Maximum line of sight. Inclination, curve, drainage, presence of sidewalk, distance to intersection, distance to driveway, populaton of children, proximity to school, width, apparent width.
Then setup a traffic cone at various detail points in the road and measure the distance to the cone to make cars stop. You just need a cone, adjustable speed limit indicator, and a tape measure.
Either the grocery store pays by rounding the final price down, or the customer pays when it gets rounded up. Or is it going to alternate? Even days, rounds to the customer favor, odd days it rounds against?
The site does not choose the ads based on safety. The site sets aside space that is sold to different ad brokers who use brokers who have no idea what ads are going to be run. It is dangerous by design.
Until websites stop running content provided by other (anonymous) people, there ARE no safe ads. Its broken by design.
Your claim that you never had a problem could end tonight, tomorrow, or the day after. Then what? Are you going to apologize to everyone for failing to understand the problem and telling them it was safe. Esp when professional security researchers are telling you its NOT safe?
The www is a infinite bag of untrusted/untrustworthy data that your your flawed browser sifts through. Its was already a disaster waiting to happen. The problem is, the disaster has become automated, financed, and profitable.
Can we enumerate the reasons why the the browser needs to run with the same user ID as the person that owns files?
I can think of one: access to local files for upload or download. But it seems like there could be a mechanism to hand off files to and from the browser that doesn't give it direct access. Some IPC mechanism or a filesystem-based dmz.
At this point, I really do not understand why the industry is not moving to make the browser an untrusted entity on the computer. Taking away its ability to access files, navigate the filesystem, or run programs.
They need to issue a recovery password for every account. This would be a serial number in case the account ever gets hijacked. It can only get you in to reset your password. It could be written down and stored in a safe or in a safety deposit box. And it cannot be changed. It would be displayed only one time by the website and never be visible again to anyone. So you click on the link, it says "record this" and you write it down and put it in a safe. And that link would never work again.
If the default is "on" , what if a bug in the code resets the setting or ignores the setting. Are there any indicators that this information is going out? Can there be any indicators? What is the amount of encrypted traffic going out from the system to microsoft? Any way to look at what is being sent at any point in time? Does it ever log what was sent? Can it?
Somebody will always be annoyed about something. Are they going to ban religion or atheism boards next? If they want to protect sensitive ears, then they should set-up an opt-in flag that will hide inflammatory reddts from searches and casual browsing.
You may need a (screamin) front-end machine that splits up the work and hands it off to multiple multi-core machines. These multi-core machines may only be available at lower clock-speeds.
Dont just "look at your application". But look at what parts of your application are subject to parallelism and what parts must stay single threaded. You may need a special single-thread machine that can keep the other ones fed.
If we are rightly scared of browser-borne infections and intrusions, then why are we still running browsers on our machines? Why not designate a machine, outside the firewall / in the DMZ, that runs ALL the browsers. The user logs into that machine, and the browser display events are sent back to the client machine. The safe client machine never runs a single snippet of plugin, or gobbles a single byte of untrusted network traffic. The client machine does not even -know- how to get to the internet.
Sending receiving files can be locked down and logged. Or prevented.
The sound device would be a pain, and might require a new protocol, but this would solve many problems. I think it might make SSL better too (no proxy bs).
Perhaps a specialized (corporate) browser nexus product could be offered...with sound and optimized for the browser.
The client machine never talks to the internet. It just sees pictures of it.
Trains don't really wander around randomly. So its not necessary to use the GPS system. Fixed point emitters over the tracks using simple technology would exactly position the train and insure reception no matter what the conditions. Even inside a tunnel.
I understand that putting new hardware into the trains is hard, expensive and difficult to clear for safety. But putting new hardware into the operators hands is not. Put a friggin electronic helmet on his head with a siren that goes off if the train is too fast for its registered weight / vs the track he is on. Tell him he fired if the siren goes off. Heck, put a tens unit on it.
I would suggest using hydraulics and fiberoptics. Dont bother with active circuits at all. If all you want to do is look and grab, go really old school. Dont use amplifiers when two tin cans and a string will survive the radiation.
10 seconds to create a database. 10 more seconds to create an input panel that would let you populate tables with data. You could vi-edit the panels if you wanted to make them pretty. Is there an analog to that speed of development now?
The truck drives to the address or general area, and a drone lifts the package and deposits it on the doorstep. Then flies back to the truck to fast-charge for the next delivery. Short hops, with added intelligence / visualization provided by the truck.
This is but the price we pay for not dedicating an entire core to systemd. If systemd did not have to share a core with the other processes, then it would be free to seek out and steril...correct these trifling kernel issues and the ones responsible.
Setup a hard drive or usb key with a re-installation image so that if they do experience trouble, they can just re-image their machine. All updates and software they need already installed.
Or you could have the system dual boot. Normal windows boot, but you can have them grub boot into linux and that will give you a pristine platform to log-in and save files/re-image their machine remotely via partition image. You have them boot into linux, and then you can operate on a comatose window partition without interference via ssh.
Instead of them writing AI engines to drive NPC battles, have the NPCs be human. You cannot talk or interact with the "protagonist", but you can shoot at him. Maybe by playing NPC long enough, you unlock the game and then You can play the protagonist.
I was not disagreeing with gun ownership. I just think a gun is a weapon, not a tool. If you call a gun a tool, then what is a sword? An ad-hoc non-elective surgical instrument? Overgrown Cutlery? Guns are not tools. They are weapons. I have no objection to the ownership of weapons...within reason. I just think calling them a tool seems like an attempt to shroud their importance by mingling them with other more benign implements like screwdrivers.
I am not nor will I ever advocate smart guns. In answer to your skunk anecdote, how many rounds was your weapon capable of raining down on said skunk. If you had a gun with 12+ rounds ready fly in less than 5 seconds, then I would say you had a weapon of war.
A gun is a radically different animal. Very few tools are designed to kill people and strike at a distance. A gun is not a tool. A gun is a weapon of war that has been (barely) domesticated.
To which premise do you refer? I did not make the comment with the expectation of making friends, but rather to incite debate. Anyone who talks about religion and Atheism should expect debate. That said. Religion is a fundamental construct of western civilization. To claim disagreement with what so many people have born, lived, killed, and died to believe is a very serious thing. Premise: Atheism is a refutation or dismissal of ALL stories, anecdotes, eyewitness accounts, and historical records that claim the "for real" corporeal or non-corporeal existence of divine beings . Premise: The refutation or dismissal of the existence of divine beings is incompatible with the belief, first-hand accounts, and historical record of said divine beings. Premise: A Atheist, by virtue of the first premise, holds that the stories, anecdotes, and first-hand accounts of divine beings are wrong due to error or deception.
Slashdot Mirror
This is coherent light.
Maximum line of sight. Inclination, curve, drainage, presence of sidewalk, distance to intersection, distance to driveway, populaton of children, proximity to school, width, apparent width.
Then setup a traffic cone at various detail points in the road and measure the distance to the cone to make cars stop. You just need a cone, adjustable speed limit indicator, and a tape measure.
Either the grocery store pays by rounding the final price down, or the customer pays when it gets rounded up. Or is it going to alternate? Even days, rounds to the customer favor, odd days it rounds against?
The site does not choose the ads based on safety. The site sets aside space that is sold to different ad brokers who use brokers who have no idea what ads are going to be run. It is dangerous by design.
Until websites stop running content provided by other (anonymous) people, there ARE no safe ads. Its broken by design.
Your claim that you never had a problem could end tonight, tomorrow, or the day after. Then what? Are you going to apologize to everyone for failing to understand the problem and telling them it was safe. Esp when professional security researchers are telling you its NOT safe?
The www is a infinite bag of untrusted/untrustworthy data that your your flawed browser sifts through. Its was already a disaster waiting to happen. The problem is, the disaster has become automated, financed, and profitable.
Can we enumerate the reasons why the the browser needs to run with the same user ID as the person that owns files?
I can think of one: access to local files for upload or download. But it seems like there could be a mechanism to hand off files to and from the browser that doesn't give it direct access. Some IPC mechanism or a filesystem-based dmz.
At this point, I really do not understand why the industry is not moving to make the browser an untrusted entity on the computer. Taking away its ability to access files, navigate the filesystem, or run programs.
They need to issue a recovery password for every account. This would be a serial number in case the account ever gets hijacked. It can only get you in to reset your password. It could be written down and stored in a safe or in a safety deposit box. And it cannot be changed. It would be displayed only one time by the website and never be visible again to anyone. So you click on the link, it says "record this" and you write it down and put it in a safe. And that link would never work again.
Yes yes, I know, you hate the idea.
If the default is "on" , what if a bug in the code resets the setting or ignores the setting. Are there any indicators that this information is going out? Can there be any indicators? What is the amount of encrypted traffic going out from the system to microsoft? Any way to look at what is being sent at any point in time? Does it ever log what was sent? Can it?
Somebody will always be annoyed about something. Are they going to ban religion or atheism boards next? If they want to protect sensitive ears, then they should set-up an opt-in flag that will hide inflammatory reddts from searches and casual browsing.
You may need a (screamin) front-end machine that splits up the work and hands it off to multiple multi-core machines. These multi-core machines may only be available at lower clock-speeds.
Dont just "look at your application". But look at what parts of your application are subject to parallelism and what parts must stay single threaded. You may need a special single-thread machine that can keep the other ones fed.
If we are rightly scared of browser-borne infections and intrusions, then why are we still running browsers on our machines? Why not designate a machine, outside the firewall / in the DMZ, that runs ALL the browsers. The user logs into that machine, and the browser display events are sent back to the client machine. The safe client machine never runs a single snippet of plugin, or gobbles a single byte of untrusted network traffic. The client machine does not even -know- how to get to the internet.
Sending receiving files can be locked down and logged. Or prevented.
The sound device would be a pain, and might require a new protocol, but this would solve many problems. I think it might make SSL better too (no proxy bs).
Perhaps a specialized (corporate) browser nexus product could be offered...with sound and optimized for the browser.
The client machine never talks to the internet. It just sees pictures of it.
What would it feel like to live there? Would you have to be careful walking? How long would it take to adapt.
g = 3.75 m/s^2 vs 9.8 m/s^2
Trains don't really wander around randomly. So its not necessary to use the GPS system. Fixed point emitters over the tracks using simple technology would exactly position the train and insure reception no matter what the conditions. Even inside a tunnel.
I understand that putting new hardware into the trains is hard, expensive and difficult to clear for safety. But putting new hardware into the operators hands is not. Put a friggin electronic helmet on his head with a siren that goes off if the train is too fast for its registered weight / vs the track he is on. Tell him he fired if the siren goes off.
Heck, put a tens unit on it.
I would suggest using hydraulics and fiberoptics. Dont bother with active circuits at all. If all you want to do is look and grab, go really old school. Dont use amplifiers when two tin cans and a string will survive the radiation.
10 seconds to create a database. 10 more seconds to create an input panel that would let you populate tables with data. You could vi-edit the panels if you wanted to make them pretty. Is there an analog to that speed of development now?
The truck drives to the address or general area, and a drone lifts the package and deposits it on the doorstep. Then flies back to the truck to fast-charge for the next delivery. Short hops, with added intelligence / visualization provided by the truck.
This is but the price we pay for not dedicating an entire core to systemd. If systemd did not have to share a core with the other processes, then it would be free to seek out and steril...correct these trifling kernel issues and the ones responsible.
Why isn't it computer tampering.....tampering with a computer device or program?
Setup a hard drive or usb key with a re-installation image so that if they do experience trouble, they can just re-image their machine. All updates and software they need already installed.
Or you could have the system dual boot. Normal windows boot, but you can have them grub boot into linux and that will give you a pristine platform to log-in and save files/re-image their machine remotely via partition image. You have them boot into linux, and then you can operate on a comatose window partition without interference via ssh.
Instead of them writing AI engines to drive NPC battles, have the NPCs be human. You cannot talk or interact with the "protagonist", but you can shoot at him. Maybe by playing NPC long enough, you unlock the game and then You can play the protagonist.
I was not disagreeing with gun ownership. I just think a gun is a weapon, not a tool. If you call a gun a tool, then what is a sword? An ad-hoc non-elective surgical instrument? Overgrown Cutlery? Guns are not tools. They are weapons. I have no objection to the ownership of weapons...within reason. I just think calling them a tool seems like an attempt to shroud their importance by mingling them with other more benign implements like screwdrivers.
I am not nor will I ever advocate smart guns.
In answer to your skunk anecdote, how many rounds was your weapon capable of raining down on said skunk. If you had a gun with 12+ rounds ready fly in less than 5 seconds, then I would say you had a weapon of war.
A gun is a radically different animal. Very few tools are designed to kill people and strike at a distance. A gun is not a tool. A gun is a weapon of war that has been (barely) domesticated.
In the Avengers.
To which premise do you refer? I did not make the comment with the expectation of making friends, but rather to incite debate. Anyone who talks about religion and Atheism should expect debate.
That said. Religion is a fundamental construct of western civilization. To claim disagreement with what so many people have born, lived, killed, and died to believe is a very serious thing.
Premise: Atheism is a refutation or dismissal of ALL stories, anecdotes, eyewitness accounts, and historical records that claim the "for real" corporeal or non-corporeal existence of divine beings .
Premise: The refutation or dismissal of the existence of divine beings is incompatible with the belief, first-hand accounts, and historical record of said divine beings.
Premise: A Atheist, by virtue of the first premise, holds that the stories, anecdotes, and first-hand accounts of divine beings are wrong due to error or deception.