Manufacturers can still keep their bottom line by making cables and connectors so bad they have to be replaced even more often than before. As a matter of fact, I think that already happened.
There was a piece on NPR about this about a week ago: http://bit.ly/mnZf5r
Quite interesting to listen to this in its entirety (about 46 min). The reactions from listeners to that program were markedly different from what the slashdot crowd generally seems to think.
And the logical next step can only be that in commercial aviation, they will start offloading their avionics to the combined processing power of all the cell phones that happen to be on board. Finally, they are coming to their senses!
99.997% of people don't care about this kind of thing. In a decade or two it'll be almost impossible to buy computing devices that aren't locked down. There are advantages for the vendor, and whatever disadvantages there are for the customer require specialized knowledge to even understand, so there is no market force to balance.
Thus dies the freedom that led many into computing in the first place. It was a good run while it lasted.
Thing it sounds crazy? Well not that long ago, the very *idea* of such a locked down device was crazy. Today they are all over the place and people snap them up.
Understand your sentiment, but keep in mind that one of the reasons Android is selling so well these days is because it is considered an open system, even by those who don't really understand the implications, as opposed to iOS. So, in a world where everything is totally locked down, a product that is not locked down might actually appeal to enough people that they would vote with their wallet, and ensure at least a niche for that product, if not more.
The "market" is just not something that will stay in any one corner for eternity.
My Twitter timeline is the most relevant information stream I have come across in all my online life. It really depends on who you are following (and what it is that you're interested in in the first place). I have never come across a tweet where somebody told what they had for breakfast (although I can think of circumstances in which I would find that information highly relevant).
but I'm working on it! The only way to get Corporate/Management off of IE6 is to fix any web apps you have in your organization that won't work on anything but that.
At the same time, more and more important sites out there need to stop supporting IE6. Where I work now, we are forced to use IE6 because it is "company standard", but it is accepted, at the same time, that we need to look up stuff on external web sites all the time. If those sites no longer support our browser, that would be an increasingly urgent reason to upgrade.
Once that decision is taken, it would probably only take between 4 and 6 years to actually get the project implemented...
Thanks for the correction. Apparently, the quote is being attributed to different people all the time. Here in Germany I've heard it being attributed to Goethe on more than one occasion.
Twitter is not a discussion tool. There are other tools for that, for example the tool into which I am typing this sentence. Hence my reference to weblogs as a necessary complement to Twitter.
To me, the 140-character limit of Twitter is more than offset by the conciseness of the information it thusly transports. I find it actually very stimulating to be limited to 140 characters. Forces you to think a little longer before you post.
As Goethe once said: Sorry for writing this long letter, I didn't have time for a shorter one.
But in any case, you can combine Twitter with a Blog and use that if you really think you need to say something longer than 140 characters, then post the link on Twitter. Posterous is an excellent site for that.
And to those who still think that Twitter is the place where people tell you they're having a sandwich -- you are obviously following the wrong people. It is the most efficient information engine I have ever seen -- and many other things beyond that.
So they speculate that code they wrote had an interrupt routine that was not bracketed with PUSHF/POPF instructions!!! Which is like Assembly 101.
I didn't read it that way. He's talking about an arithmetic carry condition being misremembered across an interrupt. This sounds to me like a CPU-internal hardware condition that might not have been included in the regular set of data that you save across an interrupt. Maybe the wrong type of PUSHF/POPF was used. It certainly doesn't sound like Assembly 101.
Maybe uselessly slow, yes, but this is the kind of tinkering that any device should allow if it is to be called a computer.
There's a direct link to a free information society from these kinds of experiments -- something that is very much endangered by the current trend towards unmodifiable devices and appifization.
The EXIF data says it was taken with a Nikon D700 DSLR and a 20mm lens.
A wide-angle 12.1 Mpixel image taken with a diffraction grating and cropped to 778x500 pixels would explain the image quality.
this is the "Hi res" 28k JPG image on the site. Anyone else get the feeling that they rushed up there to watch it and then someone said "I thought you said you'd bring the cameras" so it was then out with the mobile phones.
Nice speculation, but the image you refer to is probably cut out from a much larger raw image. The URL has something about "800mm" in the name, which probably refers to an already somewhat decent telephoto lens having been in use. Definitely not your mobile phone!
Oops, I misread your quote. I thought you were saying that computing itself would be a divide by zero without her. Now I see you were making a joke. Carry on and ignore my post.:)
Read the spec halfway through and hack away. You have proven yourself to be a real programmer. Salute!
Presumably the real answer to "what data was stolen" is "we don't know".
Mod parent up. I think that hits the nail on the head. Immediately when I read the article I wondered, why on earth do they keep the European data separate from the rest of the world? And, what's more, keep the British data separate from the "continental data"? I find it hard to believe that this was the case.
"... enough data there to spark a major European crime wave."
"... harvesting every record on Best Western's European reservation system."
Sounds like the article did disambiguate...
Yes, but then again it refers to the FBI as if it had something to do with this investigation. There are hints in the article, yes, but it would have helped to just say it.
It didn't help that the Slashdot summary implied it was every Best Western hotel, making no reference to Europe at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Given how many 2/10 I see in my everyday job life, it can't be that hard.
Manufacturers can still keep their bottom line by making cables and connectors so bad they have to be replaced even more often than before. As a matter of fact, I think that already happened.
There was a piece on NPR about this about a week ago: http://bit.ly/mnZf5r Quite interesting to listen to this in its entirety (about 46 min). The reactions from listeners to that program were markedly different from what the slashdot crowd generally seems to think.
And the logical next step can only be that in commercial aviation, they will start offloading their avionics to the combined processing power of all the cell phones that happen to be on board. Finally, they are coming to their senses!
99.997% of people don't care about this kind of thing. In a decade or two it'll be almost impossible to buy computing devices that aren't locked down. There are advantages for the vendor, and whatever disadvantages there are for the customer require specialized knowledge to even understand, so there is no market force to balance.
Thus dies the freedom that led many into computing in the first place. It was a good run while it lasted.
Thing it sounds crazy? Well not that long ago, the very *idea* of such a locked down device was crazy. Today they are all over the place and people snap them up.
Understand your sentiment, but keep in mind that one of the reasons Android is selling so well these days is because it is considered an open system, even by those who don't really understand the implications, as opposed to iOS. So, in a world where everything is totally locked down, a product that is not locked down might actually appeal to enough people that they would vote with their wallet, and ensure at least a niche for that product, if not more.
The "market" is just not something that will stay in any one corner for eternity.
My Twitter timeline is the most relevant information stream I have come across in all my online life. It really depends on who you are following (and what it is that you're interested in in the first place). I have never come across a tweet where somebody told what they had for breakfast (although I can think of circumstances in which I would find that information highly relevant).
but I'm working on it! The only way to get Corporate/Management off of IE6 is to fix any web apps you have in your organization that won't work on anything but that.
At the same time, more and more important sites out there need to stop supporting IE6. Where I work now, we are forced to use IE6 because it is "company standard", but it is accepted, at the same time, that we need to look up stuff on external web sites all the time. If those sites no longer support our browser, that would be an increasingly urgent reason to upgrade.
Once that decision is taken, it would probably only take between 4 and 6 years to actually get the project implemented...
Thanks for the correction. Apparently, the quote is being attributed to different people all the time. Here in Germany I've heard it being attributed to Goethe on more than one occasion.
Twitter is not a discussion tool. There are other tools for that, for example the tool into which I am typing this sentence. Hence my reference to weblogs as a necessary complement to Twitter.
Mod parent up. This link really traces it back. Thanks for the info.
He would have said that in two tweets.
To me, the 140-character limit of Twitter is more than offset by the conciseness of the information it thusly transports. I find it actually very stimulating to be limited to 140 characters. Forces you to think a little longer before you post.
As Goethe once said: Sorry for writing this long letter, I didn't have time for a shorter one.
But in any case, you can combine Twitter with a Blog and use that if you really think you need to say something longer than 140 characters, then post the link on Twitter. Posterous is an excellent site for that.
And to those who still think that Twitter is the place where people tell you they're having a sandwich -- you are obviously following the wrong people. It is the most efficient information engine I have ever seen -- and many other things beyond that.
So they speculate that code they wrote had an interrupt routine that was not bracketed with PUSHF/POPF instructions!!! Which is like Assembly 101.
I didn't read it that way. He's talking about an arithmetic carry condition being misremembered across an interrupt. This sounds to me like a CPU-internal hardware condition that might not have been included in the regular set of data that you save across an interrupt. Maybe the wrong type of PUSHF/POPF was used. It certainly doesn't sound like Assembly 101.
I'll grant you that, but what I don't understand is this:
If you test, and do find some bugs, does that allow you to put any more trust in your software than if you tested and didn't find any?
David Cummings does seem to know what he's talking about, but as it is written, there is some strange logic in the article.
Testing cannot prove the absence of bugs, only their presence. There are two things that do not follow from this:
It sounds to me as if Toyota is saying the former, while Cummings says the latter. Neither is a correct conclusion.
If there was anything that could guarantee the skyrocketing success of the iPad, we've just witnessed it.
Maybe uselessly slow, yes, but this is the kind of tinkering that any device should allow if it is to be called a computer.
There's a direct link to a free information society from these kinds of experiments -- something that is very much endangered by the current trend towards unmodifiable devices and appifization.
The EXIF data says it was taken with a Nikon D700 DSLR and a 20mm lens. A wide-angle 12.1 Mpixel image taken with a diffraction grating and cropped to 778x500 pixels would explain the image quality.
Wow.
this is the "Hi res" 28k JPG image on the site. Anyone else get the feeling that they rushed up there to watch it and then someone said "I thought you said you'd bring the cameras" so it was then out with the mobile phones.
Nice speculation, but the image you refer to is probably cut out from a much larger raw image. The URL has something about "800mm" in the name, which probably refers to an already somewhat decent telephoto lens having been in use. Definitely not your mobile phone!
I guess the summary could have been clearer about this being an intentional breakup during re-entry. The craft is designed to be destroyed after use.
Oops, I misread your quote. I thought you were saying that computing itself would be a divide by zero without her. Now I see you were making a joke. Carry on and ignore my post. :)
Read the spec halfway through and hack away. You have proven yourself to be a real programmer. Salute!
How can you forget Ada Lovelace?
Yeah, if it weren't for her, computing the ratio would always exit with division-by-zero. We owe her much.
My laptop never shuts down, I always just put it to sleep. Flip open, hack away. Less than 5 seconds. Oh, that's under Ubuntu, by the way.
Presumably the real answer to "what data was stolen" is "we don't know".
Mod parent up. I think that hits the nail on the head. Immediately when I read the article I wondered, why on earth do they keep the European data separate from the rest of the world? And, what's more, keep the British data separate from the "continental data"? I find it hard to believe that this was the case.
From TFA:
"... enough data there to spark a major European crime wave."
"... harvesting every record on Best Western's European reservation system."
Sounds like the article did disambiguate...
Yes, but then again it refers to the FBI as if it had something to do with this investigation. There are hints in the article, yes, but it would have helped to just say it.
It didn't help that the Slashdot summary implied it was every Best Western hotel, making no reference to Europe at all.