for gathering the same data from the same source it wouldn't be impossible to get a 100% match and have the data sources come from two different groups/sources.
It's like the probability of having 2 people with the same birthday in a 30 person class room being remarkably likely...
In this case they are focusing data collection on some single-group of people, that the data they collect comes up similar is statistically expected.
If both datasets measure or collect the same data, that they would have 98% of their data coincide is not that unlikely.
Depending on the collection methods used, they might get a 100% match if the data was collected through some common data-access method at near the same point in time.
I see this more as an attempt to discredit anonymous than anything else at this point -- which lends legitimacy to their claim of the FBI doing the monitoring.
Note -- I find the above to be near equal likelihood of being true as the original stories' statements... I really don't know which is true and really don't "believe" either one of them. As belief, in absence of facts is no more than superstition or religion.
For the same reason Gnu doesn't support user freedom -- and has decided that the Corporate POSIX standard will be enforced on all user systems. They've sold out -- been bought and paid for.
You think "rm -fr." would remove all files in the current dir, or "rm -fr foo/." would remove all files IN foo (but not foo). These are no longer options -- the "f" no longer overrides errors and continues.
What's worse -- when removing recursively, rm has to remove the contents BEFORE trying to remove the current directory. So you'd still expect rm -fr . to remove all files under . then fail at the last on "." -- which you wouldn't see due to the "-f" flag. Nope.
POSIX requires "." to be checked for out of order - first, and requires the force flag not to ignore this error.
Result: rm can no longer remove all files under a directory w/o also removing the directory, by itself. You'll have to use the shell to type in wild cards and hope they expand the way you want on a target system. ( * includes.files except . &.. -- unless the user has turned that off.). A note in POSIX claimed they were protecting against accidentally typing in "rm -r *" -- which doesn't address the case of including the "-f" flag nor the easier mistake to type in which is just as disastrous "rm **" which will delete all files under the current point (but leave the empty directories!)... Completely nonsense -- yet GNU has been given over to mindless supporting the corporate POSIX standard.
Free software is being sold off to corporations just like proprietary software. Only difference is the free software you can create your own patched copy for your own use -- but try distributing it as a new version to replace the old... fat chance.
No, email goes through "Servers" and thus can be cut off at a central point. Even though I have my own email server, it still goes through my ISP who still filters it for spam -- that can still be used accidently or on purpose to block arbitrary content.
I believe the point of decentralization is to not make it so easy for someone to filter your conversations and habits. Presumably, node-connections will support encryption, so those who monitor your connection won't know what you are sending without, at least, a little work....and that's about the best security we can have today...
As more programs are adapted for the Mac environment, I see more code being put in to SLOW down I/O, because it's easy for a single user program to lock up the Mac and make it unresponsive by programs doing full-speed I/O.
The same does not happen on my Windows or Linux machines -- Linux being much better about partitioning out I/O than Windows, but it would appear that even Windows is better than the Mac for multi-task I/O.
The Mac's disc encryption is not only costing Mac users time and money, but the entire industry -- making it poor choice unless you really need it.
But more and more, I'm seeing disk-limiters being put in to programs because the Mac OS doesn't do a good job of managing I/O and it's users are usually very vocal. Then those crap laden programs get passed into the high performance PC and linux world's where it's just garbage.
They can't demand it in gold -- we went off a gold based currency during I think it was the Nixon era when France did exactly that -- came with a bunch of dollars and asked for the gold backing them.
After that the Fed went off the gold standard and was allowed to float.
Gold rose from $35 oz to well over 1000 and down into the 700-800's, now it's up over 1650. That's up from ~750 since 2008... So What --- about 140% inflation for the bank bailout?
And people wonder why hard disk prices are staying high....
Bethesda dumbed down Skyrim for platforms considerably over Oblivion. If my PC @ 6x3.4GHz Cores, and GTX590 w/3G Video mem and 48G main mem, it's obvious that a next gen game that had to be dumbed down for the console in order to increase content, is experiencing problems related to size.
If you want to play a reality simulation, get a reality engine, not a toy box (not that my PC is a reality engine -- but... it's alot closer than a toy box.)...
They already dumbed it down too much for it to work on my setup -- requiring 'Steam' (who doesn't support proxies).... so I never saw the PC version working. But from reviews and scenes/videos, I can see that the game was close to state of art for a 10 yr. old console. But way lacking compared to video in Dragon Age II.5 -- and even a major step down from Oblivion in graphic realism... still used XP-era DirectX 9 graphics when DirectX 11 had been out for 2-3 years. Bleh.
Seems like corporate rape approaching discrimination based on national origin. Does Australia's constitution have protections against such? If it does, that might be used to lock out discriminatory price offers while still allowing direct, from-overseas, shipment.
Has Australia been conquered recently that corporations think it's ok to pillage it?;-/
On top of that -- what if you don't have a touch screen?
What if you are running on a 30" panel instead? Would you want to try to use that with a touch screen? Mine is mounted on an arm. If I was to try to use it as a touch panel, the entire monitor would wiggle back and forth.
But I can second what the above user has said -- I lower lights and use color calibration -- and I'm going to want my finger prints all over something that I work hard to keep spotless?
Isn't this a bit like having to browse a directory tree but with you only able to enter one path-segment at a time, then it shows you the next menu (the contents of the dir), and you select again from there to burrow down.
They started this crap in Win 7 by getting rid of the menu hierarchy and quicklaunch -- expecting people to have 1 level menus or use search, but not to follow down multi-level nested menus...
Another issue -- most desktops have become wide screens. That means it makes more sense to have multiple things on the screen. My menu is vertical, on the left side. it takes up less border space on the side - it autohides -- something that would be similar to the menu popping up when I need it (i.e. you want menu? press Win key) -- but it doesn't cover my entire screen.
What does Win8 do when a prog wants to get your attention? In earlier win's, it pops forces the menu to appear and the program gets highlighted or blinks, but the menu stays open until you click on that program to acknowledge that you've paid attention to it. Does that mean the entire screen fills up when programs want my attention?
That's when you buy from the US and deliver in Australia.
They can make a case for charging more on shipping, but for the actual unit? Does Australia slap high import taxes on imported goods?
I.e. maybe at the port, the AUS govn says, you want to deliver that, it will be $1000 and you have to pay --- not the customer -- so what do sellers do? They raise the prices in advance.
Using absolute numbers in share value, as absolute sales figures at box offices is a poor indicator of record setting sales numbers, doesn't accurate reflect record setting value.
Government corruption in the US has exceeded all previous levels. The election system has been stolen in more than one past election. It's unclear how much of the current system can be salvaged without a wholesale meltdown & overthrow. As for the chances of that happening anytime soon -- I've though them low, but as I read of the corruption charges rising and the continued sell-out of the American people by both parties (I was pro obama, but lately he's done anything but live up to his even a remote shadow of his promise).
Tea partiers have the right idea if they weren't all manipulated and p0wned by a bunch of right wing conservative think tanks. At least a few of them realize that the problem now, IS the government. A large controlling government making decisions that are not responsible to and not in the best interests of the people governed is no longer a government "of the people".
We need a new government that will again be responsible to and "of the people" and not to the corporations (the wealthy who've formed protective non-living bodies around them)....
You mean people find it easier to use other games than their crap DRM-laden game stuff like MASS Effect III which I've yet to get to run on my machine -- and am have been unable to contact their customer support because my email (ea@) is now "illegal" to contact "ea" with? (Still has my MEII and Dragon-AGE player records under that login, but now it's an illegal login for customer support.
Wow... the US makes official propaganda statements just like the good ol' USSR, North Korea and China.... Sorta warms your heart to know we keep such good company.
How would you suggest recovering an email registered account without sending an email with a new tmp password?
You can't presume the user has anything other than the computer (or a computer) and email that they originally registered with...
Isn't google's idea of two factor authentication sending SMS messages to a phone?
AFAIK, landline phones don't have SMS and I certainly wouldn't want to pay extra for it -- HOWEVER, I know that gvoice will call your number and ask you to key in a number when you sign up, so offering that as an alternative 2nd factor for pw recovery (only) -- not login), would seem acceptable to me -- but there are others that may possess no phone and only a computer...
You can't design 2-factor authentication unless you are certain it's something that every user has and that says nothing of the convenience issue.
I almost always access my accounts from a few home computers -- (usually just 1), yet the bastards still forcedme to change my password because that same computer tried to login several times to my gmail account due to thunderbird's settings being reset to defaults (normally it doesn't poll my gmail account nor access it unless I manually pull it)....but after a bad attempt at a Tbird upgrade, I reverted -- but google still forced a password change on me -- and now won't EVER let me use the old password again.
Apparently every password you ever use with google becomes part of it's statistical profile of you. This is especially useful if they force you to change it once in a while and are able to detect a pattern in your password usage. They could likely use it to preduct passwords to other sites some percentage of the time.
So much for "do no evil"...storing people's old passwords and forcing them to change periodically... AND being a data mining company that could use such info... definitely falls into the evil category!
You won't use the higher math, but having to pass it, means you reuse the lower math ALOT till it's 2nd nature and you can do it in your head. That's what is necessary to do most of the jobs.
Re:This is why we can't have nice things.
on
CDE Open Sourced
·
· Score: 1
Releasing something that's 20 yr/o tech, because no one wants it anymore, isn't necessarily a great thing -- but it might do wonders for valuing at some absurd amount and taking the write-off in taxes...
now if MS open sourced Win7 or better, WinXP,.. that would be useful, but who uses CDE?
At least in the United States, if you have enough cash you have access to the courts.*
Tell that to the owner of the megadownloads...
The US freezes assets of accused people exactly so you DON'T have access to good defense. That's been true since Bush-I signed the zero tolerance and forfeiture laws in back almost 20 years ago.
The owner of the site who the US tried to have deported from New Zealand -- who didn't entirely cooperate...offered to come back to the US for trial if they unfroze his assets so he could mount a defense.
The Feds -- eh? Why should we bother? We got you shut down like our 'friends' (Hollywood) wanted, AND **WE** get to keep all of your assets -- the cops get to keep everything they confiscate! And the beauty is -- you, the used-to-be-owner, don't even have to be tried or found guilty... it was your property that was accused, and it doesn't have rights. So it isn't entitled to presumption of innocence, and the owner must pay for a trial and prove his property's innocence!!!
VERY Screwd up... has led to alot of cop corruption over the past two decades -- including widely publicized evidence planting, and police-paid informants to send in tips so places could be raided -- and their owners shot dead (Ventura, CA 5$mill(1990's) ranch raided and owner shot in bedroom in dawn police raid to confiscate his ranch for profit by trying to find any drugs (a dime bag would do). There was nothing on the ranch and no indication of any illegal activity). The guy was clean -- DEAD clean.
The law doesn't require what they are doing. They are to respond to take down requests -- just because one of their own partners uploaded a pirated copy of the video doesn't mean the original should be taken down...
I'm seriously wondering if the news service got "exclusive rights" to the video before they subscribed to a Google service that presumes "exclusive rights" by any of their publishers -- whether or not it is... and in many cases is not.
Google is good about publishing the URL's of search results they were not allowed to show due to various requests -- and I know many of those URL's shouldn't have been blocked (and some likely 'should' under current corporate owned law), at least by publishing the requester's information and the URL, people can still see if the site falls under fair usage or even has the purported violation...
The idea that Apple's "patent", on the shape of something to display or transmit information is ludicrous to begin with -- in that light, showing movies from 30-40 years ago that show the usage of such devices, seems entirely pertinent to whether or not samsung violates apples patents or is following in the footsteps of 35 year-old SciFi, seems entire pertinent as a defense, as if it is the latter, then the obviousness of apple's patent -- and thus it's validity is completely at question. If samsung proves to a jury that apple's jury is baseless, they can vote to toss out any damages against samsung regardless of instructions about them only to decide if they violated a false and made-up law.
That's the entire basis of jury nullification of bad-laws...
Slashdot Mirror
And I still don't own an an Apple product.
The user from Arizona had a 98% match.
for gathering the same data from the same source it wouldn't be impossible to get a 100% match and have the data sources come from two different groups/sources.
It's like the probability of having 2 people with the same birthday in a 30 person class room being remarkably likely...
In this case they are focusing data collection on some single-group of people, that the data they collect comes up similar is statistically expected.
If both datasets measure or collect the same data, that they would have 98% of their data coincide is not that unlikely.
Depending on the collection methods used, they might get a 100% match if the data was collected through some common data-access method at near the same point in time.
I see this more as an attempt to discredit anonymous than anything else at this point -- which lends legitimacy to their claim of the FBI doing the monitoring.
Note -- I find the above to be near equal likelihood of being true as the original stories' statements... I really don't know which is true and really don't "believe" either one of them. As belief, in absence of facts is no more than superstition or religion.
For the same reason Gnu doesn't support user freedom -- and has decided that the Corporate POSIX standard will be enforced on all user systems. They've sold out -- been bought and paid for.
You think "rm -fr ." would remove all files in the current dir, or "rm -fr foo/."
would remove all files IN foo (but not foo). These are no longer options -- the "f" no longer overrides errors and continues.
What's worse -- when removing recursively, rm has to remove the contents BEFORE trying to remove the current directory. So you'd still expect rm -fr . to remove all files under . then fail at the last on "." -- which you wouldn't see due to the "-f" flag. Nope.
POSIX requires "." to be checked for out of order - first, and requires the force flag not to ignore this error.
Result: rm can no longer remove all files under a directory w/o also removing the directory, by itself. You'll have to use the shell to type .files except . & .. -- unless the user has turned that off.). A note in POSIX claimed they were protecting against accidentally typing in "rm -r *" -- which doesn't address the case of including the "-f" flag nor the easier mistake to type in which is just as
in wild cards and hope they expand the way you want on a target system. ( * includes
disastrous "rm **" which will delete all files under the current point (but leave the empty directories!)... Completely nonsense -- yet GNU has been given over to mindless supporting the corporate POSIX standard.
Free software is being sold off to corporations just like proprietary software. Only difference is the free software you can create your own patched copy for your own use -- but try distributing it as a new version to replace the old... fat chance.
No, email goes through "Servers" and thus can be cut off at a central point. Even though I have my own email server, it still goes through my ISP who still filters it for spam -- that can still be used accidently or on purpose to block arbitrary content.
I believe the point of decentralization is to not make it so easy for someone to filter your conversations and habits. Presumably, node-connections will support encryption, so those who monitor your connection won't know what you are sending without, at least, a little work....and that's about the best security we can have today...
I've not seen any AES accelerated algorithms give better than
~125-140MB/s. On SSD's with 400-600MB/s throughput.
That means just on single SSD's you get 300% greater performance
than with.
On a RAID, it gets worse. A HD raid can easily get to 1-2GB/s, so the
unencrypted to encryption encumbered rate is more like 800-1500%.
With SSD based raid -- that goes up to 3000-4000% of our speed being thrown away.
How is that not expensive?
Cost is performance deterioration.
As more programs are adapted for the Mac environment, I see more code being put in to SLOW down I/O, because it's easy for a single user program to lock up the Mac and make it unresponsive by programs doing full-speed I/O.
The same does not happen on my Windows or Linux machines -- Linux being much better about partitioning out I/O than Windows, but it would appear that even Windows is better than the Mac for multi-task I/O.
The Mac's disc encryption is not only costing Mac users time and money, but the entire industry -- making it poor choice unless you really need it.
But more and more, I'm seeing disk-limiters being put in to programs because the Mac OS doesn't do a good job of managing I/O and it's users are usually very vocal. Then those crap laden programs get passed into the high performance PC and linux world's where it's just
garbage.
They can't demand it in gold -- we went off a gold based currency during I think it was the Nixon era when France did exactly that -- came with a bunch of dollars and asked for the gold backing them.
After that the Fed went off the gold standard and was allowed to float.
Gold rose from $35 oz to well over 1000 and down into the 700-800's, now it's up over 1650. That's up from ~750 since 2008... So What --- about 140% inflation for the bank bailout?
And people wonder why hard disk prices are staying high....
Bethesda dumbed down Skyrim for platforms considerably over Oblivion. If my PC @ 6x3.4GHz Cores, and GTX590 w/3G Video mem and 48G main mem, it's obvious that a next gen game that had to be dumbed down for the console in order to increase content, is experiencing problems related to size.
If you want to play a reality simulation, get a reality engine, not a toy box (not that my PC is a reality engine -- but ... it's alot closer than a toy box.)...
They already dumbed it down too much for it to work on my setup -- requiring 'Steam' (who doesn't support proxies).... so I never saw the PC version working. But from reviews and scenes/videos, I can see .. still used XP-era DirectX 9 graphics when DirectX 11 had been out for 2-3 years. Bleh.
that the game was close to state of art for a 10 yr. old console. But way lacking compared to video in Dragon Age II.5 -- and even a major step down from Oblivion in graphic realism.
Thanks.
Seems like corporate rape approaching discrimination based on
national origin. Does Australia's constitution have protections against such? If it does, that might be used to lock out discriminatory price offers while still allowing direct, from-overseas, shipment.
Has Australia been conquered recently that corporations think it's ok to pillage it? ;-/
On top of that -- what if you don't have a touch screen?
What if you are running on a 30" panel instead? Would you want to try to use that with a touch screen? Mine is mounted on an arm. If I was to try to use it as a touch panel, the entire monitor would wiggle back and forth.
But I can second what the above user has said -- I lower lights and use color calibration -- and I'm going to want my finger prints all over something that I work hard to keep spotless?
Isn't this a bit like having to browse a directory tree but with you only able to enter one path-segment at a time, then it shows you the next menu (the contents of the dir), and you select again from there to burrow down.
They started this crap in Win 7 by getting rid of the menu hierarchy and quicklaunch -- expecting people to have 1 level menus or use search, but not to follow down multi-level nested menus...
Another issue -- most desktops have become wide screens. That means it makes more sense to have multiple things on the screen. My menu is vertical, on the left side. it takes up less border space on the side - it autohides -- something that would be similar to the menu popping up when I need it (i.e. you want menu? press Win key) -- but it doesn't cover my entire screen.
What does Win8 do when a prog wants to get your attention? In earlier win's, it pops forces the menu to appear and the program gets highlighted or blinks, but the menu stays open until you click on that program to acknowledge that you've paid attention to it. Does that mean the entire screen fills up when programs want my attention?
That's when you buy from the US and deliver in Australia.
They can make a case for charging more on shipping, but for the
actual unit? Does Australia slap high import taxes on imported goods?
I.e. maybe at the port, the AUS govn says, you want to deliver that, it will be $1000 and you have to pay --- not the customer -- so what do sellers do? They raise the prices in advance.
Using absolute numbers in share value, as absolute sales figures at box offices is a poor indicator of record setting sales numbers, doesn't accurate reflect record setting value.
(see subject)
No, the internet isn't the storage device -- it is a **link** to the storage device. In the same way that a link to content isn't the content.
Government corruption in the US has exceeded all previous levels. The election system has been stolen in more than one past election. It's unclear how much of the current system can be salvaged without a wholesale meltdown & overthrow. As for the chances of that happening anytime soon -- I've though them low, but as I read of the corruption charges rising and the continued sell-out of the American people by both parties (I was pro obama, but lately he's done anything but live up to his even a remote shadow of his promise).
Tea partiers have the right idea if they weren't all manipulated and p0wned by a bunch of right wing conservative think tanks. At least a few of them realize that the problem now, IS the government. A large controlling government making decisions that are not responsible to and not in the best interests of the people governed is no longer a government "of the people".
We need a new government that will again be responsible to and "of the people" and not to the corporations (the wealthy who've formed protective non-living bodies around them)....
You mean people find it easier to use other games than their crap DRM-laden game stuff like MASS Effect III which I've yet to get to run on my machine -- and am have been unable to contact their customer support because my email (ea@) is now "illegal" to contact "ea" with? (Still has my MEII and Dragon-AGE player records under that login, but now it's an illegal login for customer support.
Complete and utter Aholes. Hope they get 20c/$.
Wow... the US makes official propaganda statements just like the good ol' USSR, North Korea and China.... Sorta warms your heart to know we keep such good company.
How would you suggest recovering an email registered account without sending an email with a new tmp password?
You can't presume the user has anything other than the computer (or a computer) and email that they originally registered with...
Isn't google's idea of two factor authentication sending SMS messages to a phone?
AFAIK, landline phones don't have SMS and I certainly wouldn't want to pay extra for it -- HOWEVER, I know that gvoice will call your number and ask you to key in a number when you sign up, so offering that as an alternative 2nd factor for pw recovery (only) -- not login), would seem acceptable to me -- but there are others that may possess no phone and only a computer...
You can't design 2-factor authentication unless you are certain it's something that every user has and that says nothing of the convenience
issue.
I almost always access my accounts from a few home computers -- (usually just 1), yet the bastards still forcedme to change my password because that same computer tried to login several times to my gmail account due to thunderbird's settings being reset to defaults (normally it doesn't poll my gmail account nor access it unless I manually pull it)....but after a bad attempt at a Tbird upgrade, I reverted -- but google still forced a password change on me -- and now won't EVER let me use the old password again.
Apparently every password you ever use with google becomes part of it's statistical profile of you. This is especially useful if they force you to change it once in a while and are able to detect a pattern in your password usage. They could likely use it to preduct passwords to other sites some percentage of the time.
So much for "do no evil"...storing people's old passwords and forcing them to change periodically... AND being a data mining company that could use such info ... definitely falls into the evil category!
The only problem I have with this is -- what if you don't have a mobile phone?
It due to the retention factor.
You won't use the higher math, but having to pass it, means you reuse the lower math ALOT till it's 2nd nature and you can do it in your head. That's what is necessary to do most of the jobs.
Releasing something that's 20 yr/o tech, because no one wants it anymore, isn't necessarily a great thing -- but it might do wonders for valuing at some absurd amount and taking the write-off in taxes...
now if MS open sourced Win7 or better, WinXP, .. that would be useful,
but who uses CDE?
Tell that to the owner of the megadownloads...
The US freezes assets of accused people exactly so you DON'T have access to good defense. That's been true since Bush-I signed the zero tolerance and forfeiture laws in back almost 20 years ago.
The owner of the site who the US tried to have deported from New Zealand -- who didn't entirely cooperate...offered to come back to the US for trial if they unfroze his assets so he could mount a defense.
The Feds -- eh? Why should we bother? We got you shut down like our 'friends' (Hollywood) wanted, AND **WE** get to keep all of your assets -- the cops get to keep everything they confiscate! And the beauty is -- you, the used-to-be-owner, don't even have to be tried or found guilty... it was your property that was accused, and it doesn't have rights. So it isn't entitled to presumption of innocence, and the owner must pay for a trial and prove his property's innocence!!!
VERY Screwd up... has led to alot of cop corruption over the past
two decades -- including widely publicized evidence planting, and police-paid informants to send in tips so places could be raided -- and their owners shot dead (Ventura, CA 5$mill(1990's) ranch raided and owner shot in bedroom in dawn police raid to confiscate his ranch for profit by trying to find any drugs (a dime bag would do). There was nothing on the ranch and no indication of any illegal activity). The guy was clean -- DEAD clean.
The law doesn't require what they are doing. They are to respond to take down requests -- just because one of their own partners uploaded a pirated copy of the video doesn't mean the original should be taken down...
I'm seriously wondering if the news service got "exclusive rights" to the video before they subscribed to a Google service that presumes "exclusive rights" by any of their publishers -- whether or not it is... and in many cases is not.
Google is good about publishing the URL's of search results they were not allowed to show due to various requests -- and I know many of those URL's shouldn't have been blocked (and some likely 'should' under current corporate owned law), at least by publishing the requester's information and the URL, people can still see if the site falls under fair usage or even has the purported violation...
The idea that Apple's "patent", on the shape of something to display or transmit information is ludicrous to begin with -- in that light, showing movies from 30-40 years ago that show the usage of such devices, seems entirely pertinent to whether or not samsung violates apples patents or is following in the footsteps of 35 year-old SciFi, seems entire pertinent as a defense, as if it is the latter, then the obviousness of apple's patent -- and thus it's validity is completely at question. If samsung proves to a jury that apple's jury is baseless, they can vote to toss out any damages against samsung regardless of instructions about them only to decide if they violated a false and made-up law.
That's the entire basis of jury nullification of bad-laws...