Strange. I have encountered problems with routers getting messed up when there are a lot of connections, and Kad probably makes more connections than most other p2p protocols. Whether or not you are connected to an eDonkey server at the same time would probably not make a huge difference. The only thing I can suggest is try updating your router's firmware. If you are using Windows XP, than the SP2 connections limit could also be causing problems.
Traditional eDonkey requires servers, at least. Of course, if every eDonkey server got shut down, then the network would probably improve because then everyone would be connected to Kad.
Or if you want to be really paranoid and still use eMule, just do not connect to any servers. Kad searches usually get a lot more results than global server searches anyway.
Oh, I didn't know that the filesystems were different in that regard. I use the add/remove icon anyway because I have managed to lose a couple (FAT16 formatted) USB flash drives to unplugging at a bad time. I use FAT because it's default and because it's compatible (Windows/Mac/Linux). The average user will probably be using FAT anyway. I doubt that Microsoft would push for using NTFS on removable drives if it makes them easier to corrupt accidently.
DOS and Windows 9x did not have multiple user support because they were simply badly designed, ignoring Unix design concepts. As a result, developers got used to assuming the user had administrator access because that was the only kind. (Doing things like storing data in c:\program files\program name\data instead of %appdata%, not having a concept of per-user settings, making installations outside of the program files directory (ex. single user install) difficult, etc.) On the other hand, the Windows NT line has proper multi-user support, although it does use more complex ACLs instead of Unix's simple user/group/everyone access levels. (Yeah, I know, you can use ACLs on Unix.) Before Windows XP (a.k.a. NT 5.1), the Windows NT line was not targetted toward consumers. Now that Windows does have multi-user support, devs are not used to using it, or don't bother because everyone already runs as an admin, so why not? Now it looks like Microsoft is finally saying that they are not putting up with that policy anymore and want devs to design their programs to correctly multi-user systems or have lots of error dialogs pop up.
And it will probably be the same on Vista. The average user will only be dealing with data within their home directory, which they will have ownership of. The idea of worrying about the ACLs on removeable devices is crazy because they all use FAT or FAT32, not NTFS, and there is no reason to expect this to change any time in the future.
Actually, the thief is probably just interested in the radio/other removeable components anyway. Also, it is probably quicker to physically hot wire the car than to hack it wirelessly. On alarms: see zakezuke's comment.
20 minutes? What, is it just sending some pre-generated random number? Are they really too lazy to use a simple challenge-response scheme like normal password authenication? Or would that take up too much battery power on the errr... key?
Of course, as another poster mentioned, it does not really matter what you can do fancily and wirelessly because you can just smash the window.
Of course, there is nothing stopping you from using, or even requiring, SSL on POP, too. Unforunately, I don't know about your e-mail servers, but my ISP does not even support it.
The problem is that Bush isn't getting the warrant. If they were following FISA and actually getting warrants 72 hours latter, everything would be okay. There would be no news. The news is that Bush has decided that he does not need any warrants ever.
It seems to be generally accepted that the US (or any other country) has the right to spy on communications passing across their borders. The precise provisions under which such spying may be executed is specified in the US' Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires secret warants granted through the FISA court (which has denied something like 5 out of 16000 in the past 30 years), but allows for them to be granted up to 72 hours after beginning to wiretap. On the other hand, US laws about domestic wiretapping do not allow for secret or after the fact warants.
The lower requirements for foreign communications make sense in wartime, but not so much in peacetime. Remember that FISA was enacted in 1978, during the Cold War when the government was worried about communists (or, at least, claimed to be worried about communists).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and they didn't sell much of those DiVX things, did they?
Strange. I have encountered problems with routers getting messed up when there are a lot of connections, and Kad probably makes more connections than most other p2p protocols. Whether or not you are connected to an eDonkey server at the same time would probably not make a huge difference. The only thing I can suggest is try updating your router's firmware. If you are using Windows XP, than the SP2 connections limit could also be causing problems.
Actualy, QVGA is one of the easier ones to remember. It is just Quarter VGA. VGA=640x480, of course, so QVGA is... a quarter of that.
Traditional eDonkey requires servers, at least. Of course, if every eDonkey server got shut down, then the network would probably improve because then everyone would be connected to Kad.
Or if you want to be really paranoid and still use eMule, just do not connect to any servers. Kad searches usually get a lot more results than global server searches anyway.
Wait... Visual Studio won't run on an Intel Core Duo?
I think you win.
Can you make VOIP calls over Tor? Wait, no, too slow, right?
Oh, I didn't know that the filesystems were different in that regard. I use the add/remove icon anyway because I have managed to lose a couple (FAT16 formatted) USB flash drives to unplugging at a bad time. I use FAT because it's default and because it's compatible (Windows/Mac/Linux). The average user will probably be using FAT anyway. I doubt that Microsoft would push for using NTFS on removable drives if it makes them easier to corrupt accidently.
DOS and Windows 9x did not have multiple user support because they were simply badly designed, ignoring Unix design concepts. As a result, developers got used to assuming the user had administrator access because that was the only kind. (Doing things like storing data in c:\program files\program name\data instead of %appdata%, not having a concept of per-user settings, making installations outside of the program files directory (ex. single user install) difficult, etc.) On the other hand, the Windows NT line has proper multi-user support, although it does use more complex ACLs instead of Unix's simple user/group/everyone access levels. (Yeah, I know, you can use ACLs on Unix.) Before Windows XP (a.k.a. NT 5.1), the Windows NT line was not targetted toward consumers. Now that Windows does have multi-user support, devs are not used to using it, or don't bother because everyone already runs as an admin, so why not? Now it looks like Microsoft is finally saying that they are not putting up with that policy anymore and want devs to design their programs to correctly multi-user systems or have lots of error dialogs pop up.
Your comment reminds me of the Penny Arcade comic about Silent Hill .
Uh, isn't that exactly the feature that the article says that MS is adding to Vista?
And it will probably be the same on Vista. The average user will only be dealing with data within their home directory, which they will have ownership of. The idea of worrying about the ACLs on removeable devices is crazy because they all use FAT or FAT32, not NTFS, and there is no reason to expect this to change any time in the future.
Actually, it sounds to me like the Mac OS X sudo dialogs are just like the dialogs being described for Vista? What's the difference?
Actually, the thief is probably just interested in the radio/other removeable components anyway. Also, it is probably quicker to physically hot wire the car than to hack it wirelessly. On alarms: see zakezuke's comment.
20 minutes? What, is it just sending some pre-generated random number? Are they really too lazy to use a simple challenge-response scheme like normal password authenication? Or would that take up too much battery power on the errr... key?
Of course, as another poster mentioned, it does not really matter what you can do fancily and wirelessly because you can just smash the window.
You imply that there is something wrong with me using cracks to play my own games.
Although the comments fail to mention that the "rises up from the ashes" part was there because FireFox was called Phoenix before it was FireBird.
Of course, there is nothing stopping you from using, or even requiring, SSL on POP, too. Unforunately, I don't know about your e-mail servers, but my ISP does not even support it.
Fair enough. Especially since that Jupiter study claims a median age of 23, which is well within your definition of "young adults".
Most console users are adults. (detailed statistics) (another article)
The problem is that Bush isn't getting the warrant. If they were following FISA and actually getting warrants 72 hours latter, everything would be okay. There would be no news. The news is that Bush has decided that he does not need any warrants ever.
Could you please cite your sources? I would be very interested to see evidence that the illegal wiretapping began before 9/11.
It seems to be generally accepted that the US (or any other country) has the right to spy on communications passing across their borders. The precise provisions under which such spying may be executed is specified in the US' Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires secret warants granted through the FISA court (which has denied something like 5 out of 16000 in the past 30 years), but allows for them to be granted up to 72 hours after beginning to wiretap. On the other hand, US laws about domestic wiretapping do not allow for secret or after the fact warants.
The lower requirements for foreign communications make sense in wartime, but not so much in peacetime. Remember that FISA was enacted in 1978, during the Cold War when the government was worried about communists (or, at least, claimed to be worried about communists).
You realise that FireFox has the exact same warning message, right?