I get what you're saying, but take the example from the article summary as case in point: "... the featureless steppes of Kazakhstan, about 50 miles outside the unheard-of town of Arkalyk." Maybe during those silent minutes of terrain rolling by, the commentator could speak a few sentences about the area of Kazakhstan where the landing occurred, maybe throw out some interesting trivia, give a short history of Arkalyk? And yes, shut the hell up when something interesting starts happening.
Location. If someone has to walk 3 miles to go to the nearest place with a computer lab, they aren't going to go that often. If they have a laptop close by, they are more apt to use it.
How far do you have to walk to charge the battery? A lot of people receiving these laptops don't have electricity. If you need to walk to town to plug in, you might as well use a nicely equipped computer while you're there instead of some cheap laptop.
When I type, I do not think about letters. I imagine entire words. I do not think about spelling. People do not achieve high typing rates by working consciously at the level of letters. Having said that, this would be a godsend for people who do not have the use of their hands.
The boss is not a government entity. You drew this distinction yourself a few posts above. You're not being clever, you're just an obnoxious twit. Wanna sue me for saying so? Get in line, buddy.
They do? My wife runs a small online business selling cloth diapers. If you Google for "sex toys +site:mywifesdomain.com" it somehow returns a hit for her site's search page, on those terms, which says "No results found." I guess my wife is spamming? Maybe you should "slam" her. Actually wait, please don't. No, what's more likely is that some link farm somewhere has linked to my wife's site under a bunch of irrelevant terms, for god knows what reasons. Honestly I don't know how exactly it happens, but it happens EVERYWHERE. Have you never USED google? These link farms fuck everything up.
No, I'm not going to prove it to you by posting the actual domain. The last thing our pathetic little virtual server needs is a Slashdotting, even a minor one. But I'm sure other people will post their own examples.
Throttling? Comcast apparently blocks BitTorrent period, at least in my district. It stopped working about 6 months ago. Thanks for doing me a favor and preventing me from "infringing" by downloading an Ubuntu disc. Assholes.
So while we may talk about how anything can be broken with physical access, most of the time, especially for Slashdotter's systems, it's just not worth the effort. What we can get off the shelf, TPM or TXT, etc, is probably good enough, probably even overkill.
What you're missing is the other application of truly secure hardware -- absolutely, totally, brutally locked down DRM mechanisms. To massive IP companies, it's probably worth it to pour a few hundred million into figuring out how to cheaply build a truly hardware-secure platform. Once they have that, only the analog hole remains. Eventually, when people stop manufacturing analog devices, even that will disappear, and the only people who will have control over media will be the rights-holders and the few hobbyist who are capable of building their own analog devices.
I suggest you look into any further legal options or get a lawyer who knows what they are doing next time.
My wife was (still is) pregnant during the worst parts of it. Adding money problems on top of the stress of an expanding family and a wife who can't work would have been VERY difficult. The insurance company literally paid EVERYTHING. Before turning to them, I did consult with an extremely good attorney and he was telling us that similar cases he'd tried in the past averaged about $5000 per week. Okay, maybe the guy was full of crap and I should have looked around some more. Meanwhile, that one month timeframe is ticking down until we had to respond to the lawsuit. Calling insurance was our last resort, and I was completely stunned when they not only took the case but told us it would not affect our premiums and we wouldn't have to pay court costs. Really, what would you have done in that situation?
True -- at first glance there are serious challenges to building a hardware security primitive. But if a cheap device was ever created, it would be a very, very bad day. Control over all the hardware would be in the hands of the key-holders alone...
The consequences of speaking the truth and criticizing someone else's unacceptable behavior should not be 10 months of agony and a payout to a person who shows a clear pattern of suing their clients exactly the way she sued my wife. You are an idiot.
The lawyer didn't suck, but he was definitely not used to trying these kinds of cases. Our insurance assigned the case to a legal contracting company which normally handles all of their auto insurance claims. I asked around, and it turns out that these sorts of legal contractors typically shoot for quick closing and low damage awards. Their goal is not to win the case but to minimize exposure for the insurance company and the defendant. I almost wonder whether this was the planned outcome all along. Because the plaintiff won her case, she can't appeal it and drag the insurance company back through the entire process again. For all I know, that was the strategy on purpose.
I am, however, a bit disillusioned about free speech now. As far as I can tell, there isn't any. It's a lie.
Nope. My wife found this out the hard way this year. She was sued for "defamatory" statements she made in a formal complaint against a board-certified professional. During the court case, which was before a jury, at the plaintiff's insistence, the issue of whether or not the statements were true was not even a topic of discussion. The only thing that mattered, to both the judge and the jury apparently, was whether my wife's comments caused damage to the plaintiff's reputation. Well, of course they did. That's why they are called "complaints." Bam, $5000 judgment against my wife. Could have been worse -- the plaintiff was asking for $75,000. Thank God our homeowners insurance had our ass. We didn't pay a dime.
It was true fifty years ago, and it's still true today: If I have access to the hardware, you're screwed.
Hardware safety is like thread safety. It originates at the lowest levels and percolates upward. In thread safety, the lowest levels are primitives like interlocked exchange. On top of this, we build spin-locks. On top of those we build critical sections. Etc. Hardware can be made secure by making it tamper-resistant. Cryptographic ICs can be rigged to self-destruct when somebody opens the package. Given a secure cryptographic chip, hardware security can be assembled on top of it. I'm not willing to go out on a limb and say that we have TRULY secure cryptographic chips, but if and when we do, we can built unconditionally secure hardware on top of them just like we build thread safety out of interlocked exchanges.
Threatening to jail constituents for criticizing you? What exactly is the message you are trying to send -- which horrific evil figure of the past and present are you trying to resemble? Are you shooting for Stalin, or are you trying for something a little fresher, like Ahmadinejad?
It isn't a boycott unless paying customers leave. Every time I see an article like this there are always a slew of people who say "I'm not a customer of XXX, and I certainly never will be now!" I think Verizon is probably yawning right now. For a boycott to work, people who were a source of income to the company need to CEASE being that source of income. Otherwise it's just mental masturbation. The people who are actually customers always seem to be able to find an excuse not to take action. Personal convenience seems to trump ethics more and more.
It's not that I don't understand your position. I feel the same way. But we aren't the ones who can change the situation.
Ever seen somebody die of cancer? If you haven't, find somebody who knows someone who has and ask them if dying of cancer was pretty much the same as, say, dying instantly in a car crash.
We're all going to die some day, so why not die in an excruciating, pathetic, drawn-out way that causes your entire family to suffer? That's what you're saying?
(Has nothing to do with the claims from the article, which are bullshit)
As others have pointed out there is development time and compile time associated with C++
Why does compile time matter? How much time is spent compiling vs. testing? At my company, building the product core takes 7.5 minutes. Putting it through the full set of release-gating tests takes, on average, about three weeks.
Or are you saying you don't test your code? In my experience, people who tout the lack of compilation as an advantage tend to be the same people who throw code into production without even basic testing.
Come on people, are you dense? The idea is to create a game where success in the game is linked to personal health improvement in real life. If you don't like that sort of concept, don't play that particular game. I have no idea where you get the idea that this would be applied to all online environments.
Which is why watermarking is inherently a better solution. Watermarking enables rights owners to identify pirates after the fact instead of restricting the rights of all users by default. It's reactive instead of paranoid. If an insider duplicates a distribution it WILL be tracked back to the theater and probably the guilty party, if sufficient records are kept.
The usual argument I hear against watermarking is that it damages the content. For one, I think the technologies are getting better. Second, is that really such a terrible price to pay to avoid restrictive and authoritarian DRM technologies? Let's face it, the concept of IP is not going to go away, barring some kind of worldwide economic revolution. If we can give companies ways of tracking and enforcing their intellectual rights WITHOUT trying to restrict the use of the media, surely that's the best possible solution.
Lets try to find life that has nothing to do with the life we know and endure on this planet and would die if it tried to live amongst us.
No. What you are saying is basically, "We should be looking for something we can't imagine." I'd like to point out that this is basically the same as saying "Let's find some shit," and doesn't help whatsoever in directing us WHERE we ought to be looking for life. If you want to find life, you need some kind of strategy to narrow down the billions of possible places to look to something that's likely to turn up some results. Looking for something that, by definition, you have no idea how to look for, is not a fruitful use of resources.
Water, carbon, nitrogen, these are not rare materials in the universe. Chances are pretty good that if life could form from these materials here, it could form elsewhere. And we know WHAT to look for to recognize the signs of life as we know it. Only if we look long and hard, and find no signs of life as we know it anywhere in the measurable universe, should we turn to such vague propositions as "Let's look for something we can't imagine."
Slashdot Mirror
I get what you're saying, but take the example from the article summary as case in point: "... the featureless steppes of Kazakhstan, about 50 miles outside the unheard-of town of Arkalyk." Maybe during those silent minutes of terrain rolling by, the commentator could speak a few sentences about the area of Kazakhstan where the landing occurred, maybe throw out some interesting trivia, give a short history of Arkalyk? And yes, shut the hell up when something interesting starts happening.
Location. If someone has to walk 3 miles to go to the nearest place with a computer lab, they aren't going to go that often. If they have a laptop close by, they are more apt to use it.
How far do you have to walk to charge the battery? A lot of people receiving these laptops don't have electricity. If you need to walk to town to plug in, you might as well use a nicely equipped computer while you're there instead of some cheap laptop.
When I type, I do not think about letters. I imagine entire words. I do not think about spelling. People do not achieve high typing rates by working consciously at the level of letters. Having said that, this would be a godsend for people who do not have the use of their hands.
The boss is not a government entity. You drew this distinction yourself a few posts above. You're not being clever, you're just an obnoxious twit. Wanna sue me for saying so? Get in line, buddy.
They do? My wife runs a small online business selling cloth diapers. If you Google for "sex toys +site:mywifesdomain.com" it somehow returns a hit for her site's search page, on those terms, which says "No results found." I guess my wife is spamming? Maybe you should "slam" her. Actually wait, please don't. No, what's more likely is that some link farm somewhere has linked to my wife's site under a bunch of irrelevant terms, for god knows what reasons. Honestly I don't know how exactly it happens, but it happens EVERYWHERE. Have you never USED google? These link farms fuck everything up.
No, I'm not going to prove it to you by posting the actual domain. The last thing our pathetic little virtual server needs is a Slashdotting, even a minor one. But I'm sure other people will post their own examples.
Throttling? Comcast apparently blocks BitTorrent period, at least in my district. It stopped working about 6 months ago. Thanks for doing me a favor and preventing me from "infringing" by downloading an Ubuntu disc. Assholes.
So while we may talk about how anything can be broken with physical access, most of the time, especially for Slashdotter's systems, it's just not worth the effort. What we can get off the shelf, TPM or TXT, etc, is probably good enough, probably even overkill.
What you're missing is the other application of truly secure hardware -- absolutely, totally, brutally locked down DRM mechanisms. To massive IP companies, it's probably worth it to pour a few hundred million into figuring out how to cheaply build a truly hardware-secure platform. Once they have that, only the analog hole remains. Eventually, when people stop manufacturing analog devices, even that will disappear, and the only people who will have control over media will be the rights-holders and the few hobbyist who are capable of building their own analog devices.
I suggest you look into any further legal options or get a lawyer who knows what they are doing next time.
My wife was (still is) pregnant during the worst parts of it. Adding money problems on top of the stress of an expanding family and a wife who can't work would have been VERY difficult. The insurance company literally paid EVERYTHING. Before turning to them, I did consult with an extremely good attorney and he was telling us that similar cases he'd tried in the past averaged about $5000 per week. Okay, maybe the guy was full of crap and I should have looked around some more. Meanwhile, that one month timeframe is ticking down until we had to respond to the lawsuit. Calling insurance was our last resort, and I was completely stunned when they not only took the case but told us it would not affect our premiums and we wouldn't have to pay court costs. Really, what would you have done in that situation?
Cost? :P
True -- at first glance there are serious challenges to building a hardware security primitive. But if a cheap device was ever created, it would be a very, very bad day. Control over all the hardware would be in the hands of the key-holders alone...
The consequences of speaking the truth and criticizing someone else's unacceptable behavior should not be 10 months of agony and a payout to a person who shows a clear pattern of suing their clients exactly the way she sued my wife. You are an idiot.
The lawyer didn't suck, but he was definitely not used to trying these kinds of cases. Our insurance assigned the case to a legal contracting company which normally handles all of their auto insurance claims. I asked around, and it turns out that these sorts of legal contractors typically shoot for quick closing and low damage awards. Their goal is not to win the case but to minimize exposure for the insurance company and the defendant. I almost wonder whether this was the planned outcome all along. Because the plaintiff won her case, she can't appeal it and drag the insurance company back through the entire process again. For all I know, that was the strategy on purpose.
I am, however, a bit disillusioned about free speech now. As far as I can tell, there isn't any. It's a lie.
Washington County, Oregon.
So truth as a defense doesn't count?
Nope. My wife found this out the hard way this year. She was sued for "defamatory" statements she made in a formal complaint against a board-certified professional. During the court case, which was before a jury, at the plaintiff's insistence, the issue of whether or not the statements were true was not even a topic of discussion. The only thing that mattered, to both the judge and the jury apparently, was whether my wife's comments caused damage to the plaintiff's reputation. Well, of course they did. That's why they are called "complaints." Bam, $5000 judgment against my wife. Could have been worse -- the plaintiff was asking for $75,000. Thank God our homeowners insurance had our ass. We didn't pay a dime.
It was true fifty years ago, and it's still true today: If I have access to the hardware, you're screwed.
Hardware safety is like thread safety. It originates at the lowest levels and percolates upward. In thread safety, the lowest levels are primitives like interlocked exchange. On top of this, we build spin-locks. On top of those we build critical sections. Etc. Hardware can be made secure by making it tamper-resistant. Cryptographic ICs can be rigged to self-destruct when somebody opens the package. Given a secure cryptographic chip, hardware security can be assembled on top of it. I'm not willing to go out on a limb and say that we have TRULY secure cryptographic chips, but if and when we do, we can built unconditionally secure hardware on top of them just like we build thread safety out of interlocked exchanges.
Threatening to jail constituents for criticizing you? What exactly is the message you are trying to send -- which horrific evil figure of the past and present are you trying to resemble? Are you shooting for Stalin, or are you trying for something a little fresher, like Ahmadinejad?
Your rig weighs 74.75 tons? I think I've been bested.
It isn't a boycott unless paying customers leave. Every time I see an article like this there are always a slew of people who say "I'm not a customer of XXX, and I certainly never will be now!" I think Verizon is probably yawning right now. For a boycott to work, people who were a source of income to the company need to CEASE being that source of income. Otherwise it's just mental masturbation. The people who are actually customers always seem to be able to find an excuse not to take action. Personal convenience seems to trump ethics more and more.
It's not that I don't understand your position. I feel the same way. But we aren't the ones who can change the situation.
"I'm from Vancouver, a suburb of Portland, Oregon."
Problem solved. ;-)
Ever seen somebody die of cancer? If you haven't, find somebody who knows someone who has and ask them if dying of cancer was pretty much the same as, say, dying instantly in a car crash.
We're all going to die some day, so why not die in an excruciating, pathetic, drawn-out way that causes your entire family to suffer? That's what you're saying?
(Has nothing to do with the claims from the article, which are bullshit)
As others have pointed out there is development time and compile time associated with C++
Why does compile time matter? How much time is spent compiling vs. testing? At my company, building the product core takes 7.5 minutes. Putting it through the full set of release-gating tests takes, on average, about three weeks.
Or are you saying you don't test your code? In my experience, people who tout the lack of compilation as an advantage tend to be the same people who throw code into production without even basic testing.
Stating that there is a pattern in something, and mathematically describing it in accurate detail are two very different things.
Come on people, are you dense? The idea is to create a game where success in the game is linked to personal health improvement in real life. If you don't like that sort of concept, don't play that particular game. I have no idea where you get the idea that this would be applied to all online environments.
Yes, I somehow wrote helium instead of hydrogen. I was going to post a correction but figure somebody else would anyway.
Which is why watermarking is inherently a better solution. Watermarking enables rights owners to identify pirates after the fact instead of restricting the rights of all users by default. It's reactive instead of paranoid. If an insider duplicates a distribution it WILL be tracked back to the theater and probably the guilty party, if sufficient records are kept.
The usual argument I hear against watermarking is that it damages the content. For one, I think the technologies are getting better. Second, is that really such a terrible price to pay to avoid restrictive and authoritarian DRM technologies? Let's face it, the concept of IP is not going to go away, barring some kind of worldwide economic revolution. If we can give companies ways of tracking and enforcing their intellectual rights WITHOUT trying to restrict the use of the media, surely that's the best possible solution.
Lets try to find life that has nothing to do with the life we know and endure on this planet and would die if it tried to live amongst us.
No. What you are saying is basically, "We should be looking for something we can't imagine." I'd like to point out that this is basically the same as saying "Let's find some shit," and doesn't help whatsoever in directing us WHERE we ought to be looking for life. If you want to find life, you need some kind of strategy to narrow down the billions of possible places to look to something that's likely to turn up some results. Looking for something that, by definition, you have no idea how to look for, is not a fruitful use of resources.
Water, carbon, nitrogen, these are not rare materials in the universe. Chances are pretty good that if life could form from these materials here, it could form elsewhere. And we know WHAT to look for to recognize the signs of life as we know it. Only if we look long and hard, and find no signs of life as we know it anywhere in the measurable universe, should we turn to such vague propositions as "Let's look for something we can't imagine."