If, by the end of 2010, Chrome is running on anything other than Netbooks (the Google branded version of the OS, not the open source version that is missing a bunch of features), I'll give you $5.
You'll have to track me down though, so I'm probably not risking much.
Re:Amusingly..
on
R.I.P. FTP
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If you are maintaining a local copy and then 'uploading' it to the server, you freaking use rsync. If your host doesn't support rsync, you quit them.
I think it might be safe to do some sort of throttling after a few thousand attempts (I mean something like 3 attempts per IP, and a short wait for new IPs, the user can still make it through that).
Come to think of it, this actually explains to me why my credit union and Yahoo! are using authentication questions now (no need to throttle the authentication step, and no need to lock authenticated users out of guessing at their password during a bot attack).
I would prefer they sent me a token generator, but that's what I get for using such a small institution.
If you boost it into a higher orbit, you need a bigger rocket to get there, making the station less useful. Boosting something the size of ISS completely out of a low orbit would take a huge amount of fuel.
Well, someone has to pay for the orbital boosts it needs on a regular basis or it will de-orbit all on its own, and NASA is probably the most on the hook if it crashes into something, so if NASA doesn't feel like paying and no one else steps up...
Why does it surprise you that Morgan Stanley published something like this? One of their big activities is selling investment analysis, and the people they are selling to aren't exactly going to be wired into what Twitter is about.
They all want in on the next Google, so when something gets as much attention as Twitter has been getting (never mind that the attention is a self fulfilling prophecy; people in the media at least have a tendency to be narcissistic), the herd gets a bit jumpy.
A great example of spending a lot of money to not find the next Google is the giant pile of money that Murdoch shoveled out for MySpace.
Not very much. The actual ingredients aren't that big a chunk of the overall cost of prepared food.
Some sort of estimate is possible; assume McDonald's pays $3 a pound for beef (I expect they pay quite a bit less than this, $3 is close to the retail price for 80/20, which is apparently what they use). Assume that they make each regular hamburger with 1/10 of a pound of meat (it is probably closer to 1/12) and the cost of the most expensive ingredient is $0.30. Double the price of beef and the cost of the burger goes up $0.30 (at most, probably less).
So how does the price of corn effect the price of beef? It looks like 20 pounds of corn for 1 pound of beef is a nice safe high estimate of the amount of corn involved, so at $0.066 per pound of corn (56 pounds per bushel, $3.67 per bushel, the July), each pound of beef consumes about $1.30 of corn. So if the price of corn tripled, the $3 beef might then cost $5.60, pushing the price of the burger up $0.26.
That's probably a pretty simplistic view of how the different parts are interrelated, but I don't think it is completely ridiculous, and there is a good chance that it is an overestimate (because I tried really hard to make it an overestimate).
The passport card isn't any good for international flights, a full passport is required (so flights do not explain why these people were carrying their cards). The other reply to my post suggests a plausible explanation, people boarding Canadian cruise ships. Someone else mentions that there is a passport office in San Francisco (but it seems more likely that the people who got scanned in this article were carrying the card for a cruise).
Risk spending part of your vacation in custody. I mean, count how many times you have interacted with a police officer in the last 5 years. For me, it is something like 5 (and several of those were non-adversarial...).
So is the chip really that much harder to counterfeit than other security devices?
If not, the lack of notification about using the sleeve isn't real surprising, as they weren't doing their jobs when they decided that the cards needed the RFID chips. I mean, I certainly hope that the 20 seconds it would take to use a magswipe or type in a number are not the big holdup.
If you shove your passport in a simple metal lined sleeve, this tech isn't trackable.
It is stupid that it is necessary to do so (the convenience gained is minimal), but if it a symptom of a government conspiracy, it is good to know that they are wildly incompetent. Or at least, they want us to think they are wildly incompetent. Oh no!
If you are talking about the combination of Copernic and Outlook, never mind this post. If you are looking for a way to get the messages out of the pst files, you can import them into Outlook Express (apparently from Outlook, not directly from the pst) and then use something like Thunderbird to convert them over to mbox format (Thunderbird uses the Outlook Express binaries to read the files, making it more reliable than tools that try to parse the OE files themselves).
Most small businesses would have trouble generating a page worth of sensitive information; the relationships they have with customers (not just the contact info) are the important part of the business (perhaps along with being reliable).
Unless I misread something, the serial number is all that is on the RFID chip.
I guess the supposed advantage of the chip is that it is harder to forge than a barcode or printed number, but it doesn't seem worth it if it can automatically be identified 20 feet away (it doesn't increase risk an enormous amount for most people, but it increases it a little, with no apparent gain).
theeddie55 says in another reply to vrmlguy that the video does not say anything about the linked product, it demonstrates that the protection built into passports is insufficient, and the description for the video (I'm on a modem and haven't watched it yet) says that the video demonstrates a better method of protection.
So it looks like vrmlguy is a headless chicken. As I understand it, the various protection sleeves are just Faraday cages and are essentially impossible to circumvent.
Slashdot Mirror
If, by the end of 2010, Chrome is running on anything other than Netbooks (the Google branded version of the OS, not the open source version that is missing a bunch of features), I'll give you $5.
You'll have to track me down though, so I'm probably not risking much.
If you are maintaining a local copy and then 'uploading' it to the server, you freaking use rsync. If your host doesn't support rsync, you quit them.
PasswordSafe and KeePass both work great (I use PasswordSafe, but KeePass supports more platforms).
In addition to securely storing passwords, they have generators similar to the one you link.
I think it might be safe to do some sort of throttling after a few thousand attempts (I mean something like 3 attempts per IP, and a short wait for new IPs, the user can still make it through that).
Come to think of it, this actually explains to me why my credit union and Yahoo! are using authentication questions now (no need to throttle the authentication step, and no need to lock authenticated users out of guessing at their password during a bot attack).
I would prefer they sent me a token generator, but that's what I get for using such a small institution.
At least it is a reasonable name. If he named his kid Swordfish...
It's more like pointing out that a $25 lock is probably sufficient for a house with 25 glass windows (as opposed to a $100 lock).
If you boost it into a higher orbit, you need a bigger rocket to get there, making the station less useful. Boosting something the size of ISS completely out of a low orbit would take a huge amount of fuel.
Well, someone has to pay for the orbital boosts it needs on a regular basis or it will de-orbit all on its own, and NASA is probably the most on the hook if it crashes into something, so if NASA doesn't feel like paying and no one else steps up...
I would say, yes, those people are indeed that superficial.
You think Murdoch is happy about the $500 million he spent on MySpace?
Why does it surprise you that Morgan Stanley published something like this? One of their big activities is selling investment analysis, and the people they are selling to aren't exactly going to be wired into what Twitter is about.
They all want in on the next Google, so when something gets as much attention as Twitter has been getting (never mind that the attention is a self fulfilling prophecy; people in the media at least have a tendency to be narcissistic), the herd gets a bit jumpy.
A great example of spending a lot of money to not find the next Google is the giant pile of money that Murdoch shoveled out for MySpace.
Not very much. The actual ingredients aren't that big a chunk of the overall cost of prepared food.
Some sort of estimate is possible; assume McDonald's pays $3 a pound for beef (I expect they pay quite a bit less than this, $3 is close to the retail price for 80/20, which is apparently what they use). Assume that they make each regular hamburger with 1/10 of a pound of meat (it is probably closer to 1/12) and the cost of the most expensive ingredient is $0.30. Double the price of beef and the cost of the burger goes up $0.30 (at most, probably less).
So how does the price of corn effect the price of beef? It looks like 20 pounds of corn for 1 pound of beef is a nice safe high estimate of the amount of corn involved, so at $0.066 per pound of corn (56 pounds per bushel, $3.67 per bushel, the July), each pound of beef consumes about $1.30 of corn. So if the price of corn tripled, the $3 beef might then cost $5.60, pushing the price of the burger up $0.26.
That's probably a pretty simplistic view of how the different parts are interrelated, but I don't think it is completely ridiculous, and there is a good chance that it is an overestimate (because I tried really hard to make it an overestimate).
Wikipedia puts Dwayne Johnson at 6' 4", 225 lbs, for a BMI of 27.4:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwayne_Johnson#Training_and_Rocky_Maivia_.281996.29
I'm not sure the Hulkster has ever been real healthy.
The passport card isn't any good for international flights, a full passport is required (so flights do not explain why these people were carrying their cards). The other reply to my post suggests a plausible explanation, people boarding Canadian cruise ships. Someone else mentions that there is a passport office in San Francisco (but it seems more likely that the people who got scanned in this article were carrying the card for a cruise).
Risk spending part of your vacation in custody. I mean, count how many times you have interacted with a police officer in the last 5 years. For me, it is something like 5 (and several of those were non-adversarial...).
So is the chip really that much harder to counterfeit than other security devices?
If not, the lack of notification about using the sleeve isn't real surprising, as they weren't doing their jobs when they decided that the cards needed the RFID chips. I mean, I certainly hope that the 20 seconds it would take to use a magswipe or type in a number are not the big holdup.
Off-topic, potentially obnoxious question: Are the wes ones and yous in there habit, or are they preference?
I guess it isn't really that obnoxious, unless you choose to take it very personally; mostly, if it is a preference, I'm curious as to why.
Old timer makes wild extrapolation, maybe the old really are feeble minded.
Sounds awfully heavy.
If you shove your passport in a simple metal lined sleeve, this tech isn't trackable.
It is stupid that it is necessary to do so (the convenience gained is minimal), but if it a symptom of a government conspiracy, it is good to know that they are wildly incompetent. Or at least, they want us to think they are wildly incompetent. Oh no!
If you are talking about the combination of Copernic and Outlook, never mind this post. If you are looking for a way to get the messages out of the pst files, you can import them into Outlook Express (apparently from Outlook, not directly from the pst) and then use something like Thunderbird to convert them over to mbox format (Thunderbird uses the Outlook Express binaries to read the files, making it more reliable than tools that try to parse the OE files themselves).
Most small businesses would have trouble generating a page worth of sensitive information; the relationships they have with customers (not just the contact info) are the important part of the business (perhaps along with being reliable).
Your question is answered right in the summary. Clearly even.
Unless I misread something, the serial number is all that is on the RFID chip.
I guess the supposed advantage of the chip is that it is harder to forge than a barcode or printed number, but it doesn't seem worth it if it can automatically be identified 20 feet away (it doesn't increase risk an enormous amount for most people, but it increases it a little, with no apparent gain).
theeddie55 says in another reply to vrmlguy that the video does not say anything about the linked product, it demonstrates that the protection built into passports is insufficient, and the description for the video (I'm on a modem and haven't watched it yet) says that the video demonstrates a better method of protection.
So it looks like vrmlguy is a headless chicken. As I understand it, the various protection sleeves are just Faraday cages and are essentially impossible to circumvent.