One of the MSS (mobile satellite service) bands involved is just below the GPS L1 band used by commercial GPS units. The FCC has authorized use of this band for terrestrial cellular services since 2003 .
Now there is some dispute about details of the early FCC decisions and how many base stations were allowed under them, but it is clear that base stations were allowed next to the GPS band since 2003 and that the civil GPS supplier community paid little attention to the fact that GPS would be having a new neighbor with much stronger signals in some places than the original MSS signals.
The GPS industry has not pressed the filter manufacturers for the latest technology as the cellular systems in nearby bands have. As a result many GPS receivers have a lingering vulnerability to strong adjacent band signals that results from GPS manufacturers ignoring policy changes made in the US almost a decade ago!
an 'Argentine pop star [who] had posed for racy pictures when she was young, but recently sued Google and Yahoo to take them down.
Fortunately, Google sucks so badly now that she doesn't have much to worry about. A search for her name in Google Images brings up mostly pictures of other people, including various men, and many pictures that contain no people at all.
"EBay acquired a 28.4% stake when it bought shares from a former employee who had been given equity by Mr Newmark. A year after the deal was completed, eBay, which had said it wanted to learn from Craigslist, started Kijiji.com, a rival international network of classified ad sites that now sells ads in all 50 US states. "
According to this article, the source code for PCANywhere was stolen from Symantec's network in 2006. That's right . . . . 2006. Good work Symantec. It only took you 6 years.
For the love of all that is coffee, there are people outside the US that use wikipedia. Some of us rely on it for work/school.
Apparently you haven't heard about the person in the UK who was just ordered to be extradited to the United States for "copyright infringement" despite the fact that neither he nor his website were located in the U.S.
If Wikipedia, Facebook, Google, etc. were really serious about protesting these bad laws they would completely shut down their systems for at least a week in order to really demonstrate what the effects would be.
Google has 20,000 employees and their primary business is advertising -- 98% of their revenue, many billions of dollars every year, comes from advertising. So why would Google need to hire another company to advertise their Chrome browser? And why did *THAT* company need to hire *ANOTHER* company?
When you want to do something dodgy, while pretending to "do no evil", what better way than to hire someone else to do your dirty work for you. And when they get busted, you can just blame them and say "Hey, we didn't know anything about it".
the design, the software and the retailing of the products, not the physical making of them.
Wrong.
The claim that we should abandon manufacturing and concentrate on "high value" jobs, like design and engineering is nonsense. The reason manufacturing is important is because it creates additional jobs beyond just those involved in a particular product. For example, the Samsung plant in Texas which created "only" 1100 jobs. What about all the machinery in that plant? It didn't magically appear out of nowhere. Someone had to design and build it. That's more jobs. Other companies supplied the steel, plastic and electronics that went into creating that machinery. That's more jobs. Other companies supplied those steel, plastic and electronics companies with various raw materials and equipment. That's more jobs.
some brain-dead observers who had suggested that Google would ditch this source of money in favor of promoting Chrome, a project which generates no direct revenue at all.
How does Firefox generate revenue for Google but Chrome does not? They both do exactly the same thing -- people go to Google to search, where they are subjected to ads, which is where Google makes 98% of its money. Google has very deep pockets but it still seems strange that they are willing to pay $100 Million a year . . . . for what exactly? People who type a search query into that little Google search box in Firefox because they are too lazy and/or stupid to bookmark google.com?
People keep claiming that Chrome uses less memory than Firefox so I decided to take a look.
Memory used: Initial start up, no pages open:
Firefox 39 MB Chrome 56 MB
5 tabs open:
Firefox 135 MB Chrome 152 MB
Size on disk (Windows version)
Firefox 44 MB Chrome 75 MB
There are things that I like about Chrome and over the past couple of years Firefox has really pissed me off with their never ending bonehead design decisions. But the "Firefox is bloated" claims just don't make sense.
In a sane world, Share price is a function of revenues. Cash flow and profitability should determine stock price.
There, I fixed that for you.
Absolutely correct.
In the mid 90's I worked for a large well established company (in business for over 90 years). They reported record quarterly profits for 6 consecutive quarters -- and the stock price went down.
I agree that most emails are useless (starting from those which are sent just FYI, but are still distracting and interrupting the workflow).
If emails are "distracting and interrupting the workflow" then you are doing it wrong. The problem isn't email, it's the way people deal with it. Get away from the mindset that you have to immediately read and deal with every email the instant it arrives and you'll get a lot more work done.
surveys show that the younger generation have already all but scrapped email, with only 11 per cent of 11 to 19 year-olds using it.
There's a good idea. Let's run our business like a bunch of 11 year-olds. Sorry, but the only people who have no use for email are people who have no job and nothing worthwhile to say or do (i.e., your typical 11-19 year old)
For his part Breton hasn't sent a work email in three years. 'If people want to talk to me, they can come and visit me, call or send me a text message."
Right. Nothing wrong with a crowd of people hanging around outside his office waiting to speak with him directly, rather than just send an email that he can read when he wants. And at the same time there's a few dozen people trying to call him on the phone. Sounds like a wonderful idea. I'm sure this will work out great.
And at the heart of it, the article offers no causative argument that litigation spurred on file sharing. At best it observes that file sharing increased in the era after litigation but it falls down entirely in showing any causation rather than correlation.
I had never heard of Napster or P2P filesharing and had no idea that it existed until I read about Napster getting sued. I want to thank the RIAA for letting me know about this wonderful resource. I'm sure that there are many millions of people who share my similar experience.
"It's no secret that rock stars have riders — provisions on their contractual appearances that require a bowl of brown-free M&Ms
In an interview, Eddie Van Halen revealed the story behind the "no brown M&Ms" and it's not "OMG!! Wacky rock stars making crazy demands!!"
While on tour, Van Halen was having a lot of problems with the stage not being setup properly, particularly the electrical wiring, and they were concerned for the safety of their crew. So they put specific instructions in their rider, followed by "bowl of M&Ms with all the brown ones removed". If they got to the venue and there was no bowl of M&Ms in the dressing room, they would know that nobody had bothered to read the stage setup instructions in their rider.
No.... they are simply trying to disguise the problem in order to suck in more users. Contrary to whatever bullshit they try to spread, Google+, Facebook and all the rest will NEVER implement any policy that actually respects the privacy of users. It will never happen, because their business model depends on selling their users to advertisers.
About 3 weeks ago there was this story http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/09/25/223216/the-mythical-tunnel-between-cern-and-central-italy"> where everyone laughed at the Italian minister of Public Education and Scientific Research who issued a press release which congratulated the scientists and mentioned that Italy had funded the construction of a "tunnel between the CERN [in Geneva] and Gran Sasso [the labs in Central Italy]".
But according to this new article: "scientists created neutrinos at CERN in Geneva, and then measured how long it took them to reach a detector called OPERA, located in Italy". So what's the deal? How did those neutrinos, regardless of their speed, travel the 900 km from CERN to Italy?
If you make $15 Aussie dollars an hour, minimum wage, then $2 represents about eight minutes of your time. If you spent more than eight minutes bringing up the highly overloaded Pirate Bay page, finding a correct torrent, loading the torrent into uTorrent, downloading the file, moving it around on your NAS, putting it into iTunes, getting the book's coverart then syncing it to your iPhone, then yeah you pretty much just robbed yourself.
Just saying. You're probably saving money by buying it vs pirating it, since time=money. LOL.
Time = money is only true when you paying someone. If you are paying someone $15 per hour, then yes, 8 minutes is worth $2. However, when you are sitting at home and not getting paid then 8 minutes of your time, or 8 hours, or 8 days, is worth exactly zero.
What's with all the bitching about memory use? I have been using Firefox since it was called Firebird and have never seen any really huge memory use. For example, right now Firefox is using 231 MB. Now, being an old fart from back in the dark ages, the idea that a web browser would be using hundreds of megabytes of RAM seems really absurd. But, considering that I have 8 GB in my computer, who gives a shit how much memory Firefox is using?
Slashdot Mirror
According to this article:
Yet another "security" website that can't be arsed to actually secure their own shit.
Fortunately, Google sucks so badly now that she doesn't have much to worry about. A search for her name in Google Images brings up mostly pictures of other people, including various men, and many pictures that contain no people at all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7399720.stm
"EBay acquired a 28.4% stake when it bought shares from a former employee who had been given equity by Mr Newmark.
A year after the deal was completed, eBay, which had said it wanted to learn from Craigslist, started Kijiji.com, a rival international network of classified ad sites that now sells ads in all 50 US states. "
According to this article, the source code for PCANywhere was stolen from Symantec's network in 2006. That's right . . . . 2006. Good work Symantec. It only took you 6 years.
For the love of all that is coffee, there are people outside the US that use wikipedia. Some of us rely on it for work/school.
Apparently you haven't heard about the person in the UK who was just ordered to be extradited to the United States for "copyright infringement" despite the fact that neither he nor his website were located in the U.S.
If Wikipedia, Facebook, Google, etc. were really serious about protesting these bad laws they would completely shut down their systems for at least a week in order to really demonstrate what the effects would be.
Five minutes and nobody's posted yet. That says a lot about what people think of Facebook :)
fixed that for you.
Google has 20,000 employees and their primary business is advertising -- 98% of their revenue, many billions of dollars every year, comes from advertising. So why would Google need to hire another company to advertise their Chrome browser? And why did *THAT* company need to hire *ANOTHER* company?
When you want to do something dodgy, while pretending to "do no evil", what better way than to hire someone else to do your dirty work for you. And when they get busted, you can just blame them and say "Hey, we didn't know anything about it".
Wrong.
The claim that we should abandon manufacturing and concentrate on "high value" jobs, like design and engineering is nonsense. The reason manufacturing is important is because it creates additional jobs beyond just those involved in a particular product. For example, the Samsung plant in Texas which created "only" 1100 jobs. What about all the machinery in that plant? It didn't magically appear out of nowhere. Someone had to design and build it. That's more jobs. Other companies supplied the steel, plastic and electronics that went into creating that machinery. That's more jobs. Other companies supplied those steel, plastic and electronics companies with various raw materials and equipment. That's more jobs.
some brain-dead observers who had suggested that Google would ditch this source of money in favor of promoting Chrome, a project which generates no direct revenue at all.
How does Firefox generate revenue for Google but Chrome does not? They both do exactly the same thing -- people go to Google to search, where they are subjected to ads, which is where Google makes 98% of its money. Google has very deep pockets but it still seems strange that they are willing to pay $100 Million a year . . . . for what exactly? People who type a search query into that little Google search box in Firefox because they are too lazy and/or stupid to bookmark google.com?
People keep claiming that Chrome uses less memory than Firefox so I decided to take a look.
Memory used:
Initial start up, no pages open:
Firefox 39 MB
Chrome 56 MB
5 tabs open:
Firefox 135 MB
Chrome 152 MB
Size on disk (Windows version)
Firefox 44 MB
Chrome 75 MB
There are things that I like about Chrome and over the past couple of years Firefox has really pissed me off with their never ending bonehead design decisions. But the "Firefox is bloated" claims just don't make sense.
In a sane world, Share price is a function of revenues. Cash flow and profitability should determine stock price.
There, I fixed that for you.
Absolutely correct.
In the mid 90's I worked for a large well established company (in business for over 90 years). They reported record quarterly profits for 6 consecutive quarters -- and the stock price went down.
I agree that most emails are useless (starting from those which are sent just FYI, but are still distracting and interrupting the workflow).
If emails are "distracting and interrupting the workflow" then you are doing it wrong. The problem isn't email, it's the way people deal with it.
Get away from the mindset that you have to immediately read and deal with every email the instant it arrives and you'll get a lot more work done.
There's a good idea. Let's run our business like a bunch of 11 year-olds. Sorry, but the only people who have no use for email are people who have no job and nothing worthwhile to say or do (i.e., your typical 11-19 year old)
Right. Nothing wrong with a crowd of people hanging around outside his office waiting to speak with him directly, rather than just send an email that he can read when he wants. And at the same time there's a few dozen people trying to call him on the phone. Sounds like a wonderful idea. I'm sure this will work out great.
WTF?
It's not hacking if you know the password.
And at the heart of it, the article offers no causative argument that litigation spurred on file sharing. At best it observes that file sharing increased in the era after litigation but it falls down entirely in showing any causation rather than correlation.
I had never heard of Napster or P2P filesharing and had no idea that it existed until I read about Napster getting sued. I want to thank the RIAA for letting me know about this wonderful resource. I'm sure that there are many millions of people who share my similar experience.
Jesus fucking Christ. At least link to a real article that I can read. Not some "podcast" of someone mumbling with a heavy Russian accent.
Let's admit it, nowadays Usenet is just another warez distribution network.
Except for a few diehard nerds everyone switched to online forums long ago.
Usenet has always been a Warez distribution network. Now however, it's 99% viruses disguised as warez.
In an interview, Eddie Van Halen revealed the story behind the "no brown M&Ms" and it's not "OMG!! Wacky rock stars making crazy demands!!"
While on tour, Van Halen was having a lot of problems with the stage not being setup properly, particularly the electrical wiring, and they were concerned for the safety of their crew. So they put specific instructions in their rider, followed by "bowl of M&Ms with all the brown ones removed". If they got to the venue and there was no bowl of M&Ms in the dressing room, they would know that nobody had bothered to read the stage setup instructions in their rider.
I find it odd that nobody ever mentions that during his tenure as head of ICANN they were one of the biggest scumbag organizations of the internet.
No .... they are simply trying to disguise the problem in order to suck in more users. Contrary to whatever bullshit they try to spread, Google+, Facebook and all the rest will NEVER implement any policy that actually respects the privacy of users. It will never happen, because their business model depends on selling their users to advertisers.
I was surprised to find out that they still show advertising to paid subscribers, in particular annoying Flash based advertising.
And this is surprising ....... why? Perhaps you have never read an actual newspaper, which is not free, and contains lots of advertising.
About 3 weeks ago there was this story http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/09/25/223216/the-mythical-tunnel-between-cern-and-central-italy"> where everyone laughed at the Italian minister of Public Education and Scientific Research who issued a press release which congratulated the scientists and mentioned that Italy had funded the construction of a "tunnel between the CERN [in Geneva] and Gran Sasso [the labs in Central Italy]".
But according to this new article: "scientists created neutrinos at CERN in Geneva, and then measured how long it took them to reach a detector called OPERA, located in Italy". So what's the deal? How did those neutrinos, regardless of their speed, travel the 900 km from CERN to Italy?
Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt says if you don't like the Google+ policies regarding privacy and real names then don't use Google+.
So I took his advice.
If you make $15 Aussie dollars an hour, minimum wage, then $2 represents about eight minutes of your time. If you spent more than eight minutes bringing up the highly overloaded Pirate Bay page, finding a correct torrent, loading the torrent into uTorrent, downloading the file, moving it around on your NAS, putting it into iTunes, getting the book's coverart then syncing it to your iPhone, then yeah you pretty much just robbed yourself.
Just saying. You're probably saving money by buying it vs pirating it, since time=money. LOL.
Time = money is only true when you paying someone. If you are paying someone $15 per hour, then yes, 8 minutes is worth $2. However, when you are sitting at home and not getting paid then 8 minutes of your time, or 8 hours, or 8 days, is worth exactly zero.
What's with all the bitching about memory use? I have been using Firefox since it was called Firebird and have never seen any really huge memory use. For example, right now Firefox is using 231 MB. Now, being an old fart from back in the dark ages, the idea that a web browser would be using hundreds of megabytes of RAM seems really absurd. But, considering that I have 8 GB in my computer, who gives a shit how much memory Firefox is using?