I went to a Maker Faire a few months back and started talking to some HAM radio operators. They told me that far from a dead activity, they have actually gone digital, incorporating the Internet to connect to transceivers for when they aren't able to have an antenna in thir back yard. One other technology mentioned was SDR, otherwise known as software defined radio. SDR means that the necessary hardware is simpler, with the majority of the signal processing now in software. There is an SDR app for the iPhone, but you need a piece of hardware that plugs ino the antenna and also plugs into the headphone jack of the phone. I haven't looked at Android, but I imagine you could use some form of GnuRadio.
It was removed, but did anyone manage to get a copy before that was done. It would be interesting to get an independent (in relative terms) review of the document.
Reading fail - it is right there linked in the summary. Now excuse me while I walk away and hide in shame;)
It was removed, but did anyone manage to get a copy before that was done. It would be interesting to get an independent (in relative terms) review of the document.
It might not be, but with Linux as the OS, may we see virtual machines that optimize the performance of Linux on the host OS? One benefit would be to have a reduced Linux desktop that is simply optimized to launching games. Maybe a Game Linux distro?
Given the lack of optical drives in new Macs, external drives are the only way to go. I suppose now we will simply need to find out which drives can easily be made region free?
There are independent observers sent to elections all over the world, to ensure there aren't any problems. Some of these observers are American. Why should it be any difference in the homeland?
I want to be able to say that our elections are fair, but only by having a bit of humility and letting some external observer in can we be sure. If observers of any form are being excluded, then who is to say that the process is being respected and they very act of exclusion causes suspicion.
What google should do is the following: extend the robots.txt file format to include a way for publishers to say: this is how we'd like you to cite our website. That is, the literal text that google (or other indexers) may use to refer to a website.
There. Problem solved.
Currently there are keywords and description 'meta' tags, though we could easily encourage pages to provide an 'abstract' meta tag?
There are multiple ways of approaching the efficiency problem. The first is actually improving the engine efficiency specially, since this has a more global impact on energy use, and another is encouraging people to use alternative forms of transport, when appropriate. Alternative transports includes things like bicycles and public transport.
Public transport usually makes sense when you only have yourself and minimal cargo to move around, but as soon as you have more than a certain amount of cargo or more than a certain number of people, then private transport usually ends up being more cost effective. But whether you use a more energy efficient vehicle or public transport when suitable, we are collectively get to reduce the amount of energy consumer and the dependency on foreign sources of energy - I mention the import factor, since this seems to be such a strong focus in parts of the political scene.
This is something the ISPs, the upstreams, well the big guys in general have to do. As an end user I couldn't care less.
As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken. The problem is many of up the stream guys, at least in North America, have dropped the ball and aren't even offering options for techs who do care and are interested in being early adopters of native IPv6. Just don't get me started on some of the incompetent replies I have got from some ISPs.
Right - you know that using link-local addresses isn't the best idea in the world. It's there only as a stop-gap and some implementations (all implementations) of Linux and MacOS won't natively allow use of it if you have a 2010 address?
NAT is **NOT** a firewall - with end-to-end connectivity, you'll need a FIREWALL that is correctly configured - just like IPv4 prior to this NAT bullshit ever happened.
I never said NAT was a solution - actually I never even mentioned it at all. fe80::/64 type addresses are supported by default on all interfaces and are self assigned. Certainly they won't be accessible by hosts on other subnets, but that is the point - this is not a NAT solution, it is a non-routable IPv6 address range, which not the same thing.
If what you are saying is true, with regard to link local addresses, then this is news to me and I would like some document that backs this up.
> As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done > their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you > start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken.
If it's IPV6-only, it'll be newUNpopularsoscialsite.com. This is a classic chicken+egg problem. ISPs which go IPV6-only first will go broke. Commercial sites which go IPV6-only first will go broke. Sadly, I think it'll take a multi-lateral government-mandated "flag day" to force the switchover. At which point, all the "New World Order" conspiracy nuts will start preaching their theories.
When there are no IPv4 addressees to allocate then it will become a business decision. Today ISPs should be focusing on providing customers a dual stack solution, that is IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. We will get to a point where a new site simply can't ask for an IPv4 address, because there aren't any to allocate. Sure there will be stop gap solutions, like moving to a hosting provider that does, NAT hacks or pushing http virtual hosting to solve solutions it wasn't intended.
If you consider the chicken IPv4 and the egg IPv6, then take advantage that the chicken is still around to incubate the egg, otherwise you will need to invest in more costly solutions for not having been forward thinking.
This is something the ISPs, the upstreams, well the big guys in general have to do. As an end user I couldn't care less.
As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken. The problem is many of up the stream guys, at least in North America, have dropped the ball and aren't even offering options for techs who do care and are interested in being early adopters of native IPv6. Just don't get me started on some of the incompetent replies I have got from some ISPs.
As a savvy end user, for my home network, I will want to continue to use NAT or something equivalent. I don't want my printer, my desktop, my laptop and my phone that connect to the WiFi to have an externally approachable address.
If you configure your devices to only use link-local IPv6 addresses, then there is no reason they will be seen by the outside world. Even then, with a routable IPv6 address you can configure you firewall rules to only expose certain devices to the internet. In the IPv6 world the firewall will be your friend and I believe as it becomes a more important component people will work out ways of making it simpler to configure.
No Canadian ISP is live or in public trial of IPv6. Contacting most of them reveals that there is no knowledge of even field tests. At least in the USA Comcast has started providing IPv6. Here in Canada we are likely to be banging rocks when it comes to ISP innovation, when everyone has made their sites IPv6 accessible only.
Unless Japan manages to scale back its energy demand, then I find it difficult to believe that there is anything that trumps nuclear in terms of energy production, especially given its geography. For me the focus should be on improving nuclear and making it safer. Heck, I am curious why we haven't managed to develop a good thermocouple instead of using nuclear powered steam engines?
In the past licensing documents for AAC were certainly taking you to Dolby's site, though now I can only seem to find references to decoders and encoders on their site. Here, I wasn't confusing AC-3, which is a different beast and not as globally supported on portable devices. Either way checking the referenced docs confirm Apple wasn't really a contributor to the format, instead they were simply the first mover when it came to mass meia players.
Time will tell, but being portable device friendly in terms of decode implementation is an important factor. Apple will probably continue supporting AAC, because they already support it and Opus will probably need to prove itself before they take a risk. Heck, Microsoft wasn't much better when it was exploring alternatives to WMA. The difference here is that WMA is Microsoft's format, kept to themselves, while AAC is Dolby's. Though it should probably be mentioned the MPEG4 container was based on the Quicktime container.
By Apple's codec I think you mean AAC which isn't Apple's per se but part of the MPEG-4 specification. As for devices, lots and lots of devices support it.
in the end the bans probably don't matter that much, since they are for older products. I think this is just the courts way of saying: screw you both, we are fed up with your antics.
Shouldnt they actually go for the uploader and not hosting company or the ones that link? Ahh going for uploaders would hurts their business, so they would rather have the authorities going for the ones that link.
The other problem is that the hosting sites may be in jurisdictions that aren't so sympathetic to foreign entities screwing with their legal system. This would mean it is easier to screw with parties that are making money in jurisdictions that are sympathetic.
From what I remember reading only one quarter were infringing.
In all reality any site that host links like this should simply block anyone accessing from the USA. I am no international lawyer, but I think part of the problem is that his site was available in the USA, even if it was hosted in the UK. It is probably a grey zone, in terms of international law, but since the UK is bending over to USA based entities, this probably doesn't matter.
Mod this up. The "it's just like the naturally produced thing" argument is complete BS -- there are quite a few "naturally produced" plants which are poisonous. You also have absolutely no way to know which mods were made to the organisms.
In either case, if it's such a great thing, just label it and I might still buy the GMO product -- but leave me the choice.
Also, nature normally has checks and balances to prevent certain combinations from happening. For example a mule can't reproduce. In the case of GM crops we are forcing combinations that nature wouldn't normally accept. Also, when it comes to food safety, how can they really be sure its safe.
As a software programmer I have the source code of what I am writing and even then I can't be 100% it is bug free. With DNA there is no source code and no full understanding of the sequence, yet somehow they are able to reassure us it is 100% safe!?
Slashdot Mirror
I went to a Maker Faire a few months back and started talking to some HAM radio operators. They told me that far from a dead activity, they have actually gone digital, incorporating the Internet to connect to transceivers for when they aren't able to have an antenna in thir back yard. One other technology mentioned was SDR, otherwise known as software defined radio. SDR means that the necessary hardware is simpler, with the majority of the signal processing now in software. There is an SDR app for the iPhone, but you need a piece of hardware that plugs ino the antenna and also plugs into the headphone jack of the phone. I haven't looked at Android, but I imagine you could use some form of GnuRadio.
It was removed, but did anyone manage to get a copy before that was done. It would be interesting to get an independent (in relative terms) review of the document.
Reading fail - it is right there linked in the summary. Now excuse me while I walk away and hide in shame ;)
It was removed, but did anyone manage to get a copy before that was done. It would be interesting to get an independent (in relative terms) review of the document.
It might not be, but with Linux as the OS, may we see virtual machines that optimize the performance of Linux on the host OS? One benefit would be to have a reduced Linux desktop that is simply optimized to launching games. Maybe a Game Linux distro?
Likely they will claim that their hands are tied by the publisher.
Which would likely be a poor excuse. If that is the case, then you should be contacting your MEP (Member of European Parliament).
Given the lack of optical drives in new Macs, external drives are the only way to go. I suppose now we will simply need to find out which drives can easily be made region free?
For the UK company what was the argument for not shipping to you? Depending on what the reason was, you may want to check with your local MEP.
There are independent observers sent to elections all over the world, to ensure there aren't any problems. Some of these observers are American. Why should it be any difference in the homeland?
I want to be able to say that our elections are fair, but only by having a bit of humility and letting some external observer in can we be sure. If observers of any form are being excluded, then who is to say that the process is being respected and they very act of exclusion causes suspicion.
What google should do is the following: extend the robots.txt file format to include a way for publishers to say: this is how we'd like you to cite our website.
That is, the literal text that google (or other indexers) may use to refer to a website.
There. Problem solved.
Currently there are keywords and description 'meta' tags, though we could easily encourage pages to provide an 'abstract' meta tag?
Just lose a USB key or two. The rest is up to the person who finds it.
There are multiple ways of approaching the efficiency problem. The first is actually improving the engine efficiency specially, since this has a more global impact on energy use, and another is encouraging people to use alternative forms of transport, when appropriate. Alternative transports includes things like bicycles and public transport.
Public transport usually makes sense when you only have yourself and minimal cargo to move around, but as soon as you have more than a certain amount of cargo or more than a certain number of people, then private transport usually ends up being more cost effective. But whether you use a more energy efficient vehicle or public transport when suitable, we are collectively get to reduce the amount of energy consumer and the dependency on foreign sources of energy - I mention the import factor, since this seems to be such a strong focus in parts of the political scene.
I'd rather have a first post T-shirt.
There's only one of those and someone already got it.
Maybe: "I screamed first post and then got modded into oblivion" ;)
This is something the ISPs, the upstreams, well the big guys in general have to do. As an end user I couldn't care less.
As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken. The problem is many of up the stream guys, at least in North America, have dropped the ball and aren't even offering options for techs who do care and are interested in being early adopters of native IPv6. Just don't get me started on some of the incompetent replies I have got from some ISPs.
Right - you know that using link-local addresses isn't the best idea in the world. It's there only as a stop-gap and some implementations (all implementations) of Linux and MacOS won't natively allow use of it if you have a 2010 address?
NAT is **NOT** a firewall - with end-to-end connectivity, you'll need a FIREWALL that is correctly configured - just like IPv4 prior to this NAT bullshit ever happened.
I never said NAT was a solution - actually I never even mentioned it at all. fe80::/64 type addresses are supported by default on all interfaces and are self assigned. Certainly they won't be accessible by hosts on other subnets, but that is the point - this is not a NAT solution, it is a non-routable IPv6 address range, which not the same thing.
If what you are saying is true, with regard to link local addresses, then this is news to me and I would like some document that backs this up.
> As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done
> their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you
> start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken.
If it's IPV6-only, it'll be newUNpopularsoscialsite.com. This is a classic chicken+egg problem. ISPs which go IPV6-only first will go broke. Commercial sites which go IPV6-only first will go broke. Sadly, I think it'll take a multi-lateral government-mandated "flag day" to force the switchover. At which point, all the "New World Order" conspiracy nuts will start preaching their theories.
When there are no IPv4 addressees to allocate then it will become a business decision. Today ISPs should be focusing on providing customers a dual stack solution, that is IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. We will get to a point where a new site simply can't ask for an IPv4 address, because there aren't any to allocate. Sure there will be stop gap solutions, like moving to a hosting provider that does, NAT hacks or pushing http virtual hosting to solve solutions it wasn't intended.
If you consider the chicken IPv4 and the egg IPv6, then take advantage that the chicken is still around to incubate the egg, otherwise you will need to invest in more costly solutions for not having been forward thinking.
This is something the ISPs, the upstreams, well the big guys in general have to do. As an end user I couldn't care less.
As an end user you shouldn't have to care, but when the upstream guys haven't done their work and you can't access newpopularsoscialsite.com, which is IPv6 only, then you start getting annoyed and start trawling the net to see why things are broken. The problem is many of up the stream guys, at least in North America, have dropped the ball and aren't even offering options for techs who do care and are interested in being early adopters of native IPv6. Just don't get me started on some of the incompetent replies I have got from some ISPs.
As a savvy end user, for my home network, I will want to continue to use NAT or something equivalent. I don't want my printer, my desktop, my laptop and my phone that connect to the WiFi to have an externally approachable address.
If you configure your devices to only use link-local IPv6 addresses, then there is no reason they will be seen by the outside world. Even then, with a routable IPv6 address you can configure you firewall rules to only expose certain devices to the internet. In the IPv6 world the firewall will be your friend and I believe as it becomes a more important component people will work out ways of making it simpler to configure.
No Canadian ISP is live or in public trial of IPv6. Contacting most of them reveals that there is no knowledge of even field tests. At least in the USA Comcast has started providing IPv6. Here in Canada we are likely to be banging rocks when it comes to ISP innovation, when everyone has made their sites IPv6 accessible only.
Unless Japan manages to scale back its energy demand, then I find it difficult to believe that there is anything that trumps nuclear in terms of energy production, especially given its geography. For me the focus should be on improving nuclear and making it safer. Heck, I am curious why we haven't managed to develop a good thermocouple instead of using nuclear powered steam engines?
In the past licensing documents for AAC were certainly taking you to Dolby's site, though now I can only seem to find references to decoders and encoders on their site. Here, I wasn't confusing AC-3, which is a different beast and not as globally supported on portable devices. Either way checking the referenced docs confirm Apple wasn't really a contributor to the format, instead they were simply the first mover when it came to mass meia players.
Time will tell, but being portable device friendly in terms of decode implementation is an important factor. Apple will probably continue supporting AAC, because they already support it and Opus will probably need to prove itself before they take a risk. Heck, Microsoft wasn't much better when it was exploring alternatives to WMA. The difference here is that WMA is Microsoft's format, kept to themselves, while AAC is Dolby's. Though it should probably be mentioned the MPEG4 container was based on the Quicktime container.
By Apple's codec I think you mean AAC which isn't Apple's per se but part of the MPEG-4 specification. As for devices, lots and lots of devices support it.
Yup. Its actually Dolby's codec.
in the end the bans probably don't matter that much, since they are for older products. I think this is just the courts way of saying: screw you both, we are fed up with your antics.
Shouldnt they actually go for the uploader and not hosting company or the ones that link? Ahh going for uploaders would hurts their business, so they would rather have the authorities going for the ones that link.
The other problem is that the hosting sites may be in jurisdictions that aren't so sympathetic to foreign entities screwing with their legal system. This would mean it is easier to screw with parties that are making money in jurisdictions that are sympathetic.
From what I remember reading only one quarter were infringing.
In all reality any site that host links like this should simply block anyone accessing from the USA. I am no international lawyer, but I think part of the problem is that his site was available in the USA, even if it was hosted in the UK. It is probably a grey zone, in terms of international law, but since the UK is bending over to USA based entities, this probably doesn't matter.
Certainly one way, but I think we should simply ban anyone using "a href" in their pages.
Mod this up. The "it's just like the naturally produced thing" argument is complete BS -- there are quite a few "naturally produced" plants which are poisonous. You also have absolutely no way to know which mods were made to the organisms.
In either case, if it's such a great thing, just label it and I might still buy the GMO product -- but leave me the choice.
Also, nature normally has checks and balances to prevent certain combinations from happening. For example a mule can't reproduce. In the case of GM crops we are forcing combinations that nature wouldn't normally accept. Also, when it comes to food safety, how can they really be sure its safe.
As a software programmer I have the source code of what I am writing and even then I can't be 100% it is bug free. With DNA there is no source code and no full understanding of the sequence, yet somehow they are able to reassure us it is 100% safe!?