It's not clear whether Microsoft now considers independent developers a problem child to be quietly smothered in their sleep -- or if they just haven't figured out exactly what WP8 is going to look like, months after it's official release.
The problem for (would be) developers is that both explanations have a precedent in Microsoft's history.
Then, of course, there are those who say that the 31 lines of Genesis that describe creation aren't to be taken as a detailed account of creation -- and, more importantly, that we shouldn't make up all sorts of random stuff and pretend that that's in those 31 lines as well and demand that other people accept the stuff that people made up be included as God Given Truth. They even expect god to abide by our own 24 hour day. Rather presumptuous of us, yes?
Consider it, instead, as a parable for people who didn't even have a firm grasp of Newtonian mechanics, much less Relativity (and for the most part wouldn't have cared less about the later, even if God had tried to explain it back then).
Notice, even, that between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 there is a different order for the creation of man and beast. God, it seems, is outside of the ordere of time.
I take from Genesis a few key talking points:
God created this world, and gave us Dominion over it.. There's no promise of another one, so we better treat our 'toys' nicely
God takes time off to rest and recuperate and so should you.
The details of how god created the universe, the world and us is really left as an exercise for the reader. Those who claim that the stuff that they made up after reading Genesis is the God given truth are simply playing god, themselves.
All of the other cameras tested did just fine under these conditions. It may just be corporate culture., Olympus had a big scandal about fake financial results. It makes perfect sense that their employees would also create fake image stabalization.
btw: not a whole lot of need to compare file sizes if you use md5sum (or any larger hash). with a 128 bit hash and 4million files, your probability of an accidental hash collision are roughly 1/2^85 (or 4e25).. close enough to zero for my purposes.
As I understand iit, copyright isn't just the right to prevent others from copying. It's also the right to make your own copies.
Given that, would it be possible to sue the maker of an incorrect DMCA claim for copyright infringement with per-copy statutory damages for the destroyed copies? The DMCA does make provisions for false take-down notices....
Do a CRC32 of each file. Write to a file one per line in this order: CRC, directory, filename. Sort the file by CRC. Read the file linearly doing a full compare on any file with the same CRC (these will be adjacent in the file).
or try this script:
find . -type f -print0 | xargs -0 md5sum | sort | uniq --all-repeated=separate -w32
Of course, you'll have to do this in Linux (live CD would do.. these are all common tools). -- but you'll end up with a list of duplicate files... What you do after that is up to you..
Yes, it requires that you read each and every file (once), but you can start the script and go to bed, (redirect the output to a file). That's what computers are for, after all.
All that the Microsoft support geeks have to say to someone is
If you think that WIndows is bad, you should try these also-ran operating systems. They're second-rate for a reason. Install this crap on your systems, and your keyboards will curl and your mouse will stop working.... And I can't promise you support when you try to switch back.
It's enough to stop a Windows-only support geek in his tracks.
I hope that they didn't charge room and board based on the cost of the 'lodgings'. Given the cost of an Apollo capsule, they would have probably ended up paying about $100/day.
A hedge is a subset of the group 'bets'. It's a bet for the unwanted occasion. The (insurance) group taking the bet knows that you won't try to make the occasion happen (e.g. commit suicide), and that may be (often is) a condition of the wager (insurance) contract.
Insurance companies (like bookies) play the numbers such that enough people don't collect on their bets (policies) to cover the people who do, and provide for a good overall profit to boot.
Being in a distinguishable subset of group A doesn't mean that you're not a member of group A.
Please open any copy of Darwin's "The Origin of Species", please. It is, after all, the book that brought the issue up to public scrutiny in a big deal. And -- contrary to some opinions -- just reading something does not mean that you automatically have to agree with it.
. . . . .
I know virtually no other scientific idea that was, is and probably will be for our entire lifetime, put under so much scrutiny.
Evolution (and cosmology) doesn't exclude the possibility that god created the world. About the only thing that it really precludes is the rather wistful and arbitrary belief that God's days are 24 hours long (who am I to tell god when to go to bed?). Once you let god have a multi--billion (human) year long first day, the big bang can read: "God said, 'let there be light' and Whoof there was a universe". Genesis is mighty thin on actual details, and creationists have read a lot into it that they now demand that kids believe as a god-given truth (as opposed to stuff we made up in the face of missing 'facts' in the Bible.
In short, science doesn't speak on who created us and the universe (or even if there was a 'who'). It simply tries to reverse engineer how it unfolded (in some cases, literally).
Religion speaks on who, but anybody who says that The Bible gives any sort of details about how is making shit up.
Yes, but -- like anything else useful (water, oxygen), too much of it (also too fast an increase) can kill you (or, in this case, cause catastrophic climate effects).
CO2 isn't the worst of the greenhouse gasses, we're just generating lots and lots and lots of it all of a sudden, and the ecosystem doesn't have the ability to effectively deal with it that fast.
For an example of the effect, try drinking 20 litres of pure water tomorrow (just make sure to do it at a medical facility where they have some hope of reviving you when you collapse).
Building and maintaining a large infrastructure (especially something particularly mechanical like a wind far) in the especially hostile environment of Antarctica is going to have some really interesting engineering problems associated.
Then there's the problem of making sure that the CO2 remains frozen -- especially once the infrastructure is abandoned/broken
finally, there's the time bomb effect -- The antarctic ice belt Isn't static. It moves (albeit slowly) towards the sea, which means you're actually creating a CO2 TIme Bomb for some future generation to deal with.
Perhaps a better solution would be to put the power generation stations on Antarctica and find a way to distribute that energy to the rest of the world (or at least South America, Africa and Australia)
If you're a beggar, and I give you $5 every day, and one day i'm (say) in a bad mood, and I decide not to give you the money, That doesn't give you the right to jump up and force me to give you the money 'that you deserve' (and possibly beat me half to death in the process. It's my money and my wallet. I get to give you whatever I want (or don't).
Similarly, if a girl has been giving you sex, and decides to stop, that doesn't give you the right to force her to continue the practice.
Just like I have the right to keep my wallet closed, she has the right to keep her knees closed. Past activity (in either case, and including teasing) does not set an enforceable precedent.
Invading Afghanistan only kinda makes sense because that's where Bin Ladin was supposedly hiding (before he holed himself up in a house just outside a majour Pakistani military base... but the real source of Al Quaida's power base lies in Saudi Arabia. Iraq makes even less sense -- Saddamn had given them the boot years ago.
It's really just a hodge-podge of lhalf-baked reasons... until the massive oil and mineral resources of those two counries et involved.... then it makes pure sense.
Soft targets get targeted because the hard targets are just too hard to get to.
As juicy as killing a NATO soldier might be for a Taliban fighter, all of that armor (both body and vehicular) makes them into a foridable target. A bunch of would-be cadets lined up for their interviews, on the other hand are easy. They don't even have guns to shoot back with!
The fact that Islam reserves a special layer of hell for Muslims who kill fellow muslims (and another special hell for those who comit suicide,,, and pretty much forbuds killing Civilians in wartime)....... is an entirely non-tactical question.
An Arbor Networks graph shows less than.2% of the traffic the company measured was IPv6. That's up from a peak of.04%, which occurred on the first Worldwide IPv6 Day in 2011; hardly a blip in a year.
That's a 5-times increase in a year.
If we pretend that we're business math students, then next year we'll see 1% -- then 5% in 2 years and 25% in 3 years -- which would be easily enough to trigger further network effects.
It all breaks down in the 4th year with 125% of traffic, but I'll just take that to mean that the remaining IP4 traffic will be encapsulated in IP6 packets by then.
well, PXE isn't a big problem because it's internal network only.... Unless you have cross-network connections that are necessary to boot your machines (an extreme rarity in my world.... bordering on stupid in most cases).
It's pretty easy to explain to anybody with even a minial understanding of iptables:
-i X means 'if the packet is inbound on interface X'
-o Y means 'if the packet will be forwarded (outbound) on interface Y
$lan_if and $upstrea_if are variables to which you've assigned the proper names for the interfaces conected to the LAN side and the Internet side (respectively)
# accept anything originating at localhost (this machine/router)
ip6tables -A FORWARD -i lo -j ACCEPT
# Allow outbound connections to be initiated by machines on the inside net.
ip6tables -A FORWARD -i $lan_if -o $upstream_if -j ACCEPT
# allow packets associated with aformentioned connections to come back in.
ip6tables -A FORWRRD -i $upstream_if -o $lan_if -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
# Drop anything else.
ip6tables -P FORWARD DROP
# Turn on packet forwarding of IP6 packets between interfaces. (off by default)
sysctl net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1
This effectively gives you the same protections as an IP4 NAT setup -- but with none of the disadvantages. -- Like the fact that each machine on the inside gets it's own (external) IP address.
This means that if you want you can give machines on the inside the ability to be servers (acccept inbound conections to the machine and port) without the NAT thing of also having to assign each machine an inbound (non-standard) port number.
It really should just be a software upgrade (DD-WRT, anybody?) -- But then convincing vendors to put out an IP6 patch when they can get away with selling you a $50.000 piece of equipment with that same patch could be an uphill battle.
All you have to do to secure 'secure boot' is to ensure that the key list isn't writable after you leave the bios. (until the next hard boot).
That's it. The rest of the requirements are simply anti-competitive action hiding behind the chimera of security.
There were some MS emails released a few years ago where Microsoft executives wondered about if there was a way to force vendors to lock down the BIOS in a way that locked out Linux... Now, a few years later, they've managed to do just that.
If Microsoft were pro-active about dealing with other security concerns within WIndows, then I might accept a claim that it's benign paranoia. It is, however, clear that Microsoft still considers security to be mostly a PR/marketing issue. If you look at 'Secure Boot' as a primarily marketing/PR issue, then the intent is clear.
It's more like seconds per minute. Either it's dropped bits (64 times the speed) or someone specified beats/second instead of beats/minute. either one of those errors would give roughly the result seen.
You can see them going off in sequence... It's just way too fast.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem for (would be) developers is that both explanations have a precedent in Microsoft's history.
Genesis doesn't claim that God's days are 24 hours long. By some reports, the original Hebrew word that we now translate as 'days' is more like 'aeons' -- the Sun and the Moon weren't even created until the 4th 'day'.
Then, of course, there are those who say that the 31 lines of Genesis that describe creation aren't to be taken as a detailed account of creation -- and, more importantly, that we shouldn't make up all sorts of random stuff and pretend that that's in those 31 lines as well and demand that other people accept the stuff that people made up be included as God Given Truth. They even expect god to abide by our own 24 hour day. Rather presumptuous of us, yes?
Consider it, instead, as a parable for people who didn't even have a firm grasp of Newtonian mechanics, much less Relativity (and for the most part wouldn't have cared less about the later, even if God had tried to explain it back then). Notice, even, that between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 there is a different order for the creation of man and beast. God, it seems, is outside of the ordere of time.
I take from Genesis a few key talking points:
The details of how god created the universe, the world and us is really left as an exercise for the reader. Those who claim that the stuff that they made up after reading Genesis is the God given truth are simply playing god, themselves.
All of the other cameras tested did just fine under these conditions. It may just be corporate culture., Olympus had a big scandal about fake financial results. It makes perfect sense that their employees would also create fake image stabalization.
btw: not a whole lot of need to compare file sizes if you use md5sum (or any larger hash). with a 128 bit hash and 4million files, your probability of an accidental hash collision are roughly 1/2^85 (or 4e25) .. close enough to zero for my purposes.
Given that, would it be possible to sue the maker of an incorrect DMCA claim for copyright infringement with per-copy statutory damages for the destroyed copies? The DMCA does make provisions for false take-down notices....
Do a CRC32 of each file. Write to a file one per line in this order: CRC, directory, filename. Sort the file by CRC. Read the file linearly doing a full compare on any file with the same CRC (these will be adjacent in the file).
or try this script: find . -type f -print0 | xargs -0 md5sum | sort | uniq --all-repeated=separate -w32 Of course, you'll have to do this in Linux (live CD would do.. these are all common tools). -- but you'll end up with a list of duplicate files... What you do after that is up to you..
Yes, it requires that you read each and every file (once), but you can start the script and go to bed, (redirect the output to a file). That's what computers are for, after all.
It's enough to stop a Windows-only support geek in his tracks.
I hope that they didn't charge room and board based on the cost of the 'lodgings'. Given the cost of an Apollo capsule, they would have probably ended up paying about $100/day.
Insurance companies (like bookies) play the numbers such that enough people don't collect on their bets (policies) to cover the people who do, and provide for a good overall profit to boot.
Being in a distinguishable subset of group A doesn't mean that you're not a member of group A.
Please open any copy of Darwin's "The Origin of Species", please. It is, after all, the book that brought the issue up to public scrutiny in a big deal. And -- contrary to some opinions -- just reading something does not mean that you automatically have to agree with it.
. . . . .
I know virtually no other scientific idea that was, is and probably will be for our entire lifetime, put under so much scrutiny.
Unh, global warming?
In short, science doesn't speak on who created us and the universe (or even if there was a 'who'). It simply tries to reverse engineer how it unfolded (in some cases, literally).
Religion speaks on who, but anybody who says that The Bible gives any sort of details about how is making shit up.
Yes, but -- like anything else useful (water, oxygen), too much of it (also too fast an increase) can kill you (or, in this case, cause catastrophic climate effects).
CO2 isn't the worst of the greenhouse gasses, we're just generating lots and lots and lots of it all of a sudden, and the ecosystem doesn't have the ability to effectively deal with it that fast.
For an example of the effect, try drinking 20 litres of pure water tomorrow (just make sure to do it at a medical facility where they have some hope of reviving you when you collapse).
Building and maintaining a large infrastructure (especially something particularly mechanical like a wind far) in the especially hostile environment of Antarctica is going to have some really interesting engineering problems associated.
Then there's the problem of making sure that the CO2 remains frozen -- especially once the infrastructure is abandoned/broken
finally, there's the time bomb effect -- The antarctic ice belt Isn't static. It moves (albeit slowly) towards the sea, which means you're actually creating a CO2 TIme Bomb for some future generation to deal with.
Perhaps a better solution would be to put the power generation stations on Antarctica and find a way to distribute that energy to the rest of the world (or at least South America, Africa and Australia)
I would have thought that the Gentoo people would have known the most about stripping down a system to the bare essentials.
Similarly, if a girl has been giving you sex, and decides to stop, that doesn't give you the right to force her to continue the practice.
Just like I have the right to keep my wallet closed, she has the right to keep her knees closed. Past activity (in either case, and including teasing) does not set an enforceable precedent.
Some people would say that it's not so much a case of you using your math as it is a case of your math using you.
It's really just a hodge-podge of lhalf-baked reasons ... until the massive oil and mineral resources of those two counries et involved.... then it makes pure sense.
around the time massive mineral resources are discovered in the mountains of Afghanistan, suddenly he is public enemy #1!?
Because "massive mineral resources are discovered in the mountains"?
As juicy as killing a NATO soldier might be for a Taliban fighter, all of that armor (both body and vehicular) makes them into a foridable target. A bunch of would-be cadets lined up for their interviews, on the other hand are easy. They don't even have guns to shoot back with!
The fact that Islam reserves a special layer of hell for Muslims who kill fellow muslims (and another special hell for those who comit suicide,,, and pretty much forbuds killing Civilians in wartime) ....... is an entirely non-tactical question.
An Arbor Networks graph shows less than .2% of the traffic the company measured was IPv6. That's up from a peak of .04%, which occurred on the first Worldwide IPv6 Day in 2011; hardly a blip in a year.
That's a 5-times increase in a year.
If we pretend that we're business math students, then next year we'll see 1% -- then 5% in 2 years and 25% in 3 years -- which would be easily enough to trigger further network effects.
It all breaks down in the 4th year with 125% of traffic, but I'll just take that to mean that the remaining IP4 traffic will be encapsulated in IP6 packets by then.
well, PXE isn't a big problem because it's internal network only.... Unless you have cross-network connections that are necessary to boot your machines (an extreme rarity in my world .... bordering on stupid in most cases).
-i X means 'if the packet is inbound on interface X'
-o Y means 'if the packet will be forwarded (outbound) on interface Y
$lan_if and $upstrea_if are variables to which you've assigned the proper names for the interfaces conected to the LAN side and the Internet side (respectively)
# accept anything originating at localhost (this machine/router)
ip6tables -A FORWARD -i lo -j ACCEPT
# Allow outbound connections to be initiated by machines on the inside net.
ip6tables -A FORWARD -i $lan_if -o $upstream_if -j ACCEPT
# allow packets associated with aformentioned connections to come back in.
ip6tables -A FORWRRD -i $upstream_if -o $lan_if -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT
# Drop anything else.
ip6tables -P FORWARD DROP
# Turn on packet forwarding of IP6 packets between interfaces. (off by default)
sysctl net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1
This effectively gives you the same protections as an IP4 NAT setup -- but with none of the disadvantages. -- Like the fact that each machine on the inside gets it's own (external) IP address. This means that if you want you can give machines on the inside the ability to be servers (acccept inbound conections to the machine and port) without the NAT thing of also having to assign each machine an inbound (non-standard) port number.
It really should just be a software upgrade (DD-WRT, anybody?) -- But then convincing vendors to put out an IP6 patch when they can get away with selling you a $50.000 piece of equipment with that same patch could be an uphill battle.
That's it. The rest of the requirements are simply anti-competitive action hiding behind the chimera of security. There were some MS emails released a few years ago where Microsoft executives wondered about if there was a way to force vendors to lock down the BIOS in a way that locked out Linux ... Now, a few years later, they've managed to do just that.
If Microsoft were pro-active about dealing with other security concerns within WIndows, then I might accept a claim that it's benign paranoia. It is, however, clear that Microsoft still considers security to be mostly a PR/marketing issue. If you look at 'Secure Boot' as a primarily marketing/PR issue, then the intent is clear.
It's intentional. There's no coincidence.
You can see them going off in sequence... It's just way too fast.