No. Dry/alcohol/detergents/disinfectants do wonders to kill bacteria, but do very little against viruses. Viruses like dry, and wet shortens their lifetime unless good media. I'd wipe down any touchable surfaces with an ammonia solution, then neutralize with vinegar. pH shock those RNA strands.
It rather bothers me when vendors and other strong advocates push their points (whatever those might be) without the slightest consideration of objections, as if there were none possible. The technique of the BigLie.
Of course a netadmin has to monitor traffic. How else to assure good service? But what information is necessary and how it should be used ought to be carefully governed by ethics. Unfortunately, these ethics are not well known, and frequently violated by the concept of "owner privilige" (often might makes right). Essentially ignoring any notion of customer rights and treating employees as serfs. Both have been known to rebel for cause.
It is the deplorable state of IT ethics that is the root cause of many of these controversial actions.
The very best way to learn skepticism and critical thinking is to attend a US public school, preferably overcrowded with underpaid and subcompetent teachers and administrators.
These adults will give years worth of daily examples of unreasonableness, injustices, violations of rights and arbitrary abuse of formal power. I can think of no better example.
True, better teachers and administrators will certainly teach the 3Rs much better. But between teaching remediable subject-matter and skepticism towards authority, IMHO the latter is _far_ more important. The US might well have the worlds best school system, but not for the reasons usually considered!
ECHELON was funamentally justified somewhat differently -- the UK would spy on US territory, and the US would spy on UK territory. This is nominally legal under the guise of national intelligence efforts against a potential/past enemy. Then they would share information under the guise of international law enforcement. What is clearly illegal (verging on treason) is the willful failure of counterintelligence -- the US & the UK have a duty to protect their citizens against foreign spying of all kinds. Instead, they have facilitated it.
This trawl is quite different -- it is under the guise of Customs. All countries exert jurisdiction on what is allowed to unter their country, and under what conditions (payment of duty). Many (US included) exert similar jurisdiction over what is allowed to leave their country. Of course this requires detailed inspection, and has always been held to include information as well as physical objects.
Absent encryption (not legal everywhere), email is not private. Consider it a postcard.
Many people do not realize it, but the United States exerts very strong jurisdiction and control over all exports. This dates back to the 1790s when export of certain pine logs was prohibited because the British Navy could use them in warships.
So lobby your congresscritter to have the relevant technologies added to the Commerce Control List. Ty-Raps large enough to be used as handcuffs are already there for exactly this reason. It might not stop the Chinesee, but it will stop American facilitation. The penalties are hefty.
Doh! This is a long-known effect going by the name "Ethernet Capture Effect", and TCP streams are especially vulnerable. Even moreso on asymmetric links.
It works like this: if the upstream bandwidth is saturated, TCP ACK packets get delayed and the sender slows transmission so the downstream bandwidth does not get fully utilised.
There is no solution other than throttling the upstream senders (AFAIK good P2P software has settings). Note larger send buffers in broadband modems actually exacerbate the problem by taking longer to flush. Best to keep them empty, and th only way is throttling.
Not that [ISP] managment have ever been known for great intelligence, but throttling connections via RESET is just plain dumb. The client will just retry and extra data transferred.
The correct (and difficult to detect) way of throttling is by delaying ACK packets a few ms. Then normal TCP congestion control does all the nice throttling for you.
The ethics of throttling are a different matter: one side says they've been promised unlimited, and the other wants to be fair to all customers.
I thought there was and extremely powerful multiplier effect between silicosis&asbestosis and smoking or other lung tar. Essentially that the tar prevented/slowed the lungs from clearing the particulate matter so it causes much (25x?) greater damage. Sorry, I don't have a reference.
Yes, I realize SEL is more a security module[s]. But is there one/several for Firefox preconfigured? Flexibility (aka "power") is good, but requires admin effort. Some of this can be saved with intelligent defaults. When you haul them out of the base code, you owe the user some guidence.
While I have some interest in seeing these crackdowns, I feel the main topic goes undiscussed: What functionality is being sacrificed for security? I don't see any mention SEL will run Firefox.
Microsloth is only very slowing coming around to the idea of user accounts and privilege isolation (badly implemented in MS-Windows-Vista) in spite of repeated warnings from the NIST and the longtime availability of NIST Registry patches. While MS might be suboptimizing for low early user-support calls, they are not entirely stupid and must have chosen low security defaults for some reasons.
Until these reasons for low security are thoroughly discussed and refuted, that model will persist. "Better safe than sorry" convinces only those already convinced. I say: Better neither than either.
Per MHz or per MB licencing fees are nothing new at all. Workload or utility concept, and they've been around for years on mainframes. A little surprising that it took M$ so long to get around to them. Or not.
The real news here is that M$ is taking Linux seriously enough to be worth fighting.
Well, I didn't know cabelco were quite so pro-active as cutting someone off mid-month and banning them for a year. But OTOH, you can ban them for _life_ simply by boycotting them. They can't stop you any more than you should be able to stop them.
Within the racial (and other) anti-discrimination laws, why shouldn't they be able to ban you? They're not a charity, nor a monopoly nor a regulated public utility. Need or convenience is not a right of claim. You have alternatives.
Then nothing is "unlimited" because there always are technological limitations. You will notice they do add that disclaimer, and indicate it applies everywhere. Also carefully notice Cablecos do not say they will never take deliberate throttling actions. They say you'll get "X depending on technical considerations". Said technical considerating might well include throttling to allow [excessive] other customers access.
"unlimited" does not mean "unthorttled". "Limited" access would be limited in time or volume. AFAIK, no-one has suggested that. They mearly wish to slow down the hogs.
Yes, that's true. You can always sue. At best You could get one month's service or your modem for free. Maybe you'd have to return it. Quite possibly the court might view "unlimited usage" in the context advertised, that of household usage shown in the materials. Then you'd get nothing.
But the one thing you cannot force is continued service at your idea of "unlimited". Especially without any big upfront payment.
Thank you for the correction and spec sheet. My main point stands even stronger -- premix 2-stroke engines (especially high speed like probable in aircraft) not only throw lots of NOx but also emit lots of unburnt/partial-comb HC. Some places limit lawn-mtce engines.
I didn't see any mention of a catalytic converter on the spec sheet:)
Why not smaller later impacts? The big one would probably have liquified (basalt flows) the entire surfaces. Smaller, later impacts from trojans could have formed larger features (lunar maria) or fissured eather's supercontinents.
Sorry, I'm not paranoid. Go peddle your fear somewhere else. Yes, there are real threats. There is also a cost both in money and peace-of-mind of fighting them.
There is a balance to be struck, and "Better safe than sorry" can be answered "better neither than either".
It might well be that MS pricing is too high. It's rather high in the US, where MS-Windows may cost 33% of the machine purchase price (for low-end machines). Whence people calling it the MS tax.
Furthermore, US law seems to accept grey market good and rules anti-grey measures as anti-competitive (illegal) behaviour. So MS cannot segment markets as much as they might like.
But I simply remember Napoleon: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the middle of making a mistake."
Sure, the statistic may be correct, but it can also be meaningless -- take BR biz income (a relatlively small number because it excludes local barter) and divide by a huge population and you get a small number, easily and incongruously compared against MS Windows licence costs.
For a concrete example of abuse by statistics, consider that in the US, MS-Windows licence costs exceed the total annual income of at least 50% of all computer users [kids!]
Please do not mistake me for an MS-toad. Personally, any MS licence cost above large negative numbers is overcharging. I have to be _paid_ to use MS products.
I'm somewhat mystified at the DoJ behaviour. They are tasked with enforcing US federal law, and have been granted extraordinary powers to do so. Whatsa matter? Men with heavy guns and judicial immunity isn't enough?:)
The DoJ (and all govt entities) are creations of law,NOT any sort of corporation or moral person and are not entitled to any sort of opinion. Any expression of opinion seriously undermines the democratic process since it generally favors incumbents.
There is a clear line between answering questions and trying pro-actively to shape opinion. And they've crossed it. As they have many other lines.:( worst is they appear not to understand why what they've done on these occasions might be wrong and generally justify it as "safety" which is not theirs to decide.
Agreed the suicide had the opportunity to put their affairs in order, so the property [files] is presumed to pass to estate and heiritors.
However, this would not hold true for any material the deceased attempted or intended to delete. Deleted files and sectors are a clear example. History and cache are a grey area -- many people do not know they exist, so cannot make an intelligent decision.
Ok, so I'm a little retro. I've just [reluctantly] upgraded from lynx to link to get tables and table layout.
Everything still runs pretty fast, certainly much faster than those few occasions when I need graphics or https: and run Firefox. The difference is noticable on all machines, and greatest (~2x) on the slower ones.
Sometimes formatting gets messed up, but the main content is still in text and still very readable.
Slashdot Mirror
No. Dry/alcohol/detergents/disinfectants do wonders to kill bacteria, but do very little against viruses. Viruses like dry, and wet shortens their lifetime unless good media. I'd wipe down any touchable surfaces with an ammonia solution, then neutralize with vinegar. pH shock those RNA strands.
Of course a netadmin has to monitor traffic. How else to assure good service? But what information is necessary and how it should be used ought to be carefully governed by ethics. Unfortunately, these ethics are not well known, and frequently violated by the concept of "owner privilige" (often might makes right). Essentially ignoring any notion of customer rights and treating employees as serfs. Both have been known to rebel for cause.
It is the deplorable state of IT ethics that is the root cause of many of these controversial actions.
These adults will give years worth of daily examples of unreasonableness, injustices, violations of rights and arbitrary abuse of formal power. I can think of no better example.
True, better teachers and administrators will certainly teach the 3Rs much better. But between teaching remediable subject-matter and skepticism towards authority, IMHO the latter is _far_ more important. The US might well have the worlds best school system, but not for the reasons usually considered!
This trawl is quite different -- it is under the guise of Customs. All countries exert jurisdiction on what is allowed to unter their country, and under what conditions (payment of duty). Many (US included) exert similar jurisdiction over what is allowed to leave their country. Of course this requires detailed inspection, and has always been held to include information as well as physical objects.
Absent encryption (not legal everywhere), email is not private. Consider it a postcard.
So lobby your congresscritter to have the relevant technologies added to the Commerce Control List. Ty-Raps large enough to be used as handcuffs are already there for exactly this reason. It might not stop the Chinesee, but it will stop American facilitation. The penalties are hefty.
It works like this: if the upstream bandwidth is saturated, TCP ACK packets get delayed and the sender slows transmission so the downstream bandwidth does not get fully utilised.
There is no solution other than throttling the upstream senders (AFAIK good P2P software has settings). Note larger send buffers in broadband modems actually exacerbate the problem by taking longer to flush. Best to keep them empty, and th only way is throttling.
The correct (and difficult to detect) way of throttling is by delaying ACK packets a few ms. Then normal TCP congestion control does all the nice throttling for you.
The ethics of throttling are a different matter: one side says they've been promised unlimited, and the other wants to be fair to all customers.
Microsloth is only very slowing coming around to the idea of user accounts and privilege isolation (badly implemented in MS-Windows-Vista) in spite of repeated warnings from the NIST and the longtime availability of NIST Registry patches. While MS might be suboptimizing for low early user-support calls, they are not entirely stupid and must have chosen low security defaults for some reasons.
Until these reasons for low security are thoroughly discussed and refuted, that model will persist. "Better safe than sorry" convinces only those already convinced. I say: Better neither than either.
The real news here is that M$ is taking Linux seriously enough to be worth fighting.
Within the racial (and other) anti-discrimination laws, why shouldn't they be able to ban you? They're not a charity, nor a monopoly nor a regulated public utility. Need or convenience is not a right of claim. You have alternatives.
"unlimited" does not mean "unthorttled". "Limited" access would be limited in time or volume. AFAIK, no-one has suggested that. They mearly wish to slow down the hogs.
But the one thing you cannot force is continued service at your idea of "unlimited". Especially without any big upfront payment.
The contract is month-to-month (minus equipment lock-in), either party can leave.
Sorry, I have no sympathy for hogs and lots for those on shared circuits whose traffic gets squeezed.
I didn't see any mention of a catalytic converter on the spec sheet
A good time was not had by all :)
... at least know how to tell HW & SW faults apart.
There is a balance to be struck, and "Better safe than sorry" can be answered "better neither than either".
It might well be that MS pricing is too high. It's rather high in the US, where MS-Windows may cost 33% of the machine purchase price (for low-end machines). Whence people calling it the MS tax.
Furthermore, US law seems to accept grey market good and rules anti-grey measures as anti-competitive (illegal) behaviour. So MS cannot segment markets as much as they might like.
But I simply remember Napoleon: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the middle of making a mistake."
For a concrete example of abuse by statistics, consider that in the US, MS-Windows licence costs exceed the total annual income of at least 50% of all computer users [kids!]
Please do not mistake me for an MS-toad. Personally, any MS licence cost above large negative numbers is overcharging. I have to be _paid_ to use MS products.
The DoJ (and all govt entities) are creations of law,NOT any sort of corporation or moral person and are not entitled to any sort of opinion. Any expression of opinion seriously undermines the democratic process since it generally favors incumbents.
There is a clear line between answering questions and trying pro-actively to shape opinion. And they've crossed it. As they have many other lines. :( worst is they appear not to understand why what they've done on these occasions might be wrong and generally justify it as "safety" which is not theirs to decide.
However, this would not hold true for any material the deceased attempted or intended to delete. Deleted files and sectors are a clear example. History and cache are a grey area -- many people do not know they exist, so cannot make an intelligent decision.
Everything still runs pretty fast, certainly much faster than those few occasions when I need graphics or https: and run Firefox. The difference is noticable on all machines, and greatest (~2x) on the slower ones.
Sometimes formatting gets messed up, but the main content is still in text and still very readable.