There's an easy way to tell the difference: Hipsters are the ones in black trench coats, shaved bald (or whatever is hip, now it appears to be bald) with a bluetooth receiver in ear (that may not even work, as it's primarily for show) ordering an unnecessarily complicated drink, insisting that they check "in the back" for those breakfast wraps they're out of, (completely failing to hear that there is no "back") and wandering over to the barista for additional unending instructions on the drink, leaving the lone register locked up with his order while he thoroughly sates his empty need for attention.
The non-hipsters are the under-caffeinated people in line who think he's just an asshole.
....and why would I want to touch one? Especially in New York City.
I remember that other public resource for street information, the yellow pages. But it was hard to find a set in a phone booth that hadn't been pissed on.
...you had internet access before 1991? I worked for a military contractor, and we had internet access in the eighties. I could patch into the network via 1200 baud modem from a VT100 at home. Of course, there wasn't a lot online at the time except usenet and some ftp servers.
By the time I moved to the state where I am now, many companies had internet access, and you could still patch in via Telebit, and there was this new thing called mosaic to play with.
Switching to contracting, and lacking a corporate connection, I signed up for this thing called AOL when it first came out. Ugh. When broadband first became available, I couldn't switch to it fast enough. And then a curious thing happened -- my friends who were on aol and earthlink and so forth, *stayed on* those services even after they got cable or dsl, in the mistaken belief that those services *were* the internet. No amount of convincing would alter that belief. It was bizarre. I guess it really does depend on what you grew up with.
That statement works for people who weren't alive or were too young during that time. But for those of us who were adults in the seventies, not so much. And like now, James Hansen was leading the parade.
The advantage I see is that hydrogen will fuel existing internal combustion engines. Moreover, a pitfall of batteries is the environmental cost of making them and of disposing of them -- even modern batteries do not last forever. Whereas, hydrogen will always combine with oxygen to produce water vapor, a process that doesn't change or get less potent over time.
There may come a time in the future when people will look back and wonder why we put up with those complicated, short-lived, environmentally unhealthy (relatively) chemical batteries when we could just use solar to create hydrogen and then burn hydrogen to produce motive power, (point emission being: getting the water vapor back that you used in the original reaction to create the hydrogen) or use hydrogen in fuel cells for electricity.
I lived in Arizona for awhile, but I confess I don't know if the governor can "pocket veto" a bill or not. In any case, in this instance the bill appears to have been amended in the senate and then sent back to the house to die quietly. See link earlier in this thread.
We've been combating similar schemes in other externally originating services (ex: stealing domains) for years. Is anyone shocked that people are phishing access to cloud computing accounts?
When your resources are internal and set up properly, a bad guy has to first defeat your physical security before they can even start trying to defeat your software security. Requests for access coming from the outside are immediately suspect. But in "the cloud", *every* request is an outside request, and the service provider has to manage multiple realms with completely different access while maintaining the lowest possible cost *and* a healthy profit margin. Fails like this are inevitable.
As someone else said, stop trusting other people to manage your servers. To which I add: The value of your data probably exceeds any damages you could possibly get out of the service provider. It's a sucker bet.
...to read what they had written and realized the implications. I think you're right. This was supposed to be a feel-good touchy-feely crap bill that just states everyone's opposition to cyber bullying (whatever that really means), as exemplified by the 30-0 vote, and then everyone collectively came to the horrible realization that they just voted for a bill that technically forbade all forms of speech (because no matter what you say, there is someone, somewhere in the world that would be offended by it) and how that would play at election time, and quietly called it back.
...due to public outcry, the bill's authors realize they screwed the pooch on this one (deliberately being offensive...) and have quietly asked the governor not to sign it.
There may be another bill later, but it may be slightly less publicized.
FTFY.
Good point. To which I respond, not if we can help it.
If I could interrupt what passes for discussion in Slashdot,
I heard this on the radio on the way into work this morning: That due to public outcry, the bill's authors realize they screwed the pooch on this one (deliberately being offensive...) and have quietly asked the governor not to sign it.
There may be another bill later, but it may be slightly less insane.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled panic.
I use Blue Iris with cheap direct connected (not wifi) cameras. It's been an affordable win. If I'm alerted, I can check all the cameras without getting out of bed. If I get an email alert, I can also check the cameras via smartphone anywhere I have coverage.
Dogs: I'd have dogs anyway, (I like dogs) and I tend towards big, naturally suspicious dogs. They have better senses than you, and they're remarkably reliable in protecting a territory. The dogs sleep in the master bedroom or by the front door.
Guns don't help much when you're out of state, but they're not there to protect my belongings, they're there as a last ditch defense of my family. Stuff is just stuff, but family members are not replaceable. The self-defense firearm is in a quick-open safe that also includes a flashlight that gets checked periodically. I practice at the same range as the local police, and I'm demonstrably a better shot than some of them. As always, your mileage may vary depending on location, local laws, and personal preference. But I second that you need to know what you're doing if you're going to own a gun for self defense. (First step should be to read "In the Gravest Extreme" by Massad F. Ayoob.)
Safes: I have four. One fire safe for valuables and important paperwork, and three of varying sizes and purposes, for weapons.
Neighbors: I had to assure the neighbors across the street that my cameras won't see into their windows. (I purposely set coverage to end at the edge of the sidewalk and could demonstrate that.) But I agree, there is no substitute for knowing your neighbors.
Blue Iris Software (blueirissoftware.com) is a cheap ($50) and very capable home security software package. It runs with a variety of cameras both wireless and wired, has software motion detection, a built-in webpage, alert capability, and is surprisingly easy to set up.
I used Swann Bulldog hard wired cameras (about $28 apiece) and a relatively cheap capture board. I ran the camera wires through the attic, punching through outside walls as necessary. (Careful to waterproof the parts where the cable emerges from the wall.) The cable includes video, audio (for the front door camera), and power for the camera.
The computer is an old 1 Ghz Intel box. 500 Gbytes is more than adequate.
Motion detection sensitivity is adjustable. The software supports creating "dead zones" in the picture so that trees blowing in the wind won't cause excessive triggers.
Mine is set up to email me a snapshot if motion is detected. This puts evidence on a server several miles away in the event the house is broken into and the hardware is located and compromised. (If I were truly paranoid I would put a webcam on the server itself so it couldn't be approached without triggering an alert.)
The software includes a website that is accessible from the outside world via dyndns. I can bring up the website on my smartphone and see the output from all cameras in real time. If I'm away from home, I'll typically get an alert that someone has approached the house (usually the front door) and can push a button to see what they're doing there in real time. (Most of the time it's a delivery person.)
At night, my cell phone sits on its charger by my bed. If I get an alert, I can check all the cameras without getting out of bed. (I can also access the website from my office at home or at work and see what's going on in real time.)
This has been useful twice, once when a woman opened the gate to let my dogs out, (long story involving a real estate rep's vendetta against dog owners in the neighborhood) and once when kids stole the hubcaps off my daughter's car.
It is routinely useful in that I get to see my daughter come home from school every day. I text her "welcome home" when I get the alert. She has been in turn gratified and irritated depending on her mood. You know teens.:-)
Since the computer was an old repurposed machine, total cost was $50 for the software, $28 X 4 for the cameras, about $30 for the cables, $150 for the capture card, and a few hours of my time. I intend to add more cameras when the cost of wifi enabled weatherproof pannable cameras become more affordable. The software supports remote control of a servo-controlled webcam.
In my opinion, I have a superior system to subscribing to a service. For one thing, my recurring cost is zero. It's true that I have to take care of the threat recognition part and contact the authorities myself, but I'm comfortable doing this, and there is a certain amount of peace in seeing my daughter safely home from school.
Disadvantages: The cameras have a ring of IR LEDs around the camera element. This creates a warm zone that spiders appear to like, and appears to trigger some homing instinct in hummingbirds. So I occasionally get photos of giant hummingbirds and huge spiders emailed to me. It was a little unnerving at first, but I have gotten used to it.
What you're saying is fair, but so is the owner of the works by not wanting random Joe to publish something that would make official sequels/prequels look inconsistent with their own objectives for publishing stuff belonging in the Star Trek universe. On top of that, the idea of Random Joe making money without CBS getting a share might make them jealous.
Who knows if this piece of work happens to be in the pipeline for future Star Trek films/series? They don't have to justify themselves as the legitimate owners.
Re: consistency -- Have you read sanctioned novels set in the ST universe? Many of them break canon and some rewrite origins. It seems to me that ship has sailed, so to speak. Regardless, (this is the important part) CBS isn't doing anything new with the properties, and to my knowledge (feel free to correct) they have no current or future plans to do so. Now *were* the script in the pipeline for something in the future, maybe a point would exist, but there's no indication that this is so.
Regarding, profits, then have CBS get a modest percentage. If it's fan produced, a percentage of nothing much is nothing much.
...that mindshare of the older star trek properties, designs and interfaces will fade, since CBS isn't doing much with them and they're absolutely forbidding anyone else to keep old Trek in the public eye? It seems like CBS's interests would be better served to provide license at reasonable cost, and keep the properties in the public eye.
When I was secure in a job and looking to move up, I would decline to answer inappropriate questions. After dot com bust, when I'd been unemployed for a couple of years, I would have (and did) say anything to get hired. I agree that it's important to know your rights in an interview, but what you do about it depends on the economy and your current situation. Shouldn't be that way, but what are you going to do?
Slashdot Mirror
Just because you do something first doesn't mean you're a hipster.
Doing it first if it's not worth doing at all, *that's* a hipster.
That's the anti-hipster fad.
There's an easy way to tell the difference: Hipsters are the ones in black trench coats, shaved bald (or whatever is hip, now it appears to be bald) with a bluetooth receiver in ear (that may not even work, as it's primarily for show) ordering an unnecessarily complicated drink, insisting that they check "in the back" for those breakfast wraps they're out of, (completely failing to hear that there is no "back") and wandering over to the barista for additional unending instructions on the drink, leaving the lone register locked up with his order while he thoroughly sates his empty need for attention.
The non-hipsters are the under-caffeinated people in line who think he's just an asshole.
I expect the next Hipster fad to be a genuine touch screen stolen from a NYC phone booth.
I remember that other public resource for street information, the yellow pages. But it was hard to find a set in a phone booth that hadn't been pissed on.
By the time I moved to the state where I am now, many companies had internet access, and you could still patch in via Telebit, and there was this new thing called mosaic to play with.
Switching to contracting, and lacking a corporate connection, I signed up for this thing called AOL when it first came out. Ugh. When broadband first became available, I couldn't switch to it fast enough. And then a curious thing happened -- my friends who were on aol and earthlink and so forth, *stayed on* those services even after they got cable or dsl, in the mistaken belief that those services *were* the internet. No amount of convincing would alter that belief. It was bizarre. I guess it really does depend on what you grew up with.
Right, and scientists never formulate questionable theories for political or monetary reasons. At all. Ever.
That statement works for people who weren't alive or were too young during that time. But for those of us who were adults in the seventies, not so much. And like now, James Hansen was leading the parade.
Apparently.
The advantage I see is that hydrogen will fuel existing internal combustion engines. Moreover, a pitfall of batteries is the environmental cost of making them and of disposing of them -- even modern batteries do not last forever. Whereas, hydrogen will always combine with oxygen to produce water vapor, a process that doesn't change or get less potent over time.
There may come a time in the future when people will look back and wonder why we put up with those complicated, short-lived, environmentally unhealthy (relatively) chemical batteries when we could just use solar to create hydrogen and then burn hydrogen to produce motive power, (point emission being: getting the water vapor back that you used in the original reaction to create the hydrogen) or use hydrogen in fuel cells for electricity.
I lived in Arizona for awhile, but I confess I don't know if the governor can "pocket veto" a bill or not. In any case, in this instance the bill appears to have been amended in the senate and then sent back to the house to die quietly. See link earlier in this thread.
[citation needed]
That's fair.
Read here
Also note that the bill never made it to the governor's desk, despite earlier reports to the contrary.
We've been combating similar schemes in other externally originating services (ex: stealing domains) for years. Is anyone shocked that people are phishing access to cloud computing accounts?
When your resources are internal and set up properly, a bad guy has to first defeat your physical security before they can even start trying to defeat your software security. Requests for access coming from the outside are immediately suspect. But in "the cloud", *every* request is an outside request, and the service provider has to manage multiple realms with completely different access while maintaining the lowest possible cost *and* a healthy profit margin. Fails like this are inevitable.
As someone else said, stop trusting other people to manage your servers. To which I add: The value of your data probably exceeds any damages you could possibly get out of the service provider. It's a sucker bet.
...due to public outcry, the bill's authors realize they screwed the pooch on this one (deliberately being offensive...) and have quietly asked the governor not to sign it.
There may be another bill later, but it may be slightly less publicized.
FTFY.
Good point. To which I respond, not if we can help it.
If I could interrupt what passes for discussion in Slashdot,
I heard this on the radio on the way into work this morning: That due to public outcry, the bill's authors realize they screwed the pooch on this one (deliberately being offensive...) and have quietly asked the governor not to sign it.
There may be another bill later, but it may be slightly less insane.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled panic.
All of the above.
I use Blue Iris with cheap direct connected (not wifi) cameras. It's been an affordable win. If I'm alerted, I can check all the cameras without getting out of bed. If I get an email alert, I can also check the cameras via smartphone anywhere I have coverage.
Dogs: I'd have dogs anyway, (I like dogs) and I tend towards big, naturally suspicious dogs. They have better senses than you, and they're remarkably reliable in protecting a territory. The dogs sleep in the master bedroom or by the front door.
Guns don't help much when you're out of state, but they're not there to protect my belongings, they're there as a last ditch defense of my family. Stuff is just stuff, but family members are not replaceable. The self-defense firearm is in a quick-open safe that also includes a flashlight that gets checked periodically. I practice at the same range as the local police, and I'm demonstrably a better shot than some of them. As always, your mileage may vary depending on location, local laws, and personal preference. But I second that you need to know what you're doing if you're going to own a gun for self defense. (First step should be to read "In the Gravest Extreme" by Massad F. Ayoob.)
Safes: I have four. One fire safe for valuables and important paperwork, and three of varying sizes and purposes, for weapons.
Neighbors: I had to assure the neighbors across the street that my cameras won't see into their windows. (I purposely set coverage to end at the edge of the sidewalk and could demonstrate that.) But I agree, there is no substitute for knowing your neighbors.
Blue Iris Software (blueirissoftware.com) is a cheap ($50) and very capable home security software package. It runs with a variety of cameras both wireless and wired, has software motion detection, a built-in webpage, alert capability, and is surprisingly easy to set up.
I used Swann Bulldog hard wired cameras (about $28 apiece) and a relatively cheap capture board. I ran the camera wires through the attic, punching through outside walls as necessary. (Careful to waterproof the parts where the cable emerges from the wall.) The cable includes video, audio (for the front door camera), and power for the camera.
The computer is an old 1 Ghz Intel box. 500 Gbytes is more than adequate.
Motion detection sensitivity is adjustable. The software supports creating "dead zones" in the picture so that trees blowing in the wind won't cause excessive triggers.
Mine is set up to email me a snapshot if motion is detected. This puts evidence on a server several miles away in the event the house is broken into and the hardware is located and compromised. (If I were truly paranoid I would put a webcam on the server itself so it couldn't be approached without triggering an alert.)
The software includes a website that is accessible from the outside world via dyndns. I can bring up the website on my smartphone and see the output from all cameras in real time. If I'm away from home, I'll typically get an alert that someone has approached the house (usually the front door) and can push a button to see what they're doing there in real time. (Most of the time it's a delivery person.)
At night, my cell phone sits on its charger by my bed. If I get an alert, I can check all the cameras without getting out of bed. (I can also access the website from my office at home or at work and see what's going on in real time.)
This has been useful twice, once when a woman opened the gate to let my dogs out, (long story involving a real estate rep's vendetta against dog owners in the neighborhood) and once when kids stole the hubcaps off my daughter's car.
It is routinely useful in that I get to see my daughter come home from school every day. I text her "welcome home" when I get the alert. She has been in turn gratified and irritated depending on her mood. You know teens. :-)
Since the computer was an old repurposed machine, total cost was $50 for the software, $28 X 4 for the cameras, about $30 for the cables, $150 for the capture card, and a few hours of my time. I intend to add more cameras when the cost of wifi enabled weatherproof pannable cameras become more affordable. The software supports remote control of a servo-controlled webcam.
In my opinion, I have a superior system to subscribing to a service. For one thing, my recurring cost is zero. It's true that I have to take care of the threat recognition part and contact the authorities myself, but I'm comfortable doing this, and there is a certain amount of peace in seeing my daughter safely home from school.
Disadvantages: The cameras have a ring of IR LEDs around the camera element. This creates a warm zone that spiders appear to like, and appears to trigger some homing instinct in hummingbirds. So I occasionally get photos of giant hummingbirds and huge spiders emailed to me. It was a little unnerving at first, but I have gotten used to it.
Buy back the script from CBS and use it for a sequel to Galaxy Quest (1999).
What you're saying is fair, but so is the owner of the works by not wanting random Joe to publish something that would make official sequels/prequels look inconsistent with their own objectives for publishing stuff belonging in the Star Trek universe. On top of that, the idea of Random Joe making money without CBS getting a share might make them jealous.
Who knows if this piece of work happens to be in the pipeline for future Star Trek films/series? They don't have to justify themselves as the legitimate owners.
Re: consistency -- Have you read sanctioned novels set in the ST universe? Many of them break canon and some rewrite origins. It seems to me that ship has sailed, so to speak. Regardless, (this is the important part) CBS isn't doing anything new with the properties, and to my knowledge (feel free to correct) they have no current or future plans to do so. Now *were* the script in the pipeline for something in the future, maybe a point would exist, but there's no indication that this is so.
Regarding, profits, then have CBS get a modest percentage. If it's fan produced, a percentage of nothing much is nothing much.
So, if I have a dog with me that looks hungry, and a water dish, people will give me beer money?
Sounds uncomfortable.
When I was secure in a job and looking to move up, I would decline to answer inappropriate questions. After dot com bust, when I'd been unemployed for a couple of years, I would have (and did) say anything to get hired. I agree that it's important to know your rights in an interview, but what you do about it depends on the economy and your current situation. Shouldn't be that way, but what are you going to do?