Try getting enough servings of fresh green vegetables for a family of four on a budget.
Here's a hint:
Fresh spinach for four ($12) ($9 if you can find the unbagged bunches, seriously!)
Broccoli for four ($3)
Tomatoes (four large) ($3)
I could go on and on.
The "poor" lifestyle staple of rice and beans (arguably probably the most cost effective way) with enough veggies doesn't exist.
You CANT get enough good veggies on that budget. You could get low quality frozen. Or if you are lucky get one of those local "farm share" subscriptions ($30 per month for half share of random crap squash, who the fuck needs a whole case of squash at a time?) The idea you can get tasty veggies for cheap is simply bullshit.
I agree the "demo" is a bit off from the first potential market. But it DID get it in the news right?
So guess what, now next time I am thinking about WAN infrastructure and faced with connecting 10 locations of a printing company (which move HUGE files) I have a chance of solving the problem without 150K of equipment and services per year (which are not fast enough yet).
Imagine business parks get a "WAN LINK" building where this fiber drops to other similar buildings. You just pay for a bit of routing and the line to your office and you have a more workable solution than 40 OC3 connections.
This is a HUGE deal if you do any sort of that kind of work. Screw getting on the internet, this is about making my LAN span across 5 states transparently to the user and the admins.
Yes, because the "OMG communism! think of the children LOL111one!" argument that crops up in every heathcare debate is the product of rabid progressives not thinking about the issues.
Maybe if you stopped to listen to someone besides g.w.bush, fox news and 'god' for a few minutes you would get that you unthinking conservative retard. Yes, there are stupid libtards, however stonewalling and unwillingness to compromise is not a staple on that end of the political spectrum like it is in your neighborhood.
Sociologists and demographers have discovered that couples who have at least one son face significantly less risk of divorce than couples who have only daughters. Why is this? Apparently summary writer has not actually LIVED with 3 or more females with no other male to relate to.
I bet they have a higher suicide rate, higher drug and booze addict rate and are more prone to kill one or two family members as well.
As the sole means of access, you are right it's a ridiculous idea.
However, as a combination of the account number, the password and this thing... it acts as a captcha AND it helps the organization identify the user (who might be at a public terminal, or on a different OS or whatever) in a way that is much harder for a keylogger or infected computer to track.
For example, given time, my login and "personal question" answers can get logged by an infected machine and used.
This raises the bar a bit and causes the rootkit or whatever you want to call it to need to keep a copy of the image the user clicks on, and then have it in a form that the attacker can use to get into the account.
So phishing sites are going to be harder to do (let's face it, some of them really suck now, but are still used because they still _work_), and an aggressive and careful attacker needs to do a lot more too.
As a password = dumb. In replacement of captcha/personal questions, not so dumb.
I think the article summary just uses the word "password" as a simple "sorta means the same" for a word to make it understandable to a wide audience.
On that note, wasn't the difference in the battery life that they did not expect the panels to get cleaned off by the winds like they are getting cleaned?
Perhaps a trip into a crater is not the best way to stay in the cleansing winds....
However, having said that, I will also say that what they ignore is that the market is not free: many telcos have either government-given or self-induced monopolies in specific areas. Further, high entry costs make it practically impossible for homegrown competition to displace them when their service goes down the drain. And also, I suspect that there may be collusion to set prices (not that I have evidence, just a hunch). Plus, as another poster here mentioned, in his town, there is Comcast and the phone company. And no one else. Where I live there is hardly much more variety. In addition, switching providers is not always possible or easy (it's not like switching cell phone providers or wiping one's ass like the FCC dumbass thinks it is). The very idea of "market correction" happening is laughable when you consider the networks some of us work with daily. Even for cell phones, remember the telcos fighting tooth and nail to stop the number portability thing? Yeah, that was just an entry in a database. They resisted purely for anticompetitive reasons.
Now add your firewall, network routing, VPN, ISP owned IP addresses, etc. (and if you are unlucky SOX regulations) into the mix and there IS no market forces in any situation except a brand new city on brand new land where no existing infrastructure exists. Once you have termination liability and agreements (bribes) to cities in place "market forces" is out the window.
The FCC is a bunch of right-wing a-holes in bed and getting back-room bribes from big industry and the politicians owned by big industry to the point they carry zero credibility. (One need only look at the crackdown on non-puritan TV for proof of that.)
Feel free to tape the criminals. (There are companies that specialize in that stuff if you care to outsource.)
Keep in mind, the criminal is probably either not going to do the deed if he sees you taping, or beat you up and take your camera first..
The police on the other hand, will beat you up, throw you in jail, make up charges, financially ruin you and your family, get you fired, keep you in jail, and further their political careers while doing it. And then "drop the charges" when you try to fight back thus "fixing" all the damage they did. (Yeah right.) They are doing this now, to real people.
So, I am not sure why your child-like argument bears any weight about what the ACLU should be doing. Join and give them money, or shut your whore mouth about it cuz it's none of your bidness. Hmmkay?
That's great. Simply refrain from giving them any money and STFU then.
Yes, it is an attempt to antagonize the pigs. If you mean "stand up for ones rights" when you say "antagonize" that is...
Furthermore, the fact the ACLU is doing it (people who are quite adept at lawyering and whatnot) will allow the case to get somewhere significant, rather than just financially ass-raping some poor sap because some cop got pissed about getting taped.
With luck, it will either intimidate the asshole DAs in the world and the asshole cops in the world to do the right thing, or allow the few good ones to lay the proper smack down on the assholes to the point they have no more power. (i.e. Fired, jail, dead.)
That would actually be good if all those dudes started using it like that.
Then, a simple hosts file entry means I can block or view that stuff at will. Rather than relying on finding 40 or so other free hosting sites that are used in forums for whatever trollish crud happens to be going on that day.
In all seriousness, what you describe (scanning the pages) already happens all over if you know where to look or know the right people (who scan, rip, archive, or crack).
Pirate Bay Images will be just one more "if you know where to look" place. The average schlub is never going to know nor care about it and still buy his Playboy off the rack like he always does.
As far as the total "pirated or copied stuff" goes, the image portion of Pirate Bay will not do a whole lot to the total, or overall make it a bit harder for the copyright holders who actively try to have stuff taken down to get all the places... even though that is useless as playing spammer whack-a-mole. Get one and five minutes later there are three more.
Getting all worked up about this particular place and method is pointless.
My only complaint is it's tenancy to want to clean the print heads every time it is turned on... that combined with cats that walk over it (and hit the power button in the process). Often I would wake up to the sound of it doing something (wasting ink).
I just keep it unplugged when not in use now.
With the new digital camera I am leaning towards replacing it with a cheap color printer, but haven't pulled the trigger yet on that.
Yeah, he probably meant "Hard disk data" or something.
Though, it's still pathetic. A court order needs to be specific, and correct. Anything else is a travesty of justice and open for abuse. How else are they going to expect it to be legally binding? "Send me your thingamajig and the whatzit or you go to jail for 30 days." How is one supposed to comply with something that makes no sense? Plus, point that out or be sarcastic and you risk pissing off the judge and landing in jail.
The judge made himself look too incompetent to pick up the phone and call a nephew for a reality check. Heck, I'd do that type of work for $30 an hour if he wants to email me I am ready.
Just more proof that all portions of the legal profession have no freaking clue and are out of touch with just about any reality aside from their own little money grubbing ways.
For example, those little thingies with the black and white paddles in them that look like light bulbs from middle school science class work on the idea that photons transfer and take momentum from stuff they interact with. Momentum is a quality very closely tied with mass.
Likewise, photons are affected by gravitational fields. Having gravity and being affected by it are also qualities very tightly bound with mass.
So, you sort of need to define how you mean "mass" before claiming photons don't have it. No mass in "high school physics" sense, but sure has some mass when you are talking about cosmological stuff or high-energy physics. Indeed, you can really only say "mass: having mass like qualities X, Y and Z" and photons have some of them. So either a grid to define mass with check boxes, or make up some nomenclature Mass: x',y',z" where 1 tick means has, two has not.
Yeah, that sort of depends on whether you think the galactic plane and solar (stellar) plane have a tendency to coincide or not.
Our solar system is off galactic plane by around 63 degrees or so. The solar (stellar) plane is a function of the angular momentum of the dust cloud (assuming the solar system creation model we have is correct). The galactic plane, is the same thing, only on much larger scale of the galaxy (duh).
One would think that the total aggregate angular momentum of the galaxy would strongly suggest the same bias toward stellar planes more or less lining up. Basically if you look at a star it's probability of having the stellar plane line up with us is a bell curve where the center is 0 degrees out of galactic plane, and the higher you go the fewer do. (That's what I think is the case.)
Unfortunately, we only have one data point (our solar system) and others that by the means of detection mean they are lined up with us...
You would have to have a known average "has a planet" value for any star already to sort out if the extra solar plane has a high probability of being earth-pointing or not, and you could only do it by comparing the rate of earth-pointing planes above the galactic plane (a low probability) vs the earth-pointing in the galactic plane planets.
So you need the value (rate of "has a planet") you want to determine the value you want (how many planets are there?).
In other words, we only see a small percentage of planets that way, but we don't know what that percentage is without getting some other means to measure how many planets there are (the "has planet" rate for stars).
It's pretty cool they are finding lots of these though, sooner or later someone is going to figure out how to image them.... I look forward to that.
Well with credit to the GP, there _are_ lots of mis-used words on both sides.
"Pirate" may not be one of them, "Stealing" or "Theft" sure is. Legally and with common meaning, stealing and theft always implies the removal of the thing from the rightful owner in the sense they can't use or possess it anymore. "Theft of services" for taking electricity from someone's garage plug, or hijacking their CPU time or whatever.
Illegally copying files via a P2P is a copyright violation. It is NOT stealing.
Slashdot Mirror
Staples yes.
Try getting enough servings of fresh green vegetables for a family of four on a budget.
Here's a hint:
Fresh spinach for four ($12) ($9 if you can find the unbagged bunches, seriously!)
Broccoli for four ($3)
Tomatoes (four large) ($3)
I could go on and on.
The "poor" lifestyle staple of rice and beans (arguably probably the most cost effective way) with enough veggies doesn't exist.
You CANT get enough good veggies on that budget. You could get low quality frozen. Or if you are lucky get one of those local "farm share" subscriptions ($30 per month for half share of random crap squash, who the fuck needs a whole case of squash at a time?) The idea you can get tasty veggies for cheap is simply bullshit.
Time for the weekly RIAA, MPAA, BSA, Microsoft, GOP whitewashing is it?
You haven't had good calamari then.
You are right, most is pretty bad. But if you get it at a real seafood place or a fish market (cook yourself) it is very nice.
I agree the "demo" is a bit off from the first potential market. But it DID get it in the news right?
So guess what, now next time I am thinking about WAN infrastructure and faced with connecting 10 locations of a printing company (which move HUGE files) I have a chance of solving the problem without 150K of equipment and services per year (which are not fast enough yet).
Imagine business parks get a "WAN LINK" building where this fiber drops to other similar buildings. You just pay for a bit of routing and the line to your office and you have a more workable solution than 40 OC3 connections.
This is a HUGE deal if you do any sort of that kind of work. Screw getting on the internet, this is about making my LAN span across 5 states transparently to the user and the admins.
Yes, because the "OMG communism! think of the children LOL111one!" argument that crops up in every heathcare debate is the product of rabid progressives not thinking about the issues.
Maybe if you stopped to listen to someone besides g.w.bush, fox news and 'god' for a few minutes you would get that you unthinking conservative retard. Yes, there are stupid libtards, however stonewalling and unwillingness to compromise is not a staple on that end of the political spectrum like it is in your neighborhood.
I bet they have a higher suicide rate, higher drug and booze addict rate and are more prone to kill one or two family members as well.
(didn't RTFA)
As the sole means of access, you are right it's a ridiculous idea.
However, as a combination of the account number, the password and this thing... it acts as a captcha AND it helps the organization identify the user (who might be at a public terminal, or on a different OS or whatever) in a way that is much harder for a keylogger or infected computer to track.
For example, given time, my login and "personal question" answers can get logged by an infected machine and used.
This raises the bar a bit and causes the rootkit or whatever you want to call it to need to keep a copy of the image the user clicks on, and then have it in a form that the attacker can use to get into the account.
So phishing sites are going to be harder to do (let's face it, some of them really suck now, but are still used because they still _work_), and an aggressive and careful attacker needs to do a lot more too.
As a password = dumb. In replacement of captcha/personal questions, not so dumb.
I think the article summary just uses the word "password" as a simple "sorta means the same" for a word to make it understandable to a wide audience.
Uhm, fishing requires a boat right? Capital investment, sorta like what would be required to build a fish farm.
Seems to me like "fish farms cost money" is only a good argument if boats fall out of the sky fully fueled or something....
On that note, wasn't the difference in the battery life that they did not expect the panels to get cleaned off by the winds like they are getting cleaned?
Perhaps a trip into a crater is not the best way to stay in the cleansing winds....
Does your plan fit into this quarter or next quarter's profits?
Now add your firewall, network routing, VPN, ISP owned IP addresses, etc. (and if you are unlucky SOX regulations) into the mix and there IS no market forces in any situation except a brand new city on brand new land where no existing infrastructure exists. Once you have termination liability and agreements (bribes) to cities in place "market forces" is out the window.
The FCC is a bunch of right-wing a-holes in bed and getting back-room bribes from big industry and the politicians owned by big industry to the point they carry zero credibility. (One need only look at the crackdown on non-puritan TV for proof of that.)
Do reverse DNS on the IPs of those hops. (Or use the switch that does that in the trace command)
You can also look up their allocations at ICANN.
Feel free to tape the criminals. (There are companies that specialize in that stuff if you care to outsource.)
Keep in mind, the criminal is probably either not going to do the deed if he sees you taping, or beat you up and take your camera first..
The police on the other hand, will beat you up, throw you in jail, make up charges, financially ruin you and your family, get you fired, keep you in jail, and further their political careers while doing it. And then "drop the charges" when you try to fight back thus "fixing" all the damage they did. (Yeah right.) They are doing this now, to real people.
So, I am not sure why your child-like argument bears any weight about what the ACLU should be doing. Join and give them money, or shut your whore mouth about it cuz it's none of your bidness. Hmmkay?
That's great. Simply refrain from giving them any money and STFU then.
Yes, it is an attempt to antagonize the pigs. If you mean "stand up for ones rights" when you say "antagonize" that is...
Furthermore, the fact the ACLU is doing it (people who are quite adept at lawyering and whatnot) will allow the case to get somewhere significant, rather than just financially ass-raping some poor sap because some cop got pissed about getting taped.
With luck, it will either intimidate the asshole DAs in the world and the asshole cops in the world to do the right thing, or allow the few good ones to lay the proper smack down on the assholes to the point they have no more power. (i.e. Fired, jail, dead.)
That would actually be good if all those dudes started using it like that.
Then, a simple hosts file entry means I can block or view that stuff at will. Rather than relying on finding 40 or so other free hosting sites that are used in forums for whatever trollish crud happens to be going on that day.
Welcome to the internet, noob.
In all seriousness, what you describe (scanning the pages) already happens all over if you know where to look or know the right people (who scan, rip, archive, or crack).
Pirate Bay Images will be just one more "if you know where to look" place. The average schlub is never going to know nor care about it and still buy his Playboy off the rack like he always does.
As far as the total "pirated or copied stuff" goes, the image portion of Pirate Bay will not do a whole lot to the total, or overall make it a bit harder for the copyright holders who actively try to have stuff taken down to get all the places... even though that is useless as playing spammer whack-a-mole. Get one and five minutes later there are three more.
Getting all worked up about this particular place and method is pointless.
Count me in as another Canon i550 fan.
My only complaint is it's tenancy to want to clean the print heads every time it is turned on... that combined with cats that walk over it (and hit the power button in the process). Often I would wake up to the sound of it doing something (wasting ink).
I just keep it unplugged when not in use now.
With the new digital camera I am leaning towards replacing it with a cheap color printer, but haven't pulled the trigger yet on that.
Heh, or another simple one:
"No, of course not because I am never going to use them."
I used to work for them, and wouldn't willingly let anybody that works there bag my groceries, let alone control anything critical.
(No offense to you grocery-bagging slashdotters.)
Of those 11 dimensions 10 could be quite useful for colonizing the galaxy.
Skipping over the 8th so we don't accidentally let any red lectroids in of course.
I bet you are great fun at parties.
Yeah, he probably meant "Hard disk data" or something.
Though, it's still pathetic. A court order needs to be specific, and correct. Anything else is a travesty of justice and open for abuse. How else are they going to expect it to be legally binding? "Send me your thingamajig and the whatzit or you go to jail for 30 days." How is one supposed to comply with something that makes no sense? Plus, point that out or be sarcastic and you risk pissing off the judge and landing in jail.
The judge made himself look too incompetent to pick up the phone and call a nephew for a reality check. Heck, I'd do that type of work for $30 an hour if he wants to email me I am ready.
Just more proof that all portions of the legal profession have no freaking clue and are out of touch with just about any reality aside from their own little money grubbing ways.
No mass, but mass-like qualities.
For example, those little thingies with the black and white paddles in them that look like light bulbs from middle school science class work on the idea that photons transfer and take momentum from stuff they interact with. Momentum is a quality very closely tied with mass.
Likewise, photons are affected by gravitational fields. Having gravity and being affected by it are also qualities very tightly bound with mass.
So, you sort of need to define how you mean "mass" before claiming photons don't have it. No mass in "high school physics" sense, but sure has some mass when you are talking about cosmological stuff or high-energy physics. Indeed, you can really only say "mass: having mass like qualities X, Y and Z" and photons have some of them. So either a grid to define mass with check boxes, or make up some nomenclature Mass: x',y',z" where 1 tick means has, two has not.
Yeah, that sort of depends on whether you think the galactic plane and solar (stellar) plane have a tendency to coincide or not.
Our solar system is off galactic plane by around 63 degrees or so. The solar (stellar) plane is a function of the angular momentum of the dust cloud (assuming the solar system creation model we have is correct). The galactic plane, is the same thing, only on much larger scale of the galaxy (duh).
One would think that the total aggregate angular momentum of the galaxy would strongly suggest the same bias toward stellar planes more or less lining up. Basically if you look at a star it's probability of having the stellar plane line up with us is a bell curve where the center is 0 degrees out of galactic plane, and the higher you go the fewer do. (That's what I think is the case.)
Unfortunately, we only have one data point (our solar system) and others that by the means of detection mean they are lined up with us...
You would have to have a known average "has a planet" value for any star already to sort out if the extra solar plane has a high probability of being earth-pointing or not, and you could only do it by comparing the rate of earth-pointing planes above the galactic plane (a low probability) vs the earth-pointing in the galactic plane planets.
So you need the value (rate of "has a planet") you want to determine the value you want (how many planets are there?).
In other words, we only see a small percentage of planets that way, but we don't know what that percentage is without getting some other means to measure how many planets there are (the "has planet" rate for stars).
It's pretty cool they are finding lots of these though, sooner or later someone is going to figure out how to image them.... I look forward to that.
This is probably XP Pro machines that get infected by means other than the webserver.
Once someone has control, they can pretty easily start the service and stick malicious files in the default root in IIS.
You don't need a remote hole to get numbers like this.
Well with credit to the GP, there _are_ lots of mis-used words on both sides.
"Pirate" may not be one of them, "Stealing" or "Theft" sure is. Legally and with common meaning, stealing and theft always implies the removal of the thing from the rightful owner in the sense they can't use or possess it anymore. "Theft of services" for taking electricity from someone's garage plug, or hijacking their CPU time or whatever.
Illegally copying files via a P2P is a copyright violation. It is NOT stealing.