Seriously, why are The People trying to play Spy vs Spy with their own government? The government owns the internet. It's as silly to encrypt your license plate as it is your text messages. You have no way to do so. If you're able to send a text, then you're using a carrier of some kind. That carrier has no control over the government's ability to get the data if the government wants to.
Isn't that the whole point of this project? It allows you to encrypt your data, so unless you think the government has a secret back door into every encryption algorithm, when you encrypt your data, the government can't see it. They may still be able to see who you're talking to (a TOR-like extension might help), but they won't know what you're saying unless they compromise your phone (or happened to compromise the key exchange).
Remember, it's metadata that we're talking about. "Who talked to who - and what time(s)". Linking people together is what it's all about. They don't need to know what you're talking about, so long as they know who you're talking to.
Despite what the NSA wants you to think, it's not just "Metadata" -- any analyst who believes that a conversation is with a foreign correspondent can retrieve the entire contents of the conversation -- text, email, etc with nothing more than a slightly better than 50% belief that one party in the conversation is foreign. No warrants or other oversight required.
Do you think the government should be able to retrieve your private conversations on an analyst's "hunch"?
A several million year period where life could have developed is not much time considering that it took several billion years for life on earth to evolve from simple cells to multi-cellular organisms.
Can't they put a big red cutoff switch for the battery, for owners who won't be charging to just physically disconnect the battery when they're parked?
If I had one, I wouldn't need the computer/GPS/3G_app/dataminer to keep running when I'm grocery shopping or working, as long as it reboots in less than, say, a minute.
Do that are you're down to the raw battery leakage only.
You're willing to sit in your car for 60 seconds while you wait for the computer that runs it to boot? You're much more patient than I am.
How do they suck the waste out of the blood of someone with kidney failure? It's a solved problem. Why is slashdot filled with people who publicly announce; "I'm too stupid to solve this problem, so that's proof it's impossible" (or phrase questions with that implication, even if they immediately assert it was "just an innocent question".
Why is slashdot filled with people who publicly claim that the solution to complex problems is already solved because there are solutions to other problems that seem similar on the surface?
Dialysis is not "sucking it out" - Dialysis is carefully filtering it out -- which seems at odds with TFA's assertion that the gallium can be easily sucked back out.
Though the question was about imaging only, so removing it wouldn't be an issue. You don't, the pig dies, you get more gallium and sell some bacon.
Removing it is not an issue as long as you don't care about the creature that you're imaging surviving, which is usually not the case in diagnostic imaging. TFA suggests that it could be expanded to humans.
Even if application permissions were granted individually and even if application developers wrote their code in such a way that the application would behave as normally as possible without them, what's there to stop them from sabotaging the application in another manner until it's granted the permission they want? For example, let's say an application requests location access, and until it's granted, it simply "decides" not to work. Another example, one that cannot be simulated, is network access. Rinse, wash, repeat.
Thats exactly how things should work -- if the app author doesn't want to let the app run without whatever permissions he deems as neccessary, then he should just have the app refuse to run without the permission.
Then the user can decide if he wants the app enough to let it have whatever permission it wants.
If I install a flashlight app that wants network access and it refuses to work if I deny that access, then I would uninstall the app and give it a bad review.
When you installed it, didn't you look at the list of what it has access to? If I saw it wanting to get my location I would have stopped right there and not installed it. No flashlight app needs to know my location to work.
Many ad supported apps want your location so they can serve geo targeted ads.
Though there are plenty of free non, ad-supported flashlight apps. The only permission the app I'm using has is the ability to access the camera.
How do they suck the metal back out after it's in every tiny blood vessel of a heart? Maybe most of it stays cohesive enough to suck out in one draw, but surely as blood vessels collapse under the suction, bits and pieces of the liquid metal will break off and remain within the blood vessels. How do they get that metal out?
I understand you have your commitments, but if you didn't, would it have been worthwhile given the difference in cost of living?
Not according to the spreadsheet my wife and I made - we looked at our monthly spends on everything - car (including gas and insurance), public transportation, food, housing, income tax, dining out - everything we could think of.
And staying in the SF Bay area still made more financial sense than a 25% pay cut. Especially after receiving a couple 10%+ bonuses since then that I likely would not have received in any of the Seattle area jobs.
So if G.Fast can extend VDSL2 to 1 Gigabit at a couple hundred meters, are people really going to outgrow that by the end of the decade?
Copper links simply lack the capacity to support the massive growth in data consumption that analysts predict. Eventually, Australians will have no choice but to replace those links with fiber, probably before the end of this decade
Since the average speed in Australia is 4.8mbit now it seems unlikely that people are going to be demanding 10gigabit connections in 7 years. Even 100mbit would be about 20 times their current average and VDSL2 can already do 100mbit for short distances.
By the end of the decade, point-to-point (with high-gain directional antennas) wireless networking may be the way to go to get better bandwidth from the fiber cabinet to the home - put an antenna tower on the cabinet and hang an antenna on houses.
I am just taking a stab in the dark here as I don't really know, but maybe there are a lot of "MS Stack software" developers in the home of MS. If they got a ton of them already in town why import more?
I think that's true - I was looking for a job in Seattle for a while, and had no trouble getting interviews as a Linux infrastructure manager, but the offers were low -- 20 - 30% lower pay than I was making in the SF Bay area. The pay difference was more than a years worth of house payments on my bay area house, so it wasn't worth the move.
I suppose your use case is identical to everyone else. No, wireless just isn't an option for any reasonably sized office for anything other than mobile access.
Well no, in my office we run ethernet above the drop ceiling and bring it down to the cube walls in risers. Except for the newly leased portion of the office, we have 10 people back there on 2 Wifi nodes (one is meant for the large conference room but covers the cubes too) and they seem quite content with the situation. Running ethernet back there is somewhat difficult since it has to traverse a firewall (a physical firewall) and we don't plan on staying in this office for long so we've tacked a couple cables along the floor for the Wifi nodes.
They are even running VoIP phones over the same Wifi network (different SSID, same radios) and call quality is good -- we do some traffic shaping to make sure the phones aren't starved for bandwidth.
It's debatable whether or not a WPA-Enterprise Wifi network is less secure than the typical small office ethernet deployment where I can plug a computer into any conference room ethernet jack and have full access to the entire network. Very few small businesses use 802.1x port authentication on their hard wired networks or even force ports to guest VLANS in shared spaces like conference rooms and break rooms.
2) It'll be slower. The quoted network speeds are when there's no congestion, which won't be the case when an office has 100 PCs all on the network.
If you put 100 clients on a single Wifi node, then you get what you deserve.
What's not clear in "high-speed access to the new servers"? Or are you assuming all servers are on the other side of the internet?
What's not clear in "If you want aesthetics" -- without a drop ceiling or hollow walls to hide cable in, it's going to be exposed.
In my office (with substandard wiring that can only support 100mbit for most people - I get better throughput on the 802.11n Wifi network if no one else is watching cat videos on it), no one ever complains that the fileserver is slow, but people complain daily that the "internet is slow".
Using rigid (or PVC) conduit as a raceway for your cables, paint them any color you like. Paint the walls a dark gray charcoal and data conduits bright orange.. everything exposed (ductwork, conduit) and use industrial surface mount boxes for the data jacks (with a black wall-plate).
Looks bad-ass.
Expensive as hell.
PVC is not really that expensive so that's not really such a bad idea (10 feet of 4" PVC is around half or less the cost of a wire cable tray), but it makes adding additional cables or rerouting existing cables much more difficult -- make sure you pull spares and leave pull strings because you'll always need more -- and don't overfill the conduit.
You do have office pets, right? Just give them a collar with clips that hold SD cards, then train them to go to the server room and fill up the cards with data and return them to you.
Latency is a little high, but bandwidth can be pretty good - as they say, never underestimate the bandwidth of a Golden Retriever with a collar full of SD cards.
The problem is that this makes it a huge pain in the ass for smaller online retailers. Brick and mortar retailers only have to deal with the taxes on the particular state and local region in which their store is physically located. Any online retailer potentially has to deal with the taxes in every state and region in the world (anywhere a customer could order from).
This means that only the larger online retailers will have the infrastructure to stay in business. If I'm starting a mom-and-pop online service, I'm either going to have to pay a 3rd-party to deal with all the states' and cities' tax laws or go out of business. Because there is no way some little operation is going to be able to handle collecting all the taxes from Nowhereville, Iowa (including know what they are and where to remit them).
If online merchants were required to collect sales taxes, Paypal and other merchant payment solution providers would offer sales tax calculation as another service for their customers so small merchants wouldn't be left out, they'd just have to subscribe to a sales-tax calculation service if their payment provider doesn't already offer it - it could even become a value-added solution for UPS and/or Fedex as a part of their shipping calculators.
Yes, but clothes and shoes aren't taxed at all until you hit $110, and you can always take the bus over to Paramus and pay no sales tax at all on clothes. Presumably, these same rules will Apply to online retailers. So in effect, nothing will change for those kinds of items.
If you aren't in the market for clothes, I should mention the New Jersey "Urban Enterprise Zones". Those only have 3.5% tax and are easy to get to from NYC.
This is exactly why Amazon doesn't want to pay state/local sales taxes: because the rules are so arbitrary and hard to track accurately, especially since they have a catalog of millions of items and the tax status of the same item varies by area... i.e. some areas may classify footwear as untaxable "clothing", but others may not. There are literally thousands of local tax districts across the USA and they don't all end on convenient city or zip code boundaries.
If you're moving the tapes far enough away to get good geographical diversity, then the 747 is likely to give better ping times since it travels around 10 times faster than the station wagon. Though it does have a bit of a bufferbloat problem.
Technically one could run a webserver on a spot instance, but the availability of said server will be inversely proportional to datacenter load instead of proportional to website demand. Do you not see why that is a bad idea?
Depends on why you want to run the webserver. You can register it to a load balancer after startup. When you run out of spot instances for you web server, then you can start up full paid instances to pick up the slack.
EC2 is inherently scriptable. There's nothing stopping you from using the command-line tools to fire up an instance, and let it run, and store its results to S3, and then decommission the instance.
You are correct that what you propose is easy and well documented. However, that is not what the OP needs.
The OP needs lower-priced spot instances, which are intermittently available and designed exactly for this workflow. When the entire AWS datacenter has some spare capacity, these spot instances turn on for those who requested them to run (usually to crunch data that is not time-sensitive). The use and configuration of these instances is not so well documented, probably because you cannot run a webserver on them and that seems to be the focus of much AWS documentation. However, it is exactly these 'spot instances' which are in my opinion the genius of the cloud: they let the heavy, non-time-critical work (i.e. scientific computing) be done when the webservers and mailservers aren't so busy, thus flattening out the daily CPU demand curve
Why can't you run a webserver on a spot instance? I'm not aware of any restrictions on what you can and cannot run on a spot instance. If the dynamic IP is the problem, then either register the dynamic IP at a dynamic DNS provider, register it as a route-53 IP, or use the EC2 command line tools to attach it to a static Elastic IP address.
The EC2 API is not complicated (and can run at the command line, and has bindings for common scripting languages), and you can do pretty much anything you want with an instance.
Why didn't they just call it Windows Tablet, instead of the obscure "Windows RT" that doesn't give consumers a hint that it's a reduced functionality operating system.
The iPad can't run every OSX application, and consumers can understand that Windows Tablet can't run every Windows application.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, why are The People trying to play Spy vs Spy with their own government? The government owns the internet. It's as silly to encrypt your license plate as it is your text messages. You have no way to do so. If you're able to send a text, then you're using a carrier of some kind. That carrier has no control over the government's ability to get the data if the government wants to.
Isn't that the whole point of this project? It allows you to encrypt your data, so unless you think the government has a secret back door into every encryption algorithm, when you encrypt your data, the government can't see it. They may still be able to see who you're talking to (a TOR-like extension might help), but they won't know what you're saying unless they compromise your phone (or happened to compromise the key exchange).
Remember, it's metadata that we're talking about. "Who talked to who - and what time(s)". Linking people together is what it's all about. They don't need to know what you're talking about, so long as they know who you're talking to.
Despite what the NSA wants you to think, it's not just "Metadata" -- any analyst who believes that a conversation is with a foreign correspondent can retrieve the entire contents of the conversation -- text, email, etc with nothing more than a slightly better than 50% belief that one party in the conversation is foreign. No warrants or other oversight required.
Do you think the government should be able to retrieve your private conversations on an analyst's "hunch"?
A several million year period where life could have developed is not much time considering that it took several billion years for life on earth to evolve from simple cells to multi-cellular organisms.
Can't they put a big red cutoff switch for the battery, for owners who won't be charging to just physically disconnect the battery when they're parked?
If I had one, I wouldn't need the computer/GPS/3G_app/dataminer to keep running when I'm grocery shopping or working, as long as it reboots in less than, say, a minute.
Do that are you're down to the raw battery leakage only.
You're willing to sit in your car for 60 seconds while you wait for the computer that runs it to boot? You're much more patient than I am.
How do they suck the waste out of the blood of someone with kidney failure? It's a solved problem. Why is slashdot filled with people who publicly announce; "I'm too stupid to solve this problem, so that's proof it's impossible" (or phrase questions with that implication, even if they immediately assert it was "just an innocent question".
Why is slashdot filled with people who publicly claim that the solution to complex problems is already solved because there are solutions to other problems that seem similar on the surface?
Dialysis is not "sucking it out" - Dialysis is carefully filtering it out -- which seems at odds with TFA's assertion that the gallium can be easily sucked back out.
Though the question was about imaging only, so removing it wouldn't be an issue. You don't, the pig dies, you get more gallium and sell some bacon.
Removing it is not an issue as long as you don't care about the creature that you're imaging surviving, which is usually not the case in diagnostic imaging. TFA suggests that it could be expanded to humans.
Even if application permissions were granted individually and even if application developers wrote their code in such a way that the application would behave as normally as possible without them, what's there to stop them from sabotaging the application in another manner until it's granted the permission they want? For example, let's say an application requests location access, and until it's granted, it simply "decides" not to work. Another example, one that cannot be simulated, is network access. Rinse, wash, repeat.
Thats exactly how things should work -- if the app author doesn't want to let the app run without whatever permissions he deems as neccessary, then he should just have the app refuse to run without the permission.
Then the user can decide if he wants the app enough to let it have whatever permission it wants.
If I install a flashlight app that wants network access and it refuses to work if I deny that access, then I would uninstall the app and give it a bad review.
When you installed it, didn't you look at the list of what it has access to? If I saw it wanting to get my location I would have stopped right there and not installed it. No flashlight app needs to know my location to work.
Many ad supported apps want your location so they can serve geo targeted ads.
Though there are plenty of free non, ad-supported flashlight apps. The only permission the app I'm using has is the ability to access the camera.
How do they suck the metal back out after it's in every tiny blood vessel of a heart? Maybe most of it stays cohesive enough to suck out in one draw, but surely as blood vessels collapse under the suction, bits and pieces of the liquid metal will break off and remain within the blood vessels. How do they get that metal out?
Does it flow through capillaries?
I understand you have your commitments, but if you didn't, would it have been worthwhile given the difference in cost of living?
Not according to the spreadsheet my wife and I made - we looked at our monthly spends on everything - car (including gas and insurance), public transportation, food, housing, income tax, dining out - everything we could think of.
And staying in the SF Bay area still made more financial sense than a 25% pay cut. Especially after receiving a couple 10%+ bonuses since then that I likely would not have received in any of the Seattle area jobs.
So if G.Fast can extend VDSL2 to 1 Gigabit at a couple hundred meters, are people really going to outgrow that by the end of the decade?
Copper links simply lack the capacity to support the massive growth in data consumption that analysts predict. Eventually, Australians will have no choice but to replace those links with fiber, probably before the end of this decade
Since the average speed in Australia is 4.8mbit now it seems unlikely that people are going to be demanding 10gigabit connections in 7 years. Even 100mbit would be about 20 times their current average and VDSL2 can already do 100mbit for short distances.
By the end of the decade, point-to-point (with high-gain directional antennas) wireless networking may be the way to go to get better bandwidth from the fiber cabinet to the home - put an antenna tower on the cabinet and hang an antenna on houses.
On my lunch bag when I put it in the fridge at work I put
"Strontium-90 - RADIOACTIVE" on one side
The other I put
"LIVE SPECIMEN - BIOHAZZARD"
I just write "Urine sample" on mine and no one touches it, not even the cleaning lady.
Though I do get some funny looks when I start drinking the apple juice that I packed in a specimen cup.
MS Stack software developer
I am just taking a stab in the dark here as I don't really know, but maybe there are a lot of "MS Stack software" developers in the home of MS. If they got a ton of them already in town why import more?
I think that's true - I was looking for a job in Seattle for a while, and had no trouble getting interviews as a Linux infrastructure manager, but the offers were low -- 20 - 30% lower pay than I was making in the SF Bay area. The pay difference was more than a years worth of house payments on my bay area house, so it wasn't worth the move.
How many of them are clear on the back? Normal style cases wouldn't do the trick for this phone.
There are a number of Nexus 5 cases that are clear on the back, and it doesn't even have a rear display: http://amzn.to/1cZ1rYN
"Also nice to have, ditch the Google part of Android and gives us a clean Android install."
I'm not even going to comment on how dumb this is, I think it speaks for itself. Want to ditch the Microsoft part of Windows while you're at it?
There's a quick and easy command to do that: mkfs /dev/sda1
I suppose your use case is identical to everyone else. No, wireless just isn't an option for any reasonably sized office for anything other than mobile access.
Well no, in my office we run ethernet above the drop ceiling and bring it down to the cube walls in risers. Except for the newly leased portion of the office, we have 10 people back there on 2 Wifi nodes (one is meant for the large conference room but covers the cubes too) and they seem quite content with the situation. Running ethernet back there is somewhat difficult since it has to traverse a firewall (a physical firewall) and we don't plan on staying in this office for long so we've tacked a couple cables along the floor for the Wifi nodes.
They are even running VoIP phones over the same Wifi network (different SSID, same radios) and call quality is good -- we do some traffic shaping to make sure the phones aren't starved for bandwidth.
Aesthetics be damned, productivity comes first.
But I'm not the one asking about aesthetics.
+1
1) It's a security risk.
It's debatable whether or not a WPA-Enterprise Wifi network is less secure than the typical small office ethernet deployment where I can plug a computer into any conference room ethernet jack and have full access to the entire network. Very few small businesses use 802.1x port authentication on their hard wired networks or even force ports to guest VLANS in shared spaces like conference rooms and break rooms.
2) It'll be slower. The quoted network speeds are when there's no congestion, which won't be the case when an office has 100 PCs all on the network.
If you put 100 clients on a single Wifi node, then you get what you deserve.
What's not clear in "high-speed access to the new servers"? Or are you assuming all servers are on the other side of the internet?
What's not clear in "If you want aesthetics" -- without a drop ceiling or hollow walls to hide cable in, it's going to be exposed.
In my office (with substandard wiring that can only support 100mbit for most people - I get better throughput on the 802.11n Wifi network if no one else is watching cat videos on it), no one ever complains that the fileserver is slow, but people complain daily that the "internet is slow".
Using rigid (or PVC) conduit as a raceway for your cables, paint them any color you like. Paint the walls a dark gray charcoal and data conduits bright orange.. everything exposed (ductwork, conduit) and use industrial surface mount boxes for the data jacks (with a black wall-plate).
Looks bad-ass.
Expensive as hell.
PVC is not really that expensive so that's not really such a bad idea (10 feet of 4" PVC is around half or less the cost of a wire cable tray), but it makes adding additional cables or rerouting existing cables much more difficult -- make sure you pull spares and leave pull strings because you'll always need more -- and don't overfill the conduit.
You do have office pets, right? Just give them a collar with clips that hold SD cards, then train them to go to the server room and fill up the cards with data and return them to you.
Latency is a little high, but bandwidth can be pretty good - as they say, never underestimate the bandwidth of a Golden Retriever with a collar full of SD cards.
If you want aesthetics, go wireless. 802.11ac is probably much faster than your internet connection which is all most people care about.
The problem is that this makes it a huge pain in the ass for smaller online retailers. Brick and mortar retailers only have to deal with the taxes on the particular state and local region in which their store is physically located. Any online retailer potentially has to deal with the taxes in every state and region in the world (anywhere a customer could order from).
This means that only the larger online retailers will have the infrastructure to stay in business. If I'm starting a mom-and-pop online service, I'm either going to have to pay a 3rd-party to deal with all the states' and cities' tax laws or go out of business. Because there is no way some little operation is going to be able to handle collecting all the taxes from Nowhereville, Iowa (including know what they are and where to remit them).
If online merchants were required to collect sales taxes, Paypal and other merchant payment solution providers would offer sales tax calculation as another service for their customers so small merchants wouldn't be left out, they'd just have to subscribe to a sales-tax calculation service if their payment provider doesn't already offer it - it could even become a value-added solution for UPS and/or Fedex as a part of their shipping calculators.
Yes, but clothes and shoes aren't taxed at all until you hit $110, and you can always take the bus over to Paramus and pay no sales tax at all on clothes. Presumably, these same rules will Apply to online retailers. So in effect, nothing will change for those kinds of items.
If you aren't in the market for clothes, I should mention the New Jersey "Urban Enterprise Zones". Those only have 3.5% tax and are easy to get to from NYC.
This is exactly why Amazon doesn't want to pay state/local sales taxes: because the rules are so arbitrary and hard to track accurately, especially since they have a catalog of millions of items and the tax status of the same item varies by area... i.e. some areas may classify footwear as untaxable "clothing", but others may not. There are literally thousands of local tax districts across the USA and they don't all end on convenient city or zip code boundaries.
Ping times.
If you're moving the tapes far enough away to get good geographical diversity, then the 747 is likely to give better ping times since it travels around 10 times faster than the station wagon. Though it does have a bit of a bufferbloat problem.
Technically one could run a webserver on a spot instance, but the availability of said server will be inversely proportional to datacenter load instead of proportional to website demand. Do you not see why that is a bad idea?
Depends on why you want to run the webserver. You can register it to a load balancer after startup. When you run out of spot instances for you web server, then you can start up full paid instances to pick up the slack.
EC2 is inherently scriptable. There's nothing stopping you from using the command-line tools to fire up an instance, and let it run, and store its results to S3, and then decommission the instance.
You are correct that what you propose is easy and well documented. However, that is not what the OP needs.
The OP needs lower-priced spot instances, which are intermittently available and designed exactly for this workflow. When the entire AWS datacenter has some spare capacity, these spot instances turn on for those who requested them to run (usually to crunch data that is not time-sensitive). The use and configuration of these instances is not so well documented, probably because you cannot run a webserver on them and that seems to be the focus of much AWS documentation. However, it is exactly these 'spot instances' which are in my opinion the genius of the cloud: they let the heavy, non-time-critical work (i.e. scientific computing) be done when the webservers and mailservers aren't so busy, thus flattening out the daily CPU demand curve
Why can't you run a webserver on a spot instance? I'm not aware of any restrictions on what you can and cannot run on a spot instance. If the dynamic IP is the problem, then either register the dynamic IP at a dynamic DNS provider, register it as a route-53 IP, or use the EC2 command line tools to attach it to a static Elastic IP address.
The EC2 API is not complicated (and can run at the command line, and has bindings for common scripting languages), and you can do pretty much anything you want with an instance.
Why didn't they just call it Windows Tablet, instead of the obscure "Windows RT" that doesn't give consumers a hint that it's a reduced functionality operating system.
The iPad can't run every OSX application, and consumers can understand that Windows Tablet can't run every Windows application.
What does "RT" mean, anyway!?