1. A wireless provisioning device for use in public domain networks wherein the wireless provisioning device is accessible by a user of mobile computing devices, comprising:
a chassis;
at least one network card;
at least one wireless card;
at least one processor;
an operating system, the operating system operably configured in the chassis to control the at least one, network card, the at least one wireless card and the at least one processor, which are operatively coupled with the chassis;
a packet-switched interface capable of receiving a multiplicity of inbound framed packet-data to provide inbound packets and transmitting a multiplicity of outbound framed packet-data comprising outbound packets;
a channeling controller, coupled to the packet-switched interface that channels the inbound packets based on the inbound address information and constructs the outbound packets and channels the outbound packets with the outbound address information, the channeling controller capable of being effectively connected to at least one network via the operating system; and
an authenticator in operative communication with the operating system to allow authentication at the wireless provisioning device;
whereby the user of a mobile computing device connects to the wireless provisioning device without having to first access the Internet.
2. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the channeling controller routes the outbound packets.
3. The wireless provisioning device of claim 2, wherein the channeling controller routes the outbound packets.
4. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the channeling controller bridges the inbound packets.
5. The wireless provisioning device of claim 4, wherein the channeling controller bridges the outbound packets.
6. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the operating system of the wireless provisioning device is an open source UNIX based system.
7. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the wireless provisioning device further comprises a second processor.
8. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the wireless provisioning device further comprises a memory device and a storage device.
9. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the network card, the wireless cord, the processor, the operating system, the packet-switched interface, and the channel controller are operatively disposed within the chassis of the wireless provisioning device.
10. The wireless provision device of claim 9, wherein the authenticator is operatively disposed within the chassis of the wireless provisioning device.
11. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein bandwidth to individual user can be controlled by the wireless provisioning device operating system.
12. The wireless provisioning device of claim 1, wherein the protocol type of an individual user con be controlled by the wireless provisioning device operating system.
13. A wireless provisioning device, comprising:
a chassis;
at least one network card;
at least one wireless card;
at least one processor;
a LINUX operating system, the operating system operably configured in the chassis to control the at least one network card, the at least one wireless card and the at least one processor;
a packet-switched interface capable of receiving a multiplicity of inbound framed packet-data to provide inbound packets and transmitting a multiplicity of outbound framed packet-data comprising outbound packets;
a channeling controller, coupled to the packet-switched interface that channels the inbound packets based on the inbound address information and that constructs the outbound packets and channels the outbound packets with the outbound address information,
fanotify seems interesting because it allows you to watch for arbitrary events on a global basis without specifying which file descriptors you want to watch. It seems to pass the actual file descriptor back to the original object. You read events via getsockopt().
Or, perhaps it will soon?:
Quoth the Torvalds:
but it may be worth pointing out that we ended up disabling the new fanotify system calls because people were still unsure about the interfaces. Better let the interface discussion cook a bit longer than release with a bad interface that we need to redo.
that to the denizens of that virtual universe there is no way to prove they are or are not virtual, your question is not falsifiable
Actually, this is precisely what the experiment in TFA is looking into. 'They' could cheat the Plank length and make the universe behave as if the Plank length weren't cheated, but they can't hide the evidence of that cheating.
Not only that, before any civilization did that on any large scale there'd have to be many orders of magnitude improvement over reality in both storage and speed. No one is going to spend 10% of the matter of the universe to simulate an universe which runs as slow as the real universe.
If you have a complete understanding of the physics, you can do all kinds of optimizations. You set off a proton into space near c? You don't have to simulate its entire flight, only its possible interactions.
To make a bad analogy, it's like hidden line removal in computer graphics.
You *could* extrapolate that to mean that our universe is, when you get down to its bare essence, only data. And you *could* extrapolate that to mean we are data in a simulation somewhere. But that's two leaps of logic past what the science is actually saying.
No, you're missing the interesting wrinkle, and that's the apparent Plank length. If the Plank length is A, the Universe behaves in way A'. If the Plank length is B, the Universe behaves in way B'. This is fine - we see the Universe behaving as A', and therefore the Plank length is A.
The trick is you can set up a very specific physics experiment and look for noise signals in the Universe's smoothness. Those noise signals will either be missing (Plank length is as we expect it) or correspond to a simulation model (the noise is the cheating in the model).
When some scientists unwittingly did the experiment, they found such a noise signal and, unbeknownst to them at the time, it maps almost exactly to a model that imagines a simulated universe with a Plank length cheat (10^-27 vs 10^-35, IIRC) that's just a short enough Plank length to make the Universe behave as if the Plank length were A, when really it measures as B. So, we get an A' Universe but with only the simulation costs of a B' Universe, and [here's the speculation] cheats that make a B' Universe behave like an A' Universe.
Or, to abuse Einstein, apparently God does play dice, and he cheats like a bastard at it.
No, step 4 is getting a government to go along with your scheme, and threaten violence if they don't hand over the money you demand.
Then you can move on to Step Five: Profit.
Without this revised Step Four, everybody says, "what are you fucking kidding me? Go away." Threaten to steal their property or put them in a rapecage, and suddenly you get peoples' attention.
To be fair, Megrolled is being used more on the video's comments.
Everybody, please join me in posting a serious headline with this video as the referenced URL to your favorite social media. Now, that's how you start a meme!
And this guy is a really good bassist - getting him a good music gig would just be icing on the memewich.
More fuel = more mass = lower acceleration with same thrust.
Perhaps I'm thinking of a different design, but as I understood the benefit of the ion engine, the bulk of the energy is coming in from the solar cells, the propellant only being used as the mass source.
With chemical propellants, you're not getting any extra energy into the system, so your total energy is lower per fuel mass.
I'm remembering my physics right that we're talking about force (mass * acceleration) here, right?
I'd read that the fuel sipping nature of the thing was low enough that running out of propellant was a very long way off into space. Clearly IANARS.
I have source amnesia on it, but I did read a report that compared allergen responses by way of different methods of roasting peanuts. Supposedly before the 80's most peanuts were dry roasted in-shell, shelled and ground. Most today are shelled, fried, and ground. This seems to elicit a higher level of peanut allergy response.
Likely most of those are discomfort-level. I have that with fish, swollen tongue, tightened airway, but nothing that's going to kill me. So, I don't eat bony fish, problem solved (I really do detest the stink of it, though, especially when an officemate decides to microwave her rancid fish leftovers).
Anyway, if my kids had mild peanut allergies I might try verifying the source of the peanut butter we get and try for the old-style to see if they'd desensitize. We do get the real kind from the grinder in the store, it's so much better than jar goods.
My grandad used to tell black people who came in his restaurant the same thing. Damned government has no right to force private businesses to observe people's "civil rights." The niggers are always free to go to another restaurant if they don't like it.
Sounds like your granddad was a bigoted asshole. And correct about property rights.
"I hate what you say, but I would die for your right to say it."
(if the private business adopts corporate formation, all bets are off, of course)
Would it be creepy? Yes. The same is true of gathering info on Facebook, message boards, etc.
However, if you set your privacy settings and they circumvent them, that's totally different
Right, that's the essential difference - the bumper stickers on your car are things you mean to broadcast to the world. The stuff inside your car - that's a bit gray; your bank bill on the seat, no, the zebra-stripe seat covers, probably.
Most people on Facebook aren't intending to share their information broadly. Facebook may have poor default privacy settings, and people may be technically inept, but the intent is pretty clear. LEO's finding ways to circumvent that intent may not be breaking the law but they are violating the trust.
'Female family members'? Seriously? Why didn't you just say 'luddites' or 'technologically illiterate family members' or something else not quite as painfully sexist?
That's how the breakdown goes in my family. YMMV, the human race is vastly varied.
FB has very little IP, the only thing they have is users and brand recognition but MySpace also had that but essentially lost it.
MySpace never achieved the network-effect numbers that Facebook has. MySpace is proud of being terribly hard to use and ugly. Facebook doesn't always succeed but they are easy enough for female family members to figure out (and all their friends too).
Most of the need for fiber is to offset a bunch of the negative effects of the currently recommended primarily sugar diet.
Nah, fiber is pretty essential to keep our intestines working properly. Evolutionarily we're evolved for high-fiber, low nutrition diets for the most part. Occasionally we catch a mastodon, but mostly we eat roots and leaves. "Eat your veggies".
Slashdot Mirror
A tube still has more than one dimension
And here I was hoping for graphene mobius strips becoming anti-gravity generators to allow their existence.
Shucks.
Is this a backwards opportunity taken for asserting that he is one of the Fathers of the Internet?
It's an opportunity to get attention. Perhaps that bring consulting dollars, who knows.
a TIFF? Seriously?
via Patent Storm:
Thanks, a Slashdot comment hasn't made me chortle like that in a while.
Except it's made out of a solid piece of aluminum, not plastic.
Yikes. Has anybody done the energy calcs on this?
fanotify seems interesting because it allows you to watch for arbitrary events on a global basis without specifying which file descriptors you want to watch. It seems to pass the actual file descriptor back to the original object. You read events via getsockopt().
Or, perhaps it will soon?:
Quoth the Torvalds:
that to the denizens of that virtual universe there is no way to prove they are or are not virtual, your question is not falsifiable
Actually, this is precisely what the experiment in TFA is looking into. 'They' could cheat the Plank length and make the universe behave as if the Plank length weren't cheated, but they can't hide the evidence of that cheating.
Not only that, before any civilization did that on any large scale there'd have to be many orders of magnitude improvement over reality in both storage and speed. No one is going to spend 10% of the matter of the universe to simulate an universe which runs as slow as the real universe.
If you have a complete understanding of the physics, you can do all kinds of optimizations. You set off a proton into space near c? You don't have to simulate its entire flight, only its possible interactions.
To make a bad analogy, it's like hidden line removal in computer graphics.
You *could* extrapolate that to mean that our universe is, when you get down to its bare essence, only data. And you *could* extrapolate that to mean we are data in a simulation somewhere. But that's two leaps of logic past what the science is actually saying.
No, you're missing the interesting wrinkle, and that's the apparent Plank length. If the Plank length is A, the Universe behaves in way A'. If the Plank length is B, the Universe behaves in way B'. This is fine - we see the Universe behaving as A', and therefore the Plank length is A.
The trick is you can set up a very specific physics experiment and look for noise signals in the Universe's smoothness. Those noise signals will either be missing (Plank length is as we expect it) or correspond to a simulation model (the noise is the cheating in the model).
When some scientists unwittingly did the experiment, they found such a noise signal and, unbeknownst to them at the time, it maps almost exactly to a model that imagines a simulated universe with a Plank length cheat (10^-27 vs 10^-35, IIRC) that's just a short enough Plank length to make the Universe behave as if the Plank length were A, when really it measures as B. So, we get an A' Universe but with only the simulation costs of a B' Universe, and [here's the speculation] cheats that make a B' Universe behave like an A' Universe.
Or, to abuse Einstein, apparently God does play dice, and he cheats like a bastard at it.
No, step 4 is getting a government to go along with your scheme, and threaten violence if they don't hand over the money you demand.
Then you can move on to Step Five: Profit.
Without this revised Step Four, everybody says, "what are you fucking kidding me? Go away." Threaten to steal their property or put them in a rapecage, and suddenly you get peoples' attention.
Not an instruction manual.
To be fair, Megrolled is being used more on the video's comments.
Everybody, please join me in posting a serious headline with this video as the referenced URL to your favorite social media. Now, that's how you start a meme!
And this guy is a really good bassist - getting him a good music gig would just be icing on the memewich.
You're right, I missed a 'my' in my text. So much for my slashdot proofreading reputation. :P
Statute law changed, common law did not.
More fuel = more mass = lower acceleration with same thrust.
Perhaps I'm thinking of a different design, but as I understood the benefit of the ion engine, the bulk of the energy is coming in from the solar cells, the propellant only being used as the mass source.
With chemical propellants, you're not getting any extra energy into the system, so your total energy is lower per fuel mass.
I'm remembering my physics right that we're talking about force (mass * acceleration) here, right?
I'd read that the fuel sipping nature of the thing was low enough that running out of propellant was a very long way off into space. Clearly IANARS.
Yes, that is the law. I submit violence isn't the right approach and that people ought to be secure in their property.
^this. Gosh, darn, almighty is that true.
Also, no connection pooling. When I googled on it, I got lots of references to using Tomcat (true story).
The pea-nutty holocaust has no basis in science.
I have source amnesia on it, but I did read a report that compared allergen responses by way of different methods of roasting peanuts. Supposedly before the 80's most peanuts were dry roasted in-shell, shelled and ground. Most today are shelled, fried, and ground. This seems to elicit a higher level of peanut allergy response.
Likely most of those are discomfort-level. I have that with fish, swollen tongue, tightened airway, but nothing that's going to kill me. So, I don't eat bony fish, problem solved (I really do detest the stink of it, though, especially when an officemate decides to microwave her rancid fish leftovers).
Anyway, if my kids had mild peanut allergies I might try verifying the source of the peanut butter we get and try for the old-style to see if they'd desensitize. We do get the real kind from the grinder in the store, it's so much better than jar goods.
Voyager won't see anything more for 300,000 years, even at 100x speed a new craft won't see anything for 3000 years.
Ion engines don't have this constant velocity problem. I'm unqualified to revise the math, though (somebody please do so).
There's also the unsolved problem of the lack of deflector dishes so a spec of dust doesn't obliterate the probe 200 years from now.
My grandad used to tell black people who came in his restaurant the same thing. Damned government has no right to force private businesses to observe people's "civil rights." The niggers are always free to go to another restaurant if they don't like it.
Sounds like your granddad was a bigoted asshole. And correct about property rights.
"I hate what you say, but I would die for your right to say it."
(if the private business adopts corporate formation, all bets are off, of course)
Would it be creepy? Yes. The same is true of gathering info on Facebook, message boards, etc.
However, if you set your privacy settings and they circumvent them, that's totally different
Right, that's the essential difference - the bumper stickers on your car are things you mean to broadcast to the world. The stuff inside your car - that's a bit gray; your bank bill on the seat, no, the zebra-stripe seat covers, probably.
Most people on Facebook aren't intending to share their information broadly. Facebook may have poor default privacy settings, and people may be technically inept, but the intent is pretty clear. LEO's finding ways to circumvent that intent may not be breaking the law but they are violating the trust.
'Female family members'? Seriously? Why didn't you just say 'luddites' or 'technologically illiterate family members' or something else not quite as painfully sexist?
That's how the breakdown goes in my family. YMMV, the human race is vastly varied.
Both my wife and myself have deleted our facebook accounts. Last time I was in that situation it was with Myspace. Remember Myspace?
What would give you the idea that you and your wife are leading indicators rather than anomalous outliers?
FB has very little IP, the only thing they have is users and brand recognition but MySpace also had that but essentially lost it.
MySpace never achieved the network-effect numbers that Facebook has. MySpace is proud of being terribly hard to use and ugly. Facebook doesn't always succeed but they are easy enough for female family members to figure out (and all their friends too).
It's simply not a valid comparison.
Most of the need for fiber is to offset a bunch of the negative effects of the currently recommended primarily sugar diet.
Nah, fiber is pretty essential to keep our intestines working properly. Evolutionarily we're evolved for high-fiber, low nutrition diets for the most part. Occasionally we catch a mastodon, but mostly we eat roots and leaves. "Eat your veggies".