Gotta hate this... pay big bucks and you get sweet speeds on a figgin' plane, while the unwashed masses down here still have crappy 56k in many places! Damn capitalist pigs!
You hate it? I'm sorry; as soon as you're willing to lay down the big bucks required to establish such an infrastructure, then you, too, can get the sweet speeds... wherever and whenever you want them. Indeed someone has to pay for it.
When money can be exchanged for necessary technological goods and services, it would appear that the system works after all.
Will this come with an Cat5-10bT ethernet adapter, or a usb connection, or what?
It's a processor; not a computer. It can come with whatever land-based connectivity hardware features the computer manufacturer chooses to incorporate.
That would be a pretty neat trick on NASA's part, considering that 16 February won't happen until next month. Sorry; that's press release #02-16, from 29 January (the number does not correspond with a date), which makes it scarier to you than you thought.
Then again, I don't find it all that worrisome that NASA didn't inform the general public of this issue earlier. What would we have done with extra lead time on such a warning? I mean, besides panic unreasonably?
There is no way this can be defended ethically: Because they provide you with a service, as a corporation, they can legally observe and log every detail of enery task you use the service to complete?
Ethics has little place in this particular issue. This should really be a debate on the legality of such things, and as the stipulations of their Acceptable Use Policy clearly define that they can and will enact such periodic snooping on their customers, they're fully within their rights to do exactly that.
Quite simply, if you don't like it, then don't use it.
This just goes to show yet again that people really should thoroughly read their EULAs and AUPs before they agree to the terms by using the service/software/etc.. Ignorance of whichever legal rights you have agreed to waive is simply no excuse to bitch about it after the fact.
but every time more of these are discovered within our viewable range,
"The most recent observations... were made at the Keck telescope atop Mauna Kea in Hawaii and at the Lick Observatory near San Jose, Calif. The objects could not be seen in the telescopes, but the effects of their gravitational pull could be detected in the distinct wobbles of their stars."
We have yet to actually see any of the alleged planets outside of our own solar system. Until we actually have some form of photographic evidence that these "planetary objects" exist, a healthy dose of skepticism is entirely appropriate. I'm really, truly looking forward to getting proof, because as things stand, the astronomers aren't quite sure of what they're discovering. There's conjecture and speculation, true, but the most recent findings have shown them that their theories might not be as secure a basis as they once surmised.
Enter my house if I'm portscanning? I keep a golf club in the closet (sandwedge) just for this sort of intrusion...
Can you imagine what Sprint's lawyers could do to you in a civil suit after you injure one of their employees who legally entered your home? Some people who defend their property with what can be logically seen as a reasonable amount of violence are successfully sued by would-be thieves who illegally enter their homes. Sprint would eat your lunch. Then they would, like, beat up your mom.
And with other broadband services around (cable is much cheaper) why would anybody even consider using this service ?
Wireless broadband is particulary well-suited to service within areas where no other high-speed connectivity exists. It's good to be the only game in the area.
"Yeah, so last night I was closing up the bar, when some young punk comes in and tries to stick me up. Well, it coulda been a real ugly situation, but, I managed to shoot him in the spine." - Moe
And just why would it be against the law for them to eavesdrop on your email? If it's expressed in the terms of service and you accept it (implied by use of the service), you've granted them implicit legally-bound permission to do exactly that. You have accepted the fact that you do not necessarily have a right to privacy or anything else you might have assumed to be the case.
This is why it's rather important to thoroughly review implied contracts like a TOS or EULA. You could very easily screw yourself, and ignorance of the rules does not preclude you from legal culpability.
...you mean there are operating systems other than Windows?
It's typical Microsoft FUD, with a twist. Now that they can't get away with threatening resellers with curtailed business if they don't bundle Windows, they'll simply imply that there might be some legal liability for the resellers based on the actions of the customers if they don't assure a valid license. Not that the reseller can be held responsible....
> Now I'm paranoid. How many people actualy saw this momentary images?
> Do they look obviously retouched?
Well, while I can't give the definitive answer on that, the interface on this image [http://www.onebahamas.com/audrey/ch_fullsize_03.g if] is absolutely identical to that of Mac OS. From the pull-down menu to the "Find" button to the text on the page, this looks exactly like a screen shot from a Mac web browser.
This says something about either the underlying OS of Audrey or the veracity of this information. I'm just not quite sure which.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I only pay attention to the SMC. Then again, I can always choose not to agree with the sentiments expreseed therein.
"THIS looks like a job for emergency pants!" - Torg
You hate it? I'm sorry; as soon as you're willing to lay down the big bucks required to establish such an infrastructure, then you, too, can get the sweet speeds... wherever and whenever you want them. Indeed someone has to pay for it.
When money can be exchanged for necessary technological goods and services, it would appear that the system works after all.
It's a processor; not a computer. It can come with whatever land-based connectivity hardware features the computer manufacturer chooses to incorporate.
Try reading the article next time.
That would be a pretty neat trick on NASA's part, considering that 16 February won't happen until next month. Sorry; that's press release #02-16, from 29 January (the number does not correspond with a date), which makes it scarier to you than you thought.
Then again, I don't find it all that worrisome that NASA didn't inform the general public of this issue earlier. What would we have done with extra lead time on such a warning? I mean, besides panic unreasonably?
Ethics has little place in this particular issue. This should really be a debate on the legality of such things, and as the stipulations of their Acceptable Use Policy clearly define that they can and will enact such periodic snooping on their customers, they're fully within their rights to do exactly that.
Quite simply, if you don't like it, then don't use it.
This just goes to show yet again that people really should thoroughly read their EULAs and AUPs before they agree to the terms by using the service/software/etc.. Ignorance of whichever legal rights you have agreed to waive is simply no excuse to bitch about it after the fact.
We have yet to actually see any of the alleged planets outside of our own solar system. Until we actually have some form of photographic evidence that these "planetary objects" exist, a healthy dose of skepticism is entirely appropriate. I'm really, truly looking forward to getting proof, because as things stand, the astronomers aren't quite sure of what they're discovering. There's conjecture and speculation, true, but the most recent findings have shown them that their theories might not be as secure a basis as they once surmised.
Can you imagine what Sprint's lawyers could do to you in a civil suit after you injure one of their employees who legally entered your home? Some people who defend their property with what can be logically seen as a reasonable amount of violence are successfully sued by would-be thieves who illegally enter their homes. Sprint would eat your lunch. Then they would, like, beat up your mom.
And with other broadband services around (cable is much cheaper) why would anybody even consider using this service ?
Wireless broadband is particulary well-suited to service within areas where no other high-speed connectivity exists. It's good to be the only game in the area.
This is why it's rather important to thoroughly review implied contracts like a TOS or EULA. You could very easily screw yourself, and ignorance of the rules does not preclude you from legal culpability.
It's typical Microsoft FUD, with a twist. Now that they can't get away with threatening resellers with curtailed business if they don't bundle Windows, they'll simply imply that there might be some legal liability for the resellers based on the actions of the customers if they don't assure a valid license. Not that the reseller can be held responsible....
Well, not yet.
> Do they look obviously retouched?
Well, while I can't give the definitive answer on that, the interface on this image [http://www.onebahamas.com/audrey/ch_fullsize_03.g if] is absolutely identical to that of Mac OS. From the pull-down menu to the "Find" button to the text on the page, this looks exactly like a screen shot from a Mac web browser.
This says something about either the underlying OS of Audrey or the veracity of this information. I'm just not quite sure which.