"Common Carrier" status is something the ISP's want, so they don't have to be held responsible for subscribers' actions. If they demonstrate the capability and willingness to monitor subscribers' actions, they abandon any safe-harbor provisions the law now gives them.
If I was the legal eagle of an ISP, I would grasp the Marketing Steph-equivalent in my claws and squeeze until he admitted this is a bad idea.
Best Practices are to spin the data onto other tapes periodically before reusing those old tapes. NO DATA IS LOST, just rewritten with "fresh bits", and the tapes themselves are regularly cycled through the system, with new tapes injected into the cycle as needed.
We lost the 1970 Census data because that practice wasn't followed by the government agency in charge, and the IT departments of the world went, "WTF were they thinking?".
The entire IP stack of Vista/Longhorn has been reimplemented. IPv6 is kind of an "add-on" to the networking code in XP, but in Vista, IPv4 and IPv6 are implemented in a unified stack.
Just sayin', the behavior is going to be different, and having some bugs to shake out is really no surprise.
The Viking landed, unfortunately, on top of the Yarg king! And, to no surprise, they are really P.O'd about it. Fear not! Commander Keen has already sorted it all out.
Lest that smell increase, it should be pointed out that the Waco debacle was inherited from GHWBush's administration. Feb '93 was pretty damn early in Clinton's first term.
That does not excuse it from being a debacle and a tragedy, just that it was a bad situation well before it became worse.
Such throttling or shaping remains neutral if, to take your example, *all* email traffic is treated the same way. I think we all agree that it is fine if an ISP states that it provides various connections at various levels of throughput, and that it treats these particular types of traffic in certain ways. So stated, the consumer [hopefully] has a choice on patronizing that ISP.
Perhaps, but it is Mr. Buffet who said that he would leave his heirs "enough money that they could do anything, but not so much that they could do nothing."
Using the same tech as virus writers use to "binary diff" Microsoft patches to see what was fixed, and therefore, what is still vulnerable in the field, Coverity and related companies can still find many possible vulnerabilities. They also find a lot of false positives.
Agreed. Many Companies that actually create products hold large patent libraries in reserve in case they are sued by a competitor. The end result is, "Well, we could counter-sue because you are infringing on one of our patents, OR how about we cross-license and call it a day?"
But that strategy is useless against an entity that produces no product.
So, how is the government going to distinguish between queries for pr0n and a 12-year-old looking for fishing gear at Dick's Sporting Goods? What's your first inclination of what to type into a search engine and what do you think you'll get back?
Here in MN, Dick's just bought out Galyan's, another sporting/apparrel store and used the Dick's name. Idiots. Welcome to the now.
The cost is some small delta over the cost of printing your receipt after using an ATM machine. These are some of the same companies that manufacture ATM machines, after all!
We *must* be careful of our words. Evolution is a "theory", but it is a scientific theory, which is 1) The best explanation or model of the known facts so far, and 2) disprovable (and revisable) upon presentation of new facts. The creationist proponents just do not get the definition of "scientific theory". Yeah, I know Carl Sagan said, "Evolution is a fact,", but he meant that "fact" as in "provable evolutionary change has been found," and I agree with him.
ID is not disprovable, and its model provides for no advancement in science, i.e. there is no place on which to tack newly garnered facts, no way to do any predictions, and there is nothing to revise.
Scientists working the field of evolution may eventually find facts that prove a supreme being, and the scientific theory will be so revised at that time. For ID, the reverse can never be true.
I wish they'd rerun "Cosmos" again. Be fun to see what's evolved in 25 years.
Re:COBOL Moving Up On Java
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
And for those of you who love OO programming, there is Add-1-to-COBOL.
Slashdot Mirror
"Common Carrier" status is something the ISP's want, so they don't have to be held responsible for subscribers' actions. If they demonstrate the capability and willingness to monitor subscribers' actions, they abandon any safe-harbor provisions the law now gives them.
If I was the legal eagle of an ISP, I would grasp the Marketing Steph-equivalent in my claws and squeeze until he admitted this is a bad idea.
Best Practices are to spin the data onto other tapes periodically before reusing those old tapes. NO DATA IS LOST, just rewritten with "fresh bits", and the tapes themselves are regularly cycled through the system, with new tapes injected into the cycle as needed.
We lost the 1970 Census data because that practice wasn't followed by the government agency in charge, and the IT departments of the world went, "WTF were they thinking?".
Which is exactly what we should be thinking now.
The entire IP stack of Vista/Longhorn has been reimplemented. IPv6 is kind of an "add-on" to the networking code in XP, but in Vista, IPv4 and IPv6 are implemented in a unified stack.
Just sayin', the behavior is going to be different, and having some bugs to shake out is really no surprise.
Indeed, this bill's defeat brought to you by Swift Boat Veterans for Free Speech.
Doesn't that about sum it all up?
The Viking landed, unfortunately, on top of the Yarg king! And, to no surprise, they are really P.O'd about it.
Fear not! Commander Keen has already sorted it all out.
Unless his partner was suffering from rectal-cranial inversion, the blast was to his face.
Using "Make" would handle this. I believe it has been done, but don't know why it isn't more commonly used.
"...integrated AI sophisticated enough for it to have a favorite Thelonius Monk album"
ROFL
Good one!
Lest that smell increase, it should be pointed out that the Waco debacle was inherited from GHWBush's administration. Feb '93 was pretty damn early in Clinton's first term.
That does not excuse it from being a debacle and a tragedy, just that it was a bad situation well before it became worse.
yeah, I've seen that before. We just received the above on a family mailing list. My 15-year-old daughter responded with:
To all the old people who were born in the 20's, 30's... yeah you know who you are.
You've made cities for us with busy roads and paved streets. You've made us wear helmets.
You've told us not to get in cars with strangers.
We've heard countless lectures from you on the importance of wearing a seatbelt.
We've had friends who have gotten sick from sharing soft drinks.
Your healthiness is spilling over onto us, so we eat wheat bread and drink diet pop or water.
You've given us cell phones so you always know where we are.
We play sports, but it's hard to get outside when you have homework to do.
If we don't make the team, you still insist on making us play on a less competitive team so we can be active.
Hey... thanks.
The Doctor has been known to be partial to ginger beer.
Such throttling or shaping remains neutral if, to take your example, *all* email traffic is treated the same way. I think we all agree that it is fine if an ISP states that it provides various connections at various levels of throughput, and that it treats these particular types of traffic in certain ways. So stated, the consumer [hopefully] has a choice on patronizing that ISP.
Star Trek: The Hand-Wringing Generation. Indeed.
I mean, interstellar speed-limits? This was a useful plot-device, how?
I did enjoy the "Puppet Masters"-ripoff episodes.
Perhaps, but it is Mr. Buffet who said that he would leave his heirs "enough money that they could do anything, but not so much that they could do nothing."
I agree with commending Mr. Buffet for these actions. If he thinks the B&MG Foundation is worthy of such largess, then it probably is.
But for the rest of us, why wait until you reach their heights? Tithe now. You will be in very select company.
I pronounce it "squirrel" just to piss DB types off.
Using the same tech as virus writers use to "binary diff" Microsoft patches to see what was fixed, and therefore, what is still vulnerable in the field, Coverity and related companies can still find many possible vulnerabilities. They also find a lot of false positives.
Agreed. Many Companies that actually create products hold large patent libraries in reserve in case they are sued by a competitor. The end result is, "Well, we could counter-sue because you are infringing on one of our patents, OR how about we cross-license and call it a day?"
But that strategy is useless against an entity that produces no product.
*snort*
Agreed. This finding corroborates evolution theory, but does not "prove" it. Find a pre-Cambrian rabbit, now *that* would disprove it.
So, how is the government going to distinguish between queries for pr0n and a 12-year-old looking for fishing gear at Dick's Sporting Goods? What's your first inclination of what to type into a search engine and what do you think you'll get back?
Here in MN, Dick's just bought out Galyan's, another sporting/apparrel store and used the Dick's name. Idiots. Welcome to the now.
The cost is some small delta over the cost of printing your receipt after using an ATM machine. These are some of the same companies that manufacture ATM machines, after all!
Show me the Pre-Cambrian rabbit.
We *must* be careful of our words. Evolution is a "theory", but it is a scientific theory, which is 1) The best explanation or model of the known facts so far, and 2) disprovable (and revisable) upon presentation of new facts. The creationist proponents just do not get the definition of "scientific theory". Yeah, I know Carl Sagan said, "Evolution is a fact,", but he meant that "fact" as in "provable evolutionary change has been found," and I agree with him.
ID is not disprovable, and its model provides for no advancement in science, i.e. there is no place on which to tack newly garnered facts, no way to do any predictions, and there is nothing to revise.
Scientists working the field of evolution may eventually find facts that prove a supreme being, and the scientific theory will be so revised at that time. For ID, the reverse can never be true.
I wish they'd rerun "Cosmos" again. Be fun to see what's evolved in 25 years.
And for those of you who love OO programming, there is Add-1-to-COBOL.