The problem is, 200 Volts on a 110V circuit is a surge and will fry a 110V power supply. So surge protectors need to be voltage specific or they become ineffective at lower voltages.
I would go another route: Make sure that your have spare/alternative ways to power or charge your equipment. For example carry a 12V charger for your laptop (also works on some airplanes). Only buy equipment (phones/tablets) you can charge from an USB outlet. Carry a spare USB charger.
This will get easier over time with the USB type C connector and USB power delivery, as modern devices get equipped with it.
A well written RFI sent to some vendors should give you an overview of what is available and at what cost.
As you need file level access you should talk to NAS vendors, like Netapp or ENC Isilon. They will certainly have storage boxes for you. You'll have to fit a backup solution to your storage box too, this is work and adds cost.
If you think this may grow, then look at scalability. Not all solutions scale. Also you may end up with millions of files, this may be problemantic to some backup solutions.
I have experience with IBMs Spectrum Scale (GPFS) kit. The cluster filesystem scales nicely and handles lots of files and data with excellent performance. With the recent Elastic Storage components the price per TB is very competitive (5-10x lower than traditional enterprise storage). A half a PB of storage should cost in the $150k range, you'll have to add more for backup and maybe implementation.
For the backup you should look into tape robots. Handling a TB size backup set manually is not fun and will require considerable manpower, when a robot does it mostly unattended. It may also make sense to combine your backup with other backups on site, you may end up be ten imes bigger than everything else combined...
I went to the Kickstarter page with the intent of buying one. But then I found that shipping the $9 board to anywhere except the US starts at $20. So the price just tripled !
So it looks like I'll wait until I can order it directly from china, with no detour through the US, with free shipping.
My power company (small local power company) does this already. On my power bill I two items, one for the actual power I used and another one for the power grid. Both are per kWh, which I thinks is fair, as the bigger power connection for a bigger user will be more expensive to maintain too.
Actually in practice it seems to be the contrary. A Testa and the Hydrogen Toyota get aound 250 miles on a full charge/tank. But if you compare the drivetrain of a tesla and the Toyota you'll see the Tesla is much more compact. The front space 'frunk' is empty in the Tesla and full in the Toyota. In addition the Toyota need sapce under all seats and part of the truck is used too. The entire drivetrain and energy storage of a Tesla is in the floor and does not get in the way.
That is what I'm saying. Google can not remove the article, but is forced to remove a link (among many). For a useful right to be forgotten the concerned party should request for the article to be taken down or redacted.
The judgement show the foolish stupidness and incompetence of the judges.
Yes to the right to be forgotten. But do it right.
Currently the search engines must remove the link to the article, but the article stays. This is bullshit. If the article contains something to be forgotten it should be removed or redacted. This is the only correct way to do it. Also, there should be an open procedure, with appeals, to decide if the article must be redacted / deleted.
It is easy enough to get a big public outcry for any new nuclear plant, irrespective of its safety. The public has learned that nuclear = big accident (sooner or later). If you ask an activist if he want a coal or a nuclear plant, he will say 'neither' and fight both, but probably more vigorously against the nuclear one. That makes investing into any kind of nuclear stuff a very risky proposal.
The only way to change is when other fuels get expensive and we'll see rolling power outages again and the public experiences that we need new plants.
This sounds like a centralized style solution. It only works if communication between any drone and the central server/agency is maintained. For some parts, like flight planning, this is fine. But for collision avoidance I don't think this will cut it.
In the shipping world we already have a decentralized system called Automatic Identification System (AIS). Every vessel broadcasts its position and course on a common radio channel. Other vessels listen and if equipped with collision avoidance systems can take evasive action. Something similar for Drones could be imposed by the FCC, like it is on ships by the International Maritime Organisation.
This would suffer from the same drawbacks (ships can fake their identification), everybody can listen to broadcasts, but it would help solve 95% of the problem.
After some reflection I suspect that there never was a 'pure'/bin/sh on Linux. It may have been bash all along.
Most commercial Unixes come with a dedicated/bin/bash and the korn shell. One could install bash, but this would be a 3rd party tool and not affect system().
But this decision was probably made before ash or zsh were around. Probably after enough bugs were found in (probably unmaintained)/bin/sh that using the special posix sh mode of bash made lots of sense.
Bash has network connectivity on plenty of servers because it is used to execute cgi-script by the webserver (and other network services).
Here the definition of the system() function call often used to run external commands:
system() executes a command specified in command by calling/bin/sh -c command
/bin/sh is linked to/bin/bash and vulnerable. Executing external commands through system(), and therefore bash, is by far the easiest method, so it is widely used. It is sufficient to trick the server or daemon.
Here a proof of concept where a dhcp server tricks a dhcp client into running an arbitrary command.
https://www.trustedsec.com/sep...
> Data compression on the other hand is a different domain.
Why ?
Data compression has been used since a long time, think about stenography or shorthand, for example. This is a manual data compression system, no computer required. Many algorithms are only practical on a computer, but they still are mathematical algorithms.
I had a SGS2 and have a SGS4 now. They are fine phones. I want a replaceable battery and a SD card slot. This reduces the field for me a lot.
For my wife I bought a Moto G and I suspect I will replace my SGS4 with a phone in the same class, once it needs to be replaced. Phones are rapidly approaching the phase where most middle class phones are good enough. Two years ago a high-end device was necessary for a good experience, these days this is no longer true.
>The carrier has the choice to implement ipv6. Run ipv6 natively, and tunnel ipv4 traffic.
I don't think this will solve the problem. In the end, even if tunneling, some applications expect to see an IP per end-user. So the carrier still has to expose a dedicated IPv4 address per customer to the internet.
>Oh they can get more IPv4 addresses if they want. They are simply not willing to pay the asking price for them.
No. He will have to pass the additional cost of the IP addresses to its customers. And those customers are not ready to pay the price. They prefer a cheaper, but crappier service, otherwise the'll upgrade or switch to another more expensive carrier with real IP addresses.
The carrier has probably no choice. He can no longer get IPv4 addresses for new customers, so either he refuses customers or uses NAT to map multiple customers on the same IP.
On the other hand, the average Joe customer will not see the difference. He can surf as before and all his apps will work as before. Some apps (mostly p2p stuff) will suffer, but most internet user don't use those.
If you as customer do need a 'real' IP, then there always is the option to get a more expensive option.
I agree, I find this an excellent password recovery scheme. It does not protect against a bad choice in friends, but there are no technical protections possible against that. But for password recovery it is very good and quite safe against abuse by anonymous internet hackers.
They are actually working with rats at this time. The first couple of years that compiled a database of rat-neurons in detail: Form and function. They do test the simulation extensively: Connecting electrodes to the synapses to check out what combination of input signals cause what output signals. After wards they look at one of the brains building blocks: The neuronal column: You assemble 10'000 neurons and do the same again: Feed it input and verify the output. If the simulation and the real thing gives the same result, then your simulation is ok, otherwise you go and tweak it until you get the same results.
I don't know how they go about Human brains, I'm sure they can not easily compare the simulation with the real thing. There are no volunteers to give op a bit of brain to feed the experiments:-).
They also are the main user of a BlueGene supercomputer at EPFL to run the simulations.
We'll see where they get over time. Henry Markram, the project leader is excellent, so I'm confident.
I would expect the head of Google+ using mainly Google+ for his social networking needs, not the network of a competitor. He should not even need to be told that explicitly.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, 200 Volts on a 110V circuit is a surge and will fry a 110V power supply. So surge protectors need to be voltage specific or they become ineffective at lower voltages.
I would go another route: Make sure that your have spare/alternative ways to power or charge your equipment. For example carry a 12V charger for your laptop (also works on some airplanes). Only buy equipment (phones/tablets) you can charge from an USB outlet. Carry a spare USB charger.
This will get easier over time with the USB type C connector and USB power delivery, as modern devices get equipped with it.
A well written RFI sent to some vendors should give you an overview of what is available and at what cost.
As you need file level access you should talk to NAS vendors, like Netapp or ENC Isilon. They will certainly have storage boxes for you. You'll have to fit a backup solution to your storage box too, this is work and adds cost.
If you think this may grow, then look at scalability. Not all solutions scale. Also you may end up with millions of files, this may be problemantic to some backup solutions.
I have experience with IBMs Spectrum Scale (GPFS) kit. The cluster filesystem scales nicely and handles lots of files and data with excellent performance. With the recent Elastic Storage components the price per TB is very competitive (5-10x lower than traditional enterprise storage). A half a PB of storage should cost in the $150k range, you'll have to add more for backup and maybe implementation.
For the backup you should look into tape robots. Handling a TB size backup set manually is not fun and will require considerable manpower, when a robot does it mostly unattended. It may also make sense to combine your backup with other backups on site, you may end up be ten imes bigger than everything else combined...
I went to the Kickstarter page with the intent of buying one. But then I found that shipping the $9 board to anywhere except the US starts at $20. So the price just tripled !
So it looks like I'll wait until I can order it directly from china, with no detour through the US, with free shipping.
It looks like the Galaxy line is dead for me (no SD, no battery change).
What phones with both of these features are still out there ?
My power company (small local power company) does this already. On my power bill I two items, one for the actual power I used and another one for the power grid. Both are per kWh, which I thinks is fair, as the bigger power connection for a bigger user will be more expensive to maintain too.
Actually in practice it seems to be the contrary. A Testa and the Hydrogen Toyota get aound 250 miles on a full charge/tank. But if you compare the drivetrain of a tesla and the Toyota you'll see the Tesla is much more compact. The front space 'frunk' is empty in the Tesla and full in the Toyota. In addition the Toyota need sapce under all seats and part of the truck is used too. The entire drivetrain and energy storage of a Tesla is in the floor and does not get in the way.
That is what I'm saying. Google can not remove the article, but is forced to remove a link (among many). For a useful right to be forgotten the concerned party should request for the article to be taken down or redacted.
The judgement show the foolish stupidness and incompetence of the judges.
Yes to the right to be forgotten. But do it right.
Currently the search engines must remove the link to the article, but the article stays. This is bullshit. If the article contains something to be forgotten it should be removed or redacted. This is the only correct way to do it. Also, there should be an open procedure, with appeals, to decide if the article must be redacted / deleted.
Markus
Unfortunately yes.
It is easy enough to get a big public outcry for any new nuclear plant, irrespective of its safety. The public has learned that nuclear = big accident (sooner or later). If you ask an activist if he want a coal or a nuclear plant, he will say 'neither' and fight both, but probably more vigorously against the nuclear one. That makes investing into any kind of nuclear stuff a very risky proposal.
The only way to change is when other fuels get expensive and we'll see rolling power outages again and the public experiences that we need new plants.
Markus
This sounds like a centralized style solution. It only works if communication between any drone and the central server/agency is maintained. For some parts, like flight planning, this is fine. But for collision avoidance I don't think this will cut it.
In the shipping world we already have a decentralized system called Automatic Identification System (AIS). Every vessel broadcasts its position and course on a common radio channel. Other vessels listen and if equipped with collision avoidance systems can take evasive action. Something similar for Drones could be imposed by the FCC, like it is on ships by the International Maritime Organisation.
This would suffer from the same drawbacks (ships can fake their identification), everybody can listen to broadcasts, but it would help solve 95% of the problem.
After some reflection I suspect that there never was a 'pure' /bin/sh on Linux. It may have been bash all along.
Most commercial Unixes come with a dedicated /bin/bash and the korn shell. One could install bash, but this would be a 3rd party tool and not affect system().
Markus
Maybe.
But this decision was probably made before ash or zsh were around. Probably after enough bugs were found in (probably unmaintained) /bin/sh that using the special posix sh mode of bash made lots of sense.
Markus
Here the definition of the system() function call often used to run external commands:
system() executes a command specified in command by calling /bin/sh -c command
/bin/sh is linked to /bin/bash and vulnerable. Executing external commands through system(), and therefore bash, is by far the easiest method, so it is widely used. It is sufficient to trick the server or daemon.
Here a proof of concept where a dhcp server tricks a dhcp client into running an arbitrary command. https://www.trustedsec.com/sep...
Markus
The company is based in Italy and does not target San Francisco specifically. I don't think San Francisco has standing to sue them.
> Data compression on the other hand is a different domain.
Why ?
Data compression has been used since a long time, think about stenography or shorthand, for example. This is a manual data compression system, no computer required. Many algorithms are only practical on a computer, but they still are mathematical algorithms.
I had a SGS2 and have a SGS4 now. They are fine phones. I want a replaceable battery and a SD card slot. This reduces the field for me a lot.
For my wife I bought a Moto G and I suspect I will replace my SGS4 with a phone in the same class, once it needs to be replaced. Phones are rapidly approaching the phase where most middle class phones are good enough. Two years ago a high-end device was necessary for a good experience, these days this is no longer true.
Life will become tougher for phone manufacturers.
And I feel Groklaw is wimping out just now.
>The carrier has the choice to implement ipv6. Run ipv6 natively, and tunnel ipv4 traffic.
I don't think this will solve the problem. In the end, even if tunneling, some applications expect to see an IP per end-user. So the carrier still has to expose a dedicated IPv4 address per customer to the internet.
>Oh they can get more IPv4 addresses if they want. They are simply not willing to pay the asking price for them.
No. He will have to pass the additional cost of the IP addresses to its customers. And those customers are not ready to pay the price. They prefer a cheaper, but crappier service, otherwise the'll upgrade or switch to another more expensive carrier with real IP addresses.
The carrier has probably no choice. He can no longer get IPv4 addresses for new customers, so either he refuses customers or uses NAT to map multiple customers on the same IP.
On the other hand, the average Joe customer will not see the difference. He can surf as before and all his apps will work as before. Some apps (mostly p2p stuff) will suffer, but most internet user don't use those.
If you as customer do need a 'real' IP, then there always is the option to get a more expensive option.
I agree, I find this an excellent password recovery scheme. It does not protect against a bad choice in friends, but there are no technical protections possible against that. But for password recovery it is very good and quite safe against abuse by anonymous internet hackers.
Your Bank/Credit card company has no 24h service number for such this ?
Time to change credit card company.
Just install Hacker's Keyboard. It has a five rows and cursor keys (in landscape mode).
They are actually working with rats at this time. The first couple of years that compiled a database of rat-neurons in detail: Form and function. They do test the simulation extensively: Connecting electrodes to the synapses to check out what combination of input signals cause what output signals. After wards they look at one of the brains building blocks: The neuronal column: You assemble 10'000 neurons and do the same again: Feed it input and verify the output. If the simulation and the real thing gives the same result, then your simulation is ok, otherwise you go and tweak it until you get the same results.
I don't know how they go about Human brains, I'm sure they can not easily compare the simulation with the real thing. There are no volunteers to give op a bit of brain to feed the experiments :-).
They also are the main user of a BlueGene supercomputer at EPFL to run the simulations.
We'll see where they get over time. Henry Markram, the project leader is excellent, so I'm confident.
Markus
Very much so.
I would expect the head of Google+ using mainly Google+ for his social networking needs, not the network of a competitor. He should not even need to be told that explicitly.