreign policy.
So the Palestinian population within the country's borders doesn't exist?
What about Arabs that are also Israelis? Get elected to 'parliament', and get suspended from parliament for voting the wrong way during a crisis.
Oh, so he's just a holocaust denier instead? Well, let's start shipping him some uranium! What could possibly go wrong?
I should have known better than to use a US news outlet to make my point. FWIW, I've only read about him expressing a brief skepticism toward the holocaust, and later on acknowledging that the holocaust was real on a number of occasions.
That said, I don't like Ahmadinejad or many of his policies. But the false hysteria being drummed up to justify war is even worse.
You realize that the article you linked ends by saying that he did say Israel should be wiped off the map, right?
I'll grant you that he didn't say that his country should be the one doing the wiping. There's still a huge difference between a stable democracy (India) and a country where the religious leadership holds a veto over everything (including who can run for office) and which denies the right of one of it's neighbors to exist.
I don't think that such a dramatic dichotomy exists. FWIW, Israel plays the democracy card too, though about half of its population isn't represented.
As for the quote, yes I realize what the author said at the end. It is also blatantly dishonest squirming to reach a conclusion that is palletable to the US establishment. Given that the USA supported Saddam's invasion of Iran, resulting in about 1 million dead, and then began to play both sides, I'd say the author's attempt to save face for NYT by providing "context" is extremely misguided.
Now on to those civilized Indian quotes about Pakistan...
Probably none, nor has Iran.
It is astounding how much innuendo and false propaganda get hyped in the USA mass media and left essentially uncorrected.
I also have had very good experience with ReiserFS v3. No mishaps at all under intensive use for over 7 years.
There was also a period of 6 months when I ran Reiser4 (system and data) with no mishaps either. This was after Reiser4 had gone "1.0".
Ext3 hasn't been quite as good to me. It is less flexible and I had one episode of data loss that I'm not sure whether to blame on Ext3 or sharing the disk with Win2000 NTFS partitions (Windows partition table handling is idiosyncratic such that non-Windows partitions on the same disk are at risk).
I did briefly use XFS back before it was "maturely" integrated into Linux. Quickly lost data (files dropping like flies).
Don't forget to list it in the Miro guide.
Miro makes it pretty easy for people to browse for and download video that is distributed via bittorrent.
...already uses those methods (such as the survey and the focus group), and they are employed by various degrees to control populations through their desires and fears. We're talking about propaganda masters who have a working relationship with government psy-ops. This Adam Curtis documentary on this subject is excellent.
One doesn't interact with a web page, nor even entering most 'commands' (links), at the bottom of the window.
The standard browser configuration is excellent for showing the user the context of what's on-screen: User provides address and direction at the top, and looks for status at the bottom. Each of those two zones draws a border showing where the page cannot render, meaning the user can easily separate the web page from the rest of the desktop. Security-related information about pages and links can be seen there while generally not having to worry that its being faked.
In recent years browsers like Firefox have strengthened this layout; its been quite a while since I've seen a pop-up window not having a status bar and address bar. The benefit it that I know where the web page is really supposed to be coming from, and hovering over links allows me to see them at the bottom before clicking.
2 full length movies per day basically...
Or about 0.5 HD movies per day, or around 0.2 if you torrent.
Get off the couch and go outside!
Get a life and a household occupied by more than one person. A five-person household is going to start bumping up against such a cap if more than 2 of them regularly get HD news and entertainment from P2P.
Why should news shows distributed on the net take a backseat to the hysterical shite pushed out by "traditional" info-tainment networks? A: None, let them rot. TV's demographic recently changed such that the average viewer is over 50... they can't even hold much of their target demographic, much as Comcast tries to force us.
how would a digital device in one's pocket wipe out a DVD?
Create a replacement DVD, that's how.
Electronic processors and media are designed to come as close to infinitely malleable as possible, so they cannot be trusted authenticate transactions that are both critical and anonymous.
As for the promise of direct electronic democracy, it's laudable except that the voters would have to be identified in order to maintain accountability with error/fraud rates close to what we've had with paper ballots.
The computers are essentially "black boxes", and even trained technicians (like an MCSE) would be clueless about addressing determined fraud. It takes accomplished computer scientists specializing in security research to make sense of what went wrong in each local podunk locality -- not gonna happen.
Consider that currency is essentially anonymous. And that Wall St. and other financial sectors deal in a lot of transactions electronically. Never EVER are they performed anonymously! Have them remove identities from electronic transactions, and their whole business falls to pieces - why ask that democracy do such a thing with our political capital??
The essential logic of the vote transaction must be audit-able by a councilmember, poll worker or sherrif. So a computer-printed ballot passes muster, while an electro-magnetic digital one does not.
dismissing electronic voting off the bat when it's been successfully implemented in other countries is very shortsighted.
I am dimissing "1+1=4" here. The only countries I'm aware of started years after we did, which means they have almost no experience thus far (and even so, much of it bad).