If anybody is hogging bandwidth, you can just tap them on the shoulder and tell them to knock it off.
Except when the hog is a neighbor who has discovered the free access and is running a Kazaa file sharing client or doing some other high-bandwidth use activity. Remember, this is wireless - the person using the bandwidth might not always be visible to you.
I'm looking for a very, very small case. Something that would fit a regular sized hard drive, a mini-ITX via board, a slim PSU, and that's it.
Here is perhaps a starting point: mini-itx.com. I have no clue how good the store is, but they at least list specs and names so you can look around for the best site to buy the cases from.
There is always a project box from RadioShack, good for building your own small projects. There might be one that will fit your needs.
To take that concept one more step read Kiln People by David Brin. You can make an infinite number of clones of yourself that each last a few hours to a few days, and if you wish you can download the memories the clone experiences during his/her "life"
While I was watching Paycheck I was thinking the same thing. I loved how Brin handled the concept of having multiple copies of yourself running around and doing your business, all secretly hoping that they would get uploaded back into the original so they could live for more than the day or so they would normally have. Kiln People is a totally brilliant piece of literature.
With the patch, you instead get an unprotected AAC file.
Which is why I said it was similar. Yes the AAC has been unencrypted but that was done by iTunes, not by the patch. It's not a crack, it's a capture. The format itself has not been broken, you are just using the decrypted output in a different way.
People said the same thing about ATM machines in the 80's but look at where are today. Only the old grannies pay extra to talk to real live bank tellers.
Yeah and we pay a fee on every transaction for the privilege of using ATM machines, which save banks tons of money since they don't have to pay it a salary to sit there and dispense money. Go figure.
I say forget using ATM machines. Go inside with granny and force the bank to hire more tellers. Maybe then they will get the point and eliminate the ATM fees.
With iTunes you get 10 CD burns per playlist. However, just make a new playlist and drag the songs over to it and you get 10 more burns, repeat ad infinitum. There really is no limit to the total number of CD burns.
The DRM in the iTunes Music Store is more of a speed bump than a road block. It's pretty much the bare minimum needed to be able to sell the music. You hardly even notice it because it is so minimal. I bet you can count on one hand the number of people who LEGALLY need to burn a playlist to more than 10 CDs.
With iTunes you're locked into the iPod, with the other stores you're locked into DRM-supporting WMA portables.
Not true. With iTunes you can burn a CD and play that on any CD player, totally DRM-free. If you want to you can also re-rip those songs off the CD into any format you choose, again totally DRM-free. Then they can be played on any player you want.
Also, I personally would rather buy music from iTunes, because the M4P format has been cracked.
The M4P format has not been cracked at all. What was done was someone patched the binaries of iTunes so that they could capture the unencrypted data while it was being played (or streamed, I forget which). That data can then be re-captured into a DRM-free format. It's basically similar to burning a CD and then ripping it, without the CD step.
The advantages to iTunes and the iTunes Music Store are the awesome user interface, the minimal DRM, the song selection, the exclusive tracks. the iPod, its cross-platform nature, and the fact that it will be around for a while considering it has at least 50% of the market.
Oh right, if you know where they are on the land surface and you know the height of that point then it's trivial to predict 3 coordinates. Of course you are still getting them in 2 places, it's just that one of them is probably off the surface and can be eliminated.
Basically you are using extra data (a topological map and the assumption they are at surface level) to substitute for the last tower.
Knowing height does not require 4 towers, 3 works it requires that one tower is straight above one of the other two.
3 does not work for triangulating in 3 dimensions. No matter how the towers are placed their positions can all be contained in one plane. Since in 3 dimensions your distance from each tower will define a sphere, the intersection of the spheres drawn around two of the towers will define a circle perpendicular to a line drawn between those two towers. A sphere drawn around the third tower will intersect that circle in at most 2 points. To decide between those 2 points you need another sphere drawn around a fourth tower. Thus in 3 dimensions you need a minimum of 4 towers.
Oh, and if those three towers are in a straight line then they only count as two towers, if the four towers are on a single plane then they only count as three towers.
If all you know is distance and location of towers then in order to triangulate a position you will almost always need at least 1 more tower than the number of coordinates you are determining.
With GSM base stations you also to consider the fact that a cell is divided into several sectors, which are nothing more than oriented antenas that face a certain direction. This means that in many cases you only need data from 2 base stations, because (as you mentioned) you get cross points for 2 circles, but you can discard one point as it doesn't lie in the sector my phone is in.
Right, I was considering that the only information you had was distance from tower and position of tower. If you have more information such as direction of signal then you could conceivably even only use 1 tower. It would just be distance and direction - that's standard polar coordinates.
Of course these measurements are extremely imprecise. In reality you would need a bunch of towers to pinpoint a signal with any sort of accuracy.
To pin someone down in 2 dimensions (that is, not considering height) you need 3 towers.
Picture it this way:
They know you are x distance from tower 1 so they draw a circle of x radius from tower 1.
They also know that you are y distance from tower 2 so they draw a circle of y radius from tower 2.
If you are along a line drawn directly between the two towers then the two circles will touch at one point. However, this is very unlikely. It is more likely that you are off to the side of a line connecting the two towers. In that case the two circles will touch in two places and they won't know which point you are at.
Now if they know you are z distance from tower 3 they can draw a circle of x radius from tower 3.
Within reason the 3 circles drawn will all touch at 1 point, that is where you are.
If they want to know your height they would need at least 4 towers. Any towers beyond what they need will add to the accuracy of finding your exact location. It is common for triangulation to use 7 or 8 points in order to increase the accuracy.
I guess my suspicion that such a post could only come from an Apple shill isn't so far from the truth.
If he is such a shill then why did he offer to host the video in the first place. In fact he even did host it for a while, until he realized that the authors of the video had no desire to properly represent the situation by posting the fact that Apple had recently added replacement and insurance programs.
Secondly, car parts (and entire engines for that matter) are replaceable items. Sure, some of them you can do yourself, and others required an experienced mechanic. There are certain items like batteries, belts, filters, etc. in a car that are known wear items with known wear intervals. Consumer electronics should be the same way.
Uh yeah. As Apple (and others) have stated, the known wear interval for the polymer lithium battery is approximately 500 full charge cycles. You can get a few more if you don't always completely drain and completely fill the battery but in general you can expect that after approximately 500 cycles the battery will have significantly lowered performance.
Second, whose cell phone batteries are only $10? A new lithium-ion battery for my phone costs about $50, and that's just something you can snap on and off yourself. To have someone open up your iPod and replace the battery, then mail it back...doesn't sound that unreasonable.
Right, these batteries alone cost close to $50. Now Apple is doing the work to open up the iPod and replace the battery. The labor is probably another $50. $50 + $50 = $100, hence why they are charging $99 for replacement battery service.
Are they making money on it? I'm sure they are making some money on it, but they are not making a killing on it.
Should the batteries last longer? They can't, the technology on batteries is they only get 500 or so recharges before they kick the bucket.
Should the batteries be user-replaceable? Perhaps, but then they have to change the case design so that it can be easily opened. This means creating a partition inside the iPod to separate the battery from the rest of the components, plus adding some sort of securing mechanism to open and close the battery compartment, plus reinforcing the whole thing so that it doesn't crumple or pop open if the iPod is dropped. This means an increase in size, weight, and complexity - the very things Apple has tried to avoid with the iPods.
Finally, if you don't like it then that's why Apple is now offering an extended warranty on their iPods. It is $60 for 2 years extended warranty coverage. This covers pretty much anything happening to the iPod and is a total replacement policy with shipping included. No too bad of a dead when you consider that a $500 iPod whose battery dies out at 18 months will get replaced with a brand-new $500 iPod.
Every motorized flight that happened before the Wright Brothers was uncontrolled, and most of them crashed.
This is entirely untrue. If you will follow my earlier link concerning Whitehead you will see that his flight in 1901 was every bit as controlled as the Wrights' flight in 1903. In fact, it was more controlled since according to the accounts Whitehead travelled a longer distance and was able to bank to avoid some trees.
Yeah there are considerably better claims to the title of "First in flight" than the Wright Brothers. Unfortunately we are stuck with an inaccurate account of history as usual. It just goes to show that history is written by the victors...
Well I also live pretty damn close to Captain's Cove * and I do know that there is a replica that has flown. Replica 21B, constructed in Whitehead's home town of Leutershausen, Germany, flew 500 meters in its longest test flight. This craft was first tested on September 12th, 1997, in Manching, Germany.
There are many reports that Whitehead did fly his craft in a controlled manner. The problem is that Whitehead was broke, convinced that there was no future in flight, and never got a photo of the plane in flight. It also didn't help that he was German and World War I broke out not too long afterwards. He never got the fame and publicity that the Wright brothers did and so his achievements were easily overshadowed by the Wright brothers. This includes deals made between the Wright brothers and the Smithsonian, where the Smithsonian was given an aircraft and equipment by the Wright family on condition that no one else would be put forth as flying before the Wright brothers. If the Smithsonian were to do so the donated aircraft and all would revert back to the Wright family.
And it's a damn shame that the HMS Rose had to get sold off, although it was good seeing her in "Master and Commander".
* Next town over, Stratford. My family used to dock a boat at the Cove before Captains Cove was built up with all the shops.
* 1903: Orville & Wilbur Wright achieve controlled, manned flight (but birds fly on a regular basis)
* 1947: Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier in a military aircraft (but ordinary people fly on a regular basis)
* 2003: Brian Binnie breaks the sound barrier in a home-built spacecraft prototype (but ordinary people fly faster than sound on a regular basis)
* 2050: What's the next big advance when ordinary people fly to space on a regular basis?
You forgot one important date in the list there:
* 1901: Gustave A. Whitehead (Weisskopf) flies the first motorized airplane for a distance of 1/2 mile.
Contrary to what most people think, the Wright Brothers were not the "first in flight". Gustave Whitehead achieved motorized airplane flight over 2 years prior to the Wright Brother's maiden flight. Read more about it on this web site.
Mac os 9 was completly safe to the outside world. AFIK there were no remote holes - now it did crash every ten to fifteen minutes on me, but I've never seen remote vulnerablitly.
The classic Mac OS's did have vulnerabilities, but they were not well-documented and sporadic. In certain places bad coding produced code that was vulnerable to buffer overflow exploits. However, those are difficult to use under the best of circumstances.
Because Mac OS did not run on x86 hardware it had a different stack structure. Not only that but the processors used have always been big-endian. In order to exploit the buffer overflow vulnerabilities you would need to code in PowerPC assembler, using big-endian, and in a manner able to exploit the stack structure of Mac OS. This is a tall order because it is uncommon enough that there is not many resources out there on how to do it. Script kiddies thrive on these exploits in the x86 world because there is a ton of info on how to do it.
Not only that but Apple's development is pretty tight and planned and they did nip a lot of these invunerabilities in the bud before they became common knowledge. So no Mac OS, classic or modern, has ever been completely bulletproof but it has been a very hard target to hit for exploiters. So hard. in fact, that almost no attempts have been made
Although, if I had several grand lying around, I'd probably investigate getting a Mac of some sort. OSX looks damn pretty, and I love the way it's supposed to "just work".
You know, the funny thing is that it does look pretty but it looks pretty in such a way that you don't notice it. The operating system pretty much stays out of your way and lets you work uninhibited while still looking good.
In a way, I think that's how it should be. An operating system shouldn't be so flashy and good-looking that it overwhelms your work. It should be a clean type of good-looking, which is what Mac OS X does admirably. The added benefits of stability, connectivity, toolset, nice hardware, etc. are all icing on the cake. I truly haven't had to worry about my operating system getting in my way for years now, ever since Mac OS X 10.1 or so.
No I didn't miss his point, he posted two links. One was to the Google form of the New York Times link, the other to Slashdot's subscription service.
The New York Times makes you jump through hoops to read their site so I instead posted a link to a another news agency that does not do this. I'd rather have people go to the no-registration Seattle Post-Intelligencer so that it gets the ad revenue rather than the registration-required New York Times.
Even better, go to a news site that doesn't require you to jump through hoops in order to view their site. Here is the exact same article (NO registration required) found at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
The attacker must: Be on your local network Already have control of your DHCP server
You forgot one important thing - you must also reboot. If you don't reboot your Netinfo daemon doesn 't pick up the new information supplied by the poisoned DHCP server. So the attacker must also trick you into restarting your computer.
In short, yes this is a potential exploit but an extremely unlikely one. By the time the attacker does all of these things he probably would have been better off just walking over to your computer and stealing it from you.
There was one really rare track I wanted (a recording of a slave field hollar by Henry Ratcliff, recorded by Alan Lomax)
It doesn't happen to be called "Louisiana" does it? If so then it is in the Apple iTunes Music Store, right here. (link brings you to the iTunes Music Store) iTMS has a ton of albums recorded by Alan Lomax.
Slashdot Mirror
Except when the hog is a neighbor who has discovered the free access and is running a Kazaa file sharing client or doing some other high-bandwidth use activity. Remember, this is wireless - the person using the bandwidth might not always be visible to you.
Here is perhaps a starting point: mini-itx.com. I have no clue how good the store is, but they at least list specs and names so you can look around for the best site to buy the cases from.
There is always a project box from RadioShack, good for building your own small projects. There might be one that will fit your needs.
Remember, Google is your friend: search for project boxes
While I was watching Paycheck I was thinking the same thing. I loved how Brin handled the concept of having multiple copies of yourself running around and doing your business, all secretly hoping that they would get uploaded back into the original so they could live for more than the day or so they would normally have. Kiln People is a totally brilliant piece of literature.
Which is why I said it was similar. Yes the AAC has been unencrypted but that was done by iTunes, not by the patch. It's not a crack, it's a capture. The format itself has not been broken, you are just using the decrypted output in a different way.
Yeah and we pay a fee on every transaction for the privilege of using ATM machines, which save banks tons of money since they don't have to pay it a salary to sit there and dispense money. Go figure.
I say forget using ATM machines. Go inside with granny and force the bank to hire more tellers. Maybe then they will get the point and eliminate the ATM fees.
With iTunes you get 10 CD burns per playlist. However, just make a new playlist and drag the songs over to it and you get 10 more burns, repeat ad infinitum. There really is no limit to the total number of CD burns.
The DRM in the iTunes Music Store is more of a speed bump than a road block. It's pretty much the bare minimum needed to be able to sell the music. You hardly even notice it because it is so minimal. I bet you can count on one hand the number of people who LEGALLY need to burn a playlist to more than 10 CDs.
Not true. With iTunes you can burn a CD and play that on any CD player, totally DRM-free. If you want to you can also re-rip those songs off the CD into any format you choose, again totally DRM-free. Then they can be played on any player you want.
The M4P format has not been cracked at all. What was done was someone patched the binaries of iTunes so that they could capture the unencrypted data while it was being played (or streamed, I forget which). That data can then be re-captured into a DRM-free format. It's basically similar to burning a CD and then ripping it, without the CD step.
The advantages to iTunes and the iTunes Music Store are the awesome user interface, the minimal DRM, the song selection, the exclusive tracks. the iPod, its cross-platform nature, and the fact that it will be around for a while considering it has at least 50% of the market.
Yeah, we all listen to Playboy for the articles. Yeah that's the ticket, the articles...
Oh right, if you know where they are on the land surface and you know the height of that point then it's trivial to predict 3 coordinates. Of course you are still getting them in 2 places, it's just that one of them is probably off the surface and can be eliminated.
Basically you are using extra data (a topological map and the assumption they are at surface level) to substitute for the last tower.
3 does not work for triangulating in 3 dimensions. No matter how the towers are placed their positions can all be contained in one plane. Since in 3 dimensions your distance from each tower will define a sphere, the intersection of the spheres drawn around two of the towers will define a circle perpendicular to a line drawn between those two towers. A sphere drawn around the third tower will intersect that circle in at most 2 points. To decide between those 2 points you need another sphere drawn around a fourth tower. Thus in 3 dimensions you need a minimum of 4 towers.
Oh, and if those three towers are in a straight line then they only count as two towers, if the four towers are on a single plane then they only count as three towers.
If all you know is distance and location of towers then in order to triangulate a position you will almost always need at least 1 more tower than the number of coordinates you are determining.
Right, I was considering that the only information you had was distance from tower and position of tower. If you have more information such as direction of signal then you could conceivably even only use 1 tower. It would just be distance and direction - that's standard polar coordinates.
Of course these measurements are extremely imprecise. In reality you would need a bunch of towers to pinpoint a signal with any sort of accuracy.
To pin someone down in 2 dimensions (that is, not considering height) you need 3 towers.
Picture it this way:
If they want to know your height they would need at least 4 towers. Any towers beyond what they need will add to the accuracy of finding your exact location. It is common for triangulation to use 7 or 8 points in order to increase the accuracy.
Uh yeah. As Apple (and others) have stated, the known wear interval for the polymer lithium battery is approximately 500 full charge cycles. You can get a few more if you don't always completely drain and completely fill the battery but in general you can expect that after approximately 500 cycles the battery will have significantly lowered performance.
Right, these batteries alone cost close to $50. Now Apple is doing the work to open up the iPod and replace the battery. The labor is probably another $50. $50 + $50 = $100, hence why they are charging $99 for replacement battery service.
Are they making money on it? I'm sure they are making some money on it, but they are not making a killing on it.
Should the batteries last longer? They can't, the technology on batteries is they only get 500 or so recharges before they kick the bucket.
Should the batteries be user-replaceable? Perhaps, but then they have to change the case design so that it can be easily opened. This means creating a partition inside the iPod to separate the battery from the rest of the components, plus adding some sort of securing mechanism to open and close the battery compartment, plus reinforcing the whole thing so that it doesn't crumple or pop open if the iPod is dropped. This means an increase in size, weight, and complexity - the very things Apple has tried to avoid with the iPods.
Finally, if you don't like it then that's why Apple is now offering an extended warranty on their iPods. It is $60 for 2 years extended warranty coverage. This covers pretty much anything happening to the iPod and is a total replacement policy with shipping included. No too bad of a dead when you consider that a $500 iPod whose battery dies out at 18 months will get replaced with a brand-new $500 iPod.
This is entirely untrue. If you will follow my earlier link concerning Whitehead you will see that his flight in 1901 was every bit as controlled as the Wrights' flight in 1903. In fact, it was more controlled since according to the accounts Whitehead travelled a longer distance and was able to bank to avoid some trees.
Yeah there are considerably better claims to the title of "First in flight" than the Wright Brothers. Unfortunately we are stuck with an inaccurate account of history as usual. It just goes to show that history is written by the victors...
Well I also live pretty damn close to Captain's Cove * and I do know that there is a replica that has flown. Replica 21B, constructed in Whitehead's home town of Leutershausen, Germany, flew 500 meters in its longest test flight. This craft was first tested on September 12th, 1997, in Manching, Germany.
There are many reports that Whitehead did fly his craft in a controlled manner. The problem is that Whitehead was broke, convinced that there was no future in flight, and never got a photo of the plane in flight. It also didn't help that he was German and World War I broke out not too long afterwards. He never got the fame and publicity that the Wright brothers did and so his achievements were easily overshadowed by the Wright brothers. This includes deals made between the Wright brothers and the Smithsonian, where the Smithsonian was given an aircraft and equipment by the Wright family on condition that no one else would be put forth as flying before the Wright brothers. If the Smithsonian were to do so the donated aircraft and all would revert back to the Wright family.
And it's a damn shame that the HMS Rose had to get sold off, although it was good seeing her in "Master and Commander".
* Next town over, Stratford. My family used to dock a boat at the Cove before Captains Cove was built up with all the shops.
You forgot one important date in the list there:
Contrary to what most people think, the Wright Brothers were not the "first in flight". Gustave Whitehead achieved motorized airplane flight over 2 years prior to the Wright Brother's maiden flight. Read more about it on this web site.
The classic Mac OS's did have vulnerabilities, but they were not well-documented and sporadic. In certain places bad coding produced code that was vulnerable to buffer overflow exploits. However, those are difficult to use under the best of circumstances.
Because Mac OS did not run on x86 hardware it had a different stack structure. Not only that but the processors used have always been big-endian. In order to exploit the buffer overflow vulnerabilities you would need to code in PowerPC assembler, using big-endian, and in a manner able to exploit the stack structure of Mac OS. This is a tall order because it is uncommon enough that there is not many resources out there on how to do it. Script kiddies thrive on these exploits in the x86 world because there is a ton of info on how to do it.
Not only that but Apple's development is pretty tight and planned and they did nip a lot of these invunerabilities in the bud before they became common knowledge. So no Mac OS, classic or modern, has ever been completely bulletproof but it has been a very hard target to hit for exploiters. So hard. in fact, that almost no attempts have been made
You know, the funny thing is that it does look pretty but it looks pretty in such a way that you don't notice it. The operating system pretty much stays out of your way and lets you work uninhibited while still looking good.
In a way, I think that's how it should be. An operating system shouldn't be so flashy and good-looking that it overwhelms your work. It should be a clean type of good-looking, which is what Mac OS X does admirably. The added benefits of stability, connectivity, toolset, nice hardware, etc. are all icing on the cake. I truly haven't had to worry about my operating system getting in my way for years now, ever since Mac OS X 10.1 or so.
No I didn't miss his point, he posted two links. One was to the Google form of the New York Times link, the other to Slashdot's subscription service.
The New York Times makes you jump through hoops to read their site so I instead posted a link to a another news agency that does not do this. I'd rather have people go to the no-registration Seattle Post-Intelligencer so that it gets the ad revenue rather than the registration-required New York Times.
Even better, go to a news site that doesn't require you to jump through hoops in order to view their site. Here is the exact same article (NO registration required) found at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
You forgot one important thing - you must also reboot. If you don't reboot your Netinfo daemon doesn 't pick up the new information supplied by the poisoned DHCP server. So the attacker must also trick you into restarting your computer.
In short, yes this is a potential exploit but an extremely unlikely one. By the time the attacker does all of these things he probably would have been better off just walking over to your computer and stealing it from you.
It doesn't happen to be called "Louisiana" does it? If so then it is in the Apple iTunes Music Store, right here. (link brings you to the iTunes Music Store) iTMS has a ton of albums recorded by Alan Lomax.