Tell those cities to clean up their act, then. Those people should be able to clean up their own shit. Why should clean nations waste funds on unnecessary output controls just because Los Angeles or Mexico City can't clean up?
Besides. We all know that the clean air mandates are doled out by output allowances and nations use those allowances to buy and sell like any other asset. Pretty soon the US is paying Poland or Afghanistan so that Mexico City and Los Angeles can continue to pour out crap and it all becomes political purse strings.
Which still doesn't address the natural state of it all. Yes, humans are putting more CO2 into the air, and yes it may be causing some warming. But, guess what? Mother nature is responding to the increase in CO2 levels with algea blooms in all areas of the oceans. Too bad the media never gets the global warming hippies together with the algae freaks and explains to them the CO2 levels involved. It's perfectly demonstrated that mother nature is ramping up CO2 processing capacity and whatever global warming we're seeing will be properly modulated in 10-20 years.
You might convince the majority of/. readers, but you'll never convince anyone who actually works in the pharmaceutical industry.
Without patents, company C will never disclose what is in drug D, hence stopping future research down related veins
Nobody cares what's in drug D. It's well documented in the open literature which chemical structures perform well against which diseases. Drugs also have a finite size due to physical limitations (eg. solubility and toxicity)--typically molecular weight less than 1000. Company C isn't going to put a stop in anything by simply keeping its mouth shut.
A very cohesive argument can be made that no single molecular structure by itself treats any particular disease but rather a disease treatment relies on the interaction of many many many different molecules in many different pathways. The FDA doesn't care, though. As long as the FDA continues to run the show the way they are you can really stop wishing for any real medical treatments from the pharmaceutical industry.
Furthermore, other companies will find out what drug D is made out of and then sell it generically. Company C is screwed because it had spent all the money doing the research; it can't compete on marketing, etc., against the companies that are free-loading. Future drug companies will do no research
Complete and utter boilerplate FUD. Pharmaceutical companies gain nothing by undercutting each other. Sure, they make it look like competition to the public, but, just like automobiles or anything else, the same major players own controlling shares of all the big companies. It's called a diversified stock portfolio.
Not all monopolies are bad.
Only the ones that exist on my taxpayer dollar without explicitly asking for my support.
I like this idea and the idea where some guy wrote a perl script to associate each letter of the alphabet with a 2 character combo and then stored the key in his wallet. Common words turned into crypto.
I gave in to the open-air passwords on the notepad a long time ago. Except that I keep a simple crypto algorithm in my head. People who walk past my desk might think I'm leaving my passwords out in the open.
I guess perception is 99% of reality. Maybe that's why I've never gotten a promotion.
IMO the problem is I don't think most people's memories are good at holding something as very important and THE THING to remember, then after 3 months it's something else to remember
Agreed. It's also that passwords are overused. People, at first, balked about filling out online registration forms for every site they wanted to access. When the tout changed to signing up for an account, well, that made everything better.
After changing passwords every 3 months after 5 years even if you can remember those passwords, your memory might be associating ALL those 20 passwords
I've noticed that certain character combinations tend to recur in my passwords. For example, "nP", 'rQ", and 'e4" are common. When I remember my passwords, especially early in the morning or late at night, I may end up mixing portions of a password together.
eg. root on (one of) my home systems is "tTe4mRxC7". A password for (one of) my common Hotmail account is "e4gUmC2p". When checking Hotmail early in the morning, sometimes I'll end up with "e4mRxC2p".
A password that never expires means that the intruder has access for as long as that account exists, if the intrusion was never detected. That is not serious security. Password expiration IS for serious security, and passwords should expire very frequently
What stops the intruder from changing the password on schedule? If the account has a legit owner, and they call in to say,"My password's been changed", and that user chose a weak password to begin with, they'll probably choose another weak one which can be exploited again.
Passwords are like antibiotics--they're overused and mostly worthless. In all reality, most places probably only require passwords in an obfuscated attempt to give legitimacy and credibility to their demands for a name/address/telephone number/complete CV.
What about those one-time sign-ups that you have to do from time to time
INDEED.
I don't worry about spam e-mail. The e-mail boxes are all cluttered with kazillions of forgotten password request forms. I even have multiple instances of requests for the same password. Maybe the rest of the world likes to let their web browser remember all of their passwords--I'm not convinced that those mechanisms are secure enough that they can't be mined. Heck. Malware can install itself. What prevents it from mining passwords?
It's really silly the way the corporatization of the internet has made it nearly unusable. You can't even read today's news headlines without some corporate office asking for your complete CV and a 128-bit PGP encrypted.wav file with your vocal signature and a 15 character password with a mandatory inclusion of at least 3 extended ASCII characters.
I have a great idea that is 1) cheaper than hi-tech ID cards, 2) more effective than hi-tech ID cards, 3) more palatable for anyone concerned with personal rights:
QUIT AMASSING DATABASES ON CITIZENS AND CUSTOMERS.
Identity thieves can't steal it if it's not being artificially created.
Since you're sitting there all smug and happy with yourself, thinking that you're better than your peers on/., I have only one last question: Are you sure those are all the relevent keys? Have you scanned through the entire registry and mapped every single other existing key to a legitimate app?
It was a laser guided, satellite launched micro-missle which was targeted on OBL who was found to be hiding in Australia. That flash is all that was left of him.
The pic before/after this one don't show OBL on the pier because he was hiding in the water underneath it.
I didn't know that PEG had therapeutic uses. I've always seen it as a solid support for reagents used in chemical reactions. As a chemist, I like PEG because it's inert to a majority of chemical reactions and is insoluble in many common laboratory solvents.
In this study I imagine they're using a solubilized form of PEG. It's probably a lower polymeric weight and in a polar/protic solvent--probably aqueous.
There are a few parts of the article which struck me as questionable, though:
PEG is able to stop this cascade of injury by repairing initial membrane damage
I don't think PEG so much repairs anything as it insulates the cells from each other so that they can all repair themselves without the toxic necrosis products causing further harm. I imagine that PEG also helps to moderate pH and prevent further damage that way.
or by fusing two damaged cells together into a larger functional nerve cell.
That's a neat theory. I doubt it.
Significantly, the polymer is attracted only to damaged nerve cells and tissue when it's injected into the blood stream. It doesn't move into undamaged regions nearby.
That's another neat theory. The pharmaceutical industry would love to know how a molecule with no particular shape or form manages to distinguish between "good" and "bad" cells. I'd be interested to see where the authoring reporter received this idea. I doubt highly that this is from a study of "inject in arm, observe in spine". Most likely the injection site was very close to the damages area and the injected aliquot had a mass and volume low enough to make distribution arbitrarily interpretable.
There's been plenty going on in the field of fusion. The first experiments which investigated sonoluminescence were thought to include fusion. These were disproven. Since then, however, sonicexperimentshavebeenconducted with heavy acetone and evidence of fusion has been certain.
And yes... people are always trying to disprove it.
So it should be unusually straightforward to track down who's behind the exploits -- just follow the money trail
I've been saying this for years about spam, corporate fraud, political corruption, and any number of unwanted irritations in society. No one's ever going to follow the money trail. The money trail is good for the economy. Attempting to hamper business by restricting the money trail makes you a terrorist... yadda yadda yadda.
It's amazing. Get a room full of politicians and ask,"Which one of you has ever voted for a pork spending bill?" They'll all look around as if they have no idea what is being asked yet, at the end of the year, we can find billions of dollars appropriated to pet projects or to contracts which directly benefit the politician, their family, or their friends disproportionately from the benefit received by other citizens.
Follow the money trail? If you keep following that money trail, you'll find it leads to harassment and ostricision. You don't want to be a terrorist do you? Just be a good little citizen and let the proper authorities handle this sort of stuff. Microsoft has already pledged millions to crack down on security.
See...? This is a perfect example of what we can expect to see more of when wifi connections blanket all cities. More ACs oozing this filth as they troll through the message boards. This isn't about security. This is about the quality of the signal on the network.
No. Pass a federal law to ban integrated wifi networks altogether. If there's a chance that we can keep more people like this from getting on the network then I will be much happier.
This is why we have firewalls -- to ignore packets not of interest.
This isn't about security. This isn't even about ghettos. I'm talking all sorts of peopoe, clean, dirty, rich, poor, tall, short, thin, fat... there are all sorts of people that I see that I say,"Wow. I really hope I never have to get trolled by THEM on/." If there's a greater chance that they don't have network access, then I'm happy. A blanket wifi solution would take away any remote chance at that happiness.
I didn't, and you're right. That means this is more like a new football or baseball stadium. It's taxpayer subsidized but the profits belong exclusively to the company...
Sure... but do you really want EVERY individual in your neighborhood to have network access? When I go to the store, or to the mall, or to the pub, I run into all sorts of people that, honestly, I do not want to meet on my network.
I've had a revelation and changed my mind about this topic. We should pass a federal law banning integrated wifi networks altogether.
WHY?
Because I was making a biscuit and some tomato sauce and cheese (basically really fluffy pizza), and I thought,"If those shmucks can't afford internet access in their home, do I really want them on my network? As much as I'd like to be able to check my e-mail from anywhere, it's not worth it to give public network access to every idiot in the world."
I'm wondering why it hasn't been done already. We can buy wifi aps. It's easy to weatherproof them in a rubbermaid tub. Weld/bolt the weatherproof box to the top of a telephone in each local block. Configure the subnets, and go. It'd be a perfect automated ISP.
If it hasn't been done already I'd say the corps are dragging their feet to milk traditional ISPs for all they're worth. Bills like this only seek to inhibit a people which is finally saying,"We've had enough of this already!"
Typically, though, I'd agree with you. I think the government should set this service up and then have a contract to turn it over to a private company in less than one year. How low would it take to set up those wifi aps on telephone poles and configure the network? Properly planned it could be deployed within 3 months.
I don't see any reason why the government should take a bunch of money out of my pocket to do a lousy job at providing a service that private industry could do
At least this time they would be doing something that you know about, so you could guestimate about what it would cost in equipment and administration to put it all together. It's just aps and routers. Access would be open if all the residents were on it so there'd be no need for encryption any stronger than what you use with a standard ISP. You would know if and when you were getting fleeced and you could contact your politicians properly about it.
Oh wait. Your politicians don't want you to bother them if you're right. Strike everything I've said...
"Heaven forbid that you ask us, your politicians, to take on a task which we know is full well within the capabilities of individual citizens and the private industry. We wouldn't want to waste your taxpayer money by administering this service through the government. We have public health care to think about!."
If ever there was a law that should be repealed preemptively, it's this one. As things are the law will go into effect, it will never be repealed, and wifi networks will cost easily 10x what they should, even considering gov't bloat and favoritism in contract bidding models.
Because there's no logical reason to think that software companies spend money on anti-piracy just so that they can piss off users. What do they get out of it? Hint: it has something to do with piracy.
Just like there's no logical reason that a politician would support a pork bill. It's obvious why they're supporting a bad policy: there's something in it for them. What is that something? Who knows? It's not our job to make money for Valve but it's certain that they have it figured out. I feel that it's part of a larger push to make the public comfortable with complete online verification, and to sway opinion against the open source community which has a reputation for not being concerned with registration systems.
Many of us simply do not believe that software sharing is a bad thing, and we reject EULAs and all attempts to assert control over software after it has been sold into our possession. If you don't like it, you're free to not sell it to me.
Slashdot Mirror
But failure is never reported. Go ahead. Scan the journals. There's always methods to do this, and methods to do that, or directed observations.
At best failure is given a mention in the discussion or results sections. You can never be sure if the failure was truly a failure.
Tell those cities to clean up their act, then. Those people should be able to clean up their own shit. Why should clean nations waste funds on unnecessary output controls just because Los Angeles or Mexico City can't clean up?
Besides. We all know that the clean air mandates are doled out by output allowances and nations use those allowances to buy and sell like any other asset. Pretty soon the US is paying Poland or Afghanistan so that Mexico City and Los Angeles can continue to pour out crap and it all becomes political purse strings.
Which still doesn't address the natural state of it all. Yes, humans are putting more CO2 into the air, and yes it may be causing some warming. But, guess what? Mother nature is responding to the increase in CO2 levels with algea blooms in all areas of the oceans. Too bad the media never gets the global warming hippies together with the algae freaks and explains to them the CO2 levels involved. It's perfectly demonstrated that mother nature is ramping up CO2 processing capacity and whatever global warming we're seeing will be properly modulated in 10-20 years.
You might convince the majority of /. readers, but you'll never convince anyone who actually works in the pharmaceutical industry.
Without patents, company C will never disclose what is in drug D, hence stopping future research down related veins
Nobody cares what's in drug D. It's well documented in the open literature which chemical structures perform well against which diseases. Drugs also have a finite size due to physical limitations (eg. solubility and toxicity)--typically molecular weight less than 1000. Company C isn't going to put a stop in anything by simply keeping its mouth shut.
A very cohesive argument can be made that no single molecular structure by itself treats any particular disease but rather a disease treatment relies on the interaction of many many many different molecules in many different pathways. The FDA doesn't care, though. As long as the FDA continues to run the show the way they are you can really stop wishing for any real medical treatments from the pharmaceutical industry.
Furthermore, other companies will find out what drug D is made out of and then sell it generically. Company C is screwed because it had spent all the money doing the research; it can't compete on marketing, etc., against the companies that are free-loading. Future drug companies will do no research
Complete and utter boilerplate FUD. Pharmaceutical companies gain nothing by undercutting each other. Sure, they make it look like competition to the public, but, just like automobiles or anything else, the same major players own controlling shares of all the big companies. It's called a diversified stock portfolio.
Not all monopolies are bad.
Only the ones that exist on my taxpayer dollar without explicitly asking for my support.
I like this idea and the idea where some guy wrote a perl script to associate each letter of the alphabet with a 2 character combo and then stored the key in his wallet. Common words turned into crypto.
I gave in to the open-air passwords on the notepad a long time ago. Except that I keep a simple crypto algorithm in my head. People who walk past my desk might think I'm leaving my passwords out in the open.
I guess perception is 99% of reality. Maybe that's why I've never gotten a promotion.
IMO the problem is I don't think most people's memories are good at holding something as very important and THE THING to remember, then after 3 months it's something else to remember
Agreed. It's also that passwords are overused. People, at first, balked about filling out online registration forms for every site they wanted to access. When the tout changed to signing up for an account, well, that made everything better.
After changing passwords every 3 months after 5 years even if you can remember those passwords, your memory might be associating ALL those 20 passwords
I've noticed that certain character combinations tend to recur in my passwords. For example, "nP", 'rQ", and 'e4" are common. When I remember my passwords, especially early in the morning or late at night, I may end up mixing portions of a password together.
eg. root on (one of) my home systems is "tTe4mRxC7". A password for (one of) my common Hotmail account is "e4gUmC2p". When checking Hotmail early in the morning, sometimes I'll end up with "e4mRxC2p".
Ugh.
A password that never expires means that the intruder has access for as long as that account exists, if the intrusion was never detected. That is not serious security. Password expiration IS for serious security, and passwords should expire very frequently
What stops the intruder from changing the password on schedule? If the account has a legit owner, and they call in to say,"My password's been changed", and that user chose a weak password to begin with, they'll probably choose another weak one which can be exploited again.
Passwords are like antibiotics--they're overused and mostly worthless. In all reality, most places probably only require passwords in an obfuscated attempt to give legitimacy and credibility to their demands for a name/address/telephone number/complete CV.
Why does _EVERYTHING_ require an account?
What about those one-time sign-ups that you have to do from time to time
.wav file with your vocal signature and a 15 character password with a mandatory inclusion of at least 3 extended ASCII characters.
INDEED.
I don't worry about spam e-mail. The e-mail boxes are all cluttered with kazillions of forgotten password request forms. I even have multiple instances of requests for the same password. Maybe the rest of the world likes to let their web browser remember all of their passwords--I'm not convinced that those mechanisms are secure enough that they can't be mined. Heck. Malware can install itself. What prevents it from mining passwords?
It's really silly the way the corporatization of the internet has made it nearly unusable. You can't even read today's news headlines without some corporate office asking for your complete CV and a 128-bit PGP encrypted
I have a great idea that is 1) cheaper than hi-tech ID cards, 2) more effective than hi-tech ID cards, 3) more palatable for anyone concerned with personal rights:
QUIT AMASSING DATABASES ON CITIZENS AND CUSTOMERS.
Identity thieves can't steal it if it's not being artificially created.
Since you're sitting there all smug and happy with yourself, thinking that you're better than your peers on /., I have only one last question: Are you sure those are all the relevent keys? Have you scanned through the entire registry and mapped every single other existing key to a legitimate app?
Go ahead, say "Yes". We all know you're lying.
It was a laser guided, satellite launched micro-missle which was targeted on OBL who was found to be hiding in Australia. That flash is all that was left of him.
The pic before/after this one don't show OBL on the pier because he was hiding in the water underneath it.
I didn't know that PEG had therapeutic uses. I've always seen it as a solid support for reagents used in chemical reactions. As a chemist, I like PEG because it's inert to a majority of chemical reactions and is insoluble in many common laboratory solvents.
In this study I imagine they're using a solubilized form of PEG. It's probably a lower polymeric weight and in a polar/protic solvent--probably aqueous.
There are a few parts of the article which struck me as questionable, though:
PEG is able to stop this cascade of injury by repairing initial membrane damage
I don't think PEG so much repairs anything as it insulates the cells from each other so that they can all repair themselves without the toxic necrosis products causing further harm. I imagine that PEG also helps to moderate pH and prevent further damage that way.
or by fusing two damaged cells together into a larger functional nerve cell.
That's a neat theory. I doubt it.
Significantly, the polymer is attracted only to damaged nerve cells and tissue when it's injected into the blood stream. It doesn't move into undamaged regions nearby.
That's another neat theory. The pharmaceutical industry would love to know how a molecule with no particular shape or form manages to distinguish between "good" and "bad" cells. I'd be interested to see where the authoring reporter received this idea. I doubt highly that this is from a study of "inject in arm, observe in spine". Most likely the injection site was very close to the damages area and the injected aliquot had a mass and volume low enough to make distribution arbitrarily interpretable.
There's been plenty going on in the field of fusion. The first experiments which investigated sonoluminescence were thought to include fusion. These were disproven. Since then, however, sonic experiments have been conducted with heavy acetone and evidence of fusion has been certain.
And yes... people are always trying to disprove it.
We get to see some snippets of the final confrontation between Gandalf and Sauroman
It's Saruman.
If you're going to karma-whore for LotR, at least due it the justice of spelling the names right.
Exit stage left...
So it should be unusually straightforward to track down who's behind the exploits -- just follow the money trail
I've been saying this for years about spam, corporate fraud, political corruption, and any number of unwanted irritations in society. No one's ever going to follow the money trail. The money trail is good for the economy. Attempting to hamper business by restricting the money trail makes you a terrorist... yadda yadda yadda.
It's amazing. Get a room full of politicians and ask,"Which one of you has ever voted for a pork spending bill?" They'll all look around as if they have no idea what is being asked yet, at the end of the year, we can find billions of dollars appropriated to pet projects or to contracts which directly benefit the politician, their family, or their friends disproportionately from the benefit received by other citizens.
Follow the money trail? If you keep following that money trail, you'll find it leads to harassment and ostricision. You don't want to be a terrorist do you? Just be a good little citizen and let the proper authorities handle this sort of stuff. Microsoft has already pledged millions to crack down on security.
See...? This is a perfect example of what we can expect to see more of when wifi connections blanket all cities. More ACs oozing this filth as they troll through the message boards. This isn't about security. This is about the quality of the signal on the network.
No. Pass a federal law to ban integrated wifi networks altogether. If there's a chance that we can keep more people like this from getting on the network then I will be much happier.
This is why we have firewalls -- to ignore packets not of interest.
/." If there's a greater chance that they don't have network access, then I'm happy. A blanket wifi solution would take away any remote chance at that happiness.
This isn't about security. This isn't even about ghettos. I'm talking all sorts of peopoe, clean, dirty, rich, poor, tall, short, thin, fat... there are all sorts of people that I see that I say,"Wow. I really hope I never have to get trolled by THEM on
I didn't, and you're right. That means this is more like a new football or baseball stadium. It's taxpayer subsidized but the profits belong exclusively to the company...
Sure... but do you really want EVERY individual in your neighborhood to have network access? When I go to the store, or to the mall, or to the pub, I run into all sorts of people that, honestly, I do not want to meet on my network.
I've had a revelation and changed my mind about this topic. We should pass a federal law banning integrated wifi networks altogether.
WHY?
Because I was making a biscuit and some tomato sauce and cheese (basically really fluffy pizza), and I thought,"If those shmucks can't afford internet access in their home, do I really want them on my network? As much as I'd like to be able to check my e-mail from anywhere, it's not worth it to give public network access to every idiot in the world."
I'm wondering why it hasn't been done already. We can buy wifi aps. It's easy to weatherproof them in a rubbermaid tub. Weld/bolt the weatherproof box to the top of a telephone in each local block. Configure the subnets, and go. It'd be a perfect automated ISP.
If it hasn't been done already I'd say the corps are dragging their feet to milk traditional ISPs for all they're worth. Bills like this only seek to inhibit a people which is finally saying,"We've had enough of this already!"
Typically, though, I'd agree with you. I think the government should set this service up and then have a contract to turn it over to a private company in less than one year. How low would it take to set up those wifi aps on telephone poles and configure the network? Properly planned it could be deployed within 3 months.
As if we needed another example of how corporations like innovation only when they are profiting from it
Oooooh! Online registration.
You'll never find a device driver or get a technical support person as fast as they can kill your ability to play a video game these days.
I don't see any reason why the government should take a bunch of money out of my pocket to do a lousy job at providing a service that private industry could do
At least this time they would be doing something that you know about, so you could guestimate about what it would cost in equipment and administration to put it all together. It's just aps and routers. Access would be open if all the residents were on it so there'd be no need for encryption any stronger than what you use with a standard ISP. You would know if and when you were getting fleeced and you could contact your politicians properly about it.
Oh wait. Your politicians don't want you to bother them if you're right. Strike everything I've said...
"Heaven forbid that you ask us, your politicians, to take on a task which we know is full well within the capabilities of individual citizens and the private industry. We wouldn't want to waste your taxpayer money by administering this service through the government. We have public health care to think about!."
If ever there was a law that should be repealed preemptively, it's this one. As things are the law will go into effect, it will never be repealed, and wifi networks will cost easily 10x what they should, even considering gov't bloat and favoritism in contract bidding models.
You're no scientist.
NEWS ALERT: After decades of studies and research economists agree, the US has the largest economy
That is observation and numerically factual.
because it's based on a free market (even with all the regulations).
That is opinion and an interpretation of the data.
Welcome to real life.
Because there's no logical reason to think that software companies spend money on anti-piracy just so that they can piss off users. What do they get out of it? Hint: it has something to do with piracy.
Just like there's no logical reason that a politician would support a pork bill. It's obvious why they're supporting a bad policy: there's something in it for them. What is that something? Who knows? It's not our job to make money for Valve but it's certain that they have it figured out. I feel that it's part of a larger push to make the public comfortable with complete online verification, and to sway opinion against the open source community which has a reputation for not being concerned with registration systems.
Many of us simply do not believe that software sharing is a bad thing, and we reject EULAs and all attempts to assert control over software after it has been sold into our possession. If you don't like it, you're free to not sell it to me.