Wether the program is accurate or not is another matter, but the fact it doesn't report every system as using 100% of its memory suggests it is at least somewhat aware of superfetch etc.
I believe Windows tries to maintain a pool of free memory that isn't being used by the cache. For instance, my system (which has been up for nearly 3 days straight now, and used heavily in this time, so there's more than enough time for the cache to have filled available memory) currently has 750M commit, 660M cache, and 60M kernel, with 1570M total available, which means 60M is sitting there unused.
If your location based service isn't using your GPS but is using your IP address [...]... then it's a pathetic location based service. I mean, seriously, the closest anyone seems to be able to locate me based on my IP address is Wolverhampton, which is nearly 45 miles away from me. That's when they don't put me in Oxford, 60 miles away, or London, 110 miles away.
1. It needs to be "please burgle me". If you aren't at home, then you are being burgled, not robbed. A robbery is theft with violence or the threat of violence
Yes, violence or threat are part of the _main_ definition, but the word is used informally to refer to most kinds of theft, and it is an accepted, established usage of the word.
2. PleaseRobMe seems to be built around the premise that one home = one person. If you know where I live, please be assured that I am currently not at my home. But other people live where I live. Families exist. Flat sharing exists. Communal living exists. (Yeah, go and raid the kibbutz - I'm sure it'll be empty!) This may be true for Web 2.0 valleyboys. It's not true of the rest of the planet.
Yeah, but there's likely to be enough information on a twitter account to work out all this stuff, and identify the people who live alone (who aren't that rare, after all).
How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?
About 5,000 - 10,000 TB ought to be enough. At current rate of growth, we're talking about 20 years or so. Of course, that rate might slow down in the future...
If it's "hard to tell the difference between an adminstrative order and a law", then you agree that the claim of one law per day is not based on any objective fact.
Yes. Some cases could be argued either way, resulting in a range of possible answers to the question of how many laws were passed in 2009. Either way, though, the number is substantially higher than the number of acts of parliament that were passed, because some SIs are quite clearly and indisputably laws.
No, it's changing a definition in a previous statutory instrument, not in a law.
For reference, the relevant section of the previous statutory instrument reads:
39.--(1) It is an offence-
(a) deliberately to capture or kill a wild animal of a European protected species;
(b) deliberately to disturb any such animal;
(c) deliberately to take or destroy the eggs of such an animal; or
(d) to damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of such an animal.
(although this definition had been amended somewhat between originally passing in this form and the SI we're discussing amending it again)
This certainly sounds like a law to me, and I'd love to see you argue in front of a court trying to fine you for committing this offence that it's in a statutory instrument not a full act, so cannot be a law.
No, it's changing a definition in a previous statutory instrument, not in a law.
Yes, but the previous definition in the previous statutory instrument was providing regulations that are referenced in a full act of parliament, and therefore incorporated into law by reference.
This is part of the major complaint about the current government's constitutional record: they have seriously changed the way laws are handled, to the point that law is now passed in statutory instruments much more often than has previously happened, and this is quite clearly not a good thing because of the lack of parliamentary oversight for such laws.
Unfortunately that's not a valid workaround. How do you get your cash? At least here in the UK, all the banks insist you use your chip & pin card as proof of identity in order to get access to it, so you have to have one. If you have one, it can be stolen and used in fraud.
The end result is that merchants just say they can't implement something like that in all locations. Or the box is too expensive and they aren't buying any of them. So instead of universal penetration it is 5 or 10 percent of the merchants.
When the system was introduced there was 100% merchant penetration. The merchants were told that they had to upgrade their terminals, because the old ones would stop working.
Chip & Pin has never been about minimising fraud - it's about pushing the responsibility from the banks onto the customers
Unfortunately for them, this crack destroys their means for doing this. The way they did it was by contractually obliging the customer to keep their PIN safe: anyone other than the customer knows the PIN, they can blame the customer and not provide a refund of the money the customer has lost.
Now, however, card thieves will be able to take money from accounts _without knowing the PIN_. And furthermore, even in cases where the card thief does know the PIN, the bank _will not usually be able to prove they did_. Therefore, the responsibility for those unauthorised transactions is now squarely back on the bank's shoulders.
So, exactly, how gullible are the Australian people and/or how stupid are their politicians for anyone to think these two things are different from each other?
Of course they're different. You can give it away free. You can import it yourself. Posession isn't an offence. All three of these would be illegal if it were actually banned.
You can EASILY extract the license key from a windows machine using a registry query...
Erm, actually you can't. As of XP, the CD key is no longer stored in the registry, just the "license number" which is derived from it (IIUC) via a one-way hashing function.
Which should give the ingenious folks who developed the cracks that it is supposed to detect to find a way of working around it... a kernel patch that causes the unpatched original files to be presented when it tries to open them, or some such hack.
No, there is zero irony. It simply highlights the absurdity of the claim that the Confederate states were fighting for freedom. They seceded in an attempt to keep aristocratic rule alive when the rest of the country was turning against it; and even among the slave states, S.C. was always distinguished by the degree to which it worshiped the aristocratic ideal.
The claim you're disputing, as I understand it, is that the reason for the war was for freedom of self-government, and nothing at all to do with freedom of individual residents.
This makes it completely unironic that the same state should want to be free from those annoying constitutional protections that limit its power to remove the freedom of its residents.
All right, it would be hard to describe _all_ 3,500 of them as laws (many are just administrative orders), but _some_ of them are, e.g. no 6 (The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009, which among other things amends the definition of the offence of disturbing a wild animal in a conservation area). In some cases it's hard to tell the difference between an adminstrative order and a law. Is an order requiring a body (with the legal power to regulate RF communications) to designate a particular RF band for a particular purpose a law or not? Probably, yes: it affects what actions are legal for a certain group of people (i.e. those authorised to use the communication system that it makes provision for).
In all seriousness, a friend of mine who's been in the business for a while goes with a refinement of W.A.G.: 1. Get a WAG from the developer. 2. Apply this formula: Real estimate = WAG * (actual time for previous features / WAG for previous features) 3. Tell the developer that his original WAG is what we're using, so he actually hits something pretty close to the real estimate.
Note that taking steps 1 & 2 of this process gives you the estimating technique used by scrum, i.e. the process the guy in the article is advocating...
Even those of us with jobs don't make $10,000 a month..
True, but I'd expect to spend around half of that in additional expenses over the month. You'd need somewhere new to live, probably two places so you have a backup, some new equipment, and you can probably expect to spend a fair amount travelling. And I bet a lot of us have jobs that earn us somewhere near the $5,000 a month that'd leave you with. Plus most jobs won't let you take a 30 day holiday at short notice, so you'd be looking at the 2 or 3 months it took to find a new one as well.
Do some research. There are authors out there that made way less than 30% of sales, while the publisher took a big chunk. I was just reading a published author that has had over eight books published. On some of them, he got.50 cents per book. On others, he got a flat rate and no royalty fees at all.
30% is way above industry average for print books, yes. Author royalties on hard copy books are typically somewhere between 6% and 15%, often on a sliding scale starting at the bottom of that band and working up towards the top as larger and larger numbers are sold.
OTOH, ebook royalties have always been somewhat higher. Macmillan pays 20% - 25% on the ebooks they publish, which is admittedly less than 30%, but not by a long way. Flat rate is very rare, and most authors would shy away from such a publisher (except in the rather lucrative work-for-hire market, e.g. writing media tie-ins).
Kindle Numbers: Traditional Publishing Vs. Self Publishing
Yeah. Note, however, that we're talking about J. A. Konrath. OK, he isn't a publishing megastar, but we're not talking about an unknown. He was published by a well-known, respected publisher first. His sales figures would probably be somewhat different if he didn't have that publisher behind him.
Also, he's missing an important point. His ebook sales on his pro-published books, e.g. Whiskey Sour are lower than his ebook sales on his self-published books, but he doesn't seem to consider that there's a very good reason for this other than the pricing: most of the people reading his self-published books will be doing so after reading his professional ones. His professional ones are published in both paperback and e-book format. The self-published ones are only available in e-book. When there's no alternative available, people will buy the e-book who would normally have prefered a hard copy book. He's losing e-book sales on his pro published books to the hard copy versions of the same book, but isn't doing so on his self published books, so the figures are not comparable.
Another point to consider: Konrath is widely considered a master of the art of self-promoting a book. He's well known for this ability. Most authors rely on their publishers to promote their books much more than Konrath does. Results for his books will not apply to books from most other authors.
Also: read his conclusion.
If you're a new author, reading this and thinking about the fame and fortune you'll make on ebooks, I urge you to try the traditional route first.
Sensible advice, and completely contrary to what you seem to be suggesting.
Where's that quote from? I can't find it on either the page or in the PDF...
It's the submitter's opinion. And it's quite accurate: no such standardized set of requirements can guarantee security, because security is much more complicated than the simple kinds of rules that you can include in them. PCI compliance gives the illusion of security where it may well not actually exist at all.
As a side note, this also means that Silverlight CLR JIT produces code that's fast (not just "fast enough", but actually "high-performance", at least if the claims are true) for a video codec, which is quite impressive.
Note that xiph.org has a Java applet based Theora player, so this isn't actually anything particularly new.
Slashdot Mirror
Wether the program is accurate or not is another matter, but the fact it doesn't report every system as using 100% of its memory suggests it is at least somewhat aware of superfetch etc.
I believe Windows tries to maintain a pool of free memory that isn't being used by the cache. For instance, my system (which has been up for nearly 3 days straight now, and used heavily in this time, so there's more than enough time for the cache to have filled available memory) currently has 750M commit, 660M cache, and 60M kernel, with 1570M total available, which means 60M is sitting there unused.
If your location based service isn't using your GPS but is using your IP address [...] ... then it's a pathetic location based service. I mean, seriously, the closest anyone seems to be able to locate me based on my IP address is Wolverhampton, which is nearly 45 miles away from me. That's when they don't put me in Oxford, 60 miles away, or London, 110 miles away.
1. It needs to be "please burgle me". If you aren't at home, then you are being burgled, not robbed. A robbery is theft with violence or the threat of violence
Yes, violence or threat are part of the _main_ definition, but the word is used informally to refer to most kinds of theft, and it is an accepted, established usage of the word.
2. PleaseRobMe seems to be built around the premise that one home = one person. If you know where I live, please be assured that I am currently not at my home. But other people live where I live. Families exist. Flat sharing exists. Communal living exists. (Yeah, go and raid the kibbutz - I'm sure it'll be empty!) This may be true for Web 2.0 valleyboys. It's not true of the rest of the planet.
Yeah, but there's likely to be enough information on a twitter account to work out all this stuff, and identify the people who live alone (who aren't that rare, after all).
How long until we have enough Hard Drive storage space to backup my own brain?
About 5,000 - 10,000 TB ought to be enough. At current rate of growth, we're talking about 20 years or so. Of course, that rate might slow down in the future...
The NASA hacker from England served 0 seconds in U.S. prison.
So far. AFAIK, his extradition is still pending.
If it's "hard to tell the difference between an adminstrative order and a law", then you agree that the claim of one law per day is not based on any objective fact.
Yes. Some cases could be argued either way, resulting in a range of possible answers to the question of how many laws were passed in 2009. Either way, though, the number is substantially higher than the number of acts of parliament that were passed, because some SIs are quite clearly and indisputably laws.
No, it's changing a definition in a previous statutory instrument, not in a law.
For reference, the relevant section of the previous statutory instrument reads:
(although this definition had been amended somewhat between originally passing in this form and the SI we're discussing amending it again)
This certainly sounds like a law to me, and I'd love to see you argue in front of a court trying to fine you for committing this offence that it's in a statutory instrument not a full act, so cannot be a law.
No, it's changing a definition in a previous statutory instrument, not in a law.
Yes, but the previous definition in the previous statutory instrument was providing regulations that are referenced in a full act of parliament, and therefore incorporated into law by reference.
This is part of the major complaint about the current government's constitutional record: they have seriously changed the way laws are handled, to the point that law is now passed in statutory instruments much more often than has previously happened, and this is quite clearly not a good thing because of the lack of parliamentary oversight for such laws.
Use Cash.
Unfortunately that's not a valid workaround. How do you get your cash? At least here in the UK, all the banks insist you use your chip & pin card as proof of identity in order to get access to it, so you have to have one. If you have one, it can be stolen and used in fraud.
The end result is that merchants just say they can't implement something like that in all locations. Or the box is too expensive and they aren't buying any of them. So instead of universal penetration it is 5 or 10 percent of the merchants.
When the system was introduced there was 100% merchant penetration. The merchants were told that they had to upgrade their terminals, because the old ones would stop working.
Chip & Pin has never been about minimising fraud - it's about pushing the responsibility from the banks onto the customers
Unfortunately for them, this crack destroys their means for doing this. The way they did it was by contractually obliging the customer to keep their PIN safe: anyone other than the customer knows the PIN, they can blame the customer and not provide a refund of the money the customer has lost.
Now, however, card thieves will be able to take money from accounts _without knowing the PIN_. And furthermore, even in cases where the card thief does know the PIN, the bank _will not usually be able to prove they did_. Therefore, the responsibility for those unauthorised transactions is now squarely back on the bank's shoulders.
So, exactly, how gullible are the Australian people and/or how stupid are their politicians for anyone to think these two things are different from each other?
Of course they're different. You can give it away free. You can import it yourself. Posession isn't an offence. All three of these would be illegal if it were actually banned.
But those communities are still there. at least many of them are.
they just look small and puny next to the megacorps.
Yeah, some of still BBS. Occasionally.
You can EASILY extract the license key from a windows machine using a registry query...
Erm, actually you can't. As of XP, the CD key is no longer stored in the registry, just the "license number" which is derived from it (IIUC) via a one-way hashing function.
That is very well and good until SP1 comes out.
Which should give the ingenious folks who developed the cracks that it is supposed to detect to find a way of working around it... a kernel patch that causes the unpatched original files to be presented when it tries to open them, or some such hack.
No, there is zero irony. It simply highlights the absurdity of the claim that the Confederate states were fighting for freedom. They seceded in an attempt to keep aristocratic rule alive when the rest of the country was turning against it; and even among the slave states, S.C. was always distinguished by the degree to which it worshiped the aristocratic ideal.
The claim you're disputing, as I understand it, is that the reason for the war was for freedom of self-government, and nothing at all to do with freedom of individual residents.
This makes it completely unironic that the same state should want to be free from those annoying constitutional protections that limit its power to remove the freedom of its residents.
You shouldn't believe everything you read in hysterical right wing media. The British government passed 27 laws in 2009. So that's about one law every 2 weeks, not one a day.
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/SearchResults.aspx?TYPE=QS&Title=&Year=2009&Number=&LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)
Your search misses these results: http://opsi.gov.uk/si/si-2009-index
All right, it would be hard to describe _all_ 3,500 of them as laws (many are just administrative orders), but _some_ of them are, e.g. no 6 (The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009, which among other things amends the definition of the offence of disturbing a wild animal in a conservation area). In some cases it's hard to tell the difference between an adminstrative order and a law. Is an order requiring a body (with the legal power to regulate RF communications) to designate a particular RF band for a particular purpose a law or not? Probably, yes: it affects what actions are legal for a certain group of people (i.e. those authorised to use the communication system that it makes provision for).
In all seriousness, a friend of mine who's been in the business for a while goes with a refinement of W.A.G.:
1. Get a WAG from the developer.
2. Apply this formula: Real estimate = WAG * (actual time for previous features / WAG for previous features)
3. Tell the developer that his original WAG is what we're using, so he actually hits something pretty close to the real estimate.
Note that taking steps 1 & 2 of this process gives you the estimating technique used by scrum, i.e. the process the guy in the article is advocating...
The main page will come up, but when I try to go to a specific board, it fails...
Well, of course, we are talking about 4chan, right?
How about a NSFW tag for that site??
You hold your mouse over the link, it says 'encyclopediadramatica.com' in the status bar. Isn't that enough?
Even those of us with jobs don't make $10,000 a month..
True, but I'd expect to spend around half of that in additional expenses over the month. You'd need somewhere new to live, probably two places so you have a backup, some new equipment, and you can probably expect to spend a fair amount travelling. And I bet a lot of us have jobs that earn us somewhere near the $5,000 a month that'd leave you with. Plus most jobs won't let you take a 30 day holiday at short notice, so you'd be looking at the 2 or 3 months it took to find a new one as well.
Do some research. There are authors out there that made way less than 30% of sales, while the publisher took a big chunk. I was just reading a published author that has had over eight books published. On some of them, he got .50 cents per book. On others, he got a flat rate and no royalty fees at all.
30% is way above industry average for print books, yes. Author royalties on hard copy books are typically somewhere between 6% and 15%, often on a sliding scale starting at the bottom of that band and working up towards the top as larger and larger numbers are sold.
OTOH, ebook royalties have always been somewhat higher. Macmillan pays 20% - 25% on the ebooks they publish, which is admittedly less than 30%, but not by a long way. Flat rate is very rare, and most authors would shy away from such a publisher (except in the rather lucrative work-for-hire market, e.g. writing media tie-ins).
Kindle Numbers: Traditional Publishing Vs. Self Publishing
Yeah. Note, however, that we're talking about J. A. Konrath. OK, he isn't a publishing megastar, but we're not talking about an unknown. He was published by a well-known, respected publisher first. His sales figures would probably be somewhat different if he didn't have that publisher behind him.
Also, he's missing an important point. His ebook sales on his pro-published books, e.g. Whiskey Sour are lower than his ebook sales on his self-published books, but he doesn't seem to consider that there's a very good reason for this other than the pricing: most of the people reading his self-published books will be doing so after reading his professional ones. His professional ones are published in both paperback and e-book format. The self-published ones are only available in e-book. When there's no alternative available, people will buy the e-book who would normally have prefered a hard copy book. He's losing e-book sales on his pro published books to the hard copy versions of the same book, but isn't doing so on his self published books, so the figures are not comparable.
Another point to consider: Konrath is widely considered a master of the art of self-promoting a book. He's well known for this ability. Most authors rely on their publishers to promote their books much more than Konrath does. Results for his books will not apply to books from most other authors.
Also: read his conclusion.
Sensible advice, and completely contrary to what you seem to be suggesting.
Where's that quote from? I can't find it on either the page or in the PDF...
It's the submitter's opinion. And it's quite accurate: no such standardized set of requirements can guarantee security, because security is much more complicated than the simple kinds of rules that you can include in them. PCI compliance gives the illusion of security where it may well not actually exist at all.
As a side note, this also means that Silverlight CLR JIT produces code that's fast (not just "fast enough", but actually "high-performance", at least if the claims are true) for a video codec, which is quite impressive.
Note that xiph.org has a Java applet based Theora player, so this isn't actually anything particularly new.