I'm all for online voting, but I don't think it will (nor should) cure voter apathy. It seems that everyone is concerned about these people who don't vote. I say: let them not vote! If people don't care enough to go out and vote, they most likely don't care enough to educate themselves about who or what they are voting for. And the last thing we need in this country are (more) people hitting the voting booths who don't have a clue about the issues, candidates, or party platforms beyond the sound bites they hear on the 5-o'clock news. And yes, if I don't know much about a ballot item, I don't cast a vote one way or the other -- I don't want my uneducated random choice to cancel out the vote of somebody who knows what they are doing, and I would expect the same courtesy in return.
But yes, online voting would definitely make the process more convenient for those of us who do care enough to educate themselves about what's on a particular ballot, so I'm all for it.
According to this link in the article, the Sharp set is powered by an lithium ion battery. This link for the Sony set makes no mention of a battery, which leads me to believe that one would still need an outlet to power the display.
According to this page, Sony will be selling a black 17" widescreen wireless TV beginning May 10th for 210,000 yen ($1,752) and a silver 15" 4:3 aspect ratio model beginning June 1st for 165,000 yen ($1,377). But it does not appear that they are selling any wireless TVs yet (as the article leads one to believe).
And yes, there are some very good reasons to have a wireless television set. The only cable jack in my apartment is in the living room. My only television is a TV tuner in the computer in my bedroom (diagonally opposite end of the apartment from the living room). I had to go buy a 50ft coaxial and run it from one corner of my apartment to the other just to watch TV (not sure why I bothered, really). So yes, if I had a wireless television, I would no longer need to be careful not to trip over a 50ft coaxial when walking through my apartment. Also, a wireless TV set would allow folks to more easily watch TV from the backyard while having a barbecue, or perhaps from a patio while keeping an eye on the kids in the pool (because, if you can afford to spend more than $1,000 for a small TV set, you probably also have a pool).
Intel is planning to unveil later this week a new technological innovation that will increase the maximum amount of RAM their motherboard chipsets can address. More at 11...
"...the SQL people with their database have no basis for interfering with the Mozilla people and their specialty browser."
Actually, I think they do have a basis for interfering...
The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that the SQL people are mostly making all this fuss to get the massive amounts (relatively speaking here, folks) of free publicity for their project. I'd never heard of them until this Mozilla Phoenix/Firebird mess, so I guess it must be working.
Hiring a former cracker to secure your network could be an extremely valuable move. Why? Because they know the mindset and thought processes of one who is trying to compromise system security. This is not something that can be learned through college courses or workplace experience. Oh sure, you probably learn a lot with both of those, but it's always at least one step behind (you're only learning how to prevent those techniques, exploits, and patterns thereof that people have tried before). Former crackers can more easily step into an adversary's shoes, potentially giving their company valuable insight.
"Therefore, I say: Know your enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles, you will never be defeated. When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal." -- Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Chapter 3
Besides, if a company's network were compromised mysteriously by someone on the inside, who do you think would immediately be the prime suspect? No reasonably intelligent former cracker would ever do such a stupid thing.
Furthermore, regarding your analogies:
I would hire a convicted embezzler to keep track of my savings account if it were in danger of being attacked by numerous embezzlers on a daily basis (much like how corporate networks are attacked by crackers). And, for the same reasons as above.
And your rapist analogy is quite off base seeing how, even if one's daughter were in danger of being attacked by numerous rapists on a daily basis, such an attack would be extremely easy to spot and would require absolutely no special skills to help prevent (other than, maybe, not being a quadriplegic mute). A sufficiently trained monkey could stop a rapist -- and a sufficiently trained monkey could probably be a rapist. =)
You don't have to "watch the trailer for an idea of its scale and majesty." You could instead watch the movie itself. =)
And the voice over can be a bit misleading...
Shot in a single take. The first two attempts were cut short by technical difficulties, but the third was successful.
Because the Hermitage museum had to be shut down, the production had only one day to shoot the film.
"Acadia Research has sent hundreds of letters to various porn web sites... picking on the small fry before trying to take on well-heeled companies such as Disney."
By 'various porn web sites' do you mean the single largest online industry and the driving force behind countless advancements of the internet over the years? I think it's safe to say that Acadia Research chose the wrong 'small fry' to pick on.
"Everyone who has seen the first Harry Potter movie knows the brutal truth about what really happens when you 'capture' a piece in chess."
Or perhaps Star Wars and that round-boarded holographic chess game Chewy and R2-D2 were playing.
"They might also point out that only one piece out of 16 on each side is female. Why not half? It's sexist as well as violent!"
Ah yes, but she is by far the most powerful piece on the board, can be resurrected from the dead, and can be cloned. Besides, do you honestly believe that the King is the one in command? Hell no! That manipulative bitch is the one really pulling the strings in that army! She's obviously more than willing to let the other male pieces get slaughtered in the violent carnage while she hides behind her protective line of foot-soldier/cannon-fodder pawns (who are, no doubt, meager peasants forced to fight for the royalty to keep their farms). Oh yeah, she'll dart out every once in a while to attack, but as soon as she's threatened directly, she'll turn tail and run.
Deathrace 2000 -- Stalone getting 2nd billing to David Carradine in this wonderfuly-horrible 1975 film
Six Sting Samurai Bound The Big Hit -- agree with the author on this one
The Game -- great movie I hardly ever hear about
The Killing Fields Brazil 12 Monkeys The Fisher King The Adventures of Baron Munchausen Waking Ned Devine Flight of the Navigator -- childhood favorite
Tigerland Jesus' Son -- about a heroin addict, not Jesus and a kid. =)
Shower -- Chinese movie
Panic -- William H. Macy as a reluctant hitman, 'nuf said (haha)
So long as one does not have to wade through pay-for-placement listings before coming across something useful, Google will maintain their lead. No matter how much money Yahoo or Overture throw at their search engines, I want to find what I'm looking for in the first page or two of my search results (which doesn't always happen anyway), not what somebody else wants me to find.
How much has changed?
on
Ask Kevin Mitnick
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The evolution of the online world is an apparently gradual process to most of us who get on the internet many times each day. You have had a unique experience in that you stepped out of that world for a number of years before being allowed to step back in. We all know that technology improves a great deal in as little as a few months, so the differences between the online world you left and that which you are re-joining must be large (in degree and in number).
Which of these differences are the most significant, and have any of these changes been a step backward?
The problem with a "spammer's license" is that enforcing restrictions on one could easily be tied with the issue of corporate free speech -- something the Supreme Court has on its plate.
With the current bipartisan agreement that a tax cut is a good idea to stimulate the economy (they just seem to argue over who's taxes should be cut), I have to wonder what the real thinking is behind all this talk of adding a new internet sales tax. Ok, maybe some states will be just enforcing laws already on the books, maybe not, but it's still a new tax payment for a great majority of folks.
What is it?! Should my federal taxes be lowered so that I can pay some new internet sales tax to the state? Why don't they just give money directly to the states and ignore the general populous instead?
It seems that either: A) state politicians are too chickenshit to cut their budgets and piss off their over-demanding constituency B) they're greedy for more funds and don't give a hoot about the national economy as a whole C) a combination of the two.
Either way, I think an internet sales tax would (at least partially) cut any federal tax-cutting stimulus package off at the knees.
Logitech MX Series Mice
on
Hardware Block
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Tom's Hardware has a decent review of the new Logitech MX series of mice (MX300, MX500, MX700). About as in-depth as you can get with something as simple as a mouse, I think.
Nintendo will curtail piracy of their games because nobody will want to play anything on their older generation hardware.
Then again, with the huge number of people in China, Nintendo would only have to sell their old leftover hardware to a sliver of the population for it to be successful.
But this begs the question: did they not sell enough N64 and SNES consoles in China the first time around? If they did, they've got competition from all their old stuff floating around in 2nd-hand stores over there. And if they didn't, what makes them think this re-release of their out-dated stuff will do any better?
Assuming McAfee wants to use the SpamAssassin name, and assuming they try to make the open source project find a new name... wouldn't the open source project benefit greatly just by the exposure and publicity gained through such a move?
Ok, we're not talking a CNN breaking news story here, but I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that I had never even heard of SpamAssassin until just now via/. -- that's an increase in public exposure already. For a typical open source project (meaning: advertising efforts rely mainly on word-of-mouth and product reviews), there's the potential for great benefit here. If the open source SpamAssassin project makes a good product, nobody will remember a name change controversy one or two years down the line; but there's no doubt that more people will have been made aware that such a project existed in the first place.
No, 277 cells of cloned DNA were created; only a small percentage of those split and showed promise of being successful. They impregnated 10 humans -- 5 fetuses (feti?) were "terminated," one baby has (apparantly) been born, and 4 more are due in the next month or so.
Side note: some cloning guy on CNN said that cloning success rates in established labs (not with humans, of course) could be as high as 60% relative to the number of impregnations. So this claimed 50% rate doesn't seem too unbelievable.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder....
Do ham radio hobbiests ever run into bandwidth crowding problems at these sorts of events?
I'm all for online voting, but I don't think it will (nor should) cure voter apathy. It seems that everyone is concerned about these people who don't vote. I say: let them not vote! If people don't care enough to go out and vote, they most likely don't care enough to educate themselves about who or what they are voting for. And the last thing we need in this country are (more) people hitting the voting booths who don't have a clue about the issues, candidates, or party platforms beyond the sound bites they hear on the 5-o'clock news. And yes, if I don't know much about a ballot item, I don't cast a vote one way or the other -- I don't want my uneducated random choice to cancel out the vote of somebody who knows what they are doing, and I would expect the same courtesy in return.
But yes, online voting would definitely make the process more convenient for those of us who do care enough to educate themselves about what's on a particular ballot, so I'm all for it.
According to this link in the article, the Sharp set is powered by an lithium ion battery. This link for the Sony set makes no mention of a battery, which leads me to believe that one would still need an outlet to power the display.
According to this page, Sony will be selling a black 17" widescreen wireless TV beginning May 10th for 210,000 yen ($1,752) and a silver 15" 4:3 aspect ratio model beginning June 1st for 165,000 yen ($1,377). But it does not appear that they are selling any wireless TVs yet (as the article leads one to believe).
And yes, there are some very good reasons to have a wireless television set. The only cable jack in my apartment is in the living room. My only television is a TV tuner in the computer in my bedroom (diagonally opposite end of the apartment from the living room). I had to go buy a 50ft coaxial and run it from one corner of my apartment to the other just to watch TV (not sure why I bothered, really). So yes, if I had a wireless television, I would no longer need to be careful not to trip over a 50ft coaxial when walking through my apartment. Also, a wireless TV set would allow folks to more easily watch TV from the backyard while having a barbecue, or perhaps from a patio while keeping an eye on the kids in the pool (because, if you can afford to spend more than $1,000 for a small TV set, you probably also have a pool).
This just in!
Hard drive capacities are on the rise!
Intel is planning to unveil later this week a new technological innovation that will increase the maximum amount of RAM their motherboard chipsets can address.
More at 11...
"...the SQL people with their database have no basis for interfering with the Mozilla people and their specialty browser."
Actually, I think they do have a basis for interfering...
The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that the SQL people are mostly making all this fuss to get the massive amounts (relatively speaking here, folks) of free publicity for their project. I'd never heard of them until this Mozilla Phoenix/Firebird mess, so I guess it must be working.
Hiring a former cracker to secure your network could be an extremely valuable move. Why? Because they know the mindset and thought processes of one who is trying to compromise system security. This is not something that can be learned through college courses or workplace experience. Oh sure, you probably learn a lot with both of those, but it's always at least one step behind (you're only learning how to prevent those techniques, exploits, and patterns thereof that people have tried before). Former crackers can more easily step into an adversary's shoes, potentially giving their company valuable insight.
"Therefore, I say: Know your enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles, you will never be defeated. When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal." -- Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Chapter 3
Besides, if a company's network were compromised mysteriously by someone on the inside, who do you think would immediately be the prime suspect? No reasonably intelligent former cracker would ever do such a stupid thing.
Furthermore, regarding your analogies:
I would hire a convicted embezzler to keep track of my savings account if it were in danger of being attacked by numerous embezzlers on a daily basis (much like how corporate networks are attacked by crackers). And, for the same reasons as above.
And your rapist analogy is quite off base seeing how, even if one's daughter were in danger of being attacked by numerous rapists on a daily basis, such an attack would be extremely easy to spot and would require absolutely no special skills to help prevent (other than, maybe, not being a quadriplegic mute). A sufficiently trained monkey could stop a rapist -- and a sufficiently trained monkey could probably be a rapist. =)
And the voice over can be a bit misleading...
- Shot in a single take. The first two attempts were cut short by technical difficulties, but the third was successful.
- Because the Hermitage museum had to be shut down, the production had only one day to shoot the film.
(shamelessly copied from IMDB)"Acadia Research has sent hundreds of letters to various porn web sites ... picking on the small fry before trying to take on well-heeled companies such as Disney."
By 'various porn web sites' do you mean the single largest online industry and the driving force behind countless advancements of the internet over the years? I think it's safe to say that Acadia Research chose the wrong 'small fry' to pick on.
Are you speaking of those tall, hard, stiff, unwavering pillars?
"Do you think maybe he's compensating for something?"
-Shrek
"Everyone who has seen the first Harry Potter movie knows the brutal truth about what really happens when you 'capture' a piece in chess."
Or perhaps Star Wars and that round-boarded holographic chess game Chewy and R2-D2 were playing.
"They might also point out that only one piece out of 16 on each side is female. Why not half? It's sexist as well as violent!"
Ah yes, but she is by far the most powerful piece on the board, can be resurrected from the dead, and can be cloned. Besides, do you honestly believe that the King is the one in command? Hell no! That manipulative bitch is the one really pulling the strings in that army! She's obviously more than willing to let the other male pieces get slaughtered in the violent carnage while she hides behind her protective line of foot-soldier/cannon-fodder pawns (who are, no doubt, meager peasants forced to fight for the royalty to keep their farms). Oh yeah, she'll dart out every once in a while to attack, but as soon as she's threatened directly, she'll turn tail and run.
Deathrace 2000 -- Stalone getting 2nd billing to David Carradine in this wonderfuly-horrible 1975 film
Six Sting Samurai
Bound
The Big Hit -- agree with the author on this one
The Game -- great movie I hardly ever hear about
The Killing Fields
Brazil
12 Monkeys
The Fisher King
The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
Waking Ned Devine
Flight of the Navigator -- childhood favorite
Tigerland
Jesus' Son -- about a heroin addict, not Jesus and a kid. =)
Shower -- Chinese movie
Panic -- William H. Macy as a reluctant hitman, 'nuf said (haha)
Really? ... interesting.
Even states (like Montana) that have no sales tax?!
How
So long as one does not have to wade through pay-for-placement listings before coming across something useful, Google will maintain their lead. No matter how much money Yahoo or Overture throw at their search engines, I want to find what I'm looking for in the first page or two of my search results (which doesn't always happen anyway), not what somebody else wants me to find.
The evolution of the online world is an apparently gradual process to most of us who get on the internet many times each day. You have had a unique experience in that you stepped out of that world for a number of years before being allowed to step back in. We all know that technology improves a great deal in as little as a few months, so the differences between the online world you left and that which you are re-joining must be large (in degree and in number).
Which of these differences are the most significant, and have any of these changes been a step backward?
No, I mean that if one has a "spammer's license," then one could conceivably have it taken away -- hence the issue of corporate free speech.
The problem with a "spammer's license" is that enforcing restrictions on one could easily be tied with the issue of corporate free speech -- something the Supreme Court has on its plate.
With the current bipartisan agreement that a tax cut is a good idea to stimulate the economy (they just seem to argue over who's taxes should be cut), I have to wonder what the real thinking is behind all this talk of adding a new internet sales tax. Ok, maybe some states will be just enforcing laws already on the books, maybe not, but it's still a new tax payment for a great majority of folks.
What is it?! Should my federal taxes be lowered so that I can pay some new internet sales tax to the state? Why don't they just give money directly to the states and ignore the general populous instead?
It seems that either:
A) state politicians are too chickenshit to cut their budgets and piss off their over-demanding constituency
B) they're greedy for more funds and don't give a hoot about the national economy as a whole
C) a combination of the two.
Either way, I think an internet sales tax would (at least partially) cut any federal tax-cutting stimulus package off at the knees.
Tom's Hardware has a decent review of the new Logitech MX series of mice (MX300, MX500, MX700). About as in-depth as you can get with something as simple as a mouse, I think.
Nintendo will curtail piracy of their games because nobody will want to play anything on their older generation hardware.
Then again, with the huge number of people in China, Nintendo would only have to sell their old leftover hardware to a sliver of the population for it to be successful.
But this begs the question: did they not sell enough N64 and SNES consoles in China the first time around? If they did, they've got competition from all their old stuff floating around in 2nd-hand stores over there. And if they didn't, what makes them think this re-release of their out-dated stuff will do any better?
And now you did too! Congratulations, and welcome to the club! =)
(albeit, your whining is from a different angle; but it's still centered around the monthly fee)
Bill Mahr: Makes a shitload You'll notice that I've not included Spock the Baptist. That just wouldn't be fair... =)
Assuming McAfee wants to use the SpamAssassin name, and assuming they try to make the open source project find a new name...
/. -- that's an increase in public exposure already. For a typical open source project (meaning: advertising efforts rely mainly on word-of-mouth and product reviews), there's the potential for great benefit here. If the open source SpamAssassin project makes a good product, nobody will remember a name change controversy one or two years down the line; but there's no doubt that more people will have been made aware that such a project existed in the first place.
wouldn't the open source project benefit greatly just by the exposure and publicity gained through such a move?
Ok, we're not talking a CNN breaking news story here, but I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that I had never even heard of SpamAssassin until just now via
No, 277 cells of cloned DNA were created; only a small percentage of those split and showed promise of being successful. They impregnated 10 humans -- 5 fetuses (feti?) were "terminated," one baby has (apparantly) been born, and 4 more are due in the next month or so. Side note: some cloning guy on CNN said that cloning success rates in established labs (not with humans, of course) could be as high as 60% relative to the number of impregnations. So this claimed 50% rate doesn't seem too unbelievable.