On the other hand, when everything actually running on the Trusted Plattform is going to cost money, and there is no free (as in beer) contend available (because of the licensing costs and requirements to get a Trusted Platform certificate), how interesting will it be to everyone? How often will they upgrade? How many people have an Xbox or PS2 or GameCube or , and don't want an additional all purpose computer because the system they own completely satisfieds their needs? It all boils down to the question: If we cut down on the number of providers (and DRM just cuts down the number of entities which offer something for you, being it legal or not), how long does it take until the system is no longer able to cope with demand (not necessarily in numbers, but in features, possibilities, additions)? The IBM compatible PC was successful not necessarily because of the offerings of IBM and Microsoft, but because of the ease to create derivates and additional tools. PkZip and SideStep, Norton Utilities and all the hundreds of thousands little share- and freeware helper made it the versatile platform it is today. Introducing the trusted platform just cuts the roots to this flowering. How long will it grow if the soil gets thinner? I give the Trusted Platform about 10 years, then something will grow up in parallel and replace the Trusted Platform step by step. It will be a sheer necessity, because the platform is moving too slow for the demand, laws and industry standards be damned.
I have another issue with those 'non competing clauses'. Rightfully those clauses are invalid in European Law, because there is a high imbalance in power between the two parties. If I wrote in a contract with a company, that however the contract has ended the company is not allowed to hire someone else for the job I had at the company within a specified time, we were talking about something else... If the company is allowed to forbid me anything after all contractual obligations of the company against me have ended, then something is deeply wrong. Contracts are either active, and both parties have rights and obligations. Or contracts are expired, and none has. End of Story.
The costs of carrying out a death sentence (including death row incarceration) were about half the costs of carrying out a non-death sentence in a comparable case.
All other costs involved are the ones about investigation and ligitation, not about sentencing.
Normally (if everyone is equal before the law) the cost of ligitation should be the same for lifelong sentences and capital punishement. If the costs of investigation are lower if the prosecutor is not going for the capital punishment, then it looks to me that a prosecutor is more pressing for a thorough investigation if he can score a bull's eye. And if there is so much paper filed for a case then there are more possibilities for the attorneys of the defendant to find contradictions and faults, thus more turns and costs for appeal. And to get someone from the death row surely makes better PR than to get someone out of a lifelong sentence.
Lets put it like this: in theory paying death penalty is cheaper than lifelong sentencing for a society. But because of the prominence for the death penalty all the costs necessary to achieve capital punishment are higher, and surely a huge part of them can be attributed to the vanity of the legal actors.
The balance sheet is still negative. The security around the workplace of a high security prison is often more expensive than the revenue the prison makes with the work of the prisoners.
Work for money means lots of connections to the outer world. To protect them costs money. To protect them very well costs more money than most work for prisoners is paid for.
Prisoners mostly do boring, repeatitive or physical work, because it shouldn't be challenging or encouraging for the prisoners. They aren't on a vacation, right? That's very low paying, and often it would be cheaper to use technology instead of prisoners. And to have at least minimum security for the workplace it has to be isolated from any civil surroundings, with makes it logistically complicated and further limits the oportunities for prisoner's work.
Your mileage may vary, but I guess, having prisoners work is rather a psychological thing (people occupied with something are less likely to think the wrong thoughts, and it disciplines them to a daily routine), and less paying for the prison.
Because it costs more money. Even though in the U.S. the average person sentenced to death sits on the death row for 12 years, it is still cheaper than keeping them alive within the walls of a high security prison for 60 years.
So death penalty is for those cheapos, who don't want to pay with their taxes for the prison industry.
I prefer to use three products in combination. Microsoft Antispyware on a daily basis, and periodical runs of AdAware and SpyBot S&D seem to do the trick for now.
Yes, there were. If you look for instance around Frankfurt am Main, you have an average distance between two old celtic or germanic funeral places of less than a mile. Of course every roman settlement there was somehow founded on old celtic and germanic soil. But this makes it impossible to determine if exactly this or another funeral place was the place of choice for the romans. No, the romans founded their towns and castles purely based on strategic and political considerations: Protecting this river crossing, having a view in that valley, having those holy places as road axis for the town. The ancient roman settlement of Augusta Raurica, today's Kaiseraugst/Switzerland for instance had its roads and town gates oriented to three holy mountains in the surroundings. Of course this place was already settled by celts. But they lost the battle, the Romans plained the place, and they started anew with a completely new designed city map.
Yes... keep that in mind. Every information wants to be free. And if you compile a lot of information in a database, this information is likely to leak further. It's like herding sheep. Some of the sheep are bound to get lost eventually.
This is, because Beograd (today's name) was called 'Belgrad' also in German (there could have been another german name, maybe it was Weissenburg, german translation for Belgrad = white castle or white town, for a short time.) Novi Sad in fact was founded by Austrians, so in the beginning it had the austrian-german name Neusatz.
This might be true for the mediterranean, but not for Germany. For Colonia Agrippina and Augusta Treverorum we even know the exact dates for the foundation. Especially if a town had 'colonia' in its name you can be pretty sure that it was founded by the Romans on empty space, because then we know that the Romans called settlers (colonists) to build the town from nothing. Often the colonists were retiring soldiers of the Roman army. The Germans 2000 years ago weren't big in town founding. They had villages with palisade walls for defence, but those were often burnt down (either by accident or by neighbouring tribes out for booty) and easily rebuilt. Many of the Germans tribes were wandering around anyway. The Cimbri and teutons of 102 BC, who ran around marauding Gaul (France) and Northern Italy for instance never had any kind of town or village, but they had waggons like the early U.S. settlers which formed a castle during the night and were moving during the days.
It's not only that, it's also connected to the fact, that French is a roman language, related to the Latin, which in the middle age was the language of choice for international relations, where German is... hum... a germanic language;)
So English often has a romanized version of the german name for german towns, while for french towns the name is already roman, thus no change. An example would be Muenchen -> Munich.
A second factor is that the west and south german towns often have roman roots and were founded by roman soldiers as frontier towns and castles to defend the Limes (the roman border) against the Germans. Those towns have a 2000 year old latin name, which is still reflected in English, but the german name was heavily changed due to bad spelling and pronounciation by the inhabitants.
Examples for the later: Koeln, latin name Colonia Agrippina -> Cologne. Wien, latin name Vindobona -> Vienna Trier, latin name Augusta Treverorum (this one is Trier in English too;) )
For north and east german towns the english name often is the german one, because those towns were founded much later and started out either with a german name anyway (Hamburg, Bremen...) or have a name that is derived from the old slawic name (Berlin [this one is still slawic], Drezdany -> Dresden, Lipa -> Leipzig, Kamenice -> Chemnitz), where only the german name survived.
And then there are two different types of sunscreen anyway: Mineralic sunscreen, mostly based on Zinc Dioxide or Titanium Dioxide, and chemical sunscreen, which contain diverse compounds (for instance Octyl Methoxycinnamate), which react chemically while exposed to UV rays and thus absorb them.
Because mineralic sunscreen are reflective, they create a thin layer on the skin, and not everyone likes the fatty feeling of them. Chemical sunscreen goes into the skin, thus it feels more natural, but if the compounds get destroyed from the UV rays, they might leave poisonous remainings in the skin (Formaldehyde...).
Now we know about how unhealthy it is to eat too much food, especially fatty, salty or artificially processed food.
And even the old wisdom that a fatty diet is bad for you, gets challenged. It seems that your LDL/HDL Cholesterine ratio is not easily to change with a low fat diet at all (it seems to be more predetermined by your genetics), and the so called mediterran diet (with 40% of the food energy coming from fat) seems to cause the people to live longer than the usually recommended 30%-energy-from-fat diets.
No. The 15 mins is the "sun fun" dose. That's the one that is considered without any effect on the skin, and that's the one where the sun protection factor is calculated from (a protection factor of 10 means: 150 min is the sun fun dose if you wear a 10 sunscreen). It hasn't too much to do with the amount of Vitamin D3 production.
And yes, cell phones and PDAs should *NOT* be exposed to the internet.
And yes, cell phones and PDAs *will be* exposed to the Internet. This is what conversion is about. Especially cell phones need to be reached independently of each other. Currently you do it with the phone number, and the difference to an IP address is the limitation of services that work with phone numbers as targets.
Mobile Phone (GSM) providers allow sending of SMS and MMS via SMTP to the target phones. This is (from a protocol stack point of view) an extension of the address space within a high level protocol: The phone number is just the user name in the email. There is no reason why this couldn't or shouldn't be done on the IP level itself. Malicously malformed MMS and SMS can corrupt a buggy phone operating system independently of the address space used to get them there. Look at the phreaks and their ways to hack into telephone equiment.
Any addressable system with an incorretly implemented service is attackable from remote. That is completely independent from the method of addressing. And phones have to be addressable to make sense to most people. (The limitation to 'most people' is necessary to block the uebercorrect who might be pointing out that there are people who never get a phone call anyway...)
The system with the pumpkin is quite old. In Berlin (built between 1895 and 1899) there was a tunnel for a streetcar crossing the Spree river between the Stralau peninsula and Treptow park. It was a single track tunnel, so they needed a foolproof signal system to avoid crashes in the tunnel.
Thus they got a wooden stick. Only the streetcar with the wooden stick aboard was allowed to enter the tunnel. At the other end the wooden stick was put somewhere for the next streetcar to pick it up.
Infrared IS thermal. But the scanner is actually sending out thermal waves (light in the infrared spectrum) and looks for the reflection. Because hemoglobine absorbs certain frequencies in the thermal range of the electromagnetic spectrum (in infrared), veins will show up black and everything else white.
Slashdot Mirror
That's correct, thanks.
On the other hand, when everything actually running on the Trusted Plattform is going to cost money, and there is no free (as in beer) contend available (because of the licensing costs and requirements to get a Trusted Platform certificate), how interesting will it be to everyone? How often will they upgrade?
How many people have an Xbox or PS2 or GameCube or , and don't want an additional all purpose computer because the system they own completely satisfieds their needs?
It all boils down to the question: If we cut down on the number of providers (and DRM just cuts down the number of entities which offer something for you, being it legal or not), how long does it take until the system is no longer able to cope with demand (not necessarily in numbers, but in features, possibilities, additions)?
The IBM compatible PC was successful not necessarily because of the offerings of IBM and Microsoft, but because of the ease to create derivates and additional tools. PkZip and SideStep, Norton Utilities and all the hundreds of thousands little share- and freeware helper made it the versatile platform it is today. Introducing the trusted platform just cuts the roots to this flowering. How long will it grow if the soil gets thinner?
I give the Trusted Platform about 10 years, then something will grow up in parallel and replace the Trusted Platform step by step. It will be a sheer necessity, because the platform is moving too slow for the demand, laws and industry standards be damned.
They are, if not compensated. There was a EU High Court decision recently, which declared those types of clauses unenforcible.
I have another issue with those 'non competing clauses'. Rightfully those clauses are invalid in European Law, because there is a high imbalance in power between the two parties. If I wrote in a contract with a company, that however the contract has ended the company is not allowed to hire someone else for the job I had at the company within a specified time, we were talking about something else...
If the company is allowed to forbid me anything after all contractual obligations of the company against me have ended, then something is deeply wrong. Contracts are either active, and both parties have rights and obligations. Or contracts are expired, and none has. End of Story.
All other costs involved are the ones about investigation and ligitation, not about sentencing.
Normally (if everyone is equal before the law) the cost of ligitation should be the same for lifelong sentences and capital punishement. If the costs of investigation are lower if the prosecutor is not going for the capital punishment, then it looks to me that a prosecutor is more pressing for a thorough investigation if he can score a bull's eye. And if there is so much paper filed for a case then there are more possibilities for the attorneys of the defendant to find contradictions and faults, thus more turns and costs for appeal. And to get someone from the death row surely makes better PR than to get someone out of a lifelong sentence.
Lets put it like this: in theory paying death penalty is cheaper than lifelong sentencing for a society. But because of the prominence for the death penalty all the costs necessary to achieve capital punishment are higher, and surely a huge part of them can be attributed to the vanity of the legal actors.
The balance sheet is still negative. The security around the workplace of a high security prison is often more expensive than the revenue the prison makes with the work of the prisoners.
Work for money means lots of connections to the outer world. To protect them costs money. To protect them very well costs more money than most work for prisoners is paid for.
Prisoners mostly do boring, repeatitive or physical work, because it shouldn't be challenging or encouraging for the prisoners. They aren't on a vacation, right? That's very low paying, and often it would be cheaper to use technology instead of prisoners. And to have at least minimum security for the workplace it has to be isolated from any civil surroundings, with makes it logistically complicated and further limits the oportunities for prisoner's work.
Your mileage may vary, but I guess, having prisoners work is rather a psychological thing (people occupied with something are less likely to think the wrong thoughts, and it disciplines them to a daily routine), and less paying for the prison.
Because it costs more money. Even though in the U.S. the average person sentenced to death sits on the death row for 12 years, it is still cheaper than keeping them alive within the walls of a high security prison for 60 years.
So death penalty is for those cheapos, who don't want to pay with their taxes for the prison industry.
Even Windows has something like a crontab.
And sometimes I start the spy ware tools to keep my hands occupied while I am waiting for the inspiration.
I prefer to use three products in combination. Microsoft Antispyware on a daily basis, and periodical runs of AdAware and SpyBot S&D seem to do the trick for now.
There are things like archive numbers and stuff. And it looks suspicious, if suddenly those numbers aren't complete anymore.
Yes, there were. If you look for instance around Frankfurt am Main, you have an average distance between two old celtic or germanic funeral places of less than a mile. Of course every roman settlement there was somehow founded on old celtic and germanic soil. But this makes it impossible to determine if exactly this or another funeral place was the place of choice for the romans.
No, the romans founded their towns and castles purely based on strategic and political considerations: Protecting this river crossing, having a view in that valley, having those holy places as road axis for the town. The ancient roman settlement of Augusta Raurica, today's Kaiseraugst/Switzerland for instance had its roads and town gates oriented to three holy mountains in the surroundings. Of course this place was already settled by celts. But they lost the battle, the Romans plained the place, and they started anew with a completely new designed city map.
Yes... keep that in mind. Every information wants to be free. And if you compile a lot of information in a database, this information is likely to leak further. It's like herding sheep. Some of the sheep are bound to get lost eventually.
This is, because Beograd (today's name) was called 'Belgrad' also in German (there could have been another german name, maybe it was Weissenburg, german translation for Belgrad = white castle or white town, for a short time.) Novi Sad in fact was founded by Austrians, so in the beginning it had the austrian-german name Neusatz.
The fact was not known then. The email in question was produced in discovery in the Microsoft Anti Trust case.
This might be true for the mediterranean, but not for Germany. For Colonia Agrippina and Augusta Treverorum we even know the exact dates for the foundation. Especially if a town had 'colonia' in its name you can be pretty sure that it was founded by the Romans on empty space, because then we know that the Romans called settlers (colonists) to build the town from nothing. Often the colonists were retiring soldiers of the Roman army.
The Germans 2000 years ago weren't big in town founding. They had villages with palisade walls for defence, but those were often burnt down (either by accident or by neighbouring tribes out for booty) and easily rebuilt. Many of the Germans tribes were wandering around anyway. The Cimbri and teutons of 102 BC, who ran around marauding Gaul (France) and Northern Italy for instance never had any kind of town or village, but they had waggons like the early U.S. settlers which formed a castle during the night and were moving during the days.
It's not only that, it's also connected to the fact, that French is a roman language, related to the Latin, which in the middle age was the language of choice for international relations, where German is... hum... a germanic language ;)
;) )
So English often has a romanized version of the german name for german towns, while for french towns the name is already roman, thus no change.
An example would be Muenchen -> Munich.
A second factor is that the west and south german towns often have roman roots and were founded by roman soldiers as frontier towns and castles to defend the Limes (the roman border) against the Germans. Those towns have a 2000 year old latin name, which is still reflected in English, but the german name was heavily changed due to bad spelling and pronounciation by the inhabitants.
Examples for the later:
Koeln, latin name Colonia Agrippina -> Cologne.
Wien, latin name Vindobona -> Vienna
Trier, latin name Augusta Treverorum (this one is Trier in English too
For north and east german towns the english name often is the german one, because those towns were founded much later and started out either with a german name anyway (Hamburg, Bremen...) or have a name that is derived from the old slawic name (Berlin [this one is still slawic], Drezdany -> Dresden, Lipa -> Leipzig, Kamenice -> Chemnitz), where only the german name survived.
And then there are two different types of sunscreen anyway: Mineralic sunscreen, mostly based on Zinc Dioxide or Titanium Dioxide, and chemical sunscreen, which contain diverse compounds (for instance Octyl Methoxycinnamate), which react chemically while exposed to UV rays and thus absorb them.
Because mineralic sunscreen are reflective, they create a thin layer on the skin, and not everyone likes the fatty feeling of them. Chemical sunscreen goes into the skin, thus it feels more natural, but if the compounds get destroyed from the UV rays, they might leave poisonous remainings in the skin (Formaldehyde...).
And even the old wisdom that a fatty diet is bad for you, gets challenged. It seems that your LDL/HDL Cholesterine ratio is not easily to change with a low fat diet at all (it seems to be more predetermined by your genetics), and the so called mediterran diet (with 40% of the food energy coming from fat) seems to cause the people to live longer than the usually recommended 30%-energy-from-fat diets.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The lux (symbol: lx) is the SI derived unit of illuminance or illumination. It is equal to one lumen per square metre.
No. The 15 mins is the "sun fun" dose. That's the one that is considered without any effect on the skin, and that's the one where the sun protection factor is calculated from (a protection factor of 10 means: 150 min is the sun fun dose if you wear a 10 sunscreen). It hasn't too much to do with the amount of Vitamin D3 production.
In Germany they use semaphores, not tokens ;)
And yes, cell phones and PDAs *will be* exposed to the Internet. This is what conversion is about. Especially cell phones need to be reached independently of each other. Currently you do it with the phone number, and the difference to an IP address is the limitation of services that work with phone numbers as targets.
Mobile Phone (GSM) providers allow sending of SMS and MMS via SMTP to the target phones. This is (from a protocol stack point of view) an extension of the address space within a high level protocol: The phone number is just the user name in the email. There is no reason why this couldn't or shouldn't be done on the IP level itself. Malicously malformed MMS and SMS can corrupt a buggy phone operating system independently of the address space used to get them there. Look at the phreaks and their ways to hack into telephone equiment.
Any addressable system with an incorretly implemented service is attackable from remote. That is completely independent from the method of addressing. And phones have to be addressable to make sense to most people. (The limitation to 'most people' is necessary to block the uebercorrect who might be pointing out that there are people who never get a phone call anyway...)
The system with the pumpkin is quite old. In Berlin (built between 1895 and 1899) there was a tunnel for a streetcar crossing the Spree river between the Stralau peninsula and Treptow park. It was a single track tunnel, so they needed a foolproof signal system to avoid crashes in the tunnel.
Thus they got a wooden stick. Only the streetcar with the wooden stick aboard was allowed to enter the tunnel. At the other end the wooden stick was put somewhere for the next streetcar to pick it up.
Infrared IS thermal. But the scanner is actually sending out thermal waves (light in the infrared spectrum) and looks for the reflection. Because hemoglobine absorbs certain frequencies in the thermal range of the electromagnetic spectrum (in infrared), veins will show up black and everything else white.
You surely are hammering the point home :)