I bought a Google assistant a few months ago, just after it became available in my native language. The one thing that surprised me is that I can't teach it anything. It's supposed to learn, but I can't speed up the learning process by explaining it what I want. Why can't I use my voice to tell it what kind of routines I want? Why is it not possible to teach it synonyms?
Many TCP servers use a technique known as a SYN cookie in order to prevent attackers using spoofed IP addresses from launching SYN flood denial-of-service attacks against them. The cookie is essentially a chosen TCP initial sequence number that is calculated using some specific hashed metadata that reflects the details of the specific TCP connection. Once the client returns a correct packet to the server, the server knows that the client isn't using a forged IP address.
Sockstress computes and stores so-called client-side SYN cookies and enables Lee and Louis to specify a destination port and IP address. The method allows them to complete the TCP handshake without having to store any values, which takes time and resources. "We can then say that we want to establish X number of TCP connections on that address and that we want to use this attack type, and it does it," Lee said.
If I shoot a canadian businessman while he is in France, i've committed a crime in france, but wouldn't be extradited to Canada.
The Netherlands has extradited a Dutchman who hadn't committed a crime in the US, but had given drugs to people travelling to the US so they could sell it there. I can't find an English article on this, but here is the dutch version
There was also a story (again, in dutch) about people being extradited to the US because they sold drugs to undercover DEA-agents in the Netherlands.
Which indicates that the "throw bandwidth at it" solution
An end-user will only choose that solution if it is cheaper than a solution with QoS. However, when providers don't charge extra for QoS (or just for changes), a QoS solution will be cheaper for them. We offer QoS on some of the products we sell and many customer choose to use QoS instead of buying more bandwidth.
I think one of the reasons that the "throw bandwidth at it" solution has been used so much on the Internet so far, is that there hasn't been a decent implementation of QoS so far.
before ADSL it was a pain in the arse and using textual interfaces was fast and convenient.
I still find I can work a lot faster with textual interface than I can with GUI interface, eventhough I have 2Mbit ADSL at home. A GUI still doesn't respond as fast as I'd like it to. It still feels a bit sluggish. Also, via a text interface I can access more programs faster than via a GUI.
However, many people prefer GUI's because they have to think less about what they're doing and the availibity of bandwidth certainly improved things for them.
Not a perfect translation, but this is roughly what it says:
Valuable data on CD-r isn't always safe for a long time. Our test shows that data on a CD-r can become unreadable in two years. Chances are that if you use certain brands of CD-r, valuable personal data gets lost.
As you as a reader of PC-Active probably already know, we have done numerous CD-r tests en plublicized the the results. Those already showed that new CD-r's were sometimes less than standard quality. We have saved the 30 different brands that we tested for two years in the original casing in a closed cabinet. For the article 'CD-r ROT', we've tested those discs again with a professional CD-analyzer that looks at the state of every bit on the CD-r.
[pictures here]
In the picture you can see the same CD-r. On the left are the results of the of the test in 2001 and on the right the results of the test in 2003. The colors indicate the seriousness of the faults in the order of white, green, yellow and red. This represents 'good readable' (white) and 'unreadable' (red). The test shows that several CD-r's had become completely unreadable and that on other CD-r data had become partially unreadable. Data that had been put on the CD-r 20 months ago had become unreadable. This happened to CD-r's of well known and less known manufacturers.
It is often assumed that CD-r's are usable for at least 10 years. Some manufacturers even claim a century. Our test shows that there is a lot of crap on the market. We've seen CD-r's that never should have been on the market. These were possibly from dumped shipments. It's completely unacceptable that CD-r's become completely unusable within two years.
The shocking results can be found in the PC-active of September. Besides the possible causes of the loss of data, the article also gives some valuable tips on how to secure the data on a writable CD for a long time. The free CD-rom includes a program that will allow you to inspect the state of your own CD-r.
If you already have the fingerprint, why do you need the DNA? You might be able to link the person to another crimescene where you did find DNA, but no prints. Also, it allows you to identify a person if you have just a partial or smudged fingerprint.
I agree that technology by itself is not bad. However, the process that is followed to develop the technology can be. IMHO Experimenting on humans to refine a new technology is not a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
I bought a Google assistant a few months ago, just after it became available in my native language. The one thing that surprised me is that I can't teach it anything. It's supposed to learn, but I can't speed up the learning process by explaining it what I want. Why can't I use my voice to tell it what kind of routines I want? Why is it not possible to teach it synonyms?
There were actually two resolutions on Daylight Saving Time. The other was about abolishing DST and was rejected: https://www.timeanddate.com/ne...
As I understand it, the test cars don't go faster than 25mph. After so many miles of testing, will the car finally be ready to drive a bit faster?
Did they do the right thing by actively facilitating the mass distribution of child pornography?
You probably wouldn't be able to see clearly through the window anymore after using the touchscreen display.
Because the US doesn't try to launch cars from the deck: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiJkQzpzRc
Here's a link to an article in English:
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid14_gci1332898,00.html
From the article:
Many TCP servers use a technique known as a SYN cookie in order to prevent attackers using spoofed IP addresses from launching SYN flood denial-of-service attacks against them. The cookie is essentially a chosen TCP initial sequence number that is calculated using some specific hashed metadata that reflects the details of the specific TCP connection. Once the client returns a correct packet to the server, the server knows that the client isn't using a forged IP address.
Sockstress computes and stores so-called client-side SYN cookies and enables Lee and Louis to specify a destination port and IP address. The method allows them to complete the TCP handshake without having to store any values, which takes time and resources. "We can then say that we want to establish X number of TCP connections on that address and that we want to use this attack type, and it does it," Lee said.
Ducks are fast and they even don't obey the local speedlimit
The Netherlands has extradited a Dutchman who hadn't committed a crime in the US, but had given drugs to people travelling to the US so they could sell it there. I can't find an English article on this, but here is the dutch version
There was also a story (again, in dutch) about people being extradited to the US because they sold drugs to undercover DEA-agents in the Netherlands.
Which indicates that the "throw bandwidth at it" solution
An end-user will only choose that solution if it is cheaper than a solution with QoS. However, when providers don't charge extra for QoS (or just for changes), a QoS solution will be cheaper for them.
We offer QoS on some of the products we sell and many customer choose to use QoS instead of buying more bandwidth.
I think one of the reasons that the "throw bandwidth at it" solution has been used so much on the Internet so far, is that there hasn't been a decent implementation of QoS so far.
before ADSL it was a pain in the arse and using textual interfaces was fast and convenient.
I still find I can work a lot faster with textual interface than I can with GUI interface, eventhough I have 2Mbit ADSL at home. A GUI still doesn't respond as fast as I'd like it to. It still feels a bit sluggish. Also, via a text interface I can access more programs faster than via a GUI.
However, many people prefer GUI's because they have to think less about what they're doing and the availibity of bandwidth certainly improved things for them.
Not a perfect translation, but this is roughly what it says:
Valuable data on CD-r isn't always safe for a long time. Our test shows that data on a CD-r can become unreadable in two years. Chances are that if you use certain brands of CD-r, valuable personal data gets lost.
As you as a reader of PC-Active probably already know, we have done numerous CD-r tests en plublicized the the results. Those already showed that new CD-r's were sometimes less than standard quality. We have saved the 30 different brands that we tested for two years in the original casing in a closed cabinet.
For the article 'CD-r ROT', we've tested those discs again with a professional CD-analyzer that looks at the state of every bit on the CD-r.
[pictures here]
In the picture you can see the same CD-r. On the left are the results of the of the test in 2001 and on the right the results of the test in 2003.
The colors indicate the seriousness of the faults in the order of white, green, yellow and red. This represents 'good readable' (white) and 'unreadable' (red).
The test shows that several CD-r's had become completely unreadable and that on other CD-r data had become partially unreadable. Data that had been put on the CD-r 20 months ago had become unreadable. This happened to CD-r's of well known and less known manufacturers.
It is often assumed that CD-r's are usable for at least 10 years. Some manufacturers even claim a century. Our test shows that there is a lot of crap on the market. We've seen CD-r's that never should have been on the market. These were possibly from dumped shipments.
It's completely unacceptable that CD-r's become completely unusable within two years.
The shocking results can be found in the PC-active of September. Besides the possible causes of the loss of data, the article also gives some valuable tips on how to secure the data on a writable CD for a long time. The free CD-rom includes a program that will allow you to inspect the state of your own CD-r.
If you already have the fingerprint, why do you need the DNA?
You might be able to link the person to another crimescene where you did find DNA, but no prints.
Also, it allows you to identify a person if you have just a partial or smudged fingerprint.
I agree that technology by itself is not bad. However, the process that is followed to develop the technology can be. IMHO Experimenting on humans to refine a new technology is not a good thing.