I think Netherlands have that. The norm specifies the number of cycles per day. The grid is losing cycles during the day as heavy-duty devices go online, but then it speeds up slightly during the night so the losses don't accumulate.
In Poland, OTOH, the norm specifies 50HZ +/- 1%. Since the power plant that is "leading" in the sine wave is pumping most energy into the grid (and as result cashing most money) the grid is universally running "overclocked" (still within norm but always above 50Hz, never below), all grid-synchronized clocks going fast.
There are cases where ill intent is all that differs crime from non-crime. Example being receiving stolen goods. If you did this unknowingly and believing the goods were legit, you are innocent.
In most cases, though, while the stance shouldn't influence the "guilty/not guilty" verdict, it usually is aggravating/mitigating circumstance and in case you are guilty, will modify the scale of the sentence and may often change the classification of the act - say, manslaughter vs murder.
Theoretically, Judicial independence means that this is still fine. While the government is paying the judge's salary, they are not legally allowed to affect the verdict or pressure the judge in any way. In reality, the theory is quite near practice and yes, it seems the judges usually don't seem to be really biased in citizen vs government lawsuits that occur at all. Still, it isn't like the government really has to worry. "We do not consent to this lawsuit" is the ultimate defense and no amount of judge or jury bias matters any more with that. Why use illegal pressure for dodgy favors if you can shamelessly declare "I win because I say so".
So, what is the visible change from the user perspective resulting from that? Oh, better performance? So it wasn't a major change, just a small tune-up. (I don't care how much changed under the hood. About the only change that would guarantee major version change WITHOUT change of features would be a total rewrite (possibly in another programming language). Which actually Firefox could use, because using Javascript as its primary language for all the GUI, plugins etc is inherently insecure.)
Except the overlay stretches to half the screen width at most, abbreviating the mouseover'd URL somewhere between the hostname and the path. Meaning if you browse through Google Translate or the likes, the host part of the link gets obscured. Annoying like hell.
Yes, Firefox can update as often as they want and nobody will care in a positive way. Devs will not give a shit because they code for the lowest common denominator. They will skip 3-4 versions before caring for an upgrade. Users will be only pissed off by broken plugins. The new features are really not worth the hassle and the pages will not use new features anyway. Plugin developers will have more unnecessary work, even with automated versioning. Mozilla developers will have less time for write-test-deploy cycles, before the internals change beyond hope and the code needs to be rewritten for a new version from scratch - meaning BIG features are likely dead. Design guys will have less feedback and time to work with new interface as fewer users will upgrade and there will be less feedback before given version gets obsolete.
I really, really wonder WHO will benefit from the new schedule. Other than Microsoft, that is.
One of the caveats is that government has to consent to be sued. Yes, they can say "we do not agree for this lawsuit" and the result is "case dismissed."
I'm tempted to start a building demolition company. Using tactical nukes. You point out the town your building you want to demolish is in, and we guarantee it's razed to the ground, no other details needed.
Less money than what? Than nothing? Than no money you have with your assets frozen as bitcoin? Would they get less for selling it than by giving it to "the tap"?
Say, EFF tomorrow receives a donation of one trillion Mozambique dollars. Should they exchange it to USD as soon as possible or worry that selling them all now may earn them less money?
If EFF sets the policy: "sell ASAP at current price" then there is no worry. They are not a currency trade company, they are a charity. They can freely treat Bitcoin as "donation of other goods" and it's their duty to keep the assets in a safe form, not to speculate and wait for best offer for unsafe/volatile goods.
I guess there are many, many reasons why it should... but "because they're a soft target" is not one of them. Arguably hether that's a good reason or not, definitely because they are not a soft target.
There's always this option of leaving a tail of 4 proxies way back, and forwarding all traffic back there, and looking just like another chainlink in the chain while some innocent chap sits at the computer at the last hop.
Or they went for the cheapest 3rd party security evaluation just as well. Exactly like they went for the cheapest investigation party just now - just read the statements by these morons in TFA.
Considering words of "the anonymous expert performing the investigation" in the article, I'd say they performed some very "in-depth" security reviews of the site. Except they were performed by "experts" just as clueless as the people who wrote the faulty code. Yep, bad testing is almost worse than no testing.
But this causes less tickets. So cities shorten the yellow light instead.
Then this causes real, significant risk to human lives:
HOW do you make way for an ambulance? There is no proof to defend you, and even if there was (say, ambulance logs) obtaining them is a great hassle and will probably cost more (in lost work time) than the ticket. So, drivers aware of that will just flip a bird to the ambulance driver and wait patiently for the red light while the accident victim dies in the ambulance.
How long is the result? I mean if (I know that it's unlikely) the algorithm is ever cracked, they could generate hash collision by fine-tuning the transferred amount. I mean, $100 to account 11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 may generate the same 4-digit hash as precisely $37 418.93 to 22 2222 2222 2222 2222 2222 2222. And creating a rainbow table for your account number combined with all numbers from $0 to $MAX_ALLOWED_TRANSFER in $0.01 increments should not be that hard -if- you know the algorithm....or if all these "calculators" use the same seed, then just replace the keypad and screen with a microcontroller and generate hashes for all allowed amounts, then just hunt for a transfer that creates a hash identical to one present in your table.
If the limit is $10k, this would mean the table would have good 1mln entries, covering majority of 6-digit codes or 1 in 100 from 8-digit codes. So how many digits do you enter?
So I set up a belt-fed machinegun connected with an infrared sensor, and it fires (straight ahead, without moving) when someone enters anywhere within the 110 degree cone, range 12 meters. I set in up concealed somewhere near my farm. The noise is sure to discourage any trespassers and the chance anyone actually gets shot is extremely slim, they would have to approach head on, right in the dead center of the cone of the sensor, actually line up with the barrel.
Now the gun has fired 8000 bullets until today but I assure you any casualties were purely, completely unintentional accident, people being in the wrong place at a wrong time. Completely not my fault!
While people looking on the pics may not be persecuted, people who put the system in place, can and should. Seeing the underaged in sexual situations is inherent part of this system characteristics. Child porn -would- be produced, and while no single individual photo could make anyone guilty, the fact that the system -would- eventually take such photos and -assure- employees would see them, makes this essentially an act of manufacturing child porn.
To relate: place a camera that randomly takes pics of a kids' swimming pool locker room and posts them on the net. Most will be pics of empty room. The interval is such that there is a reasonable chance kids will change completely without even one photo of them being taken. People visiting the site, upon encountering a pic with nudes are obligated by ToS to remove it (though nobody checks if they do). Now let me add, I claim it's for community to report kids smoking in the locker room. And voila, I have a system where you are sure to find nude photos of some kids (eventually), and - is my system legal?
The individuals should not be fined. They should be put in federal prison and on sexual offenders registry for commissioning/approving/creating a system for manufacturing child pornography. (the design of the system completely assured that CP -would- be produced eventually with the system working to specs, so there is no presumption of authors being unaware of this consequence. No matter what their motives, they consciously assisted/funded/requested production of child porn)
Slashdot Mirror
I think Netherlands have that. The norm specifies the number of cycles per day. The grid is losing cycles during the day as heavy-duty devices go online, but then it speeds up slightly during the night so the losses don't accumulate.
In Poland, OTOH, the norm specifies 50HZ +/- 1%. Since the power plant that is "leading" in the sine wave is pumping most energy into the grid (and as result cashing most money) the grid is universally running "overclocked" (still within norm but always above 50Hz, never below), all grid-synchronized clocks going fast.
There are cases where ill intent is all that differs crime from non-crime. Example being receiving stolen goods. If you did this unknowingly and believing the goods were legit, you are innocent.
In most cases, though, while the stance shouldn't influence the "guilty/not guilty" verdict, it usually is aggravating/mitigating circumstance and in case you are guilty, will modify the scale of the sentence and may often change the classification of the act - say, manslaughter vs murder.
Theoretically, Judicial independence means that this is still fine. While the government is paying the judge's salary, they are not legally allowed to affect the verdict or pressure the judge in any way. In reality, the theory is quite near practice and yes, it seems the judges usually don't seem to be really biased in citizen vs government lawsuits that occur at all. Still, it isn't like the government really has to worry. "We do not consent to this lawsuit" is the ultimate defense and no amount of judge or jury bias matters any more with that. Why use illegal pressure for dodgy favors if you can shamelessly declare "I win because I say so".
Meanwhile, XWindows still at version 11r6.
So, what is the visible change from the user perspective resulting from that?
Oh, better performance? So it wasn't a major change, just a small tune-up.
(I don't care how much changed under the hood. About the only change that would guarantee major version change WITHOUT change of features would be a total rewrite (possibly in another programming language). Which actually Firefox could use, because using Javascript as its primary language for all the GUI, plugins etc is inherently insecure.)
Except the overlay stretches to half the screen width at most, abbreviating the mouseover'd URL somewhere between the hostname and the path. Meaning if you browse through Google Translate or the likes, the host part of the link gets obscured. Annoying like hell.
Yes, Firefox can update as often as they want and nobody will care in a positive way.
Devs will not give a shit because they code for the lowest common denominator. They will skip 3-4 versions before caring for an upgrade.
Users will be only pissed off by broken plugins. The new features are really not worth the hassle and the pages will not use new features anyway.
Plugin developers will have more unnecessary work, even with automated versioning.
Mozilla developers will have less time for write-test-deploy cycles, before the internals change beyond hope and the code needs to be rewritten for a new version from scratch - meaning BIG features are likely dead.
Design guys will have less feedback and time to work with new interface as fewer users will upgrade and there will be less feedback before given version gets obsolete.
I really, really wonder WHO will benefit from the new schedule.
Other than Microsoft, that is.
One of the caveats is that government has to consent to be sued. Yes, they can say "we do not agree for this lawsuit" and the result is "case dismissed."
I'm tempted to start a building demolition company. Using tactical nukes. You point out the town your building you want to demolish is in, and we guarantee it's razed to the ground, no other details needed.
Of the data, yes. Of the hardware, which is currently missing, not really.
I think this would be difficult to pull off. Do you declare every generated Bitcoin you created as income?
Less money than what? Than nothing? Than no money you have with your assets frozen as bitcoin? Would they get less for selling it than by giving it to "the tap"?
Say, EFF tomorrow receives a donation of one trillion Mozambique dollars. Should they exchange it to USD as soon as possible or worry that selling them all now may earn them less money?
If EFF sets the policy: "sell ASAP at current price" then there is no worry. They are not a currency trade company, they are a charity. They can freely treat Bitcoin as "donation of other goods" and it's their duty to keep the assets in a safe form, not to speculate and wait for best offer for unsafe/volatile goods.
I guess there are many, many reasons why it should... but "because they're a soft target" is not one of them. Arguably hether that's a good reason or not, definitely because they are not a soft target.
Are you comparing the two most powerful intelligence/investigation agencies in the USA (CIA and FBI) to children in school yards? Seriously?
punk on the defenseless.
FBI? CIA?
There's always this option of leaving a tail of 4 proxies way back, and forwarding all traffic back there, and looking just like another chainlink in the chain while some innocent chap sits at the computer at the last hop.
Or they went for the cheapest 3rd party security evaluation just as well.
Exactly like they went for the cheapest investigation party just now - just read the statements by these morons in TFA.
Considering words of "the anonymous expert performing the investigation" in the article, I'd say they performed some very "in-depth" security reviews of the site. Except they were performed by "experts" just as clueless as the people who wrote the faulty code. Yep, bad testing is almost worse than no testing.
or one casualty in an ambulance, because the driver could not make way.
But this causes less tickets. So cities shorten the yellow light instead.
Then this causes real, significant risk to human lives:
HOW do you make way for an ambulance? There is no proof to defend you, and even if there was (say, ambulance logs) obtaining them is a great hassle and will probably cost more (in lost work time) than the ticket. So, drivers aware of that will just flip a bird to the ambulance driver and wait patiently for the red light while the accident victim dies in the ambulance.
How long is the result? ...or if all these "calculators" use the same seed, then just replace the keypad and screen with a microcontroller and generate hashes for all allowed amounts, then just hunt for a transfer that creates a hash identical to one present in your table.
I mean if (I know that it's unlikely) the algorithm is ever cracked, they could generate hash collision by fine-tuning the transferred amount.
I mean, $100 to account 11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 may generate the same 4-digit hash as precisely $37 418.93 to 22 2222 2222 2222 2222 2222 2222. And creating a rainbow table for your account number combined with all numbers from $0 to $MAX_ALLOWED_TRANSFER in $0.01 increments should not be that hard -if- you know the algorithm.
If the limit is $10k, this would mean the table would have good 1mln entries, covering majority of 6-digit codes or 1 in 100 from 8-digit codes. So how many digits do you enter?
http://slashdot.org/journal/247278/On-Long-Password-Security
Using randomness to claim ignorance?
So I set up a belt-fed machinegun connected with an infrared sensor, and it fires (straight ahead, without moving) when someone enters anywhere within the 110 degree cone, range 12 meters. I set in up concealed somewhere near my farm. The noise is sure to discourage any trespassers and the chance anyone actually gets shot is extremely slim, they would have to approach head on, right in the dead center of the cone of the sensor, actually line up with the barrel.
Now the gun has fired 8000 bullets until today but I assure you any casualties were purely, completely unintentional accident, people being in the wrong place at a wrong time. Completely not my fault!
While people looking on the pics may not be persecuted, people who put the system in place, can and should. Seeing the underaged in sexual situations is inherent part of this system characteristics. Child porn -would- be produced, and while no single individual photo could make anyone guilty, the fact that the system -would- eventually take such photos and -assure- employees would see them, makes this essentially an act of manufacturing child porn.
To relate: place a camera that randomly takes pics of a kids' swimming pool locker room and posts them on the net. Most will be pics of empty room. The interval is such that there is a reasonable chance kids will change completely without even one photo of them being taken. People visiting the site, upon encountering a pic with nudes are obligated by ToS to remove it (though nobody checks if they do). Now let me add, I claim it's for community to report kids smoking in the locker room. And voila, I have a system where you are sure to find nude photos of some kids (eventually), and - is my system legal?
The individuals should not be fined. They should be put in federal prison and on sexual offenders registry for commissioning/approving/creating a system for manufacturing child pornography. (the design of the system completely assured that CP -would- be produced eventually with the system working to specs, so there is no presumption of authors being unaware of this consequence. No matter what their motives, they consciously assisted/funded/requested production of child porn)