Of course, the sensible thing to do if you can't depend on your router to resolve IPs correctly (like if you don't own or have access to it) is to set your localhost to point DNS requests directly to a trusted IP address. Or, even better (if you're really paranoid), run your own bind.
Yep. Maybe.20-finger multi-touch input with less than 6 millisecond response time...Capacitive Technology based on mutual capacitance operation theory.
Maybe this is a symptom of the beginning of the end for the professional spammer. If the whole thing ends up being more trouble than it's worth, maybe these asswipes will look for an alternative source of income.
In any case, returning to the issue of range for a moment:
I have a Belkin F8T012 USB Bluetooth dongle that works quite well at distances well over 100m. (The advertised maximum is 100m.) It wouldn't be hard to make yourself inconspicuous at that distance from the pump.
Yes, it pointed to the consumer reports article, but after that there was nothing but trolling.
I guess the Consumer Reports article said all that needed to be said. There's no useful response to be made, and that includes the outraged howls of all the fanboys.
If Apple really can't stand people poking fun at them when they screw up, perhaps they should stop being so fucking secretive and start doing some proper testing in the real world.
That is definitely a real instrument. One might not like it (personally, I don't), but it is definitely real. And it could even be good in the right hands.
Yep. Fans call it "warmth", and detractors call it any number of names. In my case, although I am fussy enough about my stereo setup to get a hard time from my wife, I have been forced to acknowledge that I have some hearing loss in the upper frequency ranges.
For this reason, I am less than fond of vinyl, despite the fact that I grew up (hah!) with it. I just need all the detail I can get.
In his case the reason why he continued seemed linked to his knowledge that this kind of thing wasn't taken very seriously.
In the case of many acquaintances of mine, it is largely associated with the fact that they are total cheapskates. This seems, I'm sorry to say, to be an unfortunately common characteristic among geeks and nerds. I don't know why, and I don't share the mentality (I err in the opposite direction), but nevertheless there it is...
Software piracy has been around since at least the early 80's.
Certainly. And music piracy was around well before that. I, and most people I knew used to copy vinyl LPs to cassette tape back in the '70s. The limiting factor was that it was slow, and the quality of the tape was never as good as the disc, so there was always the incentive to buy the original recording if and when we could afford it.
Plus, of course, the album cover was in itself such a great vehicle for artists - but we'll never see the likes of that again...
Really? Care to link to some actual research that proves that? Because otherwise I am calling bullshit. Your post sounds like some subjective bullshit that you just pulled out of your own ass.
The comment might be subjective, but it is certainly (anecdotally) true. I have many friends who seem to expect creative content to be available at absolutely no cost to themselves, no matter how much they happen to enjoy it. Interestingly, these people tend to be those with a comparatively high level of tech savvy with computers.
It would be drawing an excessively long bow to suggest that so-called "computer literacy" is equivalent to a paucity of morals, but it certainly does seem that there is sometimes a level of blindness that comes with an easy familiarity with file-sharing techniques.
A lot of the music I buy (yes, really) is on the ECM label, which I have recently realised is on the RIAA's list of "who we are". But even if FLACs were available (which they mostly aren't), I would continue to buy their CDs because they are so fucking good. No matter who their acquaintances might be, this label goes to some trouble and expense to produce recordings of stupendous quality that I happen to like, and I have no issues about rewarding that.
We used to do something similar in a very manual process by keeping the most frequently access oracle data on the leading edge of the disk platters.
I haven't really kept up to date with HDD technology in recent years, but there was a time when some operating systems (Data General's AOS/VS, for example) allowed you to keep your most frequently accessed files (or even records in a database) around the middle of the disk platter, on the principle that the heads spent more time on average around the middle than at the extremities. Bear in mind that this was in the days when such a drive would typically hold 700MB of data, and of course that this principle has no value if you partition that drive.
Having said that, I remember testing this at the time when I was sysmgr at a large DG site, and didn't find any conclusive evidence as to the value of this concept, so ended up ditching it as more trouble than it was worth.
Another problem is figuring out _why_ data isn't used before archiving it.
The problem is that so much data is made available without anyone ever considering how useful it might be. At least we've come some way in the last 20 years:
Back in the '70s and '80s I worked at many sites where mainframe ops used to clear tonnes of fanfold paper every day. This is why we had separate printer rooms: a bank of 6 or 8 barrel-printers belting out 132 columns of text at 1800 lines/minute created sacksful of dust.
Most of that rubbish was never read in any depth - it was physically impossible to do so before it became out of date, so most of that paper went straight to the shredders, which often shared space with the printers that created the stuff in the first place. I used to have fantasies about lining up the shredders directly behind the printers to save everybody the trouble of distributing the printouts.
I see 7 access points here. In a suburb. From in my house!
Sure you can. No problem. But if Google had simply collected all the SSIDs of every WAP, that would not take up that 600GB of storage mentioned. So that implies that Google was sniffing a lot more payload data, and I can't think of a single legitimate reason for doing so. Simply saying "oops, it was a mistake, my bad" doesn't work for me.
Aren't laptops lifespans something like only 2-3 years?
I still have a 6-year-old iBook G4 sitting on a shelf in my stereo cabinet. I use it (with a Logitech DiNovo Mini wireless keyboard) for piping digital video or watching DVDs when my PVR is busy doing something else. I now use a late-2006 MacBook.
Both of these machines were handed down from my wife as part of her upgrade cycle, and they still work well for me, although I use Linux on my desktop boxes. Since OS X offers a typical *nix environment from a terminal window, I can swallow other aspects of their business model that are less palatable.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, the sensible thing to do if you can't depend on your router to resolve IPs correctly (like if you don't own or have access to it) is to set your localhost to point DNS requests directly to a trusted IP address. Or, even better (if you're really paranoid), run your own bind.
Yep. Maybe.20-finger multi-touch input with less than 6 millisecond response time...Capacitive Technology based on mutual capacitance operation theory.
Flux capacitors for aliens?
w00t!
Maybe this is a symptom of the beginning of the end for the professional spammer. If the whole thing ends up being more trouble than it's worth, maybe these asswipes will look for an alternative source of income.
Probably premature, I know, but we can hope...
In any case, returning to the issue of range for a moment:
I have a Belkin F8T012 USB Bluetooth dongle that works quite well at distances well over 100m. (The advertised maximum is 100m.) It wouldn't be hard to make yourself inconspicuous at that distance from the pump.
Is a Cuban pig as good as a Cuban cigar?
It might be, but it's too hard to light...
Yes, it pointed to the consumer reports article, but after that there was nothing but trolling.
I guess the Consumer Reports article said all that needed to be said. There's no useful response to be made, and that includes the outraged howls of all the fanboys.
If Apple really can't stand people poking fun at them when they screw up, perhaps they should stop being so fucking secretive and start doing some proper testing in the real world.
Statue of limitations. English--learn it!
If you insist on correcting someone's spelling, you had better make sure you're right.
It was correctly spelt as statute.
You can also set up a routine that instructs the user how to install a real browser. Simple.
Wagner was a 19th-century composer, not 18th.
I don't understand why people put her down.
Really? I do. She is a moronic bimbo with marginally less musical talent than a sack of portland cement.
Only as often as you type pleonasms.
;-)
Why use one word when you can use a hundred? Every poet would be out of a job.
That is definitely a real instrument. One might not like it (personally, I don't), but it is definitely real. And it could even be good in the right hands.
...and vinyl has a feeling.
Yep. Fans call it "warmth", and detractors call it any number of names. In my case, although I am fussy enough about my stereo setup to get a hard time from my wife, I have been forced to acknowledge that I have some hearing loss in the upper frequency ranges.
For this reason, I am less than fond of vinyl, despite the fact that I grew up (hah!) with it. I just need all the detail I can get.
In his case the reason why he continued seemed linked to his knowledge that this kind of thing wasn't taken very seriously.
In the case of many acquaintances of mine, it is largely associated with the fact that they are total cheapskates. This seems, I'm sorry to say, to be an unfortunately common characteristic among geeks and nerds. I don't know why, and I don't share the mentality (I err in the opposite direction), but nevertheless there it is...
Software piracy has been around since at least the early 80's.
Certainly. And music piracy was around well before that. I, and most people I knew used to copy vinyl LPs to cassette tape back in the '70s. The limiting factor was that it was slow, and the quality of the tape was never as good as the disc, so there was always the incentive to buy the original recording if and when we could afford it.
Plus, of course, the album cover was in itself such a great vehicle for artists - but we'll never see the likes of that again...
Really? Care to link to some actual research that proves that? Because otherwise I am calling bullshit. Your post sounds like some subjective bullshit that you just pulled out of your own ass.
The comment might be subjective, but it is certainly (anecdotally) true. I have many friends who seem to expect creative content to be available at absolutely no cost to themselves, no matter how much they happen to enjoy it. Interestingly, these people tend to be those with a comparatively high level of tech savvy with computers.
It would be drawing an excessively long bow to suggest that so-called "computer literacy" is equivalent to a paucity of morals, but it certainly does seem that there is sometimes a level of blindness that comes with an easy familiarity with file-sharing techniques.
A lot of the music I buy (yes, really) is on the ECM label, which I have recently realised is on the RIAA's list of "who we are". But even if FLACs were available (which they mostly aren't), I would continue to buy their CDs because they are so fucking good. No matter who their acquaintances might be, this label goes to some trouble and expense to produce recordings of stupendous quality that I happen to like, and I have no issues about rewarding that.
Shockingly, this happened in 2008, not 1958.
Not that shocking when you remember that the flatbed scanner was almost (but not quite) an object of science fiction in 1958.
We used to do something similar in a very manual process by keeping the most frequently access oracle data on the leading edge of the disk platters.
I haven't really kept up to date with HDD technology in recent years, but there was a time when some operating systems (Data General's AOS/VS, for example) allowed you to keep your most frequently accessed files (or even records in a database) around the middle of the disk platter, on the principle that the heads spent more time on average around the middle than at the extremities. Bear in mind that this was in the days when such a drive would typically hold 700MB of data, and of course that this principle has no value if you partition that drive.
Having said that, I remember testing this at the time when I was sysmgr at a large DG site, and didn't find any conclusive evidence as to the value of this concept, so ended up ditching it as more trouble than it was worth.
Another problem is figuring out _why_ data isn't used before archiving it.
The problem is that so much data is made available without anyone ever considering how useful it might be. At least we've come some way in the last 20 years:
Back in the '70s and '80s I worked at many sites where mainframe ops used to clear tonnes of fanfold paper every day. This is why we had separate printer rooms: a bank of 6 or 8 barrel-printers belting out 132 columns of text at 1800 lines/minute created sacksful of dust.
Most of that rubbish was never read in any depth - it was physically impossible to do so before it became out of date, so most of that paper went straight to the shredders, which often shared space with the printers that created the stuff in the first place. I used to have fantasies about lining up the shredders directly behind the printers to save everybody the trouble of distributing the printouts.
I see 7 access points here. In a suburb. From in my house!
Sure you can. No problem. But if Google had simply collected all the SSIDs of every WAP, that would not take up that 600GB of storage mentioned. So that implies that Google was sniffing a lot more payload data, and I can't think of a single legitimate reason for doing so. Simply saying "oops, it was a mistake, my bad" doesn't work for me.
and if I recall correctly, they didn't even intend to use a packet sniffer, it was just some debug code that got left in by mistake.
Yeah, right.
Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
The guy is a genius!
Whatever. I'm over anything he calls music...
Internet: Prince is over.
Aren't laptops lifespans something like only 2-3 years?
I still have a 6-year-old iBook G4 sitting on a shelf in my stereo cabinet. I use it (with a Logitech DiNovo Mini wireless keyboard) for piping digital video or watching DVDs when my PVR is busy doing something else. I now use a late-2006 MacBook.
Both of these machines were handed down from my wife as part of her upgrade cycle, and they still work well for me, although I use Linux on my desktop boxes. Since OS X offers a typical *nix environment from a terminal window, I can swallow other aspects of their business model that are less palatable.