Or it could suggest to terrorists that they are currently successful in spreading terror across the US. If, as a result of 9/11 and other terror attacks around the world you can't walk into an airport with wires on your person then they've done their job of spreading fear and terror. Everyone is a suspect, and one worth putting to gun point.
Americans are now holding guns to fellow citizens because of a terrorist attack that occurred over six years ago. It would seem that Al-Qaeda only has to carry out an attack on US soil once every 10 years or maybe even less than that to keep American citizens in a state of fear and panic.
I don't think my country, the UK is any better. We have airports patrolled by armed police; yet they're rarely seen at railway stations and never at bus stations. I guess armed police help to keep the populace in a state of fear which may very well be what our two governments want.
I guess this could work with future OLED displays that only emit light on each pixel if it is needed, so a black background would require minimal energy. However, my current Samsung TFT monitor draws 40W whether it is on or off which I believe is due to the power transformer that it uses. Even with alternative displays, energy saving might not occur due to these power transformers.
If you look at the table with the lights dimmed so that you can be wowed by the illuminating table-cloth then the food will be silhouetted. You'll just get to see black shapes; or at least darker shapes. Then your guests won't know what they're about to eat. Mwuhahaha
Its 950 euros, that's about £640. Still, a lot of good food and drink could be bought for that sort of money that in the end is a gimmick and would likely make it harder to see your food.
If you look at the table with the lights dimmed so that you can be wowed by the illuminating table-cloth then the food will be silhouetted. You'll just get to see black shapes; or at least darker shapes.
I haven't been able to read the article thanks to the/. effect. However; from the description of the article it seems to rely on analogue connection between two points. In reality how often does this happen these days? Surely most communications are digitised at some point where upon the effects of altering the resistance of the circuit will be removed or at least altered enough not to be useful. You could set up a physical circuit for secure communications, but then it would be possible to listen in using other techniques as a wire carrying a current emits an electromagnetic field which could be picked up.
Like I said, I haven't read the article so maybe this is all explained in there.
I find it very useful to be able to type something into the address bar of Firefox and for it to take me straight to the site by using Google's 'I'm feeling lucky'. You can, however change this to search Google instead by doing the following:
Go to about:config
Type keyword.URL into the Filter field
Edit the value of keyword.URL by double clicking on its value
Paste the following into the dialog box: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=
Well, until now I didn't realise that he had successfully got a house out of his trades. The press didn't know until yesterday either, so I guess it isn't just me.
Is it in his/her tuition? Or, are Napster providing it free of charge, in order to have a portion of students become lifetime subscribers after graduation. If so, then this would seem to be a good move on Napsters' part.
Shouldn't these sites pay their fair share instead of offloading the costs to me? Sure, Slashdot buys bandwidth from some provider, but what about *my* provider? Who is going to offset the burden on their network to provide me with Slashdot's services? Why should I be forced to pay for that content?
Like you pointed out sites like Slashdot and Google pay their provider for their bandwidth. As you choose to consume their content, why shouldn't you be expected to pay for the cost of receiving it. If you are expected to pay for the cost of receiving it, as you do now, then you can choose the best provider for your needs. That maybe down to the cost, speed, download limit or some other metric.
The point is you currently get to choose your ISP, if Slashdot and Google had to pay your ISP to serve to you, then Google or Slashdot might choose not to pay some ISPs, which will reduce your choice of providers, thus probably raising prices. And, then what happens if say Google payed ISP-A, but not ISP-B, but Slashdot payed ISP-B and not ISP-A. You might end up in a situation where in order to access all of the sites you want to access you need several ISPs. How is that going to be cheaper?
Then you might reach a situation where you have proxies for accessing the content through different ISPs, so to access Google you connect via a proxy running on ISP-A network. Even if somehow you did save some money, would it really be convenient? Is convenience not worth anything to you?
I think you're spot on about making the BBC invest in programmes that are not commercially viable. However, rather than making BBC3 and 4 commercial, they should just sell their successful programmes to other Freeview channels. That way most people continue to view it, the BBC gets funding and the commercial sector is happy.
Don't worry about Student Loans. They are not like normal bank loans. You only pay them once you start earning enough. Currently you pay 9% of gross earnings after the first £15K/year, and you only have to keep on paying until you've paid it off. Additionally the interest rates are less than what you would get in a savings account, so technically you make money out of is.
Just think, if you earn over ~£4K/year you have to pay 10% tax. You see when you start earning, you have to pay tax on what you earn, the only difference between tax and a student loan is that:
a) You got something for it (an education).
b) You no longer have to pay any once you have either paid it off or have reached 65.
Yes, I have a student loan. I currently owe over £13K and it is going up £30 a month in interest. I am not too worried by it. If you are still worried about student loans, go to Hull University. That is where I went, and as far as I can tell it is about the cheapest place to live as a student.
He really meant "to prevent users from installing some anti-messenger-ad hosts file" i think
That is correct. You can set up your hosts file so that your computer doesn't access ad servers, but instead goes after 127.0.0.1. By doing this, you don't have to suffer from any advertisements in any program that downloads them from an ad server. This covers all Windows programs including FireFox, IE, Opera and MSN.
Slashdot Mirror
Or it could suggest to terrorists that they are currently successful in spreading terror across the US. If, as a result of 9/11 and other terror attacks around the world you can't walk into an airport with wires on your person then they've done their job of spreading fear and terror. Everyone is a suspect, and one worth putting to gun point.
Americans are now holding guns to fellow citizens because of a terrorist attack that occurred over six years ago. It would seem that Al-Qaeda only has to carry out an attack on US soil once every 10 years or maybe even less than that to keep American citizens in a state of fear and panic.
I don't think my country, the UK is any better. We have airports patrolled by armed police; yet they're rarely seen at railway stations and never at bus stations. I guess armed police help to keep the populace in a state of fear which may very well be what our two governments want.
I guess this could work with future OLED displays that only emit light on each pixel if it is needed, so a black background would require minimal energy. However, my current Samsung TFT monitor draws 40W whether it is on or off which I believe is due to the power transformer that it uses. Even with alternative displays, energy saving might not occur due to these power transformers.
If you look at the table with the lights dimmed so that you can be wowed by the illuminating table-cloth then the food will be silhouetted. You'll just get to see black shapes; or at least darker shapes. Then your guests won't know what they're about to eat. Mwuhahaha
Its 950 euros, that's about £640. Still, a lot of good food and drink could be bought for that sort of money that in the end is a gimmick and would likely make it harder to see your food. If you look at the table with the lights dimmed so that you can be wowed by the illuminating table-cloth then the food will be silhouetted. You'll just get to see black shapes; or at least darker shapes.
I haven't been able to read the article thanks to the /. effect. However; from the description of the article it seems to rely on analogue connection between two points. In reality how often does this happen these days? Surely most communications are digitised at some point where upon the effects of altering the resistance of the circuit will be removed or at least altered enough not to be useful. You could set up a physical circuit for secure communications, but then it would be possible to listen in using other techniques as a wire carrying a current emits an electromagnetic field which could be picked up.
Like I said, I haven't read the article so maybe this is all explained in there.
- Go to about:config
- Type keyword.URL into the Filter field
- Edit the value of keyword.URL by double clicking on its value
- Paste the following into the dialog box: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=
- Click on OK
That should now work.Or Meebo: http://www18.meebo.com/
Well, until now I didn't realise that he had successfully got a house out of his trades. The press didn't know until yesterday either, so I guess it isn't just me.
Is it in his/her tuition? Or, are Napster providing it free of charge, in order to have a portion of students become lifetime subscribers after graduation. If so, then this would seem to be a good move on Napsters' part.
Did anyone else read it as Get Laid, Get Paid before having to re-read that headline?
Like you pointed out sites like Slashdot and Google pay their provider for their bandwidth. As you choose to consume their content, why shouldn't you be expected to pay for the cost of receiving it. If you are expected to pay for the cost of receiving it, as you do now, then you can choose the best provider for your needs. That maybe down to the cost, speed, download limit or some other metric.
The point is you currently get to choose your ISP, if Slashdot and Google had to pay your ISP to serve to you, then Google or Slashdot might choose not to pay some ISPs, which will reduce your choice of providers, thus probably raising prices. And, then what happens if say Google payed ISP-A, but not ISP-B, but Slashdot payed ISP-B and not ISP-A. You might end up in a situation where in order to access all of the sites you want to access you need several ISPs. How is that going to be cheaper?
Then you might reach a situation where you have proxies for accessing the content through different ISPs, so to access Google you connect via a proxy running on ISP-A network. Even if somehow you did save some money, would it really be convenient? Is convenience not worth anything to you?
What's so interesting about our (British) political meetings?
Interestingly, the IP address (85.226.168.107) orginates from Sweden.
I think you're spot on about making the BBC invest in programmes that are not commercially viable. However, rather than making BBC3 and 4 commercial, they should just sell their successful programmes to other Freeview channels. That way most people continue to view it, the BBC gets funding and the commercial sector is happy.
Don't worry about Student Loans. They are not like normal bank loans. You only pay them once you start earning enough. Currently you pay 9% of gross earnings after the first £15K/year, and you only have to keep on paying until you've paid it off. Additionally the interest rates are less than what you would get in a savings account, so technically you make money out of is. Just think, if you earn over ~£4K/year you have to pay 10% tax. You see when you start earning, you have to pay tax on what you earn, the only difference between tax and a student loan is that: a) You got something for it (an education). b) You no longer have to pay any once you have either paid it off or have reached 65. Yes, I have a student loan. I currently owe over £13K and it is going up £30 a month in interest. I am not too worried by it. If you are still worried about student loans, go to Hull University. That is where I went, and as far as I can tell it is about the cheapest place to live as a student.
Is PSA a fuel? I thought it was the company behind Peugeot and Citroen. Or were you talking about SVO (Straight Vegetable Oil)?
That is correct. You can set up your hosts file so that your computer doesn't access ad servers, but instead goes after 127.0.0.1. By doing this, you don't have to suffer from any advertisements in any program that downloads them from an ad server. This covers all Windows programs including FireFox, IE, Opera and MSN.
Microsoft could also be using this to prevent users from blocking MSN messenger ad servers.
Mirrordot have cached the screenshots: http://mirrordot.org/stories/657bff49a3acdb9421bf2 24780af814f/index.html
Allerca Inc will probably sell them already neutered.