Correct. Its a relatively common occurrence: you have everything going to me@myisp.com but you start using me@gmail.com instead so you have your ISP forward everything that goes to me@myisp.com to me@gmail.com.
Depends how it's done (and I don't know SMTP well enough to know for sure). Since your ISP has the whole e-mail, signature and everything, they could send it along unmodified to your Gmail account, which could then do the same authentication. Since nothing in the e-mail has changed, it would still be verified as the exact one sent from unsolicitedcreditcardoffer@paypal.com
Silicon is not a good conductor. The advantage it can be doped to make it as good of a conductor as necessary (which also allows you to make transistors out of it). I doubt this plastic can be doped...
Also, why not run a test current through it to measure the conductivity instead of using an accelerator?
When ISPs start doing this, and it actually becomes a problem, I'll (probably) support some form of Net Neutrality. Until then, I see no reason for government regulation.
From Wikipedia Net Neutrality article: Currently there is full network neutrality in the United States, meaning that telecommunications companies do not offer different rates to internet consumers based on content or service type; however, there are no legal restrictions against this.
How is this not a solution in search of a problem? Are there regulations that can be enforced, but wouldn't fall under "legal restriction" as defined in Wikipedia?
If it's already prohibited, why pass another law? If there is no indication that providers are even looking down a non-neutral path, why pass a law?
Oh, and thanks to whoever modded my original post troll. I'll take that to mean you couldn't formulate a coherent argument against my point because it was so brilliantly put:)
My question for Net Neutrality has always been: why do we need a law like this? What is currently happening that needs to be fixed by this law? Forcing websites to cough up to be given a high bandwidth access to end users would be bad, but (AFAIK) that's not happening. I really don't see a need for this type of law, and I see no reason to make a law to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Re:Is Roland Piquepaille paid for Slashdot stories
on
A Single-Photon Server
·
· Score: 1
A deterministic single-photon source is very important in some quantum information experiments. For example, in quantum cryptography, you want a SINLGE photon, so that an eavesdropper cannot pick up any spare photons and measure them. You also want to know when the photons are coming, so you can know when to encode whatever information on them (ie polarization) and when to measure the photon.
I call it bloated government all around. Federal budget should be slashed slashed slashed. Enough for federal salaries, military spending, and a few other things. States can and should pick up the tab for almost everything else (and they should shrink also).
Yes I know I'm living in a dream world. The government, federal or otherwise, never shrinks and never will.
I'm a small government, small federal budget kind of guy, and I rarely approve of federal spending, but this I agree with. If the government passes a law that makes my otherwise perfectly useful TV obsolete, they damn well better help me upgrade.
Haha what an elitist post. I think you got beat up one too many times as a kid, so you decided that everyone with social skills is an idiot, and that they feared your intelligence.
I was going to write more, but I think your generalizations speak for themselves as to how absurd they are. Though judging by the +5 mod perhaps not...
This is irrelevant. DWave claimed to have the first commercial quantum computer. And then the details are its only a few bits (nothing new), can't come close to matching the performance of a classical computer (obvious), and then a complete absence of any indicators that the design will scale other than "we plan to have 1000 bits in a year".
What they claimed is trivial, the problem academics have is that they claimed it wasn't and that it will scale.
Here's a link to the abstract. Don't think you can get the full article without some sort of subscription.
Anti-reflection coatings are nothing new. Their used all the time in optics. What's new about this acts as a broadband anti-reflection coating. If this can be transferred to commercial production it would have a huge impact on optical equipment.
That's great for creating competition once the fiber is already lain. But what's the motivation for laying down the first network of fiber if there isn't one, if you are forced to turn around and give that advantage out relatively cheaply to your competitors? Of course, they could charge unreasonably large fees to lease the lines, but presumably that would be treated the same as not leasing the lines at all under this decision.
If it did start to happen, there would be news stories of all the poor illegals that can no longer get jobs or government hand outs, and are starving on the streets. Since Americans are a compassionate people, we would collectively scream that the government needs to fix this, either by allowing them to work illegally, giving them hand outs, or making them legal. Of course the current illegals that are made legal will just be replaced by new illegals, and the cycle starts all over again.
I'm too young to remember this, but apparently in the 1980's there was an immigration bill that 'fixed' the immigration problem, and look, we still have one. Shocking.
You missed my point. I was saying some people are just assholes, and some people just curse in public. It doesn't necessarily mean they have a disorder.
So anyone who is an asshole or shouts obscenities in public should be given a free pass, because why would they do those things if they didn't have a psychological disorder.
You are confusing poor service with a poor product. I won't argue that Walmart may have poor service, but that and the fact that the prices are low does not mean that the quality is necessarily poor as well. There is plenty of good quality stuff at Walmart
If I'm a casual gamer, and only buy say 3 games a year, should I go buy some game I've never heard of, or the next title in a series that has already made 6 games I enjoyed?
Slashdot Mirror
Correct. Its a relatively common occurrence: you have everything going to me@myisp.com but you start using me@gmail.com instead so you have your ISP forward everything that goes to me@myisp.com to me@gmail.com.
Depends how it's done (and I don't know SMTP well enough to know for sure). Since your ISP has the whole e-mail, signature and everything, they could send it along unmodified to your Gmail account, which could then do the same authentication. Since nothing in the e-mail has changed, it would still be verified as the exact one sent from unsolicitedcreditcardoffer@paypal.com
Silicon is not a good conductor. The advantage it can be doped to make it as good of a conductor as necessary (which also allows you to make transistors out of it). I doubt this plastic can be doped...
Also, why not run a test current through it to measure the conductivity instead of using an accelerator?
Maybe, maybe not. Until then, there is no need to pass a law that will stifle innovation in other uses of Internet technology.
Watch out for those winds the government keeps secretly creating, it might blow off your tin foil hat.
When ISPs start doing this, and it actually becomes a problem, I'll (probably) support some form of Net Neutrality. Until then, I see no reason for government regulation.
From Wikipedia Net Neutrality article: Currently there is full network neutrality in the United States, meaning that telecommunications companies do not offer different rates to internet consumers based on content or service type; however, there are no legal restrictions against this .
How is this not a solution in search of a problem? Are there regulations that can be enforced, but wouldn't fall under "legal restriction" as defined in Wikipedia?
If it's already prohibited, why pass another law? If there is no indication that providers are even looking down a non-neutral path, why pass a law?
:)
Oh, and thanks to whoever modded my original post troll. I'll take that to mean you couldn't formulate a coherent argument against my point because it was so brilliantly put
My question for Net Neutrality has always been: why do we need a law like this? What is currently happening that needs to be fixed by this law? Forcing websites to cough up to be given a high bandwidth access to end users would be bad, but (AFAIK) that's not happening. I really don't see a need for this type of law, and I see no reason to make a law to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
A deterministic single-photon source is very important in some quantum information experiments. For example, in quantum cryptography, you want a SINLGE photon, so that an eavesdropper cannot pick up any spare photons and measure them. You also want to know when the photons are coming, so you can know when to encode whatever information on them (ie polarization) and when to measure the photon.
I call it bloated government all around. Federal budget should be slashed slashed slashed. Enough for federal salaries, military spending, and a few other things. States can and should pick up the tab for almost everything else (and they should shrink also).
Yes I know I'm living in a dream world. The government, federal or otherwise, never shrinks and never will.
I'm a small government, small federal budget kind of guy, and I rarely approve of federal spending, but this I agree with. If the government passes a law that makes my otherwise perfectly useful TV obsolete, they damn well better help me upgrade.
Haha what an elitist post. I think you got beat up one too many times as a kid, so you decided that everyone with social skills is an idiot, and that they feared your intelligence.
I was going to write more, but I think your generalizations speak for themselves as to how absurd they are. Though judging by the +5 mod perhaps not...
This is irrelevant. DWave claimed to have the first commercial quantum computer. And then the details are its only a few bits (nothing new), can't come close to matching the performance of a classical computer (obvious), and then a complete absence of any indicators that the design will scale other than "we plan to have 1000 bits in a year".
What they claimed is trivial, the problem academics have is that they claimed it wasn't and that it will scale.
Here's a link to the abstract. Don't think you can get the full article without some sort of subscription.
Anti-reflection coatings are nothing new. Their used all the time in optics. What's new about this acts as a broadband anti-reflection coating. If this can be transferred to commercial production it would have a huge impact on optical equipment.
That's great for creating competition once the fiber is already lain. But what's the motivation for laying down the first network of fiber if there isn't one, if you are forced to turn around and give that advantage out relatively cheaply to your competitors? Of course, they could charge unreasonably large fees to lease the lines, but presumably that would be treated the same as not leasing the lines at all under this decision.
It'll never happen.
If it did start to happen, there would be news stories of all the poor illegals that can no longer get jobs or government hand outs, and are starving on the streets. Since Americans are a compassionate people, we would collectively scream that the government needs to fix this, either by allowing them to work illegally, giving them hand outs, or making them legal. Of course the current illegals that are made legal will just be replaced by new illegals, and the cycle starts all over again.
I'm too young to remember this, but apparently in the 1980's there was an immigration bill that 'fixed' the immigration problem, and look, we still have one. Shocking.
You missed my point. I was saying some people are just assholes, and some people just curse in public. It doesn't necessarily mean they have a disorder.
So anyone who is an asshole or shouts obscenities in public should be given a free pass, because why would they do those things if they didn't have a psychological disorder.
You know, I hate political correctness as much as anyone
Liar
I'm sure the police would say the same thing about camers in all public places, including looking through peoples' private windows.
Great, WoW runs on Vista.
I'm still not going to buy it...
You are confusing poor service with a poor product. I won't argue that Walmart may have poor service, but that and the fact that the prices are low does not mean that the quality is necessarily poor as well. There is plenty of good quality stuff at Walmart
If I'm a casual gamer, and only buy say 3 games a year, should I go buy some game I've never heard of, or the next title in a series that has already made 6 games I enjoyed?
Yes, because we all know how much the time delay between Warcraft II and World of Warcraft hurt Blizzard :P
Finally the MPAA doing something I support. This will get rid of the crappy quality bootlegs on Limewire, leaving only the high quality DVD rips.