The software is able to provide such warnings because the seismic waves produced by earthquakes travel at about 5,000 kilometers per hour, while tsunamis move much slower at 500 to 1,000 kilometers per hour"
Is this true? Earthquake waves take HOURS to traverse the globe? I would have thought seconds, maybe minutes at most.
Of course, I didn't RTFA, but this blurb triggered my BOGOSITY sensor.
Not that this is the first time this has happened to me on/.
I understand the human rights aspect of this situation, but isn't it an administrator's ability to control his/her network and user access that is important to preserve? If outsiders can circumvent the Chinese government's firewall setup and other security measures, aren't all the systems on all the networks in the world potentially vulnerable?
IANAP (I am not a physicist)...this may be obvious, but...
If this nuclear source is constantly irradiating, but the battery is not constantly under load, how is the excess energy from the tritium breakdown finally dissipated into the environment? Won't this battery get awfully warm at "idle" if it's otherwise strong enough to power something significant?
The only other way I can think of to dissipate this energy would be to allow some of the radioactivity energy through the battery's skin, and I doubt that's the case. If the radioactivity is actually loading a conventional battery, then the above-described "battery" is actually just a charging device.
Isn't a fine the same thing as government confiscation of property?
If you can't fine Microsoft in a reasonable fashion with an $XX billion fine, wouldn't the forced opening of some code be a reasonable alternative? maybe you could let MS have the choice, and let them put a price tag on their own code!
These owners had to suffer for years before they finally got Nissan to buy back their deathmobiles:
Nissan van class action settlement.
February 11, 1994
Nissan must buy back all that remain of the 33,000 fire prone mini vans it sold in the U.S. between 1987-1990 after pressure from a safety research firm and the NHTSA. The California class action agreement only gave van owner a $500 credit toward a vehicle brought from a Nissan dealer.
There's surprisingly little to be found on the web about this debacle, but I knew I had fading memories of this event tucked away in the back of my mind. Maybe there's a better page of info about this elsewhere.
Okay, so Slashdot uses the term "non-profit corporation". The supposition here is that Slashdot is accurate. To that, I say if you trust Slashdot to be accurate, the joke's on you!
I've looked at all the links on that older Slashdot article. The pages that are linked refer to the ICANN proposal that suggests restricting.org to non-profit organizations. Call me blind if you wish, but I'd really like to see where ICANN proposes restricting.org domains to corporations only.
Would someone who insists that corporations alone would be permitted to use the org TLD please post a link to an ICANN page where ICANN (not some public respondent) states this!
I fail to see where it is written thet you would have to be a non-profit corporation to make use of the.org TLD. I checked a number of documents at the ICANN site (including the March 1 proposals regarding the domain registry restructuring) and they all refer to the term non-profit organization to describe to whom the.org TLD would be restricted.
If you could cite where they refer to non-profit corporations, please let me know. I have.org domains that would belong to organizational but not corporate entities.
What is the purpose of secured networks and hacker-proof software when you can't even keep track of laptops (as in the State Department HQ) or removeable hard drives (as in Los Alamos National Labs).
Lesson: Frequently the most obvious and seemingly straightforward security efforts are the most often overlooked ones.
Radio Shack includes product codes on [practically] all of the products it sells. 06A00 means that the unit was manufactured in June (06) of 2000 (00) by manufacturer A (the letter code is only important when more than one manufacturer makes the same product, such as a resistor or a battery, or a new [generally cheaper] manufacturer is employed to make an existing product such as a speaker or a videotape).
What we are witnessing in the Tech sector is speculation. People are investing speculatively for two reasons:
1. They expect future growth in the market sector (Linux Servers in this case), and expect companies with large market share today to retain that share in the future.
2. Everyone else is doing it.
Without the Tech sector, Wall Street is showing lackluster performance. We're to the point where the only way big, established companies can grow and increase profits is through mergers.
People looking for money grabs in today's market are jumping on board a massive roller coaster on its way up...and after it crests, it'll go down really, really fast, taking every stock owner along.
I own stocks through my employer's deferred compensation plan. I am nervous.
Do you think this sort of project is only suitable for dead or dying software? By this I mean, DOS hasn't been in significant development for a while now, so making a clone is like reconstructing a static subject. Do you think your project could have been successful during the time of MS-DOS 6.0, or instead do you think commercial developers would have torpedoed your efforts by redesigning their next release to be less cloneable?
This is exactly the reason that our government should make lobbying illegal. The are many special interest groups and companies who are buying influence in our government, and it's not uncommon at all.
I have felt for quite a while now that corporations should not have any rights to lobby government. This government is of, by, and for the people (ostensibly), and it is the people who should have the right to lobby, just as they have the right to vote. I also believe that corporations (or other non-human entities) should not have the right to contribute to election campaigns.
The state has granted these entities the right to exist, along with certain strictly defined rights and responsibilities. The state should have unlimited ability to restrict these r and r's, since these do not apply directly to any actual person. I don't see the constitution as being the protect of rights for non-human entities!
I notice while previewing this posting that the above comment links still don't work, but the article link does. Just go to the 09/01/99 article and read about De Raadt's exploits, and the behavior he has exhibited.
From what I can tell, there weren't any responses to what you call 'the troll.' Although perhaps not as obvious as it could have been, my posting is critical of De Raadt (as he, not openBSD, is the subject of the newspaper article).
My criticism is not aimed at openBSD or FreeBSD. I am glad the *BSDs are around, and don't dispute their quality despite my lack of experience with these UNIXen.
D'oh! The link gives me a blank page now. Serves me right for trying to ref an archived comment.
Here's a copy:
[BEGIN QUOTED COMMENT] BSD failing (Score:0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 02, @12:56PM EDT (#177) I agree that FreeBSD is dying. And while FreeBSD is beset with its own internal strife, it is not the only BSD to be affected by this cancer. NetBSD and OpenBSD are dying too. I read that T.Deraadt email thread when I first looked at OpenBSD, and my initial impression was that Theo had a real baaaaadddd attitude. I do know for a fact that a lot of the NetBSD folks were upset to see him leave and fork off his own version of the OS, and to lose him as a developer. But in reading his email he obviously has a problem with taking any criticism, and had no problem with jumping down someone's throat with a flamethrower and foul language. Denial, its not just a river in Egypt... Not that I wouldn't use OpenBSD, or any other operating system that met my technical needs, whatever the personality of the people involved. I've dealt with enough bad attitudes from commercial OS vendors in my years in the industry to be able to deal with it if I have to. It just seems that *BSD has an extra heaping helping of bad attitudes that make commercial vendors look like pikers. If you *really* read that email thread, you would see the attitude loud and clear. "We don't think that it helps anything for you to tell someone he's a f**khead when he's posting a message trying to help with the OS development." "F**K YOU, *I* want control of the source and if you don't like it I'll fork my own off!" That's my impression of it... He sounded like an immature little upset kid to me. The development of any of the O.S. OS's is a group effort, and having one person think they have all the answers and have to be the one in control is dead wrong. So, now he *has* control of his own fork of BSD, and lost the ability to maintain many of the various platform ports because he has no developers. Thus, the OpenBSD page says that for a Vax port, for instance, "support can be easily ported over from NetBSD". Why these problems are so prevalent under FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD remains something of a mystery. These systems seem to be self selective in their attraction to weirdos and big egos. The split had nothing to do with the quality of his coding work, and everything to do with his nasty attitude towards people... and NOT just the people of NetBSD Core, but other people who were just civilians trying to help out, or looking for help. No wonder BSD is on the skids. Which BSD will be first to go under is anyone's guess but The culling has already begun. [END QUOTED COMMENT]
Slashdot Mirror
Unbelieveable...still on the front page and everything!! What gives with this ridiculous "staff"?
The software is able to provide such warnings because the seismic waves produced by earthquakes travel at about 5,000 kilometers per hour, while tsunamis move much slower at 500 to 1,000 kilometers per hour"
/.
Is this true? Earthquake waves take HOURS to traverse the globe? I would have thought seconds, maybe minutes at most.
Of course, I didn't RTFA, but this blurb triggered my BOGOSITY sensor.
Not that this is the first time this has happened to me on
I understand the human rights aspect of this situation, but isn't it an administrator's ability to control his/her network and user access that is important to preserve? If outsiders can circumvent the Chinese government's firewall setup and other security measures, aren't all the systems on all the networks in the world potentially vulnerable?
Um...the parent poster said "pollution," not "population."
Tried nambia.net and couldn't find a thing there. Are you sure it's spelled right? namibia.net doesn't seem to work either.
That makes one less migrant tech worker visa that's needed.
IANAP (I am not a physicist)...this may be obvious, but...
If this nuclear source is constantly irradiating, but the battery is not constantly under load, how is the excess energy from the tritium breakdown finally dissipated into the environment? Won't this battery get awfully warm at "idle" if it's otherwise strong enough to power something significant?
The only other way I can think of to dissipate this energy would be to allow some of the radioactivity energy through the battery's skin, and I doubt that's the case. If the radioactivity is actually loading a conventional battery, then the above-described "battery" is actually just a charging device.
What's actually the case here?
Dick and Burt Rutan are brothers.
Burt designed the plane, and Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager flew it around the world non-stop (without refueling) to set the record.
As long as we're all being anal retentive about this:
You're information is what's lacking
Actually, it's 'Your information...'.
"You're" = "You are"
and
"Your" is possessive second person.
After all this, I think I'll strive to become more anal expulsive in the future.
Isn't a fine the same thing as government confiscation of property?
If you can't fine Microsoft in a reasonable fashion with an $XX billion fine, wouldn't the forced opening of some code be a reasonable alternative? maybe you could let MS have the choice, and let them put a price tag on their own code!
Actually, the UK is not part of the EU.
The above comment is a heaping pile of steaming rubbish. The AC who posted it didn't even have the guts to sign in!
These owners had to suffer for years before they finally got Nissan to buy back their deathmobiles:
l
Nissan van class action settlement.
February 11, 1994
Nissan must buy back all that remain of the 33,000 fire prone mini vans it sold in the U.S. between 1987-1990 after pressure from a safety research firm and the NHTSA. The California class action agreement only gave van owner a $500 credit toward a vehicle brought from a Nissan dealer.
from http://www.crash-worthiness.com/nissan/nissan.htm
There's surprisingly little to be found on the web about this debacle, but I knew I had fading memories of this event tucked away in the back of my mind. Maybe there's a better page of info about this elsewhere.
Do you, perhaps, mean 'microcephalic' instead of 'hydrocephalic'? If I were hydrocephalic, I'd probably want a larger head!
p.s. If YOU are a lawyer, I am obviously NOT referring to you personaly; just lawyers in general. ;)
Spoken like a true disclaimer!
Okay, so Slashdot uses the term "non-profit corporation". The supposition here is that Slashdot is accurate. To that, I say if you trust Slashdot to be accurate, the joke's on you!
.org to non-profit organizations. Call me blind if you wish, but I'd really like to see where ICANN proposes restricting .org domains to corporations only.
I've looked at all the links on that older Slashdot article. The pages that are linked refer to the ICANN proposal that suggests restricting
Would someone who insists that corporations alone would be permitted to use the org TLD please post a link to an ICANN page where ICANN (not some public respondent) states this!
I fail to see where it is written thet you would have to be a non-profit corporation to make use of the .org TLD. I checked a number of documents at the ICANN site (including the March 1 proposals regarding the domain registry restructuring) and they all refer to the term non-profit organization to describe to whom the .org TLD would be restricted.
.org domains that would belong to organizational but not corporate entities.
If you could cite where they refer to non-profit corporations, please let me know. I have
What is the purpose of secured networks and hacker-proof software when you can't even keep track of laptops (as in the State Department HQ) or removeable hard drives (as in Los Alamos National Labs).
Lesson: Frequently the most obvious and seemingly straightforward security efforts are the most often overlooked ones.
Radio Shack includes product codes on [practically] all of the products it sells. 06A00 means that the unit was manufactured in June (06) of 2000 (00) by manufacturer A (the letter code is only important when more than one manufacturer makes the same product, such as a resistor or a battery, or a new [generally cheaper] manufacturer is employed to make an existing product such as a speaker or a videotape).
Maybe we should take a peek at the first few stories to see how things have changed?
Congratulations and continued good luck!
What we are witnessing in the Tech sector is speculation. People are investing speculatively for two reasons:
1. They expect future growth in the market sector (Linux Servers in this case), and expect companies with large market share today to retain that share in the future.
2. Everyone else is doing it.
Without the Tech sector, Wall Street is showing lackluster performance. We're to the point where the only way big, established companies can grow and increase profits is through mergers.
People looking for money grabs in today's market are jumping on board a massive roller coaster on its way up...and after it crests, it'll go down really, really fast, taking every stock owner along.
I own stocks through my employer's deferred compensation plan. I am nervous.
Do you think this sort of project is only suitable for dead or dying software? By this I mean, DOS hasn't been in significant development for a while now, so making a clone is like reconstructing a static subject. Do you think your project could have been successful during the time of MS-DOS 6.0, or instead do you think commercial developers would have torpedoed your efforts by redesigning their next release to be less cloneable?
I suggested that one crucial issue for voters to ponder is this: Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?
Is that the button I keep hitting by mistake, giving me a BSOD?
(I guess by this that Al Gore claims to have invented the keyboard, too)
This is exactly the reason that our government should make lobbying illegal. The are many special interest groups and companies who are buying influence in our government, and it's not uncommon at all.
I have felt for quite a while now that corporations should not have any rights to lobby government. This government is of, by, and for the people (ostensibly), and it is the people who should have the right to lobby, just as they have the right to vote. I also believe that corporations (or other non-human entities) should not have the right to contribute to election campaigns.
The state has granted these entities the right to exist, along with certain strictly defined rights and responsibilities. The state should have unlimited ability to restrict these r and r's, since these do not apply directly to any actual person. I don't see the constitution as being the protect of rights for non-human entities!
My impressions stem from these links:
The original slashdot article entitled OpenBSD, Security, and Theo De Raadt dated Sept. 01 1999
The above quote is from comment number 177.
Responses numbered 103 and 136.
I notice while previewing this posting that the above comment links still don't work, but the article link does. Just go to the 09/01/99 article and read about De Raadt's exploits, and the behavior he has exhibited.
From what I can tell, there weren't any responses to what you call 'the troll.' Although perhaps not as obvious as it could have been, my posting is critical of De Raadt (as he, not openBSD, is the subject of the newspaper article).
My criticism is not aimed at openBSD or FreeBSD. I am glad the *BSDs are around, and don't dispute their quality despite my lack of experience with these UNIXen.
This comment just about sums it up for me.
D'oh! The link gives me a blank page now. Serves me right for trying to ref an archived comment.
Here's a copy:
[BEGIN QUOTED COMMENT]
BSD failing (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 02, @12:56PM EDT (#177)
I agree that FreeBSD is dying. And while FreeBSD is beset with its own internal strife, it is not the only BSD to be affected by this cancer. NetBSD and OpenBSD are dying too.
I read that T.Deraadt email thread when I first looked at OpenBSD, and my initial impression was that Theo had a real baaaaadddd attitude. I do know for a fact that a lot of the NetBSD folks were upset to see him leave and fork off his own version of the OS, and to lose him as a developer. But in reading his email he obviously has a problem with taking any criticism, and had no problem with jumping down someone's throat with a flamethrower and foul language. Denial, its not just a river in Egypt...
Not that I wouldn't use OpenBSD, or any other operating system that met my technical needs, whatever the personality of the people involved. I've dealt with enough bad attitudes from commercial OS vendors in my years in the industry to be able to deal with it if I have to. It just seems that *BSD has an extra heaping helping of bad attitudes that make commercial vendors look like pikers.
If you *really* read that email thread, you would see the attitude loud and clear. "We don't think that it helps anything for you to tell someone he's a f**khead when he's posting a message trying to help with the OS development." "F**K YOU, *I* want control of the source and if you don't like it I'll fork my own off!"
That's my impression of it... He sounded like an immature little upset kid to me. The development of any of the O.S. OS's is a group effort, and having one person think they have all the answers and have to be the one in control is dead wrong. So, now he *has* control of his own fork of BSD, and lost the ability to maintain many of the various platform ports because he has no developers. Thus, the OpenBSD page says that for a Vax port, for instance, "support can be easily ported over from NetBSD". Why these problems are so prevalent under FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD remains something of a mystery. These systems seem to be self selective in their attraction to weirdos and big egos.
The split had nothing to do with the quality of his coding work, and everything to do with his nasty attitude towards people... and NOT just the people of NetBSD Core, but other people who were just civilians trying to help out, or looking for help. No wonder BSD is on the skids. Which BSD will be first to go under is anyone's guess but The culling has already begun.
[END QUOTED COMMENT]