The problem is that all the workplaces tend to be in close proximity to each other, and housing that's close is in short supply and prohibitively expensive so people are forced to look further afield where it's cheaper. How about building some offices 40 miles away where the houses are cheaper, so the staff can afford to live nearby and not have to use the highway? If workplaces were spread out instead of clumped together you'd solve a lot of these problems.
Or how about reduce people's need to all travel to the same places at the same time... Have more people working from home... Build offices near homes, instead of having them all clumped together in business districts with no residential properties nearby. Change working hours, the traditional working day is based on the need for daylight when working the fields - this doesn't apply anymore, especially in todays global world where you're likely to be dealing with people in other countries anyway.
When these GPS systems were new they actually helped, you could get off the highway and take a shortcut to avoid the blockage...
Now they tend to make things worse, the highways are designed for large volumes of traffic but the residential streets are not, so traffic that will slow a highway down will bring residential roads to a complete standstill. You're often better off just staying on the slow moving highway.
The biggest problem as always is the outdated notion of everyone working at the same time in the same place... If working locations were spread out, as were working times, and with more people working from home if their job made it practical to do so, traffic problems would be pretty much a thing of the past.
Parking in such places is not only in short supply and difficult to use without holding up traffic, but often expensive, and with overly aggressive traffic wardens all too keen to fine you for even the slightest infraction.
But those sales wouldn't be in addition to their existing high end processors, they would be instead of, plus with a $3000 price tag the sales would be low and economies of scale wouldn't kick in so the production cost would remain high too. Their existing designs are well tried and tested, R&D costs are low and the fabrication process has been refined sufficiently to have very high yields so the margins are very good. There really is no incentive to sell anything significantly better unless forced to by competition.
The Alpha processor used to be what you describe - massively faster than anything else, but highly expensive. They remained an expensive niche for people who needed the highest performance at any cost.
Except that the supposed purpose of doing physical searching was to prevent you bringing illegal or dangerous physical items such as drugs or explosives.
Your phone is a physical item, but it's also a perfectly legal item that you have every right to own and carry with you. In some cases (eg note 7) phones could become explosive, but that's irrespective of what data is stored on them. There are only a limited number of ways that physical items can be brought in or out of a country, and all of these are monitored in one form of another.
The data on the other hand poses no immediate threat to the airport or the aircraft, and there are so many other ways you could bring data into the country. Anyone who actually has any criminal intent is not going to keep such data on their phone as they travel, they will travel with a clean phone and download their data again after they have landed. Viewing the data on someone's personal device is a massive invasion of privacy, as well as putting them at risk of violating their employer's data protection policy (see the recent NASA story).
Computers *ARE* for the experts, that's one of the biggest problems these days... Despite various attempts and all kinds of false marketing, current operating systems are simply not suitable for end users (you cite linux as an example, but windows and osx are no better either). They are designed for experts, and should be used by experts. It's one thing when you have a system configured and managed by an IT department, but quite another expecting a user to manage such a system themselves.
Users are better off with a simpler system like a games console or an ipad.
And that's somehow worse than the even longer list of people who have the capability to read or modify an unencrypted plain text email? If you're concerned and sufficiently tech savvy you can verify the certificate yourself just like you can do with an HTTPS website.
The CA system is broken, but it's better than nothing.
Only that assumes paying the asking price is all you need to do, which often isn't the case...
Media is often available from different places (eg music streaming services having exclusive deals) which makes it inconvenient as you'd need multiple subscriptions... Media is often available only on certain devices, which you may not have or be able to easily obtain. Media availability often varies in different locations, with artificial barriers making it more difficult for you to buy it from an area where it's more readily available. There are various shows and movies i would like to watch but my choices are either flying halfway across the world or pirating. I may want to do something which is perfectly legal with the media, but which is made difficult by whatever ridiculous drm scheme they're using.
The media companies add all those hoops themselves, the pirate version is often easier. And you're right, the more hoops the media companies keep adding the more people will choose to pirate instead.
File sharing p2p actually reduces overall network strain compared to centralised streaming/downloading... Traffic stays more localised, and doesn't traverse the more expensive links between different ISPS and different countries.
In the UK, it comes down to "intent"... If you are selling something, what are you intending it to be used for?
If you are advertising your kodi box as being able to play pirated content, and providing it with the plugins preinstalled or instructions to do so then you are intending it to be used to view pirated content which is illegal. If you are just selling a box running a stock install of kodi and not mentioning that plugins offering illegal content are available, then your doing nothing wrong.
Same if you're selling knives... If you sell a set of kitchen knives which you advertise as great for cookery then that's fine, if you sell a set of knives which you advertise are great for murdering people then that's illegal.
More importantly, sanctions don't hurt the dictators, they hurt the people.. Decreased trade impacts the people, while those in power continue their black market trading, and reduced communication makes it easier for such regimes to control the flow of information to the people. If anything, increased trade and closer relations with such governments would be far more effective.
Also fails to mention the popularity of said games, or where they were released... If noone wants to play a game or isn't aware that it exists, then they won't want to pirate it either.
Unless you have a very fast WAN link, or have servers on your LAN which you need to pull data from at high speed then 802.11ac is pointless. 802.11n (or even g) is more than fast enough to keep up with most people's uses.
What's to stop you entering random data? I have a skype account purely for communicating with a few colleagues, a few days ago i got a bunch of happy birthday messages from them although it wasnt my birthday. Turns out that skype notified them based on the date i had entered.
On some models of printer, port 9100 can do a lot more than just accept data to be printed...
For instance, some Xerox printers let you upload firmware updates via port 9100, and vulnerabilities exist allowing remote code execution (see https://www.exploit-db.com/exp...)
Printers are fully capable computers, having processors far more powerful than even highend servers from a few years ago. If someone gains the ability to execute arbitrary code on one, then they have a foothold on your network capable of launching further attacks against other hosts.
Depends on the country, in many countries we have a legal right to return anything bought online for any reason within a certain time frame, and additional rights should the goods be faulty or not as advertised.
If you park in a handicapped bay you are depriving someone who is genuinely handicapped of the space they might actually need...
A physically healthy guy driving his million dollar supercar parks in the handicapped bay because he's too lazy to walk or feels he's too important to do so. He gets a fine which amounts to less than the cost of the gas he used driving there. He just pays it as a routine expense of driving and thinks nothing of it.
A healthy guy who works hard and can barely afford the old beat up car he drives to work in parks in a handicapped bay. He gets a fine which cuts into his budget for food that month because he has to spend all of his earnings every month.
The first guy won't think twice about parking in a handicapped bay, the fine is simply the cost of parking to him and its a trivial cost relative to what he's already spending on his car. The second guy will actually be deterred from parking in handicapped bays and is unlikely to do so.
Punishments are supposed to deter someone, fixed fines don't deter those who are rich enough to trivially pay them.
A period of 7-10 years made sense in those days, when a work had to be printed and then distributed slowly via horses and sailing ships... In these days, a work can be distributed instantly worldwide through the internet and yet instead of taking advantage of new technology, publishers are creating artificial barriers to restrict distribution.
And most work becomes abandoned after 2-3 years, at which point there is no legal way to get hold of the work. The copyright holder clearly sees no commercial value in the work, yet they prevent anyone from having it at all.
Copyright terms should be short, to reflect these modern times... Distribution should be on fair and non discriminatory terms, and work should fall into the public domain once copyright expires or once the copyright holder is no longer selling copies - whichever occurs first.
Copyright holders should also not be able to place arbitrary restrictions on a work, if you make it available then you should make it available to anyone in the world on the same terms, and anyone who buys it should have the ability to format shift, watch on any device they choose and make backup or temporary copies for their own use, and should have the right to sell their copy (transferring or destroying any personal copies in the process). It should be about give and take, but big media only wants to take
Indeed many of us make our work available for free in the form of open source software. Many more people work for free by donating their time to various charitable causes. People can and do work for free.
Most people feel that some compensation is deserved for hard work, the problem is the extreme greed of many in the industry. Why should someone still be able to earn royalties from some work their grandfather did 100 years ago?
There is also the extreme damage this does to our culture, much of the work being created today is being locked away on drm encumbered media and will no longer be available to purchase after a couple of years. By the time the copyright expires, most works will be long forgotten, any original media is likely to be unreadable and playback devices are not going to be easily available.
Copyright was about give and take, the idea was that we (society) give artists a chance to profit from their work and in exchange their work falls into the public domain after a reasonable length of time. The default state is that no such thing exists, and works are immediately in the public domain to be copied. The original copyright term of 20 years made sense in the days of printing presses and horseback courier, but today where the internet allows media to be distributed worldwide in an instant even 20 years is far too long. Now copyright is massively distorted against the public.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that all the workplaces tend to be in close proximity to each other, and housing that's close is in short supply and prohibitively expensive so people are forced to look further afield where it's cheaper.
How about building some offices 40 miles away where the houses are cheaper, so the staff can afford to live nearby and not have to use the highway?
If workplaces were spread out instead of clumped together you'd solve a lot of these problems.
Or how about reduce people's need to all travel to the same places at the same time...
Have more people working from home...
Build offices near homes, instead of having them all clumped together in business districts with no residential properties nearby.
Change working hours, the traditional working day is based on the need for daylight when working the fields - this doesn't apply anymore, especially in todays global world where you're likely to be dealing with people in other countries anyway.
When these GPS systems were new they actually helped, you could get off the highway and take a shortcut to avoid the blockage...
Now they tend to make things worse, the highways are designed for large volumes of traffic but the residential streets are not, so traffic that will slow a highway down will bring residential roads to a complete standstill. You're often better off just staying on the slow moving highway.
The biggest problem as always is the outdated notion of everyone working at the same time in the same place... If working locations were spread out, as were working times, and with more people working from home if their job made it practical to do so, traffic problems would be pretty much a thing of the past.
Parking in such places is not only in short supply and difficult to use without holding up traffic, but often expensive, and with overly aggressive traffic wardens all too keen to fine you for even the slightest infraction.
But those sales wouldn't be in addition to their existing high end processors, they would be instead of, plus with a $3000 price tag the sales would be low and economies of scale wouldn't kick in so the production cost would remain high too.
Their existing designs are well tried and tested, R&D costs are low and the fabrication process has been refined sufficiently to have very high yields so the margins are very good. There really is no incentive to sell anything significantly better unless forced to by competition.
The Alpha processor used to be what you describe - massively faster than anything else, but highly expensive. They remained an expensive niche for people who needed the highest performance at any cost.
Nobody makes any money in a commoditized market, nobody makes any money selling windows desktops either...
Except that the supposed purpose of doing physical searching was to prevent you bringing illegal or dangerous physical items such as drugs or explosives.
Your phone is a physical item, but it's also a perfectly legal item that you have every right to own and carry with you. In some cases (eg note 7) phones could become explosive, but that's irrespective of what data is stored on them. There are only a limited number of ways that physical items can be brought in or out of a country, and all of these are monitored in one form of another.
The data on the other hand poses no immediate threat to the airport or the aircraft, and there are so many other ways you could bring data into the country. Anyone who actually has any criminal intent is not going to keep such data on their phone as they travel, they will travel with a clean phone and download their data again after they have landed.
Viewing the data on someone's personal device is a massive invasion of privacy, as well as putting them at risk of violating their employer's data protection policy (see the recent NASA story).
Many ISPs actually block the default windows ports by default across their networks...
Is windows any different? You have to install tons of third party apps to gain basic functionality that comes as standard on other platforms.
Computers *ARE* for the experts, that's one of the biggest problems these days... Despite various attempts and all kinds of false marketing, current operating systems are simply not suitable for end users (you cite linux as an example, but windows and osx are no better either). They are designed for experts, and should be used by experts. It's one thing when you have a system configured and managed by an IT department, but quite another expecting a user to manage such a system themselves.
Users are better off with a simpler system like a games console or an ipad.
And that's somehow worse than the even longer list of people who have the capability to read or modify an unencrypted plain text email? If you're concerned and sufficiently tech savvy you can verify the certificate yourself just like you can do with an HTTPS website.
The CA system is broken, but it's better than nothing.
Only that assumes paying the asking price is all you need to do, which often isn't the case...
Media is often available from different places (eg music streaming services having exclusive deals) which makes it inconvenient as you'd need multiple subscriptions...
Media is often available only on certain devices, which you may not have or be able to easily obtain.
Media availability often varies in different locations, with artificial barriers making it more difficult for you to buy it from an area where it's more readily available. There are various shows and movies i would like to watch but my choices are either flying halfway across the world or pirating.
I may want to do something which is perfectly legal with the media, but which is made difficult by whatever ridiculous drm scheme they're using.
The media companies add all those hoops themselves, the pirate version is often easier. And you're right, the more hoops the media companies keep adding the more people will choose to pirate instead.
File sharing p2p actually reduces overall network strain compared to centralised streaming/downloading... Traffic stays more localised, and doesn't traverse the more expensive links between different ISPS and different countries.
In the UK, it comes down to "intent"...
If you are selling something, what are you intending it to be used for?
If you are advertising your kodi box as being able to play pirated content, and providing it with the plugins preinstalled or instructions to do so then you are intending it to be used to view pirated content which is illegal.
If you are just selling a box running a stock install of kodi and not mentioning that plugins offering illegal content are available, then your doing nothing wrong.
Same if you're selling knives... If you sell a set of kitchen knives which you advertise as great for cookery then that's fine, if you sell a set of knives which you advertise are great for murdering people then that's illegal.
The MSI driver should be a closer match for the hardware, and thus be prioritised...
More importantly, sanctions don't hurt the dictators, they hurt the people..
Decreased trade impacts the people, while those in power continue their black market trading, and reduced communication makes it easier for such regimes to control the flow of information to the people.
If anything, increased trade and closer relations with such governments would be far more effective.
Also fails to mention the popularity of said games, or where they were released... If noone wants to play a game or isn't aware that it exists, then they won't want to pirate it either.
Unless you have a very fast WAN link, or have servers on your LAN which you need to pull data from at high speed then 802.11ac is pointless. 802.11n (or even g) is more than fast enough to keep up with most people's uses.
What's to stop you entering random data?
I have a skype account purely for communicating with a few colleagues, a few days ago i got a bunch of happy birthday messages from them although it wasnt my birthday. Turns out that skype notified them based on the date i had entered.
Well there's the problem with relying on proprietary services and protocols...
I can still use IRC, SIP, Email etc from any ancient device.
On some models of printer, port 9100 can do a lot more than just accept data to be printed...
For instance, some Xerox printers let you upload firmware updates via port 9100, and vulnerabilities exist allowing remote code execution (see https://www.exploit-db.com/exp...)
Printers are fully capable computers, having processors far more powerful than even highend servers from a few years ago. If someone gains the ability to execute arbitrary code on one, then they have a foothold on your network capable of launching further attacks against other hosts.
Depends on the country, in many countries we have a legal right to return anything bought online for any reason within a certain time frame, and additional rights should the goods be faulty or not as advertised.
If you park in a handicapped bay you are depriving someone who is genuinely handicapped of the space they might actually need...
A physically healthy guy driving his million dollar supercar parks in the handicapped bay because he's too lazy to walk or feels he's too important to do so. He gets a fine which amounts to less than the cost of the gas he used driving there. He just pays it as a routine expense of driving and thinks nothing of it.
A healthy guy who works hard and can barely afford the old beat up car he drives to work in parks in a handicapped bay. He gets a fine which cuts into his budget for food that month because he has to spend all of his earnings every month.
The first guy won't think twice about parking in a handicapped bay, the fine is simply the cost of parking to him and its a trivial cost relative to what he's already spending on his car.
The second guy will actually be deterred from parking in handicapped bays and is unlikely to do so.
Punishments are supposed to deter someone, fixed fines don't deter those who are rich enough to trivially pay them.
A period of 7-10 years made sense in those days, when a work had to be printed and then distributed slowly via horses and sailing ships...
In these days, a work can be distributed instantly worldwide through the internet and yet instead of taking advantage of new technology, publishers are creating artificial barriers to restrict distribution.
And most work becomes abandoned after 2-3 years, at which point there is no legal way to get hold of the work. The copyright holder clearly sees no commercial value in the work, yet they prevent anyone from having it at all.
Copyright terms should be short, to reflect these modern times... Distribution should be on fair and non discriminatory terms, and work should fall into the public domain once copyright expires or once the copyright holder is no longer selling copies - whichever occurs first.
Copyright holders should also not be able to place arbitrary restrictions on a work, if you make it available then you should make it available to anyone in the world on the same terms, and anyone who buys it should have the ability to format shift, watch on any device they choose and make backup or temporary copies for their own use, and should have the right to sell their copy (transferring or destroying any personal copies in the process).
It should be about give and take, but big media only wants to take
Indeed many of us make our work available for free in the form of open source software. Many more people work for free by donating their time to various charitable causes. People can and do work for free.
Most people feel that some compensation is deserved for hard work, the problem is the extreme greed of many in the industry. Why should someone still be able to earn royalties from some work their grandfather did 100 years ago?
There is also the extreme damage this does to our culture, much of the work being created today is being locked away on drm encumbered media and will no longer be available to purchase after a couple of years. By the time the copyright expires, most works will be long forgotten, any original media is likely to be unreadable and playback devices are not going to be easily available.
Copyright was about give and take, the idea was that we (society) give artists a chance to profit from their work and in exchange their work falls into the public domain after a reasonable length of time. The default state is that no such thing exists, and works are immediately in the public domain to be copied. The original copyright term of 20 years made sense in the days of printing presses and horseback courier, but today where the internet allows media to be distributed worldwide in an instant even 20 years is far too long. Now copyright is massively distorted against the public.