A few years back there was an absolutely amazing music torrent called oink.me which offered unprecedented selection and quality, all assembled by dedicated contributors. Naturally, it was shut down
And just as naturally, within two weeks at least five new sites had already sprung up to fill its place. Two of the best remain to this day and are doing just as good of a job.
Until the government has absolute control over the people, when the majority of the people want something, a handful will step up to the plate and keep the game of whack-a-mole going. While the politicians and laws are technically supposed to be supported by the majority, it's the actual public support in venus such as this that truly demonstrates the "will of the majority". When there is a differing opinion between these two, it's easily argued to be the former that does not truly represent the majority opinion.
Looks almost like a touch screen version of an Apple][C
I was surprised by the picture, how it's of the exact same style as the//c. Same color, looks like the same injection-molding matte finish, the (cosmetic only?) vent slots under the handset. The size and placement of the big colorful apple logo. It was probably designed to be a matched set.
There were black and white LCD screens you could buy (for close to the cost of the computer, iirc) that attached onto the case and flipped down flat on the computer when not in use. (a bit like a notebook computer in that respect) Combine that with the other offerings of the day, a large briefcase size affair that carried the computer, a smaller keyboard, and a small pack of batteries, and you could turn the computer into something truly portable.
I don't understand why the//c had that handle on it... if you were going to be going portable with it you weren't likely going to be carrying the computer around bare by its handle.
Once life gets going and has managed to develop evolutionary mechanisms such as sex and dna, (neither of which are specifically required) life tends to become highly adaptable and resilient to changing conditions. The problem is getting there in the first place. That first "spark of life" collection of molecules that can reproduce has to happen from an incredibly good stroke of luck.
The odds of that incredibly rare event happening are made possible by and improved on by favorable conditions. Liquid water, atmosphere, a water cycle, abundant energy, and a magnetic field are all part of that "thumb on the wheel", improving the odds of genesis occurring here on earth.
But they're not required. The only thing that is probably actually required is a liquid cycle of some sort, to provide a circulation of materials because original life was almost certainly not capable of locomotion, and an abundant source of energy. I've read several papers on a plausible genesis based on a liquid methane cycle.
Several conditions on earth are probably not even optimal. The low temperature and pressure of our atmosphere for example - someplace more like Venus has an edge on Earth in that respect. Part of why people tend to think of water/carbon as necessary is they are assuming earth's low pressure and temperature. Molecules get a lot more flexible under those different conditions. If you have "water tunnel-vision" you may completely discount a place like venus where liquid water can't really exist in any quantity.
I think it's fair to argue that some combination of a liquid cycle where the liquid is at a reactive temperature and pressure are probably almost required for genesis. I hesitate to flat out say "required" because a sufficiently lucky turn of events can lead to genesis even in the most apparently unfavorable conditions imaginable. But we can't really get anything accomplished unless we set some constraints on things and try to look at more "reasonable" scenarios. Even though the number of exoplanets in existence is nearly infinite for our practical purposes, it is a finite number, and odds must come into play. Just because there's a ton of planets out there doesn't mean a bunch of them have life. Without any control point of reference it's hard to argue that even just earth in the universe having life was anything but a stroke of incredible luck. We're probably a lot more special than any of us can possibly imagine.
the FDA says that it will just continue to rely on 'voluntary self-policing' by the industry, the same method which hasn't worked out too well during the past 35 years
What idiot thinks that "voluntary self-policing" works in any for-profit business? There are two fundamental problems with that plan: (1) businesses will only "volunteer" to do what benefits them, not the public, and (2) many businesses are surprisingly short-sighted and will only "volunteer" to do things that help their industry or their business in the short-term.
This has nothing to do with how much it costs verizon. Businesses do not charge you based on what their costs are. They charge you based on what you are willing to pay.
Quit arguing over whether or not the charge is justified. It doesn't HAVE to be justified. Either you're willing to pay it or you're not. Somewhere some verizon bean counters ran all the hard math that factors in their actual costs, in terms of providing the service, loss of business, handling angry phonecalls,bad press, etc, and figured this was a net-win, and so they did it. That's all there is to it. You're totally missing the point if you're trying to figure out why verizon is "justified" in making a change to their charges. If you're willing to pay for it, they're justified in charging for it. Nothing else matters in the business world.
I would say "the idea that apps should cost something" is questionable at best,
Some of us choose software development to pay the bills. free doesn't pay the bills. Maybe if the power company did its work for free, along with all the others that invade my mailbox monthly, your idea would work. But not here. Not on this earth.
You may be used to getting free stuff, and you will have that from time to time in many places, but usually the good stuff isn't free. I can go to the local corner cone and get a little sampler cone for free, but if I want the banana split, that's not free, nor should I have any expectation that it's free.
"Beggars can't be choosers". And that's why a lot of the free stuff you can find for linux is low quality, poorly or just plain not supported, or not well optimized to fit your needs. (and I say this as a developer that gives away most of his work already)
Hoard knowledge, make YOUR job smoother, look busy, and remember you are in an ACADEMIC environment. Play that game and don't pretend you aren't in a trade school.
I prefer to take the high road on things like this. Most everywhere I've worked I've coded up things to make my job quicker, easier, and more reliable. The only problem I've really ran into is sometimes they don't want to allow you to bring in code, or there's politics where the "development team" thinks they're the only ones that know what the users need. If you've written code that you are the only one directly benefiting from, on your own time, that will probably only be useful there, you may as well let them have it. But it sounds like you should retain rights to it. I think trying to get money out of it is a waste of effort since you developed it voluntarily on your own time. You have little ground to ask for compensation for it. They really don't have right to it but it'd be a waste not to give it to them. (doesn't sound like they'd use it or really get much value out of it)
Them having it however would as a few others above noted possibly open up some contract work in the future. I wouldn't even bother with a time limit on it, odds are they wouldn't have even figured it out much by the time it expired and they'd probably chuck it and you'd both lose out. But eventually they'll need fixes or updates to it if they get used to using it. So pull the expiration but leave in the contact info. Eventually (or perhaps almost immediately?) you'll start getting calls. After a couple of those free calls, shift into "and now you need to start paying for support" mode. At which point you'll either never hear from them again, or start getting periodic work on the side. This is your best route to get compensated for your work - consider the work you've already put in as a personal investment in crafting the support hook.
I don't understand why they keep investigating and investigating and just won't finally leave google alone. Are they a monopoly? obviously. Do they abuse their monopoly position? That stone's been turned over more times than the average river rock, and nothing's been found. Why don't they give it a rest already?
I can only assume at this point that the others that wish they were in google's position keep lobbying and prodding and whining for still another investigation, if nothing else than to be a thorn in google's side. Nothing's ever going to come of it, it's just a waste of my tax money.
Funny how companies like AT&T can get snowdrifts of consumer complaints, year after year before finally being investigated (once?) and being found abusive and broken up, and yet I don't hear any consumer complaints about Google, just a few bit companies occasionally crying in their beer, yet Google gets hit with inquiries nonstop like flies on honey. Somebody's got their priorities all mixed up. (or is taking payoffs repeatedly from all the wrong characters)
When the ECS system IVSC logic detected a manifold bleed air leak, a C BLEED HOT caution ICAW asserted. In this case, the logic commanded all bleed air regulating shutoff valves to close. This action protects against a bleed air induced aircraft fire. Closing all the valves results in the immediate loss of all ECS bleed and conditioned air flow, removing air flow to the OBOGS unit. The air bleed valves will remain closed for the duration of the flight, even if the caution ICAW clears.
Either I'm reading this wrong, or the fire prevention system closed the inlet valves on the oxygen generation system, and was designed to never reopen them after the fault (over temp) was resolved, until you landed. (maybe requiring a manual physical reset?)
That sounds like a really scary thing - if it thinks there's a fire it's going to cut off your oxygen, forever, to save you.
Reminds me of a STTNG quote. Someone on the holodeck started a campfire, that the ship put out. Discussing with Worf, he says the ship put up a force field around the fire to suffocate the fire. "So what would have happened if the force field would have come up around me?" "Then you would have been standing in the fire!" "Ya, but what would happen?" "You would suffocate, and die." "oh..."
Kind of sounds like what happened here, the fire prevention system created a life-threatening situation, which the pilot wasn't able to cope with. By the time he realized his plane was trying to suffocate him, he wasn't able to activate the emergency air supply. I'd bet with those big gloves on he dropped the release ring and was fiddling with it trying to grab the ring nearly off the floor (and bumping the stick/pedal, causing him to head for a lawn dart maneuver without realizing it) and due to the urgent distraction of getting more air to breathe, by the time he realized he was headed for the dirt it was too late to pull up.
1. why doesn't the plane warn you when you're in what they describe over and over as an "unusual attitude"? I've heard the warning chirps you get when you're close to the ground, that's probably what caused him to "oh, shit!" and pull up on the stick at 3 seconds to ground level. He obviously needed more than that when going mach 1.1 almost straight down. shouldn't the operators at the control room get a notice/warning on this?? "Pilot, you've settled into an unusual attitude, is there a problem?" 2. why were they having trouble figuring out where he crashed, don't they keep real careful track of these planes? 3. why didn't they realize it was more than an "overdue" plane? when your last known position is 200 feet off the ground, going mach 1.1, pointed almost straight down, you don't need a compass and a ruler to figure out what happened to the plane. 4. remote control options? this doesn't look like he lost consciousness but was that even an option if he'd have passed out? 5. why didn't the pilot say anything after acknowledging the regrouping order? "Hey I'm having trouble breathing here!" at least? sounds like an important thing to radio in! 6. surely some of these warnings were visible at the command center? I would have expected communication on the first overtemp warning. "pilot, I'm reading an overtemp warning..."
These pilots appear to be very on their own when they're up in the air. I'd expect a lot better automatic and voluntary communication going from the plane and the pilot, to people back at the base providing continuously available support. This isn't the 1940's, you shouldn't need to wait for the pilots to get back to debrief them to figure out what all went on that afternoon. I really get the feeling nobody was paying any attention to these aircraft during this exercise. If I were planning support I'd have a constant data link from each craft to the ops room, and a dedicated person for each craft in the air, to continuously watch over it and provide exclusive support for that pilot and his craft. I simply can't believe we're not doing this...
if you send an email to someone, using Mac Mail (and they're using Mac Mail) - and you have a PGP private/public key set up already, the recipient will automatically, with no intervention on their behalf, get the public key delivered / installed? I have Mac Mail but I've never looked into this. Sounds very easy for all users at both ends to work with...
Yep. Anytime mail receives an email that has a signature attachment, it will hide the fact that there is an attachment, and will check your keychain. If the public key isn't in your keychain, it will be added. If already present, it will verify the signature using the key in your keychain (not in the message) and will post an alert if the message has been altered in transit. (I've only seen this happen once) For the most part you won't even know any of this is happening. You will notice a security indication at the top that the message is signed though, and if you reply to it you will have the option to encrypt the reply. (it will appear as an open padlock in the upper right) It's all very automatic and transparent until you need it.
The public key is sent as (mime) attachment, and if the recipient has an intelligent email app it will do something like the above and handle it. Otherwise it will display as an attachment that the user probably won't know what to do with. (I get complaints occasionally from Outlook users, "what is this attachment you keep sending me?" "ignore it, silly windows user. or download thunderbird.")
Apple's mail automatically checks your keychain to see if you have a private key available for the mail account you are creating a new message for. And if it's available, you will have the option to check the key signing check box in the upper right. It remembers your last selection, so once you check key signing, all your messages are signed until you turn it off. The signature only works for the email address(es) that's indicated in the key pair. So once you check it, it's completely automatic forever more.
So if I am correct in understanding that you do not need to provide the public key "securely" to the recipient in advance, then basically this entire process is a joke that could be worked around in a couple of minutes, providing nothing but a false sense of security.
Depends on your point of view, as mentioned in my previous post. If you've been exchanging emails with a friend for months or years, and someone decides they want to jack with you, they can't, because both of you will already have the others' public key in the keychains, and you can sign and encrypt at will and there's really nothing they can do to you. (your system will use keys already in the keychain, they don't use the key that's in the message if they already have it) Since the attacher doesn't have either of your private keys (those are never transmitted, that is the nature of public key cryptography) you're fine. They can't alter a message in transit without being detected, and they can't read encrypted messages or attachments.
BUT if you choose to start using public keys, and rely on each of you receiving the other person's just-implemented public key in their next email, you do make yourself vulnerable, that one time. If a man is in the middle, he could grab your public key, strip your signature, roll up his own key, and sign it and forward to your friend. Your friend would then add the attacker's public key to his keychain instead of your key. Now if you send a signed message, the attacker simply strips the sig and adds a new signature using his key, and your friend believes it's authentic. AND if your friend then tries to send an encrypted message back to you, he's using the ATTACKER'S public key, so the attacker can intercept it, decrypt it with his private key, read the message, then turn around and re-encrypt it using YOUR public key that he grabbed earlier, and you get the message, properly encrypted, and don't notice it's been i
it is not necessary to obtain any certificate from an outside source.
True, but many people that require your email to be signed (such as my employer did) require your key to be signed by someone that performs some sort of identity verification.
When I originally had to do this, I actually got my key (for free) from verisign, where they did that "deposit two random small bits of change into your bank account" thing, and then you had to tell them what the amounts were.
I don't think comodo did that with me, it's been awhile since I signed up. I had to switch to them when verisign stopped offering free personal certificates and mine with them expired.
I suppose I could have just rolled up my own self-signed cert when my verisign key expired. but at that time someone suggested comodo and I went with them.
The reason encryption hasn't taken off is that it's not done by default, and can't be enabled by clicking a checkbox.
Mac OS X's Mail client automatically supports PGP email certificates on both send and receive. You have to go sign up for one at some place like comodo, and download the cert. Double click and keychain assistant opens up and asks if you want to import it. Setup is complete.
Now go to your mail app and you will see an open padlock. Any email you send will be automatically signed, and recipients with intelligent email clients will automatically and transparently import your public key into their user's keychain for later use, for both verification of additional received emails and encryption of mail back to you.
If that person clicks reply, they will also have a padlock available, since their system now has your public key, so they can then send an encrypted reply back to you. If they also have a key pair in their keychain, their reply also includes their public key, allowing you to send them encrypted email in the same way. Of course for maximum security you'd need to have a more personal, direct key exchange rather than email, because a tinfoil hat would argue a skilled black hat could be in between you two when you are trying to exchange keys, and be feeding you two false keys. That's where key-signing parties come in.;)
Incredibly easy to use and built-in. Only takes a little effort to go download a free cert from comodo or someone else. What got me into it at first is a previous employer required me to email in my mileage reports for reimbursement, and required me to sign them.
So at least for the mac users, it's ready by default, and is just a check box away.:)
I'm not a drobo fanboy or anything, and they do have a few drawbacks/tradeoffs, but I think it's fair to set the record straight, considering I have personal experience with almost a dozen drobos and have friends with a combined dozens more.
You bought the Drobo because it seemed like the safest way to keep 8TB of storage going, given that that's really hard to back up? Tough tits. Yes, I know "RAID is not a backup" etc, and I did have actual backups from which I restored my data,
You took the words out of my mouth. "Raid is not a backup." Sorry to hear you believed someone, anyone that told you otherwise, but no, RAID is for high capacity, high availability, expandability, on a single volume. It's not universally supported by tools and utilities, it's not super high reliability, and it's certainly not its own backup. They don't run around the room beating a drum screaming the drawbacks of their product, nor dos anyone else. Do your research before you buy. Nothing is perfect, there are always tradeoffs.
Drobo is slow, glacially slow.
I just ran an arbitrary large file read test on a drobo here and it read at 13MB/sec. Yep, that is slow, but not what I'd call "glacial". A lot of the lower quality external USB drives access at 12MB/sec typical. They need to advertise the speeds on their web site, I agree. No, it's not smart to use the drobo for frequent large file IO.
The way Drobo lies to the OS about its capacity and available space, so you have to use the management interface to find out this basic information, will drive you nuts.
Windows and Mac OS X, the primary target platforms for the drobo, have no provision for a flexible pool where the maximum capacity is not the same as the actual current capacity based on pool size. Rant about MS and Apple if you must, but this is in no way Drobo's problem, nor could they or anyone else do it differently if they wanted to. They're required to lie to the OS because there's no way for the drobo to bump available space on demand, nor change the volume capacity on the fly because the OS's simply don't support it. Oh, and there's a green pie icon up in the menubar or down in the tray (depending on your OS) that tells you instantly how you're doing for actual usable space. Without opening their dashboard. Maybe you overlooked that?
And you will live in fear that unmounting the device by any means other than the management software will corrupt your data unrecoverably. Gods forbid you knock the USB cable out by accident.
You do realize this is true of pretty much every raid in existence?
DroboShare is the additional expensive component that turns Drobo from a USB drive into a NAS. It has its own problems. The least of which are that once you switch to DroboShare, neither Time Machine nor Lightroom will let you use the Drobo storage.
There's this check box in your preferences/control panel (depending on your OS) that enables file sharing. Try checking it to solve both of those problems. The droboshare is specifically for when you don't want to tie the drobo to another computer.
And you can use drobo (in either NAS or shared volume configuration) as a time machine backup fairly easily. Try googling for "Time Machine on a network drive" for dozens of people showing you just how to set it up. (JFGI)
You should spend a few minutes looking for answers before declaring a problem a show-stopper.
weight is really easy to figure out, or what I'm assuming you're talking about, mass, since it produces the easily observable effect of gravity
Remember that "weight" is the effect of gravitational attraction between separate bodies that possess mass. You can't talk about "weight" unless you're referring to at least two objects. (usually with great differences in mass, such as a planet and an object on said planet)
You getting decent speed out of those drobos? I have a Gen2 and it's been excruciatingly slow.
Yep, sorry I meant to mention that and forgot. Yes, drobos are SLOW. Very slow write, slow read. Somewhat deceptive of them to put esata and firewire 800 ports on them. That's their biggest drawback IMHO.
Someone above was trying to pass off my "power saw" seagate as a one-bad-experience prejudice... no, not really. I've thrown away more (of my own personal) hard drives than a lot of you will ever own. And here at work I fill boxes with dead hard drives every few months, a feat that very few here can match. That was just the most extreme example. (I could hear the damn thing in my basement when I stepped out of my truck when I got home! I didn't have any idea what awaited me in my house as I nervously unlocked the door) I've bought a lot of seagates in my time, and I don't have a single functional one left to show for it today.
I believe eSATA is up in the 150 MB/s range. To max that, you may need an enclosure that's a RAID in itself.
Depends on the controllers on both ends. Typical speeds are either 1.5 or 3.0 mbps, (I hear 6 is starting to become available?) which should translate to between 165 and 330 MB/sec, at or faster than 10k drives I believe. As a rule I usually take mbps and divide by 9 for MB/sec. (9 instead of 8, seems to account for overhead) The greens aren't too speedy and the last one I bought stated max transfer rate of 89MB/sec, and the enclosure easily hit that. But then you're also possibly limited on your esata adapter on your computer, and I'm just using a cardbus adapter here. I've got esata cards in the server at home too but haven't really tested those much for speed. Backup drives don't really need speed.
There are a number of usb + esata enclosures available fairly cheaply, I've had fairly good luck with them, one had a dead activity light and another has lost its power pack, but other than that not too bad for random purchases. At the time I was just sampling around, looking for esata at under $120 for 1TB ext.
I've bought several dozen hard drives personally over the years, starting with scsi, and I work in a computer repair shop where I've replaced hundreds of failing and dead drives over my time, so I've got a pretty good sample size to work with.
Long ago I used to buy quantum and seagate because I didn't have the money for backups and so I needed to rely on quality and warranty. Quantum was one of the best quality going, and seagate ruled the roost with its 5 year warranties.
But as the years passed, lots of HDD manufacturers got bought out. Quantum went with IBM and quality absolutely flushed down the toilet about the time of the "IBM Deskstar/Deathstar debacle. Seagate also got bought out, and their quality went south as expected, but their warranties remained at 5 yr for most models.
I continued to buy seagates, until I got so sick of dealing with failing drives and RMA hassles. I bought my last seagate about 2 years ago. (a pair of them) Two weeks after purchase, one of them suffered one of the loudest catastrophic head crashes I have ever heard - the drive sounded like an operating circular handsaw. (best buy was even surprised by the sound when I returned it) They offered me an immediate new replacement, and I instead got my money and bought a different brand. Now I see they're finally dropping their warranties, probably after an extended period of losing their shirts due to a never-ending flood of RMAs.
So at this point I'm down to looking for quality, and only expecting a 1 or 2 yr warranty. Western Digital used to be crap, but while other brands went down in quality, WD seems to have come up. I'm still seeing a lot of samsung drives failing but they've improved. Haven't seen enough toshibas to really have an opinion on them, but I generally haven't had good experiences, especially with their externals. Right now I'm buying WD greens, they're cheap and fairly reliable. I try to avoid buying drives already in enclosures, because it's been my experience that they put the cheapest thing they can find in them, especially the USB-only enclosures, those are generally junk and slow to boot.
May as well throw in my 2c on enclosures also. You get what you pay for when buying a single drive enclosure. A cheap usb-only case is going to be slow and I would be very surprised if the AC adapter lasts more than 2 yrs. My personal favorite at this time is made by OWC, their Mercury Elite Pro, it's got esata, dual fw800, fw400, and usb. USB speed can get up near 38mb/sec, fw400 and 800 top at theoretical maxes of 39 and 79, and esata I have yet to discover the speed limit on, it maxes the drives I have attached. $80 seems like a lot for an empty case, but it's worth it. Two at home and two at work, here I use them for data recovery because they're also tolerant of failing drives.
If you need more storage, go with a Drobo. One at home and one here at work, I know a dozen people that have them and nobody has any complaints, they work as advertised, are easy for even a newbie to maintain, and so far have proven very safe. Stuff a drobo full of WD greens for cheap, reliable, large storage.
I read recently that the American Red Cross is one of several charities that "carefully walk the line" of being a nonprofit organization, and that 49% of their take goes to "administrative costs". (their "administrative staff" are very well-paid) Can anyone confirm or deny this?
In the case of fast food, no reasonable person over the age of three expects to actually get a burger that looks like the picture.
If that alone were just allowable justification for manipulating ads, then they would be allowed to put a note somewhere in the ad (just as the mascara ad has done) to make sure that "every reasonable person knows this is BS".
In the case of the food, I am paying cash in advance at window 1 for what's in the picture on the glass. That's what I should be reasonably able to expect to receive at window 2. Now yes, everyone that has any experience with fast food restaurants knows this isn't how it works, but that's due to experience, not due to reasonable assumption. Take someone from another country that has never been to a fast food joint and see how they cry foul, "that looks very different than the picture in the window!" Just because you're used to how certain groups reliably false-advertise doesn't make it an acceptable behavior.
Just because you're used to someone trying to deceive you it doesn't mean they're not actually engaging in deceptive behavior.
They're photshopping. Or at least they were recently, I think they got caught. This spring I think it was they put up the pictures in the window of the new triple stacker burgers, compared to the double stacker. One day while waiting at the drive-thru I looked carefully and realized the top buns were identical. (sesame seed placement the same) Closer inspection showed the top and bottom of the double and triple stacker were pixel-for-pixel identical, they appear to have started with a triple stacker and "deleted" a layer for the double stacker.
I was tempted to contact them on this, but never got around to it. Not too much later I noticed the ad in the window, though it looked identical, had received a burger change, and now the burgers were more unique looking. So I suppose they got called out on it?
I think where they get away with this is they are a franchise and no doubt in their training etc they are telling their outlets that they are supposed to aim for making their product look identical to the ad. (an impossible task for sure, and they know it since they supply most of the raw ingredients and equipment) But then you look at "the standard" and then to look and realize that 0% are getting even close. I'd call it false advertising even when trying to hide under this.
Even so, of all the computers in your house, this is the oddest choice for using as a router. Why not.. um.. your router?
To take some of the load off your other hardware maybe. Though the router is where a LOT of things would make more sense to run if you could - bittorrent for example. no needing to deal with one computer on your network trying to bury your router with connections.
Slashdot Mirror
And just as naturally, within two weeks at least five new sites had already sprung up to fill its place. Two of the best remain to this day and are doing just as good of a job.
Until the government has absolute control over the people, when the majority of the people want something, a handful will step up to the plate and keep the game of whack-a-mole going. While the politicians and laws are technically supposed to be supported by the majority, it's the actual public support in venus such as this that truly demonstrates the "will of the majority". When there is a differing opinion between these two, it's easily argued to be the former that does not truly represent the majority opinion.
looks like it took out a Fire Emitting Transistor in the power supply section of the board...
Good times, seeing what happens when you let out the Magic Smoke.
I was surprised by the picture, how it's of the exact same style as the //c. Same color, looks like the same injection-molding matte finish, the (cosmetic only?) vent slots under the handset. The size and placement of the big colorful apple logo. It was probably designed to be a matched set.
There were black and white LCD screens you could buy (for close to the cost of the computer, iirc) that attached onto the case and flipped down flat on the computer when not in use. (a bit like a notebook computer in that respect) Combine that with the other offerings of the day, a large briefcase size affair that carried the computer, a smaller keyboard, and a small pack of batteries, and you could turn the computer into something truly portable.
I don't understand why the //c had that handle on it... if you were going to be going portable with it you weren't likely going to be carrying the computer around bare by its handle.
Once life gets going and has managed to develop evolutionary mechanisms such as sex and dna, (neither of which are specifically required) life tends to become highly adaptable and resilient to changing conditions. The problem is getting there in the first place. That first "spark of life" collection of molecules that can reproduce has to happen from an incredibly good stroke of luck.
The odds of that incredibly rare event happening are made possible by and improved on by favorable conditions. Liquid water, atmosphere, a water cycle, abundant energy, and a magnetic field are all part of that "thumb on the wheel", improving the odds of genesis occurring here on earth.
But they're not required. The only thing that is probably actually required is a liquid cycle of some sort, to provide a circulation of materials because original life was almost certainly not capable of locomotion, and an abundant source of energy. I've read several papers on a plausible genesis based on a liquid methane cycle.
Several conditions on earth are probably not even optimal. The low temperature and pressure of our atmosphere for example - someplace more like Venus has an edge on Earth in that respect. Part of why people tend to think of water/carbon as necessary is they are assuming earth's low pressure and temperature. Molecules get a lot more flexible under those different conditions. If you have "water tunnel-vision" you may completely discount a place like venus where liquid water can't really exist in any quantity.
I think it's fair to argue that some combination of a liquid cycle where the liquid is at a reactive temperature and pressure are probably almost required for genesis. I hesitate to flat out say "required" because a sufficiently lucky turn of events can lead to genesis even in the most apparently unfavorable conditions imaginable. But we can't really get anything accomplished unless we set some constraints on things and try to look at more "reasonable" scenarios. Even though the number of exoplanets in existence is nearly infinite for our practical purposes, it is a finite number, and odds must come into play. Just because there's a ton of planets out there doesn't mean a bunch of them have life. Without any control point of reference it's hard to argue that even just earth in the universe having life was anything but a stroke of incredible luck. We're probably a lot more special than any of us can possibly imagine.
What idiot thinks that "voluntary self-policing" works in any for-profit business? There are two fundamental problems with that plan: (1) businesses will only "volunteer" to do what benefits them, not the public, and (2) many businesses are surprisingly short-sighted and will only "volunteer" to do things that help their industry or their business in the short-term.
This has nothing to do with how much it costs verizon. Businesses do not charge you based on what their costs are. They charge you based on what you are willing to pay.
Quit arguing over whether or not the charge is justified. It doesn't HAVE to be justified. Either you're willing to pay it or you're not. Somewhere some verizon bean counters ran all the hard math that factors in their actual costs, in terms of providing the service, loss of business, handling angry phonecalls,bad press, etc, and figured this was a net-win, and so they did it. That's all there is to it. You're totally missing the point if you're trying to figure out why verizon is "justified" in making a change to their charges. If you're willing to pay for it, they're justified in charging for it. Nothing else matters in the business world.
Some of us choose software development to pay the bills. free doesn't pay the bills. Maybe if the power company did its work for free, along with all the others that invade my mailbox monthly, your idea would work. But not here. Not on this earth.
You may be used to getting free stuff, and you will have that from time to time in many places, but usually the good stuff isn't free. I can go to the local corner cone and get a little sampler cone for free, but if I want the banana split, that's not free, nor should I have any expectation that it's free.
"Beggars can't be choosers". And that's why a lot of the free stuff you can find for linux is low quality, poorly or just plain not supported, or not well optimized to fit your needs. (and I say this as a developer that gives away most of his work already)
I prefer to take the high road on things like this. Most everywhere I've worked I've coded up things to make my job quicker, easier, and more reliable. The only problem I've really ran into is sometimes they don't want to allow you to bring in code, or there's politics where the "development team" thinks they're the only ones that know what the users need. If you've written code that you are the only one directly benefiting from, on your own time, that will probably only be useful there, you may as well let them have it. But it sounds like you should retain rights to it. I think trying to get money out of it is a waste of effort since you developed it voluntarily on your own time. You have little ground to ask for compensation for it. They really don't have right to it but it'd be a waste not to give it to them. (doesn't sound like they'd use it or really get much value out of it)
Them having it however would as a few others above noted possibly open up some contract work in the future. I wouldn't even bother with a time limit on it, odds are they wouldn't have even figured it out much by the time it expired and they'd probably chuck it and you'd both lose out. But eventually they'll need fixes or updates to it if they get used to using it. So pull the expiration but leave in the contact info. Eventually (or perhaps almost immediately?) you'll start getting calls. After a couple of those free calls, shift into "and now you need to start paying for support" mode. At which point you'll either never hear from them again, or start getting periodic work on the side. This is your best route to get compensated for your work - consider the work you've already put in as a personal investment in crafting the support hook.
but then I saw the author wasn't Snape...
Two words: "Training Exercise"
I don't understand why they keep investigating and investigating and just won't finally leave google alone. Are they a monopoly? obviously. Do they abuse their monopoly position? That stone's been turned over more times than the average river rock, and nothing's been found. Why don't they give it a rest already?
I can only assume at this point that the others that wish they were in google's position keep lobbying and prodding and whining for still another investigation, if nothing else than to be a thorn in google's side. Nothing's ever going to come of it, it's just a waste of my tax money.
Funny how companies like AT&T can get snowdrifts of consumer complaints, year after year before finally being investigated (once?) and being found abusive and broken up, and yet I don't hear any consumer complaints about Google, just a few bit companies occasionally crying in their beer, yet Google gets hit with inquiries nonstop like flies on honey. Somebody's got their priorities all mixed up. (or is taking payoffs repeatedly from all the wrong characters)
Either I'm reading this wrong, or the fire prevention system closed the inlet valves on the oxygen generation system, and was designed to never reopen them after the fault (over temp) was resolved, until you landed. (maybe requiring a manual physical reset?)
That sounds like a really scary thing - if it thinks there's a fire it's going to cut off your oxygen, forever, to save you.
Reminds me of a STTNG quote. Someone on the holodeck started a campfire, that the ship put out. Discussing with Worf, he says the ship put up a force field around the fire to suffocate the fire. "So what would have happened if the force field would have come up around me?" "Then you would have been standing in the fire!" "Ya, but what would happen?" "You would suffocate, and die." "oh..."
Kind of sounds like what happened here, the fire prevention system created a life-threatening situation, which the pilot wasn't able to cope with. By the time he realized his plane was trying to suffocate him, he wasn't able to activate the emergency air supply. I'd bet with those big gloves on he dropped the release ring and was fiddling with it trying to grab the ring nearly off the floor (and bumping the stick/pedal, causing him to head for a lawn dart maneuver without realizing it) and due to the urgent distraction of getting more air to breathe, by the time he realized he was headed for the dirt it was too late to pull up.
1. why doesn't the plane warn you when you're in what they describe over and over as an "unusual attitude"? I've heard the warning chirps you get when you're close to the ground, that's probably what caused him to "oh, shit!" and pull up on the stick at 3 seconds to ground level. He obviously needed more than that when going mach 1.1 almost straight down. shouldn't the operators at the control room get a notice/warning on this?? "Pilot, you've settled into an unusual attitude, is there a problem?"
2. why were they having trouble figuring out where he crashed, don't they keep real careful track of these planes?
3. why didn't they realize it was more than an "overdue" plane? when your last known position is 200 feet off the ground, going mach 1.1, pointed almost straight down, you don't need a compass and a ruler to figure out what happened to the plane.
4. remote control options? this doesn't look like he lost consciousness but was that even an option if he'd have passed out?
5. why didn't the pilot say anything after acknowledging the regrouping order? "Hey I'm having trouble breathing here!" at least? sounds like an important thing to radio in!
6. surely some of these warnings were visible at the command center? I would have expected communication on the first overtemp warning. "pilot, I'm reading an overtemp warning..."
These pilots appear to be very on their own when they're up in the air. I'd expect a lot better automatic and voluntary communication going from the plane and the pilot, to people back at the base providing continuously available support. This isn't the 1940's, you shouldn't need to wait for the pilots to get back to debrief them to figure out what all went on that afternoon. I really get the feeling nobody was paying any attention to these aircraft during this exercise. If I were planning support I'd have a constant data link from each craft to the ops room, and a dedicated person for each craft in the air, to continuously watch over it and provide exclusive support for that pilot and his craft. I simply can't believe we're not doing this...
For all three of them that survive long enough to get "upgraded" you mean?
Yep. Anytime mail receives an email that has a signature attachment, it will hide the fact that there is an attachment, and will check your keychain. If the public key isn't in your keychain, it will be added. If already present, it will verify the signature using the key in your keychain (not in the message) and will post an alert if the message has been altered in transit. (I've only seen this happen once) For the most part you won't even know any of this is happening. You will notice a security indication at the top that the message is signed though, and if you reply to it you will have the option to encrypt the reply. (it will appear as an open padlock in the upper right) It's all very automatic and transparent until you need it.
The public key is sent as (mime) attachment, and if the recipient has an intelligent email app it will do something like the above and handle it. Otherwise it will display as an attachment that the user probably won't know what to do with. (I get complaints occasionally from Outlook users, "what is this attachment you keep sending me?" "ignore it, silly windows user. or download thunderbird.")
Apple's mail automatically checks your keychain to see if you have a private key available for the mail account you are creating a new message for. And if it's available, you will have the option to check the key signing check box in the upper right. It remembers your last selection, so once you check key signing, all your messages are signed until you turn it off. The signature only works for the email address(es) that's indicated in the key pair. So once you check it, it's completely automatic forever more.
Depends on your point of view, as mentioned in my previous post. If you've been exchanging emails with a friend for months or years, and someone decides they want to jack with you, they can't, because both of you will already have the others' public key in the keychains, and you can sign and encrypt at will and there's really nothing they can do to you. (your system will use keys already in the keychain, they don't use the key that's in the message if they already have it) Since the attacher doesn't have either of your private keys (those are never transmitted, that is the nature of public key cryptography) you're fine. They can't alter a message in transit without being detected, and they can't read encrypted messages or attachments.
BUT if you choose to start using public keys, and rely on each of you receiving the other person's just-implemented public key in their next email, you do make yourself vulnerable, that one time. If a man is in the middle, he could grab your public key, strip your signature, roll up his own key, and sign it and forward to your friend. Your friend would then add the attacker's public key to his keychain instead of your key. Now if you send a signed message, the attacker simply strips the sig and adds a new signature using his key, and your friend believes it's authentic. AND if your friend then tries to send an encrypted message back to you, he's using the ATTACKER'S public key, so the attacker can intercept it, decrypt it with his private key, read the message, then turn around and re-encrypt it using YOUR public key that he grabbed earlier, and you get the message, properly encrypted, and don't notice it's been i
True, but many people that require your email to be signed (such as my employer did) require your key to be signed by someone that performs some sort of identity verification.
When I originally had to do this, I actually got my key (for free) from verisign, where they did that "deposit two random small bits of change into your bank account" thing, and then you had to tell them what the amounts were.
I don't think comodo did that with me, it's been awhile since I signed up. I had to switch to them when verisign stopped offering free personal certificates and mine with them expired.
I suppose I could have just rolled up my own self-signed cert when my verisign key expired. but at that time someone suggested comodo and I went with them.
Mac OS X's Mail client automatically supports PGP email certificates on both send and receive. You have to go sign up for one at some place like comodo, and download the cert. Double click and keychain assistant opens up and asks if you want to import it. Setup is complete.
Now go to your mail app and you will see an open padlock. Any email you send will be automatically signed, and recipients with intelligent email clients will automatically and transparently import your public key into their user's keychain for later use, for both verification of additional received emails and encryption of mail back to you.
If that person clicks reply, they will also have a padlock available, since their system now has your public key, so they can then send an encrypted reply back to you. If they also have a key pair in their keychain, their reply also includes their public key, allowing you to send them encrypted email in the same way. Of course for maximum security you'd need to have a more personal, direct key exchange rather than email, because a tinfoil hat would argue a skilled black hat could be in between you two when you are trying to exchange keys, and be feeding you two false keys. That's where key-signing parties come in. ;)
Incredibly easy to use and built-in. Only takes a little effort to go download a free cert from comodo or someone else. What got me into it at first is a previous employer required me to email in my mileage reports for reimbursement, and required me to sign them.
So at least for the mac users, it's ready by default, and is just a check box away. :)
I'm not a drobo fanboy or anything, and they do have a few drawbacks/tradeoffs, but I think it's fair to set the record straight, considering I have personal experience with almost a dozen drobos and have friends with a combined dozens more.
You took the words out of my mouth. "Raid is not a backup." Sorry to hear you believed someone, anyone that told you otherwise, but no, RAID is for high capacity, high availability, expandability, on a single volume. It's not universally supported by tools and utilities, it's not super high reliability, and it's certainly not its own backup. They don't run around the room beating a drum screaming the drawbacks of their product, nor dos anyone else. Do your research before you buy. Nothing is perfect, there are always tradeoffs.
I just ran an arbitrary large file read test on a drobo here and it read at 13MB/sec. Yep, that is slow, but not what I'd call "glacial". A lot of the lower quality external USB drives access at 12MB/sec typical. They need to advertise the speeds on their web site, I agree. No, it's not smart to use the drobo for frequent large file IO.
Windows and Mac OS X, the primary target platforms for the drobo, have no provision for a flexible pool where the maximum capacity is not the same as the actual current capacity based on pool size. Rant about MS and Apple if you must, but this is in no way Drobo's problem, nor could they or anyone else do it differently if they wanted to. They're required to lie to the OS because there's no way for the drobo to bump available space on demand, nor change the volume capacity on the fly because the OS's simply don't support it. Oh, and there's a green pie icon up in the menubar or down in the tray (depending on your OS) that tells you instantly how you're doing for actual usable space. Without opening their dashboard. Maybe you overlooked that?
You do realize this is true of pretty much every raid in existence?
There's this check box in your preferences/control panel (depending on your OS) that enables file sharing. Try checking it to solve both of those problems. The droboshare is specifically for when you don't want to tie the drobo to another computer.
And you can use drobo (in either NAS or shared volume configuration) as a time machine backup fairly easily. Try googling for "Time Machine on a network drive" for dozens of people showing you just how to set it up. (JFGI)
You should spend a few minutes looking for answers before declaring a problem a show-stopper.
weight is really easy to figure out, or what I'm assuming you're talking about, mass, since it produces the easily observable effect of gravity
Remember that "weight" is the effect of gravitational attraction between separate bodies that possess mass. You can't talk about "weight" unless you're referring to at least two objects. (usually with great differences in mass, such as a planet and an object on said planet)
Yep, sorry I meant to mention that and forgot. Yes, drobos are SLOW. Very slow write, slow read. Somewhat deceptive of them to put esata and firewire 800 ports on them. That's their biggest drawback IMHO.
Someone above was trying to pass off my "power saw" seagate as a one-bad-experience prejudice... no, not really. I've thrown away more (of my own personal) hard drives than a lot of you will ever own. And here at work I fill boxes with dead hard drives every few months, a feat that very few here can match. That was just the most extreme example. (I could hear the damn thing in my basement when I stepped out of my truck when I got home! I didn't have any idea what awaited me in my house as I nervously unlocked the door) I've bought a lot of seagates in my time, and I don't have a single functional one left to show for it today.
Depends on the controllers on both ends. Typical speeds are either 1.5 or 3.0 mbps, (I hear 6 is starting to become available?) which should translate to between 165 and 330 MB/sec, at or faster than 10k drives I believe. As a rule I usually take mbps and divide by 9 for MB/sec. (9 instead of 8, seems to account for overhead) The greens aren't too speedy and the last one I bought stated max transfer rate of 89MB/sec, and the enclosure easily hit that. But then you're also possibly limited on your esata adapter on your computer, and I'm just using a cardbus adapter here. I've got esata cards in the server at home too but haven't really tested those much for speed. Backup drives don't really need speed.
There are a number of usb + esata enclosures available fairly cheaply, I've had fairly good luck with them, one had a dead activity light and another has lost its power pack, but other than that not too bad for random purchases. At the time I was just sampling around, looking for esata at under $120 for 1TB ext.
I've bought several dozen hard drives personally over the years, starting with scsi, and I work in a computer repair shop where I've replaced hundreds of failing and dead drives over my time, so I've got a pretty good sample size to work with.
Long ago I used to buy quantum and seagate because I didn't have the money for backups and so I needed to rely on quality and warranty. Quantum was one of the best quality going, and seagate ruled the roost with its 5 year warranties.
But as the years passed, lots of HDD manufacturers got bought out. Quantum went with IBM and quality absolutely flushed down the toilet about the time of the "IBM Deskstar/Deathstar debacle. Seagate also got bought out, and their quality went south as expected, but their warranties remained at 5 yr for most models.
I continued to buy seagates, until I got so sick of dealing with failing drives and RMA hassles. I bought my last seagate about 2 years ago. (a pair of them) Two weeks after purchase, one of them suffered one of the loudest catastrophic head crashes I have ever heard - the drive sounded like an operating circular handsaw. (best buy was even surprised by the sound when I returned it) They offered me an immediate new replacement, and I instead got my money and bought a different brand. Now I see they're finally dropping their warranties, probably after an extended period of losing their shirts due to a never-ending flood of RMAs.
So at this point I'm down to looking for quality, and only expecting a 1 or 2 yr warranty. Western Digital used to be crap, but while other brands went down in quality, WD seems to have come up. I'm still seeing a lot of samsung drives failing but they've improved. Haven't seen enough toshibas to really have an opinion on them, but I generally haven't had good experiences, especially with their externals. Right now I'm buying WD greens, they're cheap and fairly reliable. I try to avoid buying drives already in enclosures, because it's been my experience that they put the cheapest thing they can find in them, especially the USB-only enclosures, those are generally junk and slow to boot.
May as well throw in my 2c on enclosures also. You get what you pay for when buying a single drive enclosure. A cheap usb-only case is going to be slow and I would be very surprised if the AC adapter lasts more than 2 yrs. My personal favorite at this time is made by OWC, their Mercury Elite Pro, it's got esata, dual fw800, fw400, and usb. USB speed can get up near 38mb/sec, fw400 and 800 top at theoretical maxes of 39 and 79, and esata I have yet to discover the speed limit on, it maxes the drives I have attached. $80 seems like a lot for an empty case, but it's worth it. Two at home and two at work, here I use them for data recovery because they're also tolerant of failing drives.
If you need more storage, go with a Drobo. One at home and one here at work, I know a dozen people that have them and nobody has any complaints, they work as advertised, are easy for even a newbie to maintain, and so far have proven very safe. Stuff a drobo full of WD greens for cheap, reliable, large storage.
I read recently that the American Red Cross is one of several charities that "carefully walk the line" of being a nonprofit organization, and that 49% of their take goes to "administrative costs". (their "administrative staff" are very well-paid) Can anyone confirm or deny this?
If that alone were just allowable justification for manipulating ads, then they would be allowed to put a note somewhere in the ad (just as the mascara ad has done) to make sure that "every reasonable person knows this is BS".
In the case of the food, I am paying cash in advance at window 1 for what's in the picture on the glass. That's what I should be reasonably able to expect to receive at window 2. Now yes, everyone that has any experience with fast food restaurants knows this isn't how it works, but that's due to experience, not due to reasonable assumption. Take someone from another country that has never been to a fast food joint and see how they cry foul, "that looks very different than the picture in the window!" Just because you're used to how certain groups reliably false-advertise doesn't make it an acceptable behavior.
Just because you're used to someone trying to deceive you it doesn't mean they're not actually engaging in deceptive behavior.
They're photshopping. Or at least they were recently, I think they got caught. This spring I think it was they put up the pictures in the window of the new triple stacker burgers, compared to the double stacker. One day while waiting at the drive-thru I looked carefully and realized the top buns were identical. (sesame seed placement the same) Closer inspection showed the top and bottom of the double and triple stacker were pixel-for-pixel identical, they appear to have started with a triple stacker and "deleted" a layer for the double stacker.
I was tempted to contact them on this, but never got around to it. Not too much later I noticed the ad in the window, though it looked identical, had received a burger change, and now the burgers were more unique looking. So I suppose they got called out on it?
I think where they get away with this is they are a franchise and no doubt in their training etc they are telling their outlets that they are supposed to aim for making their product look identical to the ad. (an impossible task for sure, and they know it since they supply most of the raw ingredients and equipment) But then you look at "the standard" and then to look and realize that 0% are getting even close. I'd call it false advertising even when trying to hide under this.
To take some of the load off your other hardware maybe. Though the router is where a LOT of things would make more sense to run if you could - bittorrent for example. no needing to deal with one computer on your network trying to bury your router with connections.