Do you think that's a bad thing? Perhaps you should look at other countries who have socialized medicine before you go thinking it's such a good idea. I'd suggest Canada, or Cuba. All their people are healthy and happy right? Sure the elite get decent treatment, but what about the common man? Oh wait, what's that you say about dying of cancer while waiting for treatment? Broken bones that don't heal correctly and have to be broken and reset because the wait to see a doctor was 6 weeks?
Wait, you mentioned Canada but you're describing the US system. Try to stay on topic.
In the case of Canada they pay more than 50% of their income in taxes largely to support an ineffective and broken healthcare system.
Propaganda & bullshit. In BC I pay $192 / month (more than double that of 10 years ago) for complete health care coverage of 2 adults. Including specialists. Same day treatment at clinic. 1 week to 2 month wait for specialist care for non-severe issues. At no extra cost.
Of course if you're a politician or national figure you jump to the front of the line, but for the majority of their people it sucks.
Now you're back to describing the US system. For gawd's sake try to keep on topic. In Canada you will not find an issue that is closer to unanimous than our desire to keep our health care system and to avoid the for-profit mess that is the US system. But you probably knew that and are just a liar. Or, you're incredibly stupid for speaking on topics that you have no clue about. Or both stupid & a liar.
Anyway, joking aside, social democracies as seen in i.e. northern Europe and perhaps Canada are hardly bastions of slavery.
They're also not socialist per se, since, generally, the means of production are still more or less privately owned.
I don't think of Canada's system as all that different from that in the U.S. Taxes are a bit higher and they have a single payer healthcare system. Are there any other major differences?
Not huge differences, however socialized health care is a defining difference and it is as close as unanimous that one could possibly hope for that we do not want the US-style system. When some US politician points at our system as some kind of death-panel inspired dystopia ("we want drugs that'll cure ya, not kill ya", GW Bush in a presidential debate, etc. ad nauseam) then it is unanimous that we'll take our dose of socialism with pride.
Also attitudes on gun control are drastically different. I suppose the underlying difference is that we're more willing to give up some personal freedom (by and large) for the greater good.
In fact, slavery was mostly practised by capitalists, as it was the ultimate low cost labour and desired by large scale land owners and maybe industrialists, not by communist collectives.
I have friends who grew up under communism. From their descriptions, I don't think they'd appreciate the distinction.
True, but while social democracies aren't (perhaps) true socialism (is there not a difference between socialism & communism?), then US isn't true capitalism, because there's socialized fire fighting, military, policing, etc.
Anyway, point being - very few are saying communism is what we need in the west, but a bit of socialism is a good thing. And, it ain't slavery, something rabid capitalists seem to have taken a liking to saying in spite of slavery generally being a capitalistic practice and a gross perversion of property rights.
From Wikipedia, "Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work.[1]". So, communism really wasn't slavery, though neither was there liberty to be had. "Forced to work" is not solely a property of communism, after all.
And the USA was rather guilty of using it, yet I don't think anyone is looking back to pre-civil war USA and thinking, "socialism!"
Fair enough, but that's because socialism (and I mean full frontal socialism, not a welfare state) is a subset of slavery, not a synonym for it.
I suppose that argument could be made, but it still strikes me as a stretch. Let's agree that it's far more nuanced than the bumper sticker slogan claims.
I don't know what's more pathetic, your ignorance of what socialism is or the fact that you remember what my signature used to be.
To address your second point, breathtaking stupidity is memorable, and a guy named after a comic book character isn't that hard to remember. Such gravitas.
To address your first point, I'll repeat myself from another post:
Capitalism is when man exploits man.
Communism is the opposite.
Socialism is in between the two.
Anyway, joking aside, social democracies as seen in i.e. northern Europe and perhaps Canada are hardly bastions of slavery. In fact, slavery was mostly practised by capitalists, as it was the ultimate low cost labour and desired by large scale land owners and maybe industrialists, not by communist collectives.
And the USA was rather guilty of using it, yet I don't think anyone is looking back to pre-civil war USA and thinking, "socialism!"
As for the rest of your blather, too retarded to respond to, can't be bothered and, to steal a phrase from some wise wag: wrestling in shit with pigs is pointless and the pigs like it.
How stupid he must be to have had, for a long time, the signature "Socialism is slavery".
Not really. If the state owns everything you need to survive, it's hardly a stretch to say that it effectively owns you.
Capitalism is when man exploits man.
Communism is the opposite.
Socialism is in between the two.
Anyway, joking aside, social democracies as seen in i.e. northern Europe and perhaps Canada are hardly bastions of slavery. In fact, slavery was mostly practised by capitalists, as it was the ultimate low cost labour and desired by large scale land owners and maybe industrialists, not by communist collectives.
And the USA was rather guilty of using it, yet I don't think anyone is looking back to pre-civil war USA and thinking, "socialism!"
Not really true; if she was 11 when he was born he would NOT be a US citizen:
If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not, the child is a citizen if
* the U.S. citizen parent has been "physically present"[7] in the U.S. before the child's birth for a total period of at least five years, and
* at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent's fourteenth birthday
Thanks for the info.
I've just been butt-bitten by my usage of reductio ad absurdum — serves me right. Though my point still stands.
One thought though: if she were too young, and her child were born in a country that does not honour jus soli (citizenship by birth), where would that make the child a citizen of? Utterly stateless? Would it be a mere formality to obtain US (in this case) citizenship for the child? Has this ever been known to happen and what was the result?
This is what always made me LMAO at these chuckleheads, they can't say what they really want which is "He's a nigger!" so they try to find another reason to get rid of him, even if that reason MAKES NO SENSE. The law could NOT be clearer on the fact, as long as the mother is an American who has not renounced her citizenship then the baby is an American PERIOD.
Couldn't agree more, hairy.
no other country lets you just sneak a pregnant woman across their border and suddenly gives the kid of an illegal invader full citizenship and benefits, that would be stupid
Actually, there are some other countries (Canada is another "advanced economy", for example):
Antigua and Barbuda[9] Argentina Argentina[9] Barbados Barbados[9] Belize[9] Bolivia[9] Brazil Brazil[9] Cambodia[12] Canada Canada[9][13] Chile[14] (children of transient foreigners or of foreign diplomats on assignment in Chile only upon request) Colombia[9] Costa Rica[9][15] (Children born to non-Costa Rican citizens obtain citizenship if registered as a Costa Rican by the will of either parent during minority or by his own will up to the age of twenty-five) Dominica[9] Ecuador[9] El Salvador[9] Fiji[16] Grenada[9] Guatemala[9] Guyana[9] Honduras[9] Jamaica[9] Lesotho[17] Mexico[9] Nicaragua[9] Pakistan[9][18] Panama[9] Paraguay Paraguay[9] Peru[9] Saint Kitts and Nevis[9] Saint Lucia[9] Saint Vincent and the Grenadines[9] Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago[9] Tuvalu[19] United StatesUnited States[9] Uruguay[9] Venezuela[9]
There are also some that have modifed jus soli (which it seems a good idea to do in the days of virtually immediate international travel).
How cute that you think CNN and BBC are in the same category as Fox News. How jaded do you have to be before you start making absurd false equivalencies like that?
How stupid he must be to have had, for a long time, the signature "Socialism is slavery".
CBC's "As It Happens" & "The Current" news & current events programs are well worth a listen, eg, via podcasts.
Warm - asking difficult questions sensitively (eg, about tragic stories), & providing time both for the whole answer -and- transitions between adjacent stories... sometimes playing fitting music between them.
Smart - asking excellent & concise questions, giving time for interviewees' answers... but also asking excellent follow-up questions, so their probing questions -get- answered.
Ever since the days of the (late) radio journo Barbara Fromm, these & other Canadian programs have kept the hard-hitting interview tradition alive & well. We love em!
Love(d) AiH though haven't been listening in past couple years; still have to "second" your recommendation.
Although - it's Barbara Frum - mother of David Frum, who was author of the "Axis of Evil" line whilst one of GW Bush's speech writers.
In 1971, she joined CBC Radio as one of the first hosts of As It Happens, a newsmagazine program which used the telephone to conduct live interviews with newsmakers and other witnesses to news events, as well as quirky human-interest stories. Frum's skills as a tough, incisive and well-informed interviewer[4] quickly made the program one of CBC Radio's most popular and enduring programs (it still airs today, in virtually the same format)
That's debatable seeing as neither was born here and Barry's mother was too young when she had him for him to be considered a citizen when he was born in Kenya.
Doesn't matter if she was 11 years old and he was born on Mars.
She was American; he is American.
You, on the other hand, are a traitor to your country and ought to be deported to a state like North Korea where propaganda is true when repeated often enough.
Loyalty oaths should be required throughout the day. You should have to sign one to go to the shops or eat at a restaurant.
Best to start that kind of thing in school. Oh, wait:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
...
the fact that the people who are most likely to recite the Pledge every day, small children in schools
Gotta wonder if it's time to bring back the good ol' fashioned method:
Swearing of the Pledge is accompanied by a salute. An early version of the salute, adopted in 1892, was known as the Bellamy salute. It started with the hand outstretched toward the flag, palm down, and ended with the palm up. Because of the similarity between the Bellamy salute and the Nazi salute, developed later, United States Congress instituted the hand-over-the-heart gesture as the salute to be rendered by civilians during the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem in the United States, instead of the Bellamy salute.
Switch to Wind/Mobilicity if you have good coverage in your area. Sometimes plans come as low as $25/mo for unlimnited EVERYTHING. I got mine for $40 and it has unlimited US/canada calling, data, tether, voice mail, unlimited text, unlimited data and I can walk away whenever I want to. The 'catch' is that they don't subsidize the phones, but I find this an advantage.
Gotta agree 100% with this, except that they do subsidize their phones: you can have up to $500 on a tab (WindTab), where they reduce the outstanding amount each month by 10% of your air-time bill.
After 36 months, they wipe the balance off the tab. For my HTC Amaze, I paid $99, put $450 on a tab, and after 36 months ($144 "paid" off as 10% of my $40/m bill), they will wipe the balance to $0.00.
You jest, but for a lot of people, data is a lot cheaper than voice minutes.
Where is this mystical plan in Canada? Last I looked, and that was recently it didn't matter what plan it was. At all levels the screw over level was so high, that you were getting so badly fucked that you might as well go looking for a pay phone(we still have those in Canada).
Well, it just finished but will be back, but Wind just had a $40 / m unlimited talk & SMS (both North-America-wide), unlimited MMS, global SMS, voice mail, call display, conference calling, call waiting, and data (throttled after 5 GB).
That's the plan I'm on but the recently expired Unlimited Wish plan also included World Dialing Package: global dialing from 1c / minute. 2c / minute to Hong Kong.
So, not sure if that's a "cheap" data plan, but hard to beat. And, when my ISP failed for 9 days prior to xmas, the entire house got internet through my tethered phone, no extra costs.
Finally, check out their WindTab - basically free phones OAC with no contract and no ETF.
Perhaps you can help clear up a debate that has been happening on and off for years.
Is it really necessary to space the channels so far apart? It seems to be a conventional wisdom that flies in the face of the intent of the standard. Sure, the spectrum does overlap somewhat, but isn't the protocol and the air interface designed to handle this situation gracefully?
It sure does in the city where we have multiple APs coming in five-by-five on each and every channel.
Thanks in advance!
I am not expert, but I do believe that the channels are kept apart by as much as possible because any given channel can use enough bandwidth to overlap a couple channels next to it. Hence having as big a gap allows best utilization of each channel.
A Wi-Fi signal occupies five channels in the 2.4 GHz band. Any two channels numbers that differ by five or more, such as 2 and 7, do not overlap. The oft-repeated adage that channels 1, 6, and 11 are the only non-overlapping channels is, therefore, not accurate. Channels 1, 6, and 11 are the only group of three non-overlapping channels in the U.S.
Skip to 00:50 for the action. You can clearly see the red car turning left on a red light. After the accident I provided first aid until CHP arrived (none of the injured had life threatening injuries). I lived close to the accident site so I drove home and burned the 1080p video on a DVD and gave it to the police.
Two months later I get a call from the insurer of the red car. Apparently they were unaware of the existence of the video: "Are you sure you saw that the light was red? Are you really really sure? Really??". So I answer "I got it on video on my dashcam". "Oh, ok, thanks -click".
Is there a separate left turn control for the red car? Because I watched the video and I saw green lights for traffic in both directions.
Regardless, the red car obviously turned left whilst it was unsafe to do so, so they are still responsible. It's just that I can't determine any red light.
Meh, maybe... I'd rather have it permanently bricked with the uncertainty of return in play, than recoverable and the potential to never get it back.
I'd rather have it in my hands bricked knowing nobody got anything off of me, than out there without a permabrick solution available... know what I mean?
I know what you mean; part of me would want it perma-bricked so the parasite that stole it would get no benefit from it. Then, assuming they were charged criminally for theft, I could sue them in civil court for damages, i.e. the cost of a new phone.
Maybe the GSM consortium needs to implement something so that all carriers globally would simply refuse to register any device reported stolen, rendering them almost as useless as if bricked.
Although, thinking "out loud", a stolen device could still be used as a VOIP device on Wifi, for gaming, just not voice & text calls. And, I believe IMEI numbers can be reset too...
Seems like bricking is the best of a bad lot of solutions.
It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.
And the Slashdot crowd would be screaming EVEN LOUDER about proprietary "walled gardens".
No, some of us might scream if there was no way for a recovered device to be unbricked with presentation of original receipt and police documentation of the recovery, and / or for guarantees that one's device couldn't be bricked by pranksters.
The bricking of phones would be by carriers and apply to all phones, at least as Canadian legislation has been proposed. Actually, the legislation would not brick the phones but would disallow them from being used on any Canadian networks. If combined with the US it could be fairly effective though some would surely be sold overseas.
Regardless, it has NOTHING to do with WALLED GARDENS, so you can enjoy yours.
It looks like, from the link you provided plus a bit of deduction, the lawyer did not win, he settled with Apple for credits, and Apple likely settled because
Apple also serviced Deverett’s stolen computer for someone else even after Deverett called to tell them it was stolen.
i.e. they had his stolen item in their possession and still gave it back to the thief, or the person that bought stolen goods. That was a very dumb move.
The way this is written is so absurdly biased; if you want to promote Android devices, just come out and say it. Don't use some arbitrary statistic to promote your agenda. That's like blaming the former CEO of Lexus for making a desirable vehicle that is prone to theft as a result of its desirability or popularity.
I'm not sure that submitter theodp is a fan of Android, just an unrepentant troll.
His submissions, while full of links which can make them seem well researched, are so often unadulterated troll material it's pathetic.
I have an Android, and if this is an attempt to make Android look good, it sure as hell didn't work in my opinion.
It's not just the headline. The whole thing is google fanboy trash.
The whole thing is submitter theodp being a troll, as usual.
FTFY.
(Nothing *what-so-ever* to do with Google, unless you're an overly defensive Apple "fanboi" of some sort.)
Seriously, this theodp is worse than Roland Piquepaille ever was, or any other regular submitter for that matter. Even Jon Katz's stuff wasn't this regularly trollish.
They get asked to file suits, to draft legislation, to represent the interests of clients.
Well, one actual problem with lawyers is that they have written legislation to benefit their own profession (not surprising), and that they have created steep barriers to entry. That's what people really should be complaining about: licensing requirements and the high proportion of lawyers in legislatures.
The same complaint can be levelled at software developers: the product is so complicated that it requires another software specialist to read it.
This is because laws & software are both intricate and need to leave as little to speculation about intention as possible.
And, laws, like software, is continually "hacked at" to find loopholes which, if significant, need closing, making them even more complicated.
This may not be of use to you anymore, but I'll toss it out there: fail2ban.
I use it to ban IPs attempting ssh-as-root on first attempt, ssh login password failures on 3rd attempt. Uses iptables to block the malicious addresses. Works like a charm.
I used it but stopped doing so some years back, when botnets had become so huge that every attempt in an attack came from a different IP address. Fail2ban wasn't capable of handling that. What makes it work like a charm now?
If you set it up properly it will stop a lot of attempts on the first try: PHPMyAdmin attempts, if you're not running it / exposing it to exernal IP addrs; ssh-as-root, and more. Ban those addresses for a week or a month. Scan logs for the past month (or year) if unforgiving.
I haven't done an analysis on the failed login attempts by IP to see how distributed they are, but I get a large number of banned IPs at any one time. That means it works.
If you wanted a perfect solution, just do ifconfig eth0 down and you're golden.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think that's a bad thing? Perhaps you should look at other countries who have socialized medicine before you go thinking it's such a good idea. I'd suggest Canada, or Cuba. All their people are healthy and happy right? Sure the elite get decent treatment, but what about the common man? Oh wait, what's that you say about dying of cancer while waiting for treatment? Broken bones that don't heal correctly and have to be broken and reset because the wait to see a doctor was 6 weeks?
Wait, you mentioned Canada but you're describing the US system. Try to stay on topic.
In the case of Canada they pay more than 50% of their income in taxes largely to support an ineffective and broken healthcare system.
Propaganda & bullshit. In BC I pay $192 / month (more than double that of 10 years ago) for complete health care coverage of 2 adults. Including specialists. Same day treatment at clinic. 1 week to 2 month wait for specialist care for non-severe issues. At no extra cost.
Of course if you're a politician or national figure you jump to the front of the line, but for the majority of their people it sucks.
Now you're back to describing the US system. For gawd's sake try to keep on topic. In Canada you will not find an issue that is closer to unanimous than our desire to keep our health care system and to avoid the for-profit mess that is the US system. But you probably knew that and are just a liar. Or, you're incredibly stupid for speaking on topics that you have no clue about. Or both stupid & a liar.
A south puget sounder would stab you in the face with a fair-trade knife for claiming a californian knows rain.
Vancouverite here.
I'd loan you my organic, fair-trade knife, but it's rusted completely away.
F'ing rain.
Anyway, joking aside, social democracies as seen in i.e. northern Europe and perhaps Canada are hardly bastions of slavery.
They're also not socialist per se, since, generally, the means of production are still more or less privately owned.
I don't think of Canada's system as all that different from that in the U.S. Taxes are a bit higher and they have a single payer healthcare system. Are there any other major differences?
Not huge differences, however socialized health care is a defining difference and it is as close as unanimous that one could possibly hope for that we do not want the US-style system. When some US politician points at our system as some kind of death-panel inspired dystopia ("we want drugs that'll cure ya, not kill ya", GW Bush in a presidential debate, etc. ad nauseam) then it is unanimous that we'll take our dose of socialism with pride.
Also attitudes on gun control are drastically different. I suppose the underlying difference is that we're more willing to give up some personal freedom (by and large) for the greater good.
In fact, slavery was mostly practised by capitalists, as it was the ultimate low cost labour and desired by large scale land owners and maybe industrialists, not by communist collectives.
I have friends who grew up under communism. From their descriptions, I don't think they'd appreciate the distinction.
True, but while social democracies aren't (perhaps) true socialism (is there not a difference between socialism & communism?), then US isn't true capitalism, because there's socialized fire fighting, military, policing, etc.
Anyway, point being - very few are saying communism is what we need in the west, but a bit of socialism is a good thing. And, it ain't slavery, something rabid capitalists seem to have taken a liking to saying in spite of slavery generally being a capitalistic practice and a gross perversion of property rights.
From Wikipedia, "Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work.[1]". So, communism really wasn't slavery, though neither was there liberty to be had. "Forced to work" is not solely a property of communism, after all.
And the USA was rather guilty of using it, yet I don't think anyone is looking back to pre-civil war USA and thinking, "socialism!"
Fair enough, but that's because socialism (and I mean full frontal socialism, not a welfare state) is a subset of slavery, not a synonym for it.
I suppose that argument could be made, but it still strikes me as a stretch. Let's agree that it's far more nuanced than the bumper sticker slogan claims.
Thanks for the reasoned debate.
I don't know what's more pathetic, your ignorance of what socialism is or the fact that you remember what my signature used to be.
To address your second point, breathtaking stupidity is memorable, and a guy named after a comic book character isn't that hard to remember. Such gravitas.
To address your first point, I'll repeat myself from another post:
As for the rest of your blather, too retarded to respond to, can't be bothered and, to steal a phrase from some wise wag: wrestling in shit with pigs is pointless and the pigs like it.
How stupid he must be to have had, for a long time, the signature "Socialism is slavery".
Not really. If the state owns everything you need to survive, it's hardly a stretch to say that it effectively owns you.
Capitalism is when man exploits man.
Communism is the opposite.
Socialism is in between the two.
Anyway, joking aside, social democracies as seen in i.e. northern Europe and perhaps Canada are hardly bastions of slavery. In fact, slavery was mostly practised by capitalists, as it was the ultimate low cost labour and desired by large scale land owners and maybe industrialists, not by communist collectives.
And the USA was rather guilty of using it, yet I don't think anyone is looking back to pre-civil war USA and thinking, "socialism!"
Cheers
Not really true; if she was 11 when he was born he would NOT be a US citizen:
If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not, the child is a citizen if
* the U.S. citizen parent has been "physically present"[7] in the U.S. before the child's birth for a total period of at least five years, and
* at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent's fourteenth birthday
Thanks for the info.
I've just been butt-bitten by my usage of reductio ad absurdum — serves me right. Though my point still stands.
One thought though: if she were too young, and her child were born in a country that does not honour jus soli (citizenship by birth), where would that make the child a citizen of? Utterly stateless? Would it be a mere formality to obtain US (in this case) citizenship for the child? Has this ever been known to happen and what was the result?
This is what always made me LMAO at these chuckleheads, they can't say what they really want which is "He's a nigger!" so they try to find another reason to get rid of him, even if that reason MAKES NO SENSE. The law could NOT be clearer on the fact, as long as the mother is an American who has not renounced her citizenship then the baby is an American PERIOD.
Couldn't agree more, hairy.
no other country lets you just sneak a pregnant woman across their border and suddenly gives the kid of an illegal invader full citizenship and benefits, that would be stupid
Actually, there are some other countries (Canada is another "advanced economy", for example):
There are also some that have modifed jus soli (which it seems a good idea to do in the days of virtually immediate international travel).
How cute that you think CNN and BBC are in the same category as Fox News. How jaded do you have to be before you start making absurd false equivalencies like that?
How stupid he must be to have had, for a long time, the signature "Socialism is slavery".
That level of stupid is beyond painful.
Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
CBC's "As It Happens" & "The Current" news & current events programs are well worth a listen, eg, via podcasts.
Warm - asking difficult questions sensitively (eg, about tragic stories), & providing time both for the whole answer -and- transitions between adjacent stories... sometimes playing fitting music between them.
Smart - asking excellent & concise questions, giving time for interviewees' answers... but also asking excellent follow-up questions, so their probing questions -get- answered.
Ever since the days of the (late) radio journo Barbara Fromm, these & other Canadian programs have kept the hard-hitting interview tradition alive & well. We love em!
Love(d) AiH though haven't been listening in past couple years; still have to "second" your recommendation.
Although - it's Barbara Frum - mother of David Frum, who was author of the "Axis of Evil" line whilst one of GW Bush's speech writers.
More details here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Frum):
That's debatable seeing as neither was born here and Barry's mother was too young when she had him for him to be considered a citizen when he was born in Kenya.
Doesn't matter if she was 11 years old and he was born on Mars.
She was American; he is American.
You, on the other hand, are a traitor to your country and ought to be deported to a state like North Korea where propaganda is true when repeated often enough.
Loyalty oaths should be required throughout the day. You should have to sign one to go to the shops or eat at a restaurant.
Best to start that kind of thing in school. Oh, wait:
Gotta wonder if it's time to bring back the good ol' fashioned method:
Thanks Wikipedia.
Switch to Wind/Mobilicity if you have good coverage in your area. Sometimes plans come as low as $25/mo for unlimnited EVERYTHING. I got mine for $40 and it has unlimited US/canada calling, data, tether, voice mail, unlimited text, unlimited data and I can walk away whenever I want to. The 'catch' is that they don't subsidize the phones, but I find this an advantage.
Gotta agree 100% with this, except that they do subsidize their phones: you can have up to $500 on a tab (WindTab), where they reduce the outstanding amount each month by 10% of your air-time bill.
After 36 months, they wipe the balance off the tab. For my HTC Amaze, I paid $99, put $450 on a tab, and after 36 months ($144 "paid" off as 10% of my $40/m bill), they will wipe the balance to $0.00.
Unbeatable.
You jest, but for a lot of people, data is a lot cheaper than voice minutes.
Where is this mystical plan in Canada? Last I looked, and that was recently it didn't matter what plan it was. At all levels the screw over level was so high, that you were getting so badly fucked that you might as well go looking for a pay phone(we still have those in Canada).
Well, it just finished but will be back, but Wind just had a $40 / m unlimited talk & SMS (both North-America-wide), unlimited MMS, global SMS, voice mail, call display, conference calling, call waiting, and data (throttled after 5 GB).
That's the plan I'm on but the recently expired Unlimited Wish plan also included World Dialing Package: global dialing from 1c / minute. 2c / minute to Hong Kong.
So, not sure if that's a "cheap" data plan, but hard to beat. And, when my ISP failed for 9 days prior to xmas, the entire house got internet through my tethered phone, no extra costs.
Finally, check out their WindTab - basically free phones OAC with no contract and no ETF.
(Not affiliated, just satisfied customer.)
Perhaps you can help clear up a debate that has been happening on and off for years.
Is it really necessary to space the channels so far apart? It seems to be a conventional wisdom that flies in the face of the intent of the standard. Sure, the spectrum does overlap somewhat, but isn't the protocol and the air interface designed to handle this situation gracefully?
It sure does in the city where we have multiple APs coming in five-by-five on each and every channel.
Thanks in advance!
I am not expert, but I do believe that the channels are kept apart by as much as possible because any given channel can use enough bandwidth to overlap a couple channels next to it. Hence having as big a gap allows best utilization of each channel.
Wikipedia's Wifi Limitations section explains it better:
Or the "best" one I ever caught: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9g7H0-NelI
Skip to 00:50 for the action. You can clearly see the red car turning left on a red light. After the accident I provided first aid until CHP arrived (none of the injured had life threatening injuries). I lived close to the accident site so I drove home and burned the 1080p video on a DVD and gave it to the police.
Two months later I get a call from the insurer of the red car. Apparently they were unaware of the existence of the video: "Are you sure you saw that the light was red? Are you really really sure? Really??". So I answer "I got it on video on my dashcam". "Oh, ok, thanks -click".
Is there a separate left turn control for the red car? Because I watched the video and I saw green lights for traffic in both directions.
Regardless, the red car obviously turned left whilst it was unsafe to do so, so they are still responsible. It's just that I can't determine any red light.
Meh, maybe... I'd rather have it permanently bricked with the uncertainty of return in play, than recoverable and the potential to never get it back.
I'd rather have it in my hands bricked knowing nobody got anything off of me, than out there without a permabrick solution available... know what I mean?
I know what you mean; part of me would want it perma-bricked so the parasite that stole it would get no benefit from it. Then, assuming they were charged criminally for theft, I could sue them in civil court for damages, i.e. the cost of a new phone.
Maybe the GSM consortium needs to implement something so that all carriers globally would simply refuse to register any device reported stolen, rendering them almost as useless as if bricked.
Although, thinking "out loud", a stolen device could still be used as a VOIP device on Wifi, for gaming, just not voice & text calls. And, I believe IMEI numbers can be reset too...
Seems like bricking is the best of a bad lot of solutions.
Do you really still have the original receipts for all of your devices?
A fair number of them but I realize most people don't. However, that misses the point entirely.
If you device is stolen but recovered, do you want it permanently bricked?
It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.
And the Slashdot crowd would be screaming EVEN LOUDER about proprietary "walled gardens".
No, some of us might scream if there was no way for a recovered device to be unbricked with presentation of original receipt and police documentation of the recovery, and / or for guarantees that one's device couldn't be bricked by pranksters.
The bricking of phones would be by carriers and apply to all phones, at least as Canadian legislation has been proposed. Actually, the legislation would not brick the phones but would disallow them from being used on any Canadian networks. If combined with the US it could be fairly effective though some would surely be sold overseas.
Regardless, it has NOTHING to do with WALLED GARDENS, so you can enjoy yours.
At least one lawyer successfully sued Apple and got compensated when his previous toy got stolen. Why take responsibility for your actions when you can blame someone else?
It looks like, from the link you provided plus a bit of deduction, the lawyer did not win, he settled with Apple for credits, and Apple likely settled because
i.e. they had his stolen item in their possession and still gave it back to the thief, or the person that bought stolen goods. That was a very dumb move.
The way this is written is so absurdly biased; if you want to promote Android devices, just come out and say it. Don't use some arbitrary statistic to promote your agenda. That's like blaming the former CEO of Lexus for making a desirable vehicle that is prone to theft as a result of its desirability or popularity.
I'm not sure that submitter theodp is a fan of Android, just an unrepentant troll.
His submissions, while full of links which can make them seem well researched, are so often unadulterated troll material it's pathetic.
I have an Android, and if this is an attempt to make Android look good, it sure as hell didn't work in my opinion.
It's not just the headline. The whole thing is google fanboy trash.
The whole thing is submitter theodp being a troll, as usual.
FTFY.
(Nothing *what-so-ever* to do with Google, unless you're an overly defensive Apple "fanboi" of some sort.)
Seriously, this theodp is worse than Roland Piquepaille ever was, or any other regular submitter for that matter. Even Jon Katz's stuff wasn't this regularly trollish.
Well, one actual problem with lawyers is that they have written legislation to benefit their own profession (not surprising), and that they have created steep barriers to entry. That's what people really should be complaining about: licensing requirements and the high proportion of lawyers in legislatures.
The same complaint can be levelled at software developers: the product is so complicated that it requires another software specialist to read it.
This is because laws & software are both intricate and need to leave as little to speculation about intention as possible.
And, laws, like software, is continually "hacked at" to find loopholes which, if significant, need closing, making them even more complicated.
I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.
What really happened in Belize?
Did he kill anyone?
If yes, wouldn't it be righteous to allow the authorities to properly investigate the circumstances of the homicide?
My sense is that Slashdot has been in the tank for McAfee since this started.
I want the truth and the whole story.
All good questions. I'd just add one more: how did he not get sent back to Belize and instead found himself on his way back to USA?
This may not be of use to you anymore, but I'll toss it out there: fail2ban.
I use it to ban IPs attempting ssh-as-root on first attempt, ssh login password failures on 3rd attempt. Uses iptables to block the malicious addresses. Works like a charm.
I used it but stopped doing so some years back, when botnets had become so huge that every attempt in an attack came from a different IP address. Fail2ban wasn't capable of handling that. What makes it work like a charm now?
If you set it up properly it will stop a lot of attempts on the first try: PHPMyAdmin attempts, if you're not running it / exposing it to exernal IP addrs; ssh-as-root, and more. Ban those addresses for a week or a month. Scan logs for the past month (or year) if unforgiving.
I haven't done an analysis on the failed login attempts by IP to see how distributed they are, but I get a large number of banned IPs at any one time. That means it works.
If you wanted a perfect solution, just do ifconfig eth0 down and you're golden.
Replying to self with link to a reddit page on the variations, XKCD forum, and a very brief summary of some of the variations.