Another way to look at it is it was working fine until it was revealed that Ottawa airport had 'em, then it blows up and becomes a big deal.
If they didn't mention it, the politicians wouldn't care. But now it's THEIR conversations being spied on, it's a Very Big Deal(tm).
Unless it affects a politician, nothing gets done. Ever notice the internet spy bill only was pulled off after Vikileaks started up and how the Tories made a big deal that it was some Liberal staffer running it? And how it was practically a witch hunt even though all the records were already public - the only "unethical" thing was someone pointing it out. Nothing illegal, nothing classified, sealed, or hidden. It was just sitting on the court website in relative obscurity.
I think GP was talking about Selective Availability (SA). Basically an intentional error that limited accuracy of commercial GPS to 30-100m. It was turned off 5/2/2000. Ever since then we've had 95% 10m accuracy, but the DOD has the ability to selectively re-enable SA on individual satellites. The thought being, if we see a couple of cruise missiles ( or a missile boat ) within range of the US, we can disrupt GPS so it can't be used against us. As a defensive layer, this ability no longer packs the same punch as it did back in the day. Terrain contour matching ( TERCOM ) is cheap and 'easy' these days with the processors and power available to avionic packages. I don't doubt if you google for it, someone's built a TERCOM system for their hobby RC plane by now.
There's actually another aspect of GPS that's little known - there are limits placed on GPS receivers by the government. Basically a civillian (C/A) receiver must disable itself once its calculated speed and altitude go above certain limits (CoCom Limits), meant to prevent their use in missiles and such.
While most people won't reach the speed limits, people have reached the height limits when doing "space" photography using weather balloons. They consistently lose their GPS telemetry data at that point.
No, it's a mutual incompatibility between the App Store and the GPL. Apple chose to make it this way.
The App Store (and by extension, Apple's walled garden) is decisively anti-end user freedom. The GPL is totally pro-end user freedom. But since Apple controls the store, the only way to legitimately get GPL software on there is to own all the copyrights to the code, strip the GPL (because it will be replaced with Apple's onerous terms,) and post it. Users can then go figure out how to make use of the GPL code with a platform that is outright hostile to them.
Correction - GPLv3.
There's nothing inherently incompatible with walled gardens and the GPLv2 (it's really a case of TiVoization).
Heck, if someone wanted, they probably can alter the build system to include the source inside the IPA file submitted to Apple (thought at increased size of final file). Or even fun stuff like auto-downloading the sources on launch.
Remember - the GPL apps that were removed fro mthe App Store were removed at the request of the authors, who believed in slightly different interpretations of the GPL.
Now, the GPLv3 is completely incompatible with any App Store model that imposes DRM (which is probably why Google Play apk's have no DRM on them, other than what the author has to put in via Google Licensing Services API. I believe that Amazon's APKs are, however, DRM'd). Of course, the GPLv3 is also incompatible with GPLv2 (GPLv2-only code can NOT be mixed with GPLv3(or v3+) code at all.) because of things like this (which is why the GPLv3 was created).
By the Ed Millibands of this world, you presumably mean MPs who concentrate their time on the parliamentary work that they are paid for, rather than sending time writing novels and setting up vanity project websites.
The flip side is well, you also want legislators who have current real-world experience, not some career politician who's been at it for 30 years and completely out of touch (e.g., the ivory tower). As long as these interests are revealed well ahead of time and the appropriate people recluse themselves from voting on said topics.
Those who concentrate on their jobs find themselves the target of lobbyists because they know they don't know the real world so are vulnerable to people telling them "how it really is." (This goes for both sides).
Intel is trying to work their way in as a 3rd. player with accelerated, yet integrated, graphics chipsets -- but truthfully? I doubt they'll seriously chase after the high-performance graphics market in any serious way. For them, it's more lucrative to offer decent/usable levels of performance for the typical user and compete on having a lower price.
I think Intel would like to jump as high up that tree as possible, but it's not as easy as just saying it. You can bet they had bigger plans for Larrabee and whatnot than what became reality. Anyway, for at least another 1.5-2.5 years all games will continue to be designed to run well on 2005-2006 era hardware in the Xbox360/PS3 - the number of PC exclusives is getting slimmer and slimmer. The big question is when the 720/PS4 rolls around, if they set a new "low bar" for gaming performance but until then the more Intel can shrink the discrete graphics market the better for Intel.
Intel doesn't need to jump up as high - they already are the primary graphics in the vast majority of computers sold (heck, Apple might actually one of the few keeping Intel-only graphics down by shipping large quantities of computers with discrete GPUs - though,they also do ship plenty of Intel-graphics computers as well).
For Intel to go after the remaining percentage of people, it's going to require a much larger investment in resources just to get a little bit more marketshare.
Intel just needs to maintain marketshare - realizing fewer people play PC games, they concentrate on video so as long as they can do Blu-ray playback and handle Aero with some decency, the vast majority of consumer needs will be satisfied. Consumers looking for a gaming machine would pick up a discrete ATi/nVidia card anyhow.
Tubes are the exact opposite of "sound quality." Check the THD's on tube amps. They are honestly terrible. But then again, an opera house is also "terrible" for acoustics. It's the even order harmonics that make it distorted, lowering quality. However, even order harmonics sound "good" to most people. I have an amplifier that is about as good as it gets (Denon, THD 0.009% at rated power(80wpc)), and most of my friends hate it. It has been described as "Brutally Honest". Maybe too honest.
True. The only reason tube amps are popular is because they impart a harmonious amount of distortion in the mix, whilst the alternative solid-state amps introduce well, crap in the form of clipping.
End result is for music with a rather large dynamic range, amps that can't handle the sudden demands (most of them - usually through weedy power supplies unable to suddenly dump basically their max power through a dead short) end up clipping, horribly, generating very harsh harmonics.
Of course, the general public has shown a tendency towards liking certain forms of distorted audio. After all, what else explains, well, Beats? Or the horrible noise caused by said weedy amps blaring out latest rap hits (actually, scratch that - it's not just the weedy amps, but also horrible resonances that lead to those buzzing thumps).
Heck, I'd think a lot of the reason isn't because the audio is purer (most people hate pure audio as you mention), but because transistors don't impart the same melodious distortions tubes do while in normal mode, and then impart just horrendous artifacts when overdriven. Vinyl vs. CD, ditto (even more so with the loudness wars leading to clipping being present in the source bitstream).
Heck, a Class D amplifier has been around for years and yet people still haven't integrated them everywhere (considered the holy grail of amplifiers - super high efficiency (90+% isn't unheard of), super low distortion (rivalling the best costing many times more running in Class A or AB).
What I'd want to know is how he managed to get such a long post through before/. truncates it - usually you get maybe a short essay's worth of text before the "Read more of this comment" link shows up. This guy managed maybe five times that length.
Of course, most modern tracking system, like Google Analytics, rely on webmasters to pass links THROUGH them via javascript, so you can't block GA anymore or the site breaks (good and bad).
Naturally, stuff like NoScript evolved workarounds by faking out the GA scripts to avoid tracking.
There's MySQL, MySQL+, MySQL Max, MySQL 386, MySQL Lite, MySQL with Bacon, MySQL with jalapeno, Eventum, MySQL with antioxidants, did I say MySQL already?
The question is - how many apps are they missing? I think "Oracle DB" would have more than 100 variations and licensing terms already, so how many are they leaving out?
Most of those actually use an interim server like the one in the article to make the conversion, so could be blocked. Even those that don't frequently have problems. Youtube keeps adjusting the way it streams the media files to try and optimize overall bandwidth use and performance, and every time they make a change it breaks the plugins for a few days. That said, I don't think they can outright block them without blocking the media itself; a browser that allowed websites to query every plugin installed would be a serious security threat.
Actually, it's really easy to do it yourself, and it works extremely well in Firefox. It'll work with most sites and is unblockable basically. The sites it won't work with are sites that do exclusive streaming (no caching and play/pause/rewind/etc requires are handled by the server which changes its bitstream) and sites that break the video into tiny segments and the player dynamically changes the quality.
What you need is a firefox extension called "Live HTTP Headers" that lets you see HTTP headers as they scroll by, and something like Flashblock or NoScript that prevents running of flash (HTML5 video isn't that prevalent yet and only big ones like YouTube, Vimeo and Dailymotion support it while everyone else still uses flash).
The method is to load the page up, then open the Live HTTP Header window. Click the flash player and let it load and start the video. One of the things Live HTTP Headers will have captured is... the URL for the media (look for MIME type video/flv or video/mp4). Copy that URL and paste it in a browser tab (which also gives you cookies). If you don't have a handler, it'll ask to download. If you do, block the site temporarily and use NoScript to right-click and download it.
This method works because it relies on the fact that most video sites retrieve video via HTTP or HTTPS (could be a Flash limitation) rather than streaming the video (which requires server work) and using HTTP/HTTPS makes it more CDN-friendly since it's a static file.
Yeah.... unfortunately, that's NOT the correct way to use a credit card, in the lenders' viewpoint. And guess who makes the rules? (Hint: Not you.)
If you repeatedly pay off a credit card in full, you're just an expense on their balance sheet. (They have to keep lending you money for as long as 25-30 days at a time without making a penny of interest on it -- not to mention maintaining your account with them, printing up fresh cards for you every so often, etc. etc.)
Sure, it shows you're fiscally responsible, but not in a way that benefits them. What they're really after (and reward with a higher credit score) are people who actually carry a balance, but always make payments on time AND keep that balance somewhere under 50% of the total limit you're allowed to borrow.
If you're really going to make sure you never carry a balance on your credit cards, you're better off not having them at all. Just save up money in an interest-earning checking account that includes a debit card and use it instead. As another poster said, the alternative eventually becomes the card issuer charging you some sort of annual fee to keep the card active. That really stinks, because it's like you're paying them interest except without even getting to borrow the money first.
I've had a high-interest-rate credit card for ages. I've also only paid like $5 in interest the 15 years I had it (for the one time the statement got lost in the mail).
First, credit cards are a competitive business - your bank will have at least a dozen, half of which are no annual fees. And while bank credit cards (or credit union ones) won't be as full of perks or other stuff like nonbank cards, they will still extend them to you.
And no, if you're using the card, the bank still makes money off you - each transaction costs the merchant 3-5% (though it also means the merchant doesn't have the cost of handling cash). What costs the bank is if you have a $0 balance card and don't use it - in which case they have to keep the account open and you're not making transactions.
And while carrying a balance certainly is profitable, the card issuer has to balance that with your ability to pay. Just because you have a card with a $10,000 credit limit doesn't mean you have the ability to pay it - you could always default on the loan or go bankrupt, in which case the issuer loses out (a credit card is unsecured).
And while paying with cash or debit is great, there are still some advantages to credit. First, you have a history (which is necessary unless you rent a house forever or are rich enough to pay it off in cash). Plus, there are legal protections on credit that some issuers may extend to debit but they don't have to. And there are rewards - most debit cards don't have it.
It can also help with financial planning - the death by 1,000 cuts thing. E.g., if you're paying off stuff like $10 here and there, you can spend a lot more money because most people write it off as "it's a tiny amount" over say, spending $100. Having it consolidated on a bill with a total does show even the little charges add up rather than find your account drained one day because you made 100 $10 transactions that you forgot all about versus that one $1000 transaction for something.
Damn right. My mother is a professional photographer that sells prints online via her web store and has been using Paypal for years and she has constant problems with them. The only reason she's still with them is familiarity, and the fact that they're established and thus "trusted" by most people when it comes to web purchases.
She could always do what a good majority of businesses do - get a merchant account and accept credit cards directly rather than through Paypal. Her website will probably need to use one of those third party providers that can do it all so she doesn't have to worry about PCI-DSS, but it's certainly doable.
Depending on how she qualifies, though, the merchant account may not be better than paypal (it can be worse or more onerous). And if she's worried about "familiarity" she can offer both Paypal and direct credit card.
Though, on the downside - if you think Paypal is horrible, a merchant account can be worse (Paypal's horribleness stems from that - and that most people don't actually know what it takes to actually accept credit cards).
As a buyer, sometimes a merchant has forced me to use Paypal - either they don't accept different billing/shipping addresses, or in one case earlier this year... they wanted me to jump through hoops. As in "please scan in your credit card and email it to us".
Of course, what rubbed me was they claimed it was "for my protection" when they wanted me to send them two scans of my credit card (Front, back) via email. (If any business asks for this - it's not for your (the cardholder's) protection, it's for the business's. You're still protected by the law from fraudulent purchases.). They claimed they need to do additional verification and refused to offer anything in return (like say, expedited shipping - I'm saving them money by preventing a chargeback and keeping their merchant account rates low, after all). I had to make the purchase, so I cancelled and paid via Paypal. Paypal's protections for buyers is worse, but at least it's still there. Plus they had no guarantees or anything that the card data would be kept safe.
And finally - note that most cardholder security precautions prohibit the activity as you can lose control of your card. Perhaps the next time they do this, I'll file a complaint with my bank.
Not hard at all to install and better in every way than any official update - more configurability, less bloat, better defaults, less reliant on hacky apps to correct shit that should work properly in the first place (WiFi keep alive, call slider etc.)..
It's great and all, but it would seem to just perpetuate the whole "dump it on the community to support" thing. Release a phone, provide token updates, let the community bring the rest of it along. It's a great business model since support costs money (and the community will do it for free), but there'll be a tipping point where the community just can't support another phone.
If you have a flagship, great, but the vast majority of Android phones are sold aren't flagships, but the cheap free phones (some with 2.2 on contract, even!). Especially since it seems every Samsung phone is a Galaxy S something or other.
So did OpenBSD include a patch to use SYSEXIT instead of SYSRET if the CPU manufacturer ID was Intel?
No, they just check to make sure the address being returned into is canonical (i.e., won't cause the fault) so no fault is generated by hardware to begin with. If not, throw some big nasty exception that kills the process (it would've caused an exception anyway so you save the exception overhead).
Interesting bug with a really trivial patch to fix it.
While that is certainly true, i'd add that back then there simply weren't that many manufacturers for chips and caps so you didn't get really chip shitty dodgy parts like you do today. back then the boards were thick, traces thick, caps were made by a few companies for primarily industrial uses so were built tough, there just wasn't tons of truly cheap shitty parts to build something like that out of.
Given inflation, if eveyrone kept using "the good stuff", we'd be paying over $10,000 for a low-end PC still. Given you can buy a PC for $500 all in (or much less), the loss in quality is probably justified when you consider back in the 70's, you probably were talking about a PC costing under $100. With monitor, keyboard, powersupply, etc. You'd be laughed right out of the room as NO ONE could do that. The MOS 6502 was popular because it costed only around $20 or so alone (the Motorola 68000 - easily $200+).
Then there's the usefulness factor. That PC from 1994? Most probably still worked when they were junked as they got obsolete by the turn of the millennium, if not earlier. (My parents still have one from the era, they use it to play one game (which I copied off and put onto DOSbox). Hell, I have a PC from 2000 I'm having to replace because Windows 2000 is dead, Firefox won't run on it anymore, and 512MB of RAM just isn't cutting it (and it can't run XP because 512 is barely adequate).
Most of what we have will be in the dump purely because there's no reason to keep it around. Or more precisely, at a recyclers because there's so much that can be reused and smelted. Rightfully so as well - most of the stuff isn't really worthy of saving - there just isn't anything special about them, and as people move about, more are recycled as it's not worth moving them about. Doubly so when you consider that modern day emulation is good enough that once the hardware dies,the software can still live on.
Of course, there will still be the occasional one someone buried deep in their house and forgot all about until they went cleaning it years later.
Hard drives are both the most valuable, and the most fragile part. Do not load them in a stiff suspension vehicle like a truck, as this bounces the drives. Choose a soft-suspension normal car.
Get lots of foam. LOTS of foam. Or if you can, find one of those trays they ship hard drives with (it comes in two pieces - it's like a block of stiff foam with rectangular cutouts that drives fit in with about 1" of foam between the drives).
Label all the drives with server, slot, and RAID card. Make sure you take the RAID card out of the server!
If you get the trays, great - one drive in each slot, then put the other half on top of them. do not try to save foam.
If you can't, get antistatic bags (the silvery kind, not the pink kind). Wrap each drive individually in an antistatic bag, then wrap each drive individually in foam. Again, DO NOT SAVE FOAM. One drive ONLY - do NOT put multiple drives together unless each is separated by foam. You'll kill drives if you let them bang against each other!
Put a piece of foam in a box, then put each foam-wrapped drive in it. Once the box is full, put foam on top and seal tightly. Do not leave any airgap - fill the box completely with foam so you have a solid box with nothing rattling. Then the drives are safe from damage it's usually when they bang against each other where all the damage happens).
Put the RAID cards in another antistatic bag and keep them in another box. (This is because RAID cards are often tied to the array and firmware version specific).
Maybe I'm just spoiled by Linux, but it really irritated me that Telus (in Canada) (aka one-third of the oligopoly that controls all cel phones in the country) took months to upgrade my Google branded Nexus S to ICS. Short of rooting the damned thing there wasn't a thing I could do about it.
We've reached a point where phones are becoming computing appliances, and end users shouldn't be held hostage by this sort of nonsense. If a major upgrade is available, I should have the option of installing it now, not when some bean-counter in Toronto decides it can no longer be avoided.
You mean you didn't get it yet?
FYI - GOOGLE only released ICS for Nexus S a few months ago. They did an initial rollout in November last year, found a whole pile of problems and withdrew it. If you didn't get the update then, you were pretty much hosed until Google actually released it.
Anyhow, having a Nexus device means you aren't held hostage - just flash the factory image on your phone and be done with it. That way you won't get updates from Telus, but from Google.
The only way to get ICS on a Nexus S before Google released it was through Cyanogen. And no, you don't have to root a Nexus... that's the entire point! "fastboot oem unlock" and you're done. Nexus phones are designed for hacking around with!
I'm not sure exactly which market Seagate are aiming for here. The high performance market will go either entirely SSD, or one relatively big SSD and a huge magnetic for the rest of the stuff. The low performance consumer market will see the numbers, and take the cheap magnetic drive. The mid range market is possible their aim - but then they have to compete against a tiny SSD combined with a normal magnetic.
The problem is most laptops only have space for 1 drive. Unless they add an mSATA port, it means it's either SSD (expensive and small) or spinning rush (cheap, and big). But in the meantime, you can get almost-SSD like performance (I was blown away when I saw one in action), and large storage at the same time.
I'm considering getting one for my HTPC, which somehow only has 1 SATA port (the PATA port is reserved for blu-ray drive). The large space would be for recordings, while hopefully it caches the OS bits in SSD for fast boots, fast guide, and generally snappier performance.
Very few laptops come with dual drive slots (they exist) and sometimes you can fake it out by using the optical drive's SATA connector, but if you need the optical drive or your laptop doesn't come with an optical drive, well, it's an option if you need space and want faster performance.
They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days
You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).
Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").
Hopefully they will get rid of these BULLSHIT regulations. Handheld two way radios can put out up to SEVEN yes SEVEN watts and the FCC doesn't have any problems with those. I don't need a seven watt transmitter, but damnit allow them use use efficient antennas in cell phones. If a cop can use a five watt transmitter, why can't everybody else?
Because said transmitter operates on VHF and low UHF frequencies well under 1GHz? The lowest a cellphone goes is 800MHz right now - nominal is 1700, 1800, 1900 and 2100MHz, the microwave band. Incidentally, your microwave oven works around 2.4GHz.
Plus, there usually aren't a ton of 7 watt transmitters hanging around and they're usually operated "handsfree" with a remote speaker/mic (i.e., the handheld is on the waist). Contrast this to a cellphone where it seems everyone is yammering away or using theirs.
Next, the cycle time for handheld radios is far lower than a cellphone - it's a half-duplex link rather than a full duplex one.
Why should the farmers pay for seed that Monsanto freely pollinated? No one forced Monsanto to let their plants spread that genetic material. They could require their growers to keep their plants only indoors.
Farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for contaminating their fields if anything.
Easy, patent law. Anyone who uses a similar implementation as a patent holder is liable, even if the two came up with it via independent means. So when the Monsanto plants pollinate yours and infect your seeds, Montsanto calls it a patent violation even though Mother Nature did it.
That's the problem.
And that's the issue with GMO food - a lot of it derives from Monsanto's behavior on the market - basically bullying their way into complete control of the food we eat.
Hell, you've effectively signed the Monsanto license agreement even if someone else planted the seeds on your field.
And really, I'm guessing that's where most of the GMO opposition is coming from - forget Apple v. Samsung, it's really Monsanto v. food supply.
Canadians can still fly on plenty of domestic airlines, and I doubt an Air Canada flight that passes over, say, Alaska on the way to Tokyo, is going to divert to the US to arrest somebody.
The US demands passenger manifests and other information from every flight that overflies American airspace, even if they don't touch US soil - and I believe they even have the right to say no to the flight - either it land at a US airport and offload the objectionable passenger, or it bypass US airspace.
I believe Boeing and Airbus are making medium-haul planes to counter this, so people going from Canada to Mexico, say, can avoid US airspace completely and thus bypass the issue.
What part of the $180000 do you think goes to the people actually running the application servers? I bet the money basically all goes to insurance and lawyers, and the techs need to explain why they want a real server and isn't a virtual machine not enough, since money is so tight.
None of it.
The application fee is merely just a deterrent against entry - basically if you can spend $180k, you probably have the money and resources to manage a TLD. Those who can pay will probably do a lot of work in maintaining their TLDs and not let it become a haven for spam and viruses and other malware because well, they paid this money and if it becomes a universal ban everywhere (like.biz and.info) then it's that money down the drain.
Basically they want interested people determined to keep things working properly, not random Joe. It's why Apple prices their iOS SDK at $99/year, Microsoft same (for Windows Phone and Xbox Indie), etc. If you're as good as you say you are, it's put up or shut up.
The climate models in use twenty years ago when I was at university told us that by now, the Earth would be fried by intense UV because of the complete unstoppable destruction of the ozone layer, with arid deserts reaching from the Sahara to as far north as Denmark - where it wasn't all submerged under water from the melting icecaps.
And we did something to invalidate the models - we actually banned CFCs. I believe the Montreal Protocol was one of the drivers to prevent depletion of the ozone layer.
Basically, we invalidated the models because you can't model the entire world getting behind and fixing the problem of ozone-layer depletion. The degradation of the ozone layer has slowed and is slowly recovering (there's still a hole). And we're getting fried by UV because it's a lot thinner - after all, the rates of skin cancer have increased.
And we are seeing unprecedented storms, bitterly cold winters and blistering hot summers.
Well then you should see Hawking in Intel's promotional video's --- he is making a lot of money promoting Intel lately. At the end of one video he state that Intel has always powered his wheelchair -- the video is quite gimmicky but it's Hawking so... I have no problem believing he has sold his soul to Intel, They are probably paying for his flight into space.
Well, Hawking's first voice computer was a PC interfaced to a DECtalk running something under DOS. It's been updated many times since then (other than the DECtalk), and I suspect Intel sponsors a lot of that work - probably writing and re-writing his software (moved from DOS to Windows, interfacing hardware, etc). I won't be surprised if there's a small department at Intel meant to ensure his wheelchair still works and being able to rapidly fix it if it doesn't.
The later iterations of his wheelchair have featured the Intel logo on them as well.
Exactly. Intel seems like a great company with intelligent engineers, but look how long it's taken for them to come even close to ATI or Radeon discrete graphics. They're not going to be in the cell phone game anytime soon.
And Intel's eating AMD/s and nVidia's lunch in graphics - their graphics power something like 80-90% of the PCs shipped today. They don't need something fast and fancy - just something that an OEM can stick in a PC.
Basically, OEMs making cheap PCs wanted a cheap video card. Intel obliged by providing an OK video card to go in them, and OEMs flocked there because they could start making PCs below the $1000 mark easily. ATI and nVidia were competing against the high end while the others were all low-end offerings that were still discrete. Intel put it on the chipset and OEMs could build a PC with one less set of chips (graphics+memory) saving a lot of money.
Intel's not in the high end game and probably won't be - they just need ot iterate as much as necessary to still be a viable GPU for the vast majority of cheap computers
Slashdot Mirror
Another way to look at it is it was working fine until it was revealed that Ottawa airport had 'em, then it blows up and becomes a big deal.
If they didn't mention it, the politicians wouldn't care. But now it's THEIR conversations being spied on, it's a Very Big Deal(tm).
Unless it affects a politician, nothing gets done. Ever notice the internet spy bill only was pulled off after Vikileaks started up and how the Tories made a big deal that it was some Liberal staffer running it? And how it was practically a witch hunt even though all the records were already public - the only "unethical" thing was someone pointing it out. Nothing illegal, nothing classified, sealed, or hidden. It was just sitting on the court website in relative obscurity.
There's actually another aspect of GPS that's little known - there are limits placed on GPS receivers by the government. Basically a civillian (C/A) receiver must disable itself once its calculated speed and altitude go above certain limits (CoCom Limits), meant to prevent their use in missiles and such.
While most people won't reach the speed limits, people have reached the height limits when doing "space" photography using weather balloons. They consistently lose their GPS telemetry data at that point.
Correction - GPLv3.
There's nothing inherently incompatible with walled gardens and the GPLv2 (it's really a case of TiVoization).
Heck, if someone wanted, they probably can alter the build system to include the source inside the IPA file submitted to Apple (thought at increased size of final file). Or even fun stuff like auto-downloading the sources on launch.
Remember - the GPL apps that were removed fro mthe App Store were removed at the request of the authors, who believed in slightly different interpretations of the GPL.
Now, the GPLv3 is completely incompatible with any App Store model that imposes DRM (which is probably why Google Play apk's have no DRM on them, other than what the author has to put in via Google Licensing Services API. I believe that Amazon's APKs are, however, DRM'd). Of course, the GPLv3 is also incompatible with GPLv2 (GPLv2-only code can NOT be mixed with GPLv3(or v3+) code at all.) because of things like this (which is why the GPLv3 was created).
The flip side is well, you also want legislators who have current real-world experience, not some career politician who's been at it for 30 years and completely out of touch (e.g., the ivory tower). As long as these interests are revealed well ahead of time and the appropriate people recluse themselves from voting on said topics.
Those who concentrate on their jobs find themselves the target of lobbyists because they know they don't know the real world so are vulnerable to people telling them "how it really is." (This goes for both sides).
Intel doesn't need to jump up as high - they already are the primary graphics in the vast majority of computers sold (heck, Apple might actually one of the few keeping Intel-only graphics down by shipping large quantities of computers with discrete GPUs - though,they also do ship plenty of Intel-graphics computers as well).
For Intel to go after the remaining percentage of people, it's going to require a much larger investment in resources just to get a little bit more marketshare.
Intel just needs to maintain marketshare - realizing fewer people play PC games, they concentrate on video so as long as they can do Blu-ray playback and handle Aero with some decency, the vast majority of consumer needs will be satisfied. Consumers looking for a gaming machine would pick up a discrete ATi/nVidia card anyhow.
True. The only reason tube amps are popular is because they impart a harmonious amount of distortion in the mix, whilst the alternative solid-state amps introduce well, crap in the form of clipping.
End result is for music with a rather large dynamic range, amps that can't handle the sudden demands (most of them - usually through weedy power supplies unable to suddenly dump basically their max power through a dead short) end up clipping, horribly, generating very harsh harmonics.
Of course, the general public has shown a tendency towards liking certain forms of distorted audio. After all, what else explains, well, Beats? Or the horrible noise caused by said weedy amps blaring out latest rap hits (actually, scratch that - it's not just the weedy amps, but also horrible resonances that lead to those buzzing thumps).
Heck, I'd think a lot of the reason isn't because the audio is purer (most people hate pure audio as you mention), but because transistors don't impart the same melodious distortions tubes do while in normal mode, and then impart just horrendous artifacts when overdriven. Vinyl vs. CD, ditto (even more so with the loudness wars leading to clipping being present in the source bitstream).
Heck, a Class D amplifier has been around for years and yet people still haven't integrated them everywhere (considered the holy grail of amplifiers - super high efficiency (90+% isn't unheard of), super low distortion (rivalling the best costing many times more running in Class A or AB).
What I'd want to know is how he managed to get such a long post through before /. truncates it - usually you get maybe a short essay's worth of text before the "Read more of this comment" link shows up. This guy managed maybe five times that length.
Of course, most modern tracking system, like Google Analytics, rely on webmasters to pass links THROUGH them via javascript, so you can't block GA anymore or the site breaks (good and bad).
Naturally, stuff like NoScript evolved workarounds by faking out the GA scripts to avoid tracking.
The question is - how many apps are they missing? I think "Oracle DB" would have more than 100 variations and licensing terms already, so how many are they leaving out?
Actually, it's really easy to do it yourself, and it works extremely well in Firefox. It'll work with most sites and is unblockable basically. The sites it won't work with are sites that do exclusive streaming (no caching and play/pause/rewind/etc requires are handled by the server which changes its bitstream) and sites that break the video into tiny segments and the player dynamically changes the quality.
What you need is a firefox extension called "Live HTTP Headers" that lets you see HTTP headers as they scroll by, and something like Flashblock or NoScript that prevents running of flash (HTML5 video isn't that prevalent yet and only big ones like YouTube, Vimeo and Dailymotion support it while everyone else still uses flash).
The method is to load the page up, then open the Live HTTP Header window. Click the flash player and let it load and start the video. One of the things Live HTTP Headers will have captured is... the URL for the media (look for MIME type video/flv or video/mp4). Copy that URL and paste it in a browser tab (which also gives you cookies). If you don't have a handler, it'll ask to download. If you do, block the site temporarily and use NoScript to right-click and download it.
This method works because it relies on the fact that most video sites retrieve video via HTTP or HTTPS (could be a Flash limitation) rather than streaming the video (which requires server work) and using HTTP/HTTPS makes it more CDN-friendly since it's a static file.
I've had a high-interest-rate credit card for ages. I've also only paid like $5 in interest the 15 years I had it (for the one time the statement got lost in the mail).
First, credit cards are a competitive business - your bank will have at least a dozen, half of which are no annual fees. And while bank credit cards (or credit union ones) won't be as full of perks or other stuff like nonbank cards, they will still extend them to you.
And no, if you're using the card, the bank still makes money off you - each transaction costs the merchant 3-5% (though it also means the merchant doesn't have the cost of handling cash). What costs the bank is if you have a $0 balance card and don't use it - in which case they have to keep the account open and you're not making transactions.
And while carrying a balance certainly is profitable, the card issuer has to balance that with your ability to pay. Just because you have a card with a $10,000 credit limit doesn't mean you have the ability to pay it - you could always default on the loan or go bankrupt, in which case the issuer loses out (a credit card is unsecured).
And while paying with cash or debit is great, there are still some advantages to credit. First, you have a history (which is necessary unless you rent a house forever or are rich enough to pay it off in cash). Plus, there are legal protections on credit that some issuers may extend to debit but they don't have to. And there are rewards - most debit cards don't have it.
It can also help with financial planning - the death by 1,000 cuts thing. E.g., if you're paying off stuff like $10 here and there, you can spend a lot more money because most people write it off as "it's a tiny amount" over say, spending $100. Having it consolidated on a bill with a total does show even the little charges add up rather than find your account drained one day because you made 100 $10 transactions that you forgot all about versus that one $1000 transaction for something.
She could always do what a good majority of businesses do - get a merchant account and accept credit cards directly rather than through Paypal. Her website will probably need to use one of those third party providers that can do it all so she doesn't have to worry about PCI-DSS, but it's certainly doable.
Depending on how she qualifies, though, the merchant account may not be better than paypal (it can be worse or more onerous). And if she's worried about "familiarity" she can offer both Paypal and direct credit card.
Though, on the downside - if you think Paypal is horrible, a merchant account can be worse (Paypal's horribleness stems from that - and that most people don't actually know what it takes to actually accept credit cards).
As a buyer, sometimes a merchant has forced me to use Paypal - either they don't accept different billing/shipping addresses, or in one case earlier this year... they wanted me to jump through hoops. As in "please scan in your credit card and email it to us".
Of course, what rubbed me was they claimed it was "for my protection" when they wanted me to send them two scans of my credit card (Front, back) via email. (If any business asks for this - it's not for your (the cardholder's) protection, it's for the business's. You're still protected by the law from fraudulent purchases.). They claimed they need to do additional verification and refused to offer anything in return (like say, expedited shipping - I'm saving them money by preventing a chargeback and keeping their merchant account rates low, after all). I had to make the purchase, so I cancelled and paid via Paypal. Paypal's protections for buyers is worse, but at least it's still there. Plus they had no guarantees or anything that the card data would be kept safe.
And finally - note that most cardholder security precautions prohibit the activity as you can lose control of your card. Perhaps the next time they do this, I'll file a complaint with my bank.
It's great and all, but it would seem to just perpetuate the whole "dump it on the community to support" thing. Release a phone, provide token updates, let the community bring the rest of it along. It's a great business model since support costs money (and the community will do it for free), but there'll be a tipping point where the community just can't support another phone.
If you have a flagship, great, but the vast majority of Android phones are sold aren't flagships, but the cheap free phones (some with 2.2 on contract, even!). Especially since it seems every Samsung phone is a Galaxy S something or other.
No, they just check to make sure the address being returned into is canonical (i.e., won't cause the fault) so no fault is generated by hardware to begin with. If not, throw some big nasty exception that kills the process (it would've caused an exception anyway so you save the exception overhead).
Interesting bug with a really trivial patch to fix it.
Given inflation, if eveyrone kept using "the good stuff", we'd be paying over $10,000 for a low-end PC still. Given you can buy a PC for $500 all in (or much less), the loss in quality is probably justified when you consider back in the 70's, you probably were talking about a PC costing under $100. With monitor, keyboard, powersupply, etc. You'd be laughed right out of the room as NO ONE could do that. The MOS 6502 was popular because it costed only around $20 or so alone (the Motorola 68000 - easily $200+).
Then there's the usefulness factor. That PC from 1994? Most probably still worked when they were junked as they got obsolete by the turn of the millennium, if not earlier. (My parents still have one from the era, they use it to play one game (which I copied off and put onto DOSbox). Hell, I have a PC from 2000 I'm having to replace because Windows 2000 is dead, Firefox won't run on it anymore, and 512MB of RAM just isn't cutting it (and it can't run XP because 512 is barely adequate).
Most of what we have will be in the dump purely because there's no reason to keep it around. Or more precisely, at a recyclers because there's so much that can be reused and smelted. Rightfully so as well - most of the stuff isn't really worthy of saving - there just isn't anything special about them, and as people move about, more are recycled as it's not worth moving them about. Doubly so when you consider that modern day emulation is good enough that once the hardware dies ,the software can still live on.
Of course, there will still be the occasional one someone buried deep in their house and forgot all about until they went cleaning it years later.
Get lots of foam. LOTS of foam. Or if you can, find one of those trays they ship hard drives with (it comes in two pieces - it's like a block of stiff foam with rectangular cutouts that drives fit in with about 1" of foam between the drives).
Label all the drives with server, slot, and RAID card. Make sure you take the RAID card out of the server!
If you get the trays, great - one drive in each slot, then put the other half on top of them. do not try to save foam.
If you can't, get antistatic bags (the silvery kind, not the pink kind). Wrap each drive individually in an antistatic bag, then wrap each drive individually in foam. Again, DO NOT SAVE FOAM. One drive ONLY - do NOT put multiple drives together unless each is separated by foam. You'll kill drives if you let them bang against each other!
Put a piece of foam in a box, then put each foam-wrapped drive in it. Once the box is full, put foam on top and seal tightly. Do not leave any airgap - fill the box completely with foam so you have a solid box with nothing rattling. Then the drives are safe from damage it's usually when they bang against each other where all the damage happens).
Put the RAID cards in another antistatic bag and keep them in another box. (This is because RAID cards are often tied to the array and firmware version specific).
You mean you didn't get it yet?
FYI - GOOGLE only released ICS for Nexus S a few months ago. They did an initial rollout in November last year, found a whole pile of problems and withdrew it. If you didn't get the update then, you were pretty much hosed until Google actually released it.
Anyhow, having a Nexus device means you aren't held hostage - just flash the factory image on your phone and be done with it. That way you won't get updates from Telus, but from Google.
The only way to get ICS on a Nexus S before Google released it was through Cyanogen. And no, you don't have to root a Nexus... that's the entire point! "fastboot oem unlock" and you're done. Nexus phones are designed for hacking around with!
The problem is most laptops only have space for 1 drive. Unless they add an mSATA port, it means it's either SSD (expensive and small) or spinning rush (cheap, and big). But in the meantime, you can get almost-SSD like performance (I was blown away when I saw one in action), and large storage at the same time.
I'm considering getting one for my HTPC, which somehow only has 1 SATA port (the PATA port is reserved for blu-ray drive). The large space would be for recordings, while hopefully it caches the OS bits in SSD for fast boots, fast guide, and generally snappier performance.
Very few laptops come with dual drive slots (they exist) and sometimes you can fake it out by using the optical drive's SATA connector, but if you need the optical drive or your laptop doesn't come with an optical drive, well, it's an option if you need space and want faster performance.
You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).
Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").
Because said transmitter operates on VHF and low UHF frequencies well under 1GHz? The lowest a cellphone goes is 800MHz right now - nominal is 1700, 1800, 1900 and 2100MHz, the microwave band. Incidentally, your microwave oven works around 2.4GHz.
Plus, there usually aren't a ton of 7 watt transmitters hanging around and they're usually operated "handsfree" with a remote speaker/mic (i.e., the handheld is on the waist). Contrast this to a cellphone where it seems everyone is yammering away or using theirs.
Next, the cycle time for handheld radios is far lower than a cellphone - it's a half-duplex link rather than a full duplex one.
Easy, patent law. Anyone who uses a similar implementation as a patent holder is liable, even if the two came up with it via independent means. So when the Monsanto plants pollinate yours and infect your seeds, Montsanto calls it a patent violation even though Mother Nature did it.
That's the problem.
And that's the issue with GMO food - a lot of it derives from Monsanto's behavior on the market - basically bullying their way into complete control of the food we eat.
Hell, you've effectively signed the Monsanto license agreement even if someone else planted the seeds on your field.
And really, I'm guessing that's where most of the GMO opposition is coming from - forget Apple v. Samsung, it's really Monsanto v. food supply.
The US demands passenger manifests and other information from every flight that overflies American airspace, even if they don't touch US soil - and I believe they even have the right to say no to the flight - either it land at a US airport and offload the objectionable passenger, or it bypass US airspace.
I believe Boeing and Airbus are making medium-haul planes to counter this, so people going from Canada to Mexico, say, can avoid US airspace completely and thus bypass the issue.
None of it.
The application fee is merely just a deterrent against entry - basically if you can spend $180k, you probably have the money and resources to manage a TLD. Those who can pay will probably do a lot of work in maintaining their TLDs and not let it become a haven for spam and viruses and other malware because well, they paid this money and if it becomes a universal ban everywhere (like .biz and .info) then it's that money down the drain.
Basically they want interested people determined to keep things working properly, not random Joe. It's why Apple prices their iOS SDK at $99/year, Microsoft same (for Windows Phone and Xbox Indie), etc. If you're as good as you say you are, it's put up or shut up.
And we did something to invalidate the models - we actually banned CFCs. I believe the Montreal Protocol was one of the drivers to prevent depletion of the ozone layer.
Basically, we invalidated the models because you can't model the entire world getting behind and fixing the problem of ozone-layer depletion. The degradation of the ozone layer has slowed and is slowly recovering (there's still a hole). And we're getting fried by UV because it's a lot thinner - after all, the rates of skin cancer have increased.
And we are seeing unprecedented storms, bitterly cold winters and blistering hot summers.
Well, Hawking's first voice computer was a PC interfaced to a DECtalk running something under DOS. It's been updated many times since then (other than the DECtalk), and I suspect Intel sponsors a lot of that work - probably writing and re-writing his software (moved from DOS to Windows, interfacing hardware, etc). I won't be surprised if there's a small department at Intel meant to ensure his wheelchair still works and being able to rapidly fix it if it doesn't.
The later iterations of his wheelchair have featured the Intel logo on them as well.
And Intel's eating AMD/s and nVidia's lunch in graphics - their graphics power something like 80-90% of the PCs shipped today. They don't need something fast and fancy - just something that an OEM can stick in a PC.
Basically, OEMs making cheap PCs wanted a cheap video card. Intel obliged by providing an OK video card to go in them, and OEMs flocked there because they could start making PCs below the $1000 mark easily. ATI and nVidia were competing against the high end while the others were all low-end offerings that were still discrete. Intel put it on the chipset and OEMs could build a PC with one less set of chips (graphics+memory) saving a lot of money.
Intel's not in the high end game and probably won't be - they just need ot iterate as much as necessary to still be a viable GPU for the vast majority of cheap computers