not sure what you mean by shooting yourself in the back? escape velocity of earth is 7 mi/sec, So anything with a 0 drag co-efficient going that speed would never return to earth again (ie partical gun) Depending on direction launched it would either orbit earth, or leave the earth and orbit the sun. They are proposing launching at 30* that speed, so obviously something fairly sleek at that speed could lose up to 96% of it's energy to drag, and still reach a orbit, and thus could make it to a shuttle orbit to be picked up.
This was short on details, but the military builds electronics into some bullets that function at 15,000 G's. Napkin math says that would need a 1 mile long barrel to reach the 13k mph quoted in the article. if it was 5 miles long your 3500 G's you could launch about anything submerged in a liquid (typical wrist watch survives this without the liquid.) So about the only thing they couldn't launch is something living. But even at 1/2 mile their still under the accelertion of a gun, so wouldn't even deform anything made of lead. So all non electronics, probably even most de-activated electronics submerged in liquids.
that risk should be calculated using not on the time of discovery and publication, but rather, upon the ship date of the software.
gotcha, so while they all have the exact same flaw, windows 7 is more secure than Vista which is more secure than XP from this vulnerability because windows 7 is not as old? My only point is, no single formula works for how secure you were. Either your security was not strong enough, and you got hacked, or it just didn't matter, your data is still safe. I agree it would be nice to be able to say product Y is the most secure than X because y*a > x*b, but in reality we all now realize every OS, and every computer (with a decent level of functionality) has at least 1 vulnerability that will allow all the data to either be accessed and/or destroyed. So IMHO the best we can currently do is judge our suppliers on how fast they react, and make a educated guess on how many extra precautions we must take to minimize the damage based on past history.
true, but FYI, most of the companies targeted in this attack are capable software companies, all capable of debugging and fixing all software they have access to the source. Without access to source, these otherwise capable companies only option would be to pay vendor (Microsoft) to fix the flaws or shutdown everything requiring that closed source software. Thanks to this being a high profile attack and being very large companies it is not a big deal, microsoft will fix quickly, closed vs open is not a issue. But, building any product based on a closed source solution locks you into a single supplier, as long as they realize that, and do not put all their eggs into that one basket recovery is possible. Otherwise it is not.
under the idea that you cannot receive effective advice of counsel if the papers are subject to search, but that does not stop the search from taking place to begin with.
To me you answered your own question, if the search occurs effective use of counsel is reduced, 6th amendment violation. The privilege may be waived if the confidential communications are disclosed to third parties. Also since the purpose behind this legal principle is to protect an individual's ability to access the justice system by encouraging complete disclosure to legal advisers without the fear that any disclosure of those communications may prejudice the client in the future. Basically once you give your attorney info, if the Border patrol then has access to that info and thus will react to that info, being a 3rd party legal search would likely remove search privilege, but even if it didn't it would result in border patrol banning, or reacting to the client in a manner that is a punishment to the client (again a 6th amendment violation of their right to fair counsel) Example, a person aware of illegal drug trafficking discloses how drugs are smuggled across the border relating to defense of a un-related crime to his attorney. Attorney client privilege alone wouldn't protect Border Patrol from using that in prosecution of a 3rd party. But that prosecution would very likely git the attorney and client in serious jeopardy of being killed for revenge, that's a decent prejudice preventing a fair trial.
Lawyers are different, they have a 6th amendment protection that has no such "reasonable search exemption." The argument allowing searches has always been "it's a reasonable search" to avoid 5th amendment requirements. No argument (I know of) has been made as to why a 6th amendment doesn't apply.
Aren't border crossings an exception to the Fourth Amendment
That is the current interpretation they want to challenge and overturn that as well. Lawyer client privilege is the 6th amendment BTW, so it is a broader than the 4th amendment which has the "reasonable search" exception. The 6th amendment has no such exception, so seams like a challenge asking the courts "Does any part of the constitution apply at the border?"
it probably isn't that simple. Google has to measure future value, or they may get stuck like some US based equipment manufactures did recently. IE years ago the China rules for big equipment orders (must build manufacturing in china...) was not profitable. Asian manufactures went in anyway. When china held up better, and did more stimulus money in manufacturing during this recession, the Asian manufactures were at a huge advantage with dealer networks, government contacts, China strategies... The US companies had to buy China partners to get in. Smart companies need to keep a finger on the pulse of these possibly emerging markets, if China opens up the disposable income gap could swap in a short time.
Sounds like I need to get my business plan in action. My business idea is "designated bum" IE I want to get as many photos and locations of the jobless/down on their luck types. When some millionaire+ gets tagged with jail time I use facial recognition software to find him a bum to sit in his place. The bun gets some cash 3 warm meals...
Or it could say that you've had an an e-mail address for a very long time
I assumed that was the point, Someone with a common_name@aol.com address must be at least in the 30's. likewise someone with a john_smith@gmail.com is a quick adapter... so if your looking for a young person, but don't want to open yourself to a age discrimination policy, choose some criteria like this.
Apple is exclusive to ATT because the other carriers refused to do the necessary things to their systems to allow for that.
And who was correct? ATT spent the money/resources where Apple told them, millions updating voice mail for text search, while Verizon apparently spent those resources on network improvements. Now Apple gets all the credit, and a chunk of all sales, in exchange ATT gets Apple's PR machine (which is shifting all blame on ATT, despite Apple having complete say in what requirements ATT network needed) While Verizon now has the Google PR machine, and Google developed even better voice mail for the phone (actually Voice to text search/preview of emails) and ATT doesn't have to pay a dime for it. Since ATT (same as VZ) doesn't seam to own those rights to anything, Apple is able to take their reputation intact, and a 3% market share leaving ATT with any black eyes. Obviously Apple is the big winner, but going forward VZ and GOOG look to be in the Cat bird seat. Both great, but which PR machine would you bet more on, Apple or Google?
I still agree with the GP, The only thing that this sell could take away, is the right to use the name "MySQL." And possibly any updates that the new owners add to MySQL. IE we have the code in a GPL license, we can always build from that, we just have to choose a different name if oracle declares their branch of MySQL is no longer open-source. And also Oracle would become the only one capable of creating new MySQL pre-priority licenses of MySQL.
FYI Their are a couple other options from MVNO's, for instance http://www.pagepluscellular.com/ seams to have decent reviews, and uses the entire verizon network. Their unlimited plan is about as cheap as I have seen (no unlimited data plans though) (never used them, only looked at there site and am thinking...)
you might look into a MVNO instead of directly from a provider from: http://www.prepaidreviews.com/bestrated.html was the first listing I found with links to some options. I am considering pagepluscellular many of their plans are much cheaper than any of the verizon/sprint plans for me, but they don't offer many discounted phones (only used it appears), so you would need to buy any new gadgets outright. Also Verizon will not sell the droid phones without a data plan ( I mostly have wifi access everywhere I go, and can use my companies broadband card with a Wifi access point to share in other places.) So I would buy it outright from google for around $300, but probably not the $500+ to get the cheaper plans.
what makes you think that? No mention of the name of who this hero is, this was a person very alert and un-afraid to attack when those much closer had no clue what was going on, and who's job appears to require anonymity.
well food aid is a farce, feeding a person for a day with no clear cut "this is the last day you have to feed yourself starting then" Only creates a outdoor prison (when food is free, no one can make money growing food. When the main business is dependent on feeling sorry for the people, there is incentive to maintain that..) It is also never so clear cut. For example a lot of money (50 million+ a day?) was generated daily at WTC. That kind of money supported feeding millions of people continuously. So it was likely a few billion was destroyed that day, Granted the war in IRAQ could have built 2 WTC buildings in every single US state, clearly war wasn't the correct response for our economy, only the correct response for Haliburton's economy. Without corruption a quick world wide supported clearing out of Afghanistan seamed warranted. With the political corruption we had in place the #1 goal became guaranteeing a long lived money out, thus turning the right decision into the wrong one. (Very few could have comprehended the depths of the Busch/Cheny corruption at the time of the original decision.)
US has many high mileage cycles, just the savings over 50 MPG is diminishing. IE if you drive 1000 miles a month, 25 MPG to 50 MPG saves 20 gallons of fuel a month. going from 50 to 125 mpg saves 12 gallons of fuel a month. So a ugly slow battery power scooter would never sell, when (for example) my 600cc enduro is lighter, faster (100 mph), goes anywhere and gets 65 mpg. I would never hall around 100 pounds of batteries to save $20 worth of fuel a month, it already costs me ~$20 a month for tires. Not sure what hybrid means on this bike, but I would never shutdown the bike motor, the constant noise make them noticeable and any additional delay getting to max power can be difference from life to death, without any surrounding protection from idiots, only agility.
About once every 5 years I spray some white paint around the top of mine (35 gallon tank I take in to fill+5 gallon backup with a automatic switch.) Surprise inspection, that rust was left visible? I think they are certified for 15 years in AZ, and inspection is simply empty the tank and look inside, unless it was stored empty no rust then your good for another 15years for $15 fee.
according to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery with a 10-20% loss when charging. Then a continuous 30% self-discharge every month, thus you would burn a extra 3.5 weeks of power (7%.) I am thinking 17-27% waste of power, is it the Electric companies pushing for this?
Probably also has to do with cost, the Tesla battery cost to Tesla is estimated to be $30k, and last 100k miles, so $.30/mile in battery cost alone as a upfront cost. Allowable for a "luxary" but not very feasible for "economy"
very few people would recommend storing enough gasoline in your basement to run your household for a week.
FYI, That's about 26 gallons, so people who have attached 2 car garages do that every day. With propane it would be even easier, I wouldn't hesitate to store 2 * 15 gallon propane tanks under my bed (even if I was a smoker.)
I'm sure Apple would prefer for me to buy a new phone,
No apple might prefer you buy a new Iphone, but it is it worth the risk that it wouldn't be a android/blackberry? They get a monthly share of at&t revenue so you are still paying apple for something... Apple is not msft, still pushing out monthly updates for a OS they sold me almost 10 years ago, and never getting another dime from me.
I think your confusing Binary, and Source code. I am not aware of any restrictions on modifying the binary of open-source programs, IE if you use a different compiler to build mozilla you would have a different binary, but you don't have to release the source to the compiler... You would have to indicate some how what source you used and follow the original license (and can't use the name and logos of mozilla or firefox.) Apple doesn't release their source code (at least not all of it.) They are only referring to modifying the binaries in this suit. Since no one has challenged the legality of any of the pieces that PyStar sells, only that they installed and ran all of the software for you. IE the sell a retail version of OS-X with the machine. Their boot loader program is currently legal. The hardware hasn't been challanged.
Personally it seams like if Pystar has the right to distribute OS-X, and the software that modifies and installs OS-X, and makes it clear to the customer this is what they have done, this seams like to me Copyright law should be changed to allow this to be done in some manner regardless of the OEM's complaint. IE this is no different than me building PC's, making a dual boot windows/linux build then selling the PC with a retail copy of windows. Since the windows boot loader was changed, it is not un-modified windows. So this ruling says I have to have Microsoft's permission to sell this PC.
Halliburton is not in the defense business to defend. They're in the defense business to make money.
You say that like it's a either or conflict. Some corruption/alternative motives of congress,etc may screw up the feedback loop, but thats the contractor following the motive of those pulling the money strings. If those with the military money's primary motive was defense (a stretch, I know) Then the only way for Haliburton to keep getting contracts for defense is to provide the best defense for the money. Granted they could half ass one contract take that money and do something else, if they then didn't provide the best product desired by the customer, then the customer would have black listed them, and gone with another contractor who would. So the problem is that the military personal making those decisions primary focus isn't defense, if you don't fix that your not going to get anything different by doing away with contractors...
Slashdot Mirror
not sure what you mean by shooting yourself in the back? escape velocity of earth is 7 mi/sec, So anything with a 0 drag co-efficient going that speed would never return to earth again (ie partical gun) Depending on direction launched it would either orbit earth, or leave the earth and orbit the sun. They are proposing launching at 30* that speed, so obviously something fairly sleek at that speed could lose up to 96% of it's energy to drag, and still reach a orbit, and thus could make it to a shuttle orbit to be picked up.
This was short on details, but the military builds electronics into some bullets that function at 15,000 G's. Napkin math says that would need a 1 mile long barrel to reach the 13k mph quoted in the article. if it was 5 miles long your 3500 G's you could launch about anything submerged in a liquid (typical wrist watch survives this without the liquid.) So about the only thing they couldn't launch is something living.
But even at 1/2 mile their still under the accelertion of a gun, so wouldn't even deform anything made of lead. So all non electronics, probably even most de-activated electronics submerged in liquids.
that risk should be calculated using not on the time of discovery and publication, but rather, upon the ship date of the software.
gotcha, so while they all have the exact same flaw, windows 7 is more secure than Vista which is more secure than XP from this vulnerability because windows 7 is not as old? My only point is, no single formula works for how secure you were. Either your security was not strong enough, and you got hacked, or it just didn't matter, your data is still safe. I agree it would be nice to be able to say product Y is the most secure than X because y*a > x*b, but in reality we all now realize every OS, and every computer (with a decent level of functionality) has at least 1 vulnerability that will allow all the data to either be accessed and/or destroyed. So IMHO the best we can currently do is judge our suppliers on how fast they react, and make a educated guess on how many extra precautions we must take to minimize the damage based on past history.
true, but FYI, most of the companies targeted in this attack are capable software companies, all capable of debugging and fixing all software they have access to the source. Without access to source, these otherwise capable companies only option would be to pay vendor (Microsoft) to fix the flaws or shutdown everything requiring that closed source software. Thanks to this being a high profile attack and being very large companies it is not a big deal, microsoft will fix quickly, closed vs open is not a issue. But, building any product based on a closed source solution locks you into a single supplier, as long as they realize that, and do not put all their eggs into that one basket recovery is possible. Otherwise it is not.
under the idea that you cannot receive effective advice of counsel if the papers are subject to search, but that does not stop the search from taking place to begin with.
To me you answered your own question, if the search occurs effective use of counsel is reduced, 6th amendment violation.
The privilege may be waived if the confidential communications are disclosed to third parties.
Also since the purpose behind this legal principle is to protect an individual's ability to access the justice system by encouraging complete disclosure to legal advisers without the fear that any disclosure of those communications may prejudice the client in the future.
Basically once you give your attorney info, if the Border patrol then has access to that info and thus will react to that info, being a 3rd party legal search would likely remove search privilege, but even if it didn't it would result in border patrol banning, or reacting to the client in a manner that is a punishment to the client (again a 6th amendment violation of their right to fair counsel)
Example, a person aware of illegal drug trafficking discloses how drugs are smuggled across the border relating to defense of a un-related crime to his attorney. Attorney client privilege alone wouldn't protect Border Patrol from using that in prosecution of a 3rd party. But that prosecution would very likely git the attorney and client in serious jeopardy of being killed for revenge, that's a decent prejudice preventing a fair trial.
Lawyers are different, they have a 6th amendment protection that has no such "reasonable search exemption." The argument allowing searches has always been "it's a reasonable search" to avoid 5th amendment requirements. No argument (I know of) has been made as to why a 6th amendment doesn't apply.
Aren't border crossings an exception to the Fourth Amendment
That is the current interpretation they want to challenge and overturn that as well. Lawyer client privilege is the 6th amendment BTW, so it is a broader than the 4th amendment which has the "reasonable search" exception. The 6th amendment has no such exception, so seams like a challenge asking the courts "Does any part of the constitution apply at the border?"
"It cost us more than it's getting us."
it probably isn't that simple. Google has to measure future value, or they may get stuck like some US based equipment manufactures did recently. IE years ago the China rules for big equipment orders (must build manufacturing in china...) was not profitable. Asian manufactures went in anyway. When china held up better, and did more stimulus money in manufacturing during this recession, the Asian manufactures were at a huge advantage with dealer networks, government contacts, China strategies... The US companies had to buy China partners to get in. Smart companies need to keep a finger on the pulse of these possibly emerging markets, if China opens up the disposable income gap could swap in a short time.
Sounds like I need to get my business plan in action. My business idea is "designated bum" IE I want to get as many photos and locations of the jobless/down on their luck types. When some millionaire+ gets tagged with jail time I use facial recognition software to find him a bum to sit in his place. The bun gets some cash 3 warm meals...
Or it could say that you've had an an e-mail address for a very long time
I assumed that was the point, Someone with a common_name@aol.com address must be at least in the 30's. likewise someone with a john_smith@gmail.com is a quick adapter... so if your looking for a young person, but don't want to open yourself to a age discrimination policy, choose some criteria like this.
Apple is exclusive to ATT because the other carriers refused to do the necessary things to their systems to allow for that.
And who was correct? ATT spent the money/resources where Apple told them, millions updating voice mail for text search, while Verizon apparently spent those resources on network improvements. Now Apple gets all the credit, and a chunk of all sales, in exchange ATT gets Apple's PR machine (which is shifting all blame on ATT, despite Apple having complete say in what requirements ATT network needed) While Verizon now has the Google PR machine, and Google developed even better voice mail for the phone (actually Voice to text search/preview of emails) and ATT doesn't have to pay a dime for it. Since ATT (same as VZ) doesn't seam to own those rights to anything, Apple is able to take their reputation intact, and a 3% market share leaving ATT with any black eyes. Obviously Apple is the big winner, but going forward VZ and GOOG look to be in the Cat bird seat. Both great, but which PR machine would you bet more on, Apple or Google?
I still agree with the GP, The only thing that this sell could take away, is the right to use the name "MySQL." And possibly any updates that the new owners add to MySQL. IE we have the code in a GPL license, we can always build from that, we just have to choose a different name if oracle declares their branch of MySQL is no longer open-source. And also Oracle would become the only one capable of creating new MySQL pre-priority licenses of MySQL.
FYI Their are a couple other options from MVNO's, for instance http://www.pagepluscellular.com/ seams to have decent reviews, and uses the entire verizon network. Their unlimited plan is about as cheap as I have seen (no unlimited data plans though)
(never used them, only looked at there site and am thinking...)
you might look into a MVNO instead of directly from a provider from: http://www.prepaidreviews.com/bestrated.html was the first listing I found with links to some options. I am considering pagepluscellular many of their plans are much cheaper than any of the verizon/sprint plans for me, but they don't offer many discounted phones (only used it appears), so you would need to buy any new gadgets outright.
Also Verizon will not sell the droid phones without a data plan ( I mostly have wifi access everywhere I go, and can use my companies broadband card with a Wifi access point to share in other places.) So I would buy it outright from google for around $300, but probably not the $500+ to get the cheaper plans.
No TSA or air marshalls needed.
what makes you think that? No mention of the name of who this hero is, this was a person very alert and un-afraid to attack when those much closer had no clue what was going on, and who's job appears to require anonymity.
well food aid is a farce, feeding a person for a day with no clear cut "this is the last day you have to feed yourself starting then" Only creates a outdoor prison (when food is free, no one can make money growing food. When the main business is dependent on feeling sorry for the people, there is incentive to maintain that..)
It is also never so clear cut. For example a lot of money (50 million+ a day?) was generated daily at WTC. That kind of money supported feeding millions of people continuously. So it was likely a few billion was destroyed that day, Granted the war in IRAQ could have built 2 WTC buildings in every single US state, clearly war wasn't the correct response for our economy, only the correct response for Haliburton's economy. Without corruption a quick world wide supported clearing out of Afghanistan seamed warranted. With the political corruption we had in place the #1 goal became guaranteeing a long lived money out, thus turning the right decision into the wrong one. (Very few could have comprehended the depths of the Busch/Cheny corruption at the time of the original decision.)
US has many high mileage cycles, just the savings over 50 MPG is diminishing. IE if you drive 1000 miles a month, 25 MPG to 50 MPG saves 20 gallons of fuel a month. going from 50 to 125 mpg saves 12 gallons of fuel a month. So a ugly slow battery power scooter would never sell, when (for example) my 600cc enduro is lighter, faster (100 mph), goes anywhere and gets 65 mpg. I would never hall around 100 pounds of batteries to save $20 worth of fuel a month, it already costs me ~$20 a month for tires. Not sure what hybrid means on this bike, but I would never shutdown the bike motor, the constant noise make them noticeable and any additional delay getting to max power can be difference from life to death, without any surrounding protection from idiots, only agility.
your thinking of the 5 Gallon tanks, the 100# tanks are more like $65-$100. It cost the same $15 to inspect.
About once every 5 years I spray some white paint around the top of mine (35 gallon tank I take in to fill+5 gallon backup with a automatic switch.) Surprise inspection, that rust was left visible? I think they are certified for 15 years in AZ, and inspection is simply empty the tank and look inside, unless it was stored empty no rust then your good for another 15years for $15 fee.
according to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery with a 10-20% loss when charging. Then a continuous 30% self-discharge every month, thus you would burn a extra 3.5 weeks of power (7%.) I am thinking 17-27% waste of power, is it the Electric companies pushing for this?
Probably also has to do with cost, the Tesla battery cost to Tesla is estimated to be $30k, and last 100k miles, so $.30/mile in battery cost alone as a upfront cost. Allowable for a "luxary" but not very feasible for "economy"
very few people would recommend storing enough gasoline in your basement to run your household for a week.
FYI, That's about 26 gallons, so people who have attached 2 car garages do that every day. With propane it would be even easier, I wouldn't hesitate to store 2 * 15 gallon propane tanks under my bed (even if I was a smoker.)
I'm sure Apple would prefer for me to buy a new phone,
No apple might prefer you buy a new Iphone, but it is it worth the risk that it wouldn't be a android/blackberry? They get a monthly share of at&t revenue so you are still paying apple for something... Apple is not msft, still pushing out monthly updates for a OS they sold me almost 10 years ago, and never getting another dime from me.
I think your confusing Binary, and Source code. I am not aware of any restrictions on modifying the binary of open-source programs, IE if you use a different compiler to build mozilla you would have a different binary, but you don't have to release the source to the compiler... You would have to indicate some how what source you used and follow the original license (and can't use the name and logos of mozilla or firefox.)
Apple doesn't release their source code (at least not all of it.) They are only referring to modifying the binaries in this suit.
Since no one has challenged the legality of any of the pieces that PyStar sells, only that they installed and ran all of the software for you. IE the sell a retail version of OS-X with the machine. Their boot loader program is currently legal. The hardware hasn't been challanged.
Personally it seams like if Pystar has the right to distribute OS-X, and the software that modifies and installs OS-X, and makes it clear to the customer this is what they have done, this seams like to me Copyright law should be changed to allow this to be done in some manner regardless of the OEM's complaint. IE this is no different than me building PC's, making a dual boot windows/linux build then selling the PC with a retail copy of windows. Since the windows boot loader was changed, it is not un-modified windows. So this ruling says I have to have Microsoft's permission to sell this PC.
Halliburton is not in the defense business to defend. They're in the defense business to make money.
You say that like it's a either or conflict. Some corruption/alternative motives of congress,etc may screw up the feedback loop, but thats the contractor following the motive of those pulling the money strings. If those with the military money's primary motive was defense (a stretch, I know) Then the only way for Haliburton to keep getting contracts for defense is to provide the best defense for the money. Granted they could half ass one contract take that money and do something else, if they then didn't provide the best product desired by the customer, then the customer would have black listed them, and gone with another contractor who would. So the problem is that the military personal making those decisions primary focus isn't defense, if you don't fix that your not going to get anything different by doing away with contractors...