If you make a mistake you just start over. It's just your username and password. I used keystroke timing measurements of password entry on an Apple II+ as additional verification of user identity (ca. 1983).
Given it was an Apple II, there were plenty of other ways in, unless you had padlocks on the floppy drives and you replaced the ROMS.
In other words this isn't a new idea. It's been around for at least 25 years.
Like encrypted email, freenet is pointless unless you use it for everything. If you don't encrypt all of your email then sending ANY encrypted email is taken as a sign of having something to hide.
Until freenet is an accepted distribution channel for legal content, having freenet on your hard drive will be considered a sign of guilt. When the main channel for linux distributions becomes freenet, then maybe it will be considered acceptable to have it installed. Before then, it's guilt by association.
For that to happen freenet will need to compete with P2P software that runs faster.
Ixpiyacoc: What the hell is Quetzalcoatl doing at a Mayan end of the world party?
Nohochacyum: Beats me. I bet Kramer brought him. It was a bad idea to invite Kramer.
Kukulcan: Hey numb-nuts, there's only room for one winged serpent at this party.
[Ruckus ensues.]
Insurance is the biggest scam of all time, that it's mandatory for driving doesn't help either.
If you want to opt out, you probably can. All that's required in California is that you either depost $35,000 with the DMV or post a bond for the same amount. It's unlikely that the DMV pays interest on such deposits though, but depending upon where you live and how you invest the lost interest might be less than your insurance costs.
It's also possible to self insure, but you need to have at least 25 vehicles registered in your name to do that.
That's great, in theory at least. So tell me. What company do you currently go to in order to buy an inkjet printer with cheap high capacity cartridges that can be supplied by someone other than the manufacturer? The difference is that it is (and/or will be) much easier to make your own LED "lightbulb" than to make your own inkjet printer/printer cartridge.
Actually it used to be trivial to refill an inkjet cartridge. It wasn't until the cartridges gained electronics that this became an issue. You are operating under the assumption that LEDs that function simply by applying power will always be available. The joy of semiconductors is that the additional circuitry required to lock an LED to a specific device is much smaller than the light emitting portion of the semiconductor.
If there's a buck to be made by making LED bulbs that only work in lamps from the same manufacturer, someone will do it. If there's a gigabuck to be made, the manufacturers will collude to prevent generic lamps and bulbs from being available.
All it takes is 1 company not to do this, and the rest of those who do are screwed. When you buy a "bulb" every 6 months, you'll ask me what kind I buy when I tell you that I've bought one in my entire life. That's great, in theory at least. So tell me. What company do you currently go to in order to buy an inkjet printer with cheap high capacity cartridges that can be supplied by someone other than the manufacturer?
Great in theory, but in practice there's too much money to be made for the market to actually work.
C -- you think you know it, because you know C++, but you really don't. Also, if you're on Unix, you'll need it at some point.
... To your list above, I would add....
C++ -- you think you know it, because you use C++, but you probably haven't used most of the features. Sit down and learn the rest of it. Besides, it may have changed in the last year.
(By you, I don't mean "you" specifically, but "you" generically.)
IANAL, but you may have a claim on the payout, if the terms of the settlement do not require Verizon to follow the terms of the GPL.
I can see several possibilities.
The terms of the settlement require Verizon to pay a sum to Andersen and Landley and to follow the terms of the GPL for copies all distributed, and for all copies distributed in the future. In this case you probably have no claim as you released the software according to the GPL, and Andersen and Landley have followed the terms of the GPL. The GPL doesn't require that revenues be shared with the developer.
The terms of the settlement require Verizon to pay a sum to Andersen and Landley in return for which they give Verizon a license to a non-GPL distribution of BusyBox. In this case, you probably have a claim against Andersen and Landley for GPL violation if any of your code remains in the BusyBox distribution. You may also have a claim against Verizon for GPL violation.
The third, remote possibility is that Andersen and Landley removed all code contributions for which they didn't hold copyright from BusyBox prior to its distribution by Verizon, in which case they could possibly hold fill copyright to the version that Verizon distributed.
The next move is definitely yours. I probably wouldn't let it slide if I were in your shoes. Again, IANAL, but you might want to talk to one.
If you've nothing to hide... Even if you've got nothing to hide, you have to consider the statistics. The DNA analysis performed by police labs does not result in a unique DNA profile for every individual. It essentially results in a fuzzy image, one that will probably match the same individual the next time, but is not unique. The actual number of DNA profiles that the tests are capable of identifying is not generally reported. The labs themselves usually throw around numbers like "the chances of an accidental match are one in a million." Since labs tend to exaggerate in their promotional materials, the chances of an accidental match are much higher than that.
But for sake of argument, lets say that they are they do have a 0.0001% accidental match rate. (I have strong doubts that any real laboratory could achieve better than a 0.01% error rate, but we'll give them the extra two orders of magnitude.) There are about 61 million people in Britain. That means the for any crime that has DNA evidence, about 61 people in Britian will match. So if you just pick the first person you find in your database that has the right DNA profile, what are the chances that you have the right person? Less than 2%.
Do you really want to stake your freedom on the possibility that nobody else with your DNA profile will commit a crime while you are somewhere in the vicinity?
OTOH, I never understood why someone would marry someone who would disallow them from having something they want(monetary reasons aside). Almost all marriages are all about disallowing your spouse from having something they want.
Get ready for an onslaught of comments from people who want to have their cake and eat it too. (ie. those that don't want the advertising, but also don't want to make a donation to Wikipedia) There's a larger problem with advertising than "people don't like it." I am closely related to a nonprofit organization, one that could also make a butt-load of cash if we were to strategically place advertisments on our web site.
There's a reason we don't and it's not that our visitors would object. IANAA and IANATL, but I do speak to them on occasion. Advertising revenues are what is known as "unrelated business taxable income". Notice the word taxable. It complicates life for a non-profit. Taxable income over a small threshold means that the organizations tax returns must be made public. If contributions and government support fall below 33% of total income, the organization no longer qualifies as "publicly supported." In essence, too much advertising income can jeopardize your status as a non-profit.
Are the boomers really buying that much music online?
I know my dad is. He lost most of his music collection in Katrina. He's been rebuying things as he wants to hear them from iTunes. There's a new invention that your dad should hear about. It's called a used CD store. You can find one in most every large town. They sell music in a non-DRM format, it's generally cheaper than iTunes if you want the whole album, and even better, the MAFIAA doesn't get a cut.
Can I be part of the shooting your mother-in-law to reduce your chance of a heart attack study? The study has already been done. There appears to be a significant decrease in heart attack risk after shooting your mother-in-law, but only in states with the death penalty. In states without the death penalty, any difference is statistically insignificant.
Oh it works...ask the Russians, they've had to use theirs twice, and both times the crew survived. Our version has similar in principle and performance. The Russian modules have a significant advantage, the crew module is more nearly spherical so drag and lift are not so highly dependent upon attitude.
But if NASA intends to perform full-scale in-flight testing in a variety of flight modes, I'm prepared to be impressed. A "from the ground" test doesn't impress me that much.
It is not a trivial thing to pull a payload off of a rocket in subsonic, transonic, and supersonic conditions without destroying that payload (which in this case means astronauts). Damn straight. And this system probably won't work in all of those environments. There will probably be a limited set of circumstances where this system will offer any chance of survival. I haven't seen any estimates of which flight envelopes this will function in, and at velocity, once these motors shut down the capsule is going to be in an unstable attitude and potentially in the path of an accelerating booster that has had its load lightened. I've often wondered the escape system is more of a "feel-good" item than an actual safety feature.
I can see the system having use in subsonic aborts, but in a high drag super/hypersonic environment you need to get far enough from the vehicle, transition to lifting body attitude, and slow down enough to deploy the chutes. Through much of the powered flight regime the attitude transition might not be possible without turning the capsule into a pinwheel.
Its a very good thing that the escape system on Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were never necessary in flight. Real space travel (i.e. not-suborbital) is dangerous and is probably going to stay that way.
Mr. Tivoization-is-great is lining up on the wrong side again.
There is legitimate cause to believe that NDISwrapper cannot itself be licensed under the GPL if it links against non-GPL code. But it doesn't necessarily link against non-GPL code, it just has the ability to link against non-GPL code. If you use that argument to claim it can't be licensed via the GPL, you would need to make the same claim about the whole kernel, because the linux kernel has the ability to link against non-GPL code as well.
This is not a licensing issue, it's a control issue. Linus has a problem with NDISwrapper because (according to what I have read) NDISwrapper resets the GPLONLY flag if it loads a non-GPL driver. Linus doesn't like that because he doesn't control NDISwrapper. Linus wants to control the kernel, and therefore he feels he needs to control the GPLONLY flag and can't trust anyone else to properly use it.
Since the GPLONLY flag defines symbols that are only exported to modules licensed under the GPL, this caused a problem. Linus was requiring that the owner of those symbols agree to NDISwrapper using them (and preferably having them not defined as GPLONLY for consistency ). Since NDISwrapper is legitimately and legally licensed under the GPL, it should be able to use those symbols when loading a GPL licensed driver. Preventing GPL licensed modules from accessing those symbols is discriminatory and antithetical to the GPL. But then again, Linus has been behaving in a manner antithetical to the GPL for quite some time now.
Just because something is stated in a ToS doesn't mean it's legally stated in a ToS.
"If you use our service to break the law, we'll disconnect you" is likely a valid, legally binding contract clause. That may be what the clause says, but in the terms they actually use in practice are "If we suspect you have used our service to break the law or are told by an untrustworthy party that you have used our service to break the law, we'll disconnect you even if you have not used our service to break the law."
It's unlikely that that is a valid, legally binding contract clause.
this means you think Mr. Jobs is directly and purposefully trying to deceive the buying public Remember that Jobs is the guy that invented personal computer marketing. Woz invented (designed and built) the Apple I and II. Jobs directly and purposefully tried to deceive the buying public about what it was good for.
So yes, I think Jobs directly and purposely tries to deceive the buying public. That's what marketing is. The skill of marketing is lying just enough to get people to buy your products without lying so much that people get pissed off and refuse to buy more of your products.
Quantum mechanics is easy to simulate. [yoda]
Tried have you?
[/yoda]
If it's so easy, can simulate a single atom for me? Let's say a Beryllium atom of the most common isotope? Compute the exact energy levels of all of the electrons, and all of the electronic transitions. Now compare them to measured values and tell me again how simple it is to simulate quantum mechanics.
Mass of Luna: 7.3477 × 10^22 kg
Mass of Apophis: 2.6 × 10^10 kg
Say we parked Apophis in geosynchronous orbit (42 164 000 m above the center of the Earth). That's about a hundred times closer than the average distance of Luna from the same point (384 400 000 m). However, Apophis is a little more than 10^12 times less massive than the moon, and the smaller mass matters a lot more than the smaller radius.
(Yes, I did look up the gravitational equation. Yes, I did actually run the numbers. This being Slashdot, yes, I'm comfortable with admitting that.) You don't even need to look up the gravitational equation in that case. If you put it in geosynchronous orbit any tidal effect is going to be static, even if the mass is large.
The gravitational equation isn't quite the right one to use. "Tidal forces" are the radial derivative of the gravitational force, so in effect tidal forces are a 1/r^3 force rather than a 1/r^2 force. So the tidal force per unit mass is about 760 times larger at geosynch than at lunar orbit, but since the mass is 3x10^12 times less, you're still talking about essentially no effect.
Even in low earth orbit tides from Apophis would be unmeasurable.
I think it has a lot to do with why some people get on anti-depressents and then contemplate suicide. Trust me, most people who contemplate suicide after the get on antidepressants were contemplating suicide before they got on antidepressants.
It has been known for a long time (before antidepressants) that people tend to commit suicide as they are coming out of the worst portions of their depression. It is usually interpreted as an effect of recovery. Someone is suicidal, but incapable of getting out of bed, is less likely to commit suicide than someone who suddenly has the energy to act on their suicidal impulses.
The first effect of many antidepressants is to increase the perceived energy levels of the patient, rather than directly affecting mood.
But exercise has been shown to help depression. A lot of the studies that showed this are of questionable value. Some of the initial studies were surveys of people at the gym that showed that people at the gym were less likely to be depressed than the average person. Damn straight, if you can get up and go to the gym you, by definition, are not depressed.
Other studies have excluded people who were assigned to the "exercise" group but were unable to get up and make themselves exercise. So the "exercise" groups in the studies were made up of people who were either well enough to exercise or recovered enough to exercise.
In either case it can make it very hard to tell whether exercise was contributing to their recovery or merely a sign that they were recovering.
Are there studies that had supervised exercise in addition to talk therapy compared to talk therapy alone that had enough participants for the results to be statistically significant?
Thinking that you're going to not be depressed anymore makes you less depressed!
The truth is more like "Becoming less depressed makes you think that something you thought made you less depressed."
I can't tell you how many people I've known who have suffered from clinical depression have come to the conclusion (after the fact) that they willed themselves out of it.
Until they suffer their next bout and can't repeat the trick of "snapping out of it" without assistance.
Slashdot Mirror
Given it was an Apple II, there were plenty of other ways in, unless you had padlocks on the floppy drives and you replaced the ROMS.
In other words this isn't a new idea. It's been around for at least 25 years.
Until freenet is an accepted distribution channel for legal content, having freenet on your hard drive will be considered a sign of guilt. When the main channel for linux distributions becomes freenet, then maybe it will be considered acceptable to have it installed. Before then, it's guilt by association.
For that to happen freenet will need to compete with P2P software that runs faster.
Ixpiyacoc: What the hell is Quetzalcoatl doing at a Mayan end of the world party?
Nohochacyum: Beats me. I bet Kramer brought him. It was a bad idea to invite Kramer.
Kukulcan: Hey numb-nuts, there's only room for one winged serpent at this party.
[Ruckus ensues.]
It's also possible to self insure, but you need to have at least 25 vehicles registered in your name to do that.
Actually it used to be trivial to refill an inkjet cartridge. It wasn't until the cartridges gained electronics that this became an issue. You are operating under the assumption that LEDs that function simply by applying power will always be available. The joy of semiconductors is that the additional circuitry required to lock an LED to a specific device is much smaller than the light emitting portion of the semiconductor.
If there's a buck to be made by making LED bulbs that only work in lamps from the same manufacturer, someone will do it. If there's a gigabuck to be made, the manufacturers will collude to prevent generic lamps and bulbs from being available.
Great in theory, but in practice there's too much money to be made for the market to actually work.
He was a friend, and we will miss him.
...- C++ -- you think you know it, because you use C++, but you probably haven't used most of the features. Sit down and learn the rest of it. Besides, it may have changed in the last year.
(By you, I don't mean "you" specifically, but "you" generically.)I can see several possibilities.
The next move is definitely yours. I probably wouldn't let it slide if I were in your shoes. Again, IANAL, but you might want to talk to one.
But for sake of argument, lets say that they are they do have a 0.0001% accidental match rate. (I have strong doubts that any real laboratory could achieve better than a 0.01% error rate, but we'll give them the extra two orders of magnitude.) There are about 61 million people in Britain. That means the for any crime that has DNA evidence, about 61 people in Britian will match. So if you just pick the first person you find in your database that has the right DNA profile, what are the chances that you have the right person? Less than 2%.
Do you really want to stake your freedom on the possibility that nobody else with your DNA profile will commit a crime while you are somewhere in the vicinity?
Usually that something is another sexual partner.
There's a larger problem with advertising than "people don't like it." I am closely related to a nonprofit organization, one that could also make a butt-load of cash if we were to strategically place advertisments on our web site.
There's a reason we don't and it's not that our visitors would object. IANAA and IANATL, but I do speak to them on occasion. Advertising revenues are what is known as "unrelated business taxable income". Notice the word taxable. It complicates life for a non-profit. Taxable income over a small threshold means that the organizations tax returns must be made public. If contributions and government support fall below 33% of total income, the organization no longer qualifies as "publicly supported." In essence, too much advertising income can jeopardize your status as a non-profit.
I know my dad is. He lost most of his music collection in Katrina. He's been rebuying things as he wants to hear them from iTunes. There's a new invention that your dad should hear about. It's called a used CD store. You can find one in most every large town. They sell music in a non-DRM format, it's generally cheaper than iTunes if you want the whole album, and even better, the MAFIAA doesn't get a cut.
But if NASA intends to perform full-scale in-flight testing in a variety of flight modes, I'm prepared to be impressed. A "from the ground" test doesn't impress me that much.
I can see the system having use in subsonic aborts, but in a high drag super/hypersonic environment you need to get far enough from the vehicle, transition to lifting body attitude, and slow down enough to deploy the chutes. Through much of the powered flight regime the attitude transition might not be possible without turning the capsule into a pinwheel.
Its a very good thing that the escape system on Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were never necessary in flight. Real space travel (i.e. not-suborbital) is dangerous and is probably going to stay that way.
This is not a licensing issue, it's a control issue. Linus has a problem with NDISwrapper because (according to what I have read) NDISwrapper resets the GPLONLY flag if it loads a non-GPL driver. Linus doesn't like that because he doesn't control NDISwrapper. Linus wants to control the kernel, and therefore he feels he needs to control the GPLONLY flag and can't trust anyone else to properly use it.
Since the GPLONLY flag defines symbols that are only exported to modules licensed under the GPL, this caused a problem. Linus was requiring that the owner of those symbols agree to NDISwrapper using them (and preferably having them not defined as GPLONLY for consistency ). Since NDISwrapper is legitimately and legally licensed under the GPL, it should be able to use those symbols when loading a GPL licensed driver. Preventing GPL licensed modules from accessing those symbols is discriminatory and antithetical to the GPL. But then again, Linus has been behaving in a manner antithetical to the GPL for quite some time now."If you use our service to break the law, we'll disconnect you" is likely a valid, legally binding contract clause. That may be what the clause says, but in the terms they actually use in practice are "If we suspect you have used our service to break the law or are told by an untrustworthy party that you have used our service to break the law, we'll disconnect you even if you have not used our service to break the law."
It's unlikely that that is a valid, legally binding contract clause.
So yes, I think Jobs directly and purposely tries to deceive the buying public. That's what marketing is. The skill of marketing is lying just enough to get people to buy your products without lying so much that people get pissed off and refuse to buy more of your products.
Mass of Apophis: 2.6 × 10^10 kg
Say we parked Apophis in geosynchronous orbit (42 164 000 m above the center of the Earth). That's about a hundred times closer than the average distance of Luna from the same point (384 400 000 m). However, Apophis is a little more than 10^12 times less massive than the moon, and the smaller mass matters a lot more than the smaller radius.
(Yes, I did look up the gravitational equation. Yes, I did actually run the numbers. This being Slashdot, yes, I'm comfortable with admitting that.) You don't even need to look up the gravitational equation in that case. If you put it in geosynchronous orbit any tidal effect is going to be static, even if the mass is large.
The gravitational equation isn't quite the right one to use. "Tidal forces" are the radial derivative of the gravitational force, so in effect tidal forces are a 1/r^3 force rather than a 1/r^2 force. So the tidal force per unit mass is about 760 times larger at geosynch than at lunar orbit, but since the mass is 3x10^12 times less, you're still talking about essentially no effect.
Even in low earth orbit tides from Apophis would be unmeasurable.
It has been known for a long time (before antidepressants) that people tend to commit suicide as they are coming out of the worst portions of their depression. It is usually interpreted as an effect of recovery. Someone is suicidal, but incapable of getting out of bed, is less likely to commit suicide than someone who suddenly has the energy to act on their suicidal impulses.
The first effect of many antidepressants is to increase the perceived energy levels of the patient, rather than directly affecting mood.
Other studies have excluded people who were assigned to the "exercise" group but were unable to get up and make themselves exercise. So the "exercise" groups in the studies were made up of people who were either well enough to exercise or recovered enough to exercise.
In either case it can make it very hard to tell whether exercise was contributing to their recovery or merely a sign that they were recovering.
Are there studies that had supervised exercise in addition to talk therapy compared to talk therapy alone that had enough participants for the results to be statistically significant?
The truth is more like "Becoming less depressed makes you think that something you thought made you less depressed."
I can't tell you how many people I've known who have suffered from clinical depression have come to the conclusion (after the fact) that they willed themselves out of it.
Until they suffer their next bout and can't repeat the trick of "snapping out of it" without assistance.