Yeah, the Sacagawea $1 coin is still made. You can even buy them by the sack if you want. The old Susan B. Anthony dollars, which looked a lot like quarters, are still circulated but haven't been made since 1981.
Close, but actually the Susan B. was reissued in 1999. The story I heard was that a subway system used them as tokens, and they need more. But the Mint couldn't make Squawbucks until 2000, so they had to bring back the Susan B Anthony for one year.
Most US post offices have vending machines that both accept and make change in dollar coins. You can still pick up 1999 Susans that way. Unless you use the same post office I do...
Banks usually have Sacagaweas available. They come in a roll of 25, but they'll give you as many as you want (within reason, and assuming they have them) Just ask the teller for some.
Just because Microsoft doesn't publish their source code, doesn't mean the source code is not available. Crackers aren't afraid to decompile code, or use social engineering to obtain it. Non disclosures mean nothing to someone who is writing a virus.
But it does stop the white hats.
That asymmetry makes a big difference in the analysis. In open source the white hats and black hats are on equal footing. In closed source, the black hats have an advantage somewhere between alpha and 0, depending on how hard it is to obtain the source. Historically, it's been proven over and over that obtaining the source is much easier than the original designers thought, which is the reason security through obscurity is treated with such derision in the crypto community.
Most bugs are found by people running the code. Most security holes are found by people who are looking for them. Since Black hats have no real difficulty obtaining the source, "Closed" source gives them a huge advantage over their white hat counter parts.
Think of all the Bandwidth wasted on spam. (Downloading, and sending.)
Hmm... Ok. Average size of spam, under 10K. Average number of spams per person per day, under 10. Bandwidth per person 9.26 bits per second.
Holy cow! 9.26 per second, why that works out to almost a quarter of a million dollars per month, when you multiply it by 100,000,000 users, Why, that would be nearly five cents per person per year - goodness.
Sorry, I do feel for the people who pay for tbe bandwith spam uses. But I feel more for the people who lose time because of reading it.
They all got it wrong. Now they have to backtrack. Lowcost flatrate, unlimited broadband will become a thing of the past. I'd put my house on it.
I agree that lowcost flatrate, unlimited broadband will become a thing of the past, but not because consumers don't want it.
I think the majority of consumers want a flat fee. If that's not available, then they go with flat rate. Only if flat rate is unavailable will they settle for measured rate. For most consumers, $25 a month for 64Kbps is preferable to $25 a month for 128Kbps + $5 for each Gig over 10.
But broadband providers aren't interested in less service at a lower price, so I expect that some new technology will whup their sorry asses.
It occured to me that corporations have one thing that the Internet lacks: stability
Open/Closed and Stable/unstable are very different beasts with little or no correlation.
What threatens stability is the percentage of people who are unhappy. If a lot of people are unhappy with the current situation, then you have things like revolutions. Appeasing the masses is good policy. Sadly, good policy is something that ICANN seems to be in short supply of.
In short, what would it take to revoke ICANN's powers entirely in favor of something more fair and impartial?.
ICANN was "blessed" by the US department of commerce to run the DNS.
If you want to get something else, then you'd either need to convince the DoC that ICANN isn't doing what the DoC wants, or convince the people who use DNS that they should use another body to make policy for the DNS.
Alternic is trying, but IMO they are shooting to low, trying to organize the end users. The end users are ultimately the deciders, but they don't for the most part care about network issues. Much better is to try and reach the ISPs and network administrators. That's a difficult group to define exactly, but a reasonable approximation is anyone with an autonomous system number.
ISPs are in the business of running the internet. If you convince enough of them to adopt a different root, you win. For that, you only need to write some reasonable policies that would make the internet a better place for ISPs if they were followed. Note though, most ISPs care a lot more about stability than about correctness. Any policy that means making a change is going to be bad in their eyes. You want change, so you're going to need to overcome that. One solution would be straight cash bribes. I.e. Force registries to pay them. This could be justified by calling it a fee for the ISPs DNS service. Another possibility is greater control. Democracy is a great system for giving people the illusion of control - One AS, One vote.
I always thought the best way for the damn labels to justify the high prices and fight mp3 pirating is by offering a better product
The recording is the least important part of the quality. CDs are already higher quality recordings than MP3s, doesn't stop them from being pirated. What they need to improve is price, availablity, and choice.
Need I remind you that if you use Comcast as your ISP you are using *their* networks. Its not like they don't have a right to maintain it anyways they want. Unless the TOS specifically says "We will not log your activity" this lawsuit should be thrown out.
The right to swing *their* fist stops where the customers nose begins.
There are limits to what you can do with your property, and those limits are in part defined by injury it causes others. If you want to do something as egregious as Comcast (i.e. something your customers wouldn't reasonably expect you to do) then you had damn well better state that up front in large print. In other words, it is like they like they don't have a right to maintain their network anyway they want. Unless the TOS states in large print "WE WILL LOG YOUR ACTIVITY AND SELL IT TO THIRD PARTIES" then they are at fault.
OK, time for an philosophical question. Should free speech be considered an absolute right (i.e. no limitations placed on it at all)?
Free speach doesn't mean the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Disseminating some information is actually harmful to others (for example, a web page of credit card numbers). The harm caused by the dissemination must be considered.
In the SOF case, there's a secondary consideration, after determining that the ad was harmful information, and that the harm was sufficient to warrent not printing it, then you need to prove that SOF knew (or should have known) that the ad was harmful, and printed it anyway.
Government managers pride themselves on how much they spend and how many people they command, not on how much they save. Keep in mind that they cannot turn a profit or even show a savings - that's suicide - much more so than having your project fail spectacularly.
Bureaucracies often need to be able to quantify their logic (to avoid actual thought?) - so perhaps Linux should just cost more up front? That would make it a lot easier to go over budget later...
Nah - what you need is to sell the idea of a support team being cheaper than the propietary software. That way the empire builder manger types can justify enlarging their kindom of employees, and still claim to be saving money.
"Yes I hired more support staff, but I would have spent even more if I hadn't used Linux..."
The company also complained that the Pentagon is funding research on making free software more secure, which in effect subsidizes Microsoft's open-source competitors, Stenbit said.
And when they pay for software, the government isn't subsidizing the producer?
The government funded research on security is available to everyone - Microsoft included. When they fund research on faster planes, only a few companies gain the benefit. They aren't likely to stop doing either.
You can patent an idea so it doesn't matter how little code it takes to implement the idea.
It should.
Anything which can be written in two lines of code should be considered "obvious" in the unpatentable sense of that word. (Obviously, the lines need to be limited to reasonable length.)
Well, this would be all fine and good if I were adequately informed of the danger of riding a particular coaster. I'm certainly no engineer, and couldn't make any kind of good assessment of the safety of a particular roller coaster.
So, if there isn't going to be regulation as to how many Gs you can expose riders to, there should be a requirement for them to prominently post information on maximum expected g-forces, and comprehensive safety history of that particular ride.
What if the sign posted the relative risk compared to driving?
"Driving home from this amusement park is 660 times more like to kill you than riding this roller coaster."
If you really want a labeling law, how about listing the risk per second, and determining an amount below which labeling is not required.
I suggest that anything less risky than riding in a car be below the threshold.
-- this is not a.sig
Re:Easy steps to unsubscribe...
on
Disconnecting
·
· Score: 3, Funny
When asked why you want to cancel the service...
On good answer is "broken record." No matter what they say to distract you, say "I want to disconnect my service."
I.e. Them: "Is there a problem?" You: "I want to disconnect my service." Them: "Why do you want to cancel the service?" You: "I want to disconnect my service." Them: "Would a free month change your mind?" You: "I want to disconnect my service." Them: "I need to put down a reason." You: "I want to disconnect my service." Them: "Why not wait till the end of the month?" You: "I want to disconnect my service." Them: "But why?" You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Most people give up after the third repeat.
-- this is not a.sig
Re:the beauty of credit cards
on
Disconnecting
·
· Score: 2
You know, the first thing I would do after this is call my credit card company and tell them that you've canceled these accounts and that there should be 1 final payment to them and no more after that.
You complained about having them on auto-bill, but that actually makes it easier to protect yourself.
I had heard so many bad things about an ISP charging after disconnect, that when I canceled, I canceled my credit card too. They still charged it for an extra month. (The charges were reversed with me having to do anything, but still..)
Next time, before canceling an account, I plan on changing all my user info (including the credit card number) to something bogus.
You could say the same of the road leading to your house. If those that build it suck, you lose.
The solution is not to build two roads (or get a helicopter landing platform on the roof of your house) as an alternative, but just to make sure that the road-building organization does not suck.
Helicopters seem like a perfectly good solution to me - I'd much rather have a flying car than a road. Most people don't use helicopters now, because even calculating in the cost of the roads, cars are a lot cheaper. If 802.11b is cheaper than local loop, then we should concentrate on eliminating the local loop altogether, not the other way around.
Lumens/Watt; 85-95: 32 watt T8 fluorescent 60-65: standard F40T12 cool white fluorescent 48-60: compact fluorescents 20: T3 tubular halogen 15-19: white LED 17: standard 100 watt incandescent 6: incandescent night light bulb (7w) 6: incandescent flashlight bulbs
The very best white LEDs are still under 35 lumens/watt, or about 1/2 the efficency of a flourencent. They have been steadily improving however, and around 2004 should surpass them.
Can someone please present a way to overhaul the email system so that it works the way it was intended?
I think the email system is already working the way it was intended. Near instant delivery at near zero cost.
What you probably want is a system that overhauls email so that it works the way you want. I.e. you only get email that is of interest to you. Although there are several things that improve on the current situation, (Spam Wolf, Spam Assassin, Vipul's Razor...) IMO, the only long term solution is digitally signed email to identify friends, and a large fee for unknowns. The fee could be real cash, or hash-cash, or a donation to charity, or held in escrow, but the principle is the same - make it cost a lot to send email to people you don't know.
Slashdot Mirror
Close, but actually the Susan B. was reissued in 1999. The story I heard was that a subway system used them as tokens, and they need more. But the Mint couldn't make Squawbucks until 2000, so they had to bring back the Susan B Anthony for one year.
Most US post offices have vending machines that both accept and make change in dollar coins.
You can still pick up 1999 Susans that way. Unless you use the same post office I do...
Banks usually have Sacagaweas available. They come in a roll of 25, but they'll give you as many as you want
(within reason, and assuming they have them)
Just ask the teller for some.
Excellent troll.
.sig
I especially liked the "free speech is privilage not a right" bit - brilliant.
-- this is not a
Just because Microsoft doesn't publish their source code,
.sig
doesn't mean the source code is not available.
Crackers aren't afraid to decompile code, or use social engineering to obtain it.
Non disclosures mean nothing to someone who is writing a virus.
But it does stop the white hats.
That asymmetry makes a big difference in the analysis.
In open source the white hats and black hats are on equal footing.
In closed source, the black hats have an advantage somewhere
between alpha and 0, depending on how hard it is to obtain the source.
Historically, it's been proven over and over that obtaining the source is much easier than the original designers thought,
which is the reason security through obscurity is treated with such derision in the crypto community.
Most bugs are found by people running the code.
Most security holes are found by people who are looking for them.
Since Black hats have no real difficulty obtaining the source,
"Closed" source gives them a huge advantage over their white hat counter parts.
-- this is not a
Pity they aren't launching from such a balloon -
.sig
they'd get another 50 klicks higher at least.
-- this is not a
Hmm... Ok.
Average size of spam, under 10K.
Average number of spams per person per day, under 10.
Bandwidth per person 9.26 bits per second.
Holy cow! 9.26 per second, why that works out to almost a quarter of a million dollars per month,
when you multiply it by 100,000,000 users,
Why, that would be nearly five cents per person per year - goodness.
Sorry, I do feel for the people who pay for tbe bandwith spam uses.
But I feel more for the people who lose time because of reading it.
-- this is not a
I agree that lowcost flatrate, unlimited broadband will become a thing of the past, but not because consumers don't want it.
I think the majority of consumers want a flat fee.
If that's not available, then they go with flat rate.
Only if flat rate is unavailable will they settle for measured rate.
For most consumers, $25 a month for 64Kbps is preferable to
$25 a month for 128Kbps + $5 for each Gig over 10.
But broadband providers aren't interested in less service at a lower price,
so I expect that some new technology will whup their sorry asses.
-- this is not a
I agree that "unbreakable" is an unachievable goal.
.sig
Please describe what level of breakability you think they should be striving for.
-- this is not a
Open/Closed and Stable/unstable are very different beasts with little or no correlation.
What threatens stability is the percentage of people who are unhappy.
If a lot of people are unhappy with the current situation, then you have things like revolutions.
Appeasing the masses is good policy.
Sadly, good policy is something that ICANN seems to be in short supply of.
-- there are no real email addresses here
ICANN was "blessed" by the US department of commerce to run the DNS.
If you want to get something else, then you'd either need to convince the DoC that ICANN isn't doing what the DoC wants, or convince the people who use DNS that they should use another body to make policy for the DNS.
Alternic is trying, but IMO they are shooting to low, trying to organize the end users.
The end users are ultimately the deciders, but they don't for the most part care about network issues.
Much better is to try and reach the ISPs and network administrators.
That's a difficult group to define exactly, but a reasonable approximation is anyone with an autonomous system number.
ISPs are in the business of running the internet.
If you convince enough of them to adopt a different root, you win.
For that, you only need to write some reasonable policies that would make the internet a better place for ISPs if they were followed.
Note though, most ISPs care a lot more about stability than about correctness.
Any policy that means making a change is going to be bad in their eyes.
You want change, so you're going to need to overcome that.
One solution would be straight cash bribes.
I.e. Force registries to pay them.
This could be justified by calling it a fee for the ISPs DNS service.
Another possibility is greater control.
Democracy is a great system for giving people the illusion of control - One AS, One vote.
-- there are no real email addresses here
The recording is the least important part of the quality.
CDs are already higher quality recordings than MP3s, doesn't stop them from being pirated.
What they need to improve is price, availablity, and choice.
-- this is not a
His statement makes perfect sense, you just have trouble accepting it.
-- this is not a
like chicken.
The right to swing *their* fist stops where the customers nose begins.
There are limits to what you can do with your property,
and those limits are in part defined by injury it causes others.
If you want to do something as egregious as Comcast
(i.e. something your customers wouldn't reasonably expect you to do)
then you had damn well better state that up front in large print.
In other words, it is like they like they don't have a right
to maintain their network anyway they want.
Unless the TOS states in large print
"WE WILL LOG YOUR ACTIVITY AND SELL IT TO THIRD PARTIES"
then they are at fault.
There are limits, and Comcast exceeded them.
-- this is not a
Free speach doesn't mean the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Disseminating some information is actually harmful to others (for example, a web page of credit card numbers). The harm caused by the dissemination must be considered.
In the SOF case, there's a secondary consideration, after determining that the ad was harmful information, and that the harm was sufficient to warrent not printing it, then you need to prove that SOF knew (or should have known) that the ad was harmful, and printed it anyway.
-- this is not a
Nah - what you need is to sell the idea of a support team being cheaper than the propietary software. That way the empire builder manger types can justify enlarging their kindom of employees, and still claim to be saving money.
"Yes I hired more support staff, but I would have spent even more if I hadn't used Linux..."
-- This is not a
And when they pay for software, the government isn't subsidizing the producer?
The government funded research on security is available to everyone - Microsoft included.
When they fund research on faster planes, only a few companies gain the benefit.
They aren't likely to stop doing either.
-- this is not a
January 3rd, 1982.
And before back in the day, paying for software
-- this is not a
It should.
Anything which can be written in two lines of code should be considered "obvious" in the
unpatentable sense of that word.
(Obviously, the lines need to be limited to reasonable length.)
-- this is not a
What if the sign posted the relative risk compared to driving?
"Driving home from this amusement park is 660 times more like to kill you than riding this roller coaster."
If you really want a labeling law, how about listing the risk per second,
and determining an amount below which labeling is not required.
I suggest that anything less risky than riding in a car be below the threshold.
-- this is not a
On good answer is "broken record."
No matter what they say to distract you, say
"I want to disconnect my service."
I.e.
Them: "Is there a problem?"
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Them: "Why do you want to cancel the service?"
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Them: "Would a free month change your mind?"
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Them: "I need to put down a reason."
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Them: "Why not wait till the end of the month?"
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Them: "But why?"
You: "I want to disconnect my service."
Most people give up after the third repeat.
-- this is not a
I had heard so many bad things about an ISP charging after disconnect,
that when I canceled, I canceled my credit card too.
They still charged it for an extra month.
(The charges were reversed with me having to do anything, but still..)
Next time, before canceling an account, I plan on changing all my
user info (including the credit card number) to something bogus.
-- this is not a
Helicopters seem like a perfectly good solution to me - I'd much rather have a flying car than a road.
Most people don't use helicopters now, because even calculating in the cost of the roads, cars are a lot cheaper.
If 802.11b is cheaper than local loop, then we should concentrate on eliminating the local loop altogether, not the other way around.
-- this is not a
Last year, the numbers were something like this;
.sig
Lumens/Watt;
85-95: 32 watt T8 fluorescent
60-65: standard F40T12 cool white fluorescent
48-60: compact fluorescents
20: T3 tubular halogen
15-19: white LED
17: standard 100 watt incandescent
6: incandescent night light bulb (7w)
6: incandescent flashlight bulbs
The very best white LEDs are still under 35 lumens/watt, or about 1/2 the efficency of a flourencent. They have been steadily improving however, and around 2004 should surpass them.
But not today.
-- this is not a
I think the email system is already working the way it was intended.
Near instant delivery at near zero cost.
What you probably want is a system that overhauls email so that it works the way you want.
I.e. you only get email that is of interest to you.
Although there are several things that improve on the current situation, (Spam Wolf,
Spam Assassin, Vipul's Razor...)
IMO, the only long term solution is digitally signed email to identify friends,
and a large fee for unknowns.
The fee could be real cash, or hash-cash, or a donation to charity,
or held in escrow, but the principle is the same -
make it cost a lot to send email to people you don't know.
-- Spam Wolf, the best spam blocking vaporware yet!
Right idea, but wrong price points. Relase 3 versions;
a "Gold" version at $395.00, a "Silver" version for $195.00, and a "Basic" version for $79.95.
Affordable and expensive at the same time.
-- this is not a