As more and more non-criminal people are forced to use more and more encryption, this will just make more and easier choices available, even for the criminals. But the government may also try to make all use of encryption illegal, too, thus turning everyone into a criminal.
How do they record your secure web activities? Seems the only thing they can know from it is where your HTTPS requests are going to. And what about the VPN set up to friends in free countries like Norway and Sweden?
No really, you don't have to have golden ears to hear the difference. Either take the time to burn tracks from CDs into a totally loss-less format like FLAC or do what I do and screw digital music for now, it's not ready for prime time- buy used CDs they're literally sonically perfect, (even too perfect for some vinyl lovers).
I sent my first e-mail in 1977 in college. We just didn't use that term for it. We called it "a message" for lack of a simpler term (though arguably "email" might be simpler for being shorter, but that name didn't enter the picture because we were not using postage stamps).
Basically, it was on the IBM mainframe running VM/CMS at our school. It was done in some simple batch scripts that accessed the punch card reader queues in each virtual machine (a login session created a virtual machine with ran a primitive OS called CMS). There were no domain names; just user names. And mostly it was all UPPER CASE EBCDIC although I did send lower case on it which worked fine on ASCII terminals and not on some 3270 terminals. There were no fancy RFC822 headers. Each "spool file" had metadata identifying the sending user and date/time. The "card format contents" was the message body.
If using the term "email" or "e-mail" or "mail" is required to qualify, then this didn't. If sending between different computers is required to qualify, then this didn't. But it did work for everyone who had a mainframe account, which was all faculty, staff, grad students, CS students, and everyone in a programming class that used the mainframe. And I never got spam.
The designers of ATSC chose a 16:9 aspect ratio because it matches many theatrical films and offers a better viewing experience than 4:3 on movies and TV shows. It wasn't their intent to create a de facto standard for computer monitors; that is due to cost-cutting on the part of the consumer electronics industry.
Most movies are still chopped or letterboxed. It is NOT a MATCH of theatrical films. It is a COMPROMISE between theatrical films and other stuff like old TV shows and crappy B films. What will match theatrical films is 64:27... as in 4096x1728. If they come out with a monitor like that in a usable spectrum, I'd buy it up to $2k.
Yes, those and larger are available. But I have always preferred to buy monitors in a real store so I can see them operate first. I need to know the color spectrum they use, and NONE of the online retailers makes that data available. In a store I can quickly see if the monitor is suitable or not. Online, it is impossible. My latest monitor, a 1920x1200 NEC EA241WM, I did buy online because I saw it on someone else's desktop and it had the right spectrum. I bought one for home and ordered one at work. When people at work saw it, most of them wanted one, too. Then newbies got the crappy Dell hand-me-downs.
Social worker, teachers, and others doing the "noble work" are always underpaid. That's just the way it is. As long as people are willing to do that work for cheap, it will be done for cheap. Local governments don't care because they have to balance the budget, unlike the Feds.
Linux is capable of being a high speed layer 3 switch. It will need a few more tweaks, but not all that much. Basically, some stuff done in user space needs to move back into the kernel for this kind of "firmware like" performance levels (e.g. this is not for a general purpose Linux PC).
What is needed is some open hardware platforms that are effective as router/switch devices. This basically means a 1U rack case, one board inside with 16 ports of gigabit speed (a couple of fiber uplink 10-gigabit a big plus), and hopefully a better CPU (big endian) for networking. Everything needs to work on open source drivers.
Remote KVM is really not a part of IPMI. Many companies are tossing it in. But they often screw it up by using a proprietary closed protocol for which they require you to use a Java applet inside a browser (which for me totally defeats the need I have, which is to record snapshot of the servers in an automated workflow). They need to change their design to use KVM over VNC over SSL over TCP over IP. They aren't there, yet. But maybe if a few more thousand people pester them, they might do it.
Supermicro does make great stuff. But I haven't found anything they make do be suitable for a network switch. The standard model here is 1U rack space, flash device for the OS (preferably internally removable, like maybe CF or SDHC on the board inside), and 16 gigabit ethernet ports (a couple of them being ten gigabit a plus, and being fiber a plus-plus). Also, a leaner CPU that runs cool, like ARM, MIPS, or PPC, would be great (but this is outside Supermicro's current area of expertise). So we are talking about a single board with all the ports right on it, and everything can be accessed with open source kernel tree drivers.
How about some hardware in the "16 ports in 1U" class machines on which Linux can run and use all parts with only open source drivers? I can make my own customized system to do what I want it to do once there is an open hardware platform to do it on. But that needs to be a company that is not dedicated to pushing their own software. It needs to be a company that is smart enough to make money selling hardware.
I've looked around widely for what I want. Several companies come close, but each has one or two issues that are show stoppers and they won't budge on them. For example, I want my 16 port gigabit layer 3 v4/v6 switch based on Linux with all open source drivers to be in a 1U form factor, like normal switches are. A multi-core big-endian processor would be a plus.
Looking for 16 gigabit ports (a pair of 10-gigabit ports for upstream would be a big plus) in a 1U rack mount form factor. Just hardware that Linux supports with open source drivers.
These look like they would be nice if they would open their drivers so I can build my own kernel and system with special features I want to add. So I'm continuing to look around for an open, big-endian, platform which Linux supports, and for which it is easy to build in a lot of gigabit and up ethernet ports in a small size (1U).
Hover over the Products tab. You get choices for the various product line numbers. But this is obscurity for the public market. The marketing director might know exactly what all those numbers mean. But those who are new to this company will not. That's not to say they must not list their products by number somewhere. But I am saying they need to list their products by what functions they do and what problems they solve, so that new customers can go right to the correct pages. Potential customers won't be, if they have to step navigate sequentially by going in and out of different pages. They be better off scrolling than doing that.
How about a STABLE release? When will that happen? This browser is just getting to be ridiculous. I'm waiting for STABILITY before I upgrade. I'm still on a 15 month old version... you figure it out. I'll upgrade by the end of the year. But if Firefox doesn't show some stability by then, I'll be going with Opera.
Slashdot Mirror
As more and more non-criminal people are forced to use more and more encryption, this will just make more and easier choices available, even for the criminals. But the government may also try to make all use of encryption illegal, too, thus turning everyone into a criminal.
That command does not seem to work very well. All I ended up with is a giant file called "curl" with a ton of garbage in it.
I think the real solution is the wide spread use of encryption.
How do they record your secure web activities? Seems the only thing they can know from it is where your HTTPS requests are going to. And what about the VPN set up to friends in free countries like Norway and Sweden?
No really, you don't have to have golden ears to hear the difference. Either take the time to burn tracks from CDs into a totally loss-less format like FLAC or do what I do and screw digital music for now, it's not ready for prime time- buy used CDs they're literally sonically perfect, (even too perfect for some vinyl lovers).
Agreed! Perfection is overrated!
I'm streaming from Magnatune to my Bose QC 15 right now.
I sent my first e-mail in 1977 in college. We just didn't use that term for it. We called it "a message" for lack of a simpler term (though arguably "email" might be simpler for being shorter, but that name didn't enter the picture because we were not using postage stamps).
Basically, it was on the IBM mainframe running VM/CMS at our school. It was done in some simple batch scripts that accessed the punch card reader queues in each virtual machine (a login session created a virtual machine with ran a primitive OS called CMS). There were no domain names; just user names. And mostly it was all UPPER CASE EBCDIC although I did send lower case on it which worked fine on ASCII terminals and not on some 3270 terminals. There were no fancy RFC822 headers. Each "spool file" had metadata identifying the sending user and date/time. The "card format contents" was the message body.
If using the term "email" or "e-mail" or "mail" is required to qualify, then this didn't. If sending between different computers is required to qualify, then this didn't. But it did work for everyone who had a mainframe account, which was all faculty, staff, grad students, CS students, and everyone in a programming class that used the mainframe. And I never got spam.
That's a figure of speech. The real advice is update your Linkedin profile.
Seems to be popular. Already sold out. Damn you /. geeks.
Resolution is for cameras. 1920x1080 is a GEOMETRY (a crappy one). 1920x1200 is a GEOMETRY (slightly better).
A monitor with ROUNDED sides shows a company NOT interested in designing into it what matters.
The designers of ATSC chose a 16:9 aspect ratio because it matches many theatrical films and offers a better viewing experience than 4:3 on movies and TV shows. It wasn't their intent to create a de facto standard for computer monitors; that is due to cost-cutting on the part of the consumer electronics industry.
Most movies are still chopped or letterboxed. It is NOT a MATCH of theatrical films. It is a COMPROMISE between theatrical films and other stuff like old TV shows and crappy B films. What will match theatrical films is 64:27 ... as in 4096x1728. If they come out with a monitor like that in a usable spectrum, I'd buy it up to $2k.
Yes, those and larger are available. But I have always preferred to buy monitors in a real store so I can see them operate first. I need to know the color spectrum they use, and NONE of the online retailers makes that data available. In a store I can quickly see if the monitor is suitable or not. Online, it is impossible. My latest monitor, a 1920x1200 NEC EA241WM, I did buy online because I saw it on someone else's desktop and it had the right spectrum. I bought one for home and ordered one at work. When people at work saw it, most of them wanted one, too. Then newbies got the crappy Dell hand-me-downs.
eRacks
Social worker, teachers, and others doing the "noble work" are always underpaid. That's just the way it is. As long as people are willing to do that work for cheap, it will be done for cheap. Local governments don't care because they have to balance the budget, unlike the Feds.
Linux is capable of being a high speed layer 3 switch. It will need a few more tweaks, but not all that much. Basically, some stuff done in user space needs to move back into the kernel for this kind of "firmware like" performance levels (e.g. this is not for a general purpose Linux PC).
What is needed is some open hardware platforms that are effective as router/switch devices. This basically means a 1U rack case, one board inside with 16 ports of gigabit speed (a couple of fiber uplink 10-gigabit a big plus), and hopefully a better CPU (big endian) for networking. Everything needs to work on open source drivers.
Remote KVM is really not a part of IPMI. Many companies are tossing it in. But they often screw it up by using a proprietary closed protocol for which they require you to use a Java applet inside a browser (which for me totally defeats the need I have, which is to record snapshot of the servers in an automated workflow). They need to change their design to use KVM over VNC over SSL over TCP over IP. They aren't there, yet. But maybe if a few more thousand people pester them, they might do it.
Supermicro does make great stuff. But I haven't found anything they make do be suitable for a network switch. The standard model here is 1U rack space, flash device for the OS (preferably internally removable, like maybe CF or SDHC on the board inside), and 16 gigabit ethernet ports (a couple of them being ten gigabit a plus, and being fiber a plus-plus). Also, a leaner CPU that runs cool, like ARM, MIPS, or PPC, would be great (but this is outside Supermicro's current area of expertise). So we are talking about a single board with all the ports right on it, and everything can be accessed with open source kernel tree drivers.
How about some hardware in the "16 ports in 1U" class machines on which Linux can run and use all parts with only open source drivers? I can make my own customized system to do what I want it to do once there is an open hardware platform to do it on. But that needs to be a company that is not dedicated to pushing their own software. It needs to be a company that is smart enough to make money selling hardware.
I've looked around widely for what I want. Several companies come close, but each has one or two issues that are show stoppers and they won't budge on them. For example, I want my 16 port gigabit layer 3 v4/v6 switch based on Linux with all open source drivers to be in a 1U form factor, like normal switches are. A multi-core big-endian processor would be a plus.
Looking for 16 gigabit ports (a pair of 10-gigabit ports for upstream would be a big plus) in a 1U rack mount form factor. Just hardware that Linux supports with open source drivers.
These look like they would be nice if they would open their drivers so I can build my own kernel and system with special features I want to add. So I'm continuing to look around for an open, big-endian, platform which Linux supports, and for which it is easy to build in a lot of gigabit and up ethernet ports in a small size (1U).
Hover over the Products tab. You get choices for the various product line numbers. But this is obscurity for the public market. The marketing director might know exactly what all those numbers mean. But those who are new to this company will not. That's not to say they must not list their products by number somewhere. But I am saying they need to list their products by what functions they do and what problems they solve, so that new customers can go right to the correct pages. Potential customers won't be, if they have to step navigate sequentially by going in and out of different pages. They be better off scrolling than doing that.
My files were encrypted.
Indeed it is broken. I also found IPv6 is broken at BIT.LY, too :-(
How about a STABLE release? When will that happen? This browser is just getting to be ridiculous. I'm waiting for STABILITY before I upgrade. I'm still on a 15 month old version ... you figure it out. I'll upgrade by the end of the year. But if Firefox doesn't show some stability by then, I'll be going with Opera.