I think the main use I get out of mine is passing my email address easily, without having to spell everything out. Yes - I still find it useful, but it's probably not what it used to be (I'm sure it gets tossed/circular filed after everything is entered into the appropriate address book application)
I know some other schools have started similar programs - but I thought I'd point out that WPI started a new program specifically for game development/design/art/etc.: Interactive Media & Game Development. They've also recently redesigned their undergrad CS curriculum - although I think that was mainly to be more accessible to non-majors (e.g. ECE's, etc. - WPI being a primarily engineering school).
Considering many hospitals are funded through their municipalities (counties, etc.), I don't see how this ends up being a dramatic change. If someone gets treatment and isn't able to pay - the hospital eats the cost == the funding source (city/county/state/paying customers/etc.) eats the cost. So, how is this any different from the situation we have today?
It is pretty well established that he did in fact invent them in 1945 - and although many people lament the fact that he never bothered to file for a patent - he would often retort that even if he had, the patent would have long expired before the first commercial geostationary communication satellite was launched (Intelsat 1). The first geostationary satellite of any type was the Syncom 2.
Actually that is the point of some of the 'put silence here': it tells the local client to add comfort noise to let the user know the connection is still working. Of course the cost of this is allow the sort of traffic analysis TFA refers to.
Since the full paper doesn't look like it's available yet, it's not clear how much they can identify - but a similar research (e.g. this paper) is able to identify certain words (from a limited vocabulary) during an encrypted conversation. It's not the same as listening to a decrypted stream obviously - but it highlights the vulnerability to traffic analysis - this is revealing much more information than simply the existence of a conversation between two people - it can reveal at least some of the contents of that conversation.
This is very similar to traffic analysis attacks on SSH (like this one) where packet sizes and inter-arrival times can indicate which keys you are typing. Effective, practical counter-measures against good traffic analysis techniques are very difficult - especially if the attacked has enough traffic to work with (i.e. many conversations, many sessions, etc.).
I will echo some of the previous posts: First and foremost exactly how the work-day goes depends entirely on the lab. That pretty much applies to things like: etiquette, what the prof/boss is like, how your seniors (grad students/etc.) will treat you, etc.
Generally speaking though - at a university lab the main thing that will come across is the fact that it is supposed to be a place of learning. New students are expected to know very little and will need training on any of the esoteric lab equipment (or even non-esoteric lab equipment - since you're talking about a lab with a biology focus in which not everyone is a bio-person). The professor should be aware of this fact - and should have instituted a culture (from PhD students on down) which fosters the idea that people are there to learn (including the professor! Since the whole point of research is to discover new things).
I can tell you that nearly all of my experiences in university/research labs have been good - which is the reason I still work in one now (and have committed myself to the path of Piling it Higher and Deeper). YMMV. But I will say this - if the lab is not structured to teach as well as get research done - it is not the place to be in.
What's wrong with the 17th amendment? You don't want senators to be elected directly by the people of the state? Or you don't want the governor to be the one to appoint replacements if they die/leave office?
I want to echo everyone else that already said it: Thanks very much Taco - I've been enjoying the site for many years now, and imagine I will continue to do so.
As you think about the future, I have to wonder about the remark: What does slashdot need to make it a 'modern web application'? The most recent updates to the look and feel are for the most part good with me. My general thoughts are that you have a modern interface already, and for the time being about the best thing you could do is just subtle tweaks here and there. Making things a little easier to navigate, incremental improvements that speed load/rendering time in most browsers. I don't think you need to re-think slashdot to become a modern web app. Just little fixes here and there, occasionally trying something out to see if it looks/feels better.
Except in this case J&J and the ARC both have rights to (separate uses of) the Red Cross logo. J&J has been using the Red Cross design since 1887 for branding of their prodcuts (e.g. band-aids). Now the ARC wants to license out use of the logo in areas where J&J has held those rights. While I'm sure the ARC could make good use of that money - J&J must still protect its trademarks, even if it pits them against a non-profit.
Cell phones do interfere with other devices - that the nature of all electronics - especially ones in which radio transmitters play a leading role. There is no getting around the fact that cell phones create radio 'noise'. Yes, they have been tested to make sure they are only creating radio emissions to some agreed upon level in the band/frequencies they are licensed to transmit on, and some (lower) agreed upon level outside of that band. However, certifying electronics for use on-board planes is a little more of a dicy issues - because the mere possibility that booting up your laptop during landing might generate enough noise to screw with the GPS, or the ILS systems that are helping the pilot guide the giant metal tube full of jet fuel and fragile humans to a concrate surface is a scary enough scenario that the FAA has decided its easier to just have a blanket ban on such things during take-off/landing. The ban on cell phones is a similar conservative (or paranoid if you prefer) move: its easier to say its not allowed than to test its enough to be reasonably certain its safe. In reality modern digital cell phones inside a modern jet could be perfectly safe - but there are a large number of models of airframes out there, and a much much larger number of cell phone models - many of which can operate in several different modes and corresponding frequencies. Certainly I'd prefer they spend the time to check it out some more so that in the future they can certify my cell phone is safe to use on the particular plane I'm stepping onto so I can talk during particularly long flights. In the meantime I have to wait until the plane taxis to a full stop by the gate before powering it up and making the call to say we've landed. An inconvenience, but I don't mind the fact that they're focusing more energy on the making the plane safe part and haven't devoting their full energy to making it easier to make phone calls during the flight part.
Or you could take some of the 4.00cm parts and run them through a finishing pass (or grind/polish/etc.) to get the 4.00000 cm part. The additional operation obviously makes it a little more expensive to make, but sales tells me I can pass that additional expense along to the customer at a premium and make up for the captial investment in the higher precision grinder pretty quick.
Do have numbers on this somewhere? According to wikipedia the B-2 cost roughly $22 billion in R&D (including a redesign from high-altitude to a low-altitude bomber). I can't find any simliar numbers for the Taurus (except that the redesign of the second generation cost approx. $650 million).
The US government wants to load up the soldiers with more and more expensive hardware, while the 'bad guys' can kill them with a few bucks worth of explosives and a cheap cell-phone. Like managers everywhere, they have an expensive solution to the wrong problem. While I think there may be something to the argument you're trying to make, you don't support it at all.
Will allow them to kill more innocent civilians faster, thereby increasing the number of 'bad guys' they have to fight. This is just plain ridiculous.
The US military _ALREADY HAS_ failed. It's a cold-war military in 21st century urban combat against guys with AK-47s, RPGs and cell-phones; didn't you even read about that recent US military war game where the officer playing the 'bad guys' took out the US fleet with fishing boats and anti-ship missiles that cost a tiny fraction of the amount the US government spent on their ships? Again - I think you may be trying to make a valid point, so in the interest of civilized debate (I realize I'm on/., but I'm a machocist), I'll rebut:
AK-47's are good for one thing only: spraying a lot of bullets in a random direction that may or may not be in the general vicinity of the person you're trying to hit. They have some plusese: they are dirt cheap, reliable even in horrible conditions (mud, water, dust, etc.), and don't require much in the way of precision machine tools so they can literally be made in someones garage. But they are not good at putting bullets on target at any range except point-blank. You might argue this makes them good in the urban war, but a good SMG is probably more effective in the hands of someone well trained.
M-16's on the other hand are precision tools of killing in the hands of a well-trained marksman (which is what the US Army and Marine corps turn out). They have some downsides: they are high-maintenance, and require regular cleaning in poor conditions. However, in the hands of someone trained they are extremely effective.
As for the cell-phone detonated explosives - I generally agree that there is no good technical solution to all the ways that the terrorists can come up with to place some deadly device in the general vicinity of either innocent civilians or actual military targets (they seem less concerned with the second though, since they're harder, and come with instant backup/retribution for any bad guys in the area). Cell-phone jammers for things like convoys make sense (although they obviously degrade the quality of life for those nearby when the convoy passes through), but often the best solution is someone well-trained on the lookup for something suspicious.
Hey, this is/. - please keep your comments off-topic! If you must comment on the actual substance of the article, please stick to wild accusations about one side or the other of the polical spectrum is terrible for this country/world/humanity.
Seriously though, as I understand it the expected test of the Land Warrior system in Iraq (outfitting one of the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams from the 2nd ID) was scaled back from 'full-deployment' to every soldier due to weight concerns (the batteries, cameras, and computers still took up far too much weight - not to mention being expensive). Only one soldier in a squad would have the full system. It looks like instead they decided to go back to the drawing board and come up with something that doesn't add 40lbs of weight to a soldier that already has plenty of gear to haul around. According to General Dynamics C4 they're basically merging the Land Warrior and Future Force Warrior programs.
Don't think the ER's in most major cities give them enough 'experiance'? Really, I don't think the best thing we can do for medical science is provide them with more casualties to deal with.
There is some evidence that many felt Bin Laden went to far with his attacks on the WTC - by calling down the wrath of the US, which basically meant an invasion of Afghanistan (home to most of their training bases). Of course, with the follow-up invasion of Iraq, things have perhaps swung the other direction, it certainly has become good for recruiting.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the main use I get out of mine is passing my email address easily, without having to spell everything out. Yes - I still find it useful, but it's probably not what it used to be (I'm sure it gets tossed/circular filed after everything is entered into the appropriate address book application)
I know some other schools have started similar programs - but I thought I'd point out that WPI started a new program specifically for game development/design/art/etc.: Interactive Media & Game Development. They've also recently redesigned their undergrad CS curriculum - although I think that was mainly to be more accessible to non-majors (e.g. ECE's, etc. - WPI being a primarily engineering school).
Considering many hospitals are funded through their municipalities (counties, etc.), I don't see how this ends up being a dramatic change. If someone gets treatment and isn't able to pay - the hospital eats the cost == the funding source (city/county/state/paying customers/etc.) eats the cost. So, how is this any different from the situation we have today?
It is pretty well established that he did in fact invent them in 1945 - and although many people lament the fact that he never bothered to file for a patent - he would often retort that even if he had, the patent would have long expired before the first commercial geostationary communication satellite was launched (Intelsat 1). The first geostationary satellite of any type was the Syncom 2.
Actually that is the point of some of the 'put silence here': it tells the local client to add comfort noise to let the user know the connection is still working. Of course the cost of this is allow the sort of traffic analysis TFA refers to.
Since the full paper doesn't look like it's available yet, it's not clear how much they can identify - but a similar research (e.g. this paper) is able to identify certain words (from a limited vocabulary) during an encrypted conversation. It's not the same as listening to a decrypted stream obviously - but it highlights the vulnerability to traffic analysis - this is revealing much more information than simply the existence of a conversation between two people - it can reveal at least some of the contents of that conversation.
This is very similar to traffic analysis attacks on SSH (like this one) where packet sizes and inter-arrival times can indicate which keys you are typing.
Effective, practical counter-measures against good traffic analysis techniques are very difficult - especially if the attacked has enough traffic to work with (i.e. many conversations, many sessions, etc.).
I will echo some of the previous posts:
First and foremost exactly how the work-day goes depends entirely on the lab.
That pretty much applies to things like: etiquette, what the prof/boss is like, how your seniors (grad students/etc.) will treat you, etc.
Generally speaking though - at a university lab the main thing that will come across is the fact that it is supposed to be a place of learning. New students are expected to know very little and will need training on any of the esoteric lab equipment (or even non-esoteric lab equipment - since you're talking about a lab with a biology focus in which not everyone is a bio-person). The professor should be aware of this fact - and should have instituted a culture (from PhD students on down) which fosters the idea that people are there to learn (including the professor! Since the whole point of research is to discover new things).
I can tell you that nearly all of my experiences in university/research labs have been good - which is the reason I still work in one now (and have committed myself to the path of Piling it Higher and Deeper). YMMV. But I will say this - if the lab is not structured to teach as well as get research done - it is not the place to be in.
What's wrong with the 17th amendment? You don't want senators to be elected directly by the people of the state? Or you don't want the governor to be the one to appoint replacements if they die/leave office?
let's hear it for Oklahoma State:
http://www2.dasnr.okstate.edu/Members/donald.stotts-40okstate.edu/general-motors-and-coskata-announce-partnership-that-builds-on-osu-biofuels-team-research
I actually got to read about this last week in the college newspaper.
I want to echo everyone else that already said it: Thanks very much Taco - I've been enjoying the site for many years now, and imagine I will continue to do so.
As you think about the future, I have to wonder about the remark: What does slashdot need to make it a 'modern web application'? The most recent updates to the look and feel are for the most part good with me. My general thoughts are that you have a modern interface already, and for the time being about the best thing you could do is just subtle tweaks here and there. Making things a little easier to navigate, incremental improvements that speed load/rendering time in most browsers. I don't think you need to re-think slashdot to become a modern web app. Just little fixes here and there, occasionally trying something out to see if it looks/feels better.
Looking forward to the next 10 years...
Except in this case J&J and the ARC both have rights to (separate uses of) the Red Cross logo. J&J has been using the Red Cross design since 1887 for branding of their prodcuts (e.g. band-aids). Now the ARC wants to license out use of the logo in areas where J&J has held those rights. While I'm sure the ARC could make good use of that money - J&J must still protect its trademarks, even if it pits them against a non-profit.
NTFS has the same issue - you can change the owner of everything - but it can take a while if you have a lot of files/directories.
Do you mean geothermal heat pumps?
And some redneck cracker is using his computer monitors to prop up the axles on one of the dead cars sitting in his lawn. Better?
Awww, what a cute l'il puppy. Want some steak? Mmmmmmm... steak. Good puppy.
Cell phones do interfere with other devices - that the nature of all electronics - especially ones in which radio transmitters play a leading role. There is no getting around the fact that cell phones create radio 'noise'. Yes, they have been tested to make sure they are only creating radio emissions to some agreed upon level in the band/frequencies they are licensed to transmit on, and some (lower) agreed upon level outside of that band. However, certifying electronics for use on-board planes is a little more of a dicy issues - because the mere possibility that booting up your laptop during landing might generate enough noise to screw with the GPS, or the ILS systems that are helping the pilot guide the giant metal tube full of jet fuel and fragile humans to a concrate surface is a scary enough scenario that the FAA has decided its easier to just have a blanket ban on such things during take-off/landing. The ban on cell phones is a similar conservative (or paranoid if you prefer) move: its easier to say its not allowed than to test its enough to be reasonably certain its safe. In reality modern digital cell phones inside a modern jet could be perfectly safe - but there are a large number of models of airframes out there, and a much much larger number of cell phone models - many of which can operate in several different modes and corresponding frequencies. Certainly I'd prefer they spend the time to check it out some more so that in the future they can certify my cell phone is safe to use on the particular plane I'm stepping onto so I can talk during particularly long flights. In the meantime I have to wait until the plane taxis to a full stop by the gate before powering it up and making the call to say we've landed. An inconvenience, but I don't mind the fact that they're focusing more energy on the making the plane safe part and haven't devoting their full energy to making it easier to make phone calls during the flight part.
Given the legal issues WRT AOL I don't think this can be blamed on SF.net - which is currently still providing file mirroring service for the project.
Or you could take some of the 4.00cm parts and run them through a finishing pass (or grind/polish/etc.) to get the 4.00000 cm part. The additional operation obviously makes it a little more expensive to make, but sales tells me I can pass that additional expense along to the customer at a premium and make up for the captial investment in the higher precision grinder pretty quick.
That would be the Future Force Warrior program, not the Land Warrior program.
Do have numbers on this somewhere? According to wikipedia the B-2 cost roughly $22 billion in R&D (including a redesign from high-altitude to a low-altitude bomber). I can't find any simliar numbers for the Taurus (except that the redesign of the second generation cost approx. $650 million).
AK-47's are good for one thing only: spraying a lot of bullets in a random direction that may or may not be in the general vicinity of the person you're trying to hit. They have some plusese: they are dirt cheap, reliable even in horrible conditions (mud, water, dust, etc.), and don't require much in the way of precision machine tools so they can literally be made in someones garage. But they are not good at putting bullets on target at any range except point-blank. You might argue this makes them good in the urban war, but a good SMG is probably more effective in the hands of someone well trained.
M-16's on the other hand are precision tools of killing in the hands of a well-trained marksman (which is what the US Army and Marine corps turn out). They have some downsides: they are high-maintenance, and require regular cleaning in poor conditions. However, in the hands of someone trained they are extremely effective.
As for the cell-phone detonated explosives - I generally agree that there is no good technical solution to all the ways that the terrorists can come up with to place some deadly device in the general vicinity of either innocent civilians or actual military targets (they seem less concerned with the second though, since they're harder, and come with instant backup/retribution for any bad guys in the area). Cell-phone jammers for things like convoys make sense (although they obviously degrade the quality of life for those nearby when the convoy passes through), but often the best solution is someone well-trained on the lookup for something suspicious.
Seriously though, as I understand it the expected test of the Land Warrior system in Iraq (outfitting one of the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams from the 2nd ID) was scaled back from 'full-deployment' to every soldier due to weight concerns (the batteries, cameras, and computers still took up far too much weight - not to mention being expensive). Only one soldier in a squad would have the full system. It looks like instead they decided to go back to the drawing board and come up with something that doesn't add 40lbs of weight to a soldier that already has plenty of gear to haul around. According to General Dynamics C4 they're basically merging the Land Warrior and Future Force Warrior programs.
Don't think the ER's in most major cities give them enough 'experiance'? Really, I don't think the best thing we can do for medical science is provide them with more casualties to deal with.
There is some evidence that many felt Bin Laden went to far with his attacks on the WTC - by calling down the wrath of the US, which basically meant an invasion of Afghanistan (home to most of their training bases). Of course, with the follow-up invasion of Iraq, things have perhaps swung the other direction, it certainly has become good for recruiting.