Why should I chill out? The fact that a giant separatist parasite exists as a national party disgusts me. I don't care how many other redeeming qualities they have, or who they're representing. The people of Quebec can have their grievances heard, in turn, just like every other province.
Or at least that's how a democracy is supposed to work. I'm not sure what the fuck we're running now.
People in Quebec get to vote for a party they feel represents their interests, just like people in every other province. If the people voting for them thought that the other parties were worth anything, then maybe they would vote for them. As it is most people I speak to just seem to want to vote for the party that is the least terrible, and that is with a bar set dishearteningly low. Remember, nothing is stopping any other province from have their own Bloc, and indeed the western provinces do, though they don't seem to get any votes that seem to register - then again the conservative government seems to represent more of Alberta's interests than anyone else's.
Here is a list of registered political parties in Canada:
Certainly and GM crops aren't the real solution and this is for multiple reasons:
- Monsanto based grain can't be reused by the farmers, so one company hold everyone to ransom.
- GM crops require far more chemicals than traditional crops. This risks killing off pollinators.
- GM farming is a short-term solution.
We may able boost yield in the short term, using GM crops, but we may end up with dangerous mutations that can't be used in a food source and with a lack of pollinating insects that are necessary to make our crops survive.
The sad truth is that the real problem is over population. There is only so many people the planet can support. History has shown us plenty of examples of human populations making their lands inhospitable, because of short-term planning and no regards for the future.
The other issue is over-consumption. If you go to the USA, UK and Australia you will see many cases of people eating far beyond what they need. If people only ate what made sense then this would also help food go round. The problem is this does not fit into what companies want and being able to eat more than you need is an apparent presentation of wealth.
Don't get me started on G20 countries wanting to exploit third-world countries, in such as way that the people have lived on those lands for centuries are kicked off and end up with no means of feeding themselves. When blaming some of these countries for crimes against humanity, we should sometimes be taking that blame back to our own governments and companies.
How many "bits and bytes" does a device have to store to be declared a computer? I mean, mine stores a password, those are a few bits, where is the limit? I don't know enough about the case to comment on the details, but it seems an odd thing to base a ruling on to me.
Don't forget that lots of the routers now have usb ports included. So you can turn your "router" into a "computer" just by plugging in a usb memory stick.
How much data are you willing to expose due to simple wireless key decryption? Secure data should be on another server with separate authentication, IMHO. ''
At one place I work the wireless connection only gives you access to the internet. If you want access to the company network, then you will have to do it using the VPN. It may sound a bit paranoid, but at least VPN security is more robust than wireless security.
This is why having your wireless outer also be your file server is a bad idea. You are essentially getting one door to unlock to get access to all the goodies. If your drive is connected to a server with a separate level of security then you have just made it that much harder to access that data for the unauthorised.
As to the power usage thing, this is one reason why I would like to see "wake on demand" or other similar technologies take off across the board. These technologies allow you to put your computer to sleep and then have it wake up when there is a request for a service being offered by that computer. Currently I can do this with an Apple Airport Express and a mac-mini server. I just checked and Avahi doesn't yet work with this.
If the router was using an encrypted connection, then they should at least be a fine, but only if real intrusion was demonstrated. If it wasn't encrypted then that's the owner's fault.
The door analogy fails in the sense that your building has a specific graphical location, with which by default I am outside. A wireless signal can encroach on space that I am in and therefore includes me in that space whether I like it or not. You could argue that when I am decrypting the signal I am simply making sense of the noise around me and not intentionally making use of that noise. Think of it this way: if your minivan is on my land without my permission is the crime of me unlocking it to see what's in it still the same as if I did that while it was outside my land?
In many ways if you have sensitive data going over the wireless signal, then you should be using an extra layer of encryption on top of whatever the wireless standard offers, or questioning your use of the wireless technology. In many cases lack of computing power is not an excuse, as it is with cell phones for example. The only question I have now is what cross-platform solutions provide this extra level of data encryption?
To some this is just a pissing contest, while others see it as the world changing domination by which their manly hood is challenged. For post people if the user experience meets or beats their expectations, then that is all that matters. I am with you that it really doesn't matter - well unless mine is the winner;)
I think its a question of perceived survivability and confidence in human engineering. At the end of the day its really a question of trust. For me I wouldn't want to challenge whether I can survive a two story drop and sometimes human engineering inspires confidence.
Maybe the Free Software Foundation and Apple needs to sit down together, so we open source developers can find out where they stand.
Myself, I have no issue paying for open source, especially when it helps the developers, but it would be nice to be able to have open source software on the app store. What do companies like Apple have to fear?
The question I have is how much does DST have to do with it and how much is simply the time of year? It is possible that people are simply trying to stay awake longer than the available light. I have read elsewhere that being up after dark is not good for you, though like every other study I have to ask myself how much is this based in the factor being studied and how much is this simply a life-style factor?
I think what we have here is more of a opportunity from the regulator. Essentially the ISPs are encouraged to play nice and have the regulator give them some leeway, otherwise the regulator will decide how the game will be played. Regulators in European nations are usually more effective than their North American counter-parts, based on what I have seen.
What about their ongoing questionable hardware issues (you know, stuff like the grip of death, things that aren't fatal to a project but are hard to classify as anything but stupid).
Apple get's things wrong too. It could be argued this is what happens when you try pushing the edge, but in reality it was probably an oversight due to other priorities getting in the way.
Before Steve Jobs was brought back to Apple, the company was quickly going down hill. Their arrogance cost them the market, and the OS had some serious stability issues. Rebuilding MacOS X on the foundation of OpenStep, and thus BSD, was a big help in changing the appealing, but unstable OS, into an appealing and stable OS. From what I have read Steve Jobs likes to keep a tight ship and the employees benefit and suffer at the same time. They benefit because they end up excelling at what they do and they suffer because the demands put on them are high.
Microsoft from what I read, at the time of Vista, suffered from internal competition that was actually hurting the company, since teams almost acted to sabotage the efforts of other teams. I don't know whether Steve Balmer shaped things up after that, since Windows 7 seems to be a better OS, or whether they are just cruising on the same trajectory, but no one has noticed the direction?
The quality of the leadership counts for as much as anything.
I doubt it would win on performance per watt. Freescale and IBM didn't seem to care about that. IBM made it clear they just wanted to concrete or sheer processing capability. I suspect that was one if the reasons Apple moved to Intel - well that and cost.
Re:It's a bit more complex than this article...
on
Pocket Wars and Cores
·
· Score: 1
I was reading that the ARM chips support Big and Little endian. Is this selected by the OS or by the firmware? Also does this make a difference for compiled software, such as a binary for a Linux application?
If you come to/. you should realise that many stories summaries seem to be designed as flames. Once you realise that you know to do you own research on the side, if the story matters at all.
Re:I think my first ARM device was a Gameboy Advan
on
Pocket Wars and Cores
·
· Score: 1
Indeed Acorn existed long before the advent of the Archimedes and the ARM chip it powered. It was the first time I had ever heard about a RISC chip. It sounds like ARM was one of the first RISC chips, and has managed to stay around while others just fell back into the unknown.
The BBC Micro before it was based on the 6502 chip.
Using open source requires making some decisions and in certain sacrificing something. If you are hoping to get a freebie, then you will want to be using a BSD license, but if you decide to use code with GPL then you have to recognise the intent is about "giving back to your peers" - it is not really "something for nothing" as many people think it is. Healthy open source is about people participating in the process, rather than simply trying to get as much free stuff as possible and complaining that the upstream developers aren't doing enough.
I suppose only time will tell. At least with HTML5 a lot more work has been done with optimizing the engines, but we still aren't immune to the endless "for" loops that take up all the CPU - maybe that would take some code that would detect a CPU crushing "for" loop and de-prioritise the code? Either way I would be curious to see how much they decide to optimise the generated code. I don't want to see something akin to the mess generated by programs such as "MS FrontPage".
Forgot to say that the certification process would include a set of API usage tests and behavior tests. No application developer would be forced to go through the process, but if the fee is low and on a yearly basis, then I imagine many develops would want to reassure the customer base.
What would be nice, is even if the market place is left open, there would be an option to pay Google to certify your application. The idea being that people can then choose between "certified" apps or uncertified ones. This would help give users some sort of reassurance, but still leave the choice option open.
As to the kill switch, does Google print a list of applications to which it was applied?
Current web sites won't require it, but at a certain point new web sites or businesses will only be able to get an IPv6 address or IPv6 subnet. If you want to access their web sites then you will need it. The IPv4 address pool exhaustion is going to hit Asia and Africa first, so you will likely be cut off from new businesses and service in those geographic regions.
Akamai is already doing the work necessary for IPv6 support, but it probably won't be ready until late 2011 or 2012.
Really the only big problem on the PC side is legacy XP installations, Win7 has IPv6 enabled OOTB.
Windows XP is not a problem either. All it takes is one command, on the command line, and IPv6 is active. It even assigns itself an address using router advertisements. For the DNS server address you will still need IPv4, but in an internal network that isn't really an issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Why should I chill out? The fact that a giant separatist parasite exists as a national party disgusts me. I don't care how many other redeeming qualities they have, or who they're representing. The people of Quebec can have their grievances heard, in turn, just like every other province.
Or at least that's how a democracy is supposed to work. I'm not sure what the fuck we're running now.
People in Quebec get to vote for a party they feel represents their interests, just like people in every other province. If the people voting for them thought that the other parties were worth anything, then maybe they would vote for them. As it is most people I speak to just seem to want to vote for the party that is the least terrible, and that is with a bar set dishearteningly low. Remember, nothing is stopping any other province from have their own Bloc, and indeed the western provinces do, though they don't seem to get any votes that seem to register - then again the conservative government seems to represent more of Alberta's interests than anyone else's.
Here is a list of registered political parties in Canada:
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&dir=par&document=index&lang=e
No, you are a consumer. You are only a citizen when it pleases our corporate overlords.
When 30% of our food doesn't even get eaten?
Certainly and GM crops aren't the real solution and this is for multiple reasons:
- Monsanto based grain can't be reused by the farmers, so one company hold everyone to ransom.
- GM crops require far more chemicals than traditional crops. This risks killing off pollinators.
- GM farming is a short-term solution.
We may able boost yield in the short term, using GM crops, but we may end up with dangerous mutations that can't be used in a food source and with a lack of pollinating insects that are necessary to make our crops survive.
The sad truth is that the real problem is over population. There is only so many people the planet can support. History has shown us plenty of examples of human populations making their lands inhospitable, because of short-term planning and no regards for the future.
The other issue is over-consumption. If you go to the USA, UK and Australia you will see many cases of people eating far beyond what they need. If people only ate what made sense then this would also help food go round. The problem is this does not fit into what companies want and being able to eat more than you need is an apparent presentation of wealth.
Don't get me started on G20 countries wanting to exploit third-world countries, in such as way that the people have lived on those lands for centuries are kicked off and end up with no means of feeding themselves. When blaming some of these countries for crimes against humanity, we should sometimes be taking that blame back to our own governments and companies.
How many "bits and bytes" does a device have to store to be declared a computer? I mean, mine stores a password, those are a few bits, where is the limit? I don't know enough about the case to comment on the details, but it seems an odd thing to base a ruling on to me.
Don't forget that lots of the routers now have usb ports included. So you can turn your "router" into a "computer" just by plugging in a usb memory stick.
How much data are you willing to expose due to simple wireless key decryption? Secure data should be on another server with separate authentication, IMHO. ''
At one place I work the wireless connection only gives you access to the internet. If you want access to the company network, then you will have to do it using the VPN. It may sound a bit paranoid, but at least VPN security is more robust than wireless security.
This is why having your wireless outer also be your file server is a bad idea. You are essentially getting one door to unlock to get access to all the goodies. If your drive is connected to a server with a separate level of security then you have just made it that much harder to access that data for the unauthorised.
As to the power usage thing, this is one reason why I would like to see "wake on demand" or other similar technologies take off across the board. These technologies allow you to put your computer to sleep and then have it wake up when there is a request for a service being offered by that computer. Currently I can do this with an Apple Airport Express and a mac-mini server. I just checked and Avahi doesn't yet work with this.
If the router was using an encrypted connection, then they should at least be a fine, but only if real intrusion was demonstrated. If it wasn't encrypted then that's the owner's fault.
The door analogy fails in the sense that your building has a specific graphical location, with which by default I am outside. A wireless signal can encroach on space that I am in and therefore includes me in that space whether I like it or not. You could argue that when I am decrypting the signal I am simply making sense of the noise around me and not intentionally making use of that noise. Think of it this way: if your minivan is on my land without my permission is the crime of me unlocking it to see what's in it still the same as if I did that while it was outside my land?
In many ways if you have sensitive data going over the wireless signal, then you should be using an extra layer of encryption on top of whatever the wireless standard offers, or questioning your use of the wireless technology. In many cases lack of computing power is not an excuse, as it is with cell phones for example. The only question I have now is what cross-platform solutions provide this extra level of data encryption?
To some this is just a pissing contest, while others see it as the world changing domination by which their manly hood is challenged. For post people if the user experience meets or beats their expectations, then that is all that matters. I am with you that it really doesn't matter - well unless mine is the winner ;)
Why do we insist on speaking of the internet as some mythical being with the ability to observe, act and heal?
Its sounds nicer and we are just thinking of Skynet and the Matrix. We are simply the worker cells. :)
Does anyone know how other countries compare in this regards? I imagine certain countries have certain clear points of failure.
I think its a question of perceived survivability and confidence in human engineering. At the end of the day its really a question of trust. For me I wouldn't want to challenge whether I can survive a two story drop and sometimes human engineering inspires confidence.
Maybe the Free Software Foundation and Apple needs to sit down together, so we open source developers can find out where they stand.
Myself, I have no issue paying for open source, especially when it helps the developers, but it would be nice to be able to have open source software on the app store. What do companies like Apple have to fear?
The question I have is how much does DST have to do with it and how much is simply the time of year? It is possible that people are simply trying to stay awake longer than the available light. I have read elsewhere that being up after dark is not good for you, though like every other study I have to ask myself how much is this based in the factor being studied and how much is this simply a life-style factor?
I think what we have here is more of a opportunity from the regulator. Essentially the ISPs are encouraged to play nice and have the regulator give them some leeway, otherwise the regulator will decide how the game will be played. Regulators in European nations are usually more effective than their North American counter-parts, based on what I have seen.
What about everything before OS X?
What about their ongoing questionable hardware issues (you know, stuff like the grip of death, things that aren't fatal to a project but are hard to classify as anything but stupid).
Apple get's things wrong too. It could be argued this is what happens when you try pushing the edge, but in reality it was probably an oversight due to other priorities getting in the way.
Before Steve Jobs was brought back to Apple, the company was quickly going down hill. Their arrogance cost them the market, and the OS had some serious stability issues. Rebuilding MacOS X on the foundation of OpenStep, and thus BSD, was a big help in changing the appealing, but unstable OS, into an appealing and stable OS. From what I have read Steve Jobs likes to keep a tight ship and the employees benefit and suffer at the same time. They benefit because they end up excelling at what they do and they suffer because the demands put on them are high.
Microsoft from what I read, at the time of Vista, suffered from internal competition that was actually hurting the company, since teams almost acted to sabotage the efforts of other teams. I don't know whether Steve Balmer shaped things up after that, since Windows 7 seems to be a better OS, or whether they are just cruising on the same trajectory, but no one has noticed the direction?
The quality of the leadership counts for as much as anything.
I doubt it would win on performance per watt. Freescale and IBM didn't seem to care about that. IBM made it clear they just wanted to concrete or sheer processing capability. I suspect that was one if the reasons Apple moved to Intel - well that and cost.
I was reading that the ARM chips support Big and Little endian. Is this selected by the OS or by the firmware? Also does this make a difference for compiled software, such as a binary for a Linux application?
That is why ArsTechnica is on my daily list.
If you come to /. you should realise that many stories summaries seem to be designed as flames. Once you realise that you know to do you own research on the side, if the story matters at all.
Indeed Acorn existed long before the advent of the Archimedes and the ARM chip it powered. It was the first time I had ever heard about a RISC chip. It sounds like ARM was one of the first RISC chips, and has managed to stay around while others just fell back into the unknown.
The BBC Micro before it was based on the 6502 chip.
Using open source requires making some decisions and in certain sacrificing something. If you are hoping to get a freebie, then you will want to be using a BSD license, but if you decide to use code with GPL then you have to recognise the intent is about "giving back to your peers" - it is not really "something for nothing" as many people think it is. Healthy open source is about people participating in the process, rather than simply trying to get as much free stuff as possible and complaining that the upstream developers aren't doing enough.
I suppose only time will tell. At least with HTML5 a lot more work has been done with optimizing the engines, but we still aren't immune to the endless "for" loops that take up all the CPU - maybe that would take some code that would detect a CPU crushing "for" loop and de-prioritise the code? Either way I would be curious to see how much they decide to optimise the generated code. I don't want to see something akin to the mess generated by programs such as "MS FrontPage".
Forgot to say that the certification process would include a set of API usage tests and behavior tests. No application developer would be forced to go through the process, but if the fee is low and on a yearly basis, then I imagine many develops would want to reassure the customer base.
What would be nice, is even if the market place is left open, there would be an option to pay Google to certify your application. The idea being that people can then choose between "certified" apps or uncertified ones. This would help give users some sort of reassurance, but still leave the choice option open.
As to the kill switch, does Google print a list of applications to which it was applied?
Just use regular HTML tags or just the url. /. does not use bbcode.
Current web sites won't require it, but at a certain point new web sites or businesses will only be able to get an IPv6 address or IPv6 subnet. If you want to access their web sites then you will need it. The IPv4 address pool exhaustion is going to hit Asia and Africa first, so you will likely be cut off from new businesses and service in those geographic regions.
Akamai is already doing the work necessary for IPv6 support, but it probably won't be ready until late 2011 or 2012.
Really the only big problem on the PC side is legacy XP installations, Win7 has IPv6 enabled OOTB.
Windows XP is not a problem either. All it takes is one command, on the command line, and IPv6 is active. It even assigns itself an address using router advertisements. For the DNS server address you will still need IPv4, but in an internal network that isn't really an issue.