With a 245mW laser, that should be modded informative, not funny. It is strong enough that it can cause permanent eye damage from a reflection, long before the blink reflex kicks in.
Yeah. But CD burner lasers are infrared so they won't look as cool (and you won't know that you are aiming it at your eye until you hear the boiling sound).
And be very very careful with these lasers, they are strong enough to cause permanent eye damage and blindness even at very short exposure times.
But a router routes (forwarding based on OSI Layer 3 addresses) between interfaces, not switch (forwarding based on OSI L1/L2). Also, the interfaces don't have to be Ethernet, they might be ISDN, ATM, token-ring, xDSL, OC-3...
You're setting up a false dichotomy, those are not the only two options available. In order to minimise the Window of Exposure, it is best to have it not blow up in media AND have it fixed as soon as possible.
I'm all for letting security issues blow up in media if the software vendor ignores them, there's nothing like a little public shaming to make public companies get their act together security-wise. But as long as the software vendor fixes reported problems in a timely fashion, the only thing that is achieved by a media blow up before a patch is available is that more potential exploiters are made aware of the issue.
True, full disclosure is needed as the ultimate Damocles sword to force companies to fix problems. If Sun acts slowly on this one, I'm all in favour of plastering it all over the front page of the WSJ.
Sun was made aware of this problem 10 days ago, and nothing seems to suggest that they don't take the issue seriously. The time it takes them to write a fix, do regression testing and push a patch out the door will likely not change due to this story reaching the/. frontpage or not. The only thing that will change is the number of people that are made aware of the issue before the fix is available, and in consequence the number of phishers/spammers/etc that have the opportunity to exploit it. That is, increasing the Window of Exposure
Information wants to be anthropomorphised and all that, but I'd still prefer this one to stay below the main stream media radar until Sun can get a fix out.
As for voting Bush. Since I'm not a US citizen, that would require use of the password '12345678'.
"even my consumer grade dlink adsl-router runs DHCP"
You just made my point for me. Most IP's in the world are given out by DHCP servers, but a router is not the same as a DHCP server.
Your dlink box is also an ADSL-modem. Doesn't mean that routers are ADSL-modems. Your dlink box probably also has a 4-port switch. Doesn't mean that routers are switches. Many consumer grade routers are also wireless network access points. Doesn't mean that routers are 802.11a/b/g APs. Pretty much *all* consumer grade routers include port-forwarding, NAT, IPsec pass-through, SPI,... Some include QoS, DMZ, VPN,.. Doesn't mean that routers are.. You get the picture?
The definition of a router is that it routes. That routers you buy at bestbuy also includes other functionality does not change the definition.
It's been a while since I read the DOCSIS spec, but as far as I remember:
Download link use regular cable TV channel frequencies (50-800+MHz), so bandwidth is pretty much only restricted by how many TV channels the cable co wants to dedicate to data. 42Mbps downlink for each 6MHz TV channel used for data.
Upload link use frequencies below the regular TV channels, 5-42MHz. So max uplink capacity is a lot lower. Uplink MAC can be controlled by the CMTS (TDMA, S-CDMA), it can be set to contention (similar to Ethernet CSMA/CD) or it can use a combination of both.
Exactly. There's nothing really new or newsworthy here. Most businesses prefer to stay on the trailing edge of Windows unless there's some really compelling reason to upgrade. win3.x/9x/ME to 2K/XP was the last big cycle, and even with the hugely improved stability and security of the NT family many businesses waited until 2002 to give things like app compatibility and device driver support time to shake out.
Business is really all about risk vs reward. Migrating to Vista has associated risk and cost (licenses, IT staff training, user training, app and device compatibility) but it doesn't have much reward. Even if migrating to Vista works perfectly large businesses won't do the switch until they have to unless there's a tangible reward like better stability, security or desktop management.
Any country who has an FCC or equivalent. Naming those that don't would be easier.
something that controls the power usage on the wireless card should be built into the fucking hardware, not controlled by an easily hackable blob
Problem is that different countries have different rules. Both for power output and which frequency bands can be used. Making one chip for Japan, one for Europe and one for USA isn't very efficient so manufacturers like Broadcomm and Marvel make more generic chips and load firmware that implement the local rules.
I'm sure it would be trivial to figure out how to get any and all wireless cards banned in those countries because no wireless card is invulnerable to hard hacking by a clever engineer.
But that's user modification, that's unlikely to get the manufacturer banned.
The thing is that the atmosphere that's there is equivalent to Earth atmos at 100K feet. 1% of 1ATM.
A glider with decent performance would have to be huge. You're talking hauling lots of material from Earth for a single use entry vehicle.
Not to mention the problems of actually controlling the glider. While the gravity is 1/3 of Earth's, inertia depends on mass only. 'Circling the runway' would be an interesting exercise. And then there's landing, level flight speed would be large and you have to bleed off that speed when landing. Pretty much no atmos, so brake chutes, slats et all would have little effect. And gravity is 1/3 Earth, so the amount of wheel braking would also be limited. Which translates to a very long runway, preferably uphill.
Is that really the case in the US? I must admit I'm not an expert on FCC regs, but the impression I got (US carrier regs has some times popped up in the current net neutrality debate) is that there's no Carterphone equivalent that requires US cell carriers to allow any compatible handset on their networks. The reason that you can use any GSM phone on AT&T/T-mobile networks is afaict because the GSM standard was designed that way and not because of FCC regs.
Could you go more into detail about the FCC issues? I'd expect that FCC set some robustness requirements on the RF parts of the phone, in essence making sure that faulty or malicious 3rd party software can't snafu the MAC/baseband/RF. But I can't really see what that has to do with 1 or 2 CPUs, since all the radio stuff is generally handled by a separate chip(set). Besides, the radio part has hard realtime requirements which makes it difficult to run that on the same CPU as UI/display/3rd party sw so it simply makes sense to have it on a dedicated chip or as a separate module on a soc.
Yeah, that was my thought too. Like GRUB on steroids, a Sun bootmanager or EFI/OpenFirmware.
The big hurdle would be how to bootstrap a different OS on the thing. The CPU core is an ARM, so a basic kernel should probably not be too hard - unless Apple has done a Tivo and run a signature check on the boot image. What's more iffy is whether there's enough documentation available on the rest of the Samsung core and the various other chips.
You live in the US? The land of broken bluetooth, crippled wifi and no ringtones except those bought from the carrier? In that 3rd world country of crippled-by-carrier phones, that is true to some extent. However, if you cross the pacific or atlantic the situation is different - for example, when a UK carrier tried to cripple the VOIP capability of the Nokia N95 the consumer blowback forced them to make a hasty retreat.
Native SDKs and dev tools for the major smartphone platforms are available for free or for a low fee. Some platforms have certain restrictions on installing software not signed by a valid certificate. Self-signing or adding your own CAs is usually supported (it is mostly an anti-malware thing, not anti 3rd-party developer).
Can I run a real Web browser?
Opera Mobile (native, full client) and Opera Mini (J2ME, web-pages pre-chewed by Opera's proxy) are available for pretty much all major platforms. And f.ex. the latest Nokia phones running S60 3rd ed. come standard with a browser based on the same rendering and javascript core that Safari use (webkit) - even supports RSS feeds. They aren't quite there compared to the iPhone when it comes to navigating pages, but when it comes to actually rendering correctly the iPhone is not in any way a revolution.
So for most users the iPhone is a better application platform than other phones.
The iPhone is a better *appliance*. The iPhone is an Internet pad, a phone and an iPod wrapped in a sleek package and a very good UI. Compared to true smartphones it is not however an application platform. You have to stand real close to Jobs' RDF to think that AJAX compares to native apps.
It has fewer features and less expandability compared to phones in the same price range. It does however deliver a better user experience. Traditional phone makers like Nokia and SE should really take notice when they see that customers choose a less open and less feature-rich device because it has a better UI.
Slashdot Mirror
With a 245mW laser, that should be modded informative, not funny. It is strong enough that it can cause permanent eye damage from a reflection, long before the blink reflex kicks in.
Yeah. But CD burner lasers are infrared so they won't look as cool (and you won't know that you are aiming it at your eye until you hear the boiling sound).
And be very very careful with these lasers, they are strong enough to cause permanent eye damage and blindness even at very short exposure times.
But a router routes (forwarding based on OSI Layer 3 addresses) between interfaces, not switch (forwarding based on OSI L1/L2). Also, the interfaces don't have to be Ethernet, they might be ISDN, ATM, token-ring, xDSL, OC-3...
You're setting up a false dichotomy, those are not the only two options available. In order to minimise the Window of Exposure, it is best to have it not blow up in media AND have it fixed as soon as possible.
I'm all for letting security issues blow up in media if the software vendor ignores them, there's nothing like a little public shaming to make public companies get their act together security-wise. But as long as the software vendor fixes reported problems in a timely fashion, the only thing that is achieved by a media blow up before a patch is available is that more potential exploiters are made aware of the issue.
True, full disclosure is needed as the ultimate Damocles sword to force companies to fix problems. If Sun acts slowly on this one, I'm all in favour of plastering it all over the front page of the WSJ.
/. frontpage or not. The only thing that will change is the number of people that are made aware of the issue before the fix is available, and in consequence the number of phishers/spammers/etc that have the opportunity to exploit it. That is, increasing the Window of Exposure
Sun was made aware of this problem 10 days ago, and nothing seems to suggest that they don't take the issue seriously. The time it takes them to write a fix, do regression testing and push a patch out the door will likely not change due to this story reaching the
Information wants to be anthropomorphised and all that, but I'd still prefer this one to stay below the main stream media radar until Sun can get a fix out.
As for voting Bush. Since I'm not a US citizen, that would require use of the password '12345678'.
For the love of all that is holy, please don't promote this story to the /. frontpage. The less advertisers that are made aware of this the better.
So any network device that reports a command unknown to "Router(config)# service dhcp" is not a router?
That many routers happen to include a DHCP server does not mean that 'does DHCP' is one of the criteria that defines what a router is.
"even my consumer grade dlink adsl-router runs DHCP"
You just made my point for me. Most IP's in the world are given out by DHCP servers, but a router is not the same as a DHCP server.
Your dlink box is also an ADSL-modem. Doesn't mean that routers are ADSL-modems.
Your dlink box probably also has a 4-port switch. Doesn't mean that routers are switches.
Many consumer grade routers are also wireless network access points. Doesn't mean that routers are 802.11a/b/g APs.
Pretty much *all* consumer grade routers include port-forwarding, NAT, IPsec pass-through, SPI,... Some include QoS, DMZ, VPN,.. Doesn't mean that routers are..
You get the picture?
The definition of a router is that it routes. That routers you buy at bestbuy also includes other functionality does not change the definition.
Because it is the ultimate geek pr0n?
You might want to retake Internet 101. Routers don't assign IPs.
It's been a while since I read the DOCSIS spec, but as far as I remember:
Download link use regular cable TV channel frequencies (50-800+MHz), so bandwidth is pretty much only restricted by how many TV channels the cable co wants to dedicate to data. 42Mbps downlink for each 6MHz TV channel used for data.
Upload link use frequencies below the regular TV channels, 5-42MHz. So max uplink capacity is a lot lower. Uplink MAC can be controlled by the CMTS (TDMA, S-CDMA), it can be set to contention (similar to Ethernet CSMA/CD) or it can use a combination of both.
Ah, the comedy of an AC asking a 4 digit UID if he's new here.
/.)
(And the puzzled befuddlement of seeing a 4 digit UID attempt to use bbcode on
Exactly. There's nothing really new or newsworthy here. Most businesses prefer to stay on the trailing edge of Windows unless there's some really compelling reason to upgrade. win3.x/9x/ME to 2K/XP was the last big cycle, and even with the hugely improved stability and security of the NT family many businesses waited until 2002 to give things like app compatibility and device driver support time to shake out.
Business is really all about risk vs reward. Migrating to Vista has associated risk and cost (licenses, IT staff training, user training, app and device compatibility) but it doesn't have much reward. Even if migrating to Vista works perfectly large businesses won't do the switch until they have to unless there's a tangible reward like better stability, security or desktop management.
Does such a project exist yet? If not, why not?
When you take the road less traveled,
don't complain about being lonely.
C:\> COPY CON
You seriously need to get out a bit.
What countries? Name them.
Any country who has an FCC or equivalent. Naming those that don't would be easier.
something that controls the power usage on the wireless card should be built into the fucking hardware, not controlled by an easily hackable blob
Problem is that different countries have different rules. Both for power output and which frequency bands can be used. Making one chip for Japan, one for Europe and one for USA isn't very efficient so manufacturers like Broadcomm and Marvel make more generic chips and load firmware that implement the local rules.
I'm sure it would be trivial to figure out how to get any and all wireless cards banned in those countries because no wireless card is invulnerable to hard hacking by a clever engineer.
But that's user modification, that's unlikely to get the manufacturer banned.
The thing is that the atmosphere that's there is equivalent to Earth atmos at 100K feet. 1% of 1ATM.
A glider with decent performance would have to be huge. You're talking hauling lots of material from Earth for a single use entry vehicle.
Not to mention the problems of actually controlling the glider. While the gravity is 1/3 of Earth's, inertia depends on mass only. 'Circling the runway' would be an interesting exercise. And then there's landing, level flight speed would be large and you have to bleed off that speed when landing. Pretty much no atmos, so brake chutes, slats et all would have little effect. And gravity is 1/3 Earth, so the amount of wheel braking would also be limited. Which translates to a very long runway, preferably uphill.
Because the law says they have to.
Is that really the case in the US? I must admit I'm not an expert on FCC regs, but the impression I got (US carrier regs has some times popped up in the current net neutrality debate) is that there's no Carterphone equivalent that requires US cell carriers to allow any compatible handset on their networks. The reason that you can use any GSM phone on AT&T/T-mobile networks is afaict because the GSM standard was designed that way and not because of FCC regs.
Because kernels which run on handhelds, supercomputers and mainframes have different constraints in terms of memory, power management
Not to mention different CPU families, a kernel compiled for ARM7 isn't going to run on IBM POWER.
Could you go more into detail about the FCC issues? I'd expect that FCC set some robustness requirements on the RF parts of the phone, in essence making sure that faulty or malicious 3rd party software can't snafu the MAC/baseband/RF. But I can't really see what that has to do with 1 or 2 CPUs, since all the radio stuff is generally handled by a separate chip(set). Besides, the radio part has hard realtime requirements which makes it difficult to run that on the same CPU as UI/display/3rd party sw so it simply makes sense to have it on a dedicated chip or as a separate module on a soc.
Yeah, that was my thought too. Like GRUB on steroids, a Sun bootmanager or EFI/OpenFirmware.
The big hurdle would be how to bootstrap a different OS on the thing. The CPU core is an ARM, so a basic kernel should probably not be too hard - unless Apple has done a Tivo and run a signature check on the boot image. What's more iffy is whether there's enough documentation available on the rest of the Samsung core and the various other chips.
Usually the phones are crippled in some way
You live in the US? The land of broken bluetooth, crippled wifi and no ringtones except those bought from the carrier? In that 3rd world country of crippled-by-carrier phones, that is true to some extent. However, if you cross the pacific or atlantic the situation is different - for example, when a UK carrier tried to cripple the VOIP capability of the Nokia N95 the consumer blowback forced them to make a hasty retreat.
Native SDKs and dev tools for the major smartphone platforms are available for free or for a low fee. Some platforms have certain restrictions on installing software not signed by a valid certificate. Self-signing or adding your own CAs is usually supported (it is mostly an anti-malware thing, not anti 3rd-party developer).
Can I run a real Web browser?
Opera Mobile (native, full client) and Opera Mini (J2ME, web-pages pre-chewed by Opera's proxy) are available for pretty much all major platforms. And f.ex. the latest Nokia phones running S60 3rd ed. come standard with a browser based on the same rendering and javascript core that Safari use (webkit) - even supports RSS feeds. They aren't quite there compared to the iPhone when it comes to navigating pages, but when it comes to actually rendering correctly the iPhone is not in any way a revolution.
So for most users the iPhone is a better application platform than other phones.
The iPhone is a better *appliance*. The iPhone is an Internet pad, a phone and an iPod wrapped in a sleek package and a very good UI. Compared to true smartphones it is not however an application platform. You have to stand real close to Jobs' RDF to think that AJAX compares to native apps.
It has fewer features and less expandability compared to phones in the same price range. It does however deliver a better user experience. Traditional phone makers like Nokia and SE should really take notice when they see that customers choose a less open and less feature-rich device because it has a better UI.
So what you're really saying is, "Government is returning to its roots"
No, it is copyright returning to its roots. Early copyright has its root in government control of the printing presses.