Yes, but you have to ask how this fits into their quest to organize the world's information? I naively assume they don't intend to fubar 'your Internet', but this looks a lot like the whole gmail "we store your email forever" sort of deal.
It seems this registration-scheme would enable them to organize new blogs/sites using their existing network-search framework. And, I can see blogs really taking off in the immediate future. If any of you have used Picasa + Hello + Blogger, you'll know what I mean. Scary Easy.
Now, you get all sorts of random people posting their thoughts/musings/interests all over -- all being syphoned through Google's keyword-storing architecture. Sergey and Larry are no dummies: they've done their research in data mining. Why stop at data mining the existing information source, when you can create a new one?
Google employees have been awarded end-of-fiscal year watches -- is a Google-branded form of time travel next? Will the watches solve the Twins Paradox? Will they use their watches to purge the streets of evil?
Are these 82% of "web searchers from a limited polling" then a bunch of idiots, or are they just by-products of our consumer-oriented marketeering?
Would anyone out there venture to say that "82%" of those people searching might be doing so to support some need to buy something anyway? After all, the whole intent of search engines is to find information -- I wouldn't believe anyone that told me more than "18%" of web-searchers are searching for mere educational/enlightenment purposes(no pr0n doesn't count here).
"Avalon" unifies how Windows creates, displays, and manipulates documents, media, and user interface. This enables developers and designers to create visually-stunning, differentiated user experiences that improve customer connection...
Okay, I guess the *silly example* isn't very pertinent, considering how you've just decided that being stuck at a tollbooth and short 50 cents is better than having your car lifted.
Back to a relevant example:)
What you're saying is that merely because I believe my computer to be secure, I am less secure than if it is known to be unsecured.
So, right now I believe my computer to be secure. You're telling me that if I disconnect it from the firewall and leave my system barebone cable-modem connected to the net, I am more secure just because I know this. Maybe my head is filled with cheese, because I just don't get it.
Getting back to the article at hand, I think a company that does choose "security through obscurity" is betting against the world. They're making the brash statement, "We can maintain security through whatever you throw at us". And, maybe they do pretty well -- maybe they *are* smarter than everyone else, able to keep ahead of the haxors and scriptkiddies... for awhile.
dangerous things like printing off your gmail and holding up banks with the threat of papercuts?
I think there's a false sense of security with any communication medium -- cell phones and landwire are both prone to tapping. Snailmail can get stolen if your mailbox flag is up, Heck, even fiber can be sniffed(given a nice stable submarine, lots of storage, and a blanket defense budget).
I don't see how "security through obscurity" is worse than "no security". If I leave my car unlocked and a thief happens by, he only needs to know how to start the car to steal it.
But, if I leave the car locked but don't tell anyone how its locked, now the thief needs to figure out how to break into the car, and then be able to start it.
"Security through obscurity" is better than nothing at all.
I was just wondering why Real Networks is linked along with Windows and Mac for sponsorship(or something), aside for their cd-burning software...
According to this info-mech DRM Technology Vendors site it sounds like they're positioning themselves to be *the* multi-platform multimedia DRM protection software.
A lot of people ditch their wired lines and just use their cell phone.
6.2% of people don't have *wired lines* -- this means they have no choice on the matter and are not ditching their wired for cell phones.
I think you meant that a good portion of them choose not to have wired lines installed by the phone companies, either for economics or philosophy. I wonder how many of these people live in Alaska, or are Amish?
Sorry to disappoint you chemistry geeks out there, it's been verified: I did a search on GTK and did not find any Grand Theft K 3d chemistry gaming references...apparently it's some toolkit for gimps.
I'm going to start a company that produces Wingding-intertubes for floating down neighboring Stromboli Stream. A by-product of the Wingding manufacturing process happens to be Toxic Chemicals A,B, and C. I figure, what the hell, I'll go dump them into Stromboli Stream and not have to pay a red cent for disposal!!
Woohoo! Wingding sales are skyrocketing -- but wait, people are getting sick in Stromboli Stream, and their Wingdings aren't floating! What should I do?!
I know, I'll buy an environmental cleanup company, and charge the county a goat-load to clean the stream! Time to go buy another golden caviar-filled rumpus room!
We now return to your previously scheduled slashdot article.
Irregardless of the quality of the anti-spyware, isn't it just damned *ironic* when a company can make a huge profit on a product, and then make *another* goatload of cash by fixing it.
So I ask you, why would Microsoft *ever* wish to produce flawless software???
A trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods
So, with that definition in mind, I think a domain name does give an indication of the source of goods, and www.googlesucksadonkey.com would not be valid for a search engine name...
Yeah, I think Matlab is trying to pay the rent. That's why they charge mandatory subscriptions fees to the tune of $500/year. And if you don't pay them and wish to get a license in the future -- you have to *back pay* all your unpaid maintenence fees.
Okay, there's something to be against recommending to the poster: "math software is for fancy lads -- why don't you just whip them there kiddies 'til they learn their 'rithmatic."
It's just that we live in a visual age. Why not put some of these Clinton-funded Pentium III's to good use! Give these kids a lab once a month that exposes them to some of the applications of math. It's a lot easier to lead a horse to water if the horse knows the water will satiate its thirst.
I've seen Mathematica do some awesome abstract math. I've used matlab to run control algorithms on live freakin' motors. If these students are serious about engineering/physics/applied math, a little exposure to what they could *actually be working with someday* would not impede their understanding of the maths behind the software -- it would more likely motivate them and give them some end goal.
Birch bark and charcoal we would have killed for birchbark and charcoal! We had to gather dirt and mix it with spit and draw that onto rabbit pelts back in my day!
I think that's a good point. For high school calculus(circa 1995), they basically required us to purchase frickin TI-85's. I still have this 1/2 lb lump of graphing calculator, and I only use it for conversions (which I can't do in my head anymore:)
That being said, any math tool you give these students can be a crutch later on, so choose wisely.
Since these kids are freshman -- why not give them multiple labs(intermixed with some actual learning) that will allow them to experiment between the different environments out there. After all, they may not get to *choose* their math processing medium when they get into serious work.
Two points of contention -- 1. any math program needs to have instant feedback. Computer scientists may enjoy scouring for results, but mathematician's usually do not. 2. Speed adjustments are different than algorithm testing. "Early optimization is the root of all evil". D. Knuth(sp)
In fact, Matlab's mex files are implemented in C. It's all based upon FFTW, ATLAS, Lapack, Blas to name a few. You wouldn't write a Python FFT routine -- you would load SciPy, Numeric, or any other Py-FFT-du-jour and leverage time-tested C-routines.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but you have to ask how this fits into their quest to organize the world's information? I naively assume they don't intend to fubar 'your Internet', but this looks a lot like the whole gmail "we store your email forever" sort of deal.
It seems this registration-scheme would enable them to organize new blogs/sites using their existing network-search framework. And, I can see blogs really taking off in the immediate future. If any of you have used Picasa + Hello + Blogger, you'll know what I mean. Scary Easy.
Now, you get all sorts of random people posting their thoughts/musings/interests all over -- all being syphoned through Google's keyword-storing architecture. Sergey and Larry are no dummies: they've done their research in data mining. Why stop at data mining the existing information source, when you can create a new one?
Time to go buy some tinfoil futures...
well, if they're already associated with blog-spot, wouldn't yournamehere.gspot.com make more sense?
I for one, welcome our new www.domain-overlords.net
Google employees have been awarded end-of-fiscal year watches -- is a Google-branded form of time travel next? Will the watches solve the Twins Paradox? Will they use their watches to purge the streets of evil?
Stay tuned, faithful citizen!
Are these 82% of "web searchers from a limited polling" then a bunch of idiots, or are they just by-products of our consumer-oriented marketeering?
Would anyone out there venture to say that "82%" of those people searching might be doing so to support some need to buy something anyway? After all, the whole intent of search engines is to find information -- I wouldn't believe anyone that told me more than "18%" of web-searchers are searching for mere educational/enlightenment purposes(no pr0n doesn't count here).
Maybe they think that the "Sponsor" is Google, in which case it would sound like "Google Recommended Results"...
I guess it doesn't need to put the lotion on its skin anymore...
"Avalon" unifies how Windows creates, displays, and manipulates documents, media, and user interface. This enables developers and designers to create visually-stunning, differentiated user experiences that improve customer connection...
snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors! snake oil vendors!
ad infinitum...
Okay, I guess the *silly example* isn't very pertinent, considering how you've just decided that being stuck at a tollbooth and short 50 cents is better than having your car lifted.
:)
Back to a relevant example
What you're saying is that merely because I believe my computer to be secure, I am less secure than if it is known to be unsecured.
So, right now I believe my computer to be secure. You're telling me that if I disconnect it from the firewall and leave my system barebone cable-modem connected to the net, I am more secure just because I know this. Maybe my head is filled with cheese, because I just don't get it.
Getting back to the article at hand, I think a company that does choose "security through obscurity" is betting against the world. They're making the brash statement, "We can maintain security through whatever you throw at us". And, maybe they do pretty well -- maybe they *are* smarter than everyone else, able to keep ahead of the haxors and scriptkiddies... for awhile.
dangerous things like printing off your gmail and holding up banks with the threat of papercuts?
I think there's a false sense of security with any communication medium -- cell phones and landwire are both prone to tapping. Snailmail can get stolen if your mailbox flag is up, Heck, even fiber can be sniffed(given a nice stable submarine, lots of storage, and a blanket defense budget).
I don't see how "security through obscurity" is worse than "no security". If I leave my car unlocked and a thief happens by, he only needs to know how to start the car to steal it.
But, if I leave the car locked but don't tell anyone how its locked, now the thief needs to figure out how to break into the car, and then be able to start it.
"Security through obscurity" is better than nothing at all.
I was just wondering why Real Networks is linked along with Windows and Mac for sponsorship(or something), aside for their cd-burning software...
According to this info-mech DRM Technology Vendors site it sounds like they're positioning themselves to be *the* multi-platform multimedia DRM protection software.
A lot of people ditch their wired lines and just use their cell phone.
6.2% of people don't have *wired lines* -- this means they have no choice on the matter and are not ditching their wired for cell phones.
I think you meant that a good portion of them choose not to have wired lines installed by the phone companies, either for economics or philosophy. I wonder how many of these people live in Alaska, or are Amish?
Sorry to disappoint you chemistry geeks out there, it's been verified: I did a search on GTK and did not find any Grand Theft K 3d chemistry gaming references...apparently it's some toolkit for gimps.
Move along, nothing to see here.
At the risk of being redundenter again:
http://www.moodle.com/
Welcome to Bizarro World.
I'm going to start a company that produces Wingding-intertubes for floating down neighboring Stromboli Stream. A by-product of the Wingding manufacturing process happens to be Toxic Chemicals A,B, and C. I figure, what the hell, I'll go dump them into Stromboli Stream and not have to pay a red cent for disposal!!
Woohoo! Wingding sales are skyrocketing -- but wait, people are getting sick in Stromboli Stream, and their Wingdings aren't floating! What should I do?!
I know, I'll buy an environmental cleanup company, and charge the county a goat-load to clean the stream! Time to go buy another golden caviar-filled rumpus room!
We now return to your previously scheduled slashdot article.
Irregardless of the quality of the anti-spyware, isn't it just damned *ironic* when a company can make a huge profit on a product, and then make *another* goatload of cash by fixing it.
So I ask you, why would Microsoft *ever* wish to produce flawless software???
So, with that definition in mind, I think a domain name does give an indication of the source of goods, and www.googlesucksadonkey.com would not be valid for a search engine name...
Hmmm, Google goes public, stock price soars 100 points.... how can we grab some of that cash...
Let's ask our lawyers!
I thought phase 2 was going to be a 'quiet upgrade' of the iPod's mind-control equalizer features as to penetrate even the sturdiest foil hat...
Yeah, I think Matlab is trying to pay the rent. That's why they charge mandatory subscriptions fees to the tune of $500/year. And if you don't pay them and wish to get a license in the future -- you have to *back pay* all your unpaid maintenence fees.
Still, you gotta love their Start-button...
Okay, there's something to be against recommending to the poster: "math software is for fancy lads -- why don't you just whip them there kiddies 'til they learn their 'rithmatic."
It's just that we live in a visual age. Why not put some of these Clinton-funded Pentium III's to good use! Give these kids a lab once a month that exposes them to some of the applications of math. It's a lot easier to lead a horse to water if the horse knows the water will satiate its thirst.
I've seen Mathematica do some awesome abstract math. I've used matlab to run control algorithms on live freakin' motors. If these students are serious about engineering/physics/applied math, a little exposure to what they could *actually be working with someday* would not impede their understanding of the maths behind the software -- it would more likely motivate them and give them some end goal.
Thanks -- when some sort of Wiki-dot overtakes slashdot, we won't have these sorts of errors... ;)
Birch bark and charcoal
we would have killed for birchbark and charcoal! We had to gather dirt and mix it with spit and draw that onto rabbit pelts back in my day!
We liked it -- we loved it!
I think that's a good point. For high school calculus(circa 1995), they basically required us to purchase frickin TI-85's. I still have this 1/2 lb lump of graphing calculator, and I only use it for conversions (which I can't do in my head anymore :)
That being said, any math tool you give these students can be a crutch later on, so choose wisely.
Since these kids are freshman -- why not give them multiple labs(intermixed with some actual learning) that will allow them to experiment between the different environments out there. After all, they may not get to *choose* their math processing medium when they get into serious work.
Two points of contention -- 1. any math program needs to have instant feedback. Computer scientists may enjoy scouring for results, but mathematician's usually do not. 2. Speed adjustments are different than algorithm testing. "Early optimization is the root of all evil". D. Knuth(sp)
In fact, Matlab's mex files are implemented in C. It's all based upon FFTW, ATLAS, Lapack, Blas to name a few. You wouldn't write a Python FFT routine -- you would load SciPy, Numeric, or any other Py-FFT-du-jour and leverage time-tested C-routines.