If you don't trust an OS vendor, isn't using a network monitoring tool on a different host entirely, with physical access to the wire, pretty much the only way to go? If they were so motivated, the OS would basically be a rootkit with device drivers and a userspace API...
Put the host to be inspected on a secured wireless network, then use another host on the same network to sniff wireless packets. That works too.
It is? Give examples. In-person voter fraud is almost non-existent. Ballot box stuffing, payola and other forms of voter fraud are not affected by requiring ID.
It's "non-existent" because democrats try very hard to keep people for even looking for it.
You won't find your fat-fold encased penis if no woman ever looks for it either. That doesn't mean your fat-fold encased penis isn't there.
Just means the FBI will only be hiring people who are good at lying about wrongdoing. Which is probably really more useful and what they want in the long run.
But it's not what they want. You know what the word is for "guy who can blithely lie his way through a polygraph?" It's "spy."
Polygraphs are pseudoscientific bullshit, but the only people they weed out are the honest ones. I know you're worried about abusive/sociopathic cops, and that's one problem. But if I if I can switch to Fedspeak, for a moment - the risk isn't that the FBI's recruitment policies select for sociopaths, it's that they select for double agents. Moronic ideologue non-threats like AQ/IS and domestic terrorists like the Sovereign Citizen derpers might not make it past this screening, but they're practically begging FSB and PLA to infiltrate them. It's assinine, it's self-destructive, and it doesn't even serve the larger gains of the FBI, just of the bureaucrats who have a vested interest in the revolving door between the IC and polygraph-reliant clearance-processing industry.
Likewise, they are insuring their agents are clueless socially broken idiots who are also sanctimonious twatwaffles about it.
Which makes them neither effective nor able to get the best and brightest. From what I have observed about the next generation of folks entering college about now, they will nave ZERO chance of hiring anybody in that age group. It'll be easy to identify the FBI undercover guy, he'll be the one with the walker and the gray hair.
This is talking about the premeditated killing of a civilian by another civilian ("murder") occurring as a cause of specific data transmissions on the public TCP/IP-based internet ("online").
If you're going to count radio-control systems and military systems then you can go back a LOT further than armed drones, but that's not what this story is about.
Does "Swatting" count?
If so, then yeah I believe it could or has happened already. Skype is being used to call local police forces on the other side of the planet to send the cops to peoples' houses over trivial shit like rivalries in video games.
Given the nature of many police forces, it won't be long before (or has already occurred) someone gets shot by police over it, or police shot by home owners (if in some states. Not you Texas, your gun laws suck.)
The problem is that hiding your picture results in far fewer messages, by a factor of eight.
I don't doubt it. There is no point in messaging someone without a picture. You could be talking to a land whale for all you know. There are some seriously fat, ugly women out there, and a high percentage turn to online dating as men find their appearance so revolting in real life. Attractive women are getting laid the old fashioned way. There's no need to get computers involved.
You also gotta watch out for "myspace angles" type photos. Be vary wary of a woman without arms, hands, or body in the photos. Chances are she outweighs you if you don't see that stuff.
I know a woman who works in IT across the street, while cute, she's about 150 pounds overweight. I ran across her on OkCupid (blocked her right away) but her photos make her look MUCH better than she actually is, even though there are lots of them. Somehow, she either used old photos, or manipulated the photo (pre or post snap) to remove her gigantic gut.
I expect the women with NO photos available are either cheating, or way worse than that. I skip right over them, and my first response to being messaged by one would be "put a picture up in your profile or fuck off".
Like it or not, physical beauty is tremendously important to most men. If you don't have it, or won't show it, you are going to be last in line out of the gate.
getting stared down with that "how dare YOU talk to ME" look
I can only imagine how beta you are...
While callous, the above comment has a point.
This new "dating site" system is going to make the whole set of men the women browse considerably more "beta" as a whole.
BTW, guys who gotta call other guys "beta" are likewise beta themselves. If you are alpha, you know it, and everybody else knows it and it doesn't have to be said.
Note that "behaving like a jerk", which is the problem here, is orthogonal to "making the first move".
"Behaving like a jerk" and "OMG he's so cute" can be valid responses to the EXACT SAME BEHAVIOR. The match up between whatever trips her trigger and what he's doing make it "good" or what she doesn't like about him (her friend told her he's unemployed) plus the same behavior makes him "creepy."
This reality stems from biology, women as the investors and men as the spreaders of DNA.
I don't think it is fair of the creators to compare it to Tinder though - there are a range of online dating sites designed to cater to different expectations - eHarmony and Match are geared to long term relationships for instance, while Tinder and Zoosk are much more geared toward casual dating/hookups.
Which is funny, because even the younger crowd of females on Tinder typically say something about "soulmates" or "not DTF" or whatever rejection of casual hookups they care to add. Then, many of them can be worked into casual hookups with proper application of game. (Which I don't have, btw, just noted this from watching others.)
They should add a moderator ability to both men and women. Sort of like Slashdot. You get a few mod points to use to vote up or vote down the behavior of the person's interactions. Then you can set their messages to whatever threshold of moderation you want. "Only show me messages from people modded on average above 3.5"
No kidding. Having a steady stream of people interested in you seems like being "In the drivers's seat" to me. What exactly is the problem?
Women just don't want to go through the work of filtering (or briefly looking at a profile in order to decide not to respond or block the sender) and this requires a whole new method?
How about women accept that dating is work, even if you are a woman?
Faster at what? Bankrupting the people who bring you free content? Hosting and time/effort to build and maintain websites is expensive. People should get paid to deliver websites just as you benefit non-monetarily by viewing a web page.
Entitlement mentality much? How much is left on your EBT card this month?
If they didn't want to go out of business, they would run their own ads and keep careful watch on what those ads do.
It's a pain in the ass to block stuff, but a bigger pain in the ass to get infected, or clean PCs of grandma and other relatives all the time. Nobody would bother blocking if ads weren't intrusive and dangerous.
The trick is that doctors need to stop treating schizophrenics like we're sick. They need to start treating us like we're real people that just happen to have a different sense of reality.
In a sense, I sort of agree with you, in another, totally not. Depression is also another way of viewing reality. Is someone who's depressed "wrong" about concentrating on the negative aspects of living? No... but I think most people who're depressed would rather NOT be depressed. Obviously telling someone who's depressed to just "cheer up", and "things aren't that bad" isn't going to help much. But like a disease, it's an aspect of yourself you'd rather not have and aren't in total control of, and want to be "cured" of. So the disease model isn't too far from the truth. I don't see how scizophrenia is much different.
You yourself don't really like your symptoms, wouldn't you rather they be gone? So I'm not sure I really understand your point.
I have met (and married) people who "didn't feel normal" when they weren't depressed and would have constant lapses in treatment drugs (even if they worked, which most didn't).
While they didn't enjoy being depressed, they enjoyed "not being themselves" less, or were so screwed up the cause-effect understanding was broken.
Depression while also a complicated and layered description containing many different states, is not similar in that people always want to not be it.
I mean, specifically GO TO FUCKING GOOGLE.COM and use the search engine there. Not Bing, not whatever else, and especially not your "ask.com" tool bar that infected your computer. GOOGLE. Nobody uses it generically, they all mean specifically go to Google to search. It's you retards that don't know how to search that think we mean something else.
I'm all for options, but some states have laws that mandate this type of technology for civilian use as a cynical and unconstitutional way to increase the cost of gun ownership and reduce the selection of guns.
And this is good thing. The second amendment doesn't specify how much it costs to bear the arms. Only that you're allowed to. So yeah don't ban guns, just increase the cost of possessing them so that only those really really really into guns will go for it.
If we are going to do that, pay for your constitutional rights, how about about $1,000 per year to vote?
I like your ideas and want to subscribe to your newsletter.
If it's extremely reliable, I think even gun advocates would adopt this. Here's hoping.
Every fingerprint identifying based lock that was "extremely reliable" has been so far, complete garbage. This one will be no different.
Your hope is misplaced. You might as well wish the moon turns into pizza and comes to visit. What you should hope for, is a change in coddling of the criminals, dregs, druggies and useless human flesh that cause problems. You know, inner city Shitcago thug and gang culture and "aspiring rap artist" who was "turning his life around" (how about you never fuck up in the first place huh chump?) that manage to beat their girlfriends on camera and get shot by police (innocent of course!) after committing felony strong armed robbery while never once producing a musical note worth anything.
Re:Might want to tighten the bolts on those sabers
on
China's Island Factory
·
· Score: 1
Built islands from outcropings,etc below the water line do not count towards extending range of the territorial limits.
Many of the South China Sea territories are in dispute or are considered to be in international waters. China refuses to acknowledge other nations claims to many of South China Sea territories.
Good point. By that standard, the same would be true of anchored ships and hydrocarbon drilling rigs.
Someone invariably says something to the effect of "Well, you'd have to be an idiot to have your window shrunk down to that size! It's their own fault for being stupid!"
<rant>
I get plenty of that here too, but It's not the user who is being stupid, it's the moron who tries to cover his design flaws with such a remark.
Web content should adjust itself to match the user's display and window, not the other way around.
I'm so fed up with all those websites that show their content as a 10 cm (or 4 inch if you prefer) vertical band in the middle of the window, that my browser window is set to accomodate not much more than that by default. Wider sites should reflow to fit that. If they don't, they're even more wrongheaded than those that insist on turning your screen estate into 80% empty space if you dare to run your browser full screen.
</rant>
Don't be such a short-sighted idiot.
The tools to do that are only a year or two old. It takes time to cycle through old tech and use new tech into a web site. There are ALWAYS some new thing that newer browsers will do that you can't use because it's brand new, and requires a rebuild of the site. Like, every week there is something new. For many years, people were waiting for IE8 to die out with XP.
Rebuilding a site is expensive, especially if it's a commercial site and the company isn't big enough to have an expert on staff.
Learn how best to automate that task so you can start on other projects to automating other tasks.
Yup. But do it in secret and don't share the automation with the employer. Use your spare time to look for a new job.
IF you come to the point where know your job is going to evaporate, it's better not to make a lot of waves (and that includes positive ones) until you are ready to go anyway. Your employer is already NOT paying attention and may not have a full understanding of what you do already. You'll be facing "the Bob's" in no time.
There is a reason they call it "work." Boring and repetitive comes with that. Brush up on your Zen skills and deal with it. And FIND ANOTHER JOB.
The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons.
And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.
This is not direct military support.
These are Russians that moved into Ukrainian territory either as soldiers in Russian forces, or as "civilians" over the last few years.
The attackers are RUSSIANS. The guys operating the BUK that shot down the airliner were RUSSIAN SOLDIERS. You don't hand a BUK over to "separatists" and a few months later have them wipe out 5 aircraft in a week. Take a look at the BUK system sometime. There is NO WAY the equipment was "handed over". It was OPERATED by RUSSIANS just like every other proxy war, Vietnam, Korea, and a whole bunch of smaller ones.
Russia is going to do what they are going to do, and for the most part, the West is going to stay out of it. Ukraine needs to start an absolutely brutal guerrilla war, or they are done for. That's all there is to it. (They are probably STILL done for no matter what they do.) The Soviets are re-building their empire.
I have several X-Fi cards at home. It would be nice to know what they sound like. Unfortunately I use Linux.
Phillip.
Heheh
One major difference between cards and onboard is cards get a lot more effort into the tools and drivers. That alone could make the difference in what people are perceiving without requiring any kind of hardware or circuit quality difference.
I just moved an SB X-FI card from my old gaming machine to my work and listen to music machine and it DID make a difference over onboard sound. I did it to take advantage of some tracks that use surround sound and noted a difference in even Youtube (which is strict stereo) music. The card was already paid for and there so I figured why not...
Had I not played the same track on Youtube only a short gap to install the card and basic drivers I probably would not have noticed the difference. Back in "the day" that sound card with "surround sound" headphones gave me tremendous advantage in some games as I could actually hear distinct sets of footfalls in relative spacial position in game. You can't do that with two low-quality channels coming out of the game.
Looking for the "lock symbol" is the one thing the masses have managed to learn about Internet security.
People (the inexperienced ones) cause customer service headaches when they can't / won't learn that this system doesn't need it. "Where is the lock?" "How come you don't have a lock?" "My grandson says the lock means you are secure." etc.
For $40 a year, a company can head off 40 tech support calls with the worst type of users (the ones that don't even understand enough to put the answers in context and need 15 minutes of explaining to understand the answer) by slapping an SSL cert on every server. Sometimes it's even people in the "IT department" that have this gap in knowledge.
The company I work for does exactly this. I even got kudos for suggesting a wildcard cert would be cheaper and easier than individual certs for all the hostnames. Now it's standard procedure to slap the the cert on everything public facing. And, there's only one renewal date to deal with as opposed to a trickle of them every other week all year.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't trust an OS vendor, isn't using a network monitoring tool on a different host entirely, with physical access to the wire, pretty much the only way to go? If they were so motivated, the OS would basically be a rootkit with device drivers and a userspace API...
Put the host to be inspected on a secured wireless network, then use another host on the same network to sniff wireless packets. That works too.
Voter fraud is a worse problem.
It is? Give examples. In-person voter fraud is almost non-existent. Ballot box stuffing, payola and other forms of voter fraud are not affected by requiring ID.
It's "non-existent" because democrats try very hard to keep people for even looking for it.
You won't find your fat-fold encased penis if no woman ever looks for it either. That doesn't mean your fat-fold encased penis isn't there.
But it's not what they want. You know what the word is for "guy who can blithely lie his way through a polygraph?" It's "spy."
Polygraphs are pseudoscientific bullshit, but the only people they weed out are the honest ones. I know you're worried about abusive/sociopathic cops, and that's one problem. But if I if I can switch to Fedspeak, for a moment - the risk isn't that the FBI's recruitment policies select for sociopaths, it's that they select for double agents. Moronic ideologue non-threats like AQ/IS and domestic terrorists like the Sovereign Citizen derpers might not make it past this screening, but they're practically begging FSB and PLA to infiltrate them. It's assinine, it's self-destructive, and it doesn't even serve the larger gains of the FBI, just of the bureaucrats who have a vested interest in the revolving door between the IC and polygraph-reliant clearance-processing industry.
Likewise, they are insuring their agents are clueless socially broken idiots who are also sanctimonious twatwaffles about it.
Which makes them neither effective nor able to get the best and brightest. From what I have observed about the next generation of folks entering college about now, they will nave ZERO chance of hiring anybody in that age group. It'll be easy to identify the FBI undercover guy, he'll be the one with the walker and the gray hair.
This is talking about the premeditated killing of a civilian by another civilian ("murder") occurring as a cause of specific data transmissions on the public TCP/IP-based internet ("online").
If you're going to count radio-control systems and military systems then you can go back a LOT further than armed drones, but that's not what this story is about.
Does "Swatting" count?
If so, then yeah I believe it could or has happened already. Skype is being used to call local police forces on the other side of the planet to send the cops to peoples' houses over trivial shit like rivalries in video games.
Given the nature of many police forces, it won't be long before (or has already occurred) someone gets shot by police over it, or police shot by home owners (if in some states. Not you Texas, your gun laws suck.)
The problem is that hiding your picture results in far fewer messages, by a factor of eight.
I don't doubt it. There is no point in messaging someone without a picture. You could be talking to a land whale for all you know. There are some seriously fat, ugly women out there, and a high percentage turn to online dating as men find their appearance so revolting in real life. Attractive women are getting laid the old fashioned way. There's no need to get computers involved.
You also gotta watch out for "myspace angles" type photos. Be vary wary of a woman without arms, hands, or body in the photos. Chances are she outweighs you if you don't see that stuff.
I know a woman who works in IT across the street, while cute, she's about 150 pounds overweight. I ran across her on OkCupid (blocked her right away) but her photos make her look MUCH better than she actually is, even though there are lots of them. Somehow, she either used old photos, or manipulated the photo (pre or post snap) to remove her gigantic gut.
I expect the women with NO photos available are either cheating, or way worse than that. I skip right over them, and my first response to being messaged by one would be "put a picture up in your profile or fuck off".
Like it or not, physical beauty is tremendously important to most men. If you don't have it, or won't show it, you are going to be last in line out of the gate.
I can only imagine how beta you are...
While callous, the above comment has a point.
This new "dating site" system is going to make the whole set of men the women browse considerably more "beta" as a whole.
BTW, guys who gotta call other guys "beta" are likewise beta themselves. If you are alpha, you know it, and everybody else knows it and it doesn't have to be said.
Note that "behaving like a jerk", which is the problem here, is orthogonal to "making the first move".
"Behaving like a jerk" and "OMG he's so cute" can be valid responses to the EXACT SAME BEHAVIOR. The match up between whatever trips her trigger and what he's doing make it "good" or what she doesn't like about him (her friend told her he's unemployed) plus the same behavior makes him "creepy."
This reality stems from biology, women as the investors and men as the spreaders of DNA.
I don't think it is fair of the creators to compare it to Tinder though - there are a range of online dating sites designed to cater to different expectations - eHarmony and Match are geared to long term relationships for instance, while Tinder and Zoosk are much more geared toward casual dating/hookups.
Which is funny, because even the younger crowd of females on Tinder typically say something about "soulmates" or "not DTF" or whatever rejection of casual hookups they care to add. Then, many of them can be worked into casual hookups with proper application of game. (Which I don't have, btw, just noted this from watching others.)
They should add a moderator ability to both men and women. Sort of like Slashdot. You get a few mod points to use to vote up or vote down the behavior of the person's interactions. Then you can set their messages to whatever threshold of moderation you want. "Only show me messages from people modded on average above 3.5"
Women just message the men they like instead.
No kidding. Having a steady stream of people interested in you seems like being "In the drivers's seat" to me. What exactly is the problem?
Women just don't want to go through the work of filtering (or briefly looking at a profile in order to decide not to respond or block the sender) and this requires a whole new method?
How about women accept that dating is work, even if you are a woman?
Faster at what? Bankrupting the people who bring you free content? Hosting and time/effort to build and maintain websites is expensive. People should get paid to deliver websites just as you benefit non-monetarily by viewing a web page.
Entitlement mentality much? How much is left on your EBT card this month?
If they didn't want to go out of business, they would run their own ads and keep careful watch on what those ads do.
It's a pain in the ass to block stuff, but a bigger pain in the ass to get infected, or clean PCs of grandma and other relatives all the time. Nobody would bother blocking if ads weren't intrusive and dangerous.
Indeed.
My hosts file (across my Windows, Linux, and OSX) machines have been using the excellent MSVP hosts (http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm) for years.
Plus, it speeds up internet browsing instead of having the browser ping 10+ different domains.
Yup. Been using that for years. Very nice. Very little in the way of bullshit from Google or anywhere else.
" Bono said the new tech "can't be pirated" "
Since when is Bono qualified to have an opinion on this subject? He should make songs and not talk about things he hasn't got a clue about.
Considering the new album, he's not really qualified to make songs either.
The trick is that doctors need to stop treating schizophrenics like we're sick. They need to start treating us like we're real people that just happen to have a different sense of reality. In a sense, I sort of agree with you, in another, totally not. Depression is also another way of viewing reality. Is someone who's depressed "wrong" about concentrating on the negative aspects of living? No... but I think most people who're depressed would rather NOT be depressed. Obviously telling someone who's depressed to just "cheer up", and "things aren't that bad" isn't going to help much. But like a disease, it's an aspect of yourself you'd rather not have and aren't in total control of, and want to be "cured" of. So the disease model isn't too far from the truth. I don't see how scizophrenia is much different.
You yourself don't really like your symptoms, wouldn't you rather they be gone? So I'm not sure I really understand your point.
I have met (and married) people who "didn't feel normal" when they weren't depressed and would have constant lapses in treatment drugs (even if they worked, which most didn't).
While they didn't enjoy being depressed, they enjoyed "not being themselves" less, or were so screwed up the cause-effect understanding was broken.
Depression while also a complicated and layered description containing many different states, is not similar in that people always want to not be it.
I mean, specifically GO TO FUCKING GOOGLE.COM and use the search engine there. Not Bing, not whatever else, and especially not your "ask.com" tool bar that infected your computer. GOOGLE. Nobody uses it generically, they all mean specifically go to Google to search. It's you retards that don't know how to search that think we mean something else.
I'm all for options, but some states have laws that mandate this type of technology for civilian use as a cynical and unconstitutional way to increase the cost of gun ownership and reduce the selection of guns.
And this is good thing. The second amendment doesn't specify how much it costs to bear the arms. Only that you're allowed to. So yeah don't ban guns, just increase the cost of possessing them so that only those really really really into guns will go for it.
If we are going to do that, pay for your constitutional rights, how about about $1,000 per year to vote?
I like your ideas and want to subscribe to your newsletter.
If it's extremely reliable, I think even gun advocates would adopt this. Here's hoping.
Every fingerprint identifying based lock that was "extremely reliable" has been so far, complete garbage. This one will be no different.
Your hope is misplaced. You might as well wish the moon turns into pizza and comes to visit. What you should hope for, is a change in coddling of the criminals, dregs, druggies and useless human flesh that cause problems. You know, inner city Shitcago thug and gang culture and "aspiring rap artist" who was "turning his life around" (how about you never fuck up in the first place huh chump?) that manage to beat their girlfriends on camera and get shot by police (innocent of course!) after committing felony strong armed robbery while never once producing a musical note worth anything.
Built islands from outcropings,etc below the water line do not count towards extending range of the territorial limits.
Many of the South China Sea territories are in dispute or are considered to be in international waters. China refuses to acknowledge other nations claims to many of South China Sea territories.
Good point. By that standard, the same would be true of anchored ships and hydrocarbon drilling rigs.
Someone invariably says something to the effect of "Well, you'd have to be an idiot to have your window shrunk down to that size! It's their own fault for being stupid!"
<rant> I get plenty of that here too, but It's not the user who is being stupid, it's the moron who tries to cover his design flaws with such a remark. Web content should adjust itself to match the user's display and window, not the other way around.
I'm so fed up with all those websites that show their content as a 10 cm (or 4 inch if you prefer) vertical band in the middle of the window, that my browser window is set to accomodate not much more than that by default. Wider sites should reflow to fit that. If they don't, they're even more wrongheaded than those that insist on turning your screen estate into 80% empty space if you dare to run your browser full screen. </rant>
Don't be such a short-sighted idiot.
The tools to do that are only a year or two old. It takes time to cycle through old tech and use new tech into a web site. There are ALWAYS some new thing that newer browsers will do that you can't use because it's brand new, and requires a rebuild of the site. Like, every week there is something new. For many years, people were waiting for IE8 to die out with XP.
Rebuilding a site is expensive, especially if it's a commercial site and the company isn't big enough to have an expert on staff.
Again, don't be an idiot. Or, grow up.
.... stupid millenials....
Learn how best to automate that task so you can start on other projects to automating other tasks.
Yup. But do it in secret and don't share the automation with the employer. Use your spare time to look for a new job.
IF you come to the point where know your job is going to evaporate, it's better not to make a lot of waves (and that includes positive ones) until you are ready to go anyway. Your employer is already NOT paying attention and may not have a full understanding of what you do already. You'll be facing "the Bob's" in no time.
There is a reason they call it "work." Boring and repetitive comes with that. Brush up on your Zen skills and deal with it. And FIND ANOTHER JOB.
I have had so so many hack attempts from Amazons servers that it was just easier to fire wall ALL of them.
Yup. Amazon Cloud and a couple others are completely null routed from my work network. Big sections of others overseas are blocked as well.
So far, complaints have been zero. And, we get less log and web site form harassment from misbehaving bots.
We have determined that the signal to noise ratio coming from cloud hosting services is ZERO.
The side that apparently blew a 300-civilian passenger jet out of the sky because they're too dumb to know what a Boeing looks like is getting direct military support from a major regional power which just happens to have nuclear weapons.
And I thought my hometown of Detroit was fucked.
This is not direct military support.
These are Russians that moved into Ukrainian territory either as soldiers in Russian forces, or as "civilians" over the last few years.
The attackers are RUSSIANS. The guys operating the BUK that shot down the airliner were RUSSIAN SOLDIERS. You don't hand a BUK over to "separatists" and a few months later have them wipe out 5 aircraft in a week. Take a look at the BUK system sometime. There is NO WAY the equipment was "handed over". It was OPERATED by RUSSIANS just like every other proxy war, Vietnam, Korea, and a whole bunch of smaller ones.
Russia is going to do what they are going to do, and for the most part, the West is going to stay out of it. Ukraine needs to start an absolutely brutal guerrilla war, or they are done for. That's all there is to it. (They are probably STILL done for no matter what they do.) The Soviets are re-building their empire.
You can control what time of day the ads are displayed.
Try avoiding the times when they are being used up, or try focusing on when your potential customers are on and using computers.
I have several X-Fi cards at home. It would be nice to know what they sound like. Unfortunately I use Linux.
Phillip.
Heheh
One major difference between cards and onboard is cards get a lot more effort into the tools and drivers. That alone could make the difference in what people are perceiving without requiring any kind of hardware or circuit quality difference.
I just moved an SB X-FI card from my old gaming machine to my work and listen to music machine and it DID make a difference over onboard sound. I did it to take advantage of some tracks that use surround sound and noted a difference in even Youtube (which is strict stereo) music. The card was already paid for and there so I figured why not...
Had I not played the same track on Youtube only a short gap to install the card and basic drivers I probably would not have noticed the difference. Back in "the day" that sound card with "surround sound" headphones gave me tremendous advantage in some games as I could actually hear distinct sets of footfalls in relative spacial position in game. You can't do that with two low-quality channels coming out of the game.
So why are they using SSL in the first place?
Looking for the "lock symbol" is the one thing the masses have managed to learn about Internet security.
People (the inexperienced ones) cause customer service headaches when they can't / won't learn that this system doesn't need it. "Where is the lock?" "How come you don't have a lock?" "My grandson says the lock means you are secure." etc.
For $40 a year, a company can head off 40 tech support calls with the worst type of users (the ones that don't even understand enough to put the answers in context and need 15 minutes of explaining to understand the answer) by slapping an SSL cert on every server. Sometimes it's even people in the "IT department" that have this gap in knowledge.
The company I work for does exactly this. I even got kudos for suggesting a wildcard cert would be cheaper and easier than individual certs for all the hostnames. Now it's standard procedure to slap the the cert on everything public facing. And, there's only one renewal date to deal with as opposed to a trickle of them every other week all year.