block chains either have to go to a central authority or they have to be distributed among a limited set of nodes that that sync to maintain the longest chain.
If you want it to be secure then I think that you either have to use a very expensive hash and pay the Miner (like bit coin proof of work) or you have to limit this to a distributed set of miner nodes that use a shared secret.
one of the other has to be in place I think because otherwise anyone coutd forge the chain if it's free to hash and not a closed set of trustee nodes.
Since were talking oranges , individually, then you need the cheap method with a centrally authorized set of approver nodes.
But if you are going to have such a centralized authority. Why not a regular old fashioned database?
I just don't understand what is special here about the block chain.
It does have some robust aspects of syncronizing a distributed set of approver nodes by consensus (longest chain wins). But that isn't really special and can be done with databases that synchronize too.
some features I particularly like about anaconda are
1. it makes reversions much more simple and reliable. SO if you install something and later find you need to downgrade, it can walk back all the dendencies.
2. It does the best job of solving mutal dependencies i've seen. if you install one package that also installs say the latest version of Latex, then late install a package but it requires an older LAtex, it can find some combination of Latex and all it's dependencies that let you run all your installs even if it has to downgrade some. it's really robust and warns you about it's tricky schemes before it does them
3. However with the environments this situation actually arrises less than it used to. It used to be one had one giant monolithic apt-get set of libraries for every damn thing you did on your computer. Now with enviroments you install the least set of installs to do whatever you are doing. Say scientific pything. Maybe you don't need the GPU or Simd for some project well don't install those alpha-level libs needed for that. But when you do need that risk taking fragile class of dependencies well you can have that in enviroment. And both of those are separated from the ones you need for word processing and those are separated from the ones you need for Blender.
do all the fragilities go away. And if one of them does die you can just kill it. and re-install. And it's fast cause it's small and minimal to download.
4. finally it's easy to clone an particular environment. Combine this with minimal installs per environment and it makes knowing what the minimum set of dependcies you need to make your code work. Easy to distribute.
5. when I used to have to reinstall some monolithic apt-get environment accumulated from years of installs I would find that somethings could no longer be found in the same versions or had been deprecated. getting back to where you were, especially if you used non-standard repositories was hell.
they should give it replaceble themed metaphor names for it's cute naming of steps Instead of just, Cellar, and brewing, and....
one could come up with more edgy or more cute names. Perhaps a Football theme, or BDSM theme or Cat lover theme.
Other than that does anything distinguish Homebrew?
it seems like every 5 years the distro that's the least broken and least hassle fluctuates
for a while it was Fink., then Macports, then back to Fink. THen back to mac ports. Then homebrew.
Over the last while homebrew has been pretty consistently good so I've not had to go back to one of the others.
Currently however, being heavily into python now, I use anaconda for everything Anaconda can supply and then only then reach for the homebrew.
What I like about some of these is that maintain their own diractory like/opt/sw or the brew directory , and don't poison your/usr tree. This makes trashing them and re-installing a bitrotted crufty install easy to fix. I also like that I can even do user level installs for some of these.
But my favorite by far is anaconda with its environments to keep the vegetables from touching on my plate. If someone could expand anaconda to gobble up all of homebrew this would be perfect.
Here's another possible way to work this in a low risk low hazard environment that makes the most sense to me.
1. Don't prevent it or impede it in any way. 2. Except, periodically poll the system state with a hypervisor that looks for evidence of timing based attacks. it could also scoop up row hammer attacks in the same way. 3. Freeze the processes and report them to the admin, and if you opt-in, report suspect behavior with code snippets or fingerprints to a central database
the Internet ran over Dial-up phones (telecom) and now phones run over the internet. And I'm communicating with you at a distance electronically. Tele-com.
Microsoft got in a snarl for keeping US accounts on UK servers or vica versa then refusing to comply with data requests.
Then there's the issue of are you allowed to encrypt communications at all as a means to evade warranted surveilance? For example, in the 70s some folks marketed an encrypted CB radio. If you recall CB radios, one of their uses was for drug running speed boats to arrange a meeting at sea. And for smuggling and illicit transport of goods in the US. The FCC ended that one by saying CB band could not use encryption.
SO there's strong precedents that say the governement may access your encrypted communications. A lot of people chafe at this. But the point is not what is should be but what is the law and precedent. And if that precedent exists in the laws of a country then the companies need to follow it.
Where it gets tricky is when the company that is providing the offshoring doesn't exactly reside in the US Off-shoring is a tricky bussiness. This happens in banking a lot. People hide money in offshore accounts. Now what authority does the US or any country have to interogte those accounts? If the banks are solely in another country and don't rely on US systems to do bussiness the US govt doesn't have a lot of leverage.
So why can't I offshore my e-mail. And for that matter VPN my Voip off shore so that it prohibits eaves dropping by the govt.
If my service provider is say, Yandex or Baidu, it may not have any bussiness ops in that part of it's bussiness in the US. So how does the US make them comply?
For that matter Microsoft itslef is an Irish/Dutch company so why should theyhave to comply with US data laws?
THe answer is indirect. Apple and microsoft have bussiness ops in the US and Russia that requires good relations. They can't be scofflaws on e-mail if they want to sell iphones or MS Word.
SO it's totally reasonable that if you are going to comply with a country's data and privacy laws you do it as they prescribe. It's not a moral decision.
you are right that there copyright is a drag on the system. Sometimes friction is good, sometimes it's bad. the tragedy of the commons is a well known case where making people pay to use common lands they collectively already own promotes healthier sustainable use of the land for everyone. But obviously if the rent is too high it also deoptimizes that objective too. In general light regulation enable markets to form. Markets are good. So regulation is good. But heavy regulation also is a toll too. There's always a balance. But without copyrights there would be very few markets in what we call copyrightable materials.
Since OTA (over the air) TV is ad-supported, and since Locast does not alter or remove the ads, it would seem that the channels get broader ad exposure when they appear on Locast, and therefore could make a case that their ad time is more valuable. Therefore, I would think the broadcasters would be in favor of Locast.
But it's the broadcaster not locast who gets to make that decision.
and to give an example of the hypothetical case you describe, In the case of sporting events there are commonly local blackout restrictions. these are copyrights not of the broadcaster but of the content owner. The broadcaster in turn must use copyright restrictions to enforce those. thus it isn't just about ad revenue.
copyright is the ability of an owner to refuse someone else using their material in an unintended way.
Film the new release of starwars on my cell phone in the theater, copyright is what prevents me from distributing it.
Thus it's not a question of "can I do it" or "is it east to do". These waves are being broadcast freely. But the intended distance for viewing is the intended distance of the broadcast. not replication by extraordinary means.
THe rationale for copyright is that by restricting acces it creates market place and thus actually more goods and services will be produced. Any one item will be reproduced less but the profit and creative control of the producer creates and environment we all benefit from. it doesn't matter that its free to copy. it harms the marketplace. so it is a stealing from the common good even if you are giving it away
using google as your DNS also provides all your surfing habits and a lot of other stuff to google. They could if they wanted to reroute all your content through google with the power of DNS they just haven't as far as I know.
The freaky detail on this is that Stone has a richard nixon tattoo (not kidding). And he's being indicted for orchestrating a conspiracy to obstruct justice. Fate?
Slashdot Mirror
block chains either have to go to a central authority or they have to be distributed among a limited set of nodes that that sync to maintain the longest chain.
If you want it to be secure then I think that you either have to use a very expensive hash and pay the Miner (like bit coin proof of work) or you have to limit this to a distributed set of miner nodes that use a shared secret.
one of the other has to be in place I think because otherwise anyone coutd forge the chain if it's free to hash and not a closed set of trustee nodes.
Since were talking oranges , individually, then you need the cheap method with a centrally authorized set of approver nodes.
But if you are going to have such a centralized authority. Why not a regular old fashioned database?
I just don't understand what is special here about the block chain.
It does have some robust aspects of syncronizing a distributed set of approver nodes by consensus (longest chain wins). But that isn't really special and can be done with databases that synchronize too.
[Da] or [Nyet]
I don't think this puts in a delay. I think it lets you retract it. The end user could screen shot it, but the official message is deleted.
yes but if every package installed dumps into /usr/local it becomes the trash compacter on the death star. You don't want to wade in and clean it out.
Evidently the UN team never watched Idiocracy. Carl's Jr Or perhaps they are part of it. Mountain Dew.
Perhaps their study found that AI will perfect a fidget spinner more enjoyable than eating or Sex. Taco Bell.
Or we'll get so politically correct that we all get assigned to one night of Rehab. Carl's Jr.
See you in 500 years.
some features I particularly like about anaconda are
1. it makes reversions much more simple and reliable. SO if you install something and later find you need to downgrade, it can walk back all the dendencies.
2. It does the best job of solving mutal dependencies i've seen. if you install one package that also installs say the latest version of Latex, then late install a package but it requires an older LAtex, it can find some combination of Latex and all it's dependencies that let you run all your installs even if it has to downgrade some. it's really robust and warns you about it's tricky schemes before it does them
3. However with the environments this situation actually arrises less than it used to. It used to be one had one giant monolithic apt-get set of libraries for every damn thing you did on your computer. Now with enviroments you install the least set of installs to do whatever you are doing. Say scientific pything. Maybe you don't need the GPU or Simd for some project well don't install those alpha-level libs needed for that. But when you do need that risk taking fragile class of dependencies well you can have that in enviroment. And both of those are separated from the ones you need for word processing and those are separated from the ones you need for Blender.
do all the fragilities go away. And if one of them does die you can just kill it. and re-install. And it's fast cause it's small and minimal to download.
4. finally it's easy to clone an particular environment. Combine this with minimal installs per environment and it makes knowing what the minimum set of dependcies you need to make your code work. Easy to distribute.
5. when I used to have to reinstall some monolithic apt-get environment accumulated from years of installs I would find that somethings could no longer be found in the same versions or had been deprecated. getting back to where you were, especially if you used non-standard repositories was hell.
they should give it replaceble themed metaphor names for it's cute naming of steps ....
Instead of just, Cellar, and brewing, and
one could come up with more edgy or more cute names. Perhaps a Football theme, or BDSM theme or Cat lover theme.
Other than that does anything distinguish Homebrew?
it seems like every 5 years the distro that's the least broken and least hassle fluctuates
for a while it was Fink., then Macports, then back to Fink. THen back to mac ports. Then homebrew.
Over the last while homebrew has been pretty consistently good so I've not had to go back to one of the others.
Currently however, being heavily into python now, I use anaconda for everything Anaconda can supply and then only then reach for the homebrew.
What I like about some of these is that maintain their own diractory like /opt/sw or the brew directory , and don't poison your /usr tree. This makes trashing them and re-installing a bitrotted crufty install easy to fix. I also like that I can even do user level installs for some of these.
But my favorite by far is anaconda with its environments to keep the vegetables from touching on my plate. If someone could expand anaconda to gobble up all of homebrew this would be perfect.
Here's another possible way to work this in a low risk low hazard environment that makes the most sense to me.
1. Don't prevent it or impede it in any way.
2. Except, periodically poll the system state with a hypervisor that looks for evidence of timing based attacks. it could also scoop up row hammer attacks in the same way.
3. Freeze the processes and report them to the admin, and if you opt-in, report suspect behavior with code snippets or fingerprints to a central database
the Internet ran over Dial-up phones (telecom) and now phones run over the internet. And I'm communicating with you at a distance electronically. Tele-com.
What part of foxy and con does il Cheeto not understand. Probably all of it.
Microsoft got in a snarl for keeping US accounts on UK servers or vica versa then refusing to comply with data requests.
Then there's the issue of are you allowed to encrypt communications at all as a means to evade warranted surveilance? For example, in the 70s some folks marketed an encrypted CB radio. If you recall CB radios, one of their uses was for drug running speed boats to arrange a meeting at sea. And for smuggling and illicit transport of goods in the US.
The FCC ended that one by saying CB band could not use encryption.
SO there's strong precedents that say the governement may access your encrypted communications. A lot of people chafe at this. But the point is not what is should be but what is the law and precedent. And if that precedent exists in the laws of a country then the companies need to follow it.
Where it gets tricky is when the company that is providing the offshoring doesn't exactly reside in the US
Off-shoring is a tricky bussiness. This happens in banking a lot. People hide money in offshore accounts. Now what authority does the US or any country have to interogte those accounts? If the banks are solely in another country and don't rely on US systems to do bussiness the US govt doesn't have a lot of leverage.
So why can't I offshore my e-mail. And for that matter VPN my Voip off shore so that it prohibits eaves dropping by the govt.
If my service provider is say, Yandex or Baidu, it may not have any bussiness ops in that part of it's bussiness in the US. So how does the US make them comply?
For that matter Microsoft itslef is an Irish/Dutch company so why should theyhave to comply with US data laws?
THe answer is indirect. Apple and microsoft have bussiness ops in the US and Russia that requires good relations. They can't be scofflaws on e-mail if they want to sell iphones or MS Word.
SO it's totally reasonable that if you are going to comply with a country's data and privacy laws you do it as they prescribe. It's not a moral decision.
you are right that there copyright is a drag on the system. Sometimes friction is good, sometimes it's bad. the tragedy of the commons is a well known case where making people pay to use common lands they collectively already own promotes healthier sustainable use of the land for everyone. But obviously if the rent is too high it also deoptimizes that objective too. In general light regulation enable markets to form. Markets are good. So regulation is good. But heavy regulation also is a toll too. There's always a balance. But without copyrights there would be very few markets in what we call copyrightable materials.
So you accept everything at face value then?
Since OTA (over the air) TV is ad-supported, and since Locast does not alter or remove the ads, it would seem that the channels get broader ad exposure when they appear on Locast, and therefore could make a case that their ad time is more valuable. Therefore, I would think the broadcasters would be in favor of Locast.
But it's the broadcaster not locast who gets to make that decision.
and to give an example of the hypothetical case you describe, In the case of sporting events there are commonly local blackout restrictions. these are copyrights not of the broadcaster but of the content owner. The broadcaster in turn must use copyright restrictions to enforce those.
thus it isn't just about ad revenue.
copyright is the ability of an owner to refuse someone else using their material in an unintended way.
Film the new release of starwars on my cell phone in the theater, copyright is what prevents me from distributing it.
Thus it's not a question of "can I do it" or "is it east to do". These waves are being broadcast freely. But the intended distance for viewing is the intended distance of the broadcast. not replication by extraordinary means.
THe rationale for copyright is that by restricting acces it creates market place and thus actually more goods and services will be produced. Any one item will be reproduced less but the profit and creative control of the producer creates and environment we all benefit from. it doesn't matter that its free to copy. it harms the marketplace. so it is a stealing from the common good even if you are giving it away
People draw what they thing things will look like in the future all the time.
therefore an AI can too. Doesn't matter where you the the "I".
Of course a dumb AI will extrapolate all products that get smaller with time to a point.
When do you get the khakis?
when they go on sale a K-mart
I don't think these can be "well researched".
3 million / 13 = 230,000 per year.
assume he edits 300 days per year
769 per day
assume he works 4 hours per day after his day-job on this
769/4 = 192 per hour
that's 3.2 per minute.
When does he read the books he uses?
using google as your DNS also provides all your surfing habits and a lot of other stuff to google. They could if they wanted to reroute all your content through google with the power of DNS they just haven't as far as I know.
remind me where all the money stolen from the SWIFT system was clawed back from?
I go past 2GB of data and verizon throttles me down to 2G edge speed. t..i..m..e.....d..i...a....l....a......t........e........s
they would and people would insert it gladly. Fortunately they haven't... yet.
It's going to happen on a massive scale at some point. THen what?
Dam you beat me to it.
The freaky detail on this is that Stone has a richard nixon tattoo (not kidding). And he's being indicted for orchestrating a conspiracy to obstruct justice. Fate?
meant to say 1/4