The Z600 in 4Q10 is the first Atom supposed to go into Smartphones. What Intel bought are not general purpose CPUs like Atom. It's the high frequency chips talking to the mobile base stations. Think "modem chips for mobiles". The chips running applications on the phones are totally different ones.
No it doesn't. Infineon hasn't made RAM in a long time. They sold off their RAM business in 2006 naming it "Qimonda". in January 2009 Qimonda declared bankruptcy.
Let's create preferred lanes for Mercedes, Lexus and BMW drivers. After all, these people paid a lot more than Al Bundy for his Dodge and they pay more taxes as well. So it's entirely fair they get preferred treatment and lower driving latency (get to their destination faster). They're businessmen and women, so their needs are different from the normal people. We still have enough other roads for all the other drivers, don't worry.
It's hard to believe people will accept this kind of thing being installed on their computers, so I can't wait to see how Hadopi moves forward with it.
Easy: when HADOPI detects the first P2P usage via their network sniffing, they don't just send a letter, but also mandate that the user installs said spyware. Of course hilarity ensues if the user uses Linux or OSX or Android or whatever.
Which one of the leaked documents exposed an "unvarnished truth" to the world that wasn't known or at least expected before hand?
Just like in court "expected" doesn't cut it when you need PROOF.
As for truth: little things like hushed up friendly fire that cost allies (Canadians) lives. The canadians are sorta pissed about that, as they should be.
Or US death squadrons operating from german barracks in northern Afghanistan. That's fairly big news since all our parliament members, the ones responsible for the.af invasion, proclaim it's news to them. Such death squads are illegal under german law as is torture, so knowing about such things is really bad election mojo. Of course not really knowing what happens in a place they send people to kill and get killed isn't exactly a endorsement of their "leadership" either...
So while I dunno what new things they exposed in the US, but the world, and the current afghan war, is more than a little bit of US politics.
Yes we do. Here's why: You have two choices: Broadband which is slow but has a flatrate, or PSTN which you pay per minute and is a lot slower to boot, resulting in higher costs for even less bytes transmitted.
As long as the ISP is upfront about this when ordering, it's no problem. Admittedly this is a pretty big IF with your average ISP, but it's all that can be done. I have two relatives, one lives in a small city (~15k-20k residents), the other out in the boondocks. The small city gets only 3MBps instead of the usual 6MBps DSL city wide due to bad, old wires, the other gets around 600 kBps due to wires and distance. For both, DSL was a no brainer compared to PSTN: at least ten times faster than the analog modem and no ticking clock in the background.
It's not the speeds that are important in Europe, it's the the ticking clock which is always running when using the phone network for Internet access.
There already was a public talk about this GSM vulnerability last december. Back then, the group cracking the protocol didn't have the hard/software to demultiplex the connections a GSM basestation has to handle in realtime. That problem is now solved and so the hack is fully functional. The rainbowtables needed to crack the protocol were publicly created for almost all of 2009. The GSM industry had PLENTY of time to react and get their shit together, instead they stonewalled, ignored and threatened the hacking group as Mr. Piaget described back in his December 2009 talk. The DECT industry group for cordless phones who use a similar encryption method but weaker as GSM had their protocol examined bofore that in 2008 or so by the same people. When the hackers approached the DECT people they were basically welcomed and both, DECT group and hackers, worked together on fixing the protocol, spec and especially implementations. Ironically the DECT industry group and the GSM association is made of largely of the same companies...
Science does not have the luxury to hide its underlying data, no matter how good the motives. Ever.
If science cannot survive attack by well funded partisan hacks, then it's worthless as a method. Reality is what doesn't go away after you close your eyes. Either climate change doesn't go away no matter what Exxon et al. say, then their think tank "studies" just contradict reality and are doomed anyways. Or serious flaws are found in the theory. It has to sink or swim on its own merit, not because some institution or other says "we looked at the data and we say so. Trust us we're the experts".
Mr. Phil Jones needs to make up his mind what he wants to be: a politician or a scientists. For politicians data hiding, to deny an advantage to a political opponent, is normal mode of operation. For a scientist it is a cardinal sin and immediately disqualifies for any serious research.
It's not a problem. The servers, and companies running these TLDs are american companies running their servers in the US. As such, they have to obey US laws. Just like Google China has to obey US laws and Google US has to obey US laws: do (physical|legal) business in a location, obey the laws of the place.
If the registries or the customers of the registries or ICANN doesn't like that, they need to find another place to set up shop. It doesn't matter what.tld this is: the US judicial system decided something unlawful was going on on these DNS servers (resolving IPs for unlawful purposes) on US soil, so they shut that down. No matter which:.com,.us. or.iq for iraq (a few years ago,.iq was served from a texan company IIRC). When something unlawful under US laws happened in that.iq domain space, the US had all the right in the world to interdict it.
What gives the US the right is simply this: the registry for said TLD is located in the US.
Just like China can apply their local laws to the TLD registry they control,.cn, and North Korea can apply its laws to.nk, so can the US do the same for the registries which are based there:.com,.net,.org,.us.
The same applies to webservers: no matter under what TLD a webserver serves, if it's physically located inside the US, US laws apply to this server. In that case the US can't control the DNS name of the sites which are served but the pages/sites themselves.
If you don't like that, you can only try to convince your preferred registry to relocate to a country which has laws and procedures which are better suited to your goals. Or you could simply register a domain under that country's TLD.
There are a lot of talented, professional people working for free: Linux programmers, Debian developers, Gnome developers.... And don't say they get paid lots of money for it: they certainly didn't get any money when they started.
Are you saying there is less free talent available in the AV arts than in programming?
So the researchers will likely be given some source code, but nobody has to release that to the rest of us.
Yes, none of the researchers has to release anything, but at the same time they have the right under the GPL to do so if they wish. So the right under the GPL conflicts with the probable NDA they signed. Can you sign away the rights you have under the GPL?
If they distribute it to the researchers they must release it to the researchers or commit a GPL violation.
Of course the researchers don't want to demand source since then they won't get freebies like this the next time Intel does such a Santa Claus imitation of distributing presents.
There's an interesting thought: what happens if you are a beta tester who has to sign a NDA to get something which includes GPL code. What takes precedence? Your NDA, or your right to demand source to the GPL stuff and redistribute it publically?
You have to ask yourself: who is your customer? The person who reads your paper, or the person who buys advertising space? To produce a newspaper/web site designed to increase the number of views/clicks of adverts is a very different skills from producing a newspaper/website designed to amass a loyal readership.
All traditional dead tree newspapers across the world already answered this decades ago: the advertisers. Advertisers are the ones who pay the biggest fraction of newspaper production costs.
How can Mrs. O'Gara be fired when her publisher touts her as: "Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media." at http://maureenogara.sys-con.com/
sys-con being the slimeballs^Wpublisher where the PJ hit piece was published 5 years ago and for which she was supposedly "fired".
It is natural insofar as humanity didn't do anything to create it. While the cow herds are expressly bred and raised by humans. A wild cow or zebra or gnu are natural too, even when they produce exactly the same methane. In Nature, the amount of cattle raised by humans is not sustainable. It only works for us since we specially grow feedstock using fertilizer and pesticide to get a bigger crop than naturally possible.
All the "don't tell me about it until I can buy it at Walmart" posts that are starting to infest this site are a symptom of that.
They are a simple reaction to innumerable bullshit PR releases of companies that soon folded or at least had to eat their words. Like the fuel-cell one a few days ago where "black and green ink" magically make the gizmo work. That is pure bullshit there. If the company doesn't have anything substantial to say, they should STFU. Oh wait, but then there is no next VC funding round. Oh noes! The icing on the cake is then the claim to be cheaper than the grid but only with massive subsidies with vague hopes of bringing down the cost in the future while currently it takes 30 years to break even, something solar cells or windmills can do a lot earlier with less environmental impact (natural gas is not exactly green).
So the sensible attitude is "Go away and come back when you can produce your tech so cheaply and make it so consumer friendly and useful that Walmart sells your stuff, but spare me your pie in the sky bullshit". Walmart is in this case the litmus test of "is it profitable, is it useful". In the above case of course Walmart wouldn't sell it but lots of builders, contractors and the like.
The mirror-site cryptome put up is http://cryptomeorg.siteprotect.net/ However, they took the offending document down and wrote "for the MS Spy Guide send email to..."
Why do nuclear energy corporations get loan guarantees? Is the energy not as cheap as proponents say? Is it not profitable enough for private ventures to fund it?
The nuclear power industries worldwide already get very preferential treatment by not having to insure powerplants or paying for their waste disposal, but that apparently isn't enough.
Re:And we're trusting you because....
on
Hiding From Google
·
· Score: 2, Informative
A distributed service like has existed for years now, so there's not really a need for a replacement. It's called http://tor.eff.org/
Slashdot Mirror
An IMAP server (dovecot, cyrus, courier) of your choice for Linux. If you don't have a Linux server you can always run it inside a small VM.
Infineon hasn't made RAM for 4 years now when they spun off Qimonda. Qimonda itself went bankrupt early 2009.
The Z600 in 4Q10 is the first Atom supposed to go into Smartphones.
What Intel bought are not general purpose CPUs like Atom. It's the high frequency chips talking to the mobile base stations. Think "modem chips for mobiles". The chips running applications on the phones are totally different ones.
No it doesn't. Infineon hasn't made RAM in a long time. They sold off their RAM business in 2006 naming it "Qimonda". in January 2009 Qimonda declared bankruptcy.
Let's create preferred lanes for Mercedes, Lexus and BMW drivers. After all, these people paid a lot more than Al Bundy for his Dodge and they pay more taxes as well. So it's entirely fair they get preferred treatment and lower driving latency (get to their destination faster). They're businessmen and women, so their needs are different from the normal people. We still have enough other roads for all the other drivers, don't worry.
It's hard to believe people will accept this kind of thing being installed on their computers, so I can't wait to see how Hadopi moves forward with it.
Easy: when HADOPI detects the first P2P usage via their network sniffing, they don't just send a letter, but also mandate that the user installs said spyware.
Of course hilarity ensues if the user uses Linux or OSX or Android or whatever.
Which one of the leaked documents exposed an "unvarnished truth" to the world that wasn't known or at least expected before hand?
Just like in court "expected" doesn't cut it when you need PROOF.
As for truth: little things like hushed up friendly fire that cost allies (Canadians) lives. The canadians are sorta pissed about that, as they should be.
Or US death squadrons operating from german barracks in northern Afghanistan. That's fairly big news since all our parliament members, the ones responsible for the .af invasion, proclaim it's news to them. Such death squads are illegal under german law as is torture, so knowing about such things is really bad election mojo. Of course not really knowing what happens in a place they send people to kill and get killed isn't exactly a endorsement of their "leadership" either...
So while I dunno what new things they exposed in the US, but the world, and the current afghan war, is more than a little bit of US politics.
Yes we do.
Here's why: You have two choices: Broadband which is slow but has a flatrate, or PSTN which you pay per minute and is a lot slower to boot, resulting in higher costs for even less bytes transmitted.
As long as the ISP is upfront about this when ordering, it's no problem. Admittedly this is a pretty big IF with your average ISP, but it's all that can be done.
I have two relatives, one lives in a small city (~15k-20k residents), the other out in the boondocks. The small city gets only 3MBps instead of the usual 6MBps DSL city wide due to bad, old wires, the other gets around 600 kBps due to wires and distance. For both, DSL was a no brainer compared to PSTN: at least ten times faster than the analog modem and no ticking clock in the background.
It's not the speeds that are important in Europe, it's the the ticking clock which is always running when using the phone network for Internet access.
There already was a public talk about this GSM vulnerability last december. Back then, the group cracking the protocol didn't have the hard/software to demultiplex the connections a GSM basestation has to handle in realtime. That problem is now solved and so the hack is fully functional. The rainbowtables needed to crack the protocol were publicly created for almost all of 2009. The GSM industry had PLENTY of time to react and get their shit together, instead they stonewalled, ignored and threatened the hacking group as Mr. Piaget described back in his December 2009 talk.
The DECT industry group for cordless phones who use a similar encryption method but weaker as GSM had their protocol examined bofore that in 2008 or so by the same people. When the hackers approached the DECT people they were basically welcomed and both, DECT group and hackers, worked together on fixing the protocol, spec and especially implementations.
Ironically the DECT industry group and the GSM association is made of largely of the same companies...
Now the only question left is: when does it come to a shop near me?
Science does not have the luxury to hide its underlying data, no matter how good the motives. Ever.
If science cannot survive attack by well funded partisan hacks, then it's worthless as a method. Reality is what doesn't go away after you close your eyes. Either climate change doesn't go away no matter what Exxon et al. say, then their think tank "studies" just contradict reality and are doomed anyways. Or serious flaws are found in the theory. It has to sink or swim on its own merit, not because some institution or other says "we looked at the data and we say so. Trust us we're the experts".
Mr. Phil Jones needs to make up his mind what he wants to be: a politician or a scientists. For politicians data hiding, to deny an advantage to a political opponent, is normal mode of operation. For a scientist it is a cardinal sin and immediately disqualifies for any serious research.
It's not a problem. The servers, and companies running these TLDs are american companies running their servers in the US. As such, they have to obey US laws. Just like Google China has to obey US laws and Google US has to obey US laws: do (physical|legal) business in a location, obey the laws of the place.
If the registries or the customers of the registries or ICANN doesn't like that, they need to find another place to set up shop. It doesn't matter what .tld this is: the US judicial system decided something unlawful was going on on these DNS servers (resolving IPs for unlawful purposes) on US soil, so they shut that down. .com, .us. or .iq for iraq (a few years ago, .iq was served from a texan company IIRC). When something unlawful under US laws happened in that .iq domain space, the US had all the right in the world to interdict it.
No matter which:
What gives the US the right is simply this: the registry for said TLD is located in the US.
Just like China can apply their local laws to the TLD registry they control ,.cn, and North Korea can apply its laws to .nk, so can the US do the same for the registries which are based there: .com, .net, .org, .us.
The same applies to webservers: no matter under what TLD a webserver serves, if it's physically located inside the US, US laws apply to this server. In that case the US can't control the DNS name of the sites which are served but the pages/sites themselves.
If you don't like that, you can only try to convince your preferred registry to relocate to a country which has laws and procedures which are better suited to your goals. Or you could simply register a domain under that country's TLD.
There are a lot of talented, professional people working for free: Linux programmers, Debian developers, Gnome developers....
And don't say they get paid lots of money for it: they certainly didn't get any money when they started.
Are you saying there is less free talent available in the AV arts than in programming?
Yes, none of the researchers has to release anything, but at the same time they have the right under the GPL to do so if they wish. So the right under the GPL conflicts with the probable NDA they signed. Can you sign away the rights you have under the GPL?
So you say China has a harder copyright laws and enforces them more stringently that western nations? Is that really what you want to say?
If they distribute it to the researchers they must release it to the researchers or commit a GPL violation.
Of course the researchers don't want to demand source since then they won't get freebies like this the next time Intel does such a Santa Claus imitation of distributing presents.
There's an interesting thought: what happens if you are a beta tester who has to sign a NDA to get something which includes GPL code. What takes precedence? Your NDA, or your right to demand source to the GPL stuff and redistribute it publically?
You have to ask yourself: who is your customer? The person who reads your paper, or the person who buys advertising space? To produce a newspaper/web site designed to increase the number of views/clicks of adverts is a very different skills from producing a newspaper/website designed to amass a loyal readership.
All traditional dead tree newspapers across the world already answered this decades ago: the advertisers. Advertisers are the ones who pay the biggest fraction of newspaper production costs.
That's a trade secret. For a patent, you have to show how it actually works. No one managed to dissect His Holiness Steve yet.
How can Mrs. O'Gara be fired when her publisher touts her as:
"Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media."
at http://maureenogara.sys-con.com/
sys-con being the slimeballs^Wpublisher where the PJ hit piece was published 5 years ago and for which she was supposedly "fired".
It is natural insofar as humanity didn't do anything to create it. While the cow herds are expressly bred and raised by humans. A wild cow or zebra or gnu are natural too, even when they produce exactly the same methane.
In Nature, the amount of cattle raised by humans is not sustainable. It only works for us since we specially grow feedstock using fertilizer and pesticide to get a bigger crop than naturally possible.
All the "don't tell me about it until I can buy it at Walmart" posts that are starting to infest this site are a symptom of that.
They are a simple reaction to innumerable bullshit PR releases of companies that soon folded or at least had to eat their words. Like the fuel-cell one a few days ago where "black and green ink" magically make the gizmo work. That is pure bullshit there. If the company doesn't have anything substantial to say, they should STFU. Oh wait, but then there is no next VC funding round. Oh noes!
The icing on the cake is then the claim to be cheaper than the grid but only with massive subsidies with vague hopes of bringing down the cost in the future while currently it takes 30 years to break even, something solar cells or windmills can do a lot earlier with less environmental impact (natural gas is not exactly green).
So the sensible attitude is "Go away and come back when you can produce your tech so cheaply and make it so consumer friendly and useful that Walmart sells your stuff, but spare me your pie in the sky bullshit". Walmart is in this case the litmus test of "is it profitable, is it useful". In the above case of course Walmart wouldn't sell it but lots of builders, contractors and the like.
The mirror-site cryptome put up is http://cryptomeorg.siteprotect.net/ ..."
However, they took the offending document down and wrote "for the MS Spy Guide send email to
Why do nuclear energy corporations get loan guarantees? Is the energy not as cheap as proponents say? Is it not profitable enough for private ventures to fund it?
The nuclear power industries worldwide already get very preferential treatment by not having to insure powerplants or paying for their waste disposal, but that apparently isn't enough.
A distributed service like has existed for years now, so there's not really a need for a replacement. It's called http://tor.eff.org/