Assuming that "Walkie Talkies" means the old AM CB kind, you should find that using more modern FRS, or preferably the more powerful GMRS (your school should have no problem getting the license), radios should solve your problem.
I use the motorola FRS radios every time I go anywhere outside the US, and my wife and I have no problem contacting each other in Hotels, malls, airports, etc.
Compare prices here: http://www.nextag.com/All~frs+gmrs+radioz0zB4zmain z5-htm
I sent Forbes the following, under the subject "Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish"
Begin quote-------------------
I don't understand Forbes sympathy for a business model that shifts its cost of doing business to an unwilling participant. Faxes cost money to receive. As such, you have no right to send someone an unsolicited fax solely for the benefit of YOUR business.
Given Forbes basic capitalist/libertarian viewpoint, I don't see how you can justify this type of business. The same is true for SPAM.
It is because the SENDER bears the cost of junk-mail and phone solicitations that those are, at least until you actively send a cease-and-desist of some kind, legal.
When the bulk of the cost (paper, ink, storage, processing and routing) is borne by the recipient, the sender should be REQUIRED to solicit and PROVE consent.
Fax.com and the rest of the junk faxers and spammers are parasitic scum who use the resources of unwilling recipients to fund their business. From a strictly economic viewpoint this is a bad thing, as it diverts the resources of businesses from the conduct of their business. From a moral standpoint it is equally vile. No-one should be allowed to take the resources of another for their own benefit without their consent.
I would have thought that that principle would be basic to Forbes' editorial viewpoint.
And Greenpeace aren't head cases? What do you call ramming Sailboats with powerboats because you don't like their sponsor?
Believe it or not, some of us happen to think owning firearms and hunting are basic human rights and necessary survival skills, your religion ( which is what environmentalism is) notwithstanding.
The "Deep Ecology" movement is at least as intolerant and militant a fundamentalist religion as militant Islam. It also presents a much greater threat to human life. After all, one of environmentalism's greatest "achievements", the banning of DDT, causes the deaths of over 1 Million people a year from Malaria.
Can you please:
a: Post URLS as hrefs, so we can click on them.
b: Post hosts that are at least RESOLVABLE. This host doesn't resolve. I can understand 404 due to the/. effect, but not something that doesn't even show up in the DNS (in fact, none of the sub-zones in the URL resolve).
Moderators, PLEASE check the darn URL before modding up. This post was a freaking waste of space.
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost msfc.nasa.gov ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost nasa.gov ;; Got answer:
etc. etc.
What we've got right now is an establishment of Environmentalism as the new worldwide government sponsored and supported religion.
Michael Crichton said it best in a speech in September.
Come on guys, why are we modding offtopic (NT) and Flamebait offtopic (WMD) as Funny or Insightful./. SNR is approaching the 3dB rolloff these days.
I'm going to have to start browsing @ 7, and modding funny -2.
What the UN, and the morons that ejected Paul Twomey from the meeting, don't understand, is that in order for their edicts to hold sway, the Internet must adopt them.
They have no real power, and they have even less over a network based on collaborative peering.
You can't dictate any change to the Internet. It has to be adopted by consensus. These self-important NWO Bureaucrats can say whatever they want, exclude whoever they want, and ruminate in whatever way they want. The Internet is no more under their control than it is under mine.
The fact is, the UN is less and less relevant. When despotic African kleptocrats and sponsors of terrorism got to chair human rights and anti-terrorist commissions, the whole thing was shown up for what it's been since the 1972 oil embargo: Bad window dressing on the failure of Metternick's fancy of a world government of nobles.
Who cares about the UN, let them waste breath and money at will. They have no real power. Power comes from the governed, and the Internauts care naught for the UN.
I actually decided that this one was worth replying to SCO on, so I posted this throught the comment page of their website:
Having read your recent open letter, I'm a bit confused. I am not a lawyer, although I've been involved in enough work in contract and intellectual property law over the years that I think I have a well-tuned BS filter.
What are you trying to say?
Are you saying that you have a case against IBM? That is for the court to decide.
Are you saying that you have a case against all Linux users? Once again, that is for the courts to decide. You have claimed that you will offer indemnity to those that buy your binary licenses, but you have not made the delivery of such licenses actually possible, which could be used as a defense by anyone you choose to sue. You also have offered no evidence that you do, in fact, have a cause of action against Linux users. Short of evidence and some opinion that Linux DOES include code that was misappropriated (as opposed to contributed by SCO, its agents or assigns in the Caldera days), your threats border on barratry.
The way the letter was written is half legal argument, half sophistry. It reminds me a lot of the breathless non-sequiturs stock newsletter promoters string together for their hype sheets. Perhaps that is its intent, to hype your stock. It seems, more and more, that this is the intent of your whole suit and associated noise making.
What you are doing looks more and more like a pump-and-dump.
It's too bad. SCO used to be a half-way decent company. If you had stuck to improving your products, by coming out with SVR4 Open Server sometime soon after its general availability, as opposed to limping along with a set of kludges on top of SVR3.2 for nearly a decade, and doing some "reference implementation" that included a real UI, etc., instead of leaving Unix to degenerate into a Tower of Babel, you probably would have an actual business, as opposed to being a roadblock in the way of progress for the industry.
Why don't you go back to whatever hole you crawled out of, and let Boies go back to trying to thwart the electoral process.
Whoever wrote this is illiterate. Comma splices, subordinate clauses, and nouns used as adjectives everywhere. It scores 5.6 on Deloitte's Bullfighter, which is on the bad side of the median.
I've received Nigerian Letters with better prose.
So either:
1: Darl wrote it himself (it seems to fit with his manner of speech from the nterviews with him that I have read).
2: SCO's PR guys are pretty bad.
Whatever you can say about Boies et al, they are very literate. I've seen and read enough of Boies to know he didn't write this screed.
My 1989 Jeep Wrangler, the first OBDC based Jeep (2.5L TBI 4Cyl) is still running, original engine and electronics. The computer and the engine have outlasted 5 Sets of Brakes, 4 Sets of tires, 4 Catalytic Converters, 3 Exhausts, 3 Clutches (Hydraulic), 2 interiors, 3 stereos, and 2 suspensions (I off-road a lot). Despite having a full set of trail racks, lock-boxes, beefed up suspension and driveline (slip yoke eliminator, Dana 44 4.11 Diffs), it still gets 15 MPG average, and that is including a LOT of 4WD on dirt.
My 2000 Audi S4 also has had no computer related problems (Blown Tranny and Turbo, but that was from driving a tad hard on mountain roads).
Prior to that, my 1994 Acura Integra LS ran flawlessly for 6 years, and it had all the computer-controlled bells and whistles you'd expect from a VVT car.
Maybe the problem is BMW (Audi owner snicker as we note their running away from Le Mans with their tail between their legs)?
I am writing to oppose the Anti-Trust exemption for the recording and movie industries proposed by Sen. Orrin Hatch as part of the EnFORCE act, as well as to express my opinions about the continuing increase in legal protections and exemptions beign given to the recording and motion-picture industries. These industries have repeatedly and demonstrably engaged in illegal and unethical business practices from the days of payola, through the exploitative contracts with artists, to the current day; when they have used the draconian police-state powers granted them in the DMCA to do thingslike: sue 12 year old honor students (and take away money they sorely need for school); or erroneously sieze the property of 66 year old grandmothers. They have consistently shown themselves to be untrustworthy, and engaged in scummy business practices and fascist enforcement actions that would have any DA lose their next election. Granting them an anti-trust exemption will only give them further free reign to abuse their content producers, and browbeat their customers. We rightly reserve police powers for the government, where we have the checks and balances of a democracy. Granting the power of collusion on top of the existing ones is asking for wholesale abuse of individual rights.
Congress has, over the past several years, engaged in a wholesale giveaway to a small, already wealthy, group by extending copyrights and treating ordinary consumers as criminals, all while providing the content providers with legal mechanisms to circumvent the well established rights of first sale and fair use. The result has been an escalating arms race between an industry that produces art as an industrial product, and consumers who want entertainment in a convenient, suited to their personal tastes, and reasonably priced manner.
Despite the industry's assertions to the contrary, it is the fact that people see little value in their products, as well as the fact that they failed to take advantage of the new, lower cost, distribution models, leaving a void that has been filled by non-US companies, that are the causes of their decline. Producing an ever-more homogenous, focus-group derived, predictable, stream of lower average quality and little or no variety, which therefore only appeals to a clearly identified minority: Middle-Class Mall-Rats aged 15-24, is the problem, not music "theft". Nor, regardless of what they say, is the current decline in music sales unprecedented. It happened towards the end of the 1970's, before the arrival of Punk Rock. Then, as now, the products of the RIAA were insipid, predictable, and uncreative, and touched no chord among the populace.
Last, but not least, each and every time that a new means of delivering entertainment in a more felxible way, usually with the ability for the consumer to copy it, has arrived; the content industries have screamed foul, and fought it tooth and nail, claiming that it would run them out of business. In all the cases where they were unsuccessful (Cassette Tapes, VCR, CD-R), the result was at worst non-existent, at best an increase in sales as users bought pre-recorded music in the new format rather than deal with the hassle of making it themselves. In the cases where the industry has succeeded in using the law to cripple a new format: DAT, Napster; the result has been negative for them.
The problem is not one that will be solved by laws, any more than forcing someone to carry a Red flag in front of early automobiles saved the coach industry (but it did slow the growth of the auto industry, which was bad for consumers and the economy). The problem is a business one, and it needs to be solved as a business model. If the content industry make content available conveniently, and at a price that is less than the hassle factor of piracy, then the vast majority of their customers will buy it that way. Whether that will support the current profit margins they enjoy or not is really irrelevant, because the advent
In England, Ireland, and other UK-linked cultures, a Fag is a cigarette. The etymology is twig or small stick.
On Topic: How does LA County expect people to bid/work on anything? Master/Slave isn't only used in Computing, but also in Hydraulics. As in the MASTER and SLAVE cylinder in a car Clutch or Brake system. Does LA County REALLY expect GM, FORD, etc. to rewrite all their shop manuals and part descriptions just for LA?
Who can be contacted to do something about this?
There wasn't any "space" in the singularity that the universe came out of in the "Big Bang". Matter was denser than anything you have personally experienced.
I suggest reading your modern physics.
Who rated this insightful anyway? It's more like a demonstration of ignorance!
The Stryker is another of Eric Shinseki's lame ideas.
Same guy who thought changing from the Field Cap to the Black Beret would be good for morale.
Caused a huge problem with the Rangers, and makes keeping the sun out of your eyes in formation impossible (sunglasses are not allowed in formations).
I'm glad he's gone.
Hopefully his lame ideas (most of which were tested @ Fort Lewis, just south of Seattle, hmmmm, wonder why the OS was Windows?) will also go soon.
Answer= Samsung I330, was Re:Yeah, so?
on
Death of the PDA?
·
· Score: 1
MY Samsung I330 is a great PDA AND a great phone.
I'll give you one good reason for the combo: Integrated dialing from the same address book. Also, it has the ability to be held to your head, use a headset, or use the SPEAKERPHONE. Never mind the fact that carrying 2 devices is a royal PITA.
Lasts 2 days on the small battery, a week on the big one, and I use it contantly. With Sprint PCS Business Connection it even trumps Blackberry, giving me notifications wehn I get new mail, full access to the mail server, and the ability to view attachments and attach files from my PC to outgoing mails.
Here's a note I sent to the white-house on this:
Given the recent bellicose and racist comments by the President of Malaysia, which indicate that Malaysia is squarely on the side of the Islamists we are currently at war with, I urge you to oppose, and prevent, Malaysia from sending an Astronaut to the International Space Station.
The US is the largest, and almost the sole significant, contributor to the Space Station. Having a representative of a country that chooses to incite hatred and violence towards us and our allies, as well as provide a base of operations against us, be our "Guest" there, is unseemly.
Malaysia must pay a price for its positions and behavior. Space is the final frontier for humankind, and we should make it clear that medievalism has no place in our future by preventing representatives of medievalist governments from setting foot there.
Having been a partner on a venture fund, I can tell you you are so Full Of Smeeely stuff that it isn't funny.
Preferred stock actually gives you MORE say. In a typical Private Equity Transaction, the PREFERRED (usually the Venture) investors are almost always guaranteed a board seat, in addition to voting at the same rate as if converted to common.
You are thinking public equity. The '30 acts only apply in Private equity to ensure that the investors are "Accredited", and prevent out and out fraud.
There's actually a very interesting academic treatise on this exact point here.
However, I believe that people get the government they deserve.
Somewhat akin to the theory that it was, in fact, that the climate made survival difficult, and thus requiring ingenuity and organization, but not so brutal that all that was possible was survival, the reason Northern Europeans came to dominate the world. Those who lived in nice climates with abundant food had no incentive to improve their lot, while those in brutal ones like North America, the Arctic, most of Asia (Siberia, Mongolia, central China, etc.) were too busy surviving to thrive.
Considering that the surviving members of a suicide bomber's family receive $$; Punishing them for the suicide bomber is probably the only action with any hope of deterrence Israel can do. If I were Sharon, I'd kill each suicide bomber's extended family, no hold that, I'd kneecap them. But what do I know, I'm Irish, we won our terrorist war, mostly by avoiding non-combatant casualties.
The Palestinians and all Islamists are scum who don't deserve a country. Just look at how the rest of the Arab world lives. Despite the greatest natural resources on Earth, they continue to live like animals, treat their women like crap, and have nothing to offer the world except violence.
The JDL also tried to kill a US Congressman (mine at the time), Darrel Issa , the architect of the CA recall, for the simple reason that he is Lebanese (2nd generation).
These people are terrorists, in the same way Al Qaeda are. Just because they're Jewish, and so ostensibly on our side, is no reason to give them a pass.
Just because it's on the web, doesn't make it any more protected than a pamphlet. If you advocate violence, you're not engaging in protected speech, you're committing a crime. End of story.
Get a clue.
Al Qaeda sites were already covered by this. We just finally got some partial balance in it.
If someone called this group a source of "Hate Speech" I'm sure the average/.er, who is usually from the lunatic left, would be all for banning it.
Zionists are at least as bad as Islamists.
1: Most domains have more than one MX. While the mailhost you connect to to verify may not have mail to send you, one of the other ones, or a private mailserver that is used by users but is not a gateway MX, may actually be trying to send mail to you.
2: Spammers could just use long, short lived, subdomain/host combinations. OK, you'd know what IP address the message came from, but you can generally figure that out now, and in fact, the spammer could add forged prior relay headers in front of their own anyway, just like they do now.
The only solution is a whitelist with sender authentication. The only way to do that is PKI. IE: I sign every message I send, and all recipients verify the signature, and compare my credentials to a whitelist. If I'm on it, the message gets through, if I'm not, then, depending on the recipient's policy, I'm asked to perform some verification steps, they review messages that are held for review, or they trash my message. This process COULD be made part of the SMTP exchange, as in I send a signed response to a challenge phrase that veifies who I am, but that would probably be too much work for the servers.
Solar sails operate on Newton's third law. IE, they impart force based on reflecting a particle (or lots of them), known as photons, and in that reflection, which is not directly reflective, take sin(angle of reflection)*mv in forward motion, while decelerating the photon. Assuming that Quantum ElectroDynamics is correct, and a photon is merely an electron at limit velocity, the kinetic energy is the mass conversion of the deceleration. IE, the equivalent Schrodinger value of the electron produced at the reflection by the deceleration of the photon, which would be approximated by sin(angle of incidence)c. Beyond that, the force generated by the solar sail would be the integral of the flux density of light-the relative velocity of the sail to the incident light over the incident angle of the radiation on the sail. Hardly an easy problem, but also not beyond undergraduate calculus.
Carnot was unaware of the wave theory of matter or quantum physics, as, apparently, is the author of this article. Adiabatic cycles work in classical, IE low velocity, non Boyle limit environments, but , like most classical physics, fall apart at the quantum level.
For further reading, I advise the Feynman lectures on Physics, or if you're feeling adventurous, you could always finish his doctoral Thesis: Wheeler & Feynman, Princeton, 1943 (the subject is the concept of unification under the principle of Least Effort), as yet, unsolved.
Since Fermat's last theorem has been proved, maybe we can NOW move on to unification?
If you read the Memo linked at the bottom, you will see that this is, in fact, a trojan for BANNING most OSS in the DOD. It has been policy, mostly honored in the breach than the observance, that all systems used in the DOD be NIAP Evaluated to the level required for accreditation to the classification of the data being processed. This memo REITERATES that guidance by including the policy. Since all DOD systems MAY process Sensitive But Unclassified data (like anything with an SSID in it), that means ALL systems need at least EAL 2, and in general the lowest level that gets accredited is EAL 3 (on the basis of "train as you fight", so you use the same systems in peace as you would use in war). This evaluation costs money, and must be redone each time the code changes. Who is doing this for most OSS?
It's a source of constant debate in the DOD community, but the reality of the IA policy is that ONLY commercial software is likely to actually pass muster.
In the early days of Firewalls and other forms of Internet Security devices, the Proxy was the security mechanism of choice. Then along came "Stateful Inspection" which has won out because of performance. However, it has always been known that a proxy approach was, inherently, more secure (or at least could be made so). As hardware makes the performance advantage of Packet Filtering negligible, and more and more attacks become application-based, do you see the trend returning to proxies, or something else?
Slashdot Mirror
Assuming that "Walkie Talkies" means the old AM CB kind, you should find that using more modern FRS, or preferably the more powerful GMRS (your school should have no problem getting the license), radios should solve your problem.n z5-htm
I use the motorola FRS radios every time I go anywhere outside the US, and my wife and I have no problem contacting each other in Hotels, malls, airports, etc.
Compare prices here: http://www.nextag.com/All~frs+gmrs+radioz0zB4zmai
I sent Forbes the following, under the subject "Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish" Begin quote-------------------
I don't understand Forbes sympathy for a business model that shifts its cost of doing business to an unwilling participant. Faxes cost money to receive. As such, you have no right to send someone an unsolicited fax solely for the benefit of YOUR business.
Given Forbes basic capitalist/libertarian viewpoint, I don't see how you can justify this type of business. The same is true for SPAM.
It is because the SENDER bears the cost of junk-mail and phone solicitations that those are, at least until you actively send a cease-and-desist of some kind, legal.
When the bulk of the cost (paper, ink, storage, processing and routing) is borne by the recipient, the sender should be REQUIRED to solicit and PROVE consent.
Fax.com and the rest of the junk faxers and spammers are parasitic scum who use the resources of unwilling recipients to fund their business. From a strictly economic viewpoint this is a bad thing, as it diverts the resources of businesses from the conduct of their business. From a moral standpoint it is equally vile. No-one should be allowed to take the resources of another for their own benefit without their consent. I would have thought that that principle would be basic to Forbes' editorial viewpoint.
And Greenpeace aren't head cases? What do you call ramming Sailboats with powerboats because you don't like their sponsor?
Believe it or not, some of us happen to think owning firearms and hunting are basic human rights and necessary survival skills, your religion ( which is what environmentalism is) notwithstanding.
The "Deep Ecology" movement is at least as intolerant and militant a fundamentalist religion as militant Islam. It also presents a much greater threat to human life. After all, one of environmentalism's greatest "achievements", the banning of DDT, causes the deaths of over 1 Million people a year from Malaria.
Can you please: /. effect, but not something that doesn't even show up in the DNS (in fact, none of the sub-zones in the URL resolve).
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
;; Got answer:
a: Post URLS as hrefs, so we can click on them.
b: Post hosts that are at least RESOLVABLE. This host doesn't resolve. I can understand 404 due to the
Moderators, PLEASE check the darn URL before modding up. This post was a freaking waste of space.
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost msfc.nasa.gov
; > DiG 9.2.1 > @localhost nasa.gov
etc. etc.
What we've got right now is an establishment of Environmentalism as the new worldwide government sponsored and supported religion.
Michael Crichton said it best in a speech in September.
Come on guys, why are we modding offtopic (NT) and Flamebait offtopic (WMD) as Funny or Insightful. /. SNR is approaching the 3dB rolloff these days.
I'm going to have to start browsing @ 7, and modding funny -2.
What the UN, and the morons that ejected Paul Twomey from the meeting, don't understand, is that in order for their edicts to hold sway, the Internet must adopt them.
They have no real power, and they have even less over a network based on collaborative peering.
You can't dictate any change to the Internet. It has to be adopted by consensus. These self-important NWO Bureaucrats can say whatever they want, exclude whoever they want, and ruminate in whatever way they want. The Internet is no more under their control than it is under mine.
The fact is, the UN is less and less relevant. When despotic African kleptocrats and sponsors of terrorism got to chair human rights and anti-terrorist commissions, the whole thing was shown up for what it's been since the 1972 oil embargo: Bad window dressing on the failure of Metternick's fancy of a world government of nobles.
Who cares about the UN, let them waste breath and money at will. They have no real power. Power comes from the governed, and the Internauts care naught for the UN.
I actually decided that this one was worth replying to SCO on, so I posted this throught the comment page of their website:
Having read your recent open letter, I'm a bit confused. I am not a lawyer, although I've been involved in enough work in contract and intellectual property law over the years that I think I have a well-tuned BS filter.
What are you trying to say?
Are you saying that you have a case against IBM? That is for the court to decide.
Are you saying that you have a case against all Linux users? Once again, that is for the courts to decide. You have claimed that you will offer indemnity to those that buy your binary licenses, but you have not made the delivery of such licenses actually possible, which could be used as a defense by anyone you choose to sue. You also have offered no evidence that you do, in fact, have a cause of action against Linux users. Short of evidence and some opinion that Linux DOES include code that was misappropriated (as opposed to contributed by SCO, its agents or assigns in the Caldera days), your threats border on barratry.
The way the letter was written is half legal argument, half sophistry. It reminds me a lot of the breathless non-sequiturs stock newsletter promoters string together for their hype sheets. Perhaps that is its intent, to hype your stock. It seems, more and more, that this is the intent of your whole suit and associated noise making.
What you are doing looks more and more like a pump-and-dump.
It's too bad. SCO used to be a half-way decent company. If you had stuck to improving your products, by coming out with SVR4 Open Server sometime soon after its general availability, as opposed to limping along with a set of kludges on top of SVR3.2 for nearly a decade, and doing some "reference implementation" that included a real UI, etc., instead of leaving Unix to degenerate into a Tower of Babel, you probably would have an actual business, as opposed to being a roadblock in the way of progress for the industry.
Why don't you go back to whatever hole you crawled out of, and let Boies go back to trying to thwart the electoral process.
Whoever wrote this is illiterate. Comma splices, subordinate clauses, and nouns used as adjectives everywhere. It scores 5.6 on Deloitte's Bullfighter, which is on the bad side of the median.
I've received Nigerian Letters with better prose.
So either:
1: Darl wrote it himself (it seems to fit with his manner of speech from the nterviews with him that I have read).
2: SCO's PR guys are pretty bad.
Whatever you can say about Boies et al, they are very literate. I've seen and read enough of Boies to know he didn't write this screed.
My 1989 Jeep Wrangler, the first OBDC based Jeep (2.5L TBI 4Cyl) is still running, original engine and electronics. The computer and the engine have outlasted 5 Sets of Brakes, 4 Sets of tires, 4 Catalytic Converters, 3 Exhausts, 3 Clutches (Hydraulic), 2 interiors, 3 stereos, and 2 suspensions (I off-road a lot). Despite having a full set of trail racks, lock-boxes, beefed up suspension and driveline (slip yoke eliminator, Dana 44 4.11 Diffs), it still gets 15 MPG average, and that is including a LOT of 4WD on dirt.
My 2000 Audi S4 also has had no computer related problems (Blown Tranny and Turbo, but that was from driving a tad hard on mountain roads).
Prior to that, my 1994 Acura Integra LS ran flawlessly for 6 years, and it had all the computer-controlled bells and whistles you'd expect from a VVT car.
Maybe the problem is BMW (Audi owner snicker as we note their running away from Le Mans with their tail between their legs)?
I Posted this to Sens. Feinstein and Boxer:
I am writing to oppose the Anti-Trust exemption for the recording and movie industries proposed by Sen. Orrin Hatch as part of the EnFORCE act, as well as to express my opinions about the continuing increase in legal protections and exemptions beign given to the recording and motion-picture industries. These industries have repeatedly and demonstrably engaged in illegal and unethical business practices from the days of payola, through the exploitative contracts with artists, to the current day; when they have used the draconian police-state powers granted them in the DMCA to do thingslike: sue 12 year old honor students (and take away money they sorely need for school); or erroneously sieze the property of 66 year old grandmothers. They have consistently shown themselves to be untrustworthy, and engaged in scummy business practices and fascist enforcement actions that would have any DA lose their next election. Granting them an anti-trust exemption will only give them further free reign to abuse their content producers, and browbeat their customers. We rightly reserve police powers for the government, where we have the checks and balances of a democracy. Granting the power of collusion on top of the existing ones is asking for wholesale abuse of individual rights.
Congress has, over the past several years, engaged in a wholesale giveaway to a small, already wealthy, group by extending copyrights and treating ordinary consumers as criminals, all while providing the content providers with legal mechanisms to circumvent the well established rights of first sale and fair use. The result has been an escalating arms race between an industry that produces art as an industrial product, and consumers who want entertainment in a convenient, suited to their personal tastes, and reasonably priced manner.
Despite the industry's assertions to the contrary, it is the fact that people see little value in their products, as well as the fact that they failed to take advantage of the new, lower cost, distribution models, leaving a void that has been filled by non-US companies, that are the causes of their decline. Producing an ever-more homogenous, focus-group derived, predictable, stream of lower average quality and little or no variety, which therefore only appeals to a clearly identified minority: Middle-Class Mall-Rats aged 15-24, is the problem, not music "theft". Nor, regardless of what they say, is the current decline in music sales unprecedented. It happened towards the end of the 1970's, before the arrival of Punk Rock. Then, as now, the products of the RIAA were insipid, predictable, and uncreative, and touched no chord among the populace.
Last, but not least, each and every time that a new means of delivering entertainment in a more felxible way, usually with the ability for the consumer to copy it, has arrived; the content industries have screamed foul, and fought it tooth and nail, claiming that it would run them out of business. In all the cases where they were unsuccessful (Cassette Tapes, VCR, CD-R), the result was at worst non-existent, at best an increase in sales as users bought pre-recorded music in the new format rather than deal with the hassle of making it themselves. In the cases where the industry has succeeded in using the law to cripple a new format: DAT, Napster; the result has been negative for them.
The problem is not one that will be solved by laws, any more than forcing someone to carry a Red flag in front of early automobiles saved the coach industry (but it did slow the growth of the auto industry, which was bad for consumers and the economy). The problem is a business one, and it needs to be solved as a business model. If the content industry make content available conveniently, and at a price that is less than the hassle factor of piracy, then the vast majority of their customers will buy it that way. Whether that will support the current profit margins they enjoy or not is really irrelevant, because the advent
In England, Ireland, and other UK-linked cultures, a Fag is a cigarette. The etymology is twig or small stick.
On Topic: How does LA County expect people to bid/work on anything? Master/Slave isn't only used in Computing, but also in Hydraulics. As in the MASTER and SLAVE cylinder in a car Clutch or Brake system. Does LA County REALLY expect GM, FORD, etc. to rewrite all their shop manuals and part descriptions just for LA?
Who can be contacted to do something about this?
There wasn't any "space" in the singularity that the universe came out of in the "Big Bang". Matter was denser than anything you have personally experienced. I suggest reading your modern physics. Who rated this insightful anyway? It's more like a demonstration of ignorance!
The Stryker is another of Eric Shinseki's lame ideas. Same guy who thought changing from the Field Cap to the Black Beret would be good for morale. Caused a huge problem with the Rangers, and makes keeping the sun out of your eyes in formation impossible (sunglasses are not allowed in formations). I'm glad he's gone. Hopefully his lame ideas (most of which were tested @ Fort Lewis, just south of Seattle, hmmmm, wonder why the OS was Windows?) will also go soon.
MY Samsung I330 is a great PDA AND a great phone.
I'll give you one good reason for the combo: Integrated dialing from the same address book. Also, it has the ability to be held to your head, use a headset, or use the SPEAKERPHONE. Never mind the fact that carrying 2 devices is a royal PITA.
Lasts 2 days on the small battery, a week on the big one, and I use it contantly. With Sprint PCS Business Connection it even trumps Blackberry, giving me notifications wehn I get new mail, full access to the mail server, and the ability to view attachments and attach files from my PC to outgoing mails.
Here's a note I sent to the white-house on this:
Given the recent bellicose and racist comments by the President of Malaysia, which indicate that Malaysia is squarely on the side of the Islamists we are currently at war with, I urge you to oppose, and prevent, Malaysia from sending an Astronaut to the International Space Station.
The US is the largest, and almost the sole significant, contributor to the Space Station. Having a representative of a country that chooses to incite hatred and violence towards us and our allies, as well as provide a base of operations against us, be our "Guest" there, is unseemly.
Malaysia must pay a price for its positions and behavior. Space is the final frontier for humankind, and we should make it clear that medievalism has no place in our future by preventing representatives of medievalist governments from setting foot there.
Having been a partner on a venture fund, I can tell you you are so Full Of Smeeely stuff that it isn't funny. Preferred stock actually gives you MORE say. In a typical Private Equity Transaction, the PREFERRED (usually the Venture) investors are almost always guaranteed a board seat, in addition to voting at the same rate as if converted to common. You are thinking public equity. The '30 acts only apply in Private equity to ensure that the investors are "Accredited", and prevent out and out fraud.
There's actually a very interesting academic treatise on this exact point here.
However, I believe that people get the government they deserve.
Somewhat akin to the theory that it was, in fact, that the climate made survival difficult, and thus requiring ingenuity and organization, but not so brutal that all that was possible was survival, the reason Northern Europeans came to dominate the world. Those who lived in nice climates with abundant food had no incentive to improve their lot, while those in brutal ones like North America, the Arctic, most of Asia (Siberia, Mongolia, central China, etc.) were too busy surviving to thrive.
Considering that the surviving members of a suicide bomber's family receive $$; Punishing them for the suicide bomber is probably the only action with any hope of deterrence Israel can do. If I were Sharon, I'd kill each suicide bomber's extended family, no hold that, I'd kneecap them. But what do I know, I'm Irish, we won our terrorist war, mostly by avoiding non-combatant casualties. The Palestinians and all Islamists are scum who don't deserve a country. Just look at how the rest of the Arab world lives. Despite the greatest natural resources on Earth, they continue to live like animals, treat their women like crap, and have nothing to offer the world except violence.
The JDL also tried to kill a US Congressman (mine at the time), Darrel Issa , the architect of the CA recall, for the simple reason that he is Lebanese (2nd generation). These people are terrorists, in the same way Al Qaeda are. Just because they're Jewish, and so ostensibly on our side, is no reason to give them a pass.
Just because it's on the web, doesn't make it any more protected than a pamphlet. If you advocate violence, you're not engaging in protected speech, you're committing a crime. End of story. Get a clue. Al Qaeda sites were already covered by this. We just finally got some partial balance in it. If someone called this group a source of "Hate Speech" I'm sure the average /.er, who is usually from the lunatic left, would be all for banning it.
Zionists are at least as bad as Islamists.
There are a couple of problems with this:
1: Most domains have more than one MX. While the mailhost you connect to to verify may not have mail to send you, one of the other ones, or a private mailserver that is used by users but is not a gateway MX, may actually be trying to send mail to you.
2: Spammers could just use long, short lived, subdomain/host combinations. OK, you'd know what IP address the message came from, but you can generally figure that out now, and in fact, the spammer could add forged prior relay headers in front of their own anyway, just like they do now.
The only solution is a whitelist with sender authentication. The only way to do that is PKI. IE: I sign every message I send, and all recipients verify the signature, and compare my credentials to a whitelist. If I'm on it, the message gets through, if I'm not, then, depending on the recipient's policy, I'm asked to perform some verification steps, they review messages that are held for review, or they trash my message. This process COULD be made part of the SMTP exchange, as in I send a signed response to a challenge phrase that veifies who I am, but that would probably be too much work for the servers.
Solar sails operate on Newton's third law. IE, they impart force based on reflecting a particle (or lots of them), known as photons, and in that reflection, which is not directly reflective, take sin(angle of reflection)*mv in forward motion, while decelerating the photon. Assuming that Quantum ElectroDynamics is correct, and a photon is merely an electron at limit velocity, the kinetic energy is the mass conversion of the deceleration. IE, the equivalent Schrodinger value of the electron produced at the reflection by the deceleration of the photon, which would be approximated by sin(angle of incidence)c. Beyond that, the force generated by the solar sail would be the integral of the flux density of light-the relative velocity of the sail to the incident light over the incident angle of the radiation on the sail. Hardly an easy problem, but also not beyond undergraduate calculus.
Carnot was unaware of the wave theory of matter or quantum physics, as, apparently, is the author of this article. Adiabatic cycles work in classical, IE low velocity, non Boyle limit environments, but , like most classical physics, fall apart at the quantum level.
For further reading, I advise the Feynman lectures on Physics, or if you're feeling adventurous, you could always finish his doctoral Thesis: Wheeler & Feynman, Princeton, 1943 (the subject is the concept of unification under the principle of Least Effort), as yet, unsolved.
Since Fermat's last theorem has been proved, maybe we can NOW move on to unification?
If you read the Memo linked at the bottom, you will see that this is, in fact, a trojan for BANNING most OSS in the DOD. It has been policy, mostly honored in the breach than the observance, that all systems used in the DOD be NIAP Evaluated to the level required for accreditation to the classification of the data being processed. This memo REITERATES that guidance by including the policy. Since all DOD systems MAY process Sensitive But Unclassified data (like anything with an SSID in it), that means ALL systems need at least EAL 2, and in general the lowest level that gets accredited is EAL 3 (on the basis of "train as you fight", so you use the same systems in peace as you would use in war). This evaluation costs money, and must be redone each time the code changes. Who is doing this for most OSS? It's a source of constant debate in the DOD community, but the reality of the IA policy is that ONLY commercial software is likely to actually pass muster.
In the early days of Firewalls and other forms of Internet Security devices, the Proxy was the security mechanism of choice. Then along came "Stateful Inspection" which has won out because of performance. However, it has always been known that a proxy approach was, inherently, more secure (or at least could be made so). As hardware makes the performance advantage of Packet Filtering negligible, and more and more attacks become application-based, do you see the trend returning to proxies, or something else?