These questions are so leading as to qualify at trolling and/or flamebait'. Just what OS do you thing they are using with Asterisk? (OK. That is also a leading question that qualifies as flamebait.) But more seriously, I don't think that the question is 'can Asterisk handle 30 calls?', but 'How much hardware do I need to handle 30 calls?' Or even more relavently, 'How does the cost of aquiring and running an Asterisk on Linux gateway compare with the corresponding costs for a commercial gateway?'
I think that this is one of several patent applications for software that should be used to shame the patent office and the corporations that apply for software patents on other people's work. Consider US Patent 6,775,781, with was filed by Microsoft on August 10, 2004. From the abstract:
A computer such as a network appliance executes an administrative security process configured to run under an administrative privilege level. Having an administrative privilege level, the administrative security process can initiate administrative functions in an operating system function library. A user process executing under a non-administrative privilege level can initiate a particular administrative function that the process would not otherwise be able to initiate by requesting that the administrative security process initiate the function. In response to a request to initiate a particular function from a process with a non-administrative privilege level, the administrative security process determines whether the requesting process is authorized to initiate the particular administrative function based on information accessed in a data store. If the requesting process is authorized, the administrative security process initiates the particular administrative function. In this manner, the administrative security process facilitates access to specific administrative functions for a user process having a privilege level that does not permit the user process to access the administrative functions.
This is a patent on their 'runas' command. But how is this different from the 'sudo' command that has been present on Unix-like systems since 1986. ( See http://www.courtesan.com/sudo/history.html for a history of sudo.) How dare Microsoft so blatantly steal the work of others, in this case the work of Bob Coggeshall, Cliff
Spencer, Garth Snyder, Bob Manchek, Trent Hein and Todd Miller. Hypocracy must be opposed, it is immoral. This is not only 'money gurbbing' at its worst, it amount to a theft of other people's work. We must all complain loudly and often to our elected officials.
This won't work, I already invented the infinite loop as a freshman. I even have documentation from the instructor that proves it, so I can demonstrate prior art.
This is exactly why asp web applciations scale poorly. You can decided to hold off and do all validation on a final post. But that isn't user friendly. If you validate each input using server controls, every control causes a round trip to a single server that has to access the user's session varables and respond. Client computers often use about 3% of their CPUs, so anytime you can move the validation to the client, you will make the application more responsive and you will reduce the load on the server. Client-side validation can be a big win UNLESS you have two users fighting over a single record (e.g. on-line reservation system) or when the amount of data needed to do the validation would be prohibitive (e.g. In principle, I can almost always figure out the state and city from the zip code, so you can write a web form that would autopopulate the, downloading every valid state/city/zip combination in the US so you could autopopulate the city and state values web form. I know that there are zipcodes that span city and even state borders, but they are rare and a dropdown with two cities is much nicer than a dropdown of every municipality in California.)
In my opinion, a good web developer will use server-side validation as a last resort.
I with you. I only allow 'users' to surf the web. The only time an 'admin' account is allowed on the net is to connect to microsoft and install software.
I don't believe that touchez means 'touch it', that would be touchez-la. (Or touchez-le, if one prefers to touch masculine things) By itself, touchez is the second person, plural form of toucher, or 'to touch' in English. I was correctly caught mistaking whose for who's. This was mildly embarassing, so I was joking about being stung by the comment. A judge in fencing would anounce touche, but an oponent that was struck might say 'touchez' or even 'touchez-moi' to the oponent that landed a blow.
A traffic cop can the person standing in the street directing traffic and seeing that one confused persons doesn't stop everyone, at least if the cop can help it. This seems to be a rather good analogy for what is being proposed. No one in this article is suggesting that the NSA become a cyber 'SWAT' teams that can as shock troops against criminals. The evolution of the NDA's role from traffic cop to SWAT team will depend upon the will of the American people, a thought that I find disquieting but not hopeless.
Messiah's soft cover quantum books are ok. The thick covers are nearly drool-proof. In comparison, hard covers on Jackson's E&M text gets pretty gross after a few sleep/drooling sessions. All this is, of course, hypothetical.
First, she has ended up getting credit, even if it was after her death. The lack of a Nobel prize is due to the rules of the prize rather than suppression by others. Besides, if she had published, rather than shared, she would have gotten more credit.
There is fierce competition in science, and it does have economic consequences for the researchers. But, the competion is to publish, not to discover. You MUST share to produce value. I have heard producing results but not publishing as 'mental masturbation'. The point is clear, its may feel alot like something productive, but is isn't fruitful. This is just like open source, creating perfect software that nobody uses doesn't get you fame. So, I think that good science is an excellent example of the same economics as open source software.
Use Subversion for document management. Access via WebDAV (using Apache) and you have a document repopistory that has secure (SSL) access over the web. This does most of what I use for 'document management' and Subversion is actually efficient (in that the bandwidth is proportional to the changes in the repository, not the size of the repository itself.)
Concerning policy management, what cannot be done via SSH? You can have simple scripts (stored in subversion, of course) that are either pulled from each client or pushed via ssh from a central server.
For truely centralized control, create a 'office application server' that users can access via thin clients; Linux or WinCE will do fine. Just remember to 'wince' if you must choose the latter!
I have a problem with your analogy. To improve the analogy, recall that Acme didn't invent the sesspit; there have been sesspits since the begining of time. Acme found a way to make sesspits with a cute interface (e.g. toilet) that people like to use, even though the parts you cannot see leak shit into the groundwater and is a breeding ground for all kinds of virii. But this is only a problem for plumbers and they don't don't control sesspit purchases.
Acme then decided to patent what had been in the public domain. Since sesspits have exsited longer than patents, everybody thought that patenting a sesspit was silly since there was 'prior art'. Still, now that Acme has an untested sesspit patent, nobody is very eater to test the patent and risk getting sued/kneecapped by Acme's team of laywers/thugs. So, most people just keep on using Acme.
Please read the third item. This is clearly describling a Unix-like system with a/tmp directory and xpdf as a pdf viewer. This isn't what you find on Windows. This whole issue is a tempest in a teapot. All of these issues are closed and the 'fix' is simply to run the current package. Just 'portupgrade' or whatever your system uses to update packages and ignore this warning.
So read up on Shannon's information theory. The information content of both digital and analog are well understood by advanced EE's (and/or physicists and mathameticians). Not surprisingly, you can change between digital and analog signals without loss of information.
The point is Peter has reached the end of the year and he is hoping to get his year-end FUD bonus from his employer. So, he had to work hard to find a feature that allows him to say IE is more secure than Firefox. You have to admire his chutzpah - and chutzpah is always in demand when Microsoft discusses security.
That's what I was thinking, this sounds like caffine without the jitters. What do you bet that the first round of brain enhancing drugs will be released for people with measureable chemical imballances. But it will then be advertised as a 'mental Viagra'. It will then be released and dangerous side effects will be discovered by the first round of 'human guinea pigs' that take this. This will be just like the recent issues raised about all the cox-2 inhibitors (e.g. Celebrex) that address arthritis pain by giving you a heart attack.
So, we Americans are not only get to pay more than the rest of the world for drugs, we also get to be the guinea pigs.
Where are you getting that? If he chooses a 4 letter word to encode, then there are at most 26^4 = 456,976 combination. Most of those are not easy to remember words. So this will only generate a relatively small number of distinct passwords. If the code sheet is comprimised, then this isn't very good. If the original 4 letter word is easy to guess and the sheet is lost, this method is very weak.
If we assume that the code sheet is a secret, then this becomes a much stronger way to generate passwords. Lets say I correctly guess that his password is 'bank', but I don't have his cheat sheet. There are (26+26+10+10)^2 = 5184 possible symbols for each letter, assuming that we use only 10 special characters. If we have 4 of these symbols, that gives 5184^4 = 722,204,136,308,736 combinations. This is pretty good.
thanks... I should have taken more EE and less physics:-) Then I might be better at getting $$$ for my schooling. Oh well... The world is full of interesting and useful things to learn. Now I can tell my kids yet another reason why imaginary numbers really matter.
Slashdot Mirror
These questions are so leading as to qualify at trolling and/or flamebait'. Just what OS do you thing they are using with Asterisk? (OK. That is also a leading question that qualifies as flamebait.) But more seriously, I don't think that the question is 'can Asterisk handle 30 calls?', but 'How much hardware do I need to handle 30 calls?' Or even more relavently, 'How does the cost of aquiring and running an Asterisk on Linux gateway compare with the corresponding costs for a commercial gateway?'
This won't work, I already invented the infinite loop as a freshman. I even have documentation from the instructor that proves it, so I can demonstrate prior art.
In my opinion, a good web developer will use server-side validation as a last resort.
I with you. I only allow 'users' to surf the web. The only time an 'admin' account is allowed on the net is to connect to microsoft and install software.
I don't believe that touchez means 'touch it', that would be touchez-la. (Or touchez-le, if one prefers to touch masculine things) By itself, touchez is the second person, plural form of toucher, or 'to touch' in English. I was correctly caught mistaking whose for who's. This was mildly embarassing, so I was joking about being stung by the comment. A judge in fencing would anounce touche, but an oponent that was struck might say 'touchez' or even 'touchez-moi' to the oponent that landed a blow.
touchez!
while ( reader.exasperation < 1):
Knock Knock.
Whose there?
Phillip.
Phillip Who?
Phillip Glass please, I'm thirsty
And conseqequently .. the title Ambiguous proves to be correct :-)
A traffic cop can the person standing in the street directing traffic and seeing that one confused persons doesn't stop everyone, at least if the cop can help it. This seems to be a rather good analogy for what is being proposed. No one in this article is suggesting that the NSA become a cyber 'SWAT' teams that can as shock troops against criminals. The evolution of the NDA's role from traffic cop to SWAT team will depend upon the will of the American people, a thought that I find disquieting but not hopeless.
Messiah's soft cover quantum books are ok. The thick covers are nearly drool-proof. In comparison, hard covers on Jackson's E&M text gets pretty gross after a few sleep/drooling sessions. All this is, of course, hypothetical.
There is fierce competition in science, and it does have economic consequences for the researchers. But, the competion is to publish, not to discover. You MUST share to produce value. I have heard producing results but not publishing as 'mental masturbation'. The point is clear, its may feel alot like something productive, but is isn't fruitful. This is just like open source, creating perfect software that nobody uses doesn't get you fame. So, I think that good science is an excellent example of the same economics as open source software.
I prefer kshing and zshing to bashing when it comes to Unix.
Concerning policy management, what cannot be done via SSH? You can have simple scripts (stored in subversion, of course) that are either pulled from each client or pushed via ssh from a central server.
For truely centralized control, create a 'office application server' that users can access via thin clients; Linux or WinCE will do fine. Just remember to 'wince' if you must choose the latter!
I have a problem with your analogy. To improve the analogy, recall that Acme didn't invent the sesspit; there have been sesspits since the begining of time. Acme found a way to make sesspits with a cute interface (e.g. toilet) that people like to use, even though the parts you cannot see leak shit into the groundwater and is a breeding ground for all kinds of virii. But this is only a problem for plumbers and they don't don't control sesspit purchases.
Acme then decided to patent what had been in the public domain. Since sesspits have exsited longer than patents, everybody thought that patenting a sesspit was silly since there was 'prior art'. Still, now that Acme has an untested sesspit patent, nobody is very eater to test the patent and risk getting sued/kneecapped by Acme's team of laywers/thugs. So, most people just keep on using Acme.
How is this animal cruelty !? Would geeks give the bears indigestion?
given the quality of the original comment, I think this fall under the 'typo/oops' category.
Please read the third item. This is clearly describling a Unix-like system with a /tmp directory and xpdf as a pdf viewer. This isn't what you find on Windows. This whole issue is a tempest in a teapot. All of these issues are closed and the 'fix' is simply to run the current package. Just 'portupgrade' or whatever your system uses to update packages and ignore this warning.
So read up on Shannon's information theory. The information content of both digital and analog are well understood by advanced EE's (and/or physicists and mathameticians). Not surprisingly, you can change between digital and analog signals without loss of information.
The point is Peter has reached the end of the year and he is hoping to get his year-end FUD bonus from his employer. So, he had to work hard to find a feature that allows him to say IE is more secure than Firefox. You have to admire his chutzpah - and chutzpah is always in demand when Microsoft discusses security.
So, we Americans are not only get to pay more than the rest of the world for drugs, we also get to be the guinea pigs.
If we assume that the code sheet is a secret, then this becomes a much stronger way to generate passwords. Lets say I correctly guess that his password is 'bank', but I don't have his cheat sheet. There are (26+26+10+10)^2 = 5184 possible symbols for each letter, assuming that we use only 10 special characters. If we have 4 of these symbols, that gives 5184^4 = 722,204,136,308,736 combinations. This is pretty good.
Am I missing something? Whete did you get 358800?
what dime store do you go to? I must have been a lot racier than the one in my neigborhood. The dime store is gone, another WalMart victim.
thanks... I should have taken more EE and less physics :-) Then I might be better at getting $$$ for my schooling. Oh well... The world is full of interesting and useful things to learn. Now I can tell my kids yet another reason why imaginary numbers really matter.
No, but at 1 Gbps, 75 MB will take 8 bits/byte * 75 ms = 600 ms to download. What will Vodafone do for the rest of the month?