Did you read who I was replying to. He said jailbreak has nothing to do with security. Jailbreak = rooting. If someone can root your phone remotely you have the security hole the size of a barn.
Frankly though my point was to illustrate the fact that jailbreaking is a security hazard if anyone besides the owner is doing it. Go troll someone else fanboi.
The problem with your analogy is the place is subject to all sorts of earthquakes. Yes, not all of them are 9.0 but they are subject to regular earthquakes. It would be like if the trade centers had to weather a plane (of varying sizes) crashing into it monthly.
If someone's passing you on the right, you're not going too slow, you're in the wrong lane. If someone's 1 car length behind you at 65 mph, there's a suicidal idiot behind you.
If either of those two things happen, in most states you are obstructing the flow of traffic, and you are just as liable to getting a ticket as the speeders.
Did you NOT look at my links. I believe they are definitive. Its the law, it is not my opinion.
I'd be very surprised if "slower yields to faster" is actually written ANYWHERE in the US Highway Code.
Umm in many states it does say something similar.
Most states follow the Uniform Vehicle Code and require drivers to keep right if they are going slower than the normal speed of traffic (regardless of the speed limit; see below)
Some states didn't allow left-lane lingering but didn't enforce the law. Now they are.
At the start of the summer, the Washington State Patrol began pulling people over for violating the state's left-lane law, which prohibits "impeding the flow of other traffic."
Upon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
B. On all roadways, a person driving a vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall drive the vehicle in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
1. Any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions existing, shall be driven in the lane nearest the right edge or right curb of the highway when such lane is available for travel except when overtaking and passing another vehicle or in preparation for a left turn or where right lanes are reserved for slow-moving traffic as permitted in this section;
These three states all imply that you must move over if they are driving at less then the "normal speed of traffic". Of course other states have different laws, but a large number of them have laws with wording similar to these. The mit page says this at the bottom of it.
Note that this law refers to the "normal" speed of traffic, not the "legal" speed of traffic. The 60 MPH driver in a 55 MPH zone where everybody else is going 65 MPH must move right. Contrast Alaska's rule, 13 AAC 002.50, allowing vehicles driving at the speed limit to use the left lane, and Colorado rev. stat. 42-4-1103, prohibiting blocking the "normal and reasonable" movement of traffic.
I like Android but all this GPL nonsense shows how dangerous using Linux or other 'free' software can be.
Lol wut?
That's why I prefer closed source software. Nobody need an army of anti-social nerds attacking them for using the operating system they promote.
Usually nerds attack users of closed sourced crap like Windows or MacOS
If you don't want people to use Linux just say so. Don't encourage Linux use and then attack companies for daring to keep their intellectual property private.
The problem is it is not their intellectual property. Due to the license its open source.
I've never heard someone complain that source code wasn't released for Windows software.
The point isn't that I want a mac that can be upgraded, the point is I do not want a computer that cannot be upgraded. There is no reason they couldn't place a panel somewhere to allow access to the drive. It seems to me that it is probably an effort to force you to visit "Apple Certified Techs" and pay more money. I don't like being forced to visit a specialist to do something that I figured out how to do myself when I was a child.
Shit its not a user serviceable part? Why the hell not? All of the other computers I own you can change the hard drive.. hell the PS3 I own (*Shudder*... Anyone want to buy a PS3? ) Allows for the user to switch the hard drive... Hell I think the instructions are in the manual.
Whatever, take your computer somewhere for that hard drive, I mean you didn't need that $75 you paid for the installation now did you?
I never said I didn't program already. My point is the parent said that a programing course should be a prerequisite for intro to programming. Please do me the favor of parsing that logic.
You changed the subject.. the subject is Sony probably lost my info. If they had proper security it probably wouldn't have happened.
Blaming hackers does not absolve sony of responsibility. I gave them info with the understanding they would protect it. They did not. They tried to bribe users with free games. NOT because the service was down but because they probably lost my info. In fact its almost a certainty they lost my info. You tried to spin it as...
...who only gave away 3 high rated games, one or two months of free premium service, a year of credit card protection, and other junk I can't remember for 3 weeks of downtime of a free service. Those bastards.
Them being nice because their free service was down.
They didn't give that away because the service was down, they gave that away because they gave my personal info to hackers on a golden god damn platter.
Slashdot Mirror
You are wrong.
http://www.enviro-news.com/news/1000_mw_australian_wind_farm_approved_in_nsw.html
1000MW site that will take up 32,000 hectares
32,000 hectares = 124 sq miles
http://www.cannonpowergroup.com/media/news-articles/milestone-reached-in-1000-mw-wind-project-in-mexico/
1000mw station that will occupy 140 sq miles
There are more, would you like them?
Perhaps I came off a bit harsh there. I apologize.
Did I say anything about androids?
No? Ok then, so that comment was for someone else then? Excellent.
Work on reading comprehension. Just because your a fanboi (Your name alone settles that.) doesn't make me one.
Did you read who I was replying to. He said jailbreak has nothing to do with security. Jailbreak = rooting. If someone can root your phone remotely you have the security hole the size of a barn.
Apparently you can jailbreak up to 4.0.1 with this method.
http://www.jailbreakme.com/faq.html
Frankly though my point was to illustrate the fact that jailbreaking is a security hazard if anyone besides the owner is doing it.
Go troll someone else fanboi.
You just essentially said that rooting a device has nothing to do with security.
Couldn't you jailbreak your iphone at one time simply by visiting a webpage? That sounds secure.
This, a thousand times this.
I approve of that as a taxpayer with no children I pay more then my fair share for their rug rats.
There is an InSSIDer for linux in alpha.
It does seem to work in Linux at least for me, it is alpha so YMMV.
http://www.metageek.net/products/inssider/linux/
Really? You windows computer goes and downloads crapware from your manufacturer, your isp, or Microsoft? It then refuses to let you delete it?
Don't worry about that, they are taking you somewhere safe! No more questions citizen.
The problem with your analogy is the place is subject to all sorts of earthquakes. Yes, not all of them are 9.0 but they are subject to regular earthquakes. It would be like if the trade centers had to weather a plane (of varying sizes) crashing into it monthly.
If someone's passing you on the right, you're not going too slow, you're in the wrong lane. If someone's 1 car length behind you at 65 mph, there's a suicidal idiot behind you.
If either of those two things happen, in most states you are obstructing the flow of traffic, and you are just as liable to getting a ticket as the speeders.
Did you NOT look at my links. I believe they are definitive. Its the law, it is not my opinion.
I'd be very surprised if "slower yields to faster" is actually written ANYWHERE in the US Highway Code.
Umm in many states it does say something similar.
Most states follow the Uniform Vehicle Code and require drivers to keep right if they are going slower than the normal speed of traffic (regardless of the speed limit; see below)
http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html
Some states didn't allow left-lane lingering but didn't enforce the law. Now they are.
At the start of the summer, the Washington State Patrol began pulling people over for violating the state's left-lane law, which prohibits "impeding the flow of other traffic."
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/left-lane-slowpokes-drive-you-crazy.aspx
For shits and giggles I pulled a few states laws on the matter
Nebraska: http://law.justia.com/codes/nebraska/2006/s60index/s6006131000.html
Upon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
Arizona: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/28/00721.htm
B. On all roadways, a person driving a vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall drive the vehicle in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
Virginia: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+46.2-804
1. Any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions existing, shall be driven in the lane nearest the right edge or right curb of the highway when such lane is available for travel except when overtaking and passing another vehicle or in preparation for a left turn or where right lanes are reserved for slow-moving traffic as permitted in this section;
These three states all imply that you must move over if they are driving at less then the "normal speed of traffic". Of course other states have different laws, but a large number of them have laws with wording similar to these. The mit page says this at the bottom of it.
Note that this law refers to the "normal" speed of traffic, not the "legal" speed of traffic. The 60 MPH driver in a 55 MPH zone where everybody else is going 65 MPH must move right. Contrast Alaska's rule, 13 AAC 002.50, allowing vehicles driving at the speed limit to use the left lane, and Colorado rev. stat. 42-4-1103, prohibiting blocking the "normal and reasonable" movement of traffic.
The entirety of conservapedia is trollish.
I like Android but all this GPL nonsense shows how dangerous using Linux or other 'free' software can be.
Lol wut?
That's why I prefer closed source software. Nobody need an army of anti-social nerds attacking them for using the operating system they promote.
Usually nerds attack users of closed sourced crap like Windows or MacOS
If you don't want people to use Linux just say so. Don't encourage Linux use and then attack companies for daring to keep their intellectual property private.
The problem is it is not their intellectual property. Due to the license its open source.
I've never heard someone complain that source code wasn't released for Windows software.
LMAO Wut?
I must be feeding a troll.
Astroturfers typically have user names... How else are they supposed to get credit for their work.
Either way, probably wouldnt matter. I believe we would default and use the savings to go to war.
Are you saying the design isn't optimal?
The point isn't that I want a mac that can be upgraded, the point is I do not want a computer that cannot be upgraded. There is no reason they couldn't place a panel somewhere to allow access to the drive. It seems to me that it is probably an effort to force you to visit "Apple Certified Techs" and pay more money. I don't like being forced to visit a specialist to do something that I figured out how to do myself when I was a child.
Its certainly more convenient to keep it in the same rack as the rest of your equipment.
Shit its not a user serviceable part? Why the hell not? All of the other computers I own you can change the hard drive.. hell the PS3 I own (*Shudder* ... Anyone want to buy a PS3? ) Allows for the user to switch the hard drive... Hell I think the instructions are in the manual.
Whatever, take your computer somewhere for that hard drive, I mean you didn't need that $75 you paid for the installation now did you?
I never said I didn't program already. My point is the parent said that a programing course should be a prerequisite for intro to programming. Please do me the favor of parsing that logic.
for universities to make this a prerequisite
You want universities to not accept CS students because they didn't take a programming course in high school?
Well id be fucked because my high school didn't offer any programming besides "Web Programming".
So if a student comes from a school that cant afford a real programming course then they just aren't good enough for you? Fuck you. Prick.
The difference here is you are giving them the benefit of the doubt against overwhelming evidence.
You changed the subject.. the subject is Sony probably lost my info. If they had proper security it probably wouldn't have happened.
Blaming hackers does not absolve sony of responsibility. I gave them info with the understanding they would protect it. They did not. They tried to bribe users with free games. NOT because the service was down but because they probably lost my info. In fact its almost a certainty they lost my info. You tried to spin it as...
...who only gave away 3 high rated games, one or two months of free premium service, a year of credit card protection, and other junk I can't remember for 3 weeks of downtime of a free service. Those bastards.
Them being nice because their free service was down.
Again, ill repeat myself. Fuck off fanboi
They didn't give that away because the service was down, they gave that away because they gave my personal info to hackers on a golden god damn platter.
Fuck off fanboi