It's an old fashion P2P protocol in which each user forwards only their inputs (e.g. keypresses) over the network to other users. Every user must run the full simulation locally, making total network traffic and resource usage O(n^2) with the number of users.
No, that doesn't appear correct. From the very page you linked to "In Croquet, each simulation has one router designated on the network. All inputs are sent to the router, and never directly to the simulation running on the machine on which the input is made. The router puts its own timestamp on the message and sends it out to everyone." I'm pretty sure that makes it O(n), not O(n^2). Twice as many clients means twice as many packets on the network, not four times as many.
The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching." --Assyrian tablet, c. 2800 BCE (allegedly)
I think something got lost in translation here. Or is a desire to write a book really a sign of the end times?
Only if you don't apply correct accounting. Total energy yield from photosynthetic organic material is always going to be less than (absorbed solar energy + energy to refine).
Wow. That's a bit pedantic, don't you think? I think most, if not all, people who think about the matter realize that the "correct" accounting is the energy we, humans, have to put into the process and how much we, humans, get out of it. I'm not really concerned with how hard it is for the Sun to generate that solar energy. For the same reason, when a company does it's accounting, it doesn't worry about how much debt the Treasury had to take on to create the money which flows through it. It's not "flawed". It's the reasoning which actually gives useful answers. I mean, come on, are we supposed to say solar is a poor energy choice because 99.99999% of the energy generated by the Sun is lost to outer space?
National lambdarail is slightly different. it's an ethernet network connecting all of the universities. and by ethernet, i mean OSI layer 1/2 are defined, the rest is up in the air. this means it CAN be used as an IP backbone, but its main purpose is to experiment in large scale networks (researching replacements for IP, for example, or experimenting with WDM over fiber).
At it's lowest level, it's a WDM network. They can provide layer 1, 2 or 3 connections to members. Each member has connection to the layer 3 IP network, which looks similar to Abilene. Members also have a separate physical port onto a layer 2 network. Using this option, you can get a VLAN directly between your site and another members site to do whatever you want on. Finally, members have the option of purchasing dedicated lambda's as well. That costs extra of course, since there is a fair amount of dedicated hardware required to provide a dedicated lambda. I2 was headed in a similar direction with the next build-out of their network, so I'm sure whatever merged entity results will provide similar functionality.
And clearly a joke, referring to the common belief he claimed he invented the internet.
Oh, I see. It's a "joke". Like the "joke" that Al Gore said he invented the Internet. See, I used to think the latter was a joke too. Until I learned a bit more a realized it's really just a lie. Now it just pisses me off. Telling lies about people in the course of political discussions isn't funny. It does a disservice to everyone.
It's pretty obvious nothing I can say can change your misconceptions about the constitution or what surveillance is actually done. So why bother?
What misconceptions? That the fourth amendment is generally considered to require court approval to perform surveillance on American citizens? That the Bush administration was ignoring this and performing "terrorist" surveillence without approval of the FISA court? Do you think I make this stuff up? It was even on Fox News for crying out loud.
Read outside your comfort zone sometime. Nice ad hominem attack. Do you even know what I read? No. You don't. You're just making stuff up again. It seems to be a common theme with the GOP and their flunkies. You do it. The "Charles Smith" blog you linked to was so full of blatant lies it's not even funny. I notice you didn't bother addressing any of those points. You call yourself "mostly libertarian". As an actual registered Libertarian who actually votes Libertarian, I have to say we don't need your help. If you want to help, stop lying so much. And stop falling for so many obvious falsehoods like you linked to earlier. It makes the rest of us look bad.
7 8 9 -- all of those will suffer from the same problems from people on channel 6. 802.11[bg] is not designed to work well and play with others.
Actually, you will see worse problems. 802.11 is in fact designed to work well with overlapping networks. Devices on overlapping networks will watch all the packets in the air on the same channel, including those on other networks. They will backoff when they see other devices sending packets. You can still get bad congestion of course, but the devices are at least trying to play nice.
If you switch to a neighboring channel, like 5 or 7, then the devices can't play nice any more. Instead of being able to hear and understand the traffic on other networks, it all just shows up as big blasts of noise. I actually did a bunch of testing of this years ago. If I put two AP's on channel 1 right next to each other and ran simultaneous transfers with two clients, the aggregate bandwidth was about 95% what I would get with two clients on 1 AP. But when I moved one AP to channel 2, it dropped to 75%-85%. At channels 1 and 3, it dropped into the 70%--75% range. After that, it climbed, getting back to just over 100% at channels 1 and 5. Channels 1-6 got me up to 180% of the original throughput and 1-7 up to 210% of the original. In retrospect, I had the AP's way too close which explains why I still saw interference at the 1-6 step. But assuming your neighbors aren't putting their access point 2 feet away from your own, this shouldn't be an issue.
So what's my point in all this? Stick to 1, 6 and 11 for everybodies sake. I have actually heard of some sites using four channels with, I guess, three channels of separation. So 1,4,7,10 for example. I haven't testing this and I'm not convinced it's really any better. Because the performance at three channels is about the same or a little worse than the same channel. It only starts to get better at four channels of separation, but then you have to use 1,5,9,13 and channels 12 and 13 aren't permitted by the FCC.
Hence, he didn't invent it. So your initial statement is clearly false. And the article you linked to has large doses of fabrication as well. Clipper chips were not going to be installed in every phone. And in no way can the Clipper-chip phones from AT&T be considered less secure than the regular unencrypted phones everyone uses anyway. Claiming that "Al Gore forgot to tell his audience was that he not only supported eavesdropping on Americans without court approval - he also chaired a project designed to execute just that in total secrecy. In short, Al Gore wanted to bug every phone, computer and fax in America" is just patently false. Clipper keys were going to be kept in escrow, and in no way did the program affect the administrations ability to tap phones one way or another. That would be CALEA, which apparently "Charles Smith" doesn't bother to mention. Probably because we are seeing huge expanses in the scope of CALEA under the GOP.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Clinton administration was exactly champions of civil rights. Look at Waco for example. But you could try to make your point using statements that are actually true instead of false. At least with the Clipper chip the administration paid lip service to due process, and claimed that keys would only be let out of escrow with a court order (not that I believed them). The Bush administration doesn't even pretend to follow the Constitution when it comes to spying on Americans.
Next to the things Bush has done we can contrast stuff like the Clipper Chip from the current liberal darling, Al Gore. Government monitoring of all encrypted communications? Al Gore really did invent that.
I'm wondering, do you have a source for that? Because from what I can tell, the Clipper Chip was in full swing in 1992. Which was, ahem, before Gore was in the White House.
FOIA Document from the FBI dated December 1992. Curiously, this document suggests that the FBI did not seek explicit approval from the Bush administration at the time because that might encourage the incoming Clinton administration to dismiss the policy out of hand. Clearly the Clinton administration did eventually sign off on the program, but "Gore really did invent that" is clearly a false statement.
That was a good theory, but they pulled the mercury out of childhood vaccines back in 2000 and it hasn't helped. If the thimerisol was causing autism, we should be seeing almost no new cases now that it's seven years later. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Yeah, the increase over the past few decades points to an environmental factor. But thimerisol is looking like a worse and worse candidate every day.
Being unable to meet demand only means bad things for Nintendo. Yeah, I'm sure Nintento execs are crying themselves to sleep at night about how bad things are going as compared to, say, Sony who has no problems meeting demand.
The demand doesn't vanish mysteriously once you can meet it with supply. It may dip as the buffer of people waiting to get one is emptied, but the steady desire for the system remains. The only thing the Wii and DS shortages accomplish is reduced sales for Nintendo.
Supply isn't free, or even cheap. Bringing new manufacturing capacity online takes time and investment. Making that investment when it may only be needed to satisfy short-term demand isn't necessarily a wise business move. In this case, who knows. But I'm pretty sure that Nintendo, who knows the actual costs involved, has a better idea than you.
But defrauding the shareholders by artificially increasing profits?
You point it out yourself. Artificially. Now that Dell is shipping AMD processors they are probably not getting the rebate from Intel anymore. Their profits are going to take a big hit for reasons which were not disclosed to investors. Had Dell been putting something in their FTC filings saying "$1 billion dollars of revenue are dependent upon exclusive marketing deals with Intel which we may not be able to maintain in the face of increasing customer demand for alternatives" or some such they would have been in the clear. But by hiding it, they set themselves up for trouble.
I would attribute it more to ineffective police and court systems and massive corruption as opposed to an income disparity.
Because clearly, there is no relationship between these three. How could there possibly be a relationship between having lots of desparately poor people and an overworked/ineffective court system? Or between having obscenely rich folks and corruption?
Sure, it's better than nothing. But is it better than a conventional encryption box which you can buy today for much cheaper? And works over any type of link?
Yeah, I noticed that too. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that quantum encryption is based on measuring the properties of single photons. Any sort of repeater or amplifier is going to replace the original photons with new ones. Even an EDFA or Ramen amp is replacing the photons which enter the amp with (multiple) new ones. Sure, they have identical properties for the purposes of classical equipment, but the quantum properties aren't preserved. That's the whole point. Nothing can interact with the transmitted photons without detection. A classical amp would be detected. And if you invented some quantum amplifier which could increase the distance without detection, that box could be used as a tap.
Basically, this is doomed to only be useful on short, dedicated, fiber circuits. The range can't be increased with current technology, and any future technology which can increase the range can almost certainly be used to copy (sorry, "teleport" as the quantum guys would say) the encrypted stream.
The end result is that if either are working after 3 or 4 years your doing well, and should really be looking for a replacement unit.
Wow! I never suspected. You should probably let Seagate know. I'm sure they will want to rethink their 5 year warranty.
Perhaps you buy really cut rate drives, but in my experience hard drives almost always outlast their usefulness. I've disposed of more drives due to a combination of obsolete busses and pathetic capacity than outright failures. If you are really seeing high failure rates after only three years, you should be looking for some external factor because that isn't normal.
most of the big sites he mentions don't use Sun hardware either. Google is pretty well know for using cheap hardware. Microsoft isn't exactly known for running on Sun stuff.
You're right, a lot of them don't. But the folks who do use a lot of Sun hardware tend to be the big players.
Sort of too bad though since I've spent enough time on Ultra 10s to have a certain fondness for Sun hardware.
Bah, kids these days. I spent many an hour doing sys-admin duties for a Sun 690MP server and a bunch of SparcStation 2 and SparcStation 5's back in the day;-) I don't think I ever fully got over the change to SysV-style Solaris from BSD-style SunOS.
These gel batteries can't provide the same sort of energy density as lithium ion batteries, but that's now a plus.
Um, no it's not a plus. Well, maybe for Sony since they can't seem to manufacture LiIon batteries reliably. But for the rest of the industry, I'm pretty sure lower engergy density (and hence shorter runtimes and/or larger batteries) is a minus. Otherwise we would all be running our laptops on alkalines.
Of course there are many, many more service providers but they will almost all go the way of YouTube; they'll get eaten by one of the majors.
The faulty logic here is that it presumes that new independent service providers aren't sprouting up every day. He sees the big trees in the forest, but misses the seeds and sprouts. Maybe that's just because the little guys don't buy pricy Sun hardware, so Sun doesn't see them. But they are there. I have no doubt that for every one web site that gets bought up by the big guys there are many more which don't.
What I see is that the Internet is an exceptionally fertile ground for seeds to sprout in. The existence of large companies such as Yahoo and Google doesn't change that. His comparison to the energy sector is flawed. The ease with which somebody can start up a new web site (sorry, "service provider") is in no way comparable to what it takes to start a new energy provider. Not even close.
It's this kind of nonsense which makes me wonder about the long term viability of Sun. It's no secret that cheap commodity boxes are eating them from the bottom up. So he spins this fairly tale about how all the small web sites (which don't run on Sun hardware) will simply cease to exist leaving only the mega sites (which do buy Sun hardware). Let me know how that works out for you.
Um, cause by design RFID tags have no power source, they rely on an induction current from the reader for power?
They have circuits in them, and wires. The fact that the power source is external is irrelevant. By your logic, a lamp can't have a switch because it relies on current from the wall for power. DOH!
While I have no insight into Apples development team or how they work, it is interesting to look at how long it took them to go from OS9 to OSX. From the public's point of view, it took less than 18 months. Internally, they spent maybe four or four and a half years turning OpenStep into OSX. Code-wise, I think the OS9->OSX switch is better compared to the Win95->Win2K transition. Which to be honest, Microsoft did in a time span comparable to the OSX release. Vista, on the other hand, is really more like a point upgrade in the 2K->XP->Vista train. Akin to the 10.0->10.1->10.2 etc upgrades. Looked at in that light, Microsoft is doing a really crappy job. XP was released October 25th, 2001. It's been over five years, and Apple has released 3 comparable upgrades and switched it's product line to a different architecture.
Taken from The Robservatory and Wikipedia:
December 20, 1996, Apple Computer announced its intention to purchase NeXT Mac OS 9, introduced by Apple Computer on 1999-10-23, 2000 Sep 13 10.0ß Public Beta 2001 Mar 24 10.0 Cheetah 2001 Sep 25 10.1 Puma 2002 Aug 23 10.2 Jaguar 2003 Oct 24 10.3 Panther 2005 Apr 29 10.4 Tiger
if some corporate whistle blower were to come forward, and show that Microsoft has used even one small piece of GPL'ed code in it's Windows product, the entire product would then be bound by the GPL
False. This is actually a little bit of M$ FUD which you have somehow bought into. If Microsoft was found to have infringing GPL code in Windows, one option would be to GPL all of Windows. The other, more likely option, would be to simply remove the offending code. The exact same think any open source project would do if it was found to have infringing code found in it.
The idea that companies need to be afraid of having their closed source application forced open because some GPL code slipped in is one of the FUD meme's the Microsoft throws around to try and limit open source adoption. The reality is that the only companies that get screwed by the GPL are the ones who insist on trying to distribute GPL binaries without source knowingly even after they've been asked not to.
It's not a sensor array, it's just LEDs emitting infrared light. The sensor is in the Wiimote.
Yeah, that's pretty funny he made that mistake. Even a casual glance at his picture of the the sensor bar shows that it's just LED's. First, there are the LED's. Plus, there just aren't enough traces/wires for their to be any meaningful sensor data someing out of it. The wiimote picture of the "LED emitter" reveals just the opposite. It looks nothing like an LED, and has something like 10 leads going into it.
Apparent lack of actions from Feds disappointing
on
Cybercrime — an Epidemic?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I don't think it's unreasonable to estimate that, in aggregate, spammers and the associated fraud is costing the country billions of dollars. I think it's a travesty that they don't seem to take the problem seriously. What I would do:
1) Stock pump scams. When one starts making the rounds (Cana Petrolium today judging by my mail), find out who made purchases of the stock in the previous week. Freeze their accounts until the individuals responsible can be dragged into an FBI office. If the FBI/SEC can't locate the individuals then it just means that the laws regulating the stock trade are jokes.
2) Phishing. Set up fake accounts with the banks being phished and submit them to the phishing sites. I'm sure the banks will be more than happy to help. As soon as anybody tries to transfer money in our out of the account, freeze the account on the other end.
3) Drug / Software scams. Same as #2. Set up fake accounts with Visa and MC. Submit them to the sites trying to 'sell' the stuff and wait for the account numbers to get re-used somewhere else (you didn't think any of these sites were doing anything other than harvesting CC numbers did you?). Follow the money.
If the Feds can't do these things, then I think it indicates that we may be at risk of a fairly catastrophic economic collapse. After all, if I can buy and sell stock illegally, take money out of bank accounts fraudulently and buy stuff with credit cards without authorization, and do it all anonymously, it's safe to say the criminals are going to win. If Bush would just declare these crooks to be 'cyberterrorists' and start subjecting them to extraordinary renditions and gitmo treatment, I bet his popularity would surge. And he would be doing something good for the country with his remaining two lame duck years.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an old fashion P2P protocol in which each user forwards only their inputs (e.g. keypresses) over the network to other users. Every user must run the full simulation locally, making total network traffic and resource usage O(n^2) with the number of users.
No, that doesn't appear correct. From the very page you linked to "In Croquet, each simulation has one router designated on the network. All inputs are sent to the router, and never directly to the simulation running on the machine on which the input is made. The router puts its own timestamp on the message and sends it out to everyone." I'm pretty sure that makes it O(n), not O(n^2). Twice as many clients means twice as many packets on the network, not four times as many.
The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound.
Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book,
and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching."
--Assyrian tablet, c. 2800 BCE (allegedly)
I think something got lost in translation here. Or is a desire to write a book really a sign of the end times?
Only if you don't apply correct accounting. Total energy yield from photosynthetic organic material is always going to be less than (absorbed solar energy + energy to refine).
Wow. That's a bit pedantic, don't you think? I think most, if not all, people who think about the matter realize that the "correct" accounting is the energy we, humans, have to put into the process and how much we, humans, get out of it. I'm not really concerned with how hard it is for the Sun to generate that solar energy. For the same reason, when a company does it's accounting, it doesn't worry about how much debt the Treasury had to take on to create the money which flows through it. It's not "flawed". It's the reasoning which actually gives useful answers. I mean, come on, are we supposed to say solar is a poor energy choice because 99.99999% of the energy generated by the Sun is lost to outer space?
National lambdarail is slightly different. it's an ethernet network connecting all of the universities. and by ethernet, i mean OSI layer 1/2 are defined, the rest is up in the air. this means it CAN be used as an IP backbone, but its main purpose is to experiment in large scale networks (researching replacements for IP, for example, or experimenting with WDM over fiber).
At it's lowest level, it's a WDM network. They can provide layer 1, 2 or 3 connections to members. Each member has connection to the layer 3 IP network, which looks similar to Abilene. Members also have a separate physical port onto a layer 2 network. Using this option, you can get a VLAN directly between your site and another members site to do whatever you want on. Finally, members have the option of purchasing dedicated lambda's as well. That costs extra of course, since there is a fair amount of dedicated hardware required to provide a dedicated lambda. I2 was headed in a similar direction with the next build-out of their network, so I'm sure whatever merged entity results will provide similar functionality.
And clearly a joke, referring to the common belief he claimed he invented the internet.
Oh, I see. It's a "joke". Like the "joke" that Al Gore said he invented the Internet. See, I used to think the latter was a joke too. Until I learned a bit more a realized it's really just a lie. Now it just pisses me off. Telling lies about people in the course of political discussions isn't funny. It does a disservice to everyone.
It's pretty obvious nothing I can say can change your misconceptions about the constitution or what surveillance is actually done. So why bother?
What misconceptions? That the fourth amendment is generally considered to require court approval to perform surveillance on American citizens? That the Bush administration was ignoring this and performing "terrorist" surveillence without approval of the FISA court? Do you think I make this stuff up? It was even on Fox News for crying out loud.
Read outside your comfort zone sometime. Nice ad hominem attack. Do you even know what I read? No. You don't. You're just making stuff up again. It seems to be a common theme with the GOP and their flunkies. You do it. The "Charles Smith" blog you linked to was so full of blatant lies it's not even funny. I notice you didn't bother addressing any of those points. You call yourself "mostly libertarian". As an actual registered Libertarian who actually votes Libertarian, I have to say we don't need your help. If you want to help, stop lying so much. And stop falling for so many obvious falsehoods like you linked to earlier. It makes the rest of us look bad.
7 8 9 -- all of those will suffer from the same problems from people on channel 6. 802.11[bg] is not designed to work well and play with others.
Actually, you will see worse problems. 802.11 is in fact designed to work well with overlapping networks. Devices on overlapping networks will watch all the packets in the air on the same channel, including those on other networks. They will backoff when they see other devices sending packets. You can still get bad congestion of course, but the devices are at least trying to play nice.
If you switch to a neighboring channel, like 5 or 7, then the devices can't play nice any more. Instead of being able to hear and understand the traffic on other networks, it all just shows up as big blasts of noise. I actually did a bunch of testing of this years ago. If I put two AP's on channel 1 right next to each other and ran simultaneous transfers with two clients, the aggregate bandwidth was about 95% what I would get with two clients on 1 AP. But when I moved one AP to channel 2, it dropped to 75%-85%. At channels 1 and 3, it dropped into the 70%--75% range. After that, it climbed, getting back to just over 100% at channels 1 and 5. Channels 1-6 got me up to 180% of the original throughput and 1-7 up to 210% of the original. In retrospect, I had the AP's way too close which explains why I still saw interference at the 1-6 step. But assuming your neighbors aren't putting their access point 2 feet away from your own, this shouldn't be an issue.
So what's my point in all this? Stick to 1, 6 and 11 for everybodies sake. I have actually heard of some sites using four channels with, I guess, three channels of separation. So 1,4,7,10 for example. I haven't testing this and I'm not convinced it's really any better. Because the performance at three channels is about the same or a little worse than the same channel. It only starts to get better at four channels of separation, but then you have to use 1,5,9,13 and channels 12 and 13 aren't permitted by the FCC.
I'll be damned, you aren't even making that up...
http://www.wordreference.com/fren/teton
It was underway before he got in the Whitehouse
Hence, he didn't invent it. So your initial statement is clearly false. And the article you linked to has large doses of fabrication as well. Clipper chips were not going to be installed in every phone. And in no way can the Clipper-chip phones from AT&T be considered less secure than the regular unencrypted phones everyone uses anyway. Claiming that "Al Gore forgot to tell his audience was that he not only supported eavesdropping on Americans without court approval - he also chaired a project designed to execute just that in total secrecy. In short, Al Gore wanted to bug every phone, computer and fax in America" is just patently false. Clipper keys were going to be kept in escrow, and in no way did the program affect the administrations ability to tap phones one way or another. That would be CALEA, which apparently "Charles Smith" doesn't bother to mention. Probably because we are seeing huge expanses in the scope of CALEA under the GOP.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Clinton administration was exactly champions of civil rights. Look at Waco for example. But you could try to make your point using statements that are actually true instead of false. At least with the Clipper chip the administration paid lip service to due process, and claimed that keys would only be let out of escrow with a court order (not that I believed them). The Bush administration doesn't even pretend to follow the Constitution when it comes to spying on Americans.
Next to the things Bush has done we can contrast stuff like the Clipper Chip from the current liberal darling, Al Gore. Government monitoring of all encrypted communications? Al Gore really did invent that.
I'm wondering, do you have a source for that? Because from what I can tell, the Clipper Chip was in full swing in 1992. Which was, ahem, before Gore was in the White House.
FOIA Document from the FBI dated December 1992. Curiously, this document suggests that the FBI did not seek explicit approval from the Bush administration at the time because that might encourage the incoming Clinton administration to dismiss the policy out of hand. Clearly the Clinton administration did eventually sign off on the program, but "Gore really did invent that" is clearly a false statement.
That was a good theory, but they pulled the mercury out of childhood vaccines back in 2000 and it hasn't helped. If the thimerisol was causing autism, we should be seeing almost no new cases now that it's seven years later. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Yeah, the increase over the past few decades points to an environmental factor. But thimerisol is looking like a worse and worse candidate every day.
Being unable to meet demand only means bad things for Nintendo.
Yeah, I'm sure Nintento execs are crying themselves to sleep at night about how bad things are going as compared to, say, Sony who has no problems meeting demand.
The demand doesn't vanish mysteriously once you can meet it with supply. It may dip as the buffer of people waiting to get one is emptied, but the steady desire for the system remains. The only thing the Wii and DS shortages accomplish is reduced sales for Nintendo.
Supply isn't free, or even cheap. Bringing new manufacturing capacity online takes time and investment. Making that investment when it may only be needed to satisfy short-term demand isn't necessarily a wise business move. In this case, who knows. But I'm pretty sure that Nintendo, who knows the actual costs involved, has a better idea than you.
But defrauding the shareholders by artificially increasing profits?
You point it out yourself. Artificially. Now that Dell is shipping AMD processors they are probably not getting the rebate from Intel anymore. Their profits are going to take a big hit for reasons which were not disclosed to investors. Had Dell been putting something in their FTC filings saying "$1 billion dollars of revenue are dependent upon exclusive marketing deals with Intel which we may not be able to maintain in the face of increasing customer demand for alternatives" or some such they would have been in the clear. But by hiding it, they set themselves up for trouble.
I would attribute it more to ineffective police and court systems and massive corruption as opposed to an income disparity.
Because clearly, there is no relationship between these three. How could there possibly be a relationship between having lots of desparately poor people and an overworked/ineffective court system? Or between having obscenely rich folks and corruption?
Somebody mod parent up! As funny that is. And whatever you do, don't tell him what that little nine means after the price of a gallon of gas.
Sure, it's better than nothing. But is it better than a conventional encryption box which you can buy today for much cheaper? And works over any type of link?
Yeah, I noticed that too. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that quantum encryption is based on measuring the properties of single photons. Any sort of repeater or amplifier is going to replace the original photons with new ones. Even an EDFA or Ramen amp is replacing the photons which enter the amp with (multiple) new ones. Sure, they have identical properties for the purposes of classical equipment, but the quantum properties aren't preserved. That's the whole point. Nothing can interact with the transmitted photons without detection. A classical amp would be detected. And if you invented some quantum amplifier which could increase the distance without detection, that box could be used as a tap.
Basically, this is doomed to only be useful on short, dedicated, fiber circuits. The range can't be increased with current technology, and any future technology which can increase the range can almost certainly be used to copy (sorry, "teleport" as the quantum guys would say) the encrypted stream.
The end result is that if either are working after 3 or 4 years your doing well, and should really be looking for a replacement unit.
Wow! I never suspected. You should probably let Seagate know. I'm sure they will want to rethink their 5 year warranty.
Perhaps you buy really cut rate drives, but in my experience hard drives almost always outlast their usefulness. I've disposed of more drives due to a combination of obsolete busses and pathetic capacity than outright failures. If you are really seeing high failure rates after only three years, you should be looking for some external factor because that isn't normal.
most of the big sites he mentions don't use Sun hardware either. Google is pretty well know for using cheap hardware. Microsoft isn't exactly known for running on Sun stuff.
;-) I don't think I ever fully got over the change to SysV-style Solaris from BSD-style SunOS.
You're right, a lot of them don't. But the folks who do use a lot of Sun hardware tend to be the big players.
Sort of too bad though since I've spent enough time on Ultra 10s to have a certain fondness for Sun hardware.
Bah, kids these days. I spent many an hour doing sys-admin duties for a Sun 690MP server and a bunch of SparcStation 2 and SparcStation 5's back in the day
These gel batteries can't provide the same sort of energy density as lithium ion batteries, but that's now a plus.
Um, no it's not a plus. Well, maybe for Sony since they can't seem to manufacture LiIon batteries reliably. But for the rest of the industry, I'm pretty sure lower engergy density (and hence shorter runtimes and/or larger batteries) is a minus. Otherwise we would all be running our laptops on alkalines.
From the blog:
Of course there are many, many more service providers but they will almost all go the way of YouTube; they'll get eaten by one of the majors.
The faulty logic here is that it presumes that new independent service providers aren't sprouting up every day. He sees the big trees in the forest, but misses the seeds and sprouts. Maybe that's just because the little guys don't buy pricy Sun hardware, so Sun doesn't see them. But they are there. I have no doubt that for every one web site that gets bought up by the big guys there are many more which don't.
What I see is that the Internet is an exceptionally fertile ground for seeds to sprout in. The existence of large companies such as Yahoo and Google doesn't change that. His comparison to the energy sector is flawed. The ease with which somebody can start up a new web site (sorry, "service provider") is in no way comparable to what it takes to start a new energy provider. Not even close.
It's this kind of nonsense which makes me wonder about the long term viability of Sun. It's no secret that cheap commodity boxes are eating them from the bottom up. So he spins this fairly tale about how all the small web sites (which don't run on Sun hardware) will simply cease to exist leaving only the mega sites (which do buy Sun hardware). Let me know how that works out for you.
Um, cause by design RFID tags have no power source, they rely on an induction current from the reader for power?
They have circuits in them, and wires. The fact that the power source is external is irrelevant. By your logic, a lamp can't have a switch because it relies on current from the wall for power. DOH!
While I have no insight into Apples development team or how they work, it is interesting to look at how long it took them to go from OS9 to OSX. From the public's point of view, it took less than 18 months. Internally, they spent maybe four or four and a half years turning OpenStep into OSX. Code-wise, I think the OS9->OSX switch is better compared to the Win95->Win2K transition. Which to be honest, Microsoft did in a time span comparable to the OSX release. Vista, on the other hand, is really more like a point upgrade in the 2K->XP->Vista train. Akin to the 10.0->10.1->10.2 etc upgrades. Looked at in that light, Microsoft is doing a really crappy job. XP was released October 25th, 2001. It's been over five years, and Apple has released 3 comparable upgrades and switched it's product line to a different architecture.
Taken from The Robservatory and Wikipedia:
December 20, 1996, Apple Computer announced its intention to purchase NeXT
Mac OS 9, introduced by Apple Computer on 1999-10-23,
2000 Sep 13 10.0ß Public Beta
2001 Mar 24 10.0 Cheetah
2001 Sep 25 10.1 Puma
2002 Aug 23 10.2 Jaguar
2003 Oct 24 10.3 Panther
2005 Apr 29 10.4 Tiger
if some corporate whistle blower were to come forward, and show that Microsoft has used even one small piece of GPL'ed code in it's Windows product, the entire product would then be bound by the GPL
False. This is actually a little bit of M$ FUD which you have somehow bought into. If Microsoft was found to have infringing GPL code in Windows, one option would be to GPL all of Windows. The other, more likely option, would be to simply remove the offending code. The exact same think any open source project would do if it was found to have infringing code found in it.
The idea that companies need to be afraid of having their closed source application forced open because some GPL code slipped in is one of the FUD meme's the Microsoft throws around to try and limit open source adoption. The reality is that the only companies that get screwed by the GPL are the ones who insist on trying to distribute GPL binaries without source knowingly even after they've been asked not to.
It's not a sensor array, it's just LEDs emitting infrared light.
The sensor is in the Wiimote.
Yeah, that's pretty funny he made that mistake. Even a casual glance at his picture of the the sensor bar shows that it's just LED's. First, there are the LED's. Plus, there just aren't enough traces/wires for their to be any meaningful sensor data someing out of it. The wiimote picture of the "LED emitter" reveals just the opposite. It looks nothing like an LED, and has something like 10 leads going into it.
I don't think it's unreasonable to estimate that, in aggregate, spammers and the associated fraud is costing the country billions of dollars. I think it's a travesty that they don't seem to take the problem seriously. What I would do:
1) Stock pump scams. When one starts making the rounds (Cana Petrolium today judging by my mail), find out who made purchases of the stock in the previous week. Freeze their accounts until the individuals responsible can be dragged into an FBI office. If the FBI/SEC can't locate the individuals then it just means that the laws regulating the stock trade are jokes.
2) Phishing. Set up fake accounts with the banks being phished and submit them to the phishing sites. I'm sure the banks will be more than happy to help. As soon as anybody tries to transfer money in our out of the account, freeze the account on the other end.
3) Drug / Software scams. Same as #2. Set up fake accounts with Visa and MC. Submit them to the sites trying to 'sell' the stuff and wait for the account numbers to get re-used somewhere else (you didn't think any of these sites were doing anything other than harvesting CC numbers did you?). Follow the money.
If the Feds can't do these things, then I think it indicates that we may be at risk of a fairly catastrophic economic collapse. After all, if I can buy and sell stock illegally, take money out of bank accounts fraudulently and buy stuff with credit cards without authorization, and do it all anonymously, it's safe to say the criminals are going to win. If Bush would just declare these crooks to be 'cyberterrorists' and start subjecting them to extraordinary renditions and gitmo treatment, I bet his popularity would surge. And he would be doing something good for the country with his remaining two lame duck years.