Crypto AG makes encryption machines that embassies use to communicate with their governments.
It is widely suspected that the NSA has another KEY that lets them read their "ecrypted" communications. The government made the usual protestations of innocence.
Not that I think you should trust Huawei, either, on the front line. On the front line of your network you should probably have a Linux or BSD firewall.
That brings up the point: I have the strange notion, call it a suspicion, that full, everyday backups may actually cause your drive to fail faster than if you didn't. I don't think this would be the case with flash, but with HDDs, it's an actual mechanical device.
At the point where that matters, you'd be better off giving your programmers 8GB RAM instead of an 8GB flash drive, and putting/tmp in memory. And even faster than the flash drive.
If the SSD companies are now trying to distinguish 4 voltage levels, and if that gets harder to do once the chip is worn and busted, then: How about "reformatting" (through a special utility program?) the flash chip to only try to distinguish 2 voltage levels? Or using the capacity of the chip in an error-correcting manner? 120GB to 40GB w/ error correction?
>they are doing it becasue that's what scum of the earth advertisers do
Do you mean that only "scum of the earth" advertisers will do that?
Or do you mean that all advertisers of "scum of the earth"?
If the latter: If you created a product, would you refrain from telling other people about it? Or would you limit yourself to only physically talking about your product?
The problem with Thunderbird is you can't push tasks to other people, which would probably be the #1 thing you want to do in a small business (delegation).
Evolution does have that capability, but it's a much less streamlined interface than Thunderbird. Also, for some reason, it's much, much slower to read off of IMAP than Thunderbird, which is almost instantaneous. Finally, Evolution make it really hard to set up your email accounts while Thunderbird is wizard-enabled.
Back to Thunderbird, but still looking for assign task functionality.
Always show open source as including the "Professional Support" option. If nothing else, just make something up for the Paypal donation link as the yearly support cost (possibly after having emailed the app author).
The MBAs are just going to blow the money on golf, anyway. Might as well send it into the opensource ecosystem.
No, they are "in" the browser. First of all, only GET and POST are supported as values in action for HTML4.
Secondly, the difference between GET, POST, PUT, etc. is not that the browser requests a URL, and merely passes along the "action" parameter, no matter what it is "get", "put", "mickymouse", "goofy".
Rather, what happens is that the browser makes an entirely different type of HTTP request depending on the action param.
GET/path/to/file/index.html HTTP/1.0
POST/path/script.cgi HTTP/1.0 (and then the data)
and PUT and DELETE.
The browser must support the methods. It will not pass along just whatever.
Regarding security: You, of course, always have a security setup, anyways. E.g., you can only DELETE items that you created.
>You probably don't want people to be able to delete content nodes on your server just by issuing a DELETE request, you'd want to POST a request to server-side code
Well, it's always going to be handled by server-side code, no matter if it's a simple GET. In fact the server doesn't even have to respond to a GET if you don't have the right security clearance.
Say you have a project management web app. You create new projects; you can also delete them. You create new tasks; you can also DELETE them. Currently, web frameworks implement workarounds for the lack of DELETE, but HTML5 is supposed to be about fixing all of that.
E.g., people used all sorts of hacks to do rounded corners; now HTML5 has them native. Finally, DELETE would just be a standard way for sending a delete message. Details are up to your app (same as for GET and POST).
>The reason browsers don't have them is because of the HTML/XHTML spec
Well, OK. But XHTML was from about 2000 or so. Now we're at HTML5 and still don't have browser-supported DELETE and PUT? What I mean to say is, if it's not in the spec, they should PUT it there, already.
Anyway, browsers have GET and POST, but does anybody know one that has PUT and DELETE? These should be relatively simple to implement, but the last time I looked, none had any, meaning that if you wanted to use REST APIs from your browser (as opposed from server-to-server), you'd have to do awkward things like GET "/account/12345/delete" instead of DELETE "/account/12345"
Which is a problem because GET is supposed to be "idempotent" (not supposed to have any side effects no matter how many times you run it).
Originally, you had "Apple Corps Ltd", a British company. And "Apple Computer, Inc", a US company.
So you would have: applecorps.ltd.uk and applecomputer.ltd.uk Not apple.ltd.uk I.e., the full name, which is always (?) unique in a given jurisdiction.
That's sort of complicated now that CA Apple finally paid off UK Apple, and changed their name to Apple Inc. The terms of that agreement might have a bearing on domain allocation in this proposed system.
Another consideration is that Apple Corps Ltd (before the agreement) might have been said to have had a stronger claim on the ltd.uk namespace, if at all it was going to conflict, because it is a domestic corporation. And Apple, Inc. would have a stronger claim to apple.inc.us.
Well, but the shops trading as "Village Grocer" aren't limited companies, right? They would have to fend for themselves in the general UK namespace, or perhaps a lower administrative level namespace (like state domains in the US).
Secondly, I didn't know that corporations could have exactly the same name. There's Ford Motors and Ford Models, but, again, they are differentiated. So it would be: fordmotors.ltd.uk and fordmodels.ltd.uk Not ford.ltd.uk
Also, as for trade names, they would not fall under the ltd namespace because they are not corporation names. For tradenames, there could be a separate tm namespaced ("trademark"). So consumer-goods corp Unilever would get: unilever.ltd.uk, but for their products like Dove soap, it would be: dove.tm.uk sun.tm.uk
If the authorities deemed it necessary, they could mandate specification of the business line for which you have a trademark: dovesoap.tm.uk suncomputer.tm.uk
They could also optionally try to get a good domain name in the general namespace: dovesoap.co.uk
Another think we might move to in the future is to specify an exact request for a domain name when you file your incorporation papers. That would be an official domain name, at which you could be serviced legally for legal notices, too.
Re:Domain of responsibility and "being uppity"
on
Sexism In Science
·
· Score: 1
Good points.
My main point was if you've got a generic clerk from the local staffing agency, they will most likely have no idea what you're working on, and in what file categories certain experiments are to go under (or even how to pronounce them). If they did, they'd probably be working as a junior engineer somewhere.
My secondary point was that the attitude of (whoever we're talking about) reeks of classism. (Filing is for the "little people".)
I agree that being discriminatory in allocating coffee-making duties (other than seniority) would be a problem.
How about an Ltd secondary level domain? It would cover limited companies (corporations). Since this namespace is already controlled (you can't have the same name as another corp, AFAIK), you would automatically be allocated "your" domain name. That, or it would be reserved for your purchase.
So, you'd have britishgas.ltd.uk
In the US, it could be westerntrucking.inc.us Or westertrucking.inc
Slashdot Mirror
Crypto AG makes encryption machines that embassies use to communicate with their governments.
It is widely suspected that the NSA has another KEY that lets them read their "ecrypted" communications. The government made the usual protestations of innocence.
Not that I think you should trust Huawei, either, on the front line. On the front line of your network you should probably have a Linux or BSD firewall.
OK, but he was only off by 800mi.
2700 mi is still a whole lot of distance within a single country (not including Alaska, of course).
You get a whole lot of countries in the 3500 mi between Sweden and India.
So, have people taken to just throwing garbage on the ground since there are no refuse bins?
That brings up the point: I have the strange notion, call it a suspicion, that full, everyday backups may actually cause your drive to fail faster than if you didn't. I don't think this would be the case with flash, but with HDDs, it's an actual mechanical device.
At the point where that matters, you'd be better off giving your programmers 8GB RAM instead of an 8GB flash drive, and putting /tmp in memory. And even faster than the flash drive.
OK, given that:
If the SSD companies are now trying to distinguish 4 voltage levels, and if that gets harder to do once the chip is worn and busted, then: How about "reformatting" (through a special utility program?) the flash chip to only try to distinguish 2 voltage levels? Or using the capacity of the chip in an error-correcting manner? 120GB to 40GB w/ error correction?
As I understand it, the DNT flag is transmitted every time you make an HTTP request, right?
If so, non-pay content providers will easily implement blocks for people who want to read their content without giving something in return.
I don't really want that to happen, but anti-advertising activists will have brought it on by their extremism.
Also, I doubt that any among the aa-activists are living the lifestyle of Ralph Waldo Emerson.
>they are doing it becasue that's what scum of the earth advertisers do
Do you mean that only "scum of the earth" advertisers will do that?
Or do you mean that all advertisers of "scum of the earth"?
If the latter: If you created a product, would you refrain from telling other people about it? Or would you limit yourself to only physically talking about your product?
Or they could ask: Do you want to be able to read free content on the web in exchange for letting advertisers track you?
The problem with Thunderbird is you can't push tasks to other people, which would probably be the #1 thing you want to do in a small business (delegation).
Evolution does have that capability, but it's a much less streamlined interface than Thunderbird. Also, for some reason, it's much, much slower to read off of IMAP than Thunderbird, which is almost instantaneous. Finally, Evolution make it really hard to set up your email accounts while Thunderbird is wizard-enabled.
Back to Thunderbird, but still looking for assign task functionality.
Very good point.
Always show open source as including the "Professional Support" option. If nothing else, just make something up for the Paypal donation link as the yearly support cost (possibly after having emailed the app author).
The MBAs are just going to blow the money on golf, anyway. Might as well send it into the opensource ecosystem.
What do you have to do in order to allow customers to call one number, and then it gets routed forward?
Digital lines (BRI/PRI)? Or can you use analog lines? How does call hunting come into this?
"it's not going anywhere"
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
The fact is, Google randomly decides to discontinue services.
If you want to use Google office services, go ahead, but don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a fact of life, like the sky or oxygen.
No, they are "in" the browser. First of all, only GET and POST are supported as values in action for HTML4.
Secondly, the difference between GET, POST, PUT, etc. is not that the browser requests a URL, and merely passes along the "action" parameter, no matter what it is "get", "put", "mickymouse", "goofy".
Rather, what happens is that the browser makes an entirely different type of HTTP request depending on the action param.
GET /path/to/file/index.html HTTP/1.0
POST /path/script.cgi HTTP/1.0
(and then the data)
and PUT and DELETE.
The browser must support the methods. It will not pass along just whatever.
Regarding security: You, of course, always have a security setup, anyways.
E.g., you can only DELETE items that you created.
>You probably don't want people to be able to delete content nodes on your server just by issuing a DELETE request, you'd want to POST a request to server-side code
Well, it's always going to be handled by server-side code, no matter if it's a simple GET. In fact the server doesn't even have to respond to a GET if you don't have the right security clearance.
Say you have a project management web app. You create new projects; you can also delete them. You create new tasks; you can also DELETE them. Currently, web frameworks implement workarounds for the lack of DELETE, but HTML5 is supposed to be about fixing all of that.
E.g., people used all sorts of hacks to do rounded corners; now HTML5 has them native. Finally, DELETE would just be a standard way for sending a delete message. Details are up to your app (same as for GET and POST).
Highly interesting, never knew about nullipotent.
>The reason browsers don't have them is because of the HTML/XHTML spec
Well, OK. But XHTML was from about 2000 or so. Now we're at HTML5 and still don't have browser-supported DELETE and PUT? What I mean to say is, if it's not in the spec, they should PUT it there, already.
1. M$ subverts DND to kill web ads (==Google).
2. M$ earns the wrath of its erstwhile darlings, corporate America.
3. ???
4. Year of the Linux Desktop
What I would like to see is support directly in the FORM element:
<form method="DELETE" action="blah.php" >
See also
http://amundsen.com/examples/put-delete-forms/
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5177595/why-dont-the-modern-browsers-support-put-and-delete-form-methods
How about "DO" instead? Much shorter.
Anyway, browsers have GET and POST, but does anybody know one that has PUT and DELETE? These should be relatively simple to implement, but the last time I looked, none had any, meaning that if you wanted to use REST APIs from your browser (as opposed from server-to-server), you'd have to do awkward things like
GET "/account/12345/delete"
instead of
DELETE "/account/12345"
Which is a problem because GET is supposed to be "idempotent" (not supposed to have any side effects no matter how many times you run it).
Yeah, but that's the thing. A lot of people, including even business customers, want a shiny computer (but with a nice warranty).
The fact that PC manufs can't seem to be able to do that is leading to Apple's seemingly unstoppable rise.
Right, obscure enough that people are independently "inventing" them. Whoever thought them up did good thing, though.
Right, I was going to bring up Apple.
Originally, you had "Apple Corps Ltd", a British company. And "Apple Computer, Inc", a US company.
So you would have:
applecorps.ltd.uk and
applecomputer.ltd.uk
Not
apple.ltd.uk
I.e., the full name, which is always (?) unique in a given jurisdiction.
That's sort of complicated now that CA Apple finally paid off UK Apple, and changed their name to Apple Inc. The terms of that agreement might have a bearing on domain allocation in this proposed system.
Another consideration is that Apple Corps Ltd (before the agreement) might have been said to have had a stronger claim on the ltd.uk namespace, if at all it was going to conflict, because it is a domestic corporation. And Apple, Inc. would have a stronger claim to apple.inc.us.
Well, but the shops trading as "Village Grocer" aren't limited companies, right? They would have to fend for themselves in the general UK namespace, or perhaps a lower administrative level namespace (like state domains in the US).
Secondly, I didn't know that corporations could have exactly the same name. There's Ford Motors and Ford Models, but, again, they are differentiated. So it would be:
fordmotors.ltd.uk and
fordmodels.ltd.uk
Not
ford.ltd.uk
Also, as for trade names, they would not fall under the ltd namespace because they are not corporation names. For tradenames, there could be a separate tm namespaced ("trademark"). So consumer-goods corp Unilever would get:
unilever.ltd.uk,
but for their products like Dove soap, it would be:
dove.tm.uk
sun.tm.uk
If the authorities deemed it necessary, they could mandate specification of the business line for which you have a trademark:
dovesoap.tm.uk
suncomputer.tm.uk
They could also optionally try to get a good domain name in the general namespace:
dovesoap.co.uk
Another think we might move to in the future is to specify an exact request for a domain name when you file your incorporation papers. That would be an official domain name, at which you could be serviced legally for legal notices, too.
Good points.
My main point was if you've got a generic clerk from the local staffing agency, they will most likely have no idea what you're working on, and in what file categories certain experiments are to go under (or even how to pronounce them). If they did, they'd probably be working as a junior engineer somewhere.
My secondary point was that the attitude of (whoever we're talking about) reeks of classism. (Filing is for the "little people".)
I agree that being discriminatory in allocating coffee-making duties (other than seniority) would be a problem.
secondary level domains:
How about an Ltd secondary level domain? It would cover limited companies (corporations). Since this namespace is already controlled (you can't have the same name as another corp, AFAIK), you would automatically be allocated "your" domain name. That, or it would be reserved for your purchase.
So, you'd have britishgas.ltd.uk
In the US, it could be
westerntrucking.inc.us
Or
westertrucking.inc