Seriously, this is 2013 already, how much longer do we have to wait for our ISPs and biggest websites to make the switch?
About five years. Most of the network gear deployed today does not handle IPv6 in ASICs, just CPU, which is too intense. Almost all of the Internet needs to be replaced.
It's only $4 a month for unlimited backups to CrashPlan.
Do they throttle? I looked into the one that advertises unlimited backups for $60/yr and they rate limit the connection down as you increase your data. I estimated 9 years for the first backup to complete based on published rates.
Use rsync between them using the --backup switch so that any changes get put into a different folder.... A clear list of any files that may have been changed for *any* reason (Cryptolocker anyone?)
I don't carry a gun around with me because I don't live in some fantasy wild-west world where having a shoot out is going to have any kind of good outcome.
The only fantasy is your denial (or lack of awareness) about the indisputable statistics on defensive gun uses. Most of them are brandishing - defensive shootings are exceedingly rare.
Nobody could get capital from the banks because there was no liquidity to be had.
This is sadly quite true. Under Dodd-Frank, the Fed has set a common lending equation that's applied to all banks' loan departments. Completely gone are the days when local banks could fund a startup they thought would make a good business. Those sorts of startup were the engine of equation in our economy, but now they're completely dead.
The result is that you can seek VC money now, if you have a business that needs startup capital, or you don't start that business. The VC's and investment banks that underwrite IPO's (and are controlling members of the Fed) are thrilled with this arrangement.
The rest of the economy can suck it.
Repeating for emphasis: every bank must now make the same kinds of loans, under a common formula that is only theoretical in nature. Dodd-Frank has created a monoculture in lending that eliminates the traditional small business funding opportunity.
And your precious guns don't stop those criminals from shooting people... So why do you think more of them will help?
You're simply wrong. Do a deep dive into the statistics of defensive gun use. The ratio of defense to offense is tremendously high, 80:1 or more, depending on the study.
You can even get entire large data sets for free if you sign a non-distribution agreement, so put on your R hat and get hacking.
I once went to a bioethics panel on computing and neuroscience and asked the ethicist who specialized in rights, "so when we have nanobots that can repair a small portion of damaged neurons in Grandma's brain, we'd probably all view that as a positive development in medical science. And then, as more and more of Grandma's natural neurons fail, the nanobots can take their place, probably before anybody notices symptoms. At some point, nearly all the neurons have failed, and Grandma's brain is mostly nanotech, but nobody on the outside noticed. So, when is Grandma no longer Grandma?"
His answer: "It sounds like you're a philosopher."
Coming generations won't get to answer so coyly. I didn't bother with the follow-up about what happens when the nanobots can duplicate her pattern elsewhere.
As to your comment about nothing changing in the last 15 years, do you mean terrorists trying to attack the US?
No, of course not - that sort of attack* is not preventable. No amount of infringement on freedoms can stop that. The FBI was informed that there were Saudi men taking flying lessons ($$$) who were completely unconcerned about landing or take-off, and the issue was buried within the FBI. The amount of intelligence is not the issue, it's the Feds' general incompetence that is (and always will be).
In fact, information theorists strongly warn that all of this extra "intelligence" makes things worse because it raises the noise floor significantly.
The NSA didn't stop the Boston bombings, and in Congressional testimony the NSA chief would admit that there were fewer than four potential events over a decade upon which all of their programs had any involvement in detecting, and in none of which was the NSA's intel required.
* asymmetrical, not 'airplanes as missiles' which hasn't been a viable strategy since 2004 when the last cockpit doors became hardened - the TSA is behavioral conditioning, not security.
People will reflexively scoff at this, but it's Puritanism. If you're a good God-fearing person, you'll have willpower and be able to lose weight. If you're fat, it's because you're a bad person. Doctors have prescription power because they're a different kind of better person. Why should a good person give a bad person something that will encourage them to still be a bad person?
Americans (at least) refuse to accept how pervasive the basic concepts of Puritanism are in our society. The "head & up, good, below the head, bad" attitude is everywhere and irrational. Read some Thaddeus Russell before you disagree.
Most importantly, Congress can't simply repeal a provision of a treaty, which is why it's so much better for industry to get their welfare written into a treaty rather than a statute. The next election could threaten their favorite statute (in theory anyhow).
It is just a matter of finding correct monetization strategy.
Just look at the pie charts - Pandora already has the system in place for music discovery, which is the coordination problem that the corporate model provided one solution for. Once bands don't need corporate music middlemen, they can get half of the revenue, or more.
I've heard a bunch of great stuff on Pandora that I'd never heard _of_ before. Apparently there were a bunch of rock bands in the early 70's that achieved very little commercial success but recorded lots of fantastic music. I assume they each got a little piece of each of the thousand times Pandora played me the same blasted ad for an Intel ultrabook (which are overpriced).
Getting new bands into the new system is the challenge. Their odds are low with the A&R man, so going into something like Pandora makes a bunch of sense. Pandora even has the filtering technology in place to detect the turkeys.
Of course a random op-ed on RWW carries more credence than an entire industry, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. So, what happens the atmospheric CO2 in that case? Would it precipitate as "dry ice" snow?
Seriously, this is 2013 already, how much longer do we have to wait for our ISPs and biggest websites to make the switch?
About five years. Most of the network gear deployed today does not handle IPv6 in ASICs, just CPU, which is too intense. Almost all of the Internet needs to be replaced.
It's only $4 a month for unlimited backups to CrashPlan.
Do they throttle? I looked into the one that advertises unlimited backups for $60/yr and they rate limit the connection down as you increase your data. I estimated 9 years for the first backup to complete based on published rates.
"Unlimited" - IDTIMWYTIM.
Use rsync between them using the --backup switch so that any changes get put into a different folder. ...
A clear list of any files that may have been changed for *any* reason (Cryptolocker anyone?)
+1 Clever.
Are you using CookieMonster? It's much better than any stock cookie controller that I've seen.
What happened to their rape, murder, and assault rates?
Also look into deaths by arson there.
August 2013 Sydney Australia launched a new plan to combat "out of control gun violence". http://www.ballinaadvocate.com.au/news/new-plan-unveil-tackle-out-of-control-gun-violence/1992835/
Clearly NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione has been taken in by NRA talking points.
Awesome, thanks for the link.
I don't carry a gun around with me because I don't live in some fantasy wild-west world where having a shoot out is going to have any kind of good outcome.
The only fantasy is your denial (or lack of awareness) about the indisputable statistics on defensive gun uses. Most of them are brandishing - defensive shootings are exceedingly rare.
What are we going to learn from an audit that could possibly matter when they tell us they are effectively printing $85B every month?
Look at the results of the partial Lahey audit - $16T in secret loans revealed. And that's the tip of the iceberg.
Everybody knows that the point of Audit the Fed is to lay out how horrible the Fed is so that End the Fed is inevitable.
Which is why the Senate will never pass it.
Nobody could get capital from the banks because there was no liquidity to be had.
This is sadly quite true. Under Dodd-Frank, the Fed has set a common lending equation that's applied to all banks' loan departments. Completely gone are the days when local banks could fund a startup they thought would make a good business. Those sorts of startup were the engine of equation in our economy, but now they're completely dead.
The result is that you can seek VC money now, if you have a business that needs startup capital, or you don't start that business. The VC's and investment banks that underwrite IPO's (and are controlling members of the Fed) are thrilled with this arrangement.
The rest of the economy can suck it.
Repeating for emphasis: every bank must now make the same kinds of loans, under a common formula that is only theoretical in nature. Dodd-Frank has created a monoculture in lending that eliminates the traditional small business funding opportunity.
In northern Europe guns are heavily regulated and they don't have nearly as much violent gun crime as the U.S.
Yet, look at the UK and Australia where violent crime deaths rose after their gun bans. Or under the Third Reich, for a more poignant example.
And your precious guns don't stop those criminals from shooting people... So why do you think more of them will help?
You're simply wrong. Do a deep dive into the statistics of defensive gun use. The ratio of defense to offense is tremendously high, 80:1 or more, depending on the study.
You can even get entire large data sets for free if you sign a non-distribution agreement, so put on your R hat and get hacking.
Then move to some other country where "liv[ing] in a Mad Max style dystopia" isn't a Constitutional right.
Which adequately describes the US before the Progressive Era. Oh, wait, no, that's not it. I was promised a steam-powered autogyro!
I get this feeling that most of the new Slashdot "editors" where hired through Dice.com
Don't be silly - they were provided by Kiva Systems.
If you plug one electronic device into another you are mimicking their communications protocol?
Depends if it's a switch or a hub.
I once went to a bioethics panel on computing and neuroscience and asked the ethicist who specialized in rights, "so when we have nanobots that can repair a small portion of damaged neurons in Grandma's brain, we'd probably all view that as a positive development in medical science. And then, as more and more of Grandma's natural neurons fail, the nanobots can take their place, probably before anybody notices symptoms. At some point, nearly all the neurons have failed, and Grandma's brain is mostly nanotech, but nobody on the outside noticed. So, when is Grandma no longer Grandma?"
His answer: "It sounds like you're a philosopher."
Coming generations won't get to answer so coyly. I didn't bother with the follow-up about what happens when the nanobots can duplicate her pattern elsewhere.
As to your comment about nothing changing in the last 15 years, do you mean terrorists trying to attack the US?
No, of course not - that sort of attack* is not preventable. No amount of infringement on freedoms can stop that. The FBI was informed that there were Saudi men taking flying lessons ($$$) who were completely unconcerned about landing or take-off, and the issue was buried within the FBI. The amount of intelligence is not the issue, it's the Feds' general incompetence that is (and always will be).
In fact, information theorists strongly warn that all of this extra "intelligence" makes things worse because it raises the noise floor significantly.
The NSA didn't stop the Boston bombings, and in Congressional testimony the NSA chief would admit that there were fewer than four potential events over a decade upon which all of their programs had any involvement in detecting, and in none of which was the NSA's intel required.
* asymmetrical, not 'airplanes as missiles' which hasn't been a viable strategy since 2004 when the last cockpit doors became hardened - the TSA is behavioral conditioning, not security.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw
(notice how much hasn't changed in 15 years)
People will reflexively scoff at this, but it's Puritanism. If you're a good God-fearing person, you'll have willpower and be able to lose weight. If you're fat, it's because you're a bad person. Doctors have prescription power because they're a different kind of better person. Why should a good person give a bad person something that will encourage them to still be a bad person?
Americans (at least) refuse to accept how pervasive the basic concepts of Puritanism are in our society. The "head & up, good, below the head, bad" attitude is everywhere and irrational. Read some Thaddeus Russell before you disagree.
I think it's tigervnc-server.
Yeah, and the latest build finally adds support for ID3 ratings tags, so you can truly go cross-player with your ratings.
Now I just need to re-rate 16,000 songs for the eleventh time...
So, it won't work on remote X, or VNC, or xpra, etc.
I just stared it under VNC (Fedora 19/KDE). Not sure about the others.
Most importantly, Congress can't simply repeal a provision of a treaty, which is why it's so much better for industry to get their welfare written into a treaty rather than a statute. The next election could threaten their favorite statute (in theory anyhow).
It is just a matter of finding correct monetization strategy.
Just look at the pie charts - Pandora already has the system in place for music discovery, which is the coordination problem that the corporate model provided one solution for. Once bands don't need corporate music middlemen, they can get half of the revenue, or more.
I've heard a bunch of great stuff on Pandora that I'd never heard _of_ before. Apparently there were a bunch of rock bands in the early 70's that achieved very little commercial success but recorded lots of fantastic music. I assume they each got a little piece of each of the thousand times Pandora played me the same blasted ad for an Intel ultrabook (which are overpriced).
Getting new bands into the new system is the challenge. Their odds are low with the A&R man, so going into something like Pandora makes a bunch of sense. Pandora even has the filtering technology in place to detect the turkeys.
Of course a random op-ed on RWW carries more credence than an entire industry, right?