Ouch. Their ADSL for 128k down is three times more expensive than my 50Mbit/s connection at home (which also has additions like static IP) according to the currency conversion at xe.com. Their 8 meg home ADSL costs more monthly than the median monthly household salary in my rich, Western nation - let alone Cuba.
Undoubtedly it's the content providers doing this, and then they wonder why so many people are still pirating their content.
I'd rather stream legally off Netflix but it's mighty frustrating when you're halfway through a series and it just vanishes from Netflix (but is still available on some other country's Netflix). If they successfully block VPNs, I'm probably going to cancel my subscription.
When looking for a new monitor 4 or 5 years ago, I compared the Apple Cinema display against the equivalent specification Dell display.
Once things like taxes and delivery were added (Dell advertised without tax or delivery, and Apple with the prices included), the Dell display was within £5 of the Apple display (I don't remember if the Dell was £5 less or £5 more). The Apple display also had a built in magsafe charger which the Dell didn't.
If you compare like with like, often you'll find that the "cheap" brands are not actually any cheaper than the "expensive" brands. It's just the cheap brands also sell lower end stuff for a lot less.
I thought while one of Volkswagen's Cxx people was busy throwing its software engineers under the bus that this indicated:
* either VW had absolutely terrible, terrible software auditing, and the executive was effectively unwittingly condemning his own company for such shoddy practises. * or he was lying.
There is absolutely no way that a "rogue engineer" as the guy put it could do this kind of thing and get away with it, even if VW's software auditing is indeed terrible. It would have taken at least the collusion of other engineers and at least some of management. If they do have software auditing, the collusion likely goes much higher.
It doesn't surprise me that the Chaos Computer Club confirms this is the case.
It's a hell of a lot less than driving a car the same distance.
Including all the costs (including the CO2 cost of making the bicycle, its consumables such as innertubes and tyres) plus the energy burn of the bike rider (including the CO2 cost in making the food), the result is about 21g CO2 per km travelled.
Making the same calculation for a typical passenger car will show the total to be for a car to be about 160g CO2 per km travelled.
The only motorised transport that comes close to the cyclist is the French TGV train, because it's effectively nuclear powered and carries a lot of people at once.
There are plenty of reasons why you might not verify a particular token is in use. For instance, we have a system which is highly distributed for which checking token uniqueness would be very costly (both to implement and at runtime). It uses version 4 UUIDs as an identifier (122 bit random), which is about 5.3x10^36 possible combinations.
You'd have to generate one of these every millisecond for tens of millions of years to even get to even a 50% chance of picking the same random UUID twice, given a good RNG. It's simply not worth adding the complexity to a distributed system to check for duplicates with those kinds of odds.
The paragraph says denied boarding OR your flight is cancelled OR overbooked. Only one condition needs to be true for the whole "or" statement to evaluate to true. They were denied boarding, therefore the condition is met; they should be refunded.
I got that going into Dallas from the immigration officer. First off there were only 3 immigration desks for an entire B767 load of people. Fortunately, for a change, I was near the head of the queue. Now I normally went direct to Houston (where I worked) and Houston had never been a problem, they looked at my visa, asked a two questions or so about my work (I was on an L1 visa) and stamped my passport. But Dallas was another story. The immigration officer was surly and demanded to see my L1 petition. Fortunately I carried it in my hand luggage, and he looked at it and told me "This is a copy. Give me the original" (it wasn't a copy, it had the ink stamp clearly visible of the US Embassy). When I told him he said it was up to his judgement whether he could let me in and next time I may be deported.
Let's not get into the US Embassy in London. When I got the visa I had to go for an "interview". This consisted of sitting in a huge square room with a bunch of other people for about 4 hours. They give you a number, like a supermarket deli (probably the same system!) and you go up when your number is called. The numbers are called in seemingly random order, so you can't read the book you brought because you suspect if you miss your number they won't call it again and they will force you to schedule a new interview. They also leave these "newspapers" around as reading material called "Going USA", the first half of which is dedicated to people who immigrated to the US saying how awful your home country is and how awesome it is they immigrated into the US and are now running a gas station, and the last half is dedicated to how we're not going to give you a visa anyway. Anyway, so my number was called some 4 hours after I got it. The officer asked me one question "how long have you worked for $COMPANY". I told him. That's all he wanted to ask. We could have done it by phone, or he could have requested that from my employer, but instead I have to waste hours travelling to London and back to be asked a simple question with two word answer.
But that's not the best one. Eventually my visa was converted to an H1 to extend my stay a year. It was approved in the US, and all the paperwork was done in the US, but because I had a vacation home I had to get a new visa put in my passport. The US Embassy in London does this. There's another form (requesting all the information you've already supplied to the INS) that the embassy wants. My employer game me the form and I filled in the few things that my employer didn't (basically the same questions on the visa waiver, including the one about "moral turpitude"), enclosed it with my passport. They refused my (already approved!) visa application because they said this form was out of date. So I go to the US Embassy's website and download the new form.
It is Exactly. The. Same. To the letter, *apart* from the issue date at the bottom. Exactly the same. Of course now I have a non-refundable flight ticket that I can't use because another round-trip time of my passport to the embassy means I have to wait another 10 days.
I think part of the problem is these immigration jobs attract certain type of "little Hitler" personality. I'm not saying all the immigration officers are like this (the ones in Houston for example have never been anything except professional and polite). It's not just the US that does this either. My next door neighbour is Albanian and she's exactly the sort of person we want to come to our country - she's well educated, she's an engineer, fluently speaks three languages - but was treated to a degrading Kafkaesque experience by the UK immigration authorities when she was moving here.
Actually it has benefits for passengers too. The DHS doesn't have this in the UK (it's likely airline staff denied the boarding, not DHS staff). But they do in Dublin. You clear US customs and immigration in Dublin, so on a Dublin to US flight you arrive in a domestic terminal having already cleared customs/immigration. This means you're much less likely to get held up and miss a connection and can have a shorter layover.
You don't need a visa but you *DO* need to be pre-approved for travel to the US by the ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization) which they were. So they had applied for travel authorization in advance, and been granted authorization.
It's not just Muslims - there was a man deported on arrival a couple of years ago because he had used a particular turn of phrase in British English (which is entirely non-threatening in British English, but interpreted as a threat by the US immigration service) on a twitter message. This showed before the Snowden stuff came out plenty of evidence that the US not only trawls social networks, but has mechanisms to match a Twitter pseudonym to an actual live person. Snowden merely confirmed what we could infer already from incidents like this.
Google Chrome already treats SHA-1 as insecure (big red crossed out HTTPS in the address bar). Unfortunately, one of the users of SHA-1 is my bank! The very same bank that insists we be PCI-DSS compliant.
The "auditor" in this case is an automated scan done by your card processor. Like the Terminator, they cannot be bargained with or negotiated with. They either pass or fail. If it fails you have to fix it. They won't accept "That's not part of the CHD environment".
You can do this if you're getting an audit done by an actual human being. We went for the full big formal audit to get a Report of Compliance by an independent auditor. You can show to the auditor that your MX and everything else surrounding it goes nowhere near the cardholder data environment, and the auditor will be happy and will attest to this. But with the automated scans that a card processor may insist on, not so much. Despite us having a ROC, plus quarterly testing from our own auditors, we had a payment processor require we submit to their automated test. It either passes or fails. If it fails you have to fix what fails, you cannot reason with it or bargain with it. The payment processor just says "tough shit you have to fix it".
That's not how PCI-DSS works. It doesn't matter if your MX is on a different continent, and it doesn't matter if no credit card data ever goes on it. if it supports a weak cipher or weak protocol you fail. Bizarrely, for things like your MX, you can pass by simply not supporting encryption at all.
It's not so much the controlled vertical landing of the rocket, but that they can re-use the rocket engines so many times. NASA never achieved that, for example the SSMEs effectively needed rebuilding after each flight. What SpaceX seem to be shooting for with this is closer to "put the gas in it, go, repeat" without the rebuild between every flight (which made the Space Shuttle so damned expensive).
Wrong comparison. You own the car, and you borrowed money to pay it.
The comparison would be - you rented a car of Hertz or whoever, and you want to drive it as an Uber car. If you look at car rental agreements, the contract will in pretty much all cases disallow this.
The answer here is to have a speed camera on every single lamp post so it's impossible to break the speed limit without getting caught (sarcasm, but that's what some people will suggest).
For cycling the real answer is to have proper, good dedicated cycleways, not the "cycle farcilities" that tend to get put up in the UK (for example putting cycle ways on footpaths which is a terrible idea, or cycle paths on roads which are barely wider than double yellow lines. The worst are probably the painted cycle paths on footpaths where the cyclist has to give way to every single side road, and because drivers won't be looking for them as they are on the pavement, they end up having to give way to TRAFFIC BEHIND THEM! which is dangerous and moronic. Who thought of these things? Seriously!) Those types of cycle path also do two other bad things - drivers yell at cyclists who recognise how dangerous these farcilities actually are to "get on the bike path" - and it also legitimises cycling on the pavement which is dangerous to pedestrians. And pedestrians just wander into them all the time without warning, so as a cyclist on one of these farcilities you can't really ride more than 5 mph. Many regular cyclists in a flat place like Cambridge will be doing 17+ mph.
"Rigid rule based approach" would probably result in many fewer snarl-ups.
Let's imagine 2 extremes: the M6 southbound near Manchester as it is today. Traffic is very heavy, and impatient drivers tend to bunch up. An impatient driver cuts from one lane to the next because the next lane is moving 1mph quicker, forcing their way into the remaining space in lane 3 causing someone to brake, and it causes a chain reaction - all the close following cars with too little distance start braking progressively harder and harder until the entire motorway stops (or worse, someone gets rear-ended). You now have a self-sustaining traffic jam with no discernible reason (from the air you just see a standing wave of stopped traffic with no obvious cause) until the evening when finally fewer vehicles are arriving at the back of the jam than are leaving from the front.
The other extreme is the same entire motorway is populated by rigidly rule following automated cars. They will all be following a safe distance. No one will cut across a lane because the other one is going 1 mph faster. Traffic flows freely all day long despite the density.
Oil is a very unusual (at least this side of the pond) method of firing a power station. According to Gridwatch, oil is currently producing exactly...exactly 0% of our electricity (as opposed to nuclear: 18%, coal, 20%, wind 14%, gas 33%).
I wonder what it looks like when you have to add the steel, concrete and other materials to mine the coal, transport the coal, dispose of the ash, fuel to move the coal to the "resource price" of the coal-fired power station comparison? The thing about wind is the fuel delivers itself.
It's irrelevant, anyway - PCI-DSS will mandate it at some point for any site that accepts credit cards (if it hasn't already: PCI-DSS already mandates that support for all versions of SSL is dropped, and "early TLS" is dropped - they've not defined "early TLS" but TLS 1.0 is known to be vulnerable to attacks already, and TLS 1.1 is structurally weak, so I bet within a year this will be clarified to mean "both TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 must not be enabled" by the webserver. By June 2016 you have to get rid of TLS 1.0 if you accept credit card payments.
Some quite recent browsers don't support TLS 1.2 by default (I think some fairly recent versions of Internet Explorer need TLS 1.2 switching on manually).
Slashdot Mirror
Ouch. Their ADSL for 128k down is three times more expensive than my 50Mbit/s connection at home (which also has additions like static IP) according to the currency conversion at xe.com. Their 8 meg home ADSL costs more monthly than the median monthly household salary in my rich, Western nation - let alone Cuba.
Undoubtedly it's the content providers doing this, and then they wonder why so many people are still pirating their content.
I'd rather stream legally off Netflix but it's mighty frustrating when you're halfway through a series and it just vanishes from Netflix (but is still available on some other country's Netflix). If they successfully block VPNs, I'm probably going to cancel my subscription.
When looking for a new monitor 4 or 5 years ago, I compared the Apple Cinema display against the equivalent specification Dell display.
Once things like taxes and delivery were added (Dell advertised without tax or delivery, and Apple with the prices included), the Dell display was within £5 of the Apple display (I don't remember if the Dell was £5 less or £5 more). The Apple display also had a built in magsafe charger which the Dell didn't.
If you compare like with like, often you'll find that the "cheap" brands are not actually any cheaper than the "expensive" brands. It's just the cheap brands also sell lower end stuff for a lot less.
I thought while one of Volkswagen's Cxx people was busy throwing its software engineers under the bus that this indicated:
* either VW had absolutely terrible, terrible software auditing, and the executive was effectively unwittingly condemning his own company for such shoddy practises.
* or he was lying.
There is absolutely no way that a "rogue engineer" as the guy put it could do this kind of thing and get away with it, even if VW's software auditing is indeed terrible. It would have taken at least the collusion of other engineers and at least some of management. If they do have software auditing, the collusion likely goes much higher.
It doesn't surprise me that the Chaos Computer Club confirms this is the case.
It's a hell of a lot less than driving a car the same distance.
Including all the costs (including the CO2 cost of making the bicycle, its consumables such as innertubes and tyres) plus the energy burn of the bike rider (including the CO2 cost in making the food), the result is about 21g CO2 per km travelled.
Making the same calculation for a typical passenger car will show the total to be for a car to be about 160g CO2 per km travelled.
The only motorised transport that comes close to the cyclist is the French TGV train, because it's effectively nuclear powered and carries a lot of people at once.
There are plenty of reasons why you might not verify a particular token is in use. For instance, we have a system which is highly distributed for which checking token uniqueness would be very costly (both to implement and at runtime). It uses version 4 UUIDs as an identifier (122 bit random), which is about 5.3x10^36 possible combinations.
You'd have to generate one of these every millisecond for tens of millions of years to even get to even a 50% chance of picking the same random UUID twice, given a good RNG. It's simply not worth adding the complexity to a distributed system to check for duplicates with those kinds of odds.
The paragraph says denied boarding OR your flight is cancelled OR overbooked. Only one condition needs to be true for the whole "or" statement to evaluate to true.
They were denied boarding, therefore the condition is met; they should be refunded.
I got that going into Dallas from the immigration officer. First off there were only 3 immigration desks for an entire B767 load of people. Fortunately, for a change, I was near the head of the queue. Now I normally went direct to Houston (where I worked) and Houston had never been a problem, they looked at my visa, asked a two questions or so about my work (I was on an L1 visa) and stamped my passport. But Dallas was another story. The immigration officer was surly and demanded to see my L1 petition. Fortunately I carried it in my hand luggage, and he looked at it and told me "This is a copy. Give me the original" (it wasn't a copy, it had the ink stamp clearly visible of the US Embassy). When I told him he said it was up to his judgement whether he could let me in and next time I may be deported.
Let's not get into the US Embassy in London. When I got the visa I had to go for an "interview". This consisted of sitting in a huge square room with a bunch of other people for about 4 hours. They give you a number, like a supermarket deli (probably the same system!) and you go up when your number is called. The numbers are called in seemingly random order, so you can't read the book you brought because you suspect if you miss your number they won't call it again and they will force you to schedule a new interview. They also leave these "newspapers" around as reading material called "Going USA", the first half of which is dedicated to people who immigrated to the US saying how awful your home country is and how awesome it is they immigrated into the US and are now running a gas station, and the last half is dedicated to how we're not going to give you a visa anyway. Anyway, so my number was called some 4 hours after I got it. The officer asked me one question "how long have you worked for $COMPANY". I told him. That's all he wanted to ask. We could have done it by phone, or he could have requested that from my employer, but instead I have to waste hours travelling to London and back to be asked a simple question with two word answer.
But that's not the best one. Eventually my visa was converted to an H1 to extend my stay a year. It was approved in the US, and all the paperwork was done in the US, but because I had a vacation home I had to get a new visa put in my passport. The US Embassy in London does this. There's another form (requesting all the information you've already supplied to the INS) that the embassy wants. My employer game me the form and I filled in the few things that my employer didn't (basically the same questions on the visa waiver, including the one about "moral turpitude"), enclosed it with my passport. They refused my (already approved!) visa application because they said this form was out of date. So I go to the US Embassy's website and download the new form.
It is Exactly. The. Same. To the letter, *apart* from the issue date at the bottom. Exactly the same. Of course now I have a non-refundable flight ticket that I can't use because another round-trip time of my passport to the embassy means I have to wait another 10 days.
I think part of the problem is these immigration jobs attract certain type of "little Hitler" personality. I'm not saying all the immigration officers are like this (the ones in Houston for example have never been anything except professional and polite). It's not just the US that does this either. My next door neighbour is Albanian and she's exactly the sort of person we want to come to our country - she's well educated, she's an engineer, fluently speaks three languages - but was treated to a degrading Kafkaesque experience by the UK immigration authorities when she was moving here.
Actually it has benefits for passengers too. The DHS doesn't have this in the UK (it's likely airline staff denied the boarding, not DHS staff). But they do in Dublin. You clear US customs and immigration in Dublin, so on a Dublin to US flight you arrive in a domestic terminal having already cleared customs/immigration. This means you're much less likely to get held up and miss a connection and can have a shorter layover.
You don't need a visa but you *DO* need to be pre-approved for travel to the US by the ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization) which they were. So they had applied for travel authorization in advance, and been granted authorization.
It's not just Muslims - there was a man deported on arrival a couple of years ago because he had used a particular turn of phrase in British English (which is entirely non-threatening in British English, but interpreted as a threat by the US immigration service) on a twitter message. This showed before the Snowden stuff came out plenty of evidence that the US not only trawls social networks, but has mechanisms to match a Twitter pseudonym to an actual live person. Snowden merely confirmed what we could infer already from incidents like this.
Google Chrome already treats SHA-1 as insecure (big red crossed out HTTPS in the address bar). Unfortunately, one of the users of SHA-1 is my bank! The very same bank that insists we be PCI-DSS compliant.
The "auditor" in this case is an automated scan done by your card processor. Like the Terminator, they cannot be bargained with or negotiated with. They either pass or fail. If it fails you have to fix it. They won't accept "That's not part of the CHD environment".
You can do this if you're getting an audit done by an actual human being. We went for the full big formal audit to get a Report of Compliance by an independent auditor. You can show to the auditor that your MX and everything else surrounding it goes nowhere near the cardholder data environment, and the auditor will be happy and will attest to this. But with the automated scans that a card processor may insist on, not so much. Despite us having a ROC, plus quarterly testing from our own auditors, we had a payment processor require we submit to their automated test. It either passes or fails. If it fails you have to fix what fails, you cannot reason with it or bargain with it. The payment processor just says "tough shit you have to fix it".
That's not how PCI-DSS works. It doesn't matter if your MX is on a different continent, and it doesn't matter if no credit card data ever goes on it. if it supports a weak cipher or weak protocol you fail. Bizarrely, for things like your MX, you can pass by simply not supporting encryption at all.
It's not so much the controlled vertical landing of the rocket, but that they can re-use the rocket engines so many times. NASA never achieved that, for example the SSMEs effectively needed rebuilding after each flight. What SpaceX seem to be shooting for with this is closer to "put the gas in it, go, repeat" without the rebuild between every flight (which made the Space Shuttle so damned expensive).
Six degrees of freedom, not six dimensions. Still only the boring old 3 dimensions.
Unlikely, as I suspect most of them are under 250g.
Wrong comparison. You own the car, and you borrowed money to pay it.
The comparison would be - you rented a car of Hertz or whoever, and you want to drive it as an Uber car. If you look at car rental agreements, the contract will in pretty much all cases disallow this.
The answer here is to have a speed camera on every single lamp post so it's impossible to break the speed limit without getting caught (sarcasm, but that's what some people will suggest).
For cycling the real answer is to have proper, good dedicated cycleways, not the "cycle farcilities" that tend to get put up in the UK (for example putting cycle ways on footpaths which is a terrible idea, or cycle paths on roads which are barely wider than double yellow lines. The worst are probably the painted cycle paths on footpaths where the cyclist has to give way to every single side road, and because drivers won't be looking for them as they are on the pavement, they end up having to give way to TRAFFIC BEHIND THEM! which is dangerous and moronic. Who thought of these things? Seriously!) Those types of cycle path also do two other bad things - drivers yell at cyclists who recognise how dangerous these farcilities actually are to "get on the bike path" - and it also legitimises cycling on the pavement which is dangerous to pedestrians. And pedestrians just wander into them all the time without warning, so as a cyclist on one of these farcilities you can't really ride more than 5 mph. Many regular cyclists in a flat place like Cambridge will be doing 17+ mph.
"Rigid rule based approach" would probably result in many fewer snarl-ups.
Let's imagine 2 extremes: the M6 southbound near Manchester as it is today. Traffic is very heavy, and impatient drivers tend to bunch up. An impatient driver cuts from one lane to the next because the next lane is moving 1mph quicker, forcing their way into the remaining space in lane 3 causing someone to brake, and it causes a chain reaction - all the close following cars with too little distance start braking progressively harder and harder until the entire motorway stops (or worse, someone gets rear-ended). You now have a self-sustaining traffic jam with no discernible reason (from the air you just see a standing wave of stopped traffic with no obvious cause) until the evening when finally fewer vehicles are arriving at the back of the jam than are leaving from the front.
The other extreme is the same entire motorway is populated by rigidly rule following automated cars. They will all be following a safe distance. No one will cut across a lane because the other one is going 1 mph faster. Traffic flows freely all day long despite the density.
Oil is a very unusual (at least this side of the pond) method of firing a power station. According to Gridwatch, oil is currently producing exactly...exactly 0% of our electricity (as opposed to nuclear: 18%, coal, 20%, wind 14%, gas 33%).
And he did all that with the full support of the traitorous Alex Salmond (former first minister of Scotland).
I wonder what it looks like when you have to add the steel, concrete and other materials to mine the coal, transport the coal, dispose of the ash, fuel to move the coal to the "resource price" of the coal-fired power station comparison? The thing about wind is the fuel delivers itself.
Also, "trump" means "fart" in northern England.
It's irrelevant, anyway - PCI-DSS will mandate it at some point for any site that accepts credit cards (if it hasn't already: PCI-DSS already mandates that support for all versions of SSL is dropped, and "early TLS" is dropped - they've not defined "early TLS" but TLS 1.0 is known to be vulnerable to attacks already, and TLS 1.1 is structurally weak, so I bet within a year this will be clarified to mean "both TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 must not be enabled" by the webserver. By June 2016 you have to get rid of TLS 1.0 if you accept credit card payments.
Some quite recent browsers don't support TLS 1.2 by default (I think some fairly recent versions of Internet Explorer need TLS 1.2 switching on manually).
As every KSP player knows, moar struts.