This clearly indicates bribery, no one hears "Microsoft" and thinks enhanced security.
Does Google's professional mail solution support S/MIME? Gmail doesn't, and it's a gaping hole in their messaging offering when compared to pretty much any popular messaging application on the market.
Disclaimer: I work for USGS/DOI.
Yes, that amongst other things. One big aspect of any federal government purchase is the requirement of encryption, and not just any encryption, but FIPS 140-2 compliant encryption systems. As far as I know, Gmail does not support that, while Exchange does.
What's more, about 1/2 the DOI has an MS Exchange-based email system, while the other have (at least the few bureaus that I know of) use a Lotus Notes-based system. So, the idea with this transition is to merge into one solution with the assumption it will be cheaper. (Will it be cheaper? Who knows...)
From what I understand, the Networx transition in DOI underwent a similar problem where the contract was awarded to the incumbent (Verizon) and this resulted in protests.
Overall I like FIPS 140-2 because it means I'm less likely to be sold a snake-oil security product, although it drives up costs inordinately. One example: I just purchased 5 2GB USB drives, for $250. The FIPS compliant price $50/unit where an off-the-shelf USB drive costs ~$8.
All things told, I would love to have a Gmail solution, but until they get FIPS 140-2 compliance, I'm stuck with MS Exchange...sad though it may be.
California is still largely powered by coal and/or natural gas.
California gets much more of its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric sources than coal (source). Gas is #1 at 116.7 TWh, followed by nuclear (31.5 TWh), and hydroelectric (29.2 TWh). Coal only accounts for 17.3 TWh (in-state + imports).
I think it's all a grand conspiracy. Roberts, being a Republican, intentionally mis-delivered the oath. Sometime later they can remove Obama from office without the messy impeachment process./sarcasm
Glass-Steagal has everything to do with the current crisis. Without its repeal there wouldn't be a quadrillion in derivatives
I'm sorry but I have to call bull shit on you for that comment. The rest of the world has been operating under a non-Glass-Steagall system for ever and they haven't had crises like this. Glass-Steagall prevented investment banks from operating as deposit-taking banks which has nothing to do with the ability (or inability) of an investment bank from creating new and more exotic (read: complex) derivatives. The repeal of Glass-Steagall is not to blame (at least in isolation).
Add to that, researching the 2005 bill that forced FM/FM to give out loans based on racial profiles instead of financial stability, and you'll have a good idea who to blame.
No, no. That is not the underlying source of FNM and FRE's problems. The problem lies in that they issued bonds which had the implicit backing of the federal government to raise cash which was then used to buy (then highly-rated) Alt-A loan-backed bonds.
The idea was since the Alt-A bonds were yielding higher than the cost to FNM and FRE's issued bonds they could make "free" money. Think about it. If you could borrow from the bank at 4% then put it back in a savings account at 6%, you pocket 2%. This is called the carry.
The reason the GSEs were able to do this is people felt (technically erroneously at the time, but it turned out to be true) that the bonds issued were government-backed (effectively like a Treasury Bond). This was assumed because at one point they were not at all private but wholly government owned companies and thus the government wouldn't let them fail (along with "too big to fail" idea).
Some (like Greenspan) advocate the break up (or the full privatization) of the GSEs which would allow them to be treated completely like private companies (and then bailed out like Bear or AIG).
My biggest problem with the OLPC project is their (apparent) target. I keep hearing about providing $100 laptops for poor children in Africa and I think that is the incorrect target as most poor children in the wilds of Africa stay in school for (probably) 8 yrs and then go work on the farm or someother non-highly technical area. (I have no data to back this up, I'm only talking from what I perceive.)
A far better target would be those children in semi-"developed" countries where the extra technical skils of knowing how to operate a laptop would greatly increase their human capital vis-à-vis the "developed" nations. To even prvide them to countries like France (where I have lived) would be a boon to the children. The level of exposure of the typical French student to computers is surprising considering how much computer skills are valued, although in France the last few years has seen a great rise in the exposure of the pupils to technology.
I think a $100 laptop would be of largest value to those in the semi-developed (say, Brazil, Ukraine, and South Africa) as many of these countries are getting to the point where their workers are starting to compete for jobs with western workers. Also, the introduction of these low-cost computers in countries were there is little exposure to technology would also be advantageous. (I can think of areas in the US where they could be put to good use, and if I'm correct (i.e. according to wikipedia) there are schools in Massachusetts and Maine are looking to deploy them.)
The OLPC computers should go to those students who are going to be needing technical skills in the work place, not those who will be working in the african savannah after only a few years of basic shcooling.
As for making a OLPCs or OLPC-like computer available to the general public, I think it would be a great idea. (Hey, I would love to have one.) I also think that the price should be elevated to off-set the cost to the true target audence (that is education departments in various nations/states). Care must be taken, however, to not elevate that price too much as I could easily see (if demand were high enough) a crooked national government buying a lot of laptops at the "government" price and simply reselling them to rich westerners. For example, if the sovereign government price was $100 and the price for individuals was $200, then what's to stop Nigera's government from buying $100 laptops and reselling them. Maybe, a $25 price over the 1M-unit bulk price would be low enough to discourage resale. It all depends upon demand. Additionally, keeping the price difference as a seperate charge, and a charge which is directly paid to a non-profit would, I think, encourage people to accept a higher price as they can have a tax-deduction to justify it.
Everyone wants a credit when they are over billed, but no offers to give money back if they are under billed.
Once, my father got a big check from his credit card company as a refund for some billing error about some cruse thing that he'd never heard about. He figured they got some number or address mixed up so he called the credit card company to try and give back the money. After several phone calls and letters demanding he prove to them that he didn't deserve the $2k+ check he just gave up and kept the money. Such is life when you try and do something good. ~K
Executing Saddam will only turn him into a martyr.
In a sense I agree that he may become a martyr but I don't trust the political situation in Iraq enough to believe that he will remain in jail for the rest of his life. I fear that unless he is dead, at some point in the future he could be freed and regain power. The only solution would be to keep him jailed in another country and I'm not sure any country would be terribly willing to be his jail-keeper. He's a bit of a hot potato.
I suppose the only place that he could be kept ouside of Iraq would be in the UN detention centre in The Hague and the amount of money that would have to be put into securing him there would be astounding.
This kinda reminds me of an argument I made one day in defense of Wikipedia. It goes like this, I was looking up some fact on Wikipeida to discredit something someone said, they said "You can't trust Wikipeida, any one can edit it." to which I responded "And any one can create a web page you can get to using Google. The difference is since Wikipedia is a central point for the colleciton of knowledge it is more likely that an 'expert' reviewed it and, if someone found an error, they can correct it, unlike some random web page."
Wikipedia's biggest strengths are these: 1) It is a large (popular), central point for information 2) Because it is large and popular people try and make it accurate ( 3) The number of people who wish to do good out number those who with to do bad on Wikiepeida )
I agree with your comments about linux. I love linux and use it alot for programming (being a CS student) because programming life is so much easier for me there, but for otherthings it's kinda hit-and-miss. (I still haven't got my wireless internet card working in it. But I almost never use wirless anyway...)
However, I disagree with your comments about Google. I think Google will (using their AJAX interfaces) be able to pose a serious challenge to Microsoft Office and I look forward to seeing what they come out with. Yes, there might not be any "useScanner()" in AJAX but that doesn't AT ALL stop Google from making a little app (maybe built into their Toolbar) that lets you use your scanner and what ever other device you need. They could easily also add the capability of faxing through Google. It's only logical to me.
Security people rarely have any idea what they are dealing with. The main reason why is they are simply given orders to "check an RFID badge" or "wave a wand around those people who set a metal detector off". They aren't paid to think critically or anything. This is often the charge levied by Schneier. If we hired smart security people, overall we'd be more secure.
I agree. That's what I've been doing. However, for international calls I use a 10-10 (currently 10-10-629) because they have slighly better rates than my calling card. The calling card has one advantage: it doesn't distinguish between fixed line and mobile phones. The 10-10 numbers often do. For example, the calling card charges me for $0.12/min for all my calls to France, where 10-10-629 charges me $0.08/min for France fixed line and $0.49/min to French mobile phones.
I heard something like this once. I heard that the 0 and 100 deg. marks were set by Fahrenheit as he mesured temperature extremes around the Amsterdam area over a (several?) years. I heard this from a guy who was INSISTANT that that was the original definition of the scale, yet I have found no other mention of that basis other than from that man. Has anyone else heard this and can corroberated it with a source?
I have read over and over that it is based on the freezing of equal of a salt & water mixture. But this post (which I am inclied to beleive because it sounds more scientific with it's specification of pressure etc.) says it's just as much salt as can be saturated in water. I think this is interesting how hard it has been to find a standard explination of how the scale is setup.
On another note, it is only this year (in my thermodynamics course) that I found out that 0 deg. C is not just the freezing point of water but the TRIPLE POINT of water (the temperature at which ice, liquid water, and water vapor can exist). I wonder why I had never heard that in the past.
Also, on other unit scales, why is it that the definition of the kilogram has moved from being defined as 1000cc (1L) of water at maximum density (4 deg. C) and gone to being defined by this chunck of platinum in the NIST valut. These standards are supposed to be easy to reproduce, where as I cannot easily reproduce the weight of the platinum chunk if I don't have it to compare to.
...sounds like an idea a friend of mine had to back up data using Kazaa. He said he was going to archive and encrypt the data he wanted to back up and name it twohotlesbiansdoingeachother.avi share it on Kazaa with the knoledge that just about every pimply faced teen boy would be downloading it. When he needed his backup, he'd just search for the file.
He never actually tried it, so I don't know if it would have worked.
Well, I like this quote, (I don't remember it from my reading of Applied Cryptography, guess I'll have to re-read the book more carefully) but it assumes something which is impossible, that is, perfect algorithms. A more interesting quote for this particular news post would be any of the many from Schneier's book Secrets and Lies. The whole point of the book, as explained in the Preface, was that Schneier assumed when he wrote Applied Cryptography that it would help people develop secure applications, however what eneded up happening was people peppered cryptography into their software assuming doing only that would make their software secure. The reality is, in most software, the is not properly implimented and therefore not secure.
Secrets and lies discusses security not cryptography and does and excellent job at it. Although I had the vegue concept that no security system is really secure before I read the book, I came away from my reading thanking Schneier for drilling the idea into my head so that I would not be naive. It is the best book on security I have read and I recommend it to anyone interested in this facinating field.
All I know is that a large part of the populous (senior citizens) get in a large number of accidents yet also drive very slowly. If they really wanted to develop a system that would reward safe drivers they would have to find a way of mesuring the driver's reaction times (the most lacking part of an elderly person's driving skills).
A ricent side note: The NTSB approved a reccomendation standardzing the "black boxes" in cars like they have in trains and planes, although it stopped short of requiring them. I had herd this was prompted by an accident in Santa Monica, CA last year, where an elderly man crashed into the farmer's market there. Supposedly, he inadvertently stepped on the gas pedal when he was going for the break.
I wonder how many discounts this gentleman would have been in for had he been using the system mentioned above, (i.e. a system which gives discounts simply for driving at or below the speedlimit).
Simpsons #AABF06
Homer: Let's see, what's Marge's birthday? Barney is April twentieth, same as Hitler's, so Marge must be fifty...oh, forget it. Flanders, what's your birthday?
(source)
At my campus streaking is a common, and welcome in the event called "First Rain". The first rainy day of the acedemic year, people go streaking through campus. It's great fun to both watch (for its curiosity) and participate in.
It's a very good point. Sometimes companies fall into harder times trying to play to their investors, such as when the Virgin Group went public they were constrained so much they eventually bought back all the stock they sold. Branson (Virgin's Chairman) talks about how they had to consult the board to authorize the signing of UB40 and since board meetings happened infrequently they could have lost the band to another record label. (For more info on Virgin's time as a public company look at Brnason's book Loosing My Virginity.)
Personally I applaud Google for not going public. I hope it turns out to be the correct move in the long run.
Maybe we can send through the ISS a couple (or several hundred) of those postage to be paid by addressee to spam king Alan Ralsky much like the people who signed him up for real junk mail in this/. this article.
I disagree. Didital won't pass it too soon because for film to completely be outdated digital has to replace medium and large format. Digital cameras are not even close to the crispness of a 4x5 or 8x10 neg.
I never though they were too aesthetically pleasing. Though, I will say that they were pretty good (not underpowered or lacking in feature) when I used them in a Journalism class I took once.
Slashdot Mirror
Does Google's professional mail solution support S/MIME? Gmail doesn't, and it's a gaping hole in their messaging offering when compared to pretty much any popular messaging application on the market.
Disclaimer: I work for USGS/DOI.
Yes, that amongst other things. One big aspect of any federal government purchase is the requirement of encryption, and not just any encryption, but FIPS 140-2 compliant encryption systems. As far as I know, Gmail does not support that, while Exchange does.
What's more, about 1/2 the DOI has an MS Exchange-based email system, while the other have (at least the few bureaus that I know of) use a Lotus Notes-based system. So, the idea with this transition is to merge into one solution with the assumption it will be cheaper. (Will it be cheaper? Who knows...)
From what I understand, the Networx transition in DOI underwent a similar problem where the contract was awarded to the incumbent (Verizon) and this resulted in protests.
Overall I like FIPS 140-2 because it means I'm less likely to be sold a snake-oil security product, although it drives up costs inordinately. One example: I just purchased 5 2GB USB drives, for $250. The FIPS compliant price $50/unit where an off-the-shelf USB drive costs ~$8.
All things told, I would love to have a Gmail solution, but until they get FIPS 140-2 compliance, I'm stuck with MS Exchange...sad though it may be.
California is still largely powered by coal and/or natural gas.
California gets much more of its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric sources than coal (source). Gas is #1 at 116.7 TWh, followed by nuclear (31.5 TWh), and hydroelectric (29.2 TWh). Coal only accounts for 17.3 TWh (in-state + imports).
...expanding highways and airports just to move the same number of people.
Because I-5 through the central valley is horribly overcrowded?
I think it's all a grand conspiracy. Roberts, being a Republican, intentionally mis-delivered the oath. Sometime later they can remove Obama from office without the messy impeachment process. /sarcasm
Glass-Steagal has everything to do with the current crisis. Without its repeal there wouldn't be a quadrillion in derivatives
I'm sorry but I have to call bull shit on you for that comment. The rest of the world has been operating under a non-Glass-Steagall system for ever and they haven't had crises like this. Glass-Steagall prevented investment banks from operating as deposit-taking banks which has nothing to do with the ability (or inability) of an investment bank from creating new and more exotic (read: complex) derivatives. The repeal of Glass-Steagall is not to blame (at least in isolation).
Add to that, researching the 2005 bill that forced FM/FM to give out loans based on racial profiles instead of financial stability, and you'll have a good idea who to blame.
No, no. That is not the underlying source of FNM and FRE's problems. The problem lies in that they issued bonds which had the implicit backing of the federal government to raise cash which was then used to buy (then highly-rated) Alt-A loan-backed bonds.
The idea was since the Alt-A bonds were yielding higher than the cost to FNM and FRE's issued bonds they could make "free" money. Think about it. If you could borrow from the bank at 4% then put it back in a savings account at 6%, you pocket 2%. This is called the carry.
The reason the GSEs were able to do this is people felt (technically erroneously at the time, but it turned out to be true) that the bonds issued were government-backed (effectively like a Treasury Bond). This was assumed because at one point they were not at all private but wholly government owned companies and thus the government wouldn't let them fail (along with "too big to fail" idea).
Some (like Greenspan) advocate the break up (or the full privatization) of the GSEs which would allow them to be treated completely like private companies (and then bailed out like Bear or AIG).
My biggest problem with the OLPC project is their (apparent) target. I keep hearing about providing $100 laptops for poor children in Africa and I think that is the incorrect target as most poor children in the wilds of Africa stay in school for (probably) 8 yrs and then go work on the farm or someother non-highly technical area. (I have no data to back this up, I'm only talking from what I perceive.)
A far better target would be those children in semi-"developed" countries where the extra technical skils of knowing how to operate a laptop would greatly increase their human capital vis-à-vis the "developed" nations. To even prvide them to countries like France (where I have lived) would be a boon to the children. The level of exposure of the typical French student to computers is surprising considering how much computer skills are valued, although in France the last few years has seen a great rise in the exposure of the pupils to technology.
I think a $100 laptop would be of largest value to those in the semi-developed (say, Brazil, Ukraine, and South Africa) as many of these countries are getting to the point where their workers are starting to compete for jobs with western workers. Also, the introduction of these low-cost computers in countries were there is little exposure to technology would also be advantageous. (I can think of areas in the US where they could be put to good use, and if I'm correct (i.e. according to wikipedia) there are schools in Massachusetts and Maine are looking to deploy them.)
The OLPC computers should go to those students who are going to be needing technical skills in the work place, not those who will be working in the african savannah after only a few years of basic shcooling.
As for making a OLPCs or OLPC-like computer available to the general public, I think it would be a great idea. (Hey, I would love to have one.) I also think that the price should be elevated to off-set the cost to the true target audence (that is education departments in various nations/states). Care must be taken, however, to not elevate that price too much as I could easily see (if demand were high enough) a crooked national government buying a lot of laptops at the "government" price and simply reselling them to rich westerners. For example, if the sovereign government price was $100 and the price for individuals was $200, then what's to stop Nigera's government from buying $100 laptops and reselling them. Maybe, a $25 price over the 1M-unit bulk price would be low enough to discourage resale. It all depends upon demand. Additionally, keeping the price difference as a seperate charge, and a charge which is directly paid to a non-profit would, I think, encourage people to accept a higher price as they can have a tax-deduction to justify it.
Everyone wants a credit when they are over billed, but no offers to give money back if they are under billed.
Once, my father got a big check from his credit card company as a refund for some billing error about some cruse thing that he'd never heard about. He figured they got some number or address mixed up so he called the credit card company to try and give back the money. After several phone calls and letters demanding he prove to them that he didn't deserve the $2k+ check he just gave up and kept the money. Such is life when you try and do something good. ~K
Executing Saddam will only turn him into a martyr.
In a sense I agree that he may become a martyr but I don't trust the political situation in Iraq enough to believe that he will remain in jail for the rest of his life. I fear that unless he is dead, at some point in the future he could be freed and regain power. The only solution would be to keep him jailed in another country and I'm not sure any country would be terribly willing to be his jail-keeper. He's a bit of a hot potato.
I suppose the only place that he could be kept ouside of Iraq would be in the UN detention centre in The Hague and the amount of money that would have to be put into securing him there would be astounding.
This kinda reminds me of an argument I made one day in defense of Wikipedia. It goes like this, I was looking up some fact on Wikipeida to discredit something someone said, they said "You can't trust Wikipeida, any one can edit it." to which I responded "And any one can create a web page you can get to using Google. The difference is since Wikipedia is a central point for the colleciton of knowledge it is more likely that an 'expert' reviewed it and, if someone found an error, they can correct it, unlike some random web page."
Wikipedia's biggest strengths are these: 1) It is a large (popular), central point for information 2) Because it is large and popular people try and make it accurate ( 3) The number of people who wish to do good out number those who with to do bad on Wikiepeida )
I agree with your comments about linux. I love linux and use it alot for programming (being a CS student) because programming life is so much easier for me there, but for otherthings it's kinda hit-and-miss. (I still haven't got my wireless internet card working in it. But I almost never use wirless anyway...)
However, I disagree with your comments about Google. I think Google will (using their AJAX interfaces) be able to pose a serious challenge to Microsoft Office and I look forward to seeing what they come out with. Yes, there might not be any "useScanner()" in AJAX but that doesn't AT ALL stop Google from making a little app (maybe built into their Toolbar) that lets you use your scanner and what ever other device you need. They could easily also add the capability of faxing through Google. It's only logical to me.
I wonder if they'll be either making a list or using this list in the novels?
Security people rarely have any idea what they are dealing with. The main reason why is they are simply given orders to "check an RFID badge" or "wave a wand around those people who set a metal detector off". They aren't paid to think critically or anything. This is often the charge levied by Schneier. If we hired smart security people, overall we'd be more secure.
I agree. That's what I've been doing. However, for international calls I use a 10-10 (currently 10-10-629) because they have slighly better rates than my calling card. The calling card has one advantage: it doesn't distinguish between fixed line and mobile phones. The 10-10 numbers often do. For example, the calling card charges me for $0.12/min for all my calls to France, where 10-10-629 charges me $0.08/min for France fixed line and $0.49/min to French mobile phones.
For more info on 10-10 numbers go to this site: 1010phonerates.com
From "The Simpsons" (9F07)
Crazy Vaclav: She can go 300 hectares on a single tank of kerosine.
Homer: What car is this country from?
Crazy Vaclav: It no longer exists, but once you drive it, you'll agree (foreign phrase)
--Crazy Vaclav pushes to start car while Homer drives--
Crazy Vaclav: Put it in "H"!
I heard something like this once. I heard that the 0 and 100 deg. marks were set by Fahrenheit as he mesured temperature extremes around the Amsterdam area over a (several?) years. I heard this from a guy who was INSISTANT that that was the original definition of the scale, yet I have found no other mention of that basis other than from that man. Has anyone else heard this and can corroberated it with a source?
I have read over and over that it is based on the freezing of equal of a salt & water mixture. But this post (which I am inclied to beleive because it sounds more scientific with it's specification of pressure etc.) says it's just as much salt as can be saturated in water. I think this is interesting how hard it has been to find a standard explination of how the scale is setup.
On another note, it is only this year (in my thermodynamics course) that I found out that 0 deg. C is not just the freezing point of water but the TRIPLE POINT of water (the temperature at which ice, liquid water, and water vapor can exist). I wonder why I had never heard that in the past.
Also, on other unit scales, why is it that the definition of the kilogram has moved from being defined as 1000cc (1L) of water at maximum density (4 deg. C) and gone to being defined by this chunck of platinum in the NIST valut. These standards are supposed to be easy to reproduce, where as I cannot easily reproduce the weight of the platinum chunk if I don't have it to compare to.
...sounds like an idea a friend of mine had to back up data using Kazaa. He said he was going to archive and encrypt the data he wanted to back up and name it twohotlesbiansdoingeachother.avi share it on Kazaa with the knoledge that just about every pimply faced teen boy would be downloading it. When he needed his backup, he'd just search for the file.
He never actually tried it, so I don't know if it would have worked.
Well, I like this quote, (I don't remember it from my reading of Applied Cryptography, guess I'll have to re-read the book more carefully) but it assumes something which is impossible, that is, perfect algorithms. A more interesting quote for this particular news post would be any of the many from Schneier's book Secrets and Lies . The whole point of the book, as explained in the Preface, was that Schneier assumed when he wrote Applied Cryptography that it would help people develop secure applications, however what eneded up happening was people peppered cryptography into their software assuming doing only that would make their software secure. The reality is, in most software, the is not properly implimented and therefore not secure.
Secrets and lies discusses security not cryptography and does and excellent job at it. Although I had the vegue concept that no security system is really secure before I read the book, I came away from my reading thanking Schneier for drilling the idea into my head so that I would not be naive. It is the best book on security I have read and I recommend it to anyone interested in this facinating field.
All I know is that a large part of the populous (senior citizens) get in a large number of accidents yet also drive very slowly. If they really wanted to develop a system that would reward safe drivers they would have to find a way of mesuring the driver's reaction times (the most lacking part of an elderly person's driving skills).
A ricent side note: The NTSB approved a reccomendation standardzing the "black boxes" in cars like they have in trains and planes, although it stopped short of requiring them. I had herd this was prompted by an accident in Santa Monica, CA last year, where an elderly man crashed into the farmer's market there. Supposedly, he inadvertently stepped on the gas pedal when he was going for the break.
I wonder how many discounts this gentleman would have been in for had he been using the system mentioned above, (i.e. a system which gives discounts simply for driving at or below the speedlimit).
Simpsons #AABF06 Homer: Let's see, what's Marge's birthday? Barney is April twentieth, same as Hitler's, so Marge must be fifty ...oh, forget it. Flanders, what's your birthday?
(source)
At my campus streaking is a common, and welcome in the event called "First Rain". The first rainy day of the acedemic year, people go streaking through campus. It's great fun to both watch (for its curiosity) and participate in.
It's a very good point. Sometimes companies fall into harder times trying to play to their investors, such as when the Virgin Group went public they were constrained so much they eventually bought back all the stock they sold. Branson (Virgin's Chairman) talks about how they had to consult the board to authorize the signing of UB40 and since board meetings happened infrequently they could have lost the band to another record label. (For more info on Virgin's time as a public company look at Brnason's book Loosing My Virginity.)
Personally I applaud Google for not going public. I hope it turns out to be the correct move in the long run.
Maybe we can send through the ISS a couple (or several hundred) of those postage to be paid by addressee to spam king Alan Ralsky much like the people who signed him up for real junk mail in this /. this article.
I disagree. Didital won't pass it too soon because for film to completely be outdated digital has to replace medium and large format. Digital cameras are not even close to the crispness of a 4x5 or 8x10 neg.
I never though they were too aesthetically pleasing. Though, I will say that they were pretty good (not underpowered or lacking in feature) when I used them in a Journalism class I took once.