They are obviously saying that they are coming to kill you on 10/31 (and presumably anybody else whose service needs to be terminated). That is the only way out for them - let the rest of us beware of "lifetime" agreements!
Being good at math often means you are a good, creative problem solver. Even though I very rarely need any specific knowledge from the math courses I've taken, I use the skills I developed solving and proving all kinds of math problems every single day. With computers and without - just make sure that whatever you study, you learn how to think.
These are things are not about security - they are about convenience. Primarily they are used for self-service password resetting. I don't think beefing up the "security" on convenience questions is really very helpful.
If you are serious about your security, you should pick randomized strings to use as the answers to the convenience questions, then store them in a nice secure password safe.
Yes, definitely bypass the engine system. You really need a deep-cycle battery (or batteries) for what you want to do. You should be thinking in terms of how a travel trailer is set up. You can charge the deep-cycle battery from the engine, but that's as far as it goes.
I'd be willing to bet there are some off the shelf solutions that would get pretty close to meeting your needs if you check out some RV stores and sources.
In this case, the business (wireless) is pretty competitive - so if AT&T decided to pass on the fine to their customers they face a real risk of losing those customers to a carrier that has not incurred the fines.
Unless, of course, there is price collusion going on and all the carriers decide to jack up their rates simultaneously - but that is a different problem.
AT&T benefited from a government contract - if they were negligent or didn't manage it well they deserve to face some kind of consequences.
Wow - how can such a shallow thoughtless answer be modded "insightful"?
If the question was "I've just quit my job coding 'cause I can't stand it any more, how can I feed my family?" - yes, that is "on a whim" and I agree, not a good way to proceed. This person is examining his life and looking for other options. That is not whimsical. He's asking for experiences of like-minded people, hoping to find inspiration. Absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. As Socrates said, the unexamined life is not worth living.
I completely identify with the question, and have been having thoughts on the same lines. My conclusions so far is that I still actually do like coding, I just don't like coding (or doing anything) for the pointy haired bosses who are not in charge where I have been working for 18 years. So I'm trying to retrain myself a bit, see if I can cash in on iOS apps or something like that. It is interesting for me to learn new things, and exercising creativity to ends of my own choosing is very refreshing. Even if I never made a dime from an app, changing my attitude and finding a creative outlet makes life tons better. I endure the idiots at work, bring home the paycheck to feed the fam, AND I'm in a better state of mind so the time I spend at home is quality time. Maybe that will be enough, maybe I will want to make a change in the future.
It is a 100% valid question and the answer is most definitely not "nope". A good programmer is a good problem solver - the problem of living a satisfying life of joy is worth solving.
I apologize for unloading on you, but you've just hit a major peeve.
I am a programmer. I recognize that Graphic/UI design is a separate skill from programming. The problem is, often I get handed a project with no UI specs. I always point it out (because I am sick and tired of the "programmers are poor designers shit") but no resources are assigned - so people end up with what I think is a good idea.
The root cause is not your perceived programmer hubris, it is the cheapness of the upper levels setting project budgets. The thing about programmers is that good programmers are excellent problem solvers - so you can ask us to do anything - and it will get done - some things better than others.
Oh, and you will find that programmers are the most logical people around - it is the rest of you that are irrational.
I think the original statement isn't as clear as it could be. It isn't talking about "moving" the telescope relative to the source, but rather just changing the point of aim - i'd swap "moving" out for "rotating" in the quoted blurb. A local, strong source will be detected regardless of the aim, but a distant, faint source can only be detected by precise aim.
If you’re pointed at an alien transmitter, then rotating the telescope will point you in a different direction, and the signal should go away. On the other hand, strong satellite signals can be detected by radio telescopes even when they point in another direction; the signal can leak into the telescopes even when you’re pointed well away.
Logic? Logic is little tweeting bird chirping in meadow. Logic is wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad.
How about this: Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
It is very easy. First, Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense! Second, let me ask you - what do you do with witches?
If they were criminals, wouldn't they keep their methods secret in order to blackmail or otherwise monetize it in some way? Research like this is the only way that security gets better.
Yes, I read the article - it pertains to the second generation kindle. As I have repeatedly stated, and you have apparently repeatedly failed to understand, I am speaking of experience of a kindle 1. As I have also repeatedly stated, I have no direct experience with any of the succeeding kindles. The policies as stated for the kindle touch generation are apparently a change from my experience that Kindle 1 allows web browsing over 3G.
I do not have the text of the original TOS. All I know is what the text on the kindle 1 says:
We are working on these experimental prototypes. Do you find them useful? Should we continue working on them? We would love to hear what you think, so please send your comments to kindle-feedback@amazon.com.
Basic Web If you need access to the Web, our Basic Web browser lets you browse, choose a bookmark, or enter a URL. Works best with web sites that are mostly text.
Since, as once again I have previously stated for those who do not know, kindle 1 does not have wi-fi (only 3G) it is not possible that there was any intent that this functionality should be restricted to wi-fi.
In summary, the statement: "Amazon never permitted people to use the 3G for web browsing" is false.
Yes, so what? Did you read the thread I was responding to? Some idiot said Amazon had always forbidden web browsing via kindle.
This is false.
I've not said they can't change it or they are wrong to change it, I'm just saying that they did change their approach and it is worth mentioning - that way people can make informed decisions. What is so objectionable about that?
The OP said "Amazon never permitted people to use the 3G for web browsing" - I was demonstrating that was false.
The fact that it existed, even though it was labeled as "experimental" and "prototype" implies it was permitted. Perhaps you should refer to a dictionary for the definition of "permitted".
Kindle 1 was out long before nook (2007 vs 2009). The original Kindle has no wi-fi radio - it is 3G only. It is 100% clear that use of the web via the 3G connection was not only permitted, but actively encouraged.
I don't know how "sudden" since I've just got a Kindle 1, but Amazon built a web-browser into the thing (on the Kindle 1, this is in the "Experimental" section). No hacking/jailbreaking/rooting required to use. It is clear from the text on the "basic web" functionality that it is an experimental prototype - they encouraged its use and were soliciting feedback.
As I've seen other posters say, I tried it out when the kindle was new but have never tried it again since. The lack of it isn't a deal-breaker for me, but it is something worth noting.
In my opinion, they should just get rid of the capital gains tax rates entirely - call it all income. I think that would be a simplification and eliminate loopholes. I think it has been a driver for lots of the problems we are facing - including the mortgage crap. Make it equally attractive, from a tax basis, to invest in an actual business directly as from just buying a mutual fund or even a stock.
Several years ago I read an article by Fred Smith (the Fed Ex founder and CEO) saying it wasn't fair to be taxing his planes and trucks at a much higher rate than capital gains. He was all for lowering his taxes to the long-term capital gains rate rather than raising the other taxes - but regardless, the huge discrepancy is fueling the creation of increasingly complex spreadsheets, not jobs, and that is a basic dysfunction in the economy.
My understanding was that the structure would be something along the lines of the current alternative minimum tax. You compute your tax via the regular rules, then according to the "buffet" rules and pay the larger. I don't know any of the details of the alternative, but my understanding of the intent is to try to ensure that everybody above a certain income level pays at least a certain % of their income regardless of the source of the income.
The long-term capital gains rate is (currently) 15% (for people in the 25%+ regular income bracket). A lot of income from capital gains will bring the overall tax percentage down. The rich have more opportunity to invest, so they benefit substantially more than people than people that only get paychecks.
Well, after my initial outrage, I got to thinking a bit about it. I have a banjo with an ebony fretboard. When I was looking to buy it, I definitely wanted that ebony fretboard. It did not even enter my consciousness to think about the environmental impact of it - I mean, one little fretboard? I'm not making a house or even a chair out of endangered wood!
But surely, all those guitars and banjos and other instruments would take a toll in total. There is an undeniable demand - it isn't hard to imagine that those pressures could lead to unsavory practices.
On the whole, it seems pretty heavy-handed to me. The burden of proving the "innocence" of an instrument seems ludicrous - yet if I ever decide to get a new banjo, I think that I will inquire more closely as to the source of materials and it will make a difference to me if a maker can assure me they are participating in sustainable practices.
Slashdot Mirror
They are obviously saying that they are coming to kill you on 10/31 (and presumably anybody else whose service needs to be terminated). That is the only way out for them - let the rest of us beware of "lifetime" agreements!
Being good at math often means you are a good, creative problem solver. Even though I very rarely need any specific knowledge from the math courses I've taken, I use the skills I developed solving and proving all kinds of math problems every single day. With computers and without - just make sure that whatever you study, you learn how to think.
These are things are not about security - they are about convenience. Primarily they are used for self-service password resetting. I don't think beefing up the "security" on convenience questions is really very helpful.
If you are serious about your security, you should pick randomized strings to use as the answers to the convenience questions, then store them in a nice secure password safe.
Yes, definitely bypass the engine system. You really need a deep-cycle battery (or batteries) for what you want to do. You should be thinking in terms of how a travel trailer is set up. You can charge the deep-cycle battery from the engine, but that's as far as it goes.
I'd be willing to bet there are some off the shelf solutions that would get pretty close to meeting your needs if you check out some RV stores and sources.
Absolutely - TOS was such that it generated enough interest in enough people to make all the rest possible.
Yes, my first thought too - I'd add Rolling Stones, Rocketship Galileo, Tunnel in the Sky, and Space Cadet.
In this case, the business (wireless) is pretty competitive - so if AT&T decided to pass on the fine to their customers they face a real risk of losing those customers to a carrier that has not incurred the fines.
Unless, of course, there is price collusion going on and all the carriers decide to jack up their rates simultaneously - but that is a different problem.
AT&T benefited from a government contract - if they were negligent or didn't manage it well they deserve to face some kind of consequences.
Wow - how can such a shallow thoughtless answer be modded "insightful"?
If the question was "I've just quit my job coding 'cause I can't stand it any more, how can I feed my family?" - yes, that is "on a whim" and I agree, not a good way to proceed. This person is examining his life and looking for other options. That is not whimsical. He's asking for experiences of like-minded people, hoping to find inspiration. Absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. As Socrates said, the unexamined life is not worth living.
I completely identify with the question, and have been having thoughts on the same lines. My conclusions so far is that I still actually do like coding, I just don't like coding (or doing anything) for the pointy haired bosses who are not in charge where I have been working for 18 years. So I'm trying to retrain myself a bit, see if I can cash in on iOS apps or something like that. It is interesting for me to learn new things, and exercising creativity to ends of my own choosing is very refreshing. Even if I never made a dime from an app, changing my attitude and finding a creative outlet makes life tons better. I endure the idiots at work, bring home the paycheck to feed the fam, AND I'm in a better state of mind so the time I spend at home is quality time. Maybe that will be enough, maybe I will want to make a change in the future.
It is a 100% valid question and the answer is most definitely not "nope". A good programmer is a good problem solver - the problem of living a satisfying life of joy is worth solving.
I apologize for unloading on you, but you've just hit a major peeve.
I am a programmer. I recognize that Graphic/UI design is a separate skill from programming. The problem is, often I get handed a project with no UI specs. I always point it out (because I am sick and tired of the "programmers are poor designers shit") but no resources are assigned - so people end up with what I think is a good idea.
The root cause is not your perceived programmer hubris, it is the cheapness of the upper levels setting project budgets. The thing about programmers is that good programmers are excellent problem solvers - so you can ask us to do anything - and it will get done - some things better than others.
Oh, and you will find that programmers are the most logical people around - it is the rest of you that are irrational.
I think the original statement isn't as clear as it could be. It isn't talking about "moving" the telescope relative to the source, but rather just changing the point of aim - i'd swap "moving" out for "rotating" in the quoted blurb. A local, strong source will be detected regardless of the aim, but a distant, faint source can only be detected by precise aim.
If you’re pointed at an alien transmitter, then rotating the telescope will point you in a different direction, and the signal should go away. On the other hand, strong satellite signals can be detected by radio telescopes even when they point in another direction; the signal can leak into the telescopes even when you’re pointed well away.
Logic? Logic is little tweeting bird chirping in meadow. Logic is wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad.
How about this: Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
Now, tell me, what do you do with witches?
It is very easy. First, Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense! Second, let me ask you - what do you do with witches?
The poster is making a sarcastic/ironic comment with historical overtones - you can read about Zeno's paradoxes here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes
(FYI, Zeno was worried about these some 2000 years before Leibnitz and Newton.)
If they were criminals, wouldn't they keep their methods secret in order to blackmail or otherwise monetize it in some way? Research like this is the only way that security gets better.
A glaring example of the epic failure of the US public educational/economic/political system. A good education should be perceived as its own reward.
Yes, I read the article - it pertains to the second generation kindle. As I have repeatedly stated, and you have apparently repeatedly failed to understand, I am speaking of experience of a kindle 1. As I have also repeatedly stated, I have no direct experience with any of the succeeding kindles. The policies as stated for the kindle touch generation are apparently a change from my experience that Kindle 1 allows web browsing over 3G.
I do not have the text of the original TOS. All I know is what the text on the kindle 1 says:
We are working on these experimental prototypes. Do you find them useful? Should we continue working on them? We would love to hear what you think, so please send your comments to kindle-feedback@amazon.com.
Basic Web
If you need access to the Web, our Basic Web browser lets you browse, choose a bookmark, or enter a URL. Works best with web sites that are mostly text.
Since, as once again I have previously stated for those who do not know, kindle 1 does not have wi-fi (only 3G) it is not possible that there was any intent that this functionality should be restricted to wi-fi.
In summary, the statement: "Amazon never permitted people to use the 3G for web browsing" is false.
Yes, so what? Did you read the thread I was responding to? Some idiot said Amazon had always forbidden web browsing via kindle.
This is false.
I've not said they can't change it or they are wrong to change it, I'm just saying that they did change their approach and it is worth mentioning - that way people can make informed decisions. What is so objectionable about that?
The OP said "Amazon never permitted people to use the 3G for web browsing" - I was demonstrating that was false.
The fact that it existed, even though it was labeled as "experimental" and "prototype" implies it was permitted. Perhaps you should refer to a dictionary for the definition of "permitted".
Kindle 1 was out long before nook (2007 vs 2009). The original Kindle has no wi-fi radio - it is 3G only. It is 100% clear that use of the web via the 3G connection was not only permitted, but actively encouraged.
It IS a change of policy.
I don't know how "sudden" since I've just got a Kindle 1, but Amazon built a web-browser into the thing (on the Kindle 1, this is in the "Experimental" section). No hacking/jailbreaking/rooting required to use. It is clear from the text on the "basic web" functionality that it is an experimental prototype - they encouraged its use and were soliciting feedback.
As I've seen other posters say, I tried it out when the kindle was new but have never tried it again since. The lack of it isn't a deal-breaker for me, but it is something worth noting.
In my opinion, they should just get rid of the capital gains tax rates entirely - call it all income. I think that would be a simplification and eliminate loopholes. I think it has been a driver for lots of the problems we are facing - including the mortgage crap. Make it equally attractive, from a tax basis, to invest in an actual business directly as from just buying a mutual fund or even a stock.
Several years ago I read an article by Fred Smith (the Fed Ex founder and CEO) saying it wasn't fair to be taxing his planes and trucks at a much higher rate than capital gains. He was all for lowering his taxes to the long-term capital gains rate rather than raising the other taxes - but regardless, the huge discrepancy is fueling the creation of increasingly complex spreadsheets, not jobs, and that is a basic dysfunction in the economy.
My understanding was that the structure would be something along the lines of the current alternative minimum tax. You compute your tax via the regular rules, then according to the "buffet" rules and pay the larger. I don't know any of the details of the alternative, but my understanding of the intent is to try to ensure that everybody above a certain income level pays at least a certain % of their income regardless of the source of the income.
The long-term capital gains rate is (currently) 15% (for people in the 25%+ regular income bracket). A lot of income from capital gains will bring the overall tax percentage down. The rich have more opportunity to invest, so they benefit substantially more than people than people that only get paychecks.
They are not trying to balance the budget solely on taxing million+ incomes. Pull your head out of the sand.
Well, after my initial outrage, I got to thinking a bit about it. I have a banjo with an ebony fretboard. When I was looking to buy it, I definitely wanted that ebony fretboard. It did not even enter my consciousness to think about the environmental impact of it - I mean, one little fretboard? I'm not making a house or even a chair out of endangered wood!
But surely, all those guitars and banjos and other instruments would take a toll in total. There is an undeniable demand - it isn't hard to imagine that those pressures could lead to unsavory practices.
On the whole, it seems pretty heavy-handed to me. The burden of proving the "innocence" of an instrument seems ludicrous - yet if I ever decide to get a new banjo, I think that I will inquire more closely as to the source of materials and it will make a difference to me if a maker can assure me they are participating in sustainable practices.