Great, sounds exactly like what people have been doing with selinux and capabilities. But selinux acknowledges we don't always do the same things with our computers as the next guy... Will this approach be as flexible?
I don't want to boohoo his research, it's probably fine, but the article summary just gets my goat. Malware is a lot more complicated than most anti-malware software authors make them sound, and false positives are the biggest/most complicated problem they have to deal with, especially in automated systems that block like this...
Unless the definition of unlimited changed neither does anyone else. At best, places get unmetered, and call it unlimited... How can it be unlimited if you can want some and not have it?
People do not buy an iphone as a cell phone... At least in Canada, not sure about other places.
With the fact that you're locked to one provider, who has iphone-only plans, and what amounts to almost a waiting list(corporate accounts, account upgrades) for certain types of accounts... ii's just not a fair comparison to the other phones, or the lure of the iphone.
userfriendly.org has that slogan on their site for a while now... With pastiches of both Cthulhu and Hasthur the one that shall not be named in there... I thought since the election was called, but I haven't checked dates...
I'm much more worried that Apple is trying to pre-empt the definition of confusion, backwards...
Any "naive", "man-on-the-street" definition of confusion about email right now, would be to say imail.app is duplicating gmail, not Apple. So they've got what amounts to a trademark program on their platform of sorts.
Just imagine they discover a security flaw in the protocol, you'd have to flash everything anyways... Unless they auto-flash... Perhaps this standard allowing bluetooth update of all devices you buy when you sink them into your bluetooth network?
You could focus on local projects, find an on-campus place for OSS projects involving just the school(and encouraging students to cooperate) build school spirit or something. Even better start one or two, get them involved and evangelize.
I doubt the web hosting is going to be able to compete with google, byte for byte, but having one that's relevant isn't always about size...
It's probably because they basically give out a power of injunction to a copyright owner, over a third party(an isp is a common receiver), without any kind of judicial review.
The fact that they aren't systematically contested in court cannot help, but on the other hand, that might be a design goal...
If you include zero, you're going 256 minus two, that's 254 usable, everyone says 253 usable because everyone's used to having the default gateway being "at the providers" and therefore unusable. But if you're delegating a/24 to internal use, you'll have 254 usable ips, counting the router you're using for that subnet.
I just wish we'd go back to a bios-based LCD, for when the screen won't work, the ram won't load in, or something similar. A way to indicate a crash without using beeps... Some environments are so noisy it's just not possible to distiguish some combinations.
And since he claims not to be a link farm, they wouldn't have to explain how their algorithm isn't faulty, and flagging him as a linkfarm? Especially since no human intervention is occuring?
I'm not talking about the scoring of points that comes out of the algorithm, but the classification of sites.
Your examples would be great, except they deal with real goods, not information. If I MD5 some string of bits, I can't guarantee it's as useful as the original string of bits, but from the point of view of the law, I just applied an algorithm, same as if I rot-13ed it.
The clock drift is not likely to be that high between two measurements. And if it is, well it won't be 10 minutes for a year. It'd be much better expressed in milliseconds per minute. I think the real-time clock in this case is likely used for printouts, such as the device might do to save the police officer having to write down, instead he just has to initial it as being correct to what's displayed on the device.
If The Google rules are: 1) well understood 2) documented 3) Non-arbitrary
I'm sure google will be able to defend them in court.
However, whenever I hear people discussing them, 2) is not true, on the argument that they would be gamable otherwise.
I predict a loss for Google. Without documentation they can't prove they're not arbitrary. If they're arbitrary, they're acting like a monopoly and need to be struck down. From "do no evil" to "do the only evil that's actually explicitly forbidden by law for a company". It's quite a drop
I was referring to the idea of encoding a lossy format in another lossy format, resulting in further losses. Not necessarily just the loss of the original lossless-to-lossy. Sorry if I was unclear.
Seriously, why encode twice? And why rate performance on how fast you can lose bits?
Wouldn't archival-quality backups be actual MPEG instead of H.2 or whatever? I mean if you're archiving, why go lossy? Is it just a badly-designed test?
I think they need to look at the han solo character first, if they're looking for psychology. The Jedi order sounded like a great idea, until we met the Jedi council...
Well speaking for myself, the only reason I buy from the ITMS is that I perceive right now that the Itunes store is happening despite the RIAA. If they started agreeing to it, I'd find that suspect, and look for someone else. They've totally alienated me as a consumer, yet they have a lock on artists I like, so I'm looking for an outlet which is refusing to be strongarmed(at least apparently).
They do "get it", itunes is their extinction, they want to renegotiate while they're still around to talk about it...
I took the GP to mean "do away with the concept of revenues from exclusivity for songs" not "the smaller players must share revenues". The problems seem to stem from laws written in the outlook of low-technology means and hard to reach populations being attempted in this era of easily reached population through technology. The industry's rights-sharing is structured with huge record-producing costs, and the assumption that a huge retail store is the only way to reach the listener. Now it's to the record companie's advantage to cling to this belief, they keep a bigger share, while their costs have been made irrelevant(you don't even need to have a physical record anymore). I've yet to see a law that mandates a maximum percentage of profit, but I think it's the only one that would curb their excesses.
Doesn't the W3C already collaborate with the INRIA on a reference browser? http://www.w3.org/Amaya/
There is a reference implementation.
It's not bloated.
It doesn't do plugins...
Noone wants to use it...
I imagine the name of the group pushing a browser does help, but I'd suggest google start looking into third party addons for Chrome anyways. And non-window versions...
Slashdot Mirror
Great, sounds exactly like what people have been doing with selinux and capabilities. But selinux acknowledges we don't always do the same things with our computers as the next guy... Will this approach be as flexible?
I don't want to boohoo his research, it's probably fine, but the article summary just gets my goat. Malware is a lot more complicated than most anti-malware software authors make them sound, and false positives are the biggest/most complicated problem they have to deal with, especially in automated systems that block like this...
Unless the definition of unlimited changed neither does anyone else. At best, places get unmetered, and call it unlimited...
How can it be unlimited if you can want some and not have it?
http://www.enom.com/
People do not buy an iphone as a cell phone... At least in Canada, not sure about other places.
With the fact that you're locked to one provider, who has iphone-only plans, and what amounts to almost a waiting list(corporate accounts, account upgrades) for certain types of accounts... ii's just not a fair comparison to the other phones, or the lure of the iphone.
Are we talking any sort of budget here, or does it have to be free?
Quite a few places will charge a nominal per-year fee for dns, and provide good uptime...
A lot of those are the places you register the domains from, and they make more money on registrations than dns service, but provide both.
Please provide details
userfriendly.org has that slogan on their site for a while now... With pastiches of both Cthulhu and Hasthur the one that shall not be named in there... I thought since the election was called, but I haven't checked dates...
Delete link from chain link, keep pointer, relink...
I read something about that in CS class
I'm much more worried that Apple is trying to pre-empt the definition of confusion, backwards...
Any "naive", "man-on-the-street" definition of confusion about email right now, would be to say imail.app is duplicating gmail, not Apple. So they've got what amounts to a trademark program on their platform of sorts.
Just imagine they discover a security flaw in the protocol, you'd have to flash everything anyways... Unless they auto-flash... Perhaps this standard allowing bluetooth update of all devices you buy when you sink them into your bluetooth network?
You could focus on local projects, find an on-campus place for OSS projects involving just the school(and encouraging students to cooperate) build school spirit or something. Even better start one or two, get them involved and evangelize.
I doubt the web hosting is going to be able to compete with google, byte for byte, but having one that's relevant isn't always about size...
It's probably because they basically give out a power of injunction to a copyright owner, over a third party(an isp is a common receiver), without any kind of judicial review.
The fact that they aren't systematically contested in court cannot help, but on the other hand, that might be a design goal...
If you include zero, you're going 256 minus two, that's 254 usable, everyone says 253 usable because everyone's used to having the default gateway being "at the providers" and therefore unusable. But if you're delegating a /24 to internal use, you'll have 254 usable ips, counting the router you're using for that subnet.
I just wish we'd go back to a bios-based LCD, for when the screen won't work, the ram won't load in, or something similar. A way to indicate a crash without using beeps... Some environments are so noisy it's just not possible to distiguish some combinations.
And since he claims not to be a link farm, they wouldn't have to explain how their algorithm isn't faulty, and flagging him as a linkfarm? Especially since no human intervention is occuring?
I'm not talking about the scoring of points that comes out of the algorithm, but the classification of sites.
Your examples would be great, except they deal with real goods, not information. If I MD5 some string of bits, I can't guarantee it's as useful as the original string of bits, but from the point of view of the law, I just applied an algorithm, same as if I rot-13ed it.
The clock drift is not likely to be that high between two measurements. And if it is, well it won't be 10 minutes for a year. It'd be much better expressed in milliseconds per minute. I think the real-time clock in this case is likely used for printouts, such as the device might do to save the police officer having to write down, instead he just has to initial it as being correct to what's displayed on the device.
You forgot c) they fired the mentor with the junior barely trained and now the junior has to do the whole job by himself
Happens a lot more than you think
If
The Google rules are:
1) well understood
2) documented
3) Non-arbitrary
I'm sure google will be able to defend them in court.
However, whenever I hear people discussing them, 2) is not true, on the argument that they would be gamable otherwise.
I predict a loss for Google. Without documentation they can't prove they're not arbitrary. If they're arbitrary, they're acting like a monopoly and need to be struck down. From "do no evil" to "do the only evil that's actually explicitly forbidden by law for a company". It's quite a drop
How about we make sure(that means testing) that if the server is unavailable, the music is unlocked.
That way if the server ever goes out of business, the music goes into the public domain.
Isn't that REALLY close to the permission system Apple has for Fairplay?
I was referring to the idea of encoding a lossy format in another lossy format, resulting in further losses. Not necessarily just the loss of the original lossless-to-lossy. Sorry if I was unclear.
Seriously, why encode twice? And why rate performance on how fast you can lose bits?
Wouldn't archival-quality backups be actual MPEG instead of H.2 or whatever? I mean if you're archiving, why go lossy?
Is it just a badly-designed test?
I think they need to look at the han solo character first, if they're looking for psychology. The Jedi order sounded like a great idea, until we met the Jedi council...
Well speaking for myself, the only reason I buy from the ITMS is that I perceive right now that the Itunes store is happening despite the RIAA. If they started agreeing to it, I'd find that suspect, and look for someone else. They've totally alienated me as a consumer, yet they have a lock on artists I like, so I'm looking for an outlet which is refusing to be strongarmed(at least apparently).
They do "get it", itunes is their extinction, they want to renegotiate while they're still around to talk about it...
I took the GP to mean "do away with the concept of revenues from exclusivity for songs" not "the smaller players must share revenues". The problems seem to stem from laws written in the outlook of low-technology means and hard to reach populations being attempted in this era of easily reached population through technology. The industry's rights-sharing is structured with huge record-producing costs, and the assumption that a huge retail store is the only way to reach the listener. Now it's to the record companie's advantage to cling to this belief, they keep a bigger share, while their costs have been made irrelevant(you don't even need to have a physical record anymore). I've yet to see a law that mandates a maximum percentage of profit, but I think it's the only one that would curb their excesses.
Doesn't the W3C already collaborate with the INRIA on a reference browser? http://www.w3.org/Amaya/
There is a reference implementation.
It's not bloated.
It doesn't do plugins...
Noone wants to use it...
I imagine the name of the group pushing a browser does help, but I'd suggest google start looking into third party addons for Chrome anyways. And non-window versions...