" Take the iPhone. Now why Apple chose to let it be locked (at least until its hacked) into AT&T only for " Take the iPhone. Now why Apple chose to let it be locked (at least until its hacked) into AT&T only for service I dont know. "
Very ea$y an$wer.
AT&T likely paid an enormou$ amount of money to Apple for thi$ priviledge. There i$ no other po$$ible rea$on Apple would cripple their income potential from their overpriced new little toy.
It i$ very likely it i$ a time limited agreement $o you'll probably $ee it open up to additional carrier$ in the not $o di$tant future.
The issue is not WHAT they're stealing, it's the fact they have been entrusted to fix a problem on the system and abusing that trust to take whatever they find.
It doesn't matter what the content is, your leaving your computer with them for whatever reason is NOT a carte blanche open invitation to copy whatever they want.
Assume, for a moment, you've legally purchased and downloaded some semi expensive application from the net. Not unheard of these days, many offer instant downloads of their products. ( Z-Brush comes to mind and is several hundred dollars in price )
Would you have an issue with the Geek Squad making a copy of that ? Or maybe your Quicken data file ? Your email folder perhaps ? An I-Tunes directory ? Pick a file ?
Yeah, I hear you out there. Encrypt it or burn it or put it on a portable drive.
Ok, think about this for a half second.
What kinds of people are likely to utilize the service provided by someone like Geek Squad ?
Visions of your parents or grandparents should be shooting through your head right about now.
What are the ODDS of your parents being able to setup an encryption system of ANY kind ? The rare parents will be able to burn a CD. Maybe. After a phone call to you.
These are the kinds of folks they're abusing.
The Geek Squad employee should have seen a big red flag when they came across the D0wnl0aded Muz1c and Pr0N folders. . . . .
With GPS finding it's way into phones these days, how difficult would it be to code the phone to disallow any incoming / outgoing transmissions once the phone is travelling X miles per hour ? ( say 30 mph )
Could be coded to allow emergency dialing only ( ergo 911 ). . . .
Tough part would be what the phone would do if no GPS signal were available I suppose. ( LOL you thought reception of cellular signals were bad )
While I'm not 100% up on the technical details of how cable works, I'm curious how much bandwidth ( if any ) would be freed up by removing 90% of the channels that no one watches anyway. If it does, in fact, free up some bandwidth, it becomes an easier ( and cheaper ) path for the Cable Companies to provide more High Definition content. Though, if it passes and all we can watch is Elmo in High Def, then I'll take a pass on the whole plan thanks. . . .
As it stands today, they have to figure out how to increase the bandwidth pipe to offer what is going to be a bandwidth heavy future.
Now, for the FCC part of this ? Screw them. If anything needs to be cleaned up, it's their perception that we need government oversight to protect us from ( gasp ) skin on television. It's perfectly ok for the news to show combat footage from ( insert the current war here ) to the fragile little minds of the children, ( screw them too while we're at it ) but whip out a boob during the Super Bowl and folks lose their damn minds. . . . .
The article doesn't mention AT&T as an ISP. It merely states they plan on filtering
this content as it runs across their network.
Well, the bad news is that most ISP data in the US traverses the AT&T network in the
form of optical longhaul systems ( Read that Sonet ) at some point in it's journey.
Your ISP leases lines from Company X who, in turn, leases their lines from AT&T.
Is similar to when your WoW session is hit with a lag storm and you start yelling at
your ISP to ' FIX YOUR SH*T ', when it's actually an optical level issue on lines owned
by someone else that is taking the data longhaul across the country.
Sprint, AT&T, whatever )
Given the technology that allowed the NSA to split the optical signal so they could
watch traffic, I wonder if they're considering applying their ' filtering ' technology
in the same manner.
In other words, would they act as big brother over all the data packets that travel
' their ' pipes and filter anything they feel is necessary ?
It's a pointless argument already.
The so called ' shield ' tries to protect from ballistic ( read that ICBM ) missiles only.
Emphasis on ' tries ' because the common workaround for it will be to oversaturate it. Ten
interceptor missiles or even fifty are no match for ICBM's with a dozen re-entry vehicles
all capable of independent targeting. Put ten birds in the air and you now have 120
inbound warheads, some real, some decoy. Technology Iran and neighboring countries do not
yet possess.
While I've been out of the field for a while ( Ex-Tomahawk type myself ) I'm pretty
sure that Russia still has quite a number of nuclear capable cruise missiles in their inventory.
That so called ' shield ' is completely powerless to stop an attack of that nature. It's unlikely
they'll even be seen until the first targets get vaporized.
Russia knows this. The US knows it as does the EU.
You know AT&T isn't going to offer this type of service to any neighborhood that isn't considered somewhat ' upscale '. It would be a waste of money. They plan on targeting those neighborhoods that they believe can afford this type of service. Verizon is the same way.
My biggest concern would be the bandwidth usage. It has to be a fixed pipe to the home so trying to watch an HD channel or two ( multiple receivers ? ) while the kids are gaming it up would be pushing the bandwidth a bit I think. Which has priority I wonder. . . . TV or net ? Can it be set from the DSL modem or does AT&T have the final say so on it ?
On a related note, it's my opinion that AT&T isn't thinking as far into the future as Verizon is ( They're running fiber all the way to the home instead of going the cheaper route and using copper the last bit. Guess the money they saved went into Ed's golden retirement fund. . .:| ) and it may come back to bite them in the ass. The fiber is going to allow a much bigger bandwidth pipe for Verizon so they'll have room to grow for future applications. Whereas AT&T will reach a bandwidth limit far sooner and will ultimately have to lay fiber anyway to stay competitive.
Unfortunately, we all know that where Verizon FIOS is available, U-Verse isn't and vice versa. All depends on whose territory you happen to live in.
So the phone companies don't really have to worry about competition from each other, it's actually the phone companies vs cable.
So while both companies strut their stuff, if you don't live in the right area, ( read that high dollar neighborhoods ) you don't get squat ! lol
Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts...
In building and shaping the site I've always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We've always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code.
But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you've made it clear. You'd rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won't delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.
If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying.
Digg on,
Kevin
by assigning another Houston police officer to ' monitor ' all red light camera infractions.
As such, before any citations are issued a Houston police officer reviews the video to determine if the incident qualifies. I'd love to see the number of officers blowing redlights who actually receive a citation.
The ONLY incident I have EVER been in was due to a police car running the red light. The vehicle in front of me was about to go through her GREEN light when she had to slam on her brakes hard to avoid hitting deputy goober who was blasting through the light.
It's an unwritten rule that police officers do NOT issue tickets to other officers. When it does happen, it's rare. On more than one occasion have I seen the police officer who doesn't want to bother with stopping for the stopsign and / or redlight. He simply kicks on his lights, blows the light / sign and kills them once through it. This particular officer did it every day. His destination ? His driveway. . .
Or we can take the case of the officer driving down the freeway at speeds that would guarantee any normal citizen a nice ticket. The whole ' enroute to a call ' thing doesn't fly when the officer in question passed his jurisdictional line forty miles back. In other words, Police Officer from city X is in city Y doing whatever. We know he's not running traffic or some radio call because he is too far out of his area of responsibility.
While I don't dislike ALL police, those of you in law enforcement should realize that it's the officers we DO see that are creating the bad public image for you.
Tests are a good way to measure how well the child has actually learned the material at hand.
You tend to forget that much of little Johnny's Straight-A homework is actually done not by little Johnny, but by little Johnny's parents. When little Johnny makes Straight-A grades on his homework, but miserably fails the test covering the same material, do we simply blame it on little Johnny's inability to take tests ? ( the usual excuse ) Or is it simply a reflection of over-ambitious parents trying to ' help ' their kiddo through school. . . . . or maybe just a slight ' push ' from a certain ( football / basketball / insert your sport here ) coach to make sure his star player doesn't fail so he can continue to play ball ?
Granted, the TAKS and their ilk are somewhat of a bad idea since we now ' teach ' the test instead of teaching the material. I know teachers who absolutely refuse to consider teaching any grades that are TAKS tested. Way too much red-tape to try and deal with.
Teacher salaries really aren't all that far off the mark. No they're not going to become millionaires, but it's a decent salary. If you break down how many days they work per year vs their pay you'll see it a bit clearer. Try it with your salary. Convert it to an hourly pay scale then do the math on ~180 working days a year. All the teachers I know ( given a choice ) would prefer to keep their number of days worked right where it is vs working more days for a larger salary. . . .
Now, the issue at hand is should we pay certain fields more / less money than the others ? Personally, I don't think it will help in the long run. All this will do ( especially in a money driven society like the good ol U.S. of A ) is shift folks into field X or Y for a certain amount of time. You will then have a shortage of teachers who want to teach fields that do not currently enjoy the salary bonus. So reward Science and Math today, deal with English / History / Art / Economics shortages tomorrow. Wash / rinse / repeat every few years as the shortages work their way through the various subjects.
" One of these things is not like the others. . . . . "
If I ever snapped and became Osama Bin American and decided to use Sat Imagery for my target lists, you can likely bet I wouldn't add it unless it was sufficiently blurry. After all, only the blurry ones would be considered semi-decent targets.
It's equivalent to our favorite little dictator wearing a shirt that says " I'm not the President " to confuse any would be terrorists.:|
However, show me ANY politician that has kept their campaign promises. Ever. I can't think of any myself. . . . . .
The candidates have a bad habit of latching onto a current high profile issue ( ergo, privacy ) and making all the claims in the world about how they plan to ' fix ' it. Time passes and the same issues are still issues years later after the aforementioned politician has been elected.
To answer the question, I would say yes ONLY IF the candidate actually stuck to their guns and delivered on their campaign promises.
Until there is some kind of accountability for all the promises they make, then my answer is, unfortunately, no. It's just pre-election fluff imo.
Should make it a provision for re-election. You don't deliver on your past promises, you become ineligible for any further terms.
If an attitude exists in the IT department, it's possible it's due to frustration. Most of the IT folks ( emphasis on MOST ) are very computer literate. Many of the jobs of today REQUIRE at least some basic knowledge of how to operate a computer. Where the frustration comes into play is when the IT folks are called over and over again to solve what would be considered basic issues. Usually, by the same folks over and over and over again. Nothing I love more than a user on the other end of the phone that, when asked about the application they use, states " I don't know, I just click the icon and it works. . . "
I know of a tech who has backups of backups of BACKUPS ( read that 3-4 copies ) of each and every file on his machine and wonders why the disk is always full.:| I've seen folks who try to push around the trackball and proclaim the ' mouse ' is broken.( Um. . . no, don't move the whole thing just the ball on top there. . . . )
The IT folks are usually understaffed, work stupid amounts of hours, and are usually managed by someone who couldn't SPELL " IT " without spell-check or a flashcard. Okay! We want you to take a call from the customer, fix their problem, then put what you found into no fewer than three different databases ( well of COURSE they're not linked, why would we do something like that ? ) day in and day out, and maintain a cheery attitude the entire time. Why isn't project XYZ finished yet ? We need someone to go over to office X and fix a system over there. I know it isn't our ' job ' per se, but he's a friend of mine and I told him we could help out ' just this once '.
I think MY attitude stems from the line of thinking that working for a company such as AT&T that one of your prerequisite skill sets would be the ability to use a computer. The ability to LEARN how to use your applications without my handholding you through it on a daily basis, and to have at least enough common sense to check the power cables when your system / monitor doesn't turn on. The snap to know that while yes it's possible the port on the switch *might* be bad, the greater likelyhood is the vendor ( lowest bidder of course ) doesn't know how to pin out a standard ethernet cable. Yes I know the correct color code, no I'm not going to do it for you. The vendor made a few thousand dollars to show up, install the equipment and terminate those cables. I suggest you call that overpaid vendor and have him test the cables.
That's a good question. Unfortunately, it's likely to only be answered correctly by those who are currently a part of the system, but lack the ability to force any changes upon it.
However, everyone has an opinion so my thoughts on it follow.
1) Schools no longer teach subjects. Educators are required to follow a curriculum that maximizes the
potential for the school district to increase their exit exam scores. It basically boils down to
only teaching the students what they need to know to pass the standards exam.
2) Schools no longer have the ability to discipline students to any useful degree. Unless the student
is violent, schools are absolutely forbidden to touch a student for any reason under fear of lawsuits.
Even if the student IS violent, the campus police or another designated group are notified to deal
with the issue.
3) School priorities are a bit backwards. Easy to see what the school considers important when it pays
a high school football coach upwards of $90,000+ per year while a high school physics teacher barely
pulls in $45,000. Then again, winning the National Science Fair competition does not bring in any
money for the district, while becoming State Champions in football does.:|
4) Environment. Would YOU want to sit in a facility as unsecure as an American High School these days ?
Seriously, Chemistry is bad enough without the ever-present thought of some nut-job showing up with
an Uzi.
5) Money and the lack thereof. Many schools can't afford to add additional teachers / classes / facilities
to reflect todays needs. Those who live in the poorest areas do not receive equivalent education that
their mid / high income bretheren do. The cycle of poverty is tough to break.
6) A dim future. The reality of education past high school is dismal. In order to obtain a degree worth
anything, the student will go so far into debt it's sad. Not uncommon to see debts of $100,000+ for
graduates of a college program. Take that outlook with the current line of thinking that job prospects
without a college degree equal low skill/wage work, and you end up with a " What's the point? " attitude.
I've been out of High School now for nearly twenty years. In that time, I haven't seen any improvement in the system as a whole. In fact, it appears to be getting worse. I've lost count of how many times I've run across stories in the education system that made me say " I'm glad I graduated when I did. I can't fathom dealing with the BS that goes on in schools today. "
All issues of pedophilia aside, ( after all, laws and morals differ from country to country ) the interesting problem is why are groups in country X ( in this case the US ) allowed to dictate the availability of information in country Y ( again, in this case Canada ) ?
Of course it's done everywhere ideals don't conincide with common thought, but left unchecked it will pretty much ruin everything it touches. No matter what the idea is, someone, somewhere is probably offended by it. Should we rip down the site ? Implement filters ? Cease and decist orders ? Disconnect them from the world ?
Simply because someone else disagrees with the existence of certain information doesn't give them the right to remove it. ( my opinion only of course and I realize that and $1.25 might get me some coffee if I don't offend them:) )
An interesting example happened while checking my spelling of pedophilia above. My corporate firewall ( for my own safety of course ) blocked my Google search of the word. After all, no employee should *dare* even mutter or think of anything on the topic. To make it easy, the company simply blocks access to information they don't feel like getting sued over. Thus, my spelling is my best guess on it so if I screwed it up, you know why. ( After all, this IS America and everyone knows that if they DON'T block it, then they must be condoning it. )
Such a sad state of existence we live in anymore.
Somewhat off topic but a thought I've been kicking around a bit more these days.
Why is it that someone convicted of a sexual crime is treated so different than those who commit crimes of a different nature ? ( Ergo: Murder, fraud, assault, burglery, etc. etc. ) Sex offenders end up having to register, have to stay away from certain folks ( read that children ), wear signs, shirts and whatnot indicating their past crimes.
When's the last time you saw a registered murderer anywhere ? Or the guy walking down the street with " I defrauded a billion in pensions and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt " ?
Why are we SO hung up on the ' sexual predator ' when there are folks FAR more dangerous out there ?
Maybe I should just go back into my cave and stay there lol
"Every time you write a check you're giving out your bank account information."
True statement. Assuming you use checks to pay for anything.
Everything goes on my credit card, since it's from the same bank as my checking account, I simply transfer the funds between accounts every month to pay it off. One box of checks lasts me YEARS.
Here's the entertaining part.
This discussion came up today and I get this email a few minutes ago:
Dear ,
As part of our security measures, we regularly screen activity in the PayPal system. We recently contacted you after noticing an issue on your account.We requested information from you for the following reason:
Our system requires further account verification.
Case ID Number:
This is a reminder to log in to PayPal as soon as possible.
Be sure to log in securely by opening a new browser window and typing the PayPal URL. Once you log in, you will be provided with steps to restore your account access. We appreciate your understanding as we work to ensure account safety.
In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement, your account access will remain limited until the issue has been resolved. Unfortunately, if access to your account remains limited for an extended period of time, it may result in further limitations or eventual account closure. We encourage you to log in to your PayPal account as soon as possible to help avoid this.
To review your account and some or all of the information that PayPal used to make its decision to limit your account access, please visit the Resolution Center. If, after reviewing your account information, you seek further clarification regarding your account access, please contact PayPal by visiting the Help Center and clicking "Contact Us".
We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please understand that this is a security measure intended to help protect you and your account. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Sincerely, PayPal Account Review Department
PayPal Email ID
Maybe if I sit back and wait, they'll close it for me:) Since I can't seem to do it myself.
Recently, I received notice from PayPal ( an actual PayPal notice, not a phishing email ) that several attempts had been made to gain access to my account from an IP they claim was somewhere in Russia.
Ok, no problem.
I log into my account and find their security notice along with the IP's that were registered when the access attempt was made. Site is verified, certificate checks out, etc. etc.
I rarely use my PayPal account anymore so I attempted to cancel the account.
THAT'S where the problem starts.
Since the access attempt, they locked the account to minimum permissions. The only way I can cancel the account and / or remove the credit card information is to provide PayPal with proof of who I am. This involves giving them my home phone number and my BANK ACCOUNT information.
Thus, my account remains open with my credit card info on their servers. You can't close it without giving out even MORE information. Which I refuse to do. Emails to customer service return the usual scripted crap they are known for.
My solution to the problem was to change my password to the most complex mind-numbing thing I could and wait until my credit card expires in December. At which point the card info on their servers will be invalid and I no longer have to worry about it.
A fast Google on PayPal problems will turn up similar stories for you.
You'll find that the majority of espionage cases involve money. Or, to be more precise about it, the lack thereof.
When folks start handing over secrets ( be them corporate or government ) the person doing the ' spying ' part is usually unhappy about something. Hates the company, hates the boss, has financial issues, envious of the ' super-suits ' making a hundred times their salary, etc. etc.
While the company can do little about the employees personal lifestyle ( perhaps he's an obsessive gambler or suffers from depression ? ) they do have some control about overall employee satisfaction while on the job. An employees pay, the work environment, overall stress level, etc. etc. all contribute to this.
While the company can elect to let go an employee with risk factor qualifiers, it's tough to spot the signs without intruding into an employees personal life. SOMEONE has to have access to sensitive data within the company, so the company needs to ensure that those folks that do are happy with their jobs.
If your IT folks are working stupidly long hours for minimal pay and crappy benefits, then you're setting yourself up for this type of problem. Actually, this isn't limited to the IT folks either. ANY of your employees can become a ' spy ' in the right situations.
( Tip: Seeing the CEO drive up in a Ferrarri after purchasing his / her fourth home because his / her pay is so obscene only serves to remind the rest of the employees of their insignificance. )
Jealousy is another big motivating factor for turning ' spy '.
While you can implement stict controls over data ( no outside personal devices, Marines at the entrances / exits who random search folks, insert your favorite surveillance technique here, NDA's, etc. ) all of that costs money. A LOT of money.
Who wants to work for a company like this anyway ? Would you subject yourself to constant surveillance while on the job ? A camera in your cubicle ? Keyloggers and Remote Viewers on your computer ? An RFID tag stapled to your forehead ? Probably not. . . .
It's a delicate balance keeping your information secret and your work environment appealing to your employees.
In the end, it's easier ( and probably more cost effective ) to keep your employees happy than it is to implement an Orwellian system in an attempt to keep your information intact.
This question will go out to you folks who actually work in the Cellular business.
With some of the new cell-phone systems having GPS capability, how difficult would it be to code the phones to simply refuse to operate once the phone had reached a certain speed ? It's unlikely you're going to run faster than 20mph with a phone in one hand, so why not simply tell the phone to disallow any calling ( inbound or outbound ) once the unit exceeds the set speed ? ( with the exception of emergency numbers 911, etc. )
Would this even be a feasable possibility or is it simply wishful thinking on my part ?
While we're at it, lets code in the Cellular equivilant of the Broadcast Flag. Essentially it's jamming, but since JAMMING is a questionable activity here in the US, we'll simply rename it, and all will be good in the world. . . .:)
I SO loved my jammer before the technology transition. I could actually sit in a movie theater and watch an entire movie without the cellular rendition of Beethoven's Fifth going off every two minutes. . . . ahhh the good old days. . . .
In other words, build the system into the phone that allows it to operate in any environment unless it detects the presence of a ' Broadcast Bit '. ( Simple, cheap device with limited range in movie theaters, hospitals, churches, restaurants, etc. etc. that simply tell the phone not to accept incoming or outgoing calls with, once again, the exception of emergency numbers. )
While I'm not normally one to condone laws and whatnot to dictate every part of our lives, it's become obvious that common sense and courtesy are just completely beyond the cell phone issue. Folks simply will NOT give the damn things up. They're like battery operated crack. . . . .
I'm only speculating here, but once they get the whole TV on the phone thing down, something's GOTTA give before that idiot watching the game on the phone @ 75mph plows through a car or two. . . .
Thoughts ?
Re:Not for gaming, for graphics workstations!!
on
ATI's 1GB Video Card
·
· Score: 1
" This card is for people who need serious rendering of high detailed scenes and 3D objects "
Actually no. I'm guessing though that you meant ' display ' instead of rendering.
The graphics card has zero to do with the final rendering of any 3D scene. THAT responsibility falls to your processor(s) and Ram.
The gfx cards power and ram capability allow you to manipulate the object more efficiently. Especially as the poly counts on the aforementioned object / scene start to get silly. Start talking about a scene with several MILLION polys and you start to see where workstation cards come into play. Workstation cards are designed to be rock solid stable. They are not designed to do 8 bazillion FPS in Unreal Tournament. . .:)
Many of the 3D apps out there ( I personally use Softimage|XSI ) are capable of OpenGL ' textured ' views of the object you're manipulating. This is where that gfx card ram comes into play. If you want an idea of what your final scene is going to look like without having to use a test render, you use the textured mode to view all of your scene models. High resolution textures eat up a LOT of memory, thus 1GB of onboard ram isn't really that far off the mark for what would be nice to use.
Unfortunately these cards usually cost an arm and a leg. Bottom line ? Not even a consideration nor even worth looking at unless you're a 3D professional with studio funds backing you up:)
I would expect to see a counter from Nvidia in one of their Quaddro model lines. . . .
Re:US still lagging behind...
on
A Look at IPTV
·
· Score: 1
Well. . . look at it in this perspective. . . .
I believe the United States is about oh. . . ten times the size of France if I'm not mistaking.
Think about how much infrastructure has to be changed / modified. I hear this quite often about how Germany or Korea is on the bleeding edge of technology when it comes to broadband. What most don't realize is how much equipment has to be changed out in a system connecting an area of 500,000 sq miles vs one that connects 5,000,000 sq miles ?
When your underlying infrastructure is this massive, it takes a LOT more capitol and time to make changes to it. *shrug*
Here is a nice example of why your line of thinking may be a bit off. . .
(2/28/06 - NEW YORK) - The U.S. government has agreed to pay $300,000 to an Egyptian man who sued after he was detained for nearly a year following the Sept. 11 attacks, his lawyer said.
They argued the government would not let them appeal their solitary confinement in a special unit of the detention center.
The lawsuit named former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and other high-ranking federal officials.
The men said they were shackled, shoved into walls, punched and called various epithets. They also alleged they were kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and denied adequate meals and medical care.
Yoon said his client was subjected to repetitive strip searches and was violated during a body-cavity search. His thyroid condition was misdiagnosed as asthma, she said. Elmaghraby wanted to continue with the lawsuit but settled because of mounting medical costs, she said.
In September, a federal judge rejected Ashcroft's attempt to block the men's lawsuit by claiming that the threat of terrorism exempts the government from following peacetime regulations.
More than 80 men were classified as suspected terrorists and held in high-security cells at the Brooklyn facility between Sept. 14, 2001, and Aug. 27, 2002.
A separate class-action lawsuit was filed in Brooklyn federal court in 2002 on behalf of hundreds of detainees in Brooklyn and New Jersey.
In that lawsuit, the Center for Constitutional Rights alleged that Ashcroft and other officials subjected prisoners to excessively harsh conditions though they had not been charged with crimes.
The fact that YOU don't think YOU'RE guilty doesn't amount to much. It's what THEY think that counts. Even if they're wrong. . . . .:)
Ya, the red-light cameras are up and ready to rumble now in Houston. So the thoughts are how long will it take before they tweak the yellow light to switch a bit faster to catch a few more ' red light runners ' ? I'm guessing once the Mayor realizes it can become a nice income source. . . .
Another thought on that subject is it's a civil fine, not a criminal offense. Wonder what they'll do if you fail to pay it ? Wonder what CAN they do ?
Anyone who lives in / near Houston knows the police chief and the new Mayor are just a bit ' off ' of reality. Currently the police are hurting because it seems they can't get enough officers willing to work for the Houston Police Department. Guess the amount of crap they put up with, the hours they work don't quite justify the pay. I believe they are currently offering sign-on bonuses to certified officers who come to work for HPD. ( somewhere in the realm of $8000 )
I think the camera statement is an idea of the Police Chief's to try and offset the officer shortage. Which, unless they raise the pay, they'll never reach the number of officers they need.
On a related note, Houston is looking at adding a new ' Public Safety ' tax to fund the additional officers needed. They are also likely to follow in the footsteps of a few other towns in the area when it comes to driving without insurance. Basically, if you get pulled over and are unable to provide proof of current insurance, your vehicle is impounded until you can provide that proof. Oh, did I mention you also get to pay the towing fee, and the daily impound fee as well ? They state they will contact the insurance folks on the spot if you have lost your card, but I'd like to see the insurance agent that answers the phone outside of standard business hours:)
Telecommuting is looking better and better . . . . .
Don't put too much thought into his statement folks:)
What I believe he is referring to is the big folks using existing SBC facilities ( ergo fiber and transmission equipment ) to connect ' their ' customers to the internet backbone via SBC owned systems. Nothing is really changing here except SBC no longer has to provide a ' discount ' to competition to utilize SBC lines.
Initially, that was the agreement in order to allow competition to get their foot in the door without requiring them to build a network of their own before they did. Hehe, it's somewhat expensive to build a network without a LOT of upfront capitol. However, most didn't bother to build any network at all of any kind and simply resold SBC pipes to end customers via a middleman setup. If something broke, you called them, they called SBC. SBC folks worked on and fixed problem, reseller contacts customer telling them problem is fixed, customer is happy. Don't think it stopped there. SBC runs data through other carriers ( Sprint comes to mind ) as well and occasionally Customer A's data goes to reseller B's service that travels SBC pipes which are muxed into really BIG pipes going through Sprint owned systems. It's a never-ending middleman game.
Project Lightspeed is designed to compete with the cable companies. It will, theoretically, provide phone, TV and broadband via fiber straight to the home. Assuming you live in a newer home, neighborhood ( read that expensive home ) that will attract customers that don't mind paying the prices SBC will charge for it. For that reason alone, I don't think it will keep pace with cable since cable pretty much goes everywhere and not just the rich neighborhoods. Of course the big money is providing business with this kind of service and not really the end users like you or I. We stand up and start yelling about something broken and we get ignored. Let a company like Shell Oil or Fingers Furniture or *insert your typical mega-sized business here* and things start happening. Executive level management starts getting involved and general chaos ensues until the problem is resolved. You think the aforementioned businesses have to deal with a thirty level call tree to report a problem ? HA, you keep thinking that:)
There are not many companies out there that can provide the ' upstarts ' with the dark fiber they would like to have. Most of it is / was owned by they big gorillas in the market, so technically they'll still have to pay for it. Only difference is they will have to provide their own transport equipment to get it from point A to point B.
You are correct about the ' floundering for cash '. Seems like SBC is trying to cut costs in any way / shape / form they can. Once the acquisition of ATT is done, rumors have the IT department taking a ten percent hit across the board. Of course to those who don't make eighty million a year ( like the hanchos ) it makes more sense to trim the excess from the top than it does the bottom, but then, this is an American company and they just don't think like that:)
Lastly, the rumor mill puts Ed retiring soon. Very soon. Once that happens it is also the rumor that the former CEO of ATT will be the new zookeeper in the gorilla cage. That and the fact that SBC will be adopting the ATT logo / name begs the question: Who really bought whom ?
Virus writers benefit Anti-Virus companies the most:)
I've always been of the opinion the best way to ensure that anti-virus software sells like wildfile, is to introduce a new virus now and then into the wild:)
" HEY BOB! " " Ya ? " " Profits are down ! Release the hounds.exe! "
Same with many other products out there. Recall the DirectTV unloopers / programmers and whatnot ? I could always picture one of the engineers who BUILT the cards to be sitting at home building the unloopers / programmers at the same time. This brings in cash from both sides and ensures a job for eternity while he works to ' counter ' what the evil hackers managed to bypass:)
Hehe just a tin-foil-hat theory:) Pay it no mind. .
Slashdot Mirror
" Take the iPhone. Now why Apple chose to let it be locked (at least until its hacked)
into AT&T only for " Take the iPhone. Now why Apple chose to let it be locked
(at least until its hacked) into AT&T only for service I dont know. "
Very ea$y an$wer.
AT&T likely paid an enormou$ amount of money to Apple for thi$ priviledge.
There i$ no other po$$ible rea$on Apple would cripple their income potential
from their overpriced new little toy.
It i$ very likely it i$ a time limited agreement $o you'll probably $ee it
open up to additional carrier$ in the not $o di$tant future.
You're missing the point I'm afraid.
The issue is not WHAT they're stealing, it's
the fact they have been entrusted to fix a
problem on the system and abusing that trust
to take whatever they find.
It doesn't matter what the content is, your
leaving your computer with them for whatever
reason is NOT a carte blanche open invitation
to copy whatever they want.
Assume, for a moment, you've legally purchased
and downloaded some semi expensive application
from the net. Not unheard of these days, many
offer instant downloads of their products.
( Z-Brush comes to mind and is several hundred
dollars in price )
Would you have an issue with the Geek Squad
making a copy of that ? Or maybe your Quicken
data file ? Your email folder perhaps ? An
I-Tunes directory ? Pick a file ?
Yeah, I hear you out there. Encrypt it or
burn it or put it on a portable drive.
Ok, think about this for a half second.
What kinds of people are likely to utilize the
service provided by someone like Geek Squad ?
Visions of your parents or grandparents should
be shooting through your head right about now.
What are the ODDS of your parents being able to
setup an encryption system of ANY kind ? The
rare parents will be able to burn a CD. Maybe.
After a phone call to you.
These are the kinds of folks they're abusing.
The Geek Squad employee should have seen a big
red flag when they came across the D0wnl0aded
Muz1c and Pr0N folders. . . . .
Thought!
With GPS finding it's way into phones these days, how difficult would it be to code the phone to disallow
any incoming / outgoing transmissions once the phone is travelling X miles per hour ? ( say 30 mph )
Could be coded to allow emergency dialing only ( ergo 911 ). . . .
Tough part would be what the phone would do if no GPS signal were available I suppose.
( LOL you thought reception of cellular signals were bad )
While I'm not 100% up on the technical details of how cable works, I'm curious how much bandwidth ( if any )
would be freed up by removing 90% of the channels that no one watches anyway. If it does, in fact, free up
some bandwidth, it becomes an easier ( and cheaper ) path for the Cable Companies to provide more High Definition
content. Though, if it passes and all we can watch is Elmo in High Def, then I'll take a pass on the whole plan
thanks. . . .
As it stands today, they have to figure out how to increase the bandwidth pipe to offer what is going to be
a bandwidth heavy future.
Now, for the FCC part of this ? Screw them. If anything needs to be cleaned up, it's their perception that we
need government oversight to protect us from ( gasp ) skin on television. It's perfectly ok for the news to show
combat footage from ( insert the current war here ) to the fragile little minds of the children, ( screw them too
while we're at it ) but whip out a boob during the Super Bowl and folks lose their damn minds. . . . .
The article doesn't mention AT&T as an ISP. It merely states they plan on filtering this content as it runs across their network. Well, the bad news is that most ISP data in the US traverses the AT&T network in the form of optical longhaul systems ( Read that Sonet ) at some point in it's journey. Your ISP leases lines from Company X who, in turn, leases their lines from AT&T. Is similar to when your WoW session is hit with a lag storm and you start yelling at your ISP to ' FIX YOUR SH*T ', when it's actually an optical level issue on lines owned by someone else that is taking the data longhaul across the country. Sprint, AT&T, whatever ) Given the technology that allowed the NSA to split the optical signal so they could watch traffic, I wonder if they're considering applying their ' filtering ' technology in the same manner. In other words, would they act as big brother over all the data packets that travel ' their ' pipes and filter anything they feel is necessary ?
It's a pointless argument already. The so called ' shield ' tries to protect from ballistic ( read that ICBM ) missiles only. Emphasis on ' tries ' because the common workaround for it will be to oversaturate it. Ten interceptor missiles or even fifty are no match for ICBM's with a dozen re-entry vehicles all capable of independent targeting. Put ten birds in the air and you now have 120 inbound warheads, some real, some decoy. Technology Iran and neighboring countries do not yet possess. While I've been out of the field for a while ( Ex-Tomahawk type myself ) I'm pretty sure that Russia still has quite a number of nuclear capable cruise missiles in their inventory. That so called ' shield ' is completely powerless to stop an attack of that nature. It's unlikely they'll even be seen until the first targets get vaporized. Russia knows this. The US knows it as does the EU.
You know AT&T isn't going to offer this type of service to any neighborhood
:| ) and it may come back
that isn't considered somewhat ' upscale '. It would be a waste of money.
They plan on targeting those neighborhoods that they believe can afford
this type of service. Verizon is the same way.
My biggest concern would be the bandwidth usage. It has to be a fixed pipe
to the home so trying to watch an HD channel or two ( multiple receivers ? )
while the kids are gaming it up would be pushing the bandwidth a bit I
think. Which has priority I wonder. . . . TV or net ? Can it be set from
the DSL modem or does AT&T have the final say so on it ?
On a related note, it's my opinion that AT&T isn't thinking as far into the
future as Verizon is ( They're running fiber all the way to the home instead
of going the cheaper route and using copper the last bit. Guess the money
they saved went into Ed's golden retirement fund. . .
to bite them in the ass. The fiber is going to allow a much bigger bandwidth
pipe for Verizon so they'll have room to grow for future applications. Whereas
AT&T will reach a bandwidth limit far sooner and will ultimately have to lay
fiber anyway to stay competitive.
Unfortunately, we all know that where Verizon FIOS is available, U-Verse
isn't and vice versa. All depends on whose territory you happen to live in.
So the phone companies don't really have to worry about competition from each
other, it's actually the phone companies vs cable.
So while both companies strut their stuff, if you don't live in the right
area, ( read that high dollar neighborhoods ) you don't get squat ! lol
Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts... In building and shaping the site I've always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We've always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code. But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you've made it clear. You'd rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won't delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be. If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying. Digg on, Kevin
by assigning another Houston police officer to ' monitor ' all red light camera infractions.
As such, before any citations are issued a Houston police officer reviews the video to determine if the
incident qualifies. I'd love to see the number of officers blowing redlights who actually receive a citation.
The ONLY incident I have EVER been in was due to a police car running the red light. The vehicle in front
of me was about to go through her GREEN light when she had to slam on her brakes hard to avoid hitting
deputy goober who was blasting through the light.
It's an unwritten rule that police officers do NOT issue tickets to other officers. When it does happen,
it's rare. On more than one occasion have I seen the police officer who doesn't want to bother with
stopping for the stopsign and / or redlight. He simply kicks on his lights, blows the light / sign and
kills them once through it. This particular officer did it every day. His destination ? His driveway. . .
Or we can take the case of the officer driving down the freeway at speeds that would guarantee any normal
citizen a nice ticket. The whole ' enroute to a call ' thing doesn't fly when the officer in question
passed his jurisdictional line forty miles back. In other words, Police Officer from city X is in city Y
doing whatever. We know he's not running traffic or some radio call because he is too far out of his area
of responsibility.
While I don't dislike ALL police, those of you in law enforcement should realize that it's the officers
we DO see that are creating the bad public image for you.
Tests are a good way to measure how well the child has actually learned the material at hand.
You tend to forget that much of little Johnny's Straight-A homework is actually done not by
little Johnny, but by little Johnny's parents. When little Johnny makes Straight-A grades on
his homework, but miserably fails the test covering the same material, do we simply blame it
on little Johnny's inability to take tests ? ( the usual excuse ) Or is it simply a reflection
of over-ambitious parents trying to ' help ' their kiddo through school. . . . . or maybe just
a slight ' push ' from a certain ( football / basketball / insert your sport here ) coach to
make sure his star player doesn't fail so he can continue to play ball ?
Granted, the TAKS and their ilk are somewhat of a bad idea since we now ' teach ' the test
instead of teaching the material. I know teachers who absolutely refuse to consider teaching
any grades that are TAKS tested. Way too much red-tape to try and deal with.
Teacher salaries really aren't all that far off the mark. No they're not going to become
millionaires, but it's a decent salary. If you break down how many days they work per year
vs their pay you'll see it a bit clearer. Try it with your salary. Convert it to an hourly
pay scale then do the math on ~180 working days a year. All the teachers I know ( given a
choice ) would prefer to keep their number of days worked right where it is vs working more
days for a larger salary. . . .
Now, the issue at hand is should we pay certain fields more / less money than the others ?
Personally, I don't think it will help in the long run. All this will do ( especially in
a money driven society like the good ol U.S. of A ) is shift folks into field X or Y for a
certain amount of time. You will then have a shortage of teachers who want to teach fields
that do not currently enjoy the salary bonus. So reward Science and Math today, deal with
English / History / Art / Economics shortages tomorrow. Wash / rinse / repeat every few
years as the shortages work their way through the various subjects.
Bingo.
:|
How did the song go. . . . .
" One of these things is not like the others. . . . . "
If I ever snapped and became Osama Bin American and decided to use Sat
Imagery for my target lists, you can likely bet I wouldn't add it unless
it was sufficiently blurry. After all, only the blurry ones would be
considered semi-decent targets.
It's equivalent to our favorite little dictator wearing a shirt that says
" I'm not the President " to confuse any would be terrorists.
However, show me ANY politician that has kept their campaign promises. Ever.
I can't think of any myself. . . . . .
The candidates have a bad habit of latching onto a current high profile issue
( ergo, privacy ) and making all the claims in the world about how they plan
to ' fix ' it. Time passes and the same issues are still issues years later
after the aforementioned politician has been elected.
To answer the question, I would say yes ONLY IF the candidate actually stuck to
their guns and delivered on their campaign promises.
Until there is some kind of accountability for all the promises they make, then
my answer is, unfortunately, no. It's just pre-election fluff imo.
Should make it a provision for re-election. You don't deliver on your past promises,
you become ineligible for any further terms.
I work in IT. Relatively large company ( AT&T )
:| I've seen folks who try to push around the trackball and proclaim the ' mouse ' is broken.( Um. . . no, don't move the whole thing just the ball on top there. . . . )
If an attitude exists in the IT department, it's possible it's due to frustration. Most of the IT folks ( emphasis on MOST ) are very computer literate. Many of the jobs of today REQUIRE at least some basic knowledge of how to operate a computer. Where the frustration comes into play is when the IT folks are called over and over again to solve what would be considered basic issues. Usually, by the same folks over and over and over again. Nothing I love more than a user on the other end of the phone that, when asked about the application they use, states " I don't know, I just click the icon and it works. . . "
I know of a tech who has backups of backups of BACKUPS ( read that 3-4 copies ) of each and every file on his machine and wonders why the disk is always full.
The IT folks are usually understaffed, work stupid amounts of hours, and are usually managed by someone who couldn't SPELL " IT " without spell-check or a flashcard. Okay! We want you to take a call from the customer, fix their problem, then put what you found into no fewer than three different databases ( well of COURSE they're not linked, why would we do something like that ? ) day in and day out, and maintain a cheery attitude the entire time. Why isn't project XYZ finished yet ? We need someone to go over to office X and fix a system over there. I know it isn't our ' job ' per se, but he's a friend of mine and I told him we could help out ' just this once '.
I think MY attitude stems from the line of thinking that working for a company such as AT&T that one of your prerequisite skill sets would be the ability to use a computer. The ability to LEARN how to use your applications without my handholding you through it on a daily basis, and to have at least enough common sense to check the power cables when your system / monitor doesn't turn on. The snap to know that while yes it's possible the port on the switch *might* be bad, the greater likelyhood is the vendor ( lowest bidder of course ) doesn't know how to pin out a standard ethernet cable. Yes I know the correct color code, no I'm not going to do it for you. The vendor made a few thousand dollars to show up, install the equipment and terminate those cables. I suggest you call that overpaid vendor and have him test the cables.
!@#$%&!+@(#&@%#~+
Cherry attitude my a$$
What's wrong with American Education you ask. . .
:|
That's a good question. Unfortunately, it's likely to only be answered correctly by those who are
currently a part of the system, but lack the ability to force any changes upon it.
However, everyone has an opinion so my thoughts on it follow.
1) Schools no longer teach subjects. Educators are required to follow a curriculum that maximizes the
potential for the school district to increase their exit exam scores. It basically boils down to
only teaching the students what they need to know to pass the standards exam.
2) Schools no longer have the ability to discipline students to any useful degree. Unless the student
is violent, schools are absolutely forbidden to touch a student for any reason under fear of lawsuits.
Even if the student IS violent, the campus police or another designated group are notified to deal
with the issue.
3) School priorities are a bit backwards. Easy to see what the school considers important when it pays
a high school football coach upwards of $90,000+ per year while a high school physics teacher barely
pulls in $45,000. Then again, winning the National Science Fair competition does not bring in any
money for the district, while becoming State Champions in football does.
4) Environment. Would YOU want to sit in a facility as unsecure as an American High School these days ?
Seriously, Chemistry is bad enough without the ever-present thought of some nut-job showing up with
an Uzi.
5) Money and the lack thereof. Many schools can't afford to add additional teachers / classes / facilities
to reflect todays needs. Those who live in the poorest areas do not receive equivalent education that
their mid / high income bretheren do. The cycle of poverty is tough to break.
6) A dim future. The reality of education past high school is dismal. In order to obtain a degree worth
anything, the student will go so far into debt it's sad. Not uncommon to see debts of $100,000+ for
graduates of a college program. Take that outlook with the current line of thinking that job prospects
without a college degree equal low skill/wage work, and you end up with a " What's the point? " attitude.
I've been out of High School now for nearly twenty years. In that time, I haven't seen any improvement in the
system as a whole. In fact, it appears to be getting worse. I've lost count of how many times I've run across
stories in the education system that made me say " I'm glad I graduated when I did. I can't fathom dealing
with the BS that goes on in schools today. "
All issues of pedophilia aside, ( after all, laws and morals differ from country to country ) the
:) )
interesting problem is why are groups in country X ( in this case the US ) allowed to dictate the availability of information in country Y ( again, in this case Canada ) ?
Of course it's done everywhere ideals don't conincide with common thought, but left unchecked it will pretty much ruin everything it touches. No matter what the idea is, someone, somewhere is probably offended by it. Should we rip down the site ? Implement filters ? Cease and decist orders ? Disconnect them from the world ?
Simply because someone else disagrees with the existence of certain information doesn't give them the right to remove it. ( my opinion only of course and I realize that and $1.25 might get me some coffee if I don't offend them
An interesting example happened while checking my spelling of pedophilia above. My corporate firewall
( for my own safety of course ) blocked my Google search of the word. After all, no employee should *dare* even mutter or think of anything on the topic. To make it easy, the company simply blocks access to information they don't feel like getting sued over. Thus, my spelling is my best guess on it so if I screwed it up, you know why. ( After all, this IS America and everyone knows that if they DON'T block it, then they must be condoning it. )
Such a sad state of existence we live in anymore.
Somewhat off topic but a thought I've been kicking around a bit more these days.
Why is it that someone convicted of a sexual crime is treated so different than those who commit crimes of a different nature ? ( Ergo: Murder, fraud, assault, burglery, etc. etc. ) Sex offenders end up having to register, have to stay away from certain folks ( read that children ), wear signs, shirts and whatnot indicating their past crimes.
When's the last time you saw a registered murderer anywhere ? Or the guy walking down the street with " I defrauded a billion in pensions and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt " ?
Why are we SO hung up on the ' sexual predator ' when there are folks FAR more dangerous out there ?
Maybe I should just go back into my cave and stay there lol
"Every time you write a check you're giving out your bank account information."
:) Since I can't seem to do it myself.
True statement. Assuming you use checks to pay for anything.
Everything goes on my credit card, since it's from the same bank as my checking account, I simply transfer
the funds between accounts every month to pay it off. One box of checks lasts me YEARS.
Here's the entertaining part.
This discussion came up today and I get this email a few minutes ago:
Dear ,
As part of our security measures, we regularly screen activity in the PayPal
system. We recently contacted you after noticing an issue on your account.We
requested information from you for the following reason:
Our system requires further account verification.
Case ID Number:
This is a reminder to log in to PayPal as soon as possible.
Be sure to log in securely by opening a new browser window and typing the
PayPal URL. Once you log in, you will be provided with steps to restore your account
access. We appreciate your understanding as we work to ensure account safety.
In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement, your account access will remain
limited until the issue has been resolved. Unfortunately, if access to your
account remains limited for an extended period of time, it may result in further
limitations or eventual account closure. We encourage you to log in to your PayPal
account as soon as possible to help avoid this.
To review your account and some or all of the information that PayPal used to
make its decision to limit your account access, please visit the Resolution
Center. If, after reviewing your account information, you seek further
clarification regarding your account access, please contact PayPal by visiting the Help
Center and clicking "Contact Us".
We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please understand that
this is a security measure intended to help protect you and your account. We
apologize for any inconvenience.
Sincerely,
PayPal Account Review Department
PayPal Email ID
Maybe if I sit back and wait, they'll close it for me
Here, I'll help you understand PayPal a bit more.
Recently, I received notice from PayPal ( an actual PayPal notice, not a phishing email ) that several attempts had been made to gain access to my account from an IP they claim was somewhere in Russia.
Ok, no problem.
I log into my account and find their security notice along with the IP's that were registered when the access attempt was made. Site is verified, certificate checks out, etc. etc.
I rarely use my PayPal account anymore so I attempted to cancel the account.
THAT'S where the problem starts.
Since the access attempt, they locked the account to minimum permissions. The only way I
can cancel the account and / or remove the credit card information is to provide PayPal with
proof of who I am. This involves giving them my home phone number and my BANK ACCOUNT information.
Thus, my account remains open with my credit card info on their servers. You can't close it without giving out even MORE information. Which I refuse to do. Emails to customer service return the usual scripted crap they are known for.
My solution to the problem was to change my password to the most complex mind-numbing thing I could and wait until my credit card expires in December. At which point the card info on their servers will be invalid and I no longer have to worry about it.
A fast Google on PayPal problems will turn up similar stories for you.
You'll find that the majority of espionage cases involve money. Or, to be more precise about it, the lack thereof.
When folks start handing over secrets ( be them corporate or government ) the person doing the ' spying ' part is usually unhappy about something. Hates the company, hates the boss, has financial issues, envious of the ' super-suits ' making a hundred times their salary, etc. etc.
While the company can do little about the employees personal lifestyle ( perhaps he's an obsessive gambler or suffers from depression ? ) they do have some control about overall employee satisfaction while on the job. An employees pay, the work environment, overall stress level, etc. etc. all contribute to this.
While the company can elect to let go an employee with risk factor qualifiers, it's tough to spot the signs without intruding into an employees personal life. SOMEONE has to have access to sensitive data within the company, so the company needs to ensure that those folks that do are happy with their jobs.
If your IT folks are working stupidly long hours for minimal pay and crappy benefits, then you're setting yourself up for this type of problem. Actually, this isn't limited to the IT folks either. ANY of your employees can become a ' spy ' in the right situations.
( Tip: Seeing the CEO drive up in a Ferrarri after purchasing his / her fourth home because his / her pay is so obscene only serves to remind the rest of the employees of their insignificance. )
Jealousy is another big motivating factor for turning ' spy '.
While you can implement stict controls over data ( no outside personal devices, Marines at the entrances / exits who random search folks, insert your favorite surveillance technique here, NDA's, etc. ) all of that costs money. A LOT of money.
Who wants to work for a company like this anyway ? Would you subject yourself to constant surveillance while on the job ? A camera in your cubicle ? Keyloggers and Remote Viewers on your computer ? An RFID tag stapled to your forehead ? Probably not. . . .
It's a delicate balance keeping your information secret and your work environment appealing to your employees.
In the end, it's easier ( and probably more cost effective ) to keep your employees happy than it is to implement an Orwellian system in an attempt to keep your information intact.
This question will go out to you folks who actually work in the Cellular business.
:)
With some of the new cell-phone systems having GPS capability, how difficult would it be to code the phones to simply refuse to operate once the phone had reached a certain speed ? It's unlikely you're going to run faster than 20mph with a phone in one hand, so why not simply tell the phone to disallow any calling ( inbound or outbound ) once the unit exceeds the set speed ? ( with the exception of emergency numbers 911, etc. )
Would this even be a feasable possibility or is it simply wishful thinking on my part ?
While we're at it, lets code in the Cellular equivilant of the Broadcast Flag. Essentially it's jamming, but since JAMMING is a questionable activity here in the US, we'll simply rename it, and all will be good in the world. . . .
I SO loved my jammer before the technology transition. I could actually sit in a movie theater and watch an entire movie without the cellular rendition of Beethoven's Fifth going off every two minutes. . . . ahhh the good old days. . . .
In other words, build the system into the phone that allows it to operate in any environment unless it detects the presence of a ' Broadcast Bit '. ( Simple, cheap device with limited range in movie theaters, hospitals, churches, restaurants, etc. etc. that simply tell the phone not to accept incoming or outgoing calls with, once again, the exception of emergency numbers. )
While I'm not normally one to condone laws and whatnot to dictate every part of our lives, it's become obvious that common sense and courtesy are just completely beyond the cell phone issue. Folks simply will NOT give the damn things up. They're like battery operated crack. . . . .
I'm only speculating here, but once they get the whole TV on the phone thing down, something's GOTTA give before that idiot watching the game on the phone @ 75mph plows through a car or two. . . .
Thoughts ?
" This card is for people who need serious rendering of high detailed scenes and 3D objects "
:)
:)
Actually no. I'm guessing though that you meant ' display ' instead of rendering.
The graphics card has zero to do with the final rendering of any 3D scene. THAT responsibility falls to your processor(s) and Ram.
The gfx cards power and ram capability allow you to manipulate the object more efficiently. Especially as the poly counts on the aforementioned object / scene start to get silly. Start talking about a scene with several MILLION polys and you start to see where workstation cards come into play. Workstation cards are designed to be rock solid stable. They are not designed to do 8 bazillion FPS in Unreal Tournament. . .
Many of the 3D apps out there ( I personally use Softimage|XSI ) are capable of OpenGL ' textured ' views of the object you're manipulating. This is where that gfx card ram comes into play. If you want an idea of what your final scene is going to look like without having to use a test render, you use the textured mode to view all of your scene models. High resolution textures eat up a LOT of memory, thus 1GB of onboard ram isn't really that far off the mark for what would be nice to use.
Unfortunately these cards usually cost an arm and a leg. Bottom line ? Not even a consideration nor even worth looking at unless you're a 3D professional with studio funds backing you up
I would expect to see a counter from Nvidia in one of their Quaddro model lines. . . .
Well. . . look at it in this perspective. . . .
I believe the United States is about oh. . . ten times the size of France if I'm not mistaking.
Think about how much infrastructure has to be changed / modified. I hear this quite often about how Germany or Korea is on the bleeding edge of technology when it comes to broadband. What most don't realize is how much equipment has to be changed out in a system connecting an area of 500,000 sq miles vs one that connects 5,000,000 sq miles ?
When your underlying infrastructure is this massive, it takes a LOT more capitol and time to make changes to it. *shrug*
Here is a nice example of why your line of thinking may be a bit off. . .
(2/28/06 - NEW YORK) - The U.S. government has agreed to pay $300,000 to an Egyptian man who sued after he was detained for nearly a year following the Sept. 11 attacks, his lawyer said.
They argued the government would not let them appeal their solitary confinement in a special unit of the detention center.
The lawsuit named former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and other high-ranking federal officials.
The men said they were shackled, shoved into walls, punched and called various epithets. They also alleged they were kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and denied adequate meals and medical care.
Yoon said his client was subjected to repetitive strip searches and was violated during a body-cavity search. His thyroid condition was misdiagnosed as asthma, she said. Elmaghraby wanted to continue with the lawsuit but settled because of mounting medical costs, she said.
In September, a federal judge rejected Ashcroft's attempt to block the men's lawsuit by claiming that the threat of terrorism exempts the government from following peacetime regulations.
More than 80 men were classified as suspected terrorists and held in high-security cells at the Brooklyn facility between Sept. 14, 2001, and Aug. 27, 2002.
A separate class-action lawsuit was filed in Brooklyn federal court in 2002 on behalf of hundreds of detainees in Brooklyn and New Jersey.
In that lawsuit, the Center for Constitutional Rights alleged that Ashcroft and other officials subjected prisoners to excessively harsh conditions though they had not been charged with crimes.
The fact that YOU don't think YOU'RE guilty doesn't amount to much. It's what THEY think that counts. Even if they're wrong. . . . .
Another thought on that subject is it's a civil fine, not a criminal offense. Wonder what they'll do if you fail to pay it ? Wonder what CAN they do ?
Anyone who lives in / near Houston knows the police chief and the new Mayor are just a bit ' off ' of reality. Currently the police are hurting because it seems they can't get enough officers willing to work for the Houston Police Department. Guess the amount of crap they put up with, the hours they work don't quite justify the pay. I believe they are currently offering sign-on bonuses to certified officers who come to work for HPD. ( somewhere in the realm of $8000 )
I think the camera statement is an idea of the Police Chief's to try and offset the officer shortage. Which, unless they raise the pay, they'll never reach the number of officers they need.
On a related note, Houston is looking at adding a new ' Public Safety ' tax to fund the additional officers needed. They are also likely to follow in the footsteps of a few other towns in the area when it comes to driving without insurance. Basically, if you get pulled over and are unable to provide proof of current insurance, your vehicle is impounded until you can provide that proof. Oh, did I mention you also get to pay the towing fee, and the daily impound fee as well ? They state they will contact the insurance folks on the spot if you have lost your card, but I'd like to see the insurance agent that answers the phone outside of standard business hours
Telecommuting is looking better and better . . . . .
What I believe he is referring to is the big folks using existing SBC facilities ( ergo fiber and transmission equipment ) to connect ' their ' customers to the internet backbone via SBC owned systems. Nothing is really changing here except SBC no longer has to provide a ' discount ' to competition to utilize SBC lines.
Initially, that was the agreement in order to allow competition to get their foot in the door without requiring them to build a network of their own before they did. Hehe, it's somewhat expensive to build a network without a LOT of upfront capitol. However, most didn't bother to build any network at all of any kind and simply resold SBC pipes to end customers via a middleman setup. If something broke, you called them, they called SBC. SBC folks worked on and fixed problem, reseller contacts customer telling them problem is fixed, customer is happy. Don't think it stopped there. SBC runs data through other carriers ( Sprint comes to mind ) as well and occasionally Customer A's data goes to reseller B's service that travels SBC pipes which are muxed into really BIG pipes going through Sprint owned systems. It's a never-ending middleman game.
Project Lightspeed is designed to compete with the cable companies. It will, theoretically, provide phone, TV and broadband via fiber straight to the home. Assuming you live in a newer home, neighborhood ( read that expensive home ) that will attract customers that don't mind paying the prices SBC will charge for it. For that reason alone, I don't think it will keep pace with cable since cable pretty much goes everywhere and not just the rich neighborhoods. Of course the big money is providing business with this kind of service and not really the end users like you or I. We stand up and start yelling about something broken and we get ignored. Let a company like Shell Oil or Fingers Furniture or *insert your typical mega-sized business here* and things start happening. Executive level management starts getting involved and general chaos ensues until the problem is resolved. You think the aforementioned businesses have to deal with a thirty level call tree to report a problem ? HA, you keep thinking that
There are not many companies out there that can provide the ' upstarts ' with the dark fiber they would like to have. Most of it is / was owned by they big gorillas in the market, so technically they'll still have to pay for it. Only difference is they will have to provide their own transport equipment to get it from point A to point B.
You are correct about the ' floundering for cash '. Seems like SBC is trying to cut costs in any way / shape / form they can. Once the acquisition of ATT is done, rumors have the IT department taking a ten percent hit across the board. Of course to those who don't make eighty million a year ( like the hanchos ) it makes more sense to trim the excess from the top than it does the bottom, but then, this is an American company and they just don't think like that
Lastly, the rumor mill puts Ed retiring soon. Very soon. Once that happens it is also the rumor that the former CEO of ATT will be the new zookeeper in the gorilla cage. That and the fact that SBC will be adopting the ATT logo / name begs the question: Who really bought whom ?
I've always been of the opinion the best way to ensure that anti-virus software sells like wildfile, is to introduce a new virus now and then into the wild
" HEY BOB! "
" Ya ? "
" Profits are down ! Release the hounds.exe! "
Same with many other products out there. Recall the DirectTV unloopers / programmers and whatnot ? I could always picture one of the engineers who BUILT the cards to be sitting at home building the unloopers / programmers at the same time. This brings in cash from both sides and ensures a job for eternity while he works to ' counter ' what the evil hackers managed to bypass
Hehe just a tin-foil-hat theory