Heh... yeah, I'd had a similar thought... "certified terrorist-free" vendors with booths located after the security check-in, who sell the now-captive audience marginally-edible shit at 10x the normal price.
LOL! Oh, it's nice to see someone else who organizes email as I do -- primarily in the order it arrived. I do some sorting out into folders by type (newsletters, specialty mailing lists or topics, etc), and I delete a lot of transient stuff, but that's mainly to keep the inbox's filesize down to where it loads fast. And what's not answered today probably never will be. Inboxes get archived off when they get too large, and allowed to start over from empty. But I don't worry or obsess over any of it. Good enough is good enough.
I know several people who would be in a diabetic coma after some unpredictable extra hours without food or drink. How do they plan to deal with that?
If they're not going to allow passengers to bring their own supplies onboard, they'd better be prepared to cover what passengers need. At the very least, bottled water, snacks of various sorts, etc.
Not only a good solution (it worked for Israel!), but also would put to real use any military personnel who are presently stuck doing make-work duty at some domestic base.
An AC says, "If you had trusted computing, you wouldn't need to hide it in the keylogger. The TPM hardware itself can hide what code is doing from the user. In fact, TC makes things worse."
Yep. In this case, we're hiding what the keylogger is doing from everyone but the TC, which may unwittingly enforce use of the keylogger... that's what the original poster was getting at. Do you really know about the integrity of everyone who works at the keyboard factory? how do you know that some mass-produced keyboard *doesn't* include a keylogging chip, and its own form of TC?
It's farfetched, but the whole point of TFA is that it *could* be done.
'In a way, this becomes an interesting argument against forced "trusted" (nee treacherous) computing, where a corporation forcing employees to run a locked-down TC OS would be the most unable to prevent the leaking of information due to this type of keylogger.'
Very interesting point. Especially since the data that's worth the most is corporate; frex, a large volume of bank records. And if one can filch a few critical passwords out of an otherwise-protected keyboard datastream... 'creative' possibilities abound.
I'm wonder if Treach^H^H^H^H^H Trusted Computing (the TC chip in the computer itself) might *prevent* a software solution from interfering with a compromised keyboard...???
Pet peeve relevant to that -- fixed width on the web page is always 5-10% wider than an equal-sized browser window, since you've got to account not only for window margins, but also that some browsers slightly stretch everything side to side. So a fixed-width page set at 1024 wide can require sidescrolling even on a 1024x768 display (the commonest default at present).
As to the rest of the comment chain... hear hear!!:)
[Me, I design for a *browser window* set at 800x600, but I test how it floats both at larger and smaller sizes.]
"Are they trying to deny me the opportunity to use a different distribution model for my music?"
Actually, that's a good point -- if you earn your living as a musician, and the RIAA denies you the right to do so by destroying your chosen distribution method -- I'm wondering if a clever lawyer might turn this into a lawsuit based on some states' right-to-work laws.
There are some homeowners associations in the US that have similar stipulations -- you can't plant, trim, or cut down anything without either prior approval, or meeting some set of guidelines.
While nominally it's to preserve the value and character of the neighbourhood, in practice it's used to come down on anyone who doesn't precisely conform to whatever petty BS the HOA Board of Directors feels like enforcing.
Actually, 20 feet is about average, or even a little tall, for a fruit tree. Most are both pruned and bred (or grafted -- rootstock type determines mature size) to what are reasonable heights for fruit trees... after all, the higher up the fruit, the more of a PITA it is to pick. (Tho an unimpeded cherry tree can reach a height of 60' or more, you don't see that very often.) Also, ornamental fruit trees tend to be smaller than bearing varieties.
Given how fruit trees are typically pruned and shaped in their youth, there probably was a good "nesting point" some 4 to 6 feet off the ground, and likely that's where the kids had climbed to. As you say, the higher branches are not going to support much weight, and will break if someone attempts it. For all we know (no photos of the tree having surfaced in this discussion), that may be what happened -- the kids, being kids, tried to clamber out on a too-thin branch, when then broke at the base as such branches will do.
BTW in my youth I was a very accomplished tree climber, and I believe all kids need the chance to climb trees. A few branches and a few heads will get broken, but humanity will survive that far better than it will jailing every kid who merely behaves like a kid. And if they were *deliberately* damaging the tree, rather than jail, make the brats plant and care for some replacements, so they learn just what they were destroying.
While you make some good points (we really *don't* know what happened, other than a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on both sides) the real point of all this yammering is that treating kids as criminals just for being stupid kids (as all kids will sometimes be) doesn't solve the problem, nor teach these kids anything about being responsible individuals.
So if they were indeed destroying the tree, a better solution would have been on the order of "Look what you've done to that poor tree!! how would you like it if someone ripped YOUR arms off?" Let the brats think about that for a while, then if punishment is indicated, hale them into some youth group that plants trees or caretakes woodlands. Get them involved so they understand exactly *what* they were destroying. Because the fact is, kids DON'T understand what they're destroying unless it's something they personally feel they have a stake in. That's just the nature of *kids*.
But hauling them off to jail accomplished nothing. The kids still don't understand what they did wrong (if anything -- *we* don't really know), and instead can only see the unfairness of how the cops reacted.
The unfortunate side effect being that when all the honest cops like your friend have resigned, what's left are the people who shouldn't have become cops in the first place.:(
I used to live next door to a cop who had been kicked out of the Navy "for the good of the service" (that's what it said on his discharge papers).
Long story short, he pulled some harrassment shit on me, and went out of his jurisdiction to do so. I immediately (it was 2am!) complained to both his immediate boss and the office his contract station answered to, and next thing I heard, he'd been fired.
However, he wasn't fired for the harrassment, but rather for being out of his jurisdiction during working hours.
Maybe the solution is this: When the parent, having failed to do due diligence when purchasing such material for their child, then complains about its content, the parent should be fined for gross negligence.
So:
1) Kid wants game. 2) Parent buys game, gives it to kid. 3) Kid plays game. 4) Parent observes nasty evil content in game. 5) Parent goes ballistic.
Now, there are two ways this can go from here:
6a) Parent whines to authorities, authorities come down on the game publisher or retailer.
or
6b) Parent whines to authorities, authorities fine parent for not bothering to be an informed parent.
And I was wondering how the heck it'd be enforced. Perhaps:
"Here's your copy of Killer Robots From Hell -- that'll be $49.95, plus a $25 fine. Your total is $74.95. Thank you for doing business with us, and have a nice day."
"I have no idea how you're supposed to back up such data, or even trust your computer to do what you tell it to do."
Silly user, you're supposed to buy it all again -- OS, programs, data, and all. Backups, what a ridiculous concept! How can we make any money if you have backups??
A while back I pitched out most of the old MFM and RLL hard drives I'd accumulated... then promptly regretted it, when I saw what they're going for to data recovery companies who need them for parts, to resurrect identical drives... that 10mb Rodine HD that I sent to the recycler presently sells for $900!!!
What I've noticed is that my perception of WHEN the HD is "getting full" has stayed constant, at about 10% of each partition, no matter how large it is.
So my 286's 20mb HD wasn't "full" until it was down to less than 2mb free space, but yonder 30GB partition is "full" with 3GB of free space left.
Goes to show that our expectation of data size has gone up, if nothing else.
As to total free space, well, junk still fills the space allotted, tho with larger HDs I no longer feel such a need to clear out old data. And I think the growth in free space has a lot to do with the dive in HD prices.
You must not have been in California lately. MOST of the adults I see now are chubby to obese, and kids in normal weight, even pre-schoolers!! have become rare enough to be remarkable. Gradeschoolers who are morbidly obese are no longer the rarity they were when I was a kid.
While anorexia is indeed a problem (as a few other posts mention), it's not nearly as common as obesity, and anorexia has its roots in the brain, not the stomach.
Even with an active lifestyle, most people experience a metabolic slowdown at around age 30, when the body goes through its final maturation stages. Trouble is, many people don't notice that now they suddenly need 1/3rd fewer calories even when they're doing the same amount of physical activity, so they gain weight for no reason that they can see.
And of course this tends to be exacerbated by the usual tendency to stop doing highly-physical activities in their 40s.
Back to your points, having good early habits makes a person more *aware* when their body's needs change, so they're less likely to get broadsided by it.
Oh, I was using "grow up fast" in the social sense, not the physical sense; indeed, human bodies still mature at much the same rate as always.:)
Good extension of the point I was after -- that our modern lifestyle is encouraging, perhaps even *enforcing* an extended childhood, and leaving modern kids less equipped to deal with adult responsibilities at age 21 than the average medieval kid was at age 14.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh... yeah, I'd had a similar thought... "certified terrorist-free" vendors with booths located after the security check-in, who sell the now-captive audience marginally-edible shit at 10x the normal price.
LOL! Oh, it's nice to see someone else who organizes email as I do -- primarily in the order it arrived. I do some sorting out into folders by type (newsletters, specialty mailing lists or topics, etc), and I delete a lot of transient stuff, but that's mainly to keep the inbox's filesize down to where it loads fast. And what's not answered today probably never will be. Inboxes get archived off when they get too large, and allowed to start over from empty. But I don't worry or obsess over any of it. Good enough is good enough.
I know several people who would be in a diabetic coma after some unpredictable extra hours without food or drink. How do they plan to deal with that?
If they're not going to allow passengers to bring their own supplies onboard, they'd better be prepared to cover what passengers need. At the very least, bottled water, snacks of various sorts, etc.
Not only a good solution (it worked for Israel!), but also would put to real use any military personnel who are presently stuck doing make-work duty at some domestic base.
An AC says, "If you had trusted computing, you wouldn't need to hide it in the keylogger. The TPM hardware itself can hide what code is doing from the user. In fact, TC makes things worse."
Yep. In this case, we're hiding what the keylogger is doing from everyone but the TC, which may unwittingly enforce use of the keylogger... that's what the original poster was getting at. Do you really know about the integrity of everyone who works at the keyboard factory? how do you know that some mass-produced keyboard *doesn't* include a keylogging chip, and its own form of TC?
It's farfetched, but the whole point of TFA is that it *could* be done.
Ain't it tho :/
... and I'm not even a programmer, just an interested bystander.
Personally, I think it's great that Borland makes these products freely available
'In a way, this becomes an interesting argument against forced "trusted" (nee treacherous) computing, where a corporation forcing employees to run a locked-down TC OS would be the most unable to prevent the leaking of information due to this type of keylogger.'
Very interesting point. Especially since the data that's worth the most is corporate; frex, a large volume of bank records. And if one can filch a few critical passwords out of an otherwise-protected keyboard datastream... 'creative' possibilities abound.
I'm wonder if Treach^H^H^H^H^H Trusted Computing (the TC chip in the computer itself) might *prevent* a software solution from interfering with a compromised keyboard...???
Pet peeve relevant to that -- fixed width on the web page is always 5-10% wider than an equal-sized browser window, since you've got to account not only for window margins, but also that some browsers slightly stretch everything side to side. So a fixed-width page set at 1024 wide can require sidescrolling even on a 1024x768 display (the commonest default at present).
:)
As to the rest of the comment chain... hear hear!!
[Me, I design for a *browser window* set at 800x600, but I test how it floats both at larger and smaller sizes.]
"Are they trying to deny me the opportunity to use a different distribution model for my music?"
Actually, that's a good point -- if you earn your living as a musician, and the RIAA denies you the right to do so by destroying your chosen distribution method -- I'm wondering if a clever lawyer might turn this into a lawsuit based on some states' right-to-work laws.
Um,let me guess...
"A little dab will do ya..."
There are some homeowners associations in the US that have similar stipulations -- you can't plant, trim, or cut down anything without either prior approval, or meeting some set of guidelines.
While nominally it's to preserve the value and character of the neighbourhood, in practice it's used to come down on anyone who doesn't precisely conform to whatever petty BS the HOA Board of Directors feels like enforcing.
Actually, 20 feet is about average, or even a little tall, for a fruit tree. Most are both pruned and bred (or grafted -- rootstock type determines mature size) to what are reasonable heights for fruit trees... after all, the higher up the fruit, the more of a PITA it is to pick. (Tho an unimpeded cherry tree can reach a height of 60' or more, you don't see that very often.) Also, ornamental fruit trees tend to be smaller than bearing varieties.
Given how fruit trees are typically pruned and shaped in their youth, there probably was a good "nesting point" some 4 to 6 feet off the ground, and likely that's where the kids had climbed to. As you say, the higher branches are not going to support much weight, and will break if someone attempts it. For all we know (no photos of the tree having surfaced in this discussion), that may be what happened -- the kids, being kids, tried to clamber out on a too-thin branch, when then broke at the base as such branches will do.
BTW in my youth I was a very accomplished tree climber, and I believe all kids need the chance to climb trees. A few branches and a few heads will get broken, but humanity will survive that far better than it will jailing every kid who merely behaves like a kid. And if they were *deliberately* damaging the tree, rather than jail, make the brats plant and care for some replacements, so they learn just what they were destroying.
And why have we yet to see any photos?
Ideally before-and-after photos, since for all we know, the kids were breaking off partially-busted branches damaged by someone else.
Of course, a "before" picture would require the luck of someone having photographed that stretch of woodland within recent memory.
But even just an "after" photo would help settle whether there was intent to damage, or simply the odd branch or two being broken, as kids will do.
While you make some good points (we really *don't* know what happened, other than a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on both sides) the real point of all this yammering is that treating kids as criminals just for being stupid kids (as all kids will sometimes be) doesn't solve the problem, nor teach these kids anything about being responsible individuals.
So if they were indeed destroying the tree, a better solution would have been on the order of "Look what you've done to that poor tree!! how would you like it if someone ripped YOUR arms off?" Let the brats think about that for a while, then if punishment is indicated, hale them into some youth group that plants trees or caretakes woodlands. Get them involved so they understand exactly *what* they were destroying. Because the fact is, kids DON'T understand what they're destroying unless it's something they personally feel they have a stake in. That's just the nature of *kids*.
But hauling them off to jail accomplished nothing. The kids still don't understand what they did wrong (if anything -- *we* don't really know), and instead can only see the unfairness of how the cops reacted.
The unfortunate side effect being that when all the honest cops like your friend have resigned, what's left are the people who shouldn't have become cops in the first place. :(
I used to live next door to a cop who had been kicked out of the Navy "for the good of the service" (that's what it said on his discharge papers).
Long story short, he pulled some harrassment shit on me, and went out of his jurisdiction to do so. I immediately (it was 2am!) complained to both his immediate boss and the office his contract station answered to, and next thing I heard, he'd been fired.
However, he wasn't fired for the harrassment, but rather for being out of his jurisdiction during working hours.
Maybe the solution is this: When the parent, having failed to do due diligence when purchasing such material for their child, then complains about its content, the parent should be fined for gross negligence.
So:
1) Kid wants game.
2) Parent buys game, gives it to kid.
3) Kid plays game.
4) Parent observes nasty evil content in game.
5) Parent goes ballistic.
Now, there are two ways this can go from here:
6a) Parent whines to authorities, authorities come down on the game publisher or retailer.
or
6b) Parent whines to authorities, authorities fine parent for not bothering to be an informed parent.
Now, which one puts the onus where it belongs??
Oh yeah, I almost forgot:
7) Profit!
"Here's your copy of Killer Robots From Hell -- that'll be $49.95, plus a $25 fine. Your total is $74.95. Thank you for doing business with us, and have a nice day."
"I have no idea how you're supposed to back up such data, or even trust your computer to do what you tell it to do."
Silly user, you're supposed to buy it all again -- OS, programs, data, and all. Backups, what a ridiculous concept! How can we make any money if you have backups??
A while back I pitched out most of the old MFM and RLL hard drives I'd accumulated... then promptly regretted it, when I saw what they're going for to data recovery companies who need them for parts, to resurrect identical drives... that 10mb Rodine HD that I sent to the recycler presently sells for $900!!!
What I've noticed is that my perception of WHEN the HD is "getting full" has stayed constant, at about 10% of each partition, no matter how large it is.
So my 286's 20mb HD wasn't "full" until it was down to less than 2mb free space, but yonder 30GB partition is "full" with 3GB of free space left.
Goes to show that our expectation of data size has gone up, if nothing else.
As to total free space, well, junk still fills the space allotted, tho with larger HDs I no longer feel such a need to clear out old data. And I think the growth in free space has a lot to do with the dive in HD prices.
You must not have been in California lately. MOST of the adults I see now are chubby to obese, and kids in normal weight, even pre-schoolers!! have become rare enough to be remarkable. Gradeschoolers who are morbidly obese are no longer the rarity they were when I was a kid.
While anorexia is indeed a problem (as a few other posts mention), it's not nearly as common as obesity, and anorexia has its roots in the brain, not the stomach.
Even with an active lifestyle, most people experience a metabolic slowdown at around age 30, when the body goes through its final maturation stages. Trouble is, many people don't notice that now they suddenly need 1/3rd fewer calories even when they're doing the same amount of physical activity, so they gain weight for no reason that they can see.
And of course this tends to be exacerbated by the usual tendency to stop doing highly-physical activities in their 40s.
Back to your points, having good early habits makes a person more *aware* when their body's needs change, so they're less likely to get broadsided by it.
Oh, I was using "grow up fast" in the social sense, not the physical sense; indeed, human bodies still mature at much the same rate as always. :)
Good extension of the point I was after -- that our modern lifestyle is encouraging, perhaps even *enforcing* an extended childhood, and leaving modern kids less equipped to deal with adult responsibilities at age 21 than the average medieval kid was at age 14.