The people on the other line refused to give you any information whether it be phone numbers, physical location, etc. I asked several times to be taken off their list.
Perhaps you could try the opposite approach - act like you're really interested in what they're selling, eventually they have to give you some sort of company name, address, phone number etc. to make the sale, right?
This is not strictly true. iPhone applications can be installed outside of the iTunes App Store--in fact, I have done such an installation myself for the purposes of beta testing. However, distribution through this method is limited to a fixed number of devices. The way it works is each device must send a code to the developer, and a provisioning key is then distributed with the application to enable its use on that device.
The article addresses this - a developer whose application was not approved for sale (due to Apple's 'duplicate functionality' standard, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish) tried to skirt the ban through the method you described. And Apple shut them down there as well.
So clearly that isn't a viable alternative for distributing applications.
Sounds very much like what I get from the Ubuntu repositories.
Think about it -- every repository for every distro, or even every sufficiently-privileged package manager, is a kill switch for your computer. When a repository has (very occasionally) accidentally delivered a package with some sort of malware attached, that package was immediately rolled back -- effectively killing the malware.
Except that Ubuntu cannot send a signal out to your PC to automatically remove or update a package that's already been installed. It can only change what packages it offers you in the future. If you choose not to run apt-get upgrade, or you opt to set the package on hold, it will remain on your computer indefinitely.
Proper hazardous waste disposal is a good thing however forcing it isn't even for companies.
Are you saying it should be legal to dump hazardous waste?
Internet Archive's Wayback Machine has a mirror
on
Web Singletons?
·
· Score: 1
It's apparently a little-known fact that the Internet Archive maintains a periodically updated copy of the Wayback Machine, fittingly at the Biblioteca Alexandrina in Egypt. It's not as up-to-date as the main site (its most recent archive is from 2006), but it's a useful as a backup, and sometimes it's able to retrieve pages that give an error on the original site.
There's more then one - while they don't provide the same interface, I'm fairly sure Google's cache of the internet could be used to produce the same thing.
Google's cache is not nearly the same thing. It only provides a single previous copy, goes back a few weeks at most and is quick to disappear once the original site has died. While it's definitely useful, it's no replacement for IA's Wayback Machine.
It's not hypocritical because the government and individual citizens are not the same thing. The government is endowed with great powers to control and regulate the lives of citizens, therefore it should be subject to higher standards and limitations to constraint abuses of those powers.
Most users won't even notice the version number unless you put it in the face. Just call it FooBuster and put the version number in an about box somewhere.
If you're like most of us, all your devices at home are living behind NAT. There's no reason they can't keep living in an ipv4 private network behind an ipv6 router.
Earbuds offer almost no passive noise attenuation, although they could do a little bit if they sealed off the ear canal.
You neglect to mention IEM (in-ear monitors), which do just that - they fit into your ear canal. They really do block out quite a good amount of sound, and they're just as portable as earbuds, though they start a bit higher in price.
Really, #2 is the key here. Most cheap headphones are completely open - they do nothing to block out sound. So when your surroundings are noisy, the only option is to jack up the sound.
While IEMs are the best way (there are some reasonable choices for under $100 as well) to block sound, another option is to look for closed headphones - ones that completely cover the ear and don't have any vents or anything to let outside sound in. These are the kinds you see DJs wearing - after all, they need to be able to listen to what they're spinning through the deafening blast of huge club speakers. They're not as ultra-portable as IEMs but many find them more comfortable.
I find this works both ways. It's definitely noticeably quieter when I turn the volume down a little, but as long as I'm wearing sealed phones that do a good job of blocking the outside noise, within a minute or two, I don't really notice the difference and the music sounds like it's at a perfectly acceptable volume.
But you wouldn't have to turn the volume up so loud to drown out road noise if your headphones did a better job of blocking out noise in the first place. That's the point.
Hmm, that's a drag, I've never had a problem with one, I love 'em.
'pure' flash devices
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Before you get all excited about running UBIFS on your USB drive, take note: UBI is not for consumer flash media. These devices already incorporate hardware to hide their flash nature so they look like a plain old block device to your OS. UBI is for pure flash devices that directly expose the quirks and distinct characteristics of the underlying media.
So what kind of flash hardware is this for? Embedded devices, apparently. But maybe as flash storage becomes more common, more devices will support raw access?
Funny coincidence, I just watched the Fish & Chips episode of Heston Blumenthal's BBC series "In Search of Perfection", which discussed just the same thing. Blumenthal is the head chef at The Fat Duck, the restaurant mentioned in the article, and a major figure in the "molecular gastronomy" scene.
He visits a scientist in the UK to test the crispiness of different batter recipes, using an apparatus that analyzes the sound waves generated by poking the food with a probe. It's not the same scientist as mentioned in the Ig Nobel article, though, no idea if it's related to the specific research citing by Ig Nobel.
There are some cable companies that DO provide unencrypted DTV - typically channels 60-99. The problem is that you can't use an ATSC/8-VSB tuner, because cable uses QAM.
HDHomeRun supports QAM as well. A DVB-T version for Europe is supposedly in the works as well.
From what I gather from the articles, they didn't actually write any code that tapped into the server... it was just getting information from the client app that was residing in memory but was not displayed to the screen.
On what basis did you draw this conclusion? I didn't see anything in the articles that suggested this. The only detail about the exploit given was that it involved the assistance of a former employee, which to me suggests someone had planted a backdoor on the server. But that's just my supposition, they really don't give enough detail. Unless I missed something?
Slashdot Mirror
The people on the other line refused to give you any information whether it be phone numbers, physical location, etc. I asked several times to be taken off their list.
Perhaps you could try the opposite approach - act like you're really interested in what they're selling, eventually they have to give you some sort of company name, address, phone number etc. to make the sale, right?
Because in most programming libraries, time is normally expressed in milliseconds.
This is not strictly true. iPhone applications can be installed outside of the iTunes App Store--in fact, I have done such an installation myself for the purposes of beta testing. However, distribution through this method is limited to a fixed number of devices. The way it works is each device must send a code to the developer, and a provisioning key is then distributed with the application to enable its use on that device.
The article addresses this - a developer whose application was not approved for sale (due to Apple's 'duplicate functionality' standard, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish) tried to skirt the ban through the method you described. And Apple shut them down there as well.
So clearly that isn't a viable alternative for distributing applications.
Sounds very much like what I get from the Ubuntu repositories.
Think about it -- every repository for every distro, or even every sufficiently-privileged package manager, is a kill switch for your computer. When a repository has (very occasionally) accidentally delivered a package with some sort of malware attached, that package was immediately rolled back -- effectively killing the malware.
Except that Ubuntu cannot send a signal out to your PC to automatically remove or update a package that's already been installed. It can only change what packages it offers you in the future. If you choose not to run apt-get upgrade, or you opt to set the package on hold, it will remain on your computer indefinitely.
Proper hazardous waste disposal is a good thing however forcing it isn't even for companies.
Are you saying it should be legal to dump hazardous waste?
It's apparently a little-known fact that the Internet Archive maintains a periodically updated copy of the Wayback Machine, fittingly at the Biblioteca Alexandrina in Egypt. It's not as up-to-date as the main site (its most recent archive is from 2006), but it's a useful as a backup, and sometimes it's able to retrieve pages that give an error on the original site.
There's also the problem that defacing us currency is quite illegal.
Not true. Only if you do it with intent to defraud or make the currency unusable. Writing an URL on it is fine.
It's why we can have those souvenir penny-smasher machines everwhere.
It's primarily useful for getting your hopes up and then being seriously disappointed.
There's more then one - while they don't provide the same interface, I'm fairly sure Google's cache of the internet could be used to produce the same thing.
Google's cache is not nearly the same thing. It only provides a single previous copy, goes back a few weeks at most and is quick to disappear once the original site has died. While it's definitely useful, it's no replacement for IA's Wayback Machine.
It's not hypocritical because the government and individual citizens are not the same thing. The government is endowed with great powers to control and regulate the lives of citizens, therefore it should be subject to higher standards and limitations to constraint abuses of those powers.
that's a cute joke, but really, the first thing they tell you in any class is why the subject matters and what you'll get out of it.
Most users won't even notice the version number unless you put it in the face. Just call it FooBuster and put the version number in an about box somewhere.
If you're like most of us, all your devices at home are living behind NAT. There's no reason they can't keep living in an ipv4 private network behind an ipv6 router.
+5 informative for "RTFA", outstanding!
Excellent explanation!
One non-technical quibble:
Earbuds offer almost no passive noise attenuation, although they could do a little bit if they sealed off the ear canal.
You neglect to mention IEM (in-ear monitors), which do just that - they fit into your ear canal. They really do block out quite a good amount of sound, and they're just as portable as earbuds, though they start a bit higher in price.
Really, #2 is the key here. Most cheap headphones are completely open - they do nothing to block out sound. So when your surroundings are noisy, the only option is to jack up the sound.
While IEMs are the best way (there are some reasonable choices for under $100 as well) to block sound, another option is to look for closed headphones - ones that completely cover the ear and don't have any vents or anything to let outside sound in. These are the kinds you see DJs wearing - after all, they need to be able to listen to what they're spinning through the deafening blast of huge club speakers. They're not as ultra-portable as IEMs but many find them more comfortable.
I find this works both ways. It's definitely noticeably quieter when I turn the volume down a little, but as long as I'm wearing sealed phones that do a good job of blocking the outside noise, within a minute or two, I don't really notice the difference and the music sounds like it's at a perfectly acceptable volume.
The problem is not all headphones are created equal. The same volume level on your ipod might sound deafening in out set yet whisper quiet in another.
Certainly you should calibrate the max volume on your device for your own headphones but there's no magic bullet that'll work well for everyone.
But you wouldn't have to turn the volume up so loud to drown out road noise if your headphones did a better job of blocking out noise in the first place. That's the point.
Hmm, that's a drag, I've never had a problem with one, I love 'em.
Before you get all excited about running UBIFS on your USB drive, take note: UBI is not for consumer flash media. These devices already incorporate hardware to hide their flash nature so they look like a plain old block device to your OS. UBI is for pure flash devices that directly expose the quirks and distinct characteristics of the underlying media.
So what kind of flash hardware is this for? Embedded devices, apparently. But maybe as flash storage becomes more common, more devices will support raw access?
When asked why he wanted to go into space, Richard explained he wanted to "experience more!"
Most critics, however, doubt he will be able to destroy 20 enemy vessels in a single mission.
Funny coincidence, I just watched the Fish & Chips episode of Heston Blumenthal's BBC series "In Search of Perfection", which discussed just the same thing. Blumenthal is the head chef at The Fat Duck, the restaurant mentioned in the article, and a major figure in the "molecular gastronomy" scene.
He visits a scientist in the UK to test the crispiness of different batter recipes, using an apparatus that analyzes the sound waves generated by poking the food with a probe. It's not the same scientist as mentioned in the Ig Nobel article, though, no idea if it's related to the specific research citing by Ig Nobel.
There's video from the episode online, the relevant segment begins at the 2 minute mark.
There are some cable companies that DO provide unencrypted DTV - typically channels 60-99. The problem is that you can't use an ATSC/8-VSB tuner, because cable uses QAM.
HDHomeRun supports QAM as well. A DVB-T version for Europe is supposedly in the works as well.
From what I gather from the articles, they didn't actually write any code that tapped into the server... it was just getting information from the client app that was residing in memory but was not displayed to the screen.
On what basis did you draw this conclusion? I didn't see anything in the articles that suggested this. The only detail about the exploit given was that it involved the assistance of a former employee, which to me suggests someone had planted a backdoor on the server. But that's just my supposition, they really don't give enough detail. Unless I missed something?