Davis Instruments manufactures an OBD-II monitoring device called CarChip E/X that happens to capture 300 hours of acceleration, braking, engine performance, and impact sensor logs- it's only about $150 at most chain Auto Parts stores.
If you're using a Toll Road, it's possible to be caught by the FBI, Toll-Tag or not. There's this little thing called a Violation Enforcement System that's typically coupled with the Toll-Tag systems. If for any reason their little violation alarm goes off, even if you're kosher, the system takes a nice photo of your license plate and the time that it occured. This is cross-checked with the event logs for toll payment, both cash and tag based, and if a payment isn't logged, they go through the DMV records and mail you a nice ticket for your cheating on the system.
If you don't want to get caught and you're being hunted by LEOs, the toll roads aren't a good idea at all anyway.
For those that don't know, RFID readers for the technology capable of reading tags at Toll-Tag distances happen to be in the tens of thousands of dollars. You need a reader for each lane of traffic. A per-mile-marker detection system's a cool idea until you start running up the bill for such a system- and that doesn't even count the need for accurate real-time monitoring of these units or for a huge honking super-computer to grind through the data and do aggregation and correlation of all the data points.
You're not going to see the uses you mention because the country's not flush with trillions of dollars to DO what you describe.
Who's the people BUYING that game and others like it (Oh, say, like Postal2, etc...) for the kids in the first place? Their Parents or the kids are allowed enough free reign by their parents on things to buy it for themselves.
Why not have the parents assume a little responsibility instead of worrying about that, eh? If it's a problem, shouldn't the Parents be the first ones to have a say in things? If they don't have a problem, it's very likely you shouldn't either.
C'mon now... We found faults with the methodology to begin with. The metrics they're using are completely useless for determining the relative security of an OS- they're using time to release fixes for reported exploits.
Now...
1) Microsoft waits until they actually have a fix or is forced to report/acknowledge an exploit when someone else makes an issue of it.
2) Microsoft doesn't report any other exploits that they know about and doesn't go auditing for potential issues either.
3) The Open Source community as a whole is rather paranoid compared to Microsoft when it comes to overall security so they report anything that might be a potential problem.
Given the above items, that isn't a terribly good metric for determining overall security, nor is determining how secure the OS is by the reported issues. Overall security is a measure of how many issues, how severe, how exploitable, and how well they get fixed. Microsoft consistently flunks in the overall issues (they have more than we do, we just don't find out about them until after the fact...), severity, and fixing arenas.
Combine this all with the facts that Microsoft maintained editorial AND financial control of the entire "study" and it all becomes a farce and worthy of the derision we're all heaping up on it.
Web designers should have been worrying about 56k speeds all along. Not everybody happens to have broadband yet, and even if they do, why should you bleed it all away with huge flash files, etc. If you have to add splash and flash, perhaps your message isn't as good as it could be.
Quite simply, there's more than enough stuff out there for you to listen to that's NOT part of the "industry", or more appropriately, the major labels.
They weren't looking out for you- they were looking out for themselves. No music to sell via ITMS, no money... Just because you want the stuff is only secondary to that and you should place yourself on the pecking order accordingly and not act so grateful as they really, really don't care about you or any other "consumers". As far as they're concerned, the consumers are going to consume whatever they offer if it's packaged nicely enough.
Just because they're priortizing their traffic doesn't mean that the best efforts is going to be crappy or largly suffer from anything Cringely's talking about. In order to priortize their traffic so as to make the other VoIP services look bad, they're going to have to impact all other services such as HTTP, FTP, SMTP, POP3, etc. in such a way as to be highly noticeable and they'll get caught with the tampering. As such, they'll get told to quit becuase it's anticompetitive or people will move to other services as they become available.
You can believe whatever you want, the fact is, Cringely doesn't seem to understand how all of this stuff actually works in this case and is being just another gasbag pundit.
Why do people assume that there's latency with encryption? Yes, it takes cycles, but with modern machines, it's not the latency hit everyone keeps thinking it is- especially with voice operations.
If they do that and it can cause quality problems with VoIP providers, what is it going to do to surfing, etc. If it degrades those services, it's going to degrade my download speeds, etc.
The whole premise is good, in and of itself, but it falls apart because people won't really appreciate their other services being screwed with in this manner- and they can't be 100% certain that they're dinking with the right or wrong ones as at least a few of the VoIP services use port 80 to tunnel through firewalls.
Larry's entitled to license things under any license he wants to. It's HIS product. However, having said this, it's still quite understandable for people to not want Linux development being tied to a closed-source product with nasty gotchas in it's free license. That's not whining in the least.
The only thing resembling "whining" seems to be coming from Larry himself with this silly license. All it's going to do is make the acrimony WORSE, not better. Kind of childish, in my not so humble opinion.
You might want to use the right part numbers when you go an speculate like this. So far, all of the parties have been wrong. It's not negligible, nor is it quite as large as others have stated. Looking up Intel's stated figures from ftp://download.intel.com/design/mobile/datashts/30 526401.pdf, on page 294, we find that the mainline mobile chip, the 915GM has a stated max TDP of 6W. So, if we assume for a moment that they're 100% accurate on this (I know, I know, just bear with me here...) then the aggregate TDP for the CPU and Northbridge is 33W for the Pentium-M model they tested- IF AMD used a laptop with this model setup. If they used a laptop with the "high-performance" chipset, it's liable to be higher. Now, that means that it's largely a push on peak consumption- it boils down to how well they idle back and how often when they're not idled back they're burning the peak power.
Keep in mind that all the other components, such as floppies, DVD drives, etc. consume power and they seriously contribute to the overall run-time of a laptop.
Was it cooking the reviews? Probably not, in reflection. Personally, I wish that the Reg author that made the article of the discussion subject would get some balls and find some integrity because he's pretty much wrong on most of what he wrote about.
Case number three's function call getting an input from a user should probably applied something along the lines of case number one. In both of the prior cases, they actually DO something to actively avoid a division by zero- in three, you do NOTHING, but yet you could have either in the function or just before the division... i.e.
It's geared more for installing the primary binaries on a server share and then installing the minimal install on workstations. Once you look at it that way, it kind of makes sense- doesn't make it any less painful on a local install for multi-user, but since most of the distributions are taking care of most of that pain for you lately, it's less of an issue unless you upgrade...
...of the big picture. The ATM is not directly connected to the Internet, no. But, how secure is the Wells Fargo end of that picture? We've seen Windows ATMs get zapped by Internet Worms because of infections that somehow get into the corporate LAN of the banks and since the VPN makes it look like the ATMs are on a network segment with the corporate LAN, the Worm gets into the ATMs anyway.
This has all the hallmarks of a BAD idea from the beginning as Windows isn't the right tool for this job no matter how you frame it because it's hopelessly insecure in ways far too numerous to count- and for financial transactions accuracy is job one and security is job two. I can believe that the ATM program works on the first nicely enough- it's not hard to do that sort of thing, really. I can't believe that they deal with #2 in ANY manner- not while you're building a fortress on a foundation of shifting sands.
Better to use QNX, Lynx, RTEMS, or even OpenBSD or Linux than Windows. Much less shifting sands there.
Invariably, the ATMs have to talk to the Bank's internal network at some point. Even over a VPN, you can have a propagation of a worm... That's how the last little inconvienence against Windows based ATMs happened. The worm got a machine on the inside of the Bank's LAN and propagated to the ATMs that were Windows based- right over the VPN.
It's a big deal. If it's going to be web-based on it's controls, etc., it will have exposed ports.
Simply put, Windows really, really isn't suitable to task for this sort of job. Never was. As far as Microsoft's track record shows, it never will be.
What if an atm-worm went around recording every atm transaction? Jesus christ.
Yep. That's why I tell people that using Windows for such things is irresponsible. I don't care how much you thought you 'saved' on development- if it's insecure, it shouldn't flippin' be used.
It keeps amazing me what they'll put Windows into and put up with it crashing. You'd think people would learn about all of this by now, but noooo....
I've always understood that while you can state venue, you can't enforce the same if it interferes with an individual's right to work within a state that doesn't accept those contracts. Basically speaking, while you COULD sue them in WA, they'd have to answer to the same sort of suit in Texas brought against them.
Typically, they won't bother with the non-compete clauses when you're in a state that prohibits them and holds right to work over all else- it's much, much more expensive than it's ever worth to them to keep an employee working for a competitor.
...for him not joining the pot. Unfair, if nobody else with a buffer joins. Could take forever if two or more that do buffer join in. That's not to say that they couldn't join in, really- anything could keep the buffer from updating (A good example would be the artist in our current thread- he only had 3 days left in his buffer because of forces beyond his control until today...). But it does make it harder on those that don't buffer up their strips all the same.
...Howard's buffer dropped to three as of yesterday. It's back up to ten, and he's gunning for a full month's buffering of Schlock for his fans. And as for the Daily Grind Contest, I don't think it's been considered. Just because you've got a buffer doesn't mean that you can't run out and go with a spate of silence on the part of the artist(s).
Shockwave Flash. It's a flash file, and unfortunately for all of us Linux and *BSD people, it don't print, even if you've got the Flash player for x86 Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Davis Instruments manufactures an OBD-II monitoring device called CarChip E/X that happens to capture 300 hours of acceleration, braking, engine performance, and impact sensor logs- it's only about $150 at most chain Auto Parts stores.
If you're using a Toll Road, it's possible to be caught by the FBI, Toll-Tag or not. There's this little thing called a Violation Enforcement System that's typically coupled with the Toll-Tag systems. If for any reason their little violation alarm goes off, even if you're kosher, the system takes a nice photo of your license plate and the time that it occured. This is cross-checked with the event logs for toll payment, both cash and tag based, and if a payment isn't logged, they go through the DMV records and mail you a nice ticket for your cheating on the system.
If you don't want to get caught and you're being hunted by LEOs, the toll roads aren't a good idea at all anyway.
For those that don't know, RFID readers for the technology capable of reading tags at Toll-Tag distances happen to be in the tens of thousands of dollars. You need a reader for each lane of traffic. A per-mile-marker detection system's a cool idea until you start running up the bill for such a system- and that doesn't even count the need for accurate real-time monitoring of these units or for a huge honking super-computer to grind through the data and do aggregation and correlation of all the data points.
You're not going to see the uses you mention because the country's not flush with trillions of dollars to DO what you describe.
Who's the people BUYING that game and others like it (Oh, say, like Postal2, etc...) for the kids in the first place? Their Parents or the kids are allowed enough free reign by their parents on things to buy it for themselves.
Why not have the parents assume a little responsibility instead of worrying about that, eh? If it's a problem, shouldn't the Parents be the first ones to have a say in things? If they don't have a problem, it's very likely you shouldn't either.
C'mon now... We found faults with the methodology to begin with. The metrics they're using are completely useless for determining the relative security of an OS- they're using time to release fixes for reported exploits.
Now...
1) Microsoft waits until they actually have a fix or is forced to report/acknowledge an exploit when someone else makes an issue of it.
2) Microsoft doesn't report any other exploits that they know about and doesn't go auditing for potential issues either.
3) The Open Source community as a whole is rather paranoid compared to Microsoft when it comes to overall security so they report anything that might be a potential problem.
Given the above items, that isn't a terribly good metric for determining overall security, nor is determining how secure the OS is by the reported issues. Overall security is a measure of how many issues, how severe, how exploitable, and how well they get fixed. Microsoft consistently flunks in the overall issues (they have more than we do, we just don't find out about them until after the fact...), severity, and fixing arenas.
Combine this all with the facts that Microsoft maintained editorial AND financial control of the entire "study" and it all becomes a farce and worthy of the derision we're all heaping up on it.
They'll make a go of claiming Linus isn't the father of Linux shortly...
Web designers should have been worrying about 56k speeds all along. Not everybody happens to have broadband yet, and even if they do, why should you bleed it all away with huge flash files, etc. If you have to add splash and flash, perhaps your message isn't as good as it could be.
Quite simply, there's more than enough stuff out there for you to listen to that's NOT part of the "industry", or more appropriately, the major labels.
They weren't looking out for you- they were looking out for themselves. No music to sell via ITMS, no money... Just because you want the stuff is only secondary to that and you should place yourself on the pecking order accordingly and not act so grateful as they really, really don't care about you or any other "consumers". As far as they're concerned, the consumers are going to consume whatever they offer if it's packaged nicely enough.
Just because they're priortizing their traffic doesn't mean that the best efforts is going to be crappy or largly suffer from anything Cringely's talking about. In order to priortize their traffic so as to make the other VoIP services look bad, they're going to have to impact all other services such as HTTP, FTP, SMTP, POP3, etc. in such a way as to be highly noticeable and they'll get caught with the tampering. As such, they'll get told to quit becuase it's anticompetitive or people will move to other services as they become available.
You can believe whatever you want, the fact is, Cringely doesn't seem to understand how all of this stuff actually works in this case and is being just another gasbag pundit.
Why do people assume that there's latency with encryption? Yes, it takes cycles, but with modern machines, it's not the latency hit everyone keeps thinking it is- especially with voice operations.
If they do that and it can cause quality problems with VoIP providers, what is it going to do to surfing, etc. If it degrades those services, it's going to degrade my download speeds, etc.
The whole premise is good, in and of itself, but it falls apart because people won't really appreciate their other services being screwed with in this manner- and they can't be 100% certain that they're dinking with the right or wrong ones as at least a few of the VoIP services use port 80 to tunnel through firewalls.
Larry's entitled to license things under any license he wants to. It's HIS product. However, having said this, it's still quite understandable for people to not want Linux development being tied to a closed-source product with nasty gotchas in it's free license. That's not whining in the least.
The only thing resembling "whining" seems to be coming from Larry himself with this silly license. All it's going to do is make the acrimony WORSE, not better. Kind of childish, in my not so humble opinion.
Personal configuration settings?
Personal templates?
There's not much of anything installed other than a link to the globally provided main install and the setups for the default settings.
You might want to use the right part numbers when you go an speculate like this. So far, all of the parties have been wrong. It's not negligible, nor is it quite as large as others have stated. Looking up Intel's stated figures from ftp://download.intel.com/design/mobile/datashts/30 526401.pdf, on page 294, we find that the mainline mobile chip, the 915GM has a stated max TDP of 6W. So, if we assume for a moment that they're 100% accurate on this (I know, I know, just bear with me here...) then the aggregate TDP for the CPU and Northbridge is 33W for the Pentium-M model they tested- IF AMD used a laptop with this model setup. If they used a laptop with the "high-performance" chipset, it's liable to be higher. Now, that means that it's largely a push on peak consumption- it boils down to how well they idle back and how often when they're not idled back they're burning the peak power.
Keep in mind that all the other components, such as floppies, DVD drives, etc. consume power and they seriously contribute to the overall run-time of a laptop.
Was it cooking the reviews? Probably not, in reflection. Personally, I wish that the Reg author that made the article of the discussion subject would get some balls and find some integrity because he's pretty much wrong on most of what he wrote about.
Case number three's function call getting an input from a user should probably applied something along the lines of case number one. In both of the prior cases, they actually DO something to actively avoid a division by zero- in three, you do NOTHING, but yet you could have either in the function or just before the division... i.e.
c = b / (a == 0) ? 1 : a
or something similar.
It's geared more for installing the primary binaries on a server share and then installing the minimal install on workstations. Once you look at it that way, it kind of makes sense- doesn't make it any less painful on a local install for multi-user, but since most of the distributions are taking care of most of that pain for you lately, it's less of an issue unless you upgrade...
...of the big picture. The ATM is not directly connected to the Internet, no. But, how secure is the Wells Fargo end of that picture? We've seen Windows ATMs get zapped by Internet Worms because of infections that somehow get into the corporate LAN of the banks and since the VPN makes it look like the ATMs are on a network segment with the corporate LAN, the Worm gets into the ATMs anyway .
This has all the hallmarks of a BAD idea from the beginning as Windows isn't the right tool for this job no matter how you frame it because it's hopelessly insecure in ways far too numerous to count- and for financial transactions accuracy is job one and security is job two. I can believe that the ATM program works on the first nicely enough- it's not hard to do that sort of thing, really. I can't believe that they deal with #2 in ANY manner- not while you're building a fortress on a foundation of shifting sands.
Better to use QNX, Lynx, RTEMS, or even OpenBSD or Linux than Windows. Much less shifting sands there.
Invariably, the ATMs have to talk to the Bank's internal network at some point. Even over a VPN, you can have a propagation of a worm... That's how the last little inconvienence against Windows based ATMs happened. The worm got a machine on the inside of the Bank's LAN and propagated to the ATMs that were Windows based- right over the VPN.
It's a big deal. If it's going to be web-based on it's controls, etc., it will have exposed ports.
Simply put, Windows really, really isn't suitable to task for this sort of job. Never was. As far as Microsoft's track record shows, it never will be.
Yep. That's why I tell people that using Windows for such things is irresponsible. I don't care how much you thought you 'saved' on development- if it's insecure, it shouldn't flippin' be used.
It keeps amazing me what they'll put Windows into and put up with it crashing. You'd think people would learn about all of this by now, but noooo....
...you have to ASK for that. The Telcos don't explicitly block them at their discretion. They can't do that and keep their common carrier status.
I've always understood that while you can state venue, you can't enforce the same if it interferes with an individual's right to work within a state that doesn't accept those contracts. Basically speaking, while you COULD sue them in WA, they'd have to answer to the same sort of suit in Texas brought against them.
Typically, they won't bother with the non-compete clauses when you're in a state that prohibits them and holds right to work over all else- it's much, much more expensive than it's ever worth to them to keep an employee working for a competitor.
We have the same sort of statutes here that Californians do. I might add, that the cost of living's a wee bit cheaper here too.
...for him not joining the pot. Unfair, if nobody else with a buffer joins. Could take forever if two or more that do buffer join in. That's not to say that they couldn't join in, really- anything could keep the buffer from updating (A good example would be the artist in our current thread- he only had 3 days left in his buffer because of forces beyond his control until today...). But it does make it harder on those that don't buffer up their strips all the same.
...Howard's buffer dropped to three as of yesterday. It's back up to ten, and he's gunning for a full month's buffering of Schlock for his fans. And as for the Daily Grind Contest, I don't think it's been considered. Just because you've got a buffer doesn't mean that you can't run out and go with a spate of silence on the part of the artist(s).
Shockwave Flash. It's a flash file, and unfortunately for all of us Linux and *BSD people, it don't print, even if you've got the Flash player for x86 Linux.
Not a good thing for PR, really.