As someone who just purchased a couple of Linksys WiFi adapters (1 PC Card, 1 USB) I can say, I don't need anything faster for my use. Half my network was 10Mb anyway, and these WiFi adapters work full speed throughout the house. perfect for home use.
(One of them claims up to 450 meters outside range. a couple walls arn't going to kill it.
'cours 54Mb would be more fun. (I did not linksys had something to do 74Mb, propietary though I believe.)
Build your own database of the roads you drive on, mark off with the GPS the start, end of any given speed limit. (You could also do this by actually following the speed limit, the GPS will record you track and speed; it isn't perfect since it filters speeds to be usefull, but quite adaquate for most roads).
I've considered hooking up 3 LEDs. A green, a Yellow and a Red, indicating the current speed related to the posted speed. Personally I'd set the Yellow to be the speed limit + margin of about 10%... GPS is accurate enough, and around here you won't get a ticket for doing 110km/h in a 100/km/h zone.
It is not illegal to carry, or use a GPS on aircraft in the U.S. as a passenger.
Period.
It may be against the Airlines policy, or the Pilot (who gets last say).
please search google/groups for GPS and airline, you'll find the discussion comes up a lot in sci.geo.satellite-nav
Anytime someone says it is by FAA regulations request a regulation number. There isn't one. There is one for the guildines airlines may use to allow, or disallow such devices
I suspect the industries are aware that unknowns would indeed be helped by have a more open market.
What wouldn't be helped would be the superstars. I think it is unlikely that n'synch, Britney, or any other flavour of the week would be helped by a more open market.
From the sounds of it, the repeated stories of various schools are using a simple method to deal with a problem: If it looks similar it is, toss the student.
Do they actually do ANY investigation?
Or do they start threatening first?
Why not monitor that student for future violations before even talking to the student. Simply getting help on an assignment may result in some of the work being similar, or the same. I've seen it happen. I've seen people that didn't talk to each other and come up with exactly the same solution using the same variable names. Complicated algorithm? no, but then, there arn't any in Intro classes anyway.
Why? Because you get into a pattern of choices and sometimes they match. (tell me how many people here use 'i' as an Integer variable generally used for a generic loop?).
No, copying code is not acceptable. Using code without including its source is unacceptable. But it shouldn't be any more acceptable for a school to toss a student for getting enough help to do an assignment. There is a difference.
The good news is there should be a number of devices in the near future with the same, or similar capabilities. The better news? It really should work as well as described.
A significant problem with receiving GPS signals the amount of time it takes to lock onto a signal. One of the reasons it takes so long is because the unit starts off with little, or no knowledge of where it is. With PCS (cellular) the unit can request the most recent alamanac, ephemeris as well as an approximate location, and time. With these 4 things a GPS unit (any new unit in the last few years) should be able to lock onto a signal in less than 15 seconds. It is my understanding that the PCS/GPS combination is expected to lock on in under 3 seconds. Based on descriptions of similar PCS/GPS combination it looks like these units are also quite capable of keeping a lock within a building with a high degree of accuracy. (Technically my handheld GPS unit can lock onto a satalite from the basement (virtual no windows) *if* the satalite is directly overhead. I suspect with newer designs it would be able to do an even better job; and if a partial location can be calculate the satalite lock should be possible.
According to some documents I previously browsed the PCS/GPS techniques allow for low power devices to lock on with very little processing. As such, the power usage is quite good. Casio's GPS watch has a battery life of about 12hrs (I think). It uses much older technologies than this device.
Me, I want this in my car. (For all those doubters out there, current handhelds work well in most cars. The cars with a thin layer of metal on the windshield DO experience problems, but most other vehicles don't have major issues. I just leave mine on the passenger seat or on the dash. (with velcro).)
Non-PCS enhanced GPS:
Generic GPS units are accurate to about 5-15meters these days. With Selective Availability off -all- GPS units benefit. (SA was used to intentionally reduce the accuracy of GPS). My handheld GPS easily gets to 5 meter accuracy on a good day, but 10 is probably about all I can trust most of the time. (Even if it is accuracte to within 1 meter in the middle of nowhere I can't be CERTAIN it is that accurate).
A $1200 GPS only system will give the same results as a $100 GPS handheld UNLESS the $1200 is designed with some of the survey techniques. Differential GPS (DGPS) is accurate to about 3-10 meters and includes reliability information (instead of error estimates) and is typically used on boats. DGPS requires a land-based tower to transmit localized GPS corrections. DGPS is accurate to 3-10 meters with, or without Selective Availability on. I suspect that is why the US Military gave its approval for Selective Availability to be disabled, it had little use anyway. (My handheld GPS supports DGPS, but it needs an external radio to receive the DGPS signals).
WAAS is new, and still in testing phase, WAAS stands for Wide Area Augmentation System. The idea behind WAAS is to have 3 meter accuracy for airplanes and boats. (Don't expect WAAS to work well in mountains, cities, or in the bush.) WAAS currently uses 2 geosynchronous satalites to send similar corrections that DGPS use, only WAAS covers most of North America. (One satalite is over the pacific, the other the atlantic, as such those of us in the middle don't get much of the signal on the ground.)
GPS is uni-directional system; No kidnappers cannot use it to find the kids to abduct. (Someone else posted that as an idea....)
And, being a 2-way pager system won't change that unless someone released all the access codes. (Even then it would not be very usefull).
I don't understand the people who don't think this can work at all.
a) Most kids would probably think the watch is cool.
b) an abductor is unlikely to be aware such things even exist.
Hell, most people are shocked when I show them my GPS, which is no longer manufactured because it has been surpassed. (GPS 48).
c) If a potential abductor is aware of it perhaps they will move on to an easier target.
(If you can't eliminate the predator just don't become the prey).
Ever few days in the city I live in there are reports of some creep approaching some kid trying to get them in the car, give them candy, expose themselves, etc. If some kid wearing a watch like this pushes the button, the parents come running and the guy is seen by an adult and possibly identified this device is worth it.
And no, I don't think there is anything unusual about the city I'm in, it only has a population of 650,000.
This just reminds me of the napster data format. Anybody ever read the reverse engineered specs? It's scary. It looks like it was designed by a monkey. And not a smart one.
yEnc sounds like a good idea, and a horribly bad implementation.
Actually a second system, if it uses a seperate set of frequencies increases the accuracy if the whole system. (Different frequencies are affected by atmospheric interference differently; and can be used to correct for problems; part of the reason the military gets higher accuracy is simply because it uses the second frequency for GPS.)
Re:How well would BeOS run on one
on
Low-end Laptops?
·
· Score: 2
according to one article I read one of the political paties (wanna guess?) was paying a group to report such instances of english signs. So, no, it wasn't 'tax dollars'. close enough.
Nusphere fixed the basic issue here; they no longer distribute without source code.
MySQLs actions make little sense, they are acting like spoiled children who didn't get their way. (Incomprehensible to me; I think an ego clash occured)
MySQL can't claim damages with regard to the GPL because there aren't any. If you look at the information released the other day you'll note near the end (EFF statement) That Nusphere fixed the problem; That EFF encourages compliance, not court action; and the short acknolwedgement that they believe Nusphere violated the license.
You would note near the beginning they state the purpose of the GPL and their general intent to reach a compliance.
Because Microsoft has never shown any level of success with security.
OpenBSD however has been able to show a significant reduction of problems.
Microsoft will never deal with the problem until they can keep programmers for more than 5 years activly writing the applications. Instead they hire people at an early age, get some code out of them, and then shuffle them around till they get bored and uninterested in what they do and they move on.
You've created a custom solution for an industry which is highly regulated. You won't have a choice on paying any ceritifcation fees, and, you might not qualify anyway.
Even if you were contracted by each bingo hall seperatly you would probably find a requirement for certification anyway. Either you, or the end results.
Had you created an accounting package (for instance) and they happened to choose it -they- would have to deal with any certification. (Although there may be other, specific regulations in your state for accounting software).
They specificly played with the timing, but it isn't too relevent for getting an accurate (quarter second) time. Besidss which they have supressed that function (Selective Availability) and cannot unilaterally turn it on without a change of law. (They don't need it anyway, they have a localized version of SA that can be used over any small area they choose.) Pretty much means North America is fine.
1) I used my own SMTP server as, at the time, my ISP was damn near useless as a mail server. By the way, at the time, no ISPs were submitting their cable modem/ dialup pools to the lists.
2) They didn't 'bother' to verify it was just them that was firewalled. They ASSUMED it was just them and acted accordingly. (They would get the address of such servers by comparing mail from users to their 'correct' mail servers. downright obsesive if you ask me.).
3) Most of the fools who add these blacklists to their mail servers do not do so with management approval; customer service for such providers tend to say ' were sorry, but internet email is unreliable, it isn't a problem on our end because we still get mail'... sure, but not from everybody.
4) It isn't a deterent, its a fucking pain in the ass. They have, and continue to add people, and networks that should not be blacklisted. It happens. And they are NEVER quick to remove it when they screw up.
Had the blacklist services been implemented in a more friendly manner they wouldn't bother me; instead they are implemented as a 'all your mail are belong to us' crap.
I've had the pleasure of sitting across the table from someone who was descriing his 'job' for one of the anti-spam groups. According to him, my home machine could end up on their list because it was an un-authorized mail server. Regardless of the fact NO-ONE except me could ever send mail from it.
He also acknowledged they would put a server on the list if it sent mail out but could not be tested. If a firewall prevented their accessing the box they would ASSUME it was hostile and put it on the list.
These are not the actions of a group of people wanting to prevent spam, these are the actions of a group of people attempting to wield control over the Internet.
They are all simply a bunch of bastards that have no regard for anyone other than themselves.
If they knew what the fuck they were doing they would automate the removale process (at a minimum) and deal seperately with those few organizations which would choose to abuse it. Instead they decided they are the arbiters of justice.
Currently there is an american company suing the Canadian government for the same thing. with any luck it is the same additive. The problem, and the reason the lawsuits can and should exist? No proper study has proven the effects. Ie: neither government has had a study done because both 'know' it is harmfull. So they won't pay for a study of somehting so obvious. Hence: No study to use in court to show it is harmfull.
Slashdot Mirror
As someone who just purchased a couple of Linksys WiFi adapters (1 PC Card, 1 USB) I can say, I don't need anything faster for my use. Half my network was 10Mb anyway, and these WiFi adapters work full speed throughout the house. perfect for home use.
(One of them claims up to 450 meters outside range. a couple walls arn't going to kill it.
'cours 54Mb would be more fun. (I did not linksys had something to do 74Mb, propietary though I believe.)
Build your own database of the roads you drive on, mark off with the GPS the start, end of any given speed limit. (You could also do this by actually following the speed limit, the GPS will record you track and speed; it isn't perfect since it filters speeds to be usefull, but quite adaquate for most roads).
I've considered hooking up 3 LEDs. A green, a Yellow and a Red, indicating the current speed related to the posted speed. Personally I'd set the Yellow to be the speed limit + margin of about 10%... GPS is accurate enough, and around here you won't get a ticket for doing 110km/h in a 100/km/h zone.
Thanks for link. I expected everybody here to jump on this as a major negative.
By the way, any o you buying a new GM may already have such a device in your car.
And yes, it will help in accident investigations.
It is not illegal to carry, or use a GPS on aircraft in the U.S. as a passenger.
Period.
It may be against the Airlines policy, or the Pilot (who gets last say).
please search google/groups for GPS and airline, you'll find the discussion comes up a lot in sci.geo.satellite-nav
Anytime someone says it is by FAA regulations request a regulation number. There isn't one.
There is one for the guildines airlines may use to allow, or disallow such devices
Perhaps people simply got BORED with the book and dontated what they thought was appropriate. Nothing.
Wrong problem.
I suspect the industries are aware that unknowns would indeed be helped by have a more open market.
What wouldn't be helped would be the superstars. I think it is unlikely that n'synch, Britney, or any other flavour of the week would be helped by a more open market.
And that would effect the bottom line.
Bull Shit.
From the sounds of it, the repeated stories of various schools are using a simple method to deal with a problem: If it looks similar it is, toss the student.
Do they actually do ANY investigation?
Or do they start threatening first?
Why not monitor that student for future violations before even talking to the student. Simply getting help on an assignment may result in some of the work being similar, or the same. I've seen it happen. I've seen people that didn't talk to each other and come up with exactly the same solution using the same variable names. Complicated algorithm? no, but then, there arn't any in Intro classes anyway.
Why? Because you get into a pattern of choices and sometimes they match. (tell me how many people here use 'i' as an Integer variable generally used for a generic loop?).
No, copying code is not acceptable. Using code without including its source is unacceptable. But it shouldn't be any more acceptable for a school to toss a student for getting enough help to do an assignment. There is a difference.
Is it good at producing, or filtering...
There -is- a difference.
Buy any PCCard based GPS (virtually any) and use the text based information they spit out. NMEA-0183.
The good news is there should be a number of devices in the near future with the same, or similar capabilities. The better news? It really should work as well as described.
A significant problem with receiving GPS signals the amount of time it takes to lock onto a signal. One of the reasons it takes so long is because the unit starts off with little, or no knowledge of where it is. With PCS (cellular) the unit can request the most recent alamanac, ephemeris as well as an approximate location, and time. With these 4 things a GPS unit (any new unit in the last few years) should be able to lock onto a signal in less than 15 seconds. It is my understanding that the PCS/GPS combination is expected to lock on in under 3 seconds.
Based on descriptions of similar PCS/GPS combination it looks like these units are also quite capable of keeping a lock within a building with a high degree of accuracy. (Technically my handheld GPS unit can lock onto a satalite from the basement (virtual no windows) *if* the satalite is directly overhead. I suspect with newer designs it would be able to do an even better job; and if a partial location can be calculate the satalite lock should be possible.
According to some documents I previously browsed the PCS/GPS techniques allow for low power devices to lock on with very little processing. As such, the power usage is quite good. Casio's GPS watch has a battery life of about 12hrs (I think). It uses much older technologies than this device.
Me, I want this in my car. (For all those doubters out there, current handhelds work well in most cars. The cars with a thin layer of metal on the windshield DO experience problems, but most other vehicles don't have major issues. I just leave mine on the passenger seat or on the dash. (with velcro).)
Non-PCS enhanced GPS:
Generic GPS units are accurate to about 5-15meters these days. With Selective Availability off -all- GPS units benefit. (SA was used to intentionally reduce the accuracy of GPS). My handheld GPS easily gets to 5 meter accuracy on a good day, but 10 is probably about all I can trust most of the time. (Even if it is accuracte to within 1 meter in the middle of nowhere I can't be CERTAIN it is that accurate).
A $1200 GPS only system will give the same results as a $100 GPS handheld UNLESS the $1200 is designed with some of the survey techniques. Differential GPS (DGPS) is accurate to about 3-10 meters and includes reliability information (instead of error estimates) and is typically used on boats. DGPS requires a land-based tower to transmit localized GPS corrections. DGPS is accurate to 3-10 meters with, or without Selective Availability on. I suspect that is why the US Military gave its approval for Selective Availability to be disabled, it had little use anyway. (My handheld GPS supports DGPS, but it needs an external radio to receive the DGPS signals).
WAAS is new, and still in testing phase, WAAS stands for Wide Area Augmentation System. The idea behind WAAS is to have 3 meter accuracy for airplanes and boats. (Don't expect WAAS to work well in mountains, cities, or in the bush.) WAAS currently uses 2 geosynchronous satalites to send similar corrections that DGPS use, only WAAS covers most of North America. (One satalite is over the pacific, the other the atlantic, as such those of us in the middle don't get much of the signal on the ground.)
GPS is uni-directional system; No kidnappers cannot use it to find the kids to abduct. (Someone else posted that as an idea....)
And, being a 2-way pager system won't change that unless someone released all the access codes. (Even then it would not be very usefull).
I don't understand the people who don't think this can work at all.
a) Most kids would probably think the watch is cool.
b) an abductor is unlikely to be aware such things even exist.
Hell, most people are shocked when I show them my GPS, which is no longer manufactured because it has been surpassed. (GPS 48).
c) If a potential abductor is aware of it perhaps they will move on to an easier target.
(If you can't eliminate the predator just don't become the prey).
Ever few days in the city I live in there are reports of some creep approaching some kid trying to get them in the car, give them candy, expose themselves, etc. If some kid wearing a watch like this pushes the button, the parents come running and the guy is seen by an adult and possibly identified this device is worth it.
And no, I don't think there is anything unusual about the city I'm in, it only has a population of 650,000.
This just reminds me of the napster data format. Anybody ever read the reverse engineered specs? It's scary. It looks like it was designed by a monkey. And not a smart one.
yEnc sounds like a good idea, and a horribly bad implementation.
Actually a second system, if it uses a seperate set of frequencies increases the accuracy if the whole system. (Different frequencies are affected by atmospheric interference differently; and can be used to correct for problems; part of the reason the military gets higher accuracy is simply because it uses the second frequency for GPS.)
Doesn't it just piss you off about BeOS?
I have been accused by americans of saying aboot. I'm from B.C. and currently residing in Manitoba (and had been here about 5 years at the time.)
To most Americans Canadians all say "about" wrong. The degree to which we do it is different, but apparent.
Me, I think it's them...
Most movies I've picked up in the last year or two has had French as a language option.
according to one article I read one of the political paties (wanna guess?) was paying a group to report such instances of english signs. So, no, it wasn't 'tax dollars'. close enough.
Nusphere fixed the basic issue here; they no longer distribute without source code.
MySQLs actions make little sense, they are acting like spoiled children who didn't get their way. (Incomprehensible to me; I think an ego clash occured)
MySQL can't claim damages with regard to the GPL because there aren't any. If you look at the information released the other day you'll note near the end (EFF statement) That Nusphere fixed the problem; That EFF encourages compliance, not court action; and the short acknolwedgement that they believe Nusphere violated the license.
You would note near the beginning they state the purpose of the GPL and their general intent to reach a compliance.
Second season? Oh hell, you have a long way to go, it gets worse; much worse.
It's so bad now I find it hard to fathom why they continue it.
Because Microsoft has never shown any level of success with security.
OpenBSD however has been able to show a significant reduction of problems.
Microsoft will never deal with the problem until they can keep programmers for more than 5 years activly writing the applications. Instead they hire people at an early age, get some code out of them, and then shuffle them around till they get bored and uninterested in what they do and they move on.
Your screwed.
You've created a custom solution for an industry which is highly regulated. You won't have a choice on paying any ceritifcation fees, and, you might not qualify anyway.
Even if you were contracted by each bingo hall seperatly you would probably find a requirement for certification anyway. Either you, or the end results.
Had you created an accounting package (for instance) and they happened to choose it -they- would have to deal with any certification. (Although there may be other, specific regulations in your state for accounting software).
They specificly played with the timing, but it isn't too relevent for getting an accurate (quarter second) time. Besidss which they have supressed that function (Selective Availability) and cannot unilaterally turn it on without a change of law. (They don't need it anyway, they have a localized version of SA that can be used over any small area they choose.) Pretty much means North America is fine.
I'm convinced they create a list of names, (anything before the @) and a list of domains, (anything after the @) and submit ALL names to all domains.
I say this because of mail I have which contains a dozen variations on my address in 'Apparently-To' entries in the mail.
1) I used my own SMTP server as, at the time, my ISP was damn near useless as a mail server. By the way, at the time, no ISPs were submitting their cable modem/ dialup pools to the lists.
2) They didn't 'bother' to verify it was just them that was firewalled. They ASSUMED it was just them and acted accordingly. (They would get the address of such servers by comparing mail from users to their 'correct' mail servers. downright obsesive if you ask me.).
3) Most of the fools who add these blacklists to their mail servers do not do so with management approval; customer service for such providers tend to say ' were sorry, but internet email is unreliable, it isn't a problem on our end because we still get mail'... sure, but not from everybody.
4) It isn't a deterent, its a fucking pain in the ass. They have, and continue to add people, and networks that should not be blacklisted. It happens. And they are NEVER quick to remove it when they screw up.
Had the blacklist services been implemented in a more friendly manner they wouldn't bother me; instead they are implemented as a 'all your mail are belong to us' crap.
I've had the pleasure of sitting across the table from someone who was descriing his 'job' for one of the anti-spam groups. According to him, my home machine could end up on their list because it was an un-authorized mail server. Regardless of the fact NO-ONE except me could ever send mail from it.
He also acknowledged they would put a server on the list if it sent mail out but could not be tested. If a firewall prevented their accessing the box they would ASSUME it was hostile and put it on the list.
These are not the actions of a group of people wanting to prevent spam, these are the actions of a group of people attempting to wield control over the Internet.
They are all simply a bunch of bastards that have no regard for anyone other than themselves.
If they knew what the fuck they were doing they would automate the removale process (at a minimum) and deal seperately with those few organizations which would choose to abuse it. Instead they decided they are the arbiters of justice.
Currently there is an american company suing the Canadian government for the same thing. with any luck it is the same additive. The problem, and the reason the lawsuits can and should exist? No proper study has proven the effects. Ie: neither government has had a study done because both 'know' it is harmfull. So they won't pay for a study of somehting so obvious. Hence: No study to use in court to show it is harmfull.
Even though it is.