It's only trusted by you if you assert that it is. This proposal formalizes the act of notifying of an available proxy and allowing the user to trust (or not trust) said proxy.
And if they simply redirect all port 443 traffic to their proxy by default so that they can cache content and optimize their network?
You can either trust their proxy, or you can fuck off and not use https.
The base problem for technologists is that the action perverted the course of future technology, and, having been altered, no amount of reparations will restore it to the course it would have taken had the event never happened.
We always ask ourselves where we would be today, if only...
The Linux distros continue to make significant headway, by any measure you care to apply, except dollar measures. So long as they stay healthy, which looks like a very long time, there will be no duopoly.
Market share? Linux enjoys half the market share of Microsoft Vista...
Linux has a lot more of the market than that, of course. It like it, it just doesn't really enjoy it.
All of the Amazon protected video content is protected by FlashAccess, which would mean a working implementation outside of the built-in one that's in the official Google Chrome, but not in Chromium.
This wouldn't be such a PITA, but at the end of Feb of 2012, the verification mechanism for the FlashAccess plugin for Flash changed. Unless the box contained a TPM and a trusted boot path, it would be possible to have one device impersonate another by interposing the unique device identifier reporting channel at a kernel level, unless you were (alternately) willing to further lock-down the Android being used so that it was unable to be used for anything else.
It turns out DRM has holes; who would have guessed?
More to the point, the way the world is going, a kid born today as a very high chance of leading a life of debt, unemployment, poverty, starvation, war, and whatever else the future has in store, before dying.
As far as we're concerned, my s.o. and I, the best time for fatherhood is never, as we reckon giving life today isn't really a gift.
I was asked to pass on this note...
Too bad; I had your second kid pencilled in to fix everything in 2060; my next opening is for a North Korean kid in 2117, unless, you know, her prospective parents feel the same way you do.
in fact, the cluster bombs and fuel-air explosives we've been using in Iraq and Afghanistan have considerably more explosive power than tactical nuclear weapons.
There is no sensible need to have tactical nuclear weapons. They do nothing for MAD, since they are not all that destructive, and they just encourage proliferation.
Your position differs with that of some of the best games theorists and strategic thinkers on the planet:
The French Super-Phenix breeder was intended to produce 1.2GW of electricity but it suffered problems and delays and was eventually shut down in part due to economic factors. Other breeders have had similar problems over the decades.
We should come right out and say that the economic factors leading to the shutdown were largely driven by Greenpeace, and that the economic factors in most use of nuclear energy projects are driven by political, rather than engineering issues.
Not really. If you took every dime the CEO of McDonalds made last year, and divide it among the burger flippers employed by McDonalds, it comes out to exactly $8.14 per *year* for each of them.
McDonalds employs a *lot* of burger flippers.
You forgot to mention that is based on the burger flippers staying with the job until the age of 65.
No, the calculation was based on 2080 hours per year, which is a full 40 hour work week for 52 weeks.
I admit that that may be an unrealistic idea, given that federal mandates kick in if you work more than 29 hours a week. So assume they drop the employee hours to avoid the federal mandates for full time employees, they would get their extra penny after 3.6 hours instead. It's still only $8.14 a year.
To put it in simpler terms: each employee would be able to buy 3 Happy Meals(tm) a year with the extra income.
(On a serious note, why does it take a PR scandal to make a fatal explosion at an gas well newsworthy?)
On a serious note, why does a fatal natural gas wellhead explosion have anything to do with where the natural gas reservoir originated?
It's a well safety issue; it doesn't matter if the reservoir was naturally occurring, came from fracking, was put there by aliens, or was put there by a God with a sense of humor, trying to convince us that the Earth was more than 6,000 years old: unsafely operated natural gas wells can explode.
They already were, as part of the first program. US HEU was also converted, mostly from stocks, since the U.S. primarily uses Plutonium bombs, both as fission warheads, and as triggers for fusion warheads.
Addressing the suggestion itself:
The HEU supply available from weapons is now too low to deal with demands of the power industry, which is why the program came to the negotiated close that it did in the first place.
The U.S. generally could deal with both the fuel availability problem and the Plutonium weapons "problem" by:
(1) fuel reprocessing, which was disallowed by executive order of then-president Jimmy Carter, This would solve the "nuclear waste" problem at the same time, as it's not actually "waste", it's actually "unreprocessed nuclear fuel".
(2) use of Plutonium reactors which could utilize said Plutonium in the first place (which would imply breeder/fast breeder reactors, which the U.S. doesn't build due to it's non-proliferation stance, which appears to be successful, since North Korea... er... wait...
(3) another START treaty involving both Russia and China, so that the warhead reductions would be mutual. The current number of warheads is approximately those needed to implement the Brookings Institute's M.A.D. policy in the first place, since you pretty much have to drop a warhead within 100m of a hardened target to ensure the destruction of the target, and there are that many hardened targets. Nuclear weapons aren't magical in their ability to destroy -- in fact, the cluster bombs and fuel-air explosives we've been using in Iraq and Afghanistan have considerably more explosive power than tactical nuclear weapons.
So in all, the proposal is unworkable until you reverse a U.S. fuel reprocessing policy set by executive order, reverse a U.S. reactor technology policy set by executive order, and then engage in arms reductions talks with people who are currently not on very good speaking terms with us due to recent foreign policy decisions.
Assume we actually cared about the minuscule amount of radioactives coming from this site...
The U.S. Navy offered to bury the material under millions of tons of cement only days after the incident was first observed by equipment on a U.S. Navy carrier off the coast of Japan. Just bury the crap in cement, as was already suggested, and let it half-life it's way down to edible levels in the next 90-180 years. Problem solved.
Why is new water being pumped into a holding tank containing the material, and then being allowed to leak over the edge and onto the ground near the tank? Because they haven't brought in water reprocessing equipment, and continue adding water to the system as a whole. It's not like Japan lacks the industrial capacity or the transportation infrastructure to get more reprocessing equipment built and delivered to the site. Problem solved.
That's true, but I'd say that the economic divide sending some people to Stanford and others who started with equal skill to Chico State is a much larger learning division than 100 Mbps vs 56 kbps.
The solution to this is not economic, it's for the students to work on themselves enough to get academic merit scholarships.
OK, I'll be the first to post it... "Go back to analog control systems". Ford Model T's don't have this problem, and neither do '63 1/2 Mustang convertibles.
so that the one you find useful wasn't the one taking huge risks
That bank isn't taking huge risks with slapout's bank account due to FDIC insurance. Moral hazard rears its ugly mug once again.
FDIC insured funds limit is $250,000. If all of slapout's funds are insured, then the total deposit amount is less than or equal to $250,000. The bank would definitionally not be taking a huge risk, since there's nothing "huge" about $250,000 from the banks perspective.
It used to be possible to have a much larger amount in a savings bank and have it not be subject to investment bank risks before the firewalls were dissolved, and the investment banks subsequently acquired all the savings banks so they could tap (and risk) those savings.
FDIC is "Well, at least you didn't lose everything" insurance. If you have retired with only $25,000/year in savings, guess what? That's not even enough to keep you in a terrible retirement home in Kansas, let alone cover medical insurance and other costs - you're going back to work, or you get to live under the viaduct with all the other homeless people.
The fact is the rest of the planet doesn't have this issue. The rest of the planet doesn't find it necessary to throw ungodly amounts of cash at folks to get them to take a CEO job. Only in the US does this happen, and their performance, globally speaking, is pathetic in comparison.
You are, of course, aware that you are trolling BlackBerry Limited, formerly known as Research In Motion Limited, a Canadian company, and blaming the U.S., right?
The salary of the vice president at McD's isn't taking money meant for the burger flippers pocket....
Um, yes... yes, he is. That's exactly the point.
Not really. If you took every dime the CEO of McDonalds made last year, and divide it among the burger flippers employed by McDonalds, it comes out to exactly $8.14 per *year* for each of them.
You are missing the fact that the telcos are not smart enough to make txt messaging free. They see it as a money maker, rather than a loss-leader.
You mean they are not stupid enough.
Given that the global SMS market in 2010 earned telephone companies US$114.6B, they'd have to be really stupid to give up that revenue by making texting free.
WhatsApp is an incredibly disruptive thing, since those 450M users they have, ~10% of cell phone subscribers, mostly outside the U.S., are going to be costing telephone carriers 10% or more of their SMS revenue. Even if it's not capable of being monetized directly, you're talking $20B the phone companies *won't* be getting in the next two years, which more than makes it worth the price.
The question you should be asking is why disrupting the phone companies business models is worth Facebook paying for that disruption on a dollar-per-dollar basis, for a 2 year amortization, or a 10 cents on the dollar basis for a 20 year amortization, assuming they get 0 more WhatsApp users (unlikely).
I could see a bunch of ways to make tons of money from this, starting with selling it to FaceBook for $19B.
Why would I publish it for 300 Euro again? I know they *claim* it's not published, but if they didn't sign an NDA, you're not going to get a patent out of it outside the U.S., and you're not going to have any protection against them just using your algorithms.
So as luck would have it, I'm one of those unlucky individuals for whom several vertebrae are deteriorating and/or growing bone spurs as I get older.
On thing that's surprised me is that it's not very common for surgeons to simply replace natural, deteriorating vertebrae with custom-shaped artificial ones. I don't know if it's because the surgery would be too complicated, or what.
But given all the problems for which 3D printing seems to be a solution, I'm hoping that it will hasten a fix for my back issues.
This is typically done by a large shaped autologous bone graft, although there are both Synex titanium expansion implants and artificial vertebral body of the biomimetic nano-hydroxyapatite/ polyamide 66 (n-HA/PA66) composites in use. Homologous attempt have frequently been unsuccessful due to immune rejection.
It's generally considered an experimental treatment in the U.S., which means that unless you get into a clinical trial, you are stuck paying out of pocket, since most insurance companies don't cover experimental treatments. Given that the biomimetic composite work was reported in the Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery, medical tourism might also be an option for you. There are also several European clinics that specialize in multilevel ADR, as well as one Australian.
So what would impress you? Having a lawyer write up a whole new license? Keeping it closed source?
Dropping the LPL for a 3 clause BSD or combined MIT license would be better than the GPLv2, and the GPLv3 would be better, if the intent was to get it in the door at the FSF, since they are quite religious about that, and they would prefer Linux switch to GPLv3 as well, since the license is basically an instrumentality of the GNU Manifesto, and intended to accomplish the goals GNU set out to accomplish. It's why they always tack a "GNU/" prefix onto Linux and piss the Linux people off. In terms of straight uniformity and simplification, since parts are already under the MIT license, that might be preferable. I doubt that they could purge the LGPL without pulling an Android/Bionic move to get the C library out from under the license.
I really don't see code from Plan 9 making its way into Linux, despite the license compatibility, and I don't see it being adopted by the BSD crowd or Mac OS X, both of which are more likely to pull in ideas from an ivory tower like Bell Labs. Like the old Salutation Consortium, the reference implementation being under the GPL makes it relatively unattractive to adopt the code to the people most likely to do so.
So basically, they've thrown it over the wall, and are hoping someone is on the other side to catch it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's only trusted by you if you assert that it is. This proposal formalizes the act of notifying of an available proxy and allowing the user to trust (or not trust) said proxy.
And if they simply redirect all port 443 traffic to their proxy by default so that they can cache content and optimize their network?
You can either trust their proxy, or you can fuck off and not use https.
The base problem for technologists is that the action perverted the course of future technology, and, having been altered, no amount of reparations will restore it to the course it would have taken had the event never happened.
We always ask ourselves where we would be today, if only...
Market share? Linux enjoys half the market share of Microsoft Vista...
Linux has a lot more of the market than that, of course. It like it, it just doesn't really enjoy it.
Yelling 'get off my lawn' is helpful?
What an egocentric view! You might as well know the truth...
"Human middle age" was invented by lawns to keep people off them. Not every evolutionary advantage targets humans as the beneficiary. ;)
Like my cat, I just pee on everything that's mine. Or that I want to be mine. Works like a charm.
I imagine this makes dating and courtship more interesting.
Like most tom cats, Chelloveck has a harem.
Seems unlikely.
All of the Amazon protected video content is protected by FlashAccess, which would mean a working implementation outside of the built-in one that's in the official Google Chrome, but not in Chromium.
This wouldn't be such a PITA, but at the end of Feb of 2012, the verification mechanism for the FlashAccess plugin for Flash changed. Unless the box contained a TPM and a trusted boot path, it would be possible to have one device impersonate another by interposing the unique device identifier reporting channel at a kernel level, unless you were (alternately) willing to further lock-down the Android being used so that it was unable to be used for anything else.
It turns out DRM has holes; who would have guessed?
More to the point, the way the world is going, a kid born today as a very high chance of leading a life of debt, unemployment, poverty, starvation, war, and whatever else the future has in store, before dying.
As far as we're concerned, my s.o. and I, the best time for fatherhood is never, as we reckon giving life today isn't really a gift.
I was asked to pass on this note...
No idea what it means, do you?
in fact, the cluster bombs and fuel-air explosives we've been using in Iraq and Afghanistan have considerably more explosive power than tactical nuclear weapons.
There is no sensible need to have tactical nuclear weapons. They do nothing for MAD, since they are not all that destructive, and they just encourage proliferation.
Your position differs with that of some of the best games theorists and strategic thinkers on the planet:
http://www.brookings.edu/~/med...
http://www.brookings.edu/~/med...
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/fi...
I'll trust them, until I see your equivalent credentials.
The French Super-Phenix breeder was intended to produce 1.2GW of electricity but it suffered problems and delays and was eventually shut down in part due to economic factors. Other breeders have had similar problems over the decades.
We should come right out and say that the economic factors leading to the shutdown were largely driven by Greenpeace, and that the economic factors in most use of nuclear energy projects are driven by political, rather than engineering issues.
Not really. If you took every dime the CEO of McDonalds made last year, and divide it among the burger flippers employed by McDonalds, it comes out to exactly $8.14 per *year* for each of them.
McDonalds employs a *lot* of burger flippers.
You forgot to mention that is based on the burger flippers staying with the job until the age of 65.
No, the calculation was based on 2080 hours per year, which is a full 40 hour work week for 52 weeks.
I admit that that may be an unrealistic idea, given that federal mandates kick in if you work more than 29 hours a week. So assume they drop the employee hours to avoid the federal mandates for full time employees, they would get their extra penny after 3.6 hours instead. It's still only $8.14 a year.
To put it in simpler terms: each employee would be able to buy 3 Happy Meals(tm) a year with the extra income.
They could probably solve this by giving people free pizza
http://rt.com/usa/chevron-frac...
(On a serious note, why does it take a PR scandal to make a fatal explosion at an gas well newsworthy?)
On a serious note, why does a fatal natural gas wellhead explosion have anything to do with where the natural gas reservoir originated?
It's a well safety issue; it doesn't matter if the reservoir was naturally occurring, came from fracking, was put there by aliens, or was put there by a God with a sense of humor, trying to convince us that the Earth was more than 6,000 years old: unsafely operated natural gas wells can explode.
They already were, as part of the first program. US HEU was also converted, mostly from stocks, since the U.S. primarily uses Plutonium bombs, both as fission warheads, and as triggers for fusion warheads.
Addressing the suggestion itself:
The HEU supply available from weapons is now too low to deal with demands of the power industry, which is why the program came to the negotiated close that it did in the first place.
The U.S. generally could deal with both the fuel availability problem and the Plutonium weapons "problem" by:
(1) fuel reprocessing, which was disallowed by executive order of then-president Jimmy Carter, This would solve the "nuclear waste" problem at the same time, as it's not actually "waste", it's actually "unreprocessed nuclear fuel".
(2) use of Plutonium reactors which could utilize said Plutonium in the first place (which would imply breeder/fast breeder reactors, which the U.S. doesn't build due to it's non-proliferation stance, which appears to be successful, since North Korea... er... wait...
(3) another START treaty involving both Russia and China, so that the warhead reductions would be mutual. The current number of warheads is approximately those needed to implement the Brookings Institute's M.A.D. policy in the first place, since you pretty much have to drop a warhead within 100m of a hardened target to ensure the destruction of the target, and there are that many hardened targets. Nuclear weapons aren't magical in their ability to destroy -- in fact, the cluster bombs and fuel-air explosives we've been using in Iraq and Afghanistan have considerably more explosive power than tactical nuclear weapons.
So in all, the proposal is unworkable until you reverse a U.S. fuel reprocessing policy set by executive order, reverse a U.S. reactor technology policy set by executive order, and then engage in arms reductions talks with people who are currently not on very good speaking terms with us due to recent foreign policy decisions.
Why is this still news?
Assume we actually cared about the minuscule amount of radioactives coming from this site...
The U.S. Navy offered to bury the material under millions of tons of cement only days after the incident was first observed by equipment on a U.S. Navy carrier off the coast of Japan. Just bury the crap in cement, as was already suggested, and let it half-life it's way down to edible levels in the next 90-180 years. Problem solved.
Why is new water being pumped into a holding tank containing the material, and then being allowed to leak over the edge and onto the ground near the tank? Because they haven't brought in water reprocessing equipment, and continue adding water to the system as a whole. It's not like Japan lacks the industrial capacity or the transportation infrastructure to get more reprocessing equipment built and delivered to the site. Problem solved.
Again: Why is this still news?
I'd like to hear more about this.
I'd happily sit down and explain it to you, but at your current bandwidth, it would take me several years to do so.
That's true, but I'd say that the economic divide sending some people to Stanford and others who started with equal skill to Chico State is a much larger learning division than 100 Mbps vs 56 kbps.
The solution to this is not economic, it's for the students to work on themselves enough to get academic merit scholarships.
OK, I'll be the first to post it... "Go back to analog control systems". Ford Model T's don't have this problem, and neither do '63 1/2 Mustang convertibles.
so that the one you find useful wasn't the one taking huge risks
That bank isn't taking huge risks with slapout's bank account due to FDIC insurance. Moral hazard rears its ugly mug once again.
FDIC insured funds limit is $250,000. If all of slapout's funds are insured, then the total deposit amount is less than or equal to $250,000. The bank would definitionally not be taking a huge risk, since there's nothing "huge" about $250,000 from the banks perspective.
It used to be possible to have a much larger amount in a savings bank and have it not be subject to investment bank risks before the firewalls were dissolved, and the investment banks subsequently acquired all the savings banks so they could tap (and risk) those savings.
FDIC is "Well, at least you didn't lose everything" insurance. If you have retired with only $25,000/year in savings, guess what? That's not even enough to keep you in a terrible retirement home in Kansas, let alone cover medical insurance and other costs - you're going back to work, or you get to live under the viaduct with all the other homeless people.
The fact is the rest of the planet doesn't have this issue. The rest of the planet doesn't find it necessary to throw ungodly amounts of cash at folks to get them to take a CEO job. Only in the US does this happen, and their performance, globally speaking, is pathetic in comparison.
You are, of course, aware that you are trolling BlackBerry Limited, formerly known as Research In Motion Limited, a Canadian company, and blaming the U.S., right?
Are you using "new math"?
$8.14 per year works out to $0.0039 per hour; if you gave them half of that, it's even less, it's $0.00196 per hour.
So every 5 hours of work would get you approximately an extra penny.
The TSA still has not caught a single terrorist trying to get on a plane.
It's all security theatre.
The've all been married?
The salary of the vice president at McD's isn't taking money meant for the burger flippers pocket....
Um, yes... yes, he is. That's exactly the point.
Not really. If you took every dime the CEO of McDonalds made last year, and divide it among the burger flippers employed by McDonalds, it comes out to exactly $8.14 per *year* for each of them.
McDonalds employs a *lot* of burger flippers.
You are missing the fact that the telcos are not smart enough to make txt messaging free. They see it as a money maker, rather than a loss-leader.
You mean they are not stupid enough.
Given that the global SMS market in 2010 earned telephone companies US$114.6B, they'd have to be really stupid to give up that revenue by making texting free.
WhatsApp is an incredibly disruptive thing, since those 450M users they have, ~10% of cell phone subscribers, mostly outside the U.S., are going to be costing telephone carriers 10% or more of their SMS revenue. Even if it's not capable of being monetized directly, you're talking $20B the phone companies *won't* be getting in the next two years, which more than makes it worth the price.
The question you should be asking is why disrupting the phone companies business models is worth Facebook paying for that disruption on a dollar-per-dollar basis, for a 2 year amortization, or a 10 cents on the dollar basis for a 20 year amortization, assuming they get 0 more WhatsApp users (unlikely).
I could see a bunch of ways to make tons of money from this, starting with selling it to FaceBook for $19B.
Why would I publish it for 300 Euro again? I know they *claim* it's not published, but if they didn't sign an NDA, you're not going to get a patent out of it outside the U.S., and you're not going to have any protection against them just using your algorithms.
This is a really silly contest.
So as luck would have it, I'm one of those unlucky individuals for whom several vertebrae are deteriorating and/or growing bone spurs as I get older.
On thing that's surprised me is that it's not very common for surgeons to simply replace natural, deteriorating vertebrae with custom-shaped artificial ones. I don't know if it's because the surgery would be too complicated, or what.
But given all the problems for which 3D printing seems to be a solution, I'm hoping that it will hasten a fix for my back issues.
This is typically done by a large shaped autologous bone graft, although there are both Synex titanium expansion implants and artificial vertebral body of the biomimetic nano-hydroxyapatite/ polyamide 66 (n-HA/PA66) composites in use. Homologous attempt have frequently been unsuccessful due to immune rejection.
It's generally considered an experimental treatment in the U.S., which means that unless you get into a clinical trial, you are stuck paying out of pocket, since most insurance companies don't cover experimental treatments. Given that the biomimetic composite work was reported in the Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery, medical tourism might also be an option for you. There are also several European clinics that specialize in multilevel ADR, as well as one Australian.
So what would impress you? Having a lawyer write up a whole new license? Keeping it closed source?
Dropping the LPL for a 3 clause BSD or combined MIT license would be better than the GPLv2, and the GPLv3 would be better, if the intent was to get it in the door at the FSF, since they are quite religious about that, and they would prefer Linux switch to GPLv3 as well, since the license is basically an instrumentality of the GNU Manifesto, and intended to accomplish the goals GNU set out to accomplish. It's why they always tack a "GNU/" prefix onto Linux and piss the Linux people off. In terms of straight uniformity and simplification, since parts are already under the MIT license, that might be preferable. I doubt that they could purge the LGPL without pulling an Android/Bionic move to get the C library out from under the license.
I really don't see code from Plan 9 making its way into Linux, despite the license compatibility, and I don't see it being adopted by the BSD crowd or Mac OS X, both of which are more likely to pull in ideas from an ivory tower like Bell Labs. Like the old Salutation Consortium, the reference implementation being under the GPL makes it relatively unattractive to adopt the code to the people most likely to do so.
So basically, they've thrown it over the wall, and are hoping someone is on the other side to catch it.