Would be interested to see someone float a thin client based on using the iPod as the user identification/storage component. Lots of ideas come to mind once you assume the iPod is ubiquotous.
USB mass storage is ubiquitous enough; from thumbdrives that store 128MB to usb harddrive based devices (not just the iPod). Only trouble is, why would you plug in your data in a machine you don't trust? And if you did, why bother with a thin client, you can just have apps on your hard drive (especially Mac apps, just drag and drop).
For your ultimate customized experience, you could lug along a bootable linux live CD, like knoppix..
As for authentication, you'd want/need some sort of challenge/response software on the device to do that. Which was the whole point of the Java ring.
Lots of ideas come to mind once you assume the iPod is ubiquotous.
Aaah, we can but dream for the day.. Lost of ideas come to minde once you assume the ubiquitousness of anything, really.
(I don't really like the iPod though. It's very small, that's the biggest feature. But having to use the software just to copy some songs on it, even though it's just another USB mass storage device? That's brain-dead. Add to that ITMS DRM tactics (and pricing) and well.. It's the microsoft of MP3 players.)
Is that you can, apparently, just hook up an infrared transceiver to a standard 3.5mm earphone/microphone plug..
So really, you only need the infrared-tranceiver-plug and some software to record sound. You sample the "sound" that comes from the tranceiver, then plug it into lineout and play back..
Of course, you can also hook up a microphone to your TVs tranceiver, and just play the recorded sounds out loud. Kind of like an old school "clicker" remote control that worked by audio. In fact, you could probably, with enough training, learn how to shriek directly in television-ese!
The clients on offer at free world dialup all support STUN for NAT traversal, and some (like X-ten) support speex.
They're all preconfigured to use free world dialup if that's where you download them. Pretty much zeroconf. I think X-ten also does GSM codec (though it doesn't say whether it uses EFR).
Too bad the default codec is G.721 muLaw (64 kbps, feh!).
If I went for a Seiko kinetic (for those not in the know - it doesn't need batteries, it recharges off the energy of your daily arm movements), I'd go for an ultra-flat model though, rather than the bling-bling.
I think most kinetic watches need to be somewhat bulky, in order to hold the weights and power generation gearing.
That's why the thickness was a big deal IIRC. I think most kinetics are 12 mm in case thickness, and I found for example this one that's only 9.5mm, which compares favorably with a lot of men's models. I'm not sure what the exact dimensions were of the model I'm thinking of though. Certainly nowhere near as flat as the Swatch ultra-flat watch (at 3.9mm thickness) though.
The best feature of this watch is that it has both an analogue and digital read-out, with no less than 3 reverse-LCD screens. That's right, just like you used to do with your calculator in high school, the polarity on the LCD screens is reversed so that you get a black background (to go with the black faceplate) and LCD-green digits.
OK, I probably won't hand it down to my grandchildren, but it's a nice looking watch with a geeky edge to it. And not even that expensive.
If I went for a Seiko kinetic (for those not in the know - it doesn't need batteries, it recharges off the energy of your daily arm movements), I'd go for an ultra-flat model though, rather than the bling-bling.
My other watch is a rather el Cheapo (though not really bad looking) radio-controlled watch. Can't find a picture of it, but really just a semi-tasteful plastic watch. Though I see that Citizen now have an all-metal casing radio-controlled watch (the metal would interfere with reception normally), so that's worth checking out.
Junghans has some multi-frequency radio controlled watches for if you travel a lot. Unfortunately junghans watches are just butt-ugly. And for GPS you need a REALLY big antenna, so don't think about putting that in a watch. Perhaps bluetooth should take care of that some time..
Unless you're looking at multi-K dollar all mechanical watches though, it's mostly a matter of taste. There are some surprisingly tasteful cheap watches out there, and some very truly GHASTLY watches that cost thousands of dollars (i.e. those blue-and-red-on-gold rolexes. Ugh.)
I don't believe SCO has any UNIX 'IP' to be released anyway.
While they may own precious few copyrights, trademarks or patents, they are the exclusive licensor for Sys V Unix (and they own some parts of their own UnixWare OS).
If some one were to buy them up (like, when their stock costs $0.0001) and write "A royalty-free non-exclusive irrevocable perpetual license on all our stuff is hereby granted to everyone" on a paper napkin, it would save non-fully-paid-up licensees of SysV a bundle of money.
And Sun Microsystems will look like a fool for splashing out for a fully-paid-up license only recently.
Not that it's likely to happen. Unless perhaps Novell or IBM picks up the Unix stuff for a penny when SCOX goes Chapter 11.
BayStar ABSOLUTELY MUST do this! Otherwise, IBM and the others will be able to get the information about the link to Microsoft (read the Halloween Memos if you don't know what I'm talking about). They ONLY way to keep that information secret (and protect Bill) is to get it wrapped up in a lawsuit with "confidential" terms and a confidentiality agreement.
Presumably SCO and Baystar already have a confidentiality agreement in place. When a court seals certain records, that just pertains to the recodrs that would otherwise have been a matter of public record. There's nothing from stopping such information to come out in another separate law suit, criminal prosecution, and the like. In fact, sealed records may not be easy to get unsealed, but at least they won't be shredded.
If SCO and Baystar wanted to cover each others' (or Microsoft's) asses, they wouldn't be going to court, they'd be turning on the shredders.
That share price is nothing compared to Berkshire Hathaway [yahoo.com]. It's not the share price that matters, but the earnings per share ($5,190 in the case of Berkshire). A higher stock price is justified if earnings are high and have growth potential.
$5,190 earnings per share in turns, doesn't mean anything if you don't know how much the share costs. The Price/Earnings (or PE) ratio is what you were looking for I guess.
But what matters most in an IPO is what the company is going to do with the money they raise. After all, if they're floating 50% of the company, they're pocketing 50% of the market capitalization on day 1 all in one go. That's a massive amount of money. If their business plan is "we'll be going on holiday in Hawaii with that money" (like many dotcom companies in the day) then simply don't buy the stock. If their business plans are to invest, preferably in tangible capital assets (rather than just buying up other companies or hiring a lot of people to sit around doing nothing), then the price might be worth it.
In google's case, some of the stock is owned by private investors, who now want their money back (with interest). They gave google the initial money, and they're now being rewarded. Essentially, as a new share holder, you'll be paying profit to the venture capitalists.
I'd be weary of a high PE ratio, principally depending on how much of the IPO's proceeds actually go to google itself, and what it plans to do with it.
A marketcap greater than Ford+GM as was stated in this thread.. That seems like a lot of cash to me. They'd better have big plans.
And as it so happens the Nigerian ministry of ICT has developed a product for the US Department of Homeland Security. Problem is, that the DHS can only contract out to a US based company or individual. Seeing as this contract is worth 480 MILLION DOLLARS, they will be glad to give you 10% of that, if you were to act as an intermediary.. There are just a feeeew formalities to be handled, like, oh, a Nigerian ICT business license, and this thing called a Remmitance Fee. Honest truth. They e-mailed me about it just yesterday.
Quality headphones and a subwoofer, OTOH, can always do better, with no extra requirements beyond not having too much background noise.
Ah, but headphones can only easily position sound relative to your head's position and orientation -- whereas this room wafefront synthesis system positions sound relative to the *room*. A sound 50 feet behind the right wall will sound 50 feed behind the right wall to a listener no matter where they are sitting in the theater and no matter which way they're looking.
The (only) issue with headphones is that some one to the left of the screen is hearing the same sounds (using normal stereo) as the person over on the right side of the screen. That totally spoils channel separation; when a car goes zipping by from left to right, you might already be hearing it predominantly in your right ear, even though you're right of the middle and the picture of the car is to the left of you..
But then, most people don't stare blankely ahead, they already turn their heads so that the action is right in front of them. With the middle, erm, right in the middle. So the position of bog standard stereo speakers in a cinema works out fine.
Though if you lack the capability to turn your head, installing 300 speakers to cater for your TWO ears would be a great thing.
Yes. Because when I buy a ticket to go to a movie, I expect no plot at all. No siree, the makers saved that part for the novelization. No better way to enhance your enjoyment of a movie than to strip out the entire plot and file it away under "merchandising".
I just like my films better without any of that "plot" or "storyline" getting in the way of good special effects and bad acting.
is to enable those people who encounter such "suspect" cans of soda during their routine X-ray scanning for security purposes to identify them, in order to prevent a false alarm. X-ray operators should now have no need to call in the bomb squad, they can simply confiscate the suspect can themselves, for security reasons, and activate it, for security reasons, and keep the prize themselves.
The idea of a servicepack is that you can use it to upgrade a live installation, just like with windows update. Reinstalling and then restoring data from a backup.. That's just.. wrong..
For one thing, what happens to stuff in the registry in odd places (HKLM)? Why isn't data already on a separate partition, if not a network (NAS/SAN) drive? Not using roaming profiles - are you mad? Why not using a slipstreamed install, or even better using ghost to duplicate disk images if you're using a "standard operating environment"?
You sound like some one who feels the need to format his hard drive every once in a while, "just in case".
Now we have XHTML and CSS. Neither of these are easy to learn. Neither of them is easy to use. Less technical people are incapable of using either. This is great for job security for webmasters, but for the growtrh of the next and for the internet as a medium of free and easy communication its horrible./i>
Actually, if Microsoft would just play ball with Internet Explorer, XHTML could be the best thing that ever happened for John Q. Average. It's vastly more easy to write a half-decent (quasi)WYSIWYG editor for XHTML with all that CSS jazz etc. than it is for the broken mess of HTML and half-assed tries at CSS that Internet Explorer supports. Webstandards are a great thing, if only the 95% marketshare dominant browser would adhere to them.
Making pages in XHTML using CSS and even javascript to manipulate CSS properties, all nice and standards based, is a breeze, even to do by hand, for Mozilla etc. It's just Internet Explorer that's being a bitch.
As for newbies hand-crafting stuff; well, the stuff that's on geocities isn't valid HTML either. There will always have to be a quirks mode for that stuff.
If anything, the SPF idea primarily favors the big ISPs and consolidated mail services. Microsoft and others aren't doing the industry a favor at all by adopting this standard. It clearly benefits them more than it does small and medium-sized Internet hosts.
Quite the reverse! Any big ISP or university or company will have a certain number of users that are on the go, and that use another ISP's smtp server to send e-mail. Small companies and individuals on the other hand either don't travel as much, or can easily adjust their DNS records to point to the handful of hosts that travelling users actually use when they're not on the motherLAN. Also, a smaller userbase is much easier to educate about using for instance a VPN connection or some sort of TLS arrangement that uses the SMTP server that is listed in SPF.
It does favor webmail over pop3/imap, however; which is why it can be a bit of a bitch for people who routinely use pop3/imap clients on their cell phone or PDA.
Me, I send my mail from PocketPutty (ssh) if I'm on the go and I can only use my PDA.
All outgoing SMTP traffic appear to come from the IP address of the firewall, but... it does NOT touch the envelope or change *ANY* header info... which point to the address of the real SMTP server.
Those should be (and are) ignored any way, since you can easily "forge" the headers. The hotmail SMTP server will check where the connection is coming from, and will check *that* IP address against SPF; the source of the tcp/ip connection is currently the only reliable information about the e-mail's origin.
if you are for catching terrorists then you get government funding and avoid investigation.
On that note..
The NRA announces that "gun ownership prevents terrorism - we may never even know just how many lives were spared"
McDonalds announces "will the obese person sitting next to you shield you from the blast? Why the new McBiggerMac mitigates the threat of terrorism"
Michael Jackson claims "while sleeping with children I tell them stories about the nasty terrorists, and we have a good old Christian time. Why, I can be heard calling the Lord's name into the tiny hours"
Monica Lewinsky claims she was "protecting president Clinton's private parts against terrorists"
RIAA claims "competition and price cuts would bring morale-lifting music within reach of terrorists".
Bin Laden claims "twin towers were hotbed of an even worse terrorist organisation, which I got rid of at the CIA's request".
and finally
Britney Spears defends mother running over papperazzi as "Oh my God, that guy was, like, totally jumping in front of the car, like, some sort of terrorist, completely, you know?"
I'd include an "RIAA claims music piracy aids terrorism", but they actually do claim that..
I mean you don't hear the same complaint when people use the [light] year as a measure of distance No because it IS a measure of distance. 1 lightyear = 1 * the speed of light * 1 year = 9.4605284 × 1015 meters.
Just because "thespeedof" is left out, doesn't make "lightyear" a unit of time; in much the same way that when us Europeans say we want "5 kilos" of something, we actually expect 5 kilograms, and not kiloWatts or some nonsense like that.
By using 'parsec' in the context of time he was obviously refering to the inverse-light parsec (based on your link it looks like 3.26 years).
If you use "meter" in the context of time, what the fudge does that mean?
5 posts, and they're down. It's almost 8pm central. Don't you people have lives?
Hey! Don't be so US-centric! It's close to 3 AM central European time, which show there are people on slashdot (unlike you USians!) that do.... erm.. where was I going with this, again?
Did you know that your local grocery store carries everything you need to make WMDs? Its absolutley true! Chlorine bleach and ammonia, they mix into an extremely poisonous gas.
Cool, I guess I'm not the only one who takes those "do not mix" symbols on the packaging of household cleaning products as hints, rather than warnings.
while you can theoretically go from 30 frames to 24 frames in post, because they were sampled at 30 fps, the action is sped up slightly.
Can't you just drop 1 frame in 5 (or 1 in 6 for PAL) to compensate for speed? Going from 30p or 30i to 24p in post shouldn't really be a problem, right?
sampling at 24 fps allows you to use a lower shutter speed, allowing better exposure in low light
While that is true, in this age where digital cameras contain CCDs that can take shots at 1/1000s to 1/60s at much higher resolutions than required for NTSC/PAL/DV (though you have to slash the megapixel claims in 3, or rather, just use 3CCDs) I don't think exposure should be a problem w.r.t. lighting..
I wonder whether cameras that record 30i operate at a 1/60s shuttertime?
There is of course the issue of motion-blur, which is obviously greater at 24fps than at 30fps, so 30-downsampled-to-24 might look jerky (i.e. not blurry enough), but I'm unsure whether that couldn't be solved in post; after all, if you're dropping 1 frame in 5, you have some extra information to play with to detect high-motion scenes and add some of the intermediate frames' content as blur..
Now if only CCDs/film were good enough to shoot at 600fps (even in low lighting), then downsampling to 25fps 24fps or 30fps would be trivial, and we could perhaps finally see 50/60/100fps movies in theaters and be done with excessive movie action blur;-)
So what's to stop it? A well-thought-out specification (RFC stylee) and an implementation.
Interested? I'm toying with the idea of doing just that, but I can't do it on my own, and you seem to have a much deeper knowledge of NNTP than I.
I'm not much of a blogger, I have no idea which blogging software it would be most important to get a post2usenet plugin for.. There are NNTP functions in PHP though, that's always good.
There's already a project that pulls RSS feeds from the web and then posts individual descriptions+links to usenet groups, at http://www.methodize.org/nntprss/.
The scope of this thing is rather grand 1) design the protocol (making decisions like, do we want to post RSS or HTML? full-body HTML or just the blog-entry? one article per blog entry, or Supersede old posts with the most recent blog-entries? use a single newsgroup, or use a hierarchy? what about security/spoofing?) 2) get bloggers to publish to NNTP 2) get clients to use NNTP 3) get ISPs to carry the newsgroup (easier with an alt* group, but hard to prevent spoofing) or the hierarchy (usenet operators dislike new hierarchies); or set up an entirely new network (like IRC people do all the time).
It would be pivotal if a popular blogging application (movabletype, pivot, sunlog) or services (blogger? google groups?) would add a post2usenet feature. Clients would hopefully soon follow, and from there ISPs would be more willing to carry groups.
Unfortunately I don't have the political clout (or time) to get involved with all those blogging tools people...
Slashdot Mirror
Would be interested to see someone float a thin client based on using the iPod as the user identification/storage component. Lots of ideas come to mind once you assume the iPod is ubiquotous.
USB mass storage is ubiquitous enough; from thumbdrives that store 128MB to usb harddrive based devices (not just the iPod). Only trouble is, why would you plug in your data in a machine you don't trust? And if you did, why bother with a thin client, you can just have apps on your hard drive (especially Mac apps, just drag and drop).
For your ultimate customized experience, you could lug along a bootable linux live CD, like knoppix..
As for authentication, you'd want/need some sort of challenge/response software on the device to do that. Which was the whole point of the Java ring.
Lots of ideas come to mind once you assume the iPod is ubiquotous.
Aaah, we can but dream for the day.. Lost of ideas come to minde once you assume the ubiquitousness of anything, really.
(I don't really like the iPod though. It's very small, that's the biggest feature. But having to use the software just to copy some songs on it, even though it's just another USB mass storage device? That's brain-dead. Add to that ITMS DRM tactics (and pricing) and well.. It's the microsoft of MP3 players.)
Is that you can, apparently, just hook up an infrared transceiver to a standard 3.5mm earphone/microphone plug..
So really, you only need the infrared-tranceiver-plug and some software to record sound. You sample the "sound" that comes from the tranceiver, then plug it into lineout and play back..
Of course, you can also hook up a microphone to your TVs tranceiver, and just play the recorded sounds out loud. Kind of like an old school "clicker" remote control that worked by audio. In fact, you could probably, with enough training, learn how to shriek directly in television-ese!
Captain crunch would approve.
The clients on offer at free world dialup all support STUN for NAT traversal, and some (like X-ten) support speex.
They're all preconfigured to use free world dialup if that's where you download them. Pretty much zeroconf. I think X-ten also does GSM codec (though it doesn't say whether it uses EFR).
Too bad the default codec is G.721 muLaw (64 kbps, feh!).
If I went for a Seiko kinetic (for those not in the know - it doesn't need batteries, it recharges off the energy of your daily arm movements), I'd go for an ultra-flat model though, rather than the bling-bling.
I think most kinetic watches need to be somewhat bulky, in order to hold the weights and power generation gearing.
That's why the thickness was a big deal IIRC. I think most kinetics are 12 mm in case thickness, and I found for example this one that's only 9.5mm, which compares favorably with a lot of men's models. I'm not sure what the exact dimensions were of the model I'm thinking of though. Certainly nowhere near as flat as the Swatch ultra-flat watch (at 3.9mm thickness) though.
Bluetooth caller ID on your watch would be nice, but you'd still have to reach for your head/handset..
Myself, I have this watch.
The best feature of this watch is that it has both an analogue and digital read-out, with no less than 3 reverse-LCD screens. That's right, just like you used to do with your calculator in high school, the polarity on the LCD screens is reversed so that you get a black background (to go with the black faceplate) and LCD-green digits.
OK, I probably won't hand it down to my grandchildren, but it's a nice looking watch with a geeky edge to it. And not even that expensive.
If I went for a Seiko kinetic (for those not in the know - it doesn't need batteries, it recharges off the energy of your daily arm movements), I'd go for an ultra-flat model though, rather than the bling-bling.
My other watch is a rather el Cheapo (though not really bad looking) radio-controlled watch. Can't find a picture of it, but really just a semi-tasteful plastic watch. Though I see that Citizen now have an all-metal casing radio-controlled watch (the metal would interfere with reception normally), so that's worth checking out.
Junghans has some multi-frequency radio controlled watches for if you travel a lot. Unfortunately junghans watches are just butt-ugly. And for GPS you need a REALLY big antenna, so don't think about putting that in a watch. Perhaps bluetooth should take care of that some time..
Unless you're looking at multi-K dollar all mechanical watches though, it's mostly a matter of taste. There are some surprisingly tasteful cheap watches out there, and some very truly GHASTLY watches that cost thousands of dollars (i.e. those blue-and-red-on-gold rolexes. Ugh.)
I don't believe SCO has any UNIX 'IP' to be released anyway.
While they may own precious few copyrights, trademarks or patents, they are the exclusive licensor for Sys V Unix (and they own some parts of their own UnixWare OS).
If some one were to buy them up (like, when their stock costs $0.0001) and write "A royalty-free non-exclusive irrevocable perpetual license on all our stuff is hereby granted to everyone" on a paper napkin, it would save non-fully-paid-up licensees of SysV a bundle of money.
And Sun Microsystems will look like a fool for splashing out for a fully-paid-up license only recently.
Not that it's likely to happen. Unless perhaps Novell or IBM picks up the Unix stuff for a penny when SCOX goes Chapter 11.
BayStar ABSOLUTELY MUST do this! Otherwise, IBM and the others will be able to get the information about the link to Microsoft (read the Halloween Memos if you don't know what I'm talking about). They ONLY way to keep that information secret (and protect Bill) is to get it wrapped up in a lawsuit with "confidential" terms and a confidentiality agreement.
Presumably SCO and Baystar already have a confidentiality agreement in place. When a court seals certain records, that just pertains to the recodrs that would otherwise have been a matter of public record. There's nothing from stopping such information to come out in another separate law suit, criminal prosecution, and the like. In fact, sealed records may not be easy to get unsealed, but at least they won't be shredded.
If SCO and Baystar wanted to cover each others' (or Microsoft's) asses, they wouldn't be going to court, they'd be turning on the shredders.
That share price is nothing compared to Berkshire Hathaway [yahoo.com]. It's not the share price that matters, but the earnings per share ($5,190 in the case of Berkshire). A higher stock price is justified if earnings are high and have growth potential.
$5,190 earnings per share in turns, doesn't mean anything if you don't know how much the share costs.
The Price/Earnings (or PE) ratio is what you were looking for I guess.
But what matters most in an IPO is what the company is going to do with the money they raise. After all, if they're floating 50% of the company, they're pocketing 50% of the market capitalization on day 1 all in one go. That's a massive amount of money. If their business plan is "we'll be going on holiday in Hawaii with that money" (like many dotcom companies in the day) then simply don't buy the stock. If their business plans are to invest, preferably in tangible capital assets (rather than just buying up other companies or hiring a lot of people to sit around doing nothing), then the price might be worth it.
In google's case, some of the stock is owned by private investors, who now want their money back (with interest). They gave google the initial money, and they're now being rewarded. Essentially, as a new share holder, you'll be paying profit to the venture capitalists.
I'd be weary of a high PE ratio, principally depending on how much of the IPO's proceeds actually go to google itself, and what it plans to do with it.
A marketcap greater than Ford+GM as was stated in this thread.. That seems like a lot of cash to me. They'd better have big plans.
And as it so happens the Nigerian ministry of ICT has developed a product for the US Department of Homeland Security. Problem is, that the DHS can only contract out to a US based company or individual. Seeing as this contract is worth 480 MILLION DOLLARS, they will be glad to give you 10% of that, if you were to act as an intermediary.. There are just a feeeew formalities to be handled, like, oh, a Nigerian ICT business license, and this thing called a Remmitance Fee. Honest truth. They e-mailed me about it just yesterday.
Quality headphones and a subwoofer, OTOH, can always do better, with no extra requirements beyond not having too much background noise.
Ah, but headphones can only easily position sound relative to your head's position and orientation -- whereas this room wafefront synthesis system positions sound relative to the *room*. A sound 50 feet behind the right wall will sound 50 feed behind the right wall to a listener no matter where they are sitting in the theater and no matter which way they're looking.
The (only) issue with headphones is that some one to the left of the screen is hearing the same sounds (using normal stereo) as the person over on the right side of the screen. That totally spoils channel separation; when a car goes zipping by from left to right, you might already be hearing it predominantly in your right ear, even though you're right of the middle and the picture of the car is to the left of you..
But then, most people don't stare blankely ahead, they already turn their heads so that the action is right in front of them. With the middle, erm, right in the middle. So the position of bog standard stereo speakers in a cinema works out fine.
Though if you lack the capability to turn your head, installing 300 speakers to cater for your TWO ears would be a great thing.
The novelization of TPM explains it.
Yes. Because when I buy a ticket to go to a movie, I expect no plot at all. No siree, the makers saved that part for the novelization. No better way to enhance your enjoyment of a movie than to strip out the entire plot and file it away under "merchandising".
I just like my films better without any of that "plot" or "storyline" getting in the way of good special effects and bad acting.
I guess to beat that, you'd need to go with a country code domain.
ai and dk should work.
Due to DNS weirdness you might need to add a dot, as in ai. and dk.
Everyone seems to be moving to xorg now. Where does this leave xfree?
Xfree86 will be featured on an upcoming episode of a new MTV hit-show presented by Ashton Kutcher, entitled "FORK'D!".
is to enable those people who encounter such "suspect" cans of soda during their routine X-ray scanning for security purposes to identify them, in order to prevent a false alarm. X-ray operators should now have no need to call in the bomb squad, they can simply confiscate the suspect can themselves, for security reasons, and activate it, for security reasons, and keep the prize themselves.
Strictly for security reasons, you see.
The idea of a servicepack is that you can use it to upgrade a live installation, just like with windows update. Reinstalling and then restoring data from a backup.. That's just.. wrong..
For one thing, what happens to stuff in the registry in odd places (HKLM)? Why isn't data already on a separate partition, if not a network (NAS/SAN) drive? Not using roaming profiles - are you mad? Why not using a slipstreamed install, or even better using ghost to duplicate disk images if you're using a "standard operating environment"?
You sound like some one who feels the need to format his hard drive every once in a while, "just in case".
Now we have XHTML and CSS. Neither of these are easy to learn. Neither of them is easy to use. Less technical people are incapable of using either. This is great for job security for webmasters, but for the growtrh of the next and for the internet as a medium of free and easy communication its horrible./i>
Actually, if Microsoft would just play ball with Internet Explorer, XHTML could be the best thing that ever happened for John Q. Average. It's vastly more easy to write a half-decent (quasi)WYSIWYG editor for XHTML with all that CSS jazz etc. than it is for the broken mess of HTML and half-assed tries at CSS that Internet Explorer supports. Webstandards are a great thing, if only the 95% marketshare dominant browser would adhere to them.
Making pages in XHTML using CSS and even javascript to manipulate CSS properties, all nice and standards based, is a breeze, even to do by hand, for Mozilla etc. It's just Internet Explorer that's being a bitch.
As for newbies hand-crafting stuff; well, the stuff that's on geocities isn't valid HTML either. There will always have to be a quirks mode for that stuff.
If anything, the SPF idea primarily favors the big ISPs and consolidated mail services. Microsoft and others aren't doing the industry a favor at all by adopting this standard. It clearly benefits them more than it does small and medium-sized Internet hosts.
Quite the reverse! Any big ISP or university or company will have a certain number of users that are on the go, and that use another ISP's smtp server to send e-mail. Small companies and individuals on the other hand either don't travel as much, or can easily adjust their DNS records to point to the handful of hosts that travelling users actually use when they're not on the motherLAN. Also, a smaller userbase is much easier to educate about using for instance a VPN connection or some sort of TLS arrangement that uses the SMTP server that is listed in SPF.
It does favor webmail over pop3/imap, however; which is why it can be a bit of a bitch for people who routinely use pop3/imap clients on their cell phone or PDA.
Me, I send my mail from PocketPutty (ssh) if I'm on the go and I can only use my PDA.
All outgoing SMTP traffic appear to come from the IP address of the firewall, but... it does NOT touch the envelope or change *ANY* header info... which point to the address of the real SMTP server.
Those should be (and are) ignored any way, since you can easily "forge" the headers. The hotmail SMTP server will check where the connection is coming from, and will check *that* IP address against SPF; the source of the tcp/ip connection is currently the only reliable information about the e-mail's origin.
On that note..
and finally
I'd include an "RIAA claims music piracy aids terrorism", but they actually do claim that..
I mean you don't hear the same complaint when people use the [light] year as a measure of distance
No because it IS a measure of distance.
1 lightyear = 1 * the speed of light * 1 year = 9.4605284 × 1015 meters.
Just because "thespeedof" is left out, doesn't make "lightyear" a unit of time; in much the same way that when us Europeans say we want "5 kilos" of something, we actually expect 5 kilograms, and not kiloWatts or some nonsense like that.
By using 'parsec' in the context of time he was obviously refering to the inverse-light parsec (based on your link it looks like 3.26 years).
If you use "meter" in the context of time, what the fudge does that mean?
Oh and btw, behold the power of google (1 Parsec) / the speed of light = 3.26163626 years.
Is AES more CPU intensive than RSA?
AES is a symmetric (i.e. shared key) cipher, specifically designed with hardware design in mind, as well as with a mode for stream operation.
RSA can only practically be used for key exchange because it's so slow.
5 posts, and they're down. It's almost 8pm central. Don't you people have lives?
Hey! Don't be so US-centric! It's close to 3 AM central European time, which show there are people on slashdot (unlike you USians!) that do.... erm.. where was I going with this, again?
*oops*
Did you know that your local grocery store carries everything you need to make WMDs? Its absolutley true! Chlorine bleach and ammonia, they mix into an extremely poisonous gas.
Cool, I guess I'm not the only one who takes those "do not mix" symbols on the packaging of household cleaning products as hints, rather than warnings.
while you can theoretically go from 30 frames to 24 frames in post, because they were sampled at 30 fps, the action is sped up slightly.
;-)
Can't you just drop 1 frame in 5 (or 1 in 6 for PAL) to compensate for speed? Going from 30p or 30i to 24p in post shouldn't really be a problem, right?
sampling at 24 fps allows you to use a lower shutter speed, allowing better exposure in low light
While that is true, in this age where digital cameras contain CCDs that can take shots at 1/1000s to 1/60s at much higher resolutions than required for NTSC/PAL/DV (though you have to slash the megapixel claims in 3, or rather, just use 3CCDs) I don't think exposure should be a problem w.r.t. lighting..
I wonder whether cameras that record 30i operate at a 1/60s shuttertime?
There is of course the issue of motion-blur, which is obviously greater at 24fps than at 30fps, so 30-downsampled-to-24 might look jerky (i.e. not blurry enough), but I'm unsure whether that couldn't be solved in post; after all, if you're dropping 1 frame in 5, you have some extra information to play with to detect high-motion scenes and add some of the intermediate frames' content as blur..
Now if only CCDs/film were good enough to shoot at 600fps (even in low lighting), then downsampling to 25fps 24fps or 30fps would be trivial, and we could perhaps finally see 50/60/100fps movies in theaters and be done with excessive movie action blur
So what's to stop it? A well-thought-out specification (RFC stylee) and an implementation.
Interested? I'm toying with the idea of doing just that, but I can't do it on my own, and you seem to have a much deeper knowledge of NNTP than I.
I'm not much of a blogger, I have no idea which blogging software it would be most important to get a post2usenet plugin for.. There are NNTP functions in PHP though, that's always good.
There's already a project that pulls RSS feeds from the web and then posts individual descriptions+links to usenet groups, at http://www.methodize.org/nntprss/.
The scope of this thing is rather grand
1) design the protocol (making decisions like, do we want to post RSS or HTML? full-body HTML or just the blog-entry? one article per blog entry, or Supersede old posts with the most recent blog-entries? use a single newsgroup, or use a hierarchy? what about security/spoofing?)
2) get bloggers to publish to NNTP
2) get clients to use NNTP
3) get ISPs to carry the newsgroup (easier with an alt* group, but hard to prevent spoofing) or the hierarchy (usenet operators dislike new hierarchies); or set up an entirely new network (like IRC people do all the time).
It would be pivotal if a popular blogging application (movabletype, pivot, sunlog) or services (blogger? google groups?) would add a post2usenet feature. Clients would hopefully soon follow, and from there ISPs would be more willing to carry groups.
Unfortunately I don't have the political clout (or time) to get involved with all those blogging tools people...