You could buy a 500 GB MythTV box, with dual tuners and about 3 xboxen for front ends. You could have the same storage and have time shifting in four rooms of your house, not to memtion all of the plug-ins mythvideo, mythdvd, mythgame, mythmusic, mythweather, and you could ssh into it as well.
Because I commented the infringing lines out, and recompiled. "Exactly which lines did I comment out?" you ask. That's *my* trade secret. But I did manage to get all of the infringing lines SCO disclosed."
Maybe we should invent driving simulators for household phones, whith simulated hazards. That way people could train themselves to pay attention when they drive, in the safety of their own home.
Make it so the houshold phone will not work unless their able to play Gran Turismo while talking.
You're assuming these addresses are ever seen by human eyes. In order to be valuable to email marketers, the addresses are transferred en mass. Spammers don't have the time to read each one individually (millions, usually) I suppose searching for the '+' could be automated, but It has been an effective method for me. I was just giving the parent poster one method, that would work in the event you don't control a domain. If you absolutely must have tin-foil-hat-privacy get a one-shot disposable account or use the letters cut from newspapers and glue them to make words. I see in the movies that's what kidnappers do.
You might also try username+foo@domain.com sendmail lets you have as many +bar accounts as you want.
I use +comdex and +networld on the end of my username so I can filter the stuff I have to register for. Not everything supports it (I'm not sure about exchange) so YMMV.
Let's not forget to ambiguously label your threat levels. If you think you might be hacked go to "High" or "Orange" If you see (or hear about, through the office grape vine)heightened network traffic, Change it to "Severe" or "Red." Now you could run OpenBSD and stay at "Low" or "Green" most of the time. Don't forget to freak out and duct tape the server racks when you reach "Red." Also Be sure to alarm your users with dire motds.
Aside from this no other actions ae needed or necessary.
KaZaA has proven it can shut clients out of the network (when it turned off the original Morpheus client)
Only by changing the protocol stack. They were able to make a client they did not write, not work with theirs. They cannot selectively turn off individual users. They basically rewrote KaZaa, and made everyone upgrade. That's Hardly "controlling that network" The original Morpheus clients could still talk to each other, but not supernodes, so that really didn't help them much.
It would help keep the device charged. Because to capture the energy, the vibrations would be dampened such that the phone *wouldn't* vibrate and then you wouldn't answer it. And as everyone knows, If you don't use the phone, The battery won't run down as fast. Of course, it would cease to be useful as a phone. But that's usually what you get when you try to get something for nothing.
The fact that they think they will be able to take users away from google by (or while) tracking their browsing habits is a bit far fetched to me. And It's not anonymous if you are logged in to yahoo. Unless you log out, disable cookies, reboot your ISP connection until you have a new IP, then perform your search. The funny thing is I wasn't a Tin Foil Hat wearing privacy nut until my government decided they wanted to Track everyone's online habits And Hold them completely waivingHabeus Corpus
If I knew where there was A remote one, I would. Running a local proxy still allows "them" to record your IP number. Bouncing off one (or more) proxies via proxys4all makes "them" have to get at least two search warrants. Cause that's what they hate. Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean Admiral Poindexter doesn't want to know all about my surfing habits. Thank Goodness for This
This would also allow better targeting for SPAM^H^H^H^H "Targeted email advertisements." Not that this would be a bad thing. Maybe if spammers were even a little bit more discriminate, some of us wouldn't have to implement client side filters. Not to mention the bandwidth utilization problem.
Or turn cookies off, and use a proxy. Two permanent settings that defeat googles ability to see where I'm clicking. To do this with Yahoo, I would have to right click *every link I choose to foolow* and save link location, paste in into the location box and manually remove the tracking information.
Why does a search for "linux" return a link to: http://srd.yahoo.com/S=2766679:WS1/R=1/K=linu x/SS= 82593/OCS=82532/H=0/T=1049724247/F=e248244e7fc465e 82c9bf12c25f246e6/*http://www.linux.org/ Instead of http://www.linux.org
And It wasn't even the frelling first result It was behind the directory and sponsored links.
So Let me get this straight Yahoo, I have to dodge your directories *and* sponsored links, I get my privacy invaded. Sounds good where do I sign up?
This is the amount of time that it takes light to travel across a planck distance (10^-33cm) I suppose that is the fastest anything (that we currrenty think we understand) can happen and therefore the smallest measurement worth knowing. I could see this discussion devolving into a special relativity discussion real quick, but that's an interesting fact to know nonetheless. So if we had infinite power, we could transmit infinite knowlegde but we could only do it over the course of a plank second impulse.
I have a feeling that when quantum entangled transmitters and recievers are ubiqutous, we will look back on this discussion with fond memories of the good 'ol days.
Broadcasting digital requires ~1 Hz/bit if the signal is binary I'm not even sure what you mean by this, I can transmit a bit in 1/2 a Hertz (or faster, governed only by the frequency responce of the transmitter) or in 2 Hz (or even slower).
Unless you have an infinite number of quantization levels in your signal to send multiple bits simultaneously And what limits this? Only power.
You just restated what I was arguing. Given infitite power, you have infinite bandwith. Ergo Bandwith, (in the most splitting-hairs-abstract-sense which we passed 30 responses ago) is not restricted by frequency, theoretically.
If we limit ourselves to analog communication, you are correct. But with digital techniques this is not the case. You can have as many bits (per cycle) as you can descritise (Hentai pointed out the minimum descritization would be governed by Planck's Constant in his thread) But aside from that, energy is the only limiting factor. (given the absence of noise, which I realize is not realisitc) See Hentai's thread above.
But that only applies to the minimum. As you increase the power, you can get more data for each symbol. So assuming we could reduce noise to nothing, bandwidth is only limited by how much power you can provide divided by the Planck constant. Remember the sum of human knowledge can be represented by a chalk mark on a big enough stick and the same holds true for a level on one instant on an EM wave.
So I would have to concede that If the universe is finite then so is bandwith. Because there would be finite energy in the wave we could produce by converting every bit of matter/dark matter/whatever/everything into an energy impulse for our EM wave.
For all we know, the big bang was and interdimentional mp3 download.
Slashdot Mirror
You could buy a 500 GB MythTV box, with dual tuners and about 3 xboxen for front ends. You could have the same storage and have time shifting in four rooms of your house, not to memtion all of the plug-ins mythvideo, mythdvd, mythgame, mythmusic, mythweather, and you could ssh into it as well.
Because I commented the infringing lines out, and recompiled.
"Exactly which lines did I comment out?" you ask. That's *my* trade secret.
But I did manage to get all of the infringing lines SCO disclosed."
Post your email address online, or in newsgroups. I get about 30 emails a day with different products offering to help me lose weight.
Oh, you have to stop using email filters as well.
Maybe we should invent driving simulators for household phones, whith simulated hazards. That way people could train themselves to pay attention when they drive, in the safety of their own home.
Make it so the houshold phone will not work unless their able to play Gran Turismo while talking.
You're assuming these addresses are ever seen by human eyes. In order to be valuable to email marketers, the addresses are transferred en mass.
Spammers don't have the time to read each one individually (millions, usually) I suppose searching for the '+' could be automated, but It has been an effective method for me.
I was just giving the parent poster one method, that would work in the event you don't control a domain. If you absolutely must have tin-foil-hat-privacy get a one-shot disposable account or use the letters cut from newspapers and glue them to make words. I see in the movies that's what kidnappers do.
You might also try username+foo@domain.com sendmail lets you have as many +bar accounts as you want.
I use +comdex and +networld on the end of my username so I can filter the stuff I have to register for. Not everything supports it (I'm not sure about exchange) so YMMV.
I played it for 72 hours straight and got severely dehydrated. If I hadn't looked at the clock I, might have died.
Let's not forget to ambiguously label your threat levels.
If you think you might be hacked go to "High" or "Orange"
If you see (or hear about, through the office grape vine)heightened network traffic, Change it to "Severe" or "Red."
Now you could run OpenBSD and stay at "Low" or "Green" most of the time.
Don't forget to freak out and duct tape the server racks when you reach "Red."
Also Be sure to alarm your users with dire motds.
Aside from this no other actions ae needed or necessary.
(This post was intended to be funny)
KaZaA has proven it can shut clients out of the network (when it turned off the original Morpheus client)
Only by changing the protocol stack. They were able to make a client they did not write, not work with theirs. They cannot selectively turn off individual users. They basically rewrote KaZaa, and made everyone upgrade. That's Hardly "controlling that network" The original Morpheus clients could still talk to each other, but not supernodes, so that really didn't help them much.
It would help keep the device charged. Because to capture the energy, the vibrations would be dampened such that the phone *wouldn't* vibrate and then you wouldn't answer it. And as everyone knows, If you don't use the phone, The battery won't run down as fast. Of course, it would cease to be useful as a phone. But that's usually what you get when you try to get something for nothing.
That way you'll have something to do while you apply patches.
It's new to me, I use google.
The fact that they think they will be able to take users away from google by (or while) tracking their browsing habits is a bit far fetched to me.
And It's not anonymous if you are logged in to yahoo. Unless you log out, disable cookies, reboot your ISP connection until you have a new IP, then perform your search.
The funny thing is I wasn't a Tin Foil Hat wearing privacy nut until my government decided they wanted to Track everyone's online habits And Hold them completely waiving Habeus Corpus
And Buffy will marry me, don't mock my love.
If I knew where there was A remote one, I would.
Running a local proxy still allows "them" to record your IP number.
Bouncing off one (or more) proxies via proxys4all
makes "them" have to get at least two search warrants. Cause that's what they hate.
Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean Admiral Poindexter doesn't want to know all about my surfing habits.
Thank Goodness for This
This would also allow better targeting for SPAM^H^H^H^H "Targeted email advertisements." Not that this would be a bad thing. Maybe if spammers were even a little bit more discriminate, some of us wouldn't have to implement client side filters. Not to mention the bandwidth utilization problem.
Or turn cookies off, and use a proxy. Two permanent settings that defeat googles ability to see where I'm clicking. To do this with Yahoo, I would have to right click *every link I choose to foolow* and save link location, paste in into the location box and manually remove the tracking information.
Why is the parent not at 5? This is EXACTLY what needs to happen to keep the ISOs from being slashdotted.
Why does a search for "linux" return a link to:u x/SS= 82593/OCS=82532/H=0/T=1049724247/F=e248244e7fc465e 82c9bf12c25f246e6/*http://www.linux.org/
http://srd.yahoo.com/S=2766679:WS1/R=1/K=lin
Instead of
http://www.linux.org
And It wasn't even the frelling first result It was behind the directory and sponsored links.
So Let me get this straight Yahoo, I have to dodge your directories *and* sponsored links, I get my privacy invaded. Sounds good where do I sign up?
Yeah And when I find out there is a vulnerablility in my firewall , I just go into a blind panic and put all of my workstations on the outside.
If parents actually do this, then they are simply allowing there genes to be naturally de-selected.
The USPTO is hiring patent reviewers.
In the short amount of time you spend reading slashdot and shaking your fist at "The Man" you could have reviewed (and rejected) an obvious patent.
Seriously, It is a nice government job, with benefits, and you'd be doing a lot of good.
Is Just to Fire all of the unhappy people
It's the last 127 seconds. I have already edited them out for my friends. And added the 127 second clip as a ruin_the_series_for_me.avi
This is the amount of time that it takes light to travel across a planck distance (10^-33cm)
I suppose that is the fastest anything (that we currrenty think we understand) can happen and therefore the smallest measurement worth knowing.
I could see this discussion devolving into a special relativity discussion real quick, but that's an interesting fact to know nonetheless.
So if we had infinite power, we could transmit infinite knowlegde but we could only do it over the course of a plank second impulse.
I have a feeling that when quantum entangled transmitters and recievers are ubiqutous, we will look back on this discussion with fond memories of the good 'ol days.
Broadcasting digital requires ~1 Hz/bit if the signal is binary
I'm not even sure what you mean by this, I can transmit a bit in 1/2 a Hertz (or faster, governed only by the frequency responce of the transmitter) or in 2 Hz (or even slower).
Unless you have an infinite number of quantization levels in your signal to send multiple bits simultaneously
And what limits this? Only power.
You just restated what I was arguing. Given infitite power, you have infinite bandwith. Ergo Bandwith, (in the most splitting-hairs-abstract-sense which we passed 30 responses ago) is not restricted by frequency, theoretically.
If we limit ourselves to analog communication, you are correct. But with digital techniques this is not the case. You can have as many bits (per cycle) as you can descritise (Hentai pointed out the minimum descritization would be governed by Planck's Constant in his thread) But aside from that, energy is the only limiting factor. (given the absence of noise, which I realize is not realisitc) See Hentai's thread above.
But that only applies to the minimum. As you increase the power, you can get more data for each symbol.
So assuming we could reduce noise to nothing, bandwidth is only limited by how much power you can provide divided by the Planck constant.
Remember the sum of human knowledge can be represented by a chalk mark on a big enough stick and the same holds true for a level on one instant on an EM wave.
So I would have to concede that If the universe is finite then so is bandwith.
Because there would be finite energy in the wave we could produce by converting every bit of matter/dark matter/whatever/everything into an energy impulse for our EM wave.
For all we know, the big bang was and interdimentional mp3 download.