When you target somebody partially or wholly because of their membership in a group (not just them as a unique individual), you are making an implicit threat against that entire group. When it is a group that has a long history of being targeted with similar violence, your implicit threat carries an especially large capability to intimidate. Hence the need to give special status to hate crimes.
I have never heard that description before. Seriously until now I was a very strong opponent of hate-crime legislation. I still oppose it as I haven't taken the time to fully consider what you're saying, but it makes sense and will make me think about it.
sponsors of a completely different bill from the one in the summary
Very first sentence says H.R. 3674.
, or in the article the summary linked to
I read that article. The only bill mentioned by title or # is HR 3674 as well, right at the bottom.
(or even the article that that article linked to).
Reading this article again I see the confusion. They talk first about a "Senate plan" (no bill by # or name), then proceed to mention a House version by the HS subcommittee as being less intrusive. They don't mention that bill by name or title, just a quote from a Dem, Langevin. As he is one of the sponsors of 3674, no doubt 3674 is the bill talked about in the article.
So we have CIO misquoting Reuters, CelticWhisper misquoting CIO,/. editors not checking the articles before posting, and these posts.
meh
Except that that is not the bill being talked about in this article. The bill being talked about in the article is in the Senate, not the House.
That is all well and good, but it does not excuse the poster I was responding to for stating that the list of sponsors he gave were the sponsors of this bill, since they are not.
So unlike the traditional magnetic stripe kind of card...and these get skimmed as well, mind you...with this attack you MUST be the next person to use the card's credentials. If not, the attack fails.
Not hard to have a scanner & processor working at the same time.
It's not quite as bad as they make it out to be here.
Perhaps financially for individual consumers, but it can be a huge problem in other ways. Wouldn't it suck if your RFID enabled credit card & passport were read at the same time and you purchased a 1-way ticket for some terrorist (Does Godwin's law include terrorism references yet?).
Naturally restricting the liability to just a couple (or 1) transaction means individuals will not be out a lot of money. But it can still cause problems for the credit card company if a large number of people are hit. For poor individuals, even $50 1 time just as they get to the supermarket can be devastating.
Furthermore, the cries that people have thrown up that someone could scan an entire room full of people at once are totally off-base. You'd need to create an induction field strong enough to energize the furthest cards...which would kill the nearest ones...and the cards would all jabber at the same time, mixing their signals.
No, you just stand at a high traffic point and use a weak field to get the cards right next to you: Union Square, public transit, shopping malls, airport.
Except that we realize what Israel plans to do with their weapons if they do lose a war and have to negotiate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_option
A nation with this thought process does not deserve nuclear armament.
And the fact that those weapons will never be used as long as people don't invade Israel means they're irresponsible? Can't be trusted?
Meanwhile Iran says they can never negotiate with Israel, Israel must be wiped out... they should have nukes?
I'm really, really, really, curious as to your thought process. Who deserves nuclear armament?
Why isn't it acceptable for Iran to say "Never again" and defend itself against neighbors that would see Iran destroyed?
Seriously? How times do they have to be quoted promising to destroy the US, Israel, Iraq, and ever non-Muslim on the planet before you realize they're not defensive?
(Also keeping in mind that iran hasn't engaged in any aggressive actions or invasions against her neighbors since the 18th century or so
Except for all the border skirmishes prior to the Iraq war, and 1982-1988 period of the Iraq war that involved Iran pushing into Iraq despite numerous cease-fire calls. And all the promises to destroy Israel and the US. Ya other than that they've just been drinking martinis.
, while Israel has bombed and invaded all of its neighbors at some pont, and its most recent war happened in only 2006.
I love comments like this. Ya, and the US bombed the shit out of Japan & Germany in WWII. Sounds horrible when you leave out the provocations. "OMG HE HIT ME [BACK]".
IE 9 is better than previous IE versions, but not "quite good", and it is still at the bottom of the pile and requires numerous customizations away from standards. Just a couple items (though I don't recall which are for IE 9 specifically):
Adding indexOf() to Array
different call for creating an Event object
different call for adding an option to a <SELECT>
different calls for Events
different call for hiding / showing some elements
css display still, STILL, can't do positioning correctly
1 thing that i know still affects IE 9: CSS margins / borders. CSS 2 was published in 1998. That is now 13 years of fail.
Umm Chrome has a lot of broken stuff where IE/Firefox work just fine.
emphasis mine to point out exactly where I disagree. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, & Opera have some slight differences and yes, I do find sometimes minor bugs (like Firefox still calculating CSS margins incorrectly for form fields), but by and large they all at least make a show of abiding by published standards. I.E. only complies with standards seemingly by random chance.
I like the general concept here, but it isn't much more sustainable than sending up supplies.
you still need to send up the raw material.
Absolutely wrong. It is far more efficient to just send up blocks of various materials, ala printer cartridges, instead of trying to predict when and how often specific parts will fail and need to be replaced.
You could send up 10 type A widgets, 10 type B widgets, 8 type C widgets, and be absolutely screwed should your 8th type C widget die while you still have 9 type A widgets collecting space dust... or you could just send up the equivalent weight of raw materials and print up whatever widget you need as you need it.
Furthermore, many space used systems are designed in less-than-optimal fashion for the sole purpose of re-using and sharing parts just so they don't have to ship 2 different replacement parts up. 3d-printing would allow every system to have its own parts, and thus not be as limited.
There's no obviously bad browser anymore, but we also don't have an obviously superior browser.
As a developer, I strongly disagree there. IE has the same problems it has always had: everything works in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, & Safari but oh, surprise surprise, it doesn't work in IE. Always have to code something special, even with widely supported Javascript frameworks, there are needed tweaks nearly every time, just for IE.
A full 26 per cent of them admit to using their privileged log in rights to look at confidential information they should not have had access to in the first place
This is first misquoted in the net-security.org
According to the paper:
26 percent of respondents are aware of an IT staff member abusing a privileged login to illicitly access sensitive information
26% are aware of somebody misusing their login credentials. For all we know every single person interviewed was talking about the very same person, which would put the % of IT staff members actually abusing their privileges around 0.000001%. If the survey was asking people "Have YOU abused your login credentials?" the response I'm sure would have been around 1-2% affirmative.
Even if you took them all at their word, only 300 people, 62% of which work for large (10,000+ employee) businesses, were interviewed. Since businesses with less than 500 employees employ 50% of the population, the pool is obviously skewed towards the big college/fortune500/Enron/Lehman Bros. style IT worker, not the local guys. And with the environment the way it is now, I'll just throw in the politicized jibe that really... is anybody surprised that the big businesses have a problem with ethics? I think there are some people protesting that kind of garbage right now in fact.
Ah, another one sided biased rant trying desperately to deflect crticism of Israel,
No, I asked you 3 times I believe for a workable solution. But you're too busy telling me I'm crying wolf and saying Israel is evil.
a nation who are nothing more than thieves who used terrorism to achevie their aims.
And here I was thinking they formed their own brigade and offered assistance to the British government in fighting the Ottoman Empire in return for land owned by the Brits. But then, I read history books.
You can rant all you like but I do not have any problem with jews, and I never have, its Israel actions that is the issue and its muderous behaviour.
You claim you have no problems with Jews. Your actions however speak differently. Stop talking like an anti-semite and start acting like somebody that actually wants to fix the situation. Criticizing only 1 side of a conflict that has problems on both sides, but refusing to try and fix the situation, is simply showing your bias by refusing to admit the atrocities on the other side.
US Liberty
Well here is a great example. Mistakes happen during wartime. Both the US and Israel researched the incident and found out it was an ACCIDENT due to misidentification. Yet anti-semites ignore that fact and call Israel evil for a mistake. Wouldn't it be a shame if some Arab Palestinians accidentally killed some innocent Jews? Wouldn't it be a shame if some Arab Palestinians purposefully promised to kill every innocent Jew? No I guess not. Damn Israel to hell!
The world is no longer listening to your pathetic anti semitism wolf cry mate
They haven't been listening for thousands of years, that is probably why the Jews keep getting shafted by people like you.
, or Israel's constant spin and lies. You can repeat the false accusation over and over but its worn thin for thinking people.
You can spin disemmble and lie all you like, but people are awake to the guilt trip now and soon
And which lie would you be talking about? Please be specific. Don't act like an anti-semite and paint me a liar without addressing specific "lies" the way you avoid discussing a workable solution to the situation so you can criticize Israel.
Israel will pay the price for its arrogance, theivery and dishonesty.
Oh there is that thievery thing again. Did Britain defeat the Ottoman's with Jewish and Arab help? Were they granted "ownership" of the area as restitution for the Ottoman's attempt to conquer the world? Did they agree to split it into 3 countries: 2 Arab, 1 Jewish, as a thank you to the helpers? At which point did they "steal" the land?
Its hillarious how you ignore the fact that the jews in the west bank are living on stolen land and far more Palestinians are in refugee camps.
When did I ignore it? Never. You probably think I'm some dumb Jew ignoring facts and blindly defending Israel. The only thing I've ever stated is my desire that people only use facts in their arguments and not be so bigoted towards opposing interpretations of the facts. The only ignoring being done here is you of the NATIVE JEWISH PALESTINIANS. They've been living on stolen land for 2000 years? Oh yea, kick them out.
They should get all their land back that was stolen by Israeli terror in 1948, which was also the year jewish terroists murdered the UN representative for attempting to reverse the ethnic cleansing they were conducting.
Wow, that is creative. They "earned" the land between 1915 and 1917 by fighting and dieing for the British against the Ottomans. The terrorist acts you're speaking of started much sooner than 1948 AGAINST the Jews by the Arabs. The Haganah was formed because the Brits were not protecting the isolated Jewish settlements. Sh
It is Israels behaviour that has brought on the current criticism.
Again, criticism is fine. Blindly saying Israel is bad and Arab Palestinians should get everything they demand while the Jewish Palestinians should just eat a cock and die is... anti-semitic.
I was once a supporter but Israels own actions have changed my view.
Yes I know. Anti-semites often get upset when Jews defend themselves.
I am sick to death of the pathetic wolf cry of anti-semitism being used EVERY time Israel is criticised.
I'm sick of every time somebody points out lies and omissions people say they're sick of the cry-wolf anti-semitism complaints. Either use facts in your arguments, or be prepared to be denounced as the anti-semite you are.
The land was not the Un's to give away in 48, and in my view is stolen from its owners.
So you are woefully ignorant of history. Great. Pretty typical of most anti-semites. The UN didn't even exist when Israel was formed, along with Jordan, by Britain, with the approval of the League of Nations. And since its owner was the Ottoman Empire before that, which ceased to exist right about the same time the Mandate for Palestine was enacted, you don't get any points for your guess.
There is no pssible justification for Israel killing 15X the pals than their own as killed,
If 15 people kill my kid, and I want to stop those 15 from killing my other kids, that is perfect justification for a 15:1 kill ratio. Other items that affect such justification include murderers hiding amongst "innocent" civilians. I say "innocent" because those "innocent" civilians that you cry about are actively aiding said terrorists. Hell, they even voted those terrorists in to run their government. They are no different than the army support infrastructure we bombed in Germany.
and such sycophantic support as you give is frankly disgusting.
How is "there is plenty of blame to go to both sides" sycophantic support? How is pointing out the obvious factual lies in a post "sycophantic" support? You make claims such as "there is no possible justification" for Israel's actions, while I claim both sides are at fault, but my comment is "sycophantic support"?
Nah, you're an anti-semite who's only solution for the entire situation is "let the Jews die". Or, you can prove you're not by offering a workable solution that keeps the Jews alive... Oh, and don't forget about the NATIVE Jewish Palestinians that you "Palestinian homeland" anti-semitic fools always conveniently ignore.
Anti-semitism is simply an excuse to invalidate criticsm of Israel
Criticism concerns facts. What he was posting were lies by omission and misdirection, probably through ignorance, that served no purpose other to inflame a dislike of Israel or Jews or both. No doubt there are different views of the situation there and how all sides should be handling it, but that is not the same as misrepresenting or distorting facts.
, it is very good to see so many posters are finally seeing the true story of Israels many war crimes. To me it makes no difference if someone is killed by terrorists or an official army. Its clear Israel has killed 15X more Pals then vice cersa.
So in absence of a way to stop either, you blame the Jews?
Their shit has been going on for a very long time, and there is plenty of blame to go to both sides, but it is being laid far more at the feet of Israel. In all the criticism that goes on, nobody seems able or willing to suggest a viable way to stop the attacks on Israel. How to stop Israel's aggression is easy: stop threatening & attacking them, if they continue their thuggery they will have nothing to say when the world thumps them the way they've done to Saddam and others.
Israel has had a gun to their heads since 1948. The trigger has been pulled several times. So, what should they do? Without some workable solution it is just worthless, inflaming, criticism. With the world's history of "blame the jew", and the current proliferation of hatred, it looks like plain old anti-semitism.
Yea, trying to portray Israel as a villain only works in a vacumn....
People B left their land for a variety of reasons during Roman times.
Throughout history actually, most often against their will. Most after 1948 after being expelled or chased out of neighboring Arab nations.
People A (The ones who stayed behind and are provably very close genetic relatives of People B) continued living there under various foreign rulers
And local.
for over a thousand years during which they abandoned the religion
*some* abandoned. The population was still 1/6 Jewish as of 1900.
they shared with people B in favor of Christianity and later Islam. People B come back, after over a thousand years, decide they want 'their land' back,
After people A attacked people B & C after joining with people D & E to conquer the world.
drive people A into concentration camps
That would be people D actually, the Arab states that attacked Israel several times.
where they live in squalor and misery.
Desert life sucks, ya. Isolating yourself by way of supporting terrorism and electing world renowned terrorist organizations goes a long way to accomplishing that as well.
Meanwhile people B live a good life financed by
their own hard work building a modern, industrialized nation that can compete in the world market in a variety of industries.
good friend country C who also provides them with high tech weapons free of charge.
In an effort to continue to oppose countries D,E,F,G, & H that are both supplying and actively supporting organizations and governments trying to annihilate country A.
White-washing Israel works best in a right wing, christian conservative or jewish zionist delusion.
"Black-washing" Israel works best for anti-semites.
There are insane losses on those things and they are at very high voltage to keep the losses down but also need high amperage and that is for a fairly known, predictable load. Imagine having the unpredictable load of cars hooking in and out as they travel.
That is the kind of answer I was looking for. Explains the limitations pretty well.
Seems then that you could install boxes every X feet to control the voltage. Then as people connect (or pass over), the system can increase/decrease power in specific areas to avoid excessive losses.
No doubt it would be more expensive than power/gas stations to setup, but it provides a huge incentive for electric car purchases. Local driving you can always use the chargers at home or at local businesses (Malls and such in the SF Bay Area at least have stations already). Long distance driving becomes better than gas cars as you never have to stop except by choice.
The benefits for long haul trucking I imagine would be insane ($100k/year for gas for long-haulers), especially for teams: non-stop cross-country ground shipping?
Carnival bumper cars just point a paddle at the ceiling.
BART, and many other electric trains, just stick out a paddle and get their electricity from alongside the track.
So why are we not doing something similar for cars? Install something under the road, or along the side, to charge the car as you drive?
I know I'm offering the simplified consumer point of view here on "we have x technology, why can't we just do y?"... I don't know electricity... But I do know I'm tired of trying to find a station for gas, and sure as hell don't want to be caught somewhere in between electric stations with a 6000 pound car I can't physically push to the side.
As has been mentioned before, be careful about ergonomics. Holding an iPad (or similar device) while confined to a bed can produce neck pain (if you hold it in your lap and look down) or arm fatigue (if you try to hold it up to avoid the neck pain).
My recommendation would be a wii, which I believe has already been successfully used in a few nursing homes. I think it would be even more successful for individual cases like this.
Cheap - under $200 for a full setup
Light, easy to use controllers
Her vision is up to snuff, so menus are not a problem
non-HD hookups, meaning better chance of connecting to older hospital/nursing home/fixed income tvs
exercise apps to improve health
chat apps to talk to the grand kids
Something for the kids to do while you visit grandma
So has Israel, and they were even ejected from UNESCO over it for awhile.
So have the Palestinians, but UNESCO didn't get involved... Do they not care about Jewish artifacts?
Either way, this article isn't about Palestine (or Israel, or anyone else in the middle east) it's about the US having a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons.
Funny. I see it as the Palestinians using a scientific & cultural organization (UNESCO) to obtain political gains (recognized statehood), bringing about political ramifications (de-funding of UNESCO).
a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons. Regardless of who the parties are, there's no good reason for such inane laws.
So, we shouldn't care that the Japanese were using POWs as guinea pigs to further their scientific research? We should just fund them and say "morals be damned."
I'm not sure if software patents should be completely abolished, just reduced. Maybe five years? I mean, how long in the software industry until something is considered old news or common knowledge?
And how long in the hardware industry?
I'm sure Goetz could argue I'm just not "inventive" enough to hold software patents. I'd wager I'm just not up to the task of working with an army of lawyers.
Hardware people are better at dealing with lawyers?
I actually take serious issue with Goetz's explanation on the second page of the article about software:
Note that these terms are all consistent with a manufactured product: research, competitive analysis, functionality, specifications, operational environment, operating characteristics, interfaces, modules, engineering, implemented, debugged, tested, quality assurance, alpha and beta testing, documentation, installation, training, OEM, component, system, repackaged, maintenance, warrants, workmanship, guarantees, errors, defects, improved, enhanced, upgraded, and models.
Dude, you can make software development as complicated as goddamn rocket science. But at the end of the day some kid in a basement can also write software sans all that shit. I know where we work, we use Agile Methodologies, high communication, we work in very small teams and we depend on our developers not to be complete liabilities. Sure your control gates and extensive product assurance works too with just about any level of competence in your developers but I feel that's why software is so unreasonably expensive these days.
You can make software development as simple as building a better mouse trap. But at the end of the day, some huge corporation can spend millions of dollars developing a really neat encryption method that a kid in a basement couldn't. Likewise (Wozniak), anybody can build (Gates) a piece of hardware (Jobs) in a garage just as well.
There are plenty of resources online that get you from nothing to your first "Hello, World!" program in a matter of minutes. The same is not true of hardware circuits
Radio Shack has been disagreeing with you for more than 80 years.
-- especially if you want to manufacture them at all in a commercially viable way.
There are thousands of companies out there whose sole business is to help you patent, sell, or manufacture your inventions.
This analogy is rather flawed.
I think the fact that you made absolutely no differentiations supports everything he said.
The other problem is the presence of search data when clicking through to unencrypted sites, if they are google customers. That means google's SSL service is a lie and your unencrypted searches will be sent to certain customers regardless of using http or https.
It seems sorta common sense that if you click on a link to a site, that site will know you clicked on it and where you're going. Similarly, if you have a cookie on a site, that site will know when you've been there and will be able to correlate all kinds of things you typed into that site with links, etc.
Google possesses this information, they can sell it. That your request travelled over HTTPS means it's secret between you and google, what either side of the transmission does with the information it obtained is strictly the business of either party.
Anything you can do with a search result from https://google.com/, like for instance, sharing a search result with a friend, google can do with your click stream, like, for instance, sharing it with their friend.
I don't care if customers get my search results. That is google's business model. My problem is they offer an ssl service, but ignore expected ssl behaviors in favor of their business model. If you perform a search using the ssl service, then your search should be encrypted. Always. However, google forwards your search request in the referer header to their customers, regardless of their customer's usage of ssl. That means if you click through to an unencrypted site, the fact that you logged into google to use their ssl service was meaningless.
So saying google's ssl service is a good thing because it promotes a greater adoption of ssl, imo, is wrong. SSL adoption is only a good thing if implemented properly.
Slashdot Mirror
When you target somebody partially or wholly because of their membership in a group (not just them as a unique individual), you are making an implicit threat against that entire group. When it is a group that has a long history of being targeted with similar violence, your implicit threat carries an especially large capability to intimidate. Hence the need to give special status to hate crimes.
I have never heard that description before. Seriously until now I was a very strong opponent of hate-crime legislation. I still oppose it as I haven't taken the time to fully consider what you're saying, but it makes sense and will make me think about it.
sponsors of a completely different bill from the one in the summary
Very first sentence says H.R. 3674.
, or in the article the summary linked to
I read that article. The only bill mentioned by title or # is HR 3674 as well, right at the bottom.
(or even the article that that article linked to).
Reading this article again I see the confusion. They talk first about a "Senate plan" (no bill by # or name), then proceed to mention a House version by the HS subcommittee as being less intrusive. They don't mention that bill by name or title, just a quote from a Dem, Langevin. As he is one of the sponsors of 3674, no doubt 3674 is the bill talked about in the article. /. editors not checking the articles before posting, and these posts.
meh
So we have CIO misquoting Reuters, CelticWhisper misquoting CIO,
Except that that is not the bill being talked about in this article. The bill being talked about in the article is in the Senate, not the House.
That is all well and good, but it does not excuse the poster I was responding to for stating that the list of sponsors he gave were the sponsors of this bill, since they are not.
The poster linked to opencongress.org
http://homeland.house.gov/bill/hr-3674-promoting-and-enhancing-cybersecurity-and-information-sharing-effectiveness-act-2011 confirms what the poster shared, including the complete list of sponsors.
If the bill being talked about was in the Senate, not the House, it would start with "S", not "H.R."
So I have to ask, where did you get your information, and why should I believe you?
So unlike the traditional magnetic stripe kind of card...and these get skimmed as well, mind you...with this attack you MUST be the next person to use the card's credentials. If not, the attack fails.
Not hard to have a scanner & processor working at the same time.
It's not quite as bad as they make it out to be here.
Perhaps financially for individual consumers, but it can be a huge problem in other ways. Wouldn't it suck if your RFID enabled credit card & passport were read at the same time and you purchased a 1-way ticket for some terrorist (Does Godwin's law include terrorism references yet?).
Naturally restricting the liability to just a couple (or 1) transaction means individuals will not be out a lot of money. But it can still cause problems for the credit card company if a large number of people are hit. For poor individuals, even $50 1 time just as they get to the supermarket can be devastating.
Furthermore, the cries that people have thrown up that someone could scan an entire room full of people at once are totally off-base. You'd need to create an induction field strong enough to energize the furthest cards...which would kill the nearest ones...and the cards would all jabber at the same time, mixing their signals.
No, you just stand at a high traffic point and use a weak field to get the cards right next to you: Union Square, public transit, shopping malls, airport.
Except that we realize what Israel plans to do with their weapons if they do lose a war and have to negotiate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_option A nation with this thought process does not deserve nuclear armament.
And the fact that those weapons will never be used as long as people don't invade Israel means they're irresponsible? Can't be trusted?
Meanwhile Iran says they can never negotiate with Israel, Israel must be wiped out... they should have nukes?
I'm really, really, really, curious as to your thought process. Who deserves nuclear armament?
Why isn't it acceptable for Iran to say "Never again" and defend itself against neighbors that would see Iran destroyed?
Seriously? How times do they have to be quoted promising to destroy the US, Israel, Iraq, and ever non-Muslim on the planet before you realize they're not defensive?
(Also keeping in mind that iran hasn't engaged in any aggressive actions or invasions against her neighbors since the 18th century or so
Except for all the border skirmishes prior to the Iraq war, and 1982-1988 period of the Iraq war that involved Iran pushing into Iraq despite numerous cease-fire calls. And all the promises to destroy Israel and the US. Ya other than that they've just been drinking martinis.
, while Israel has bombed and invaded all of its neighbors at some pont, and its most recent war happened in only 2006.
I love comments like this. Ya, and the US bombed the shit out of Japan & Germany in WWII. Sounds horrible when you leave out the provocations. "OMG HE HIT ME [BACK]".
Adding indexOf() to Array
different call for creating an Event object
different call for adding an option to a <SELECT>
different calls for Events
different call for hiding / showing some elements
css display still, STILL, can't do positioning correctly
1 thing that i know still affects IE 9: CSS margins / borders. CSS 2 was published in 1998. That is now 13 years of fail.
Umm Chrome has a lot of broken stuff where IE/Firefox work just fine.
emphasis mine to point out exactly where I disagree. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, & Opera have some slight differences and yes, I do find sometimes minor bugs (like Firefox still calculating CSS margins incorrectly for form fields), but by and large they all at least make a show of abiding by published standards. I.E. only complies with standards seemingly by random chance.
I like the general concept here, but it isn't much more sustainable than sending up supplies. you still need to send up the raw material.
Absolutely wrong. It is far more efficient to just send up blocks of various materials, ala printer cartridges, instead of trying to predict when and how often specific parts will fail and need to be replaced.
You could send up 10 type A widgets, 10 type B widgets, 8 type C widgets, and be absolutely screwed should your 8th type C widget die while you still have 9 type A widgets collecting space dust... or you could just send up the equivalent weight of raw materials and print up whatever widget you need as you need it.
Furthermore, many space used systems are designed in less-than-optimal fashion for the sole purpose of re-using and sharing parts just so they don't have to ship 2 different replacement parts up. 3d-printing would allow every system to have its own parts, and thus not be as limited.
There's no obviously bad browser anymore, but we also don't have an obviously superior browser.
As a developer, I strongly disagree there. IE has the same problems it has always had: everything works in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, & Safari but oh, surprise surprise, it doesn't work in IE. Always have to code something special, even with widely supported Javascript frameworks, there are needed tweaks nearly every time, just for IE.
http://steve.jobs/ does not seem to be operational either :).... I will probably get marked as troll by apple fanboys... still funny :p
Nah, couldn't find the +1 Troll.
They get such a bad rap... poor trolls.
study: http://www.liebsoft.com/Password_Security_Survey/
A full 26 per cent of them admit to using their privileged log in rights to look at confidential information they should not have had access to in the first place
This is first misquoted in the net-security.org
According to the paper:
26 percent of respondents are aware of an IT staff member abusing a privileged login to illicitly access sensitive information
26% are aware of somebody misusing their login credentials. For all we know every single person interviewed was talking about the very same person, which would put the % of IT staff members actually abusing their privileges around 0.000001%. If the survey was asking people "Have YOU abused your login credentials?" the response I'm sure would have been around 1-2% affirmative.
Even if you took them all at their word, only 300 people, 62% of which work for large (10,000+ employee) businesses, were interviewed. Since businesses with less than 500 employees employ 50% of the population, the pool is obviously skewed towards the big college/fortune500/Enron/Lehman Bros. style IT worker, not the local guys. And with the environment the way it is now, I'll just throw in the politicized jibe that really... is anybody surprised that the big businesses have a problem with ethics? I think there are some people protesting that kind of garbage right now in fact.
whereas the actual content of the e-mail will reaffirm what everybody already knows
Will? In the future? So you haven't read them?
If they had the brains to actually read the emails themselves, they'd see it hurts them.
Would they? I thought you hadn't read them?
Fuck Ya!
Ah, another one sided biased rant trying desperately to deflect crticism of Israel,
No, I asked you 3 times I believe for a workable solution. But you're too busy telling me I'm crying wolf and saying Israel is evil.
a nation who are nothing more than thieves who used terrorism to achevie their aims.
And here I was thinking they formed their own brigade and offered assistance to the British government in fighting the Ottoman Empire in return for land owned by the Brits. But then, I read history books.
You can rant all you like but I do not have any problem with jews, and I never have, its Israel actions that is the issue and its muderous behaviour.
You claim you have no problems with Jews. Your actions however speak differently. Stop talking like an anti-semite and start acting like somebody that actually wants to fix the situation. Criticizing only 1 side of a conflict that has problems on both sides, but refusing to try and fix the situation, is simply showing your bias by refusing to admit the atrocities on the other side.
US Liberty
Well here is a great example. Mistakes happen during wartime. Both the US and Israel researched the incident and found out it was an ACCIDENT due to misidentification. Yet anti-semites ignore that fact and call Israel evil for a mistake. Wouldn't it be a shame if some Arab Palestinians accidentally killed some innocent Jews? Wouldn't it be a shame if some Arab Palestinians purposefully promised to kill every innocent Jew? No I guess not. Damn Israel to hell!
The world is no longer listening to your pathetic anti semitism wolf cry mate
They haven't been listening for thousands of years, that is probably why the Jews keep getting shafted by people like you.
, or Israel's constant spin and lies. You can repeat the false accusation over and over but its worn thin for thinking people.
You can spin disemmble and lie all you like, but people are awake to the guilt trip now and soon
And which lie would you be talking about? Please be specific. Don't act like an anti-semite and paint me a liar without addressing specific "lies" the way you avoid discussing a workable solution to the situation so you can criticize Israel.
Israel will pay the price for its arrogance, theivery and dishonesty.
Oh there is that thievery thing again. Did Britain defeat the Ottoman's with Jewish and Arab help? Were they granted "ownership" of the area as restitution for the Ottoman's attempt to conquer the world? Did they agree to split it into 3 countries: 2 Arab, 1 Jewish, as a thank you to the helpers? At which point did they "steal" the land?
Its hillarious how you ignore the fact that the jews in the west bank are living on stolen land and far more Palestinians are in refugee camps.
When did I ignore it? Never. You probably think I'm some dumb Jew ignoring facts and blindly defending Israel. The only thing I've ever stated is my desire that people only use facts in their arguments and not be so bigoted towards opposing interpretations of the facts. The only ignoring being done here is you of the NATIVE JEWISH PALESTINIANS. They've been living on stolen land for 2000 years? Oh yea, kick them out.
They should get all their land back that was stolen by Israeli terror in 1948, which was also the year jewish terroists murdered the UN representative for attempting to reverse the ethnic cleansing they were conducting.
Wow, that is creative. They "earned" the land between 1915 and 1917 by fighting and dieing for the British against the Ottomans. The terrorist acts you're speaking of started much sooner than 1948 AGAINST the Jews by the Arabs. The Haganah was formed because the Brits were not protecting the isolated Jewish settlements. Sh
It is Israels behaviour that has brought on the current criticism.
Again, criticism is fine. Blindly saying Israel is bad and Arab Palestinians should get everything they demand while the Jewish Palestinians should just eat a cock and die is ... anti-semitic.
I was once a supporter but Israels own actions have changed my view.
Yes I know. Anti-semites often get upset when Jews defend themselves.
I am sick to death of the pathetic wolf cry of anti-semitism being used EVERY time Israel is criticised.
I'm sick of every time somebody points out lies and omissions people say they're sick of the cry-wolf anti-semitism complaints. Either use facts in your arguments, or be prepared to be denounced as the anti-semite you are.
The land was not the Un's to give away in 48, and in my view is stolen from its owners.
So you are woefully ignorant of history. Great. Pretty typical of most anti-semites. The UN didn't even exist when Israel was formed, along with Jordan, by Britain, with the approval of the League of Nations. And since its owner was the Ottoman Empire before that, which ceased to exist right about the same time the Mandate for Palestine was enacted, you don't get any points for your guess.
There is no pssible justification for Israel killing 15X the pals than their own as killed,
If 15 people kill my kid, and I want to stop those 15 from killing my other kids, that is perfect justification for a 15:1 kill ratio. Other items that affect such justification include murderers hiding amongst "innocent" civilians. I say "innocent" because those "innocent" civilians that you cry about are actively aiding said terrorists. Hell, they even voted those terrorists in to run their government. They are no different than the army support infrastructure we bombed in Germany.
and such sycophantic support as you give is frankly disgusting.
How is "there is plenty of blame to go to both sides" sycophantic support? How is pointing out the obvious factual lies in a post "sycophantic" support? You make claims such as "there is no possible justification" for Israel's actions, while I claim both sides are at fault, but my comment is "sycophantic support"?
Nah, you're an anti-semite who's only solution for the entire situation is "let the Jews die". Or, you can prove you're not by offering a workable solution that keeps the Jews alive... Oh, and don't forget about the NATIVE Jewish Palestinians that you "Palestinian homeland" anti-semitic fools always conveniently ignore.
Anti-semitism is simply an excuse to invalidate criticsm of Israel
Criticism concerns facts. What he was posting were lies by omission and misdirection, probably through ignorance, that served no purpose other to inflame a dislike of Israel or Jews or both. No doubt there are different views of the situation there and how all sides should be handling it, but that is not the same as misrepresenting or distorting facts.
, it is very good to see so many posters are finally seeing the true story of Israels many war crimes. To me it makes no difference if someone is killed by terrorists or an official army. Its clear Israel has killed 15X more Pals then vice cersa.
So in absence of a way to stop either, you blame the Jews?
Their shit has been going on for a very long time, and there is plenty of blame to go to both sides, but it is being laid far more at the feet of Israel. In all the criticism that goes on, nobody seems able or willing to suggest a viable way to stop the attacks on Israel. How to stop Israel's aggression is easy: stop threatening & attacking them, if they continue their thuggery they will have nothing to say when the world thumps them the way they've done to Saddam and others.
Israel has had a gun to their heads since 1948. The trigger has been pulled several times. So, what should they do? Without some workable solution it is just worthless, inflaming, criticism. With the world's history of "blame the jew", and the current proliferation of hatred, it looks like plain old anti-semitism.
Yea, trying to portray Israel as a villain only works in a vacumn....
People B left their land for a variety of reasons during Roman times.
Throughout history actually, most often against their will. Most after 1948 after being expelled or chased out of neighboring Arab nations.
People A (The ones who stayed behind and are provably very close genetic relatives of People B) continued living there under various foreign rulers
And local.
for over a thousand years during which they abandoned the religion
*some* abandoned. The population was still 1/6 Jewish as of 1900.
they shared with people B in favor of Christianity and later Islam. People B come back, after over a thousand years, decide they want 'their land' back,
After people A attacked people B & C after joining with people D & E to conquer the world.
drive people A into concentration camps
That would be people D actually, the Arab states that attacked Israel several times.
where they live in squalor and misery.
Desert life sucks, ya. Isolating yourself by way of supporting terrorism and electing world renowned terrorist organizations goes a long way to accomplishing that as well.
Meanwhile people B live a good life financed by
their own hard work building a modern, industrialized nation that can compete in the world market in a variety of industries.
good friend country C who also provides them with high tech weapons free of charge.
In an effort to continue to oppose countries D,E,F,G, & H that are both supplying and actively supporting organizations and governments trying to annihilate country A.
White-washing Israel works best in a right wing, christian conservative or jewish zionist delusion.
"Black-washing" Israel works best for anti-semites.
There are insane losses on those things and they are at very high voltage to keep the losses down but also need high amperage and that is for a fairly known, predictable load. Imagine having the unpredictable load of cars hooking in and out as they travel.
That is the kind of answer I was looking for. Explains the limitations pretty well.
Seems then that you could install boxes every X feet to control the voltage. Then as people connect (or pass over), the system can increase/decrease power in specific areas to avoid excessive losses.
No doubt it would be more expensive than power/gas stations to setup, but it provides a huge incentive for electric car purchases. Local driving you can always use the chargers at home or at local businesses (Malls and such in the SF Bay Area at least have stations already). Long distance driving becomes better than gas cars as you never have to stop except by choice.
The benefits for long haul trucking I imagine would be insane ($100k/year for gas for long-haulers), especially for teams: non-stop cross-country ground shipping?
Carnival bumper cars just point a paddle at the ceiling.
BART, and many other electric trains, just stick out a paddle and get their electricity from alongside the track.
So why are we not doing something similar for cars? Install something under the road, or along the side, to charge the car as you drive?
I know I'm offering the simplified consumer point of view here on "we have x technology, why can't we just do y?"... I don't know electricity... But I do know I'm tired of trying to find a station for gas, and sure as hell don't want to be caught somewhere in between electric stations with a 6000 pound car I can't physically push to the side.
My recommendation would be a wii, which I believe has already been successfully used in a few nursing homes. I think it would be even more successful for individual cases like this.
So has Israel, and they were even ejected from UNESCO over it for awhile.
So have the Palestinians, but UNESCO didn't get involved... Do they not care about Jewish artifacts?
Either way, this article isn't about Palestine (or Israel, or anyone else in the middle east) it's about the US having a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons.
Funny. I see it as the Palestinians using a scientific & cultural organization (UNESCO) to obtain political gains (recognized statehood), bringing about political ramifications (de-funding of UNESCO).
a law that prevents funding for scientific and cultural pursuits for political reasons. Regardless of who the parties are, there's no good reason for such inane laws.
So, we shouldn't care that the Japanese were using POWs as guinea pigs to further their scientific research? We should just fund them and say "morals be damned."
I'm not sure if software patents should be completely abolished, just reduced. Maybe five years? I mean, how long in the software industry until something is considered old news or common knowledge?
And how long in the hardware industry?
I'm sure Goetz could argue I'm just not "inventive" enough to hold software patents. I'd wager I'm just not up to the task of working with an army of lawyers.
Hardware people are better at dealing with lawyers?
I actually take serious issue with Goetz's explanation on the second page of the article about software:
Note that these terms are all consistent with a manufactured product: research, competitive analysis, functionality, specifications, operational environment, operating characteristics, interfaces, modules, engineering, implemented, debugged, tested, quality assurance, alpha and beta testing, documentation, installation, training, OEM, component, system, repackaged, maintenance, warrants, workmanship, guarantees, errors, defects, improved, enhanced, upgraded, and models.
Dude, you can make software development as complicated as goddamn rocket science. But at the end of the day some kid in a basement can also write software sans all that shit. I know where we work, we use Agile Methodologies, high communication, we work in very small teams and we depend on our developers not to be complete liabilities. Sure your control gates and extensive product assurance works too with just about any level of competence in your developers but I feel that's why software is so unreasonably expensive these days.
You can make software development as simple as building a better mouse trap. But at the end of the day, some huge corporation can spend millions of dollars developing a really neat encryption method that a kid in a basement couldn't. Likewise (Wozniak), anybody can build (Gates) a piece of hardware (Jobs) in a garage just as well.
There are plenty of resources online that get you from nothing to your first "Hello, World!" program in a matter of minutes. The same is not true of hardware circuits
Radio Shack has been disagreeing with you for more than 80 years.
-- especially if you want to manufacture them at all in a commercially viable way.
There are thousands of companies out there whose sole business is to help you patent, sell, or manufacture your inventions.
This analogy is rather flawed.
I think the fact that you made absolutely no differentiations supports everything he said.
The other problem is the presence of search data when clicking through to unencrypted sites, if they are google customers. That means google's SSL service is a lie and your unencrypted searches will be sent to certain customers regardless of using http or https.
It seems sorta common sense that if you click on a link to a site, that site will know you clicked on it and where you're going. Similarly, if you have a cookie on a site, that site will know when you've been there and will be able to correlate all kinds of things you typed into that site with links, etc.
Google possesses this information, they can sell it. That your request travelled over HTTPS means it's secret between you and google, what either side of the transmission does with the information it obtained is strictly the business of either party.
Anything you can do with a search result from https://google.com/, like for instance, sharing a search result with a friend, google can do with your click stream, like, for instance, sharing it with their friend.
I don't care if customers get my search results. That is google's business model. My problem is they offer an ssl service, but ignore expected ssl behaviors in favor of their business model. If you perform a search using the ssl service, then your search should be encrypted. Always. However, google forwards your search request in the referer header to their customers, regardless of their customer's usage of ssl. That means if you click through to an unencrypted site, the fact that you logged into google to use their ssl service was meaningless.
So saying google's ssl service is a good thing because it promotes a greater adoption of ssl, imo, is wrong. SSL adoption is only a good thing if implemented properly.