WPA, which stands for 'Wi-Fi Protected Access', is the replacement for WEP. It does a prima facia good job making up for WEP's flaws. Several companies have firmware updates and drivers to enable WPA. More are coming.
If you want strong protection, use it in combination with 802.1x authentication with a TLS (and accept the infrastructure problem), PEAP (and choose between the incompatible v1 or v2 versions of it, and I personally can never remember which it is MS supports), or TTLS.
For even stronger protection, turn on 'session resumption' on your.1X client (if you can), and return a Session-Timeout of a few minutes. You'll effectively completely rekey (start from new material, in addition to the rekeying WPA provides.
Efficiency - the shuttle was designed to be readily reusable and cheaper than throw-away rockets. It has not proven such.
Safety - Things _are_ pretty safe, but not safe enough. Newer tech is significantly better.
Smaller is safer, and easier to deal with: why the dual-use of sending people and stuff together? Send up 'stuff and supplies' in unmanned ships, send up 'people' in transports, and don't do both at the same time.
Numbers - There are no longer enough shuttles to sustain an op-tempo that can help get real science done.
Cheaper is better. And unmanned is cheaper and less risky. 4 unmanned launches to every manned launch should be a goal.
What we need is more space _exploitation_, not exploration: we need to get a manufacturing capability out of the gravity well, using ambient energy. For instance, some very finely tuned instruments are best constructed in space. Eventually, we need to exploit other resources, further away from us.
_THEN_, and only then, we can go to Mars.
Along this line, split the team up in two halfs (at random): have each challenge the other with some technical problem, where they have to ask debugging questions which are 'simulated' by the challenging team (if I do this, what happens). Certainly, the stronger thinkers in the group will dominate, but the point is to show how strong thinkers think strongly, isn't it?
If you are a co-loc provider, where the person configures and runs their own machine and firewall and can take steps to minimize this sort of attack, then you have no responsibility: you are merely providing bandwidth.
If you control shared servers and/or if you do not give users a configurable blocking mechanism (firewall, IP addr/range blocker, for web services a bogus URL block or the ability to ban individuals who spam sites) then you are, in fact, responsible for the bogus bandwidth usage.
I've recently begun using a service offered by my ISP, using my personal domain's 'catch-all' mail account to track who is selling my name, and to be able to filter based on that.
Is there a place for individual efforts like 'throw-away' email accounts to combat spam, or does this really need to be a community effort? Could there be a role for a DNS-like registry, where in order to send mail, you need to be a person or entity who can be gotten in touch with (and thus, smacked around appropriately)?
I'm curious: are there any materials out there with the following properties, which would make them suitable for use in this context?
1) High Thermal Conductivity
2) Very high electrical Resistance (insulators)
3) Fluid at ~0-200 degrees C
If there are no suitable fluids, perhaps merely a powdered solid would be workable
4) Low chemical reactivity - not poisonous or corrosive.
I envision a change in packaging where the
1) silicon wafer is mounted on a stand-off inside a thin composite, mostly electrically insulated 'tube' (see 2), so that a fluid as above could entirely bathe the chip
2) the connections of the chip connect to discrete contact points (possibly in three dimensions) which are conductors through the tube to the outside, which are the 'pins' of the IC.
3) Fluid is constantly pumped through the package, going to a (variously sized) 'vat' of fluid: once the heat is away from the pinpoint source, it is very much easier to cool.
Hi,
Slow as it has, purify/quantify type tools (that track and display memory leaks and time sinks, respectively) have gotten better.
I had a Quantify-like ability in the OS I worked on in the 80s (PRIMOS), called PBHIST, for process something (block?) historesis. But, I find quantify very useful (except that it slows things down inordinately for really large systems) for point-optimizations.
Purify integrated into an IDE has very high bug-finding value. Consistently running purify with a solid unit-testing suite is going to save you many headaches down the road.
-J
Hi,
The truth is, one of the key components one looks at is net income (how much money comes to you), and not core earnings (profits). If the net income growth is vectoring upwards, and profits are still positive, that company is good for the long term: this is a 'successfully managed company'.
Think of it this way: a company that makes $1.00 a year on revenues of 1B is frequently "worth more" than one that makes $1M on revenues of 10M, since you can almost _always_ manage your way smaller (tighten expenses, cost-of-doing-business, etc), and it's really hard to manage your way larger: if the money isn't already moving through you to begin with, you have to 'do something hard', like make a new product, invent something, a new service, to bring the money to you.
The fact that most of these business areas are raking in the revenue means that they really are 'investing', instead of merely taking the loss to bend the market to their will.
For instance, they spent 628M to make 531M: you don't think they could cut out 100M on MSN to make it profitable, or at least not a loss? They surely could, but I bet that they would harm their long-term growth of income. XBox is a little egregious: made 505M, spent 682M. CE/Mobility is just right for a 'start-up': made 17M, spent 40M. Now, if these continue for several years at these levels, then you might question, but XBox is relatively new, CE/MObility has become 'hot' recently, MSN probably doubles as a way to defray (hide) some of their existing costs (hosting microsoft.com, msdn, etc) that might be associated with other business units, etc.
-J
Hi,
I've been using an Interfaces Keyboard (by Cramer, which I think is sold under a couple of other names) which is totally split down the center (the '6' is repeated on both sides, but the keyboard splits at tgb and yhn.), and I have had significantly reduced RSI problems (I used to have to wear wrist splints and had shooting pains).
I keep the two halfs of the keyboard about a keyboard width apart (I know because I have a keyboard in the middle of the two halves that I don't use that often, which goes to a test machine). This allows me to sit up straight, keep my elbows on my armrests, my palms on the palm rest, and keeps my wrists in a totally neutral position. It took me exactly 1 day to get used to it, and return to my fairly high typing speed.
Secondly, there is an embedded touch-pad (I'd almost like a track point) that I use constantly just slightly offset from the keyboard, so I don't have to move my hands over to a mouse. It's effectively far quicker.
I decided that the chair-arm-mounts that can be purchased with this keyboard were a good idea, but insufficiently adjustable for my rather long arms, so I'd have to sit with my elbows behind my trunk, which doesn't seem like a hot idea.
The only goofy thing I've found about the keyboard is that it doesn't work well with any of the Keyboard/Monitor switchs I've used. Other than that, I've found the keyboard a tremendous benefit.
-J
Slashdot Mirror
WPA, which stands for 'Wi-Fi Protected Access', is the replacement for WEP. It does a prima facia good job making up for WEP's flaws. Several companies have firmware updates and drivers to enable WPA. More are coming.
.1X client (if you can), and return a Session-Timeout of a few minutes. You'll effectively completely rekey (start from new material, in addition to the rekeying WPA provides.
If you want strong protection, use it in combination with 802.1x authentication with a TLS (and accept the infrastructure problem), PEAP (and choose between the incompatible v1 or v2 versions of it, and I personally can never remember which it is MS supports), or TTLS.
For even stronger protection, turn on 'session resumption' on your
Efficiency - the shuttle was designed to be readily reusable and cheaper than throw-away rockets. It has not proven such. Safety - Things _are_ pretty safe, but not safe enough. Newer tech is significantly better. Smaller is safer, and easier to deal with: why the dual-use of sending people and stuff together? Send up 'stuff and supplies' in unmanned ships, send up 'people' in transports, and don't do both at the same time. Numbers - There are no longer enough shuttles to sustain an op-tempo that can help get real science done. Cheaper is better. And unmanned is cheaper and less risky. 4 unmanned launches to every manned launch should be a goal. What we need is more space _exploitation_, not exploration: we need to get a manufacturing capability out of the gravity well, using ambient energy. For instance, some very finely tuned instruments are best constructed in space. Eventually, we need to exploit other resources, further away from us. _THEN_, and only then, we can go to Mars.
Along this line, split the team up in two halfs (at random): have each challenge the other with some technical problem, where they have to ask debugging questions which are 'simulated' by the challenging team (if I do this, what happens). Certainly, the stronger thinkers in the group will dominate, but the point is to show how strong thinkers think strongly, isn't it?
If you control shared servers and/or if you do not give users a configurable blocking mechanism (firewall, IP addr/range blocker, for web services a bogus URL block or the ability to ban individuals who spam sites) then you are, in fact, responsible for the bogus bandwidth usage.
I've recently begun using a service offered by my ISP, using my personal domain's 'catch-all' mail account to track who is selling my name, and to be able to filter based on that. Is there a place for individual efforts like 'throw-away' email accounts to combat spam, or does this really need to be a community effort? Could there be a role for a DNS-like registry, where in order to send mail, you need to be a person or entity who can be gotten in touch with (and thus, smacked around appropriately)?
1) High Thermal Conductivity
2) Very high electrical Resistance (insulators)
3) Fluid at ~0-200 degrees C
If there are no suitable fluids, perhaps merely a powdered solid would be workable
4) Low chemical reactivity - not poisonous or corrosive.
I envision a change in packaging where the
1) silicon wafer is mounted on a stand-off inside a thin composite, mostly electrically insulated 'tube' (see 2), so that a fluid as above could entirely bathe the chip
2) the connections of the chip connect to discrete contact points (possibly in three dimensions) which are conductors through the tube to the outside, which are the 'pins' of the IC.
3) Fluid is constantly pumped through the package, going to a (variously sized) 'vat' of fluid: once the heat is away from the pinpoint source, it is very much easier to cool.
-J
Hi, Slow as it has, purify/quantify type tools (that track and display memory leaks and time sinks, respectively) have gotten better. I had a Quantify-like ability in the OS I worked on in the 80s (PRIMOS), called PBHIST, for process something (block?) historesis. But, I find quantify very useful (except that it slows things down inordinately for really large systems) for point-optimizations. Purify integrated into an IDE has very high bug-finding value. Consistently running purify with a solid unit-testing suite is going to save you many headaches down the road. -J
Hi, The truth is, one of the key components one looks at is net income (how much money comes to you), and not core earnings (profits). If the net income growth is vectoring upwards, and profits are still positive, that company is good for the long term: this is a 'successfully managed company'. Think of it this way: a company that makes $1.00 a year on revenues of 1B is frequently "worth more" than one that makes $1M on revenues of 10M, since you can almost _always_ manage your way smaller (tighten expenses, cost-of-doing-business, etc), and it's really hard to manage your way larger: if the money isn't already moving through you to begin with, you have to 'do something hard', like make a new product, invent something, a new service, to bring the money to you. The fact that most of these business areas are raking in the revenue means that they really are 'investing', instead of merely taking the loss to bend the market to their will. For instance, they spent 628M to make 531M: you don't think they could cut out 100M on MSN to make it profitable, or at least not a loss? They surely could, but I bet that they would harm their long-term growth of income. XBox is a little egregious: made 505M, spent 682M. CE/Mobility is just right for a 'start-up': made 17M, spent 40M. Now, if these continue for several years at these levels, then you might question, but XBox is relatively new, CE/MObility has become 'hot' recently, MSN probably doubles as a way to defray (hide) some of their existing costs (hosting microsoft.com, msdn, etc) that might be associated with other business units, etc. -J
> I have even made new discoveries out there. How do you know they are new? Hence, the benefit of more formal education in mathematics. -J
Hi, I've been using an Interfaces Keyboard (by Cramer, which I think is sold under a couple of other names) which is totally split down the center (the '6' is repeated on both sides, but the keyboard splits at tgb and yhn.), and I have had significantly reduced RSI problems (I used to have to wear wrist splints and had shooting pains). I keep the two halfs of the keyboard about a keyboard width apart (I know because I have a keyboard in the middle of the two halves that I don't use that often, which goes to a test machine). This allows me to sit up straight, keep my elbows on my armrests, my palms on the palm rest, and keeps my wrists in a totally neutral position. It took me exactly 1 day to get used to it, and return to my fairly high typing speed. Secondly, there is an embedded touch-pad (I'd almost like a track point) that I use constantly just slightly offset from the keyboard, so I don't have to move my hands over to a mouse. It's effectively far quicker. I decided that the chair-arm-mounts that can be purchased with this keyboard were a good idea, but insufficiently adjustable for my rather long arms, so I'd have to sit with my elbows behind my trunk, which doesn't seem like a hot idea. The only goofy thing I've found about the keyboard is that it doesn't work well with any of the Keyboard/Monitor switchs I've used. Other than that, I've found the keyboard a tremendous benefit. -J