I'm surprised that we even still use signatures now. It seems like no cashier actually looks at them, or could tell if there is even a difference. There is a strong part of me that would like the credit/debit card industry to add various biometrics that would at least be scanned by a machine so we'd actually have some ID verification other than the damn PIN number.
Actually, it's a misconception that the signature has meaning to the retailer if they match. If you look at the slip you sign, it says something to the effect of "I agree to pay this debt according to the terms of the cardholder agreement" or similar.
SIgning your card is an indication that you accept the cardholder agreement (i.e., the card is valid). Technically, a store can refuse to accept any card that is unsigned, says "CHECK ID" or similar because those cards are invalid (because you haven't indicated you accept the cardholder agreement, which covers things like... repayment of debt). The slip is used to indicate that you, the cardholder, will pay the issuer the amount listed, who will then pay the merchant that amount.
During a dispute, the best proof a merchant has is the signed slip. What makes life interesting are those places where signing the slip isn't necessary (e.g., some for transactions under $25).
My MacBookPro turned on one morning, and everything worked but the display. I managed to log in, launch iTunes and play some music, but no graphics output. A trip to the Apple store later and I'm out a machine for a week. Never had an explanation, but now I am curious if i should send it back and ask for a new logic board with a graphics chip that isn't going to fail again prematurely due to faulty design.
Well, unless your replaced logic board fails again, I don't think Apple would take it back for replacement, since it basically works. Unfortunately, the affected GPUs are basically the entire nVidia 8x00 line (except for desktop 8300, and all the 8800's). Very few laptops actually use the 8800M GPU (think gaming laptops), so any other replacement, even a new laptop with an nVidia chipset will likely have the problematic GPU. The other alternative is to find a laptop with an AMD/ATi or Intel GPU.
What's so great about an auction? People who want to buy stuff don't know how much they'll end up paying (or even whether they'll be successful), and people who want to sell stuff don't know how much they can expect to recoup for it (they can either run the risk of having to sell $200 worth of kit for 99c, or run the risk of nobody even looking at the auction because it's not "a bargain"). Give me a place I can pay a fair price for an item and that's the end of it, and I'll be happy. Let's leave eBay to the cheapskates, timewasters and rip-off merchants...
That's true if you're like the people who use eBay to buy stuff one could get at a retailer (and a way of getting said retailer to ship to you).
However, if you want something that's out of print, if it's a book or CD, maybe Amazon has it through their used service. If it's something that wasn't sent publically distributed, fat chance seeing it on Amazon at all. This is stuff like CDs and books that were released during some event/convention/etc., and never released again. In these things, which I believe are called "collectibles", eBay really is the only option. No way Amazon would bother selling something that maybe has one random seller selling their only copy per year.
Alas, the problem with Google Checkout (and looks like this Amazon service as well) has is well, individuals can't easily get an account for individual random transactions. They all appear to be more retailer-oriented service rather than people sending people money (like Paypal).
This is the bug where (I see it on Windows, but I have heard reports on Linux as well) you switch tabs, and the window contents don't repaint. Or sometimes you visit a new page, and when Firefox reflows the page, it doesn't erase the old drawn stuff, leading to a big mess at the end. The former needs no screenshot - it's basically switch tabs, and nothing appears to happen (until you scroll which forces the revealed part to be drawn, but the rest of the contents are merely shifted up).
At first I thought it was maybe a Windows thing if you exhaust the desktop heap, but it happens in Firefox first, before the other apps that normally suffer from it fail.
All the huge speed gains in FF3 are nullified if one has to scroll to get the window to repaint properly...
With all these electric cars, when will they put in something really useful instead of this flaky electronic shit, especially from MS?
Actually, it turns out that these things (automotive entertainment systems0 actually have to be extremely reliable. Windows Embedded for Automotive has to be way more robust than regular Windows Embedded, for example. The pressure comes from the car manufacturers themselves, not the public.
The reason is quite simply, if the system fails within the warranty period, it's a warranty repair. Warranty repairs are expensive, especially with prices dropping and margins thinning. Like the technology sector, a profit or a loss can be made simply by the amount of warranty work that needs to be done. (As a side benefit, people perceive a car that has to be in the shop to be of way lower quality, even if it's in the shop because the entertainment system keeps dying). Anyone remember the classic VW radio with the anti-theft that keeps going off on the slightest electrical spike?
Here's the other nasty thing about automotive systems - the parts must be available for years after the model is discontinued. With external DVD players, aftermarket stereos/DVD players, etc., it's not a big deal since the owner can buy a new one. But that new in-dash GPS/radio/climate control/etc. unit, if it breaks within that time period, it has to be replaced. (Think about all those 5 year "bumper to bumper" warranties, too). Given how fast technology moves, it's actually quite difficult to design a system and still have parts available for it 5-10 years after it was made.
I've written a wifi signal strength meter for an embedded product. During my research, I found it was pretty much standard to base the bumber of bars on the signal to noise ratio, not the raw signal strength.
... which is then overruled by the marketing department because brand 'B' only uses the signal strength, so that makes your product look bad when compared side-by-side, since theirs has more signal bars.
In the case of cellphones, it's the carrier that determines how the bars map to signal strength (or quality, if it's possible to estimate). Some carriers demand that you show 5 bars down to a really pathetic signal strength value (I've seen close to -100dbi - just as a quick comparison, most wifi chipsets lose all connectivity between -80 to -90dbi, and the best tend to disconnect around -96dbi). The headroom between that and when the baseband loses the signal completely isn't that much.
Which is why I laugh when I hear "More bars in more places". It's easy to get a "stronger" signal if you mandate that a phone must show more bars all the time.
Now, this was for a non-GSM phone, so it was mandatory to get carrier qualified. But GSM carriers are equally bad, except they don't have as much control since you can bring in any compatible phone onto the network. The only thing the carrier can claim is their phones get a "better" signal (see? more bars than your phone!).
I wonder if Apple had to jump through these hoops with the iPhone or just said to the carriers to screw it - they're designing the software their way and that includes battery and signal strength meters that make sense. Given what I see of cellphones, there's often a special baseband/firmware build for each carrier to cope with the differences... but the iPhone software seems to be either unified, or just a single build around the world. (Carriers oblige because the customers want the phone).
I would more then welcome our new Braodcom Linux driver overloads. I have to newer Dell laptops and I can't for the hell of me get wireless working on OpenSUSE 11 or earlier version of OS. And no I have no desire to spend half of the day reading up on forums on how to get it working. I just want a nice OS and have drivers easily installed.
I just bought a Dell laptop. When I was configuring it, I had two wireless options (not a common one, I know) - "Dell 802.11N" or "Intel 802.11N". I went Intel, only because I know the Intel chipset has drivers. I don't know what chipset the Dell wireless card uses, so I'd rather go with a known (Intel) than an unknown.
Now, I'd like to know which cards are the Atheros ones...
...because the opt out was buried in a 5000 word privacy policy. If anything, this story should lead the house to realize that merely posting a privacy policy on your website doesn't mean the customers are bound by it especially in terms of rights, privacy and willingness to be subjected to monitoring merely for advertising sake.
Not only that, but the privacy policy was posted on the ISP's home page, and said change to the privacy policy wasn't announced. I don't know many people who visit their ISP's privacy policy on a daily basis to see if there's any change. Most normal users probably haven't read it, and I'm sure the 15 people were probably new geek subscribers who actually decided to read the policy on subscription. Heck, I'm sure a number of people probably *don't* have their ISP home page as their browser's start page. More likely, it's pointed at the ISP's "portal" page, or some other portal page, or Google...
The problem with the questions is based on a watered-down version of bank security measures.
There were guidelines issued that said banks and other financial institutions should use two-factor authentication. The banks, however, fought back because such changes (keyfobs, scratch tickets, etc) cost money, and the guidelines were watered down to what they are now - "sorta-wannabe-two-factor".
Look at the specs - if you want decent battery life, a decent screen (with decent resolution), decent RAM and storage (specced at 512MB and 4GB), and to all go for $200, it's hard.
The only thing on the market NOW that's even remotely close is the XO-1, but it only has 256MB of RAM and 1GB storage. And it's BOM costs are quite high already, even with its anemic CPU. If you want to mass-produce it and sell for $200 retail, after taking out everyone's profit and overhead, you're looking at a manufactured unit cost of around $100. Maybe $125, if you can squeeze profit margins from retailers and the like. (Figure in profit/time for doing the software, as asll as distribution costs to get it to retailers - you'll probably want wholesale to cost around $150-160). Of that, the screen, RAM and flash are the big budget items, and a good CPU can be pricey in quantity ($10-ish, nominally for a high-end ARM processor from the big companies - Samsung/Marvell/Freescale).
It's a tight squeeze, add in the other costs like warranty and support, and you'll find not many people are willing ot take on such a high-risk project with such little returns. You can try to sell it online like the OLPC guys with their "give one get one" thing, which lets you raise the manufactured cost more, but then have to deal with all the issues of distribution to end users.
It's not that no one wants to do it, it's just that it's really hard to do a good job in very tight constraints. Give it a year, and you'll probably be able to do it with last year's CPUs, last year's RAM, and last year's storage. But if you up the requirements next year, well.
The original Eee PC had a crappy screen, crappy battery life, OK CPU, as-required RAM and as-required storage, and still cost $400, even though the screen was bulk leftovers from portable DVD players, and the CPU was more or less "hey, I found a box of these things sitting on the shelf".
I admit, I liked FF3. It was really fast, and the upgrade made me hunt for extension updates that had a few more features than the one I currently used.
Unfortunately, for me, it also had a habit of not properly repainting the window. I could browse to a page, and as it rendered, it would "forget" to erase the previous stuff it drew, leading to a huge mess. Othertimes, I would drag a window over it, then switch back to Firefox. Except, Firefox doesn't draw the page, and I'm left with an image of the last window that covered it. Finally, the one thing that really irritated me, when I switched tabs, it didn't update the window. I have to scroll down and scroll back up, which redraws the page. If the page isn't very long, this doesn't work very well.
The irritating thing is, sometimes it works just fine - draws just fine, othertimes, I get this behavior. It's almost as if the Windows desktop heap is exhausted, except that the normal programs that fail when it's full, don't.
I just wish I knew how to file the bug so I can report it...
I switched back to FF2 - I'll take correctly drawing windows over speed... scrolling windows costs way more time than FF2's slower renderer.
To be clear, are you saying that a Vista product key will work during an XP installation?
NO.
The steps I've seen documented are:
1) Get an XP CD and key. The CD has to match the key (e.g., OEM CD with OEM key, retail CD with retail key). Just to answer a FAQ: Yes, ANY. Even if it's an already activated copy of XP, or with OEM versions, bound to another machine and activated. Heck, it can be activated through Microsoft, too. You just need a legic CD and key, regardless of whether or not it's been activated, requires activation, what have you. (BTW, I think you need XP Pro - you can't downgrade to XP Home... but I could be wrong (Vista Home->XP Home? I know Vista Buziness+ -> XP Pro). 2) Use that CD and key to install XP. 3) When you activate, choose the phone option, and call Microsoft. Tell them you're downgrading your Vista to XP, and give them your Vista key, the code that the phone-activation shows (and possibly the key you're using). They'll then give you a code to enter in to activate it.
You cannot do an internet activation (since Microsoft needs to know you're exercising your downgrade rights).
No my statist friend, we don't 'elect' to use the USPS if we can avoid it. But we don't have a choice in some cases because the US Government grants a monopoly on letter delivery. UPS and Fedex can deliver freight and because nobody thought it possible and thus Congress didn't forbid it in time, overnight letters. Notice how totally the private competitors dominate the postal service in those catagories? How many YEARS it took for the postal service to even attempt an overnight delivery service... that still only promises (as in refund you money for being late) 2-3 day delivery between most endpoints.
And I prefer USPS for parcel delivery. Not only is it as reliable as FedEx, DHL and UPS, it's often vastly cheaper. Sure you can send someone a parcel for $9 via UPS to an international destination, but having been on the receiving end, it costs anywhere from 20% to 200% the cost of the item for the receiver. I was shipped a $10 item, and I paid $10 shipping. UPS wanted $22 to release it. Or I buy a $50 item and the idiot seller sends it via UPS, and UPS wants another $40 to release it. At least on a $300 item, I only had to fork over $100 more to release it. The charges? Well, you have sales taxes ($3, $7, and $36, respectively on those items). The remaining charge was for the privilege of crossing the border, and having some guy rubber-stamp paperwork saying "this item is worth $x". At least the post office charges me $5 for that (or $8 if I ship express), and I get to play the lottery (sometimes they don't even bother charging taxes!).
UPS is probably the worst at it with exorbitant brokerage fees. FedEx charges a nice flat-rate $25, and DHL charged a very reasonable $10.
I avoid people who ship via UPS exclusively - especially when I can count on the item costing me what it costs, plus shipping and taxes, plus another 30% "UPS Tax" as it's affectionately known. It's enough to actually go somewhere else and buy via USPS, or even just retail. Alas, not too many places offer FedEx, and ThinkGeek is the only one that allows one to choose DHL or UPS. (For years I avoided ThinkGeek because they shipped UPS, at least now I can order from them).
The card features one 150W power connector, as well as a 75W connector. Heise deduces that this results in a total power consumption of 300W,
Um, that just doesn't seem to quite add up to me.
Power can come from multiple sources. In this case, you have a 150W power connector (probably a 6pin PCIe one), and another 75W one (yet another 6pin PCIe). The remaining 75W comes from the PCIe connector itself.
Nothing terribly unusual - a number of cards are coming out in configurations like this, and 300W for a video card is starting to become the norm, depressing as it is.
the GPL 3 convinced me to use a BSD-style license for my projects. I want to share the code, not enforce political views I disagree with.
Does the GPLv3 prevent any new projects from adopting the GPLv2 license? (With or without the "or any later version" statement).
Just like the old (GPL incompatible) BSD license was changed to the new compatible one (removing the "advertising clause"), but projects have gone ahead and used the old BSD license anyways (because they want the advertising clause, for example).
Sydney. Not only are the prices identical, but they go up every Wednesday and then go back down on Monday. Glad to see some government has stepped in to do something about it. If only mine would:(
Well, in a highly-competitive market, price changes from one merchant follow another. Take an example from Vancouver BC - the drivers here are literally stupid enough to drive across Metro Vancouver (GVRD) to save a penny per litre. As a result, a station may decide to lower their price a bit, and if they do it enough, a lineup will form down the street for a couple of blocks. (Yes, it's stupid since you're more likely to waste more gas than the amount you save waiting at the station, or driving across the many cities).
So if the station across the street lowers their price (hurting their own profit - they may briefly sell below cost), the other stations often quickly follow suit. Then when one station is hurting enough and raise prices, the other stations notice, and judge to see whether or not they can raise prices as well (remember - profit motive - the higher the price, the higher the profit for the station). Thus prices tend to march upwards as well.
It works for gas really well compared to other stores because with gas, effectively, every station is equivalent. There aren't many intangibles (return policies, customer service, checkout times, etc) that differentiate one station from another (only one - location, but that's nullified if people are willing to drive to you).
Effectively, you could replace all the stations around town with generic ones, and no one will know the difference - the only real differentiator is price, and all the competitors ensure that no one station can maintain a price advantage, or if they can, stop losses and increase profits as soon as possible. Station profits are around a penny or two per litre.
A few years ago here, Arco opened up and had the guaranteed cheapest price (for the first few years, anyhow). Lines would extend for blocks (always easy to find an Arco station - just look for the lines). Then the price differential became slimmer and slimmer, and Arco withdrew in the end. Business was brisk, but profit from the volume wasn't.
It's a somewhat wierd phenomenon - when I go to the US, all the stations seem to have different prices within a few blocks of each other - up to abou 20 cents or so per gallon. Not so back home - they're practically all identical.
The problem is how to use the same "free" radio frequency (2.4 GHz) both for "b/g" and "n" without interferencing
* SLAP *
Seconded.
Uh, the 802.11 spec already accommodates this using the "virtual carrier" (a timer set by a packet that basically says "the medium is busy for X microseconds).
In fact, it's funny people believe 802.11 gear "interfere" with each other. They actually cooperate. If they interfered, everyone's signal would be such a horrendous mess of noise that the only way you could get a signal was to be right beside the accesspoint.
Instead, the IEEE team realize that during the creation of the 802.11 (1/2Mbps original spec) that new technologies might make it possible to have faster networking, but that the gear already deployed should be able to cope with that. Since the new modulation schemes might not be compatible with the old schemes (and thus detectable by old receivers), they have a "virtual carrier" to basically say "the medium is busy, even though you can't tell" in the header packet.
It's also why the headers are normally sent at 1/2Mbps, but I believe in 802.11g, they can use "fast headers" where they're sent at G rates. Until they detect a legacy device (B or no designation) which they then enable slow headers again ("g protection" mode) so the legacy devices won't try to interfere.
And this is for all devices that a receiver can pick up - regardless of if they're on the same network as you. So back in the days when everyone was running "G only" mode to avoid the slow headers, it was mostly a moot point since a singla B device on the same channel, regardless of whether they're on the same network, automatically enables it.
Same thing will happen with 802.11n. Because your neighbor might have his accesspoint right next to your computer, and if you decided to interfere with his accesspoint, he might buy a new one that interferes horribly with your N network (if you're lucky, he'll upgrade. If not, he'll buy some cheap sale crap).
Sure it's nice when you can toss out all the legacy crap, but that legacy crap is what keeps everyone happy. Sure you get slower speeds, but would you rather have high speeds but be limited to 15 feet of the accesspoint, or lower speeds, but actually have useful mobility? The practical upshot is your non-legacy N gear will hurt your neighbor's WiFi, who'll get someone to install another accesspoint, or a repeater, and another one, and another one... then someone will introduce higher-powered radios...
I think they should be jamming GPS in some places. Or more specifically, start jamming some people's GPS. [...] I know one bridge that has been hit 12 times in the last 3 years by trucks that were too tall.
You don't need a GPS jammer.
If your bridge is 8 feet high, you simply need a metal arch 9 feet high, and a 'low bridge' sign suspended from it by two one-foot pieces of chain.
Hence, any driver approaching the bridge who should fail to notice the 'low bridge' sign will have their attention drawn to it when it collides with their vehicle, causing a loud noise but less danger than a vehicle-bridge collision.
Firstly, there are commercial vehicle GPS units that are programmed with heights of bridges and stuff, and routing algorithms that will not only avoid these, but prefer truck routes as well. Just that well, they're more expensive than the $100 TomTom you find on sale. The cost comes from the fact that NavTeq doesn't provide height information, so that has to be gotten from another provider.
As for the "low bridge" thing, turns out drivers ignore them too. Raymond Chen details oen such bridge which had the signs, the low bar, even laser sensors that trigger flashing lights. And people still get stuck.
Another thing that gets insteresting are vehicles that are short enough, but because there's an upslope somewhere in the middle, they get stuck because the clearance decreases due to the upslope (front wheels on slope, while back wheels are on the downslope or level part).
Or you could buy a printer that supports PostScript.
Does such a thing exist for less than, say, $250?
I know that last time I looked, I had to give up Postscript to get a (network, laser) printer in my price range. I ended up with Brother HL-2070N, which is okay except that it still seems to require a driver on each client even when printing over the network, and it supports PCL instead of Postscript.
For the Brother line of printers, you want support for "BrScript" (BrotherScript) - for PostScript 3, it's called "BrScript 3". It's effectively a PostScript clone (since PostScript is trademarked, and Brother does't want to pay). But for all intents and purposes, it's PostScript. They even supply PPD files to configure your OS's PostScript driver correctly.
Has anybody actually found this to be a problem with Rogers? I have Rogers, and have never had a problem downloading torrents on their network. I almost always max out my connection downloading torrents. Unless there aren't enough seeders.
Doesn't Rogers do nasty things with encrypted traffic? (Whether it be BitTorrent, VPN, SSL, what-have-you)
I seem to recall there was a small uproar over a bunch of people who couldn't access their email via secured POP and some VPN issues with Rogers... or has that been resolved?
Apple's solution is to let things download, but put them in the downloads folder and flag them as untrusted content from the internet (well not flag them as trusted, since the default is untrusted). That is to say, that is their solution on OS X. On Windows, there is no download folder and for some reason they screwed up and did not flag it as untrusted in Vista (XP does not support that either). In my mind, their solution on OS X is superior, because it also helps solve the problem of executables masquerading as data.
Actually, Windows has this as well.
If you download a file using Internet Explorer, an NTFS file attribute is set that marks it as "downloaded - untrusted". Double click the file and you get a popup asking "DO you want to run this executable?" with a popup and showing the executable properties (signed by, etc). Problem is, it requires that you run NTFS, and if you copy the file to a network server, that network server to support extended attributes. Use Firefox or other browser, and the attribute isn't set, or copy to a fileserver that doesn't support extended attributes, and it's lost.
(Most frustrating when you have to apply 12+ patches to a program that Microsoft Update doesn't have support for. I wrote a little bash script that shells out cmd.exe (was an MSI file) to do this, but you're still left with these popups).
As for OS X, I believe these notifications started in Leopard. They too are extended attributes, I believe. Though I think OS X copies attributes to filesystems/servers that don't support them by using dotfiles, so copying the file around doesn't get rid of it. (It goes away after you've approved it, though. No reason why Apple couldn't figure out what flag IE sets and have Safari do same on Windows, either.
This is perfect! Next time a teacher or other person in authority says I can't use Wikipedia because it is unreliable I just get the content from this site and I can say that it wasn't Wikipedia!
Crap like this is exactly WHY Wikipedia should not be cited formally as a reference. Even if Wikipedia could be trusted to be 100% correct (which it can't), how do you know you're not looking at some fake shit? Wikipedia is great for personal research. For formal citation, it's garbage. For one thing, the content can change. This is part of what makes it powerful, but it also makes it useless when cited on paper. You go to the URL and see something totally different from what the author was trying to cite.
Actually, no encyclopedia (Wikipedia or otherwise) should be cited formally. It doesn't matter on how accurate it is, or who can edit it, or anything. An encyclopedia is not a primary source. It's a good starting point to find primary sources (and for those of us who aren't using it formally, a source of information) and general background information to pursue one's research, but that's it. This is most evident in Wikipedia's "No original research" stance - it knows it's not a primary source of information and it shouldn't be.
The fact that Wikipedia is freely editable means one should really go to the original source for information.
I can't wait to see how the Apple faithful attempt to defend this one.
How about "non-monetary benefits"?
Not everyone will jump at a job that pays more - I suspect for a growing number of people, there are certain non-monetary benefits that are worth way more than dollars. Things like flex time, telecommuting, vacation are often things that people may value more than their equivalent dollar value.
Maybe Apple offers a no-nonsense environment where they can work on their stuff until "it's done right" rather than "we must ship, fix it later" mentality. Maybe they like Apple. Maybe Apple as an employer treats them fairly. Who knows (I don't work for Apple). Or maybe the work environment is such that it's a healthy one, or stimulating, or something people can feel happy about and look forward to going to everyday. Or maybe they're working on a pet project (after all, Apple has hired a number of people from the open-source community, like FreeBSD developers), and they're getting paid for what would otherwise be volunteer work.
Money isn't everything to a job. For some, it's the most important thing, but for others, once they have enough to satisfy their material needs and current wants, excess money just goes to taxes. Sure other jobs can pay more, but they may make demands that are incompatible with how one wishes to spend their time. In fact, I might say if all that keeps one to a job is money, then there's something wrong.
Or, to answer the original quote - maybe the reality distortion field works great.
Between Firefox extensions such as DownloadHelper (and half a dozen others with similar functionality), and the handy "dumpstream" option to MPlayer, does anyone really care that Real has decided to support what we've had the ability to do all along?
I'm surprised no one mentioned a surefire way of ripping YouTube, Dailymotion, and practically every other streaming site there is - without installing anything more than Flash player, and letting it cache the entire video.
Then in firefox, you go to about:cache, and search it for the YouTube video ID (if it's YouTube), a.flv file, or similar. Funny thing is, these flash videos are all downloaded through the browser using regular HTTP or HTTPS, and the "hidden" URL of the video is blindingly obvious. Either wget, or copy and paste the URL (and Firefox helpfully puts up a "save" dialog).
Quite easy, though not one-click handy like the other downloaders. The advantage is you can then figure it out for practically any site.
This has the potential to be as bad as (or worse) than spam. Think about it - if you were telemarketing, you'd have to hire a bunch of people to work in a call center. This costs money (rent, phone lines, people).
But over VoIP, all you need is an internet connection. Said internet connection just has to connect to a VoIP phone over some standard protocol (Skype, SIP, what have you), and blast the message away. You can convert a botnet from sending spam to sending spam via VoIP quite easily - just change the spam-mailer to a spam-over-voip thing. If your endpoint is a regular phone line to act like a POTS line, well, get a bigger answering machine. It costs little to "spit" millions of VoIP phones, and they'll be sure to try "calling" multiple times in the hopes you pick up (or someone picks up).
It's like why the spam problem is worse than junk mail - sender has to invest in sending junk mail, while spam costs just bandwidth and botnet fees. It probably won't reach normal landlines since things like SkypeOut etc. cost money.
About the only solution would be to ensure that whoever's calling you has a real phone number at the other end and not just an arbitrary IP address. Not sure how foolproof that is, though or if it could be faked. Nor am I sure whether or not things like Vonage will be affected (do they allow calls from non-Vonage (IP-only) and non-incoming line (landline/cell/etc) people?).
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's a misconception that the signature has meaning to the retailer if they match. If you look at the slip you sign, it says something to the effect of "I agree to pay this debt according to the terms of the cardholder agreement" or similar.
SIgning your card is an indication that you accept the cardholder agreement (i.e., the card is valid). Technically, a store can refuse to accept any card that is unsigned, says "CHECK ID" or similar because those cards are invalid (because you haven't indicated you accept the cardholder agreement, which covers things like... repayment of debt). The slip is used to indicate that you, the cardholder, will pay the issuer the amount listed, who will then pay the merchant that amount.
During a dispute, the best proof a merchant has is the signed slip. What makes life interesting are those places where signing the slip isn't necessary (e.g., some for transactions under $25).
Well, unless your replaced logic board fails again, I don't think Apple would take it back for replacement, since it basically works. Unfortunately, the affected GPUs are basically the entire nVidia 8x00 line (except for desktop 8300, and all the 8800's). Very few laptops actually use the 8800M GPU (think gaming laptops), so any other replacement, even a new laptop with an nVidia chipset will likely have the problematic GPU. The other alternative is to find a laptop with an AMD/ATi or Intel GPU.
That's true if you're like the people who use eBay to buy stuff one could get at a retailer (and a way of getting said retailer to ship to you).
However, if you want something that's out of print, if it's a book or CD, maybe Amazon has it through their used service. If it's something that wasn't sent publically distributed, fat chance seeing it on Amazon at all. This is stuff like CDs and books that were released during some event/convention/etc., and never released again. In these things, which I believe are called "collectibles", eBay really is the only option. No way Amazon would bother selling something that maybe has one random seller selling their only copy per year.
Alas, the problem with Google Checkout (and looks like this Amazon service as well) has is well, individuals can't easily get an account for individual random transactions. They all appear to be more retailer-oriented service rather than people sending people money (like Paypal).
This is the bug where (I see it on Windows, but I have heard reports on Linux as well) you switch tabs, and the window contents don't repaint. Or sometimes you visit a new page, and when Firefox reflows the page, it doesn't erase the old drawn stuff, leading to a big mess at the end. The former needs no screenshot - it's basically switch tabs, and nothing appears to happen (until you scroll which forces the revealed part to be drawn, but the rest of the contents are merely shifted up).
At first I thought it was maybe a Windows thing if you exhaust the desktop heap, but it happens in Firefox first, before the other apps that normally suffer from it fail.
All the huge speed gains in FF3 are nullified if one has to scroll to get the window to repaint properly...
Actually, it turns out that these things (automotive entertainment systems0 actually have to be extremely reliable. Windows Embedded for Automotive has to be way more robust than regular Windows Embedded, for example. The pressure comes from the car manufacturers themselves, not the public.
The reason is quite simply, if the system fails within the warranty period, it's a warranty repair. Warranty repairs are expensive, especially with prices dropping and margins thinning. Like the technology sector, a profit or a loss can be made simply by the amount of warranty work that needs to be done. (As a side benefit, people perceive a car that has to be in the shop to be of way lower quality, even if it's in the shop because the entertainment system keeps dying). Anyone remember the classic VW radio with the anti-theft that keeps going off on the slightest electrical spike?
Here's the other nasty thing about automotive systems - the parts must be available for years after the model is discontinued. With external DVD players, aftermarket stereos/DVD players, etc., it's not a big deal since the owner can buy a new one. But that new in-dash GPS/radio/climate control/etc. unit, if it breaks within that time period, it has to be replaced. (Think about all those 5 year "bumper to bumper" warranties, too). Given how fast technology moves, it's actually quite difficult to design a system and still have parts available for it 5-10 years after it was made.
In the case of cellphones, it's the carrier that determines how the bars map to signal strength (or quality, if it's possible to estimate). Some carriers demand that you show 5 bars down to a really pathetic signal strength value (I've seen close to -100dbi - just as a quick comparison, most wifi chipsets lose all connectivity between -80 to -90dbi, and the best tend to disconnect around -96dbi). The headroom between that and when the baseband loses the signal completely isn't that much.
Which is why I laugh when I hear "More bars in more places". It's easy to get a "stronger" signal if you mandate that a phone must show more bars all the time.
Now, this was for a non-GSM phone, so it was mandatory to get carrier qualified. But GSM carriers are equally bad, except they don't have as much control since you can bring in any compatible phone onto the network. The only thing the carrier can claim is their phones get a "better" signal (see? more bars than your phone!).
I wonder if Apple had to jump through these hoops with the iPhone or just said to the carriers to screw it - they're designing the software their way and that includes battery and signal strength meters that make sense. Given what I see of cellphones, there's often a special baseband/firmware build for each carrier to cope with the differences... but the iPhone software seems to be either unified, or just a single build around the world. (Carriers oblige because the customers want the phone).
I just bought a Dell laptop. When I was configuring it, I had two wireless options (not a common one, I know) - "Dell 802.11N" or "Intel 802.11N". I went Intel, only because I know the Intel chipset has drivers. I don't know what chipset the Dell wireless card uses, so I'd rather go with a known (Intel) than an unknown.
Now, I'd like to know which cards are the Atheros ones...
Not only that, but the privacy policy was posted on the ISP's home page, and said change to the privacy policy wasn't announced. I don't know many people who visit their ISP's privacy policy on a daily basis to see if there's any change. Most normal users probably haven't read it, and I'm sure the 15 people were probably new geek subscribers who actually decided to read the policy on subscription. Heck, I'm sure a number of people probably *don't* have their ISP home page as their browser's start page. More likely, it's pointed at the ISP's "portal" page, or some other portal page, or Google...
The problem with the questions is based on a watered-down version of bank security measures.
There were guidelines issued that said banks and other financial institutions should use two-factor authentication. The banks, however, fought back because such changes (keyfobs, scratch tickets, etc) cost money, and the guidelines were watered down to what they are now - "sorta-wannabe-two-factor".
In reality, it's another password.
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/WishItWas-TwoFactor-.aspx
Heck, some banks are really idiotic, too...
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Banking-So-Advanced.aspx
... is that it's not possible.
Look at the specs - if you want decent battery life, a decent screen (with decent resolution), decent RAM and storage (specced at 512MB and 4GB), and to all go for $200, it's hard.
The only thing on the market NOW that's even remotely close is the XO-1, but it only has 256MB of RAM and 1GB storage. And it's BOM costs are quite high already, even with its anemic CPU. If you want to mass-produce it and sell for $200 retail, after taking out everyone's profit and overhead, you're looking at a manufactured unit cost of around $100. Maybe $125, if you can squeeze profit margins from retailers and the like. (Figure in profit/time for doing the software, as asll as distribution costs to get it to retailers - you'll probably want wholesale to cost around $150-160). Of that, the screen, RAM and flash are the big budget items, and a good CPU can be pricey in quantity ($10-ish, nominally for a high-end ARM processor from the big companies - Samsung/Marvell/Freescale).
It's a tight squeeze, add in the other costs like warranty and support, and you'll find not many people are willing ot take on such a high-risk project with such little returns. You can try to sell it online like the OLPC guys with their "give one get one" thing, which lets you raise the manufactured cost more, but then have to deal with all the issues of distribution to end users.
It's not that no one wants to do it, it's just that it's really hard to do a good job in very tight constraints. Give it a year, and you'll probably be able to do it with last year's CPUs, last year's RAM, and last year's storage. But if you up the requirements next year, well.
The original Eee PC had a crappy screen, crappy battery life, OK CPU, as-required RAM and as-required storage, and still cost $400, even though the screen was bulk leftovers from portable DVD players, and the CPU was more or less "hey, I found a box of these things sitting on the shelf".
I admit, I liked FF3. It was really fast, and the upgrade made me hunt for extension updates that had a few more features than the one I currently used.
Unfortunately, for me, it also had a habit of not properly repainting the window. I could browse to a page, and as it rendered, it would "forget" to erase the previous stuff it drew, leading to a huge mess. Othertimes, I would drag a window over it, then switch back to Firefox. Except, Firefox doesn't draw the page, and I'm left with an image of the last window that covered it. Finally, the one thing that really irritated me, when I switched tabs, it didn't update the window. I have to scroll down and scroll back up, which redraws the page. If the page isn't very long, this doesn't work very well.
The irritating thing is, sometimes it works just fine - draws just fine, othertimes, I get this behavior. It's almost as if the Windows desktop heap is exhausted, except that the normal programs that fail when it's full, don't.
I just wish I knew how to file the bug so I can report it...
I switched back to FF2 - I'll take correctly drawing windows over speed... scrolling windows costs way more time than FF2's slower renderer.
NO.
The steps I've seen documented are:
1) Get an XP CD and key. The CD has to match the key (e.g., OEM CD with OEM key, retail CD with retail key). Just to answer a FAQ: Yes, ANY. Even if it's an already activated copy of XP, or with OEM versions, bound to another machine and activated. Heck, it can be activated through Microsoft, too. You just need a legic CD and key, regardless of whether or not it's been activated, requires activation, what have you. (BTW, I think you need XP Pro - you can't downgrade to XP Home... but I could be wrong (Vista Home->XP Home? I know Vista Buziness+ -> XP Pro).
2) Use that CD and key to install XP.
3) When you activate, choose the phone option, and call Microsoft. Tell them you're downgrading your Vista to XP, and give them your Vista key, the code that the phone-activation shows (and possibly the key you're using). They'll then give you a code to enter in to activate it.
You cannot do an internet activation (since Microsoft needs to know you're exercising your downgrade rights).
And I prefer USPS for parcel delivery. Not only is it as reliable as FedEx, DHL and UPS, it's often vastly cheaper. Sure you can send someone a parcel for $9 via UPS to an international destination, but having been on the receiving end, it costs anywhere from 20% to 200% the cost of the item for the receiver. I was shipped a $10 item, and I paid $10 shipping. UPS wanted $22 to release it. Or I buy a $50 item and the idiot seller sends it via UPS, and UPS wants another $40 to release it. At least on a $300 item, I only had to fork over $100 more to release it. The charges? Well, you have sales taxes ($3, $7, and $36, respectively on those items). The remaining charge was for the privilege of crossing the border, and having some guy rubber-stamp paperwork saying "this item is worth $x". At least the post office charges me $5 for that (or $8 if I ship express), and I get to play the lottery (sometimes they don't even bother charging taxes!).
UPS is probably the worst at it with exorbitant brokerage fees. FedEx charges a nice flat-rate $25, and DHL charged a very reasonable $10.
I avoid people who ship via UPS exclusively - especially when I can count on the item costing me what it costs, plus shipping and taxes, plus another 30% "UPS Tax" as it's affectionately known. It's enough to actually go somewhere else and buy via USPS, or even just retail. Alas, not too many places offer FedEx, and ThinkGeek is the only one that allows one to choose DHL or UPS. (For years I avoided ThinkGeek because they shipped UPS, at least now I can order from them).
Power can come from multiple sources. In this case, you have a 150W power connector (probably a 6pin PCIe one), and another 75W one (yet another 6pin PCIe). The remaining 75W comes from the PCIe connector itself.
Nothing terribly unusual - a number of cards are coming out in configurations like this, and 300W for a video card is starting to become the norm, depressing as it is.
Does the GPLv3 prevent any new projects from adopting the GPLv2 license? (With or without the "or any later version" statement).
Just like the old (GPL incompatible) BSD license was changed to the new compatible one (removing the "advertising clause"), but projects have gone ahead and used the old BSD license anyways (because they want the advertising clause, for example).
Well, in a highly-competitive market, price changes from one merchant follow another. Take an example from Vancouver BC - the drivers here are literally stupid enough to drive across Metro Vancouver (GVRD) to save a penny per litre. As a result, a station may decide to lower their price a bit, and if they do it enough, a lineup will form down the street for a couple of blocks. (Yes, it's stupid since you're more likely to waste more gas than the amount you save waiting at the station, or driving across the many cities).
So if the station across the street lowers their price (hurting their own profit - they may briefly sell below cost), the other stations often quickly follow suit. Then when one station is hurting enough and raise prices, the other stations notice, and judge to see whether or not they can raise prices as well (remember - profit motive - the higher the price, the higher the profit for the station). Thus prices tend to march upwards as well.
It works for gas really well compared to other stores because with gas, effectively, every station is equivalent. There aren't many intangibles (return policies, customer service, checkout times, etc) that differentiate one station from another (only one - location, but that's nullified if people are willing to drive to you).
Effectively, you could replace all the stations around town with generic ones, and no one will know the difference - the only real differentiator is price, and all the competitors ensure that no one station can maintain a price advantage, or if they can, stop losses and increase profits as soon as possible. Station profits are around a penny or two per litre.
A few years ago here, Arco opened up and had the guaranteed cheapest price (for the first few years, anyhow). Lines would extend for blocks (always easy to find an Arco station - just look for the lines). Then the price differential became slimmer and slimmer, and Arco withdrew in the end. Business was brisk, but profit from the volume wasn't.
It's a somewhat wierd phenomenon - when I go to the US, all the stations seem to have different prices within a few blocks of each other - up to abou 20 cents or so per gallon. Not so back home - they're practically all identical.
Uh, the 802.11 spec already accommodates this using the "virtual carrier" (a timer set by a packet that basically says "the medium is busy for X microseconds).
In fact, it's funny people believe 802.11 gear "interfere" with each other. They actually cooperate. If they interfered, everyone's signal would be such a horrendous mess of noise that the only way you could get a signal was to be right beside the accesspoint.
Instead, the IEEE team realize that during the creation of the 802.11 (1/2Mbps original spec) that new technologies might make it possible to have faster networking, but that the gear already deployed should be able to cope with that. Since the new modulation schemes might not be compatible with the old schemes (and thus detectable by old receivers), they have a "virtual carrier" to basically say "the medium is busy, even though you can't tell" in the header packet.
It's also why the headers are normally sent at 1/2Mbps, but I believe in 802.11g, they can use "fast headers" where they're sent at G rates. Until they detect a legacy device (B or no designation) which they then enable slow headers again ("g protection" mode) so the legacy devices won't try to interfere.
And this is for all devices that a receiver can pick up - regardless of if they're on the same network as you. So back in the days when everyone was running "G only" mode to avoid the slow headers, it was mostly a moot point since a singla B device on the same channel, regardless of whether they're on the same network, automatically enables it.
Same thing will happen with 802.11n. Because your neighbor might have his accesspoint right next to your computer, and if you decided to interfere with his accesspoint, he might buy a new one that interferes horribly with your N network (if you're lucky, he'll upgrade. If not, he'll buy some cheap sale crap).
Sure it's nice when you can toss out all the legacy crap, but that legacy crap is what keeps everyone happy. Sure you get slower speeds, but would you rather have high speeds but be limited to 15 feet of the accesspoint, or lower speeds, but actually have useful mobility? The practical upshot is your non-legacy N gear will hurt your neighbor's WiFi, who'll get someone to install another accesspoint, or a repeater, and another one, and another one... then someone will introduce higher-powered radios...
Firstly, there are commercial vehicle GPS units that are programmed with heights of bridges and stuff, and routing algorithms that will not only avoid these, but prefer truck routes as well. Just that well, they're more expensive than the $100 TomTom you find on sale. The cost comes from the fact that NavTeq doesn't provide height information, so that has to be gotten from another provider.
As for the "low bridge" thing, turns out drivers ignore them too. Raymond Chen details oen such bridge which had the signs, the low bar, even laser sensors that trigger flashing lights. And people still get stuck.
Another thing that gets insteresting are vehicles that are short enough, but because there's an upslope somewhere in the middle, they get stuck because the clearance decreases due to the upslope (front wheels on slope, while back wheels are on the downslope or level part).
For the Brother line of printers, you want support for "BrScript" (BrotherScript) - for PostScript 3, it's called "BrScript 3". It's effectively a PostScript clone (since PostScript is trademarked, and Brother does't want to pay). But for all intents and purposes, it's PostScript. They even supply PPD files to configure your OS's PostScript driver correctly.
Doesn't Rogers do nasty things with encrypted traffic? (Whether it be BitTorrent, VPN, SSL, what-have-you)
I seem to recall there was a small uproar over a bunch of people who couldn't access their email via secured POP and some VPN issues with Rogers... or has that been resolved?
Actually, Windows has this as well.
If you download a file using Internet Explorer, an NTFS file attribute is set that marks it as "downloaded - untrusted". Double click the file and you get a popup asking "DO you want to run this executable?" with a popup and showing the executable properties (signed by, etc). Problem is, it requires that you run NTFS, and if you copy the file to a network server, that network server to support extended attributes. Use Firefox or other browser, and the attribute isn't set, or copy to a fileserver that doesn't support extended attributes, and it's lost.
(Most frustrating when you have to apply 12+ patches to a program that Microsoft Update doesn't have support for. I wrote a little bash script that shells out cmd.exe (was an MSI file) to do this, but you're still left with these popups).
As for OS X, I believe these notifications started in Leopard. They too are extended attributes, I believe. Though I think OS X copies attributes to filesystems/servers that don't support them by using dotfiles, so copying the file around doesn't get rid of it. (It goes away after you've approved it, though. No reason why Apple couldn't figure out what flag IE sets and have Safari do same on Windows, either.
Actually, no encyclopedia (Wikipedia or otherwise) should be cited formally. It doesn't matter on how accurate it is, or who can edit it, or anything. An encyclopedia is not a primary source. It's a good starting point to find primary sources (and for those of us who aren't using it formally, a source of information) and general background information to pursue one's research, but that's it. This is most evident in Wikipedia's "No original research" stance - it knows it's not a primary source of information and it shouldn't be.
The fact that Wikipedia is freely editable means one should really go to the original source for information.
How about "non-monetary benefits"?
Not everyone will jump at a job that pays more - I suspect for a growing number of people, there are certain non-monetary benefits that are worth way more than dollars. Things like flex time, telecommuting, vacation are often things that people may value more than their equivalent dollar value.
Maybe Apple offers a no-nonsense environment where they can work on their stuff until "it's done right" rather than "we must ship, fix it later" mentality. Maybe they like Apple. Maybe Apple as an employer treats them fairly. Who knows (I don't work for Apple). Or maybe the work environment is such that it's a healthy one, or stimulating, or something people can feel happy about and look forward to going to everyday. Or maybe they're working on a pet project (after all, Apple has hired a number of people from the open-source community, like FreeBSD developers), and they're getting paid for what would otherwise be volunteer work.
Money isn't everything to a job. For some, it's the most important thing, but for others, once they have enough to satisfy their material needs and current wants, excess money just goes to taxes. Sure other jobs can pay more, but they may make demands that are incompatible with how one wishes to spend their time. In fact, I might say if all that keeps one to a job is money, then there's something wrong.
Or, to answer the original quote - maybe the reality distortion field works great.
I'm surprised no one mentioned a surefire way of ripping YouTube, Dailymotion, and practically every other streaming site there is - without installing anything more than Flash player, and letting it cache the entire video.
Then in firefox, you go to about:cache, and search it for the YouTube video ID (if it's YouTube), a
Quite easy, though not one-click handy like the other downloaders. The advantage is you can then figure it out for practically any site.
That's called telemarketing. This isn't.
This has the potential to be as bad as (or worse) than spam. Think about it - if you were telemarketing, you'd have to hire a bunch of people to work in a call center. This costs money (rent, phone lines, people).
But over VoIP, all you need is an internet connection. Said internet connection just has to connect to a VoIP phone over some standard protocol (Skype, SIP, what have you), and blast the message away. You can convert a botnet from sending spam to sending spam via VoIP quite easily - just change the spam-mailer to a spam-over-voip thing. If your endpoint is a regular phone line to act like a POTS line, well, get a bigger answering machine. It costs little to "spit" millions of VoIP phones, and they'll be sure to try "calling" multiple times in the hopes you pick up (or someone picks up).
It's like why the spam problem is worse than junk mail - sender has to invest in sending junk mail, while spam costs just bandwidth and botnet fees. It probably won't reach normal landlines since things like SkypeOut etc. cost money.
About the only solution would be to ensure that whoever's calling you has a real phone number at the other end and not just an arbitrary IP address. Not sure how foolproof that is, though or if it could be faked. Nor am I sure whether or not things like Vonage will be affected (do they allow calls from non-Vonage (IP-only) and non-incoming line (landline/cell/etc) people?).