Thoroughly inspect and analyse source code {you may require expert assistance with this step}.
Build binary from source code.
Install the binary you just built yourself.
This way you can be certain that the package does what the source code says it will do. The trustworthiness of the package is dependent upon your own independent analysis of the source code.
The slightly less secure way:
Go to your OS distribution's home page.
Download binary package for your architecture.
Write down MD5 sum shown alongside package.
Compute MD5 sum of downloaded package.
If MD5s match, install binary package. Otherwise, notify your distribution's security team.
Note that this is presuming that your distributor has carried out the "most secure" method correctly. As a general rule, the better-known the distribution, the more trustworthy any packages are likely to be.
The not-at-all-secure way:
Go to some unknown random website.
Download binary package without MD5 sum.
Install and run binary package.
Of course, nobody would ever actually do it this way in real life.....
Ah, but I have a cunning plan to deal with that. Pop out the tray from the CD box. Remove the paper insert. Turn it inside out. Write on the former inside {which is now the outside} using ordinary pen. Reassemble box.
Also, the discs I use most often are always nearest to the player.....
Yes, I'm talking about the die-stamped labels that come in a pack with crappy Windoze software that probably infects your machine with spyware and adware on the way. I suspect that measuring the position of the labels on the page so as in order to use alternative software to print on them is technically a breach of the EULA; but (1) I never agreed to the EULA and (2) EULAs aren't legally enforceable.
Any non-round label applied off-centre is liable to shift the centre of mass. If the CoM is far enough away from the spindle, the disc will not spin evenly. This can lead to explosive failure at high speeds. Each turn stresses the disc more until a piece breaks off, worsening the imbalance. Total fragmentation follows. CD shards can be lethal, so absolutely do not try this at home. Giving someone you don't like very much a CD with a crack hidden by a paper label would be a highly dangerous and very irresponsible thing to do.
CDs are for listening to {if they contain music}, or backing up files to. They are not for looking at. DVDs arguably are for looking at, but only with the aid of a device {placeholder for robot joke}. I think I'll stick with my trusty OHP marker, if it's all the same to you guys. I don't need fancy gimmicks. In fact, most of the DVD+RWs I use with my TV recorder are totally unlabelled! I simply write the name of the film on the paper inlay, and never, ever take more than one disc at a time out of its box. For time-shifting regular programmes, I just use the same one disc over and over again..... I haven't yet run afoul of the limited-write thing.
Of course, if it's something special, then I'll add a self-adhesive paper label, printed separately using a template I knocked up in OpenOffice.org Draw. And given that printing the label is likely to be as expensive as burning the disc, I'm glad it's a separate process as this cuts down on muck-ups.
If it's the same copy protection they used on the Avril Lavigne CD ("Under My Skin" I think) then don't bother not buying it, because cdparanoia read that CD just fine. {In fact, I only bought that CD for the h4x0r 5k!llz challenge -- and I was so disappointed at not having to do any hard work, I forgot all about the CD. I guess the record company won that one. Funnily enough, it was the first Avril CD that had a copy-protection I really couldn't defeat: cellophane! Can't claim it's an unwanted gift / not been listened if the cellophane isn't intact.....} OTOH, buying it sort of sends out the wrong message. You might do better to shoplift the CD so at least the store don't get the money.
<germ of idea>Hey! What if everyone started actually physically stealing CDs rather than just copying them?</germ of idea> It might show the real extent of the problem. {Or it might just get us all arrested. But with enough of us on the inside, maybe we could make a difference.}
Anyway, the main point is that it's impossible for any kind of CD copy-prevention to work; and that is not a limitation of technology, but rather a limitation of the universe. Last time I checked, laws of physics couldn't be bought at any price.
The crucial point is that an encrypted message and the key that was originally encrypt it together don't prove squat. Because, if the recipient has the message and the key, then they could have written that message themself. You can prove that encrypted message C[A] was generated using key K[A]. But since the recipient has the key on their machine after they have received the message, then they could just as likely have generated that message themself. That's where the plausible deniability comes from. The recipient -- or anyone who has K[A], in fect the best thing to do with a used key is actually to make sure as many people as possible have it -- could have made the whole thing up as a sick joke, and it's mathematically impossible to prove they didn't do that.
There is, of course, a perfect alternative to GPS. That is the Ordnance Survey map and the Silva Compass, beloved of every scout and guide. Each on its own is a powerful weapon in the War On Getting Lost; but when you use them together {and especially if you add a Maglite torch} you can find your way from anywhere to anywhere. In a televised experiment, a driver equipped with map and compass managed to complete a treasure hunt-style course quicker than a driver with a GPS.
Of course, just to make things complicated, the "north" on the maps is not actually the same as either True North {where the North Pole is} or Magnetic North {where a compass needle points. Grid North was actually fixed at magnetic north many years ago}. You soon learn to correct for magnetic declination in your head and you'll generally be fine anyway as long as you take bearings often enough.
Mind, though, the way things are going, in ten years' time, kids probably won't know how to use a map and compass.....
My main printer is a HP Business Inkjet 1100. CUPS drivers are BSD-licenced {you can even comment-out the hardware-enforced cartridge expiry date}. It's kind of industrial, which I like; not quite up to the standards of the old HP, but better than most of Carly Fiorina's plasticky tat. Separate red, yellow, blue and extra-large black cartridges. USB and HP-proprietary interfaces {the latter accepting a converter for Centronics or Ethernet}. Duplexer {admittedly this isn't much good for photo printing, for obvious reasons}. Automatically determines what grade of paper is in use {spits more ink at photo paper than it does at typing paper}.
And it produces some of the most vibrant, lifelike prints I have ever seen coming out of a four-colour machine. Which is not bad for saying it only cost about as much as a few full sets of inks for most of the cheap crappy plasticky printers you can buy today!
Mind you, these days I tend to use my Palm or my notebook for displaying my photos. Although I will print a few of the absolute best shots from each memory card I fill, and hang them on the wall for awhile.
I'm just waiting for someone to make a little gadget with a row of memory card slots and a SCART cable, that plugs into a TV set and allows you to display your photos on that. {Many cheap, imported DVD players can do this, but require the photos to be on a CD rather than a memory card. They're multi-region too. Just don't connect them to a TV bigger than 35cm. or you'll be disappointed.}
Amen to that. And pay no mind to megapixels either. My own {admittedly unscientific, but I'm short-sighted which is like I see the world through a magnifying glass} measurements suggest that 4 pixels per mm. is the threshhold of discernibility. Even a VGA {640 x 480} print looks OK at postcard size {150mm. x 100mm.} The largest print you can reasonably get two of on an A4 page {allowing for margins and assuming a 4 x 3 aspect ratio à la 35mm. film} is 180mm. x 135mm. Any non-toy camera should have a resolution better than 720 x 540 {388800 pixels}. A 240mm. x 180mm. print from a 1 megapixel image will look fine.
A bad lens will mess up your pictures worse than insufficient resolution. So will a cheaply-made sensor: if the individual pixel sites on the chip are too small, then they cannot hold so much charge. The more charge a pixel can hold, the more light it takes to saturate it. The more light it takes to saturate it, the better the available contrast and the less likely you are to get pictures that look under- or over-exposed. My 1.92 megapixel Fuji 2800 has a good quality lens and a whacking huge image sensor; and it takes better pictures than any 4 megapixel camera you can buy today.
Look, I can sort of understand that space was a bit limited on the Mayflower, and that there were certain requirements that were, shall we say, rather more pressing than a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary.
But this is 2004, and there's no excuse anymore. OK? English is the language spoken in England. {Even the Taffs, the Paddies and the Jocks -- who are British but not English -- each have their own language [which almost certainly include disparaging words for English people], primarily so we don't have to talk to them.}
We really should have been a bit more Apache-like. You know -- if you want to make serious changes to the spelling or the grammar, you have to change the name of the language.
A "high street" is the main shopping street in a city. Usually characterised -- and high streets are full of character -- by buildings of different ages and styles, with combinations of backlit, neon, vinyl appliqué and hand-painted signs at slightly different heights, not to mention various exotic odours, each one competing for your undivided attention. A high street evolves continually over the years, as shops change hands, have re-fits, burn down, flood out, get rebuilt and so forth. Small independent and large national retailers jostle side by side, peddling an array of wares: there are necessarily variations from one town to another, but you might find a take-away food outlet next to an electrical appliance warehouse, an art gallery next to a motor factor or a café above a second-hand record shop. Often, unlicenced street vendors may be found {at least, till the Old Bill move them along}. Whereas a shopping centre is purpose-built, and each unit is designed to look just like the ones either side and opposite.
You can see an excellent example of each kind of shopping development in Lewisham.
If you want to talk of banning people from the Internet, I think it would be far more productive to ban anyone under the age of 18 from using the Internet.
..... which it actually does. The initial burst of "static" and the series of rising and falling pitches which follow are basically the modem's full repertoire of carrier signals. The modem on the other end picks one it recognises, and sends back a "ready" signal on that carrier. The first modem then either continues the conversation using that carrier frequency, or re-starts the negotiation. Unless both modems are programmed to retry indefinitely, one or the other will hang up on its own after too many abortive attempts.
Speed negotiation could be regarded as communication. You'd just have to hope that two people on the jury knew how a modem works.....
This is indeed a point. Why can't we simply set up and enforce "child-free zones"? I'm thinking simply of housing estates designed for adults only. Not just for paedophiles, but for paedophobes as well! There would be no schools, for instance, and certain "family friendly" measures would be waived {pr0n on low shelves! Beer in vending machines!} Residents would not be allowed to keep children in their homes, subject to criminal penalties. Landlords would be obliged to re-house you elsewhere -- or pay for corrective surgery -- if you fell pregnant.
It's not perfect; but then again, most thing aren't. We should try setting one up as an experiment.
..... which is why they should just freakin' legalise the stuff already. Get this: People do not generally commit crimes whilst under the influence of controlled substances. Most "drug-related crime" is just simple theft, committed by people seeking to obtain controlled substances -- which is expensive and awkward precisely because those substances are illegal {and therefore really should be referred to as "drug-prohibition-related crime"}. Heroin gives non-users the horrors, but it's actually quite a benign substance if it's pharmaceutical grade and if you can afford to feed your habit. A heroin habit is really no more likely to "spiral" out of control than a tobacco habit; most people could reach a comfortable level and regulate their dosage. Obstacles being unknown dosage due to unknown purity {which is only an issue in the first place because the stuff is illegal} and cost {a £10 wrap actually costs pennies to manufacture; but dealing with illegality adds costs right, left and centre}. The drug that is actually most likely to make people behave in an anti-social way is alcohol, which is legal {if you're eighteen, or in your own home, at any rate}. Adults should be trusted with the decision of what they put into their own bodies -- and it's up to them to deal with the consequences. Chocolate is harmful; but if you banned chocolate, people would still be making it, selling it and enjoying it. It'd just be more expensive and probably poorer quality.
But just you wait, because all the indications are that a real live decompiler is just around the corner. It will turn compiled object code into source code, although probably without the original variable and function names {Some compilers even leave the variable and function names in the code -- almost as though they want you to be able to decompile stuff!} Once all the extension modules are finished, you will even be able to decompile something originally written in C into BASIC.
And it will be the beginning of the end for closed source software -- not something I expect to be pretty by any stretch of the imagination, but something I think historians will later agree was very necessary in the long run.
as soon as the majority of the computing population begins to use Linux or some other variety of open source, that the assholes that create and release viruses and spyware/adware will start writing such things for Linux.
I'm not so sure this canard is true. Linux simply can't be subverted as readily as Windows. For a start, Linux has privilege separation running right through its core -- some tasks can only be performed as root. {Admittedly, Windows, in theory, has privilege separation; but 1. almost nobody uses it and 2. most things break if you do use it, so in practice it doesn't.} Working around this is just about possible, but it can be difficult -- it depends on exploiting badly-written software, which is ultimately an endangered species. A future hardware architecture may well incorporate hardware "root mode" protection -- a physical switch that must be operated before certain tasks can be performed. Linux users are also more likely than Windows users to take an attitude of "No source = No sale", and the source code is bound to advertise malicious intent.
the average person won't use Linux because they don't know how or want to recompile the kernel everytime they want to upgrade their video card.
According to NVidia, they can't release open source drivers right now because something upstream is someone else's protected IP. As soon as that information enters the public domain, which is Just A Matter Of Time, there will be open source drivers for NVidia. Also by that time, there will undoubtedly be a better automatic kernel configurator / compiler that the one we have today -- assuming we don't just say "sod compilers altogether" and move over to a 100% interpreted model for everything, which is also likely if CPU speeds keep increasing.
Yeah, but you might just as well syphon some fuel out of the tank of every car using your road and burn that.
Quick recap about energy:
Rule no. 1: Energy can never be created nor destroyed, it merely changes state.
Rule no. 2: Whenever energy changes state, there is always at least some heat on the "TO" side.
Rule no. 3: Apart from Rule 2, there is nothing at all to stop energy from changing state -- which it will do if it has to in order to keep the figures even.
Rule no. 4: Matter is really just a special kind of PE. It just doesn't tend to involve itself in cheap transactions.
Turning a generator with an electrical load on its output {meaning energy is changing state from spin KE in the armature to electrical energy in the circuit} requires more effort than turning the same generator with no electrical load {rule 1}. You can verify this experimentally using a bicycle generator. Prop up the bike wheel so it turns freely, engage the generator but disconnect the bulbs in both lights. Spin the wheel. Replace one of the bulbs. The wheel immediately slows down and stops. You just invented remote control braking! While the bulb is disconnected, the generator is turning KE into electricity, but nothing is happening to the electricity -- so it changes back to KE {rule 3}. Or it may never have changed to electricity in the first place, but there's absolutely no way to tell the difference. Rule 2 still holds either way. Friction is also turning KE into heat, so the wheel slows down eventually. When the bulb is connected, it begins changing electrical energy from the generator into heat and light; so the wheel loses KE {i.e., it slows down}.
The turbines on the central reservation impose a frictional drag, so the cars have to burn more fuel to reach a given speed than if the turbines were not there. It takes even more energy to power a load from them than just to move them round against their own friction {rules 1+3}, so the cars will have to burn more fuel when demand is heavy.
Something like this would be a good idea on the approach to an intersection or roundabout, where vehicles are wanting to slow down anyway; since that energy would just have ended up as heat otherwise. It would actually help cars slow down. But all along the roads -- no way!
Obviously. That was what Machiavelli had in mind when he wrote The Prince.
You really believe that someone with 15-20 years experience in IT, through changing technology, programming languages and management practices over the years, is suddenly unable to "move with the time" and will just sit there and say - oh well, I just don't get this "really hard" linux stuff.
No -- in fact, I'd say anyone who has used computers for more that ten years is going to be intimately familiar with command lines, and it's a fair bet that that experience includes some kind of Unix-like system.
Well, thanks, cause now I heading up my own IT company and trading on my 19 years experience.
Meanwhile the young guy is getting even further intrenched in the job cause he is now indespensible, gradually he will learn to make safe decisions that help maintain the bottom line (which he may well have reduce once a few years ago). Until one day - some snot nosed graduate comes along and.....
That problem is hardly unique to the IT sector. Ever met a university lecturer who imagines their students study only their subject? Or an engineer who imagines any technicians who are assigned to their projects are only working on their projects? I think it's a much deeper-running human problem, where something {don't ask me what, I'm not really a psychologist} causes us to switch over from an end-oriented view of a problem to a means-oriented view of the same problem.
Just change their job description under them, like it says {in very tiny print} in your company handbook that you reserve the right to do..... Learning how to use and admin a Linux system most certainly comes under the heading of "perform any other duties assigned to you by your manager". Then you aren't, strictly speaking, making them redundant -- and so don't need to provide a severance package. If they don't walk out of their own free will {which would negate any obligation on your part to provide anything more than a reference} but stay on and do particularly badly, then you can put them on verbal warning {then written warning, then final written warning} for incompetence. If it goes all the way to dismissal, you don't even need to provide them with a reference. At least, not one that will stand in their favour with future employers.....
If I were a company like AOL, and I wanted to put out "premium content" that only paying subscribers could access, I'd put it on its own subnet with my modem servers, on "unroutable" addresses; and make my own DNS entries that would not be exported to the root servers.
I also know exactly how that could be defeated.
If AOL now want to create access to "AOL-only" areas of the internet from machines that aren't directly on AOL's own little subnet, then they must be prepared that that content will not be restricted to AOL users only for much longer.
There is a replacement for MS Access, it's called phpMyAdmin. Any database used often enough and widely enough can have a dedicated frontend {PHP, Perl or Python} knocked up in an afternoon.
I have a Palm Tungsten E precisely because I did not wish to give money to Microsoft. It was very reliable. Too reliable in fact, and as a consequence I got sloppy with taking backups.
Then somehow I managed to do a factory reset, which lost me my data and my applications. Worst of all, the applications had been installed from my old Windows 98SE machine at work, which is no longer there. This means I am now going to have to find somebody who has a Windows PC {or a Mac?}, and get them to install the Palm stuff just to re-load my apps. {Unless someone knows of a bootable Windows CD, kind of like Slax but Windows-based?}
And this time, I will copy all my Palm applications to the memory card, then -- using my trusty slot reader -- archive them off, probably in the same place as my bz2 images of various size empty memory cards {IMLX using dd is the quickest way of formatting them}.
As an aside, I believe the newest member of the Tungsten family actually has a "drive mode" where it behaves more or less like a standard USB storage device. Long overdue IMHO {but I'm still not going to get this one, I'll get the next one which should answer some of the criticisms this one is bound to attract}. If only some device would emulate a USB-Ethernet adaptor, plugged into a computer with various servers such as HTTP, SSH and database.....
Slashdot Mirror
- Go to Firefox site.
- Download source tarball.
- Thoroughly inspect and analyse source code {you may require expert assistance with this step}.
- Build binary from source code.
- Install the binary you just built yourself.
This way you can be certain that the package does what the source code says it will do. The trustworthiness of the package is dependent upon your own independent analysis of the source code.The slightly less secure way:
- Go to your OS distribution's home page.
- Download binary package for your architecture.
- Write down MD5 sum shown alongside package.
- Compute MD5 sum of downloaded package.
- If MD5s match, install binary package. Otherwise, notify your distribution's security team.
Note that this is presuming that your distributor has carried out the "most secure" method correctly. As a general rule, the better-known the distribution, the more trustworthy any packages are likely to be.The not-at-all-secure way:
- Go to some unknown random website.
- Download binary package without MD5 sum.
- Install and run binary package.
Of course, nobody would ever actually do it this way in real lifeAh, but I have a cunning plan to deal with that. Pop out the tray from the CD box. Remove the paper insert. Turn it inside out. Write on the former inside {which is now the outside} using ordinary pen. Reassemble box.
.....
Also, the discs I use most often are always nearest to the player
Yes, I'm talking about the die-stamped labels that come in a pack with crappy Windoze software that probably infects your machine with spyware and adware on the way. I suspect that measuring the position of the labels on the page so as in order to use alternative software to print on them is technically a breach of the EULA; but (1) I never agreed to the EULA and (2) EULAs aren't legally enforceable.
Any non-round label applied off-centre is liable to shift the centre of mass. If the CoM is far enough away from the spindle, the disc will not spin evenly. This can lead to explosive failure at high speeds. Each turn stresses the disc more until a piece breaks off, worsening the imbalance. Total fragmentation follows. CD shards can be lethal, so absolutely do not try this at home. Giving someone you don't like very much a CD with a crack hidden by a paper label would be a highly dangerous and very irresponsible thing to do.
CDs are for listening to {if they contain music}, or backing up files to. They are not for looking at. DVDs arguably are for looking at, but only with the aid of a device {placeholder for robot joke}. I think I'll stick with my trusty OHP marker, if it's all the same to you guys. I don't need fancy gimmicks. In fact, most of the DVD+RWs I use with my TV recorder are totally unlabelled! I simply write the name of the film on the paper inlay, and never, ever take more than one disc at a time out of its box. For time-shifting regular programmes, I just use the same one disc over and over again ..... I haven't yet run afoul of the limited-write thing.
Of course, if it's something special, then I'll add a self-adhesive paper label, printed separately using a template I knocked up in OpenOffice.org Draw. And given that printing the label is likely to be as expensive as burning the disc, I'm glad it's a separate process as this cuts down on muck-ups.
If it's the same copy protection they used on the Avril Lavigne CD ("Under My Skin" I think) then don't bother not buying it, because cdparanoia read that CD just fine. {In fact, I only bought that CD for the h4x0r 5k!llz challenge -- and I was so disappointed at not having to do any hard work, I forgot all about the CD. I guess the record company won that one. Funnily enough, it was the first Avril CD that had a copy-protection I really couldn't defeat: cellophane! Can't claim it's an unwanted gift / not been listened if the cellophane isn't intact .....} OTOH, buying it sort of sends out the wrong message. You might do better to shoplift the CD so at least the store don't get the money.
<germ of idea>Hey! What if everyone started actually physically stealing CDs rather than just copying them?</germ of idea> It might show the real extent of the problem. {Or it might just get us all arrested. But with enough of us on the inside, maybe we could make a difference.}
Anyway, the main point is that it's impossible for any kind of CD copy-prevention to work; and that is not a limitation of technology, but rather a limitation of the universe. Last time I checked, laws of physics couldn't be bought at any price.
The crucial point is that an encrypted message and the key that was originally encrypt it together don't prove squat. Because, if the recipient has the message and the key, then they could have written that message themself. You can prove that encrypted message C[A] was generated using key K[A]. But since the recipient has the key on their machine after they have received the message, then they could just as likely have generated that message themself. That's where the plausible deniability comes from. The recipient -- or anyone who has K[A], in fect the best thing to do with a used key is actually to make sure as many people as possible have it -- could have made the whole thing up as a sick joke, and it's mathematically impossible to prove they didn't do that.
A supplier of vehicle spares: hoses, gaskets, anti-freeze, fuses, silencer repair tape, that sort of thing.
There is, of course, a perfect alternative to GPS. That is the Ordnance Survey map and the Silva Compass, beloved of every scout and guide. Each on its own is a powerful weapon in the War On Getting Lost; but when you use them together {and especially if you add a Maglite torch} you can find your way from anywhere to anywhere. In a televised experiment, a driver equipped with map and compass managed to complete a treasure hunt-style course quicker than a driver with a GPS.
.....
Of course, just to make things complicated, the "north" on the maps is not actually the same as either True North {where the North Pole is} or Magnetic North {where a compass needle points. Grid North was actually fixed at magnetic north many years ago}. You soon learn to correct for magnetic declination in your head and you'll generally be fine anyway as long as you take bearings often enough.
Mind, though, the way things are going, in ten years' time, kids probably won't know how to use a map and compass
My main printer is a HP Business Inkjet 1100. CUPS drivers are BSD-licenced {you can even comment-out the hardware-enforced cartridge expiry date}. It's kind of industrial, which I like; not quite up to the standards of the old HP, but better than most of Carly Fiorina's plasticky tat. Separate red, yellow, blue and extra-large black cartridges. USB and HP-proprietary interfaces {the latter accepting a converter for Centronics or Ethernet}. Duplexer {admittedly this isn't much good for photo printing, for obvious reasons}. Automatically determines what grade of paper is in use {spits more ink at photo paper than it does at typing paper}.
And it produces some of the most vibrant, lifelike prints I have ever seen coming out of a four-colour machine. Which is not bad for saying it only cost about as much as a few full sets of inks for most of the cheap crappy plasticky printers you can buy today!
Mind you, these days I tend to use my Palm or my notebook for displaying my photos. Although I will print a few of the absolute best shots from each memory card I fill, and hang them on the wall for awhile.
I'm just waiting for someone to make a little gadget with a row of memory card slots and a SCART cable, that plugs into a TV set and allows you to display your photos on that. {Many cheap, imported DVD players can do this, but require the photos to be on a CD rather than a memory card. They're multi-region too. Just don't connect them to a TV bigger than 35cm. or you'll be disappointed.}
Amen to that. And pay no mind to megapixels either. My own {admittedly unscientific, but I'm short-sighted which is like I see the world through a magnifying glass} measurements suggest that 4 pixels per mm. is the threshhold of discernibility. Even a VGA {640 x 480} print looks OK at postcard size {150mm. x 100mm.} The largest print you can reasonably get two of on an A4 page {allowing for margins and assuming a 4 x 3 aspect ratio à la 35mm. film} is 180mm. x 135mm. Any non-toy camera should have a resolution better than 720 x 540 {388800 pixels}. A 240mm. x 180mm. print from a 1 megapixel image will look fine.
A bad lens will mess up your pictures worse than insufficient resolution. So will a cheaply-made sensor: if the individual pixel sites on the chip are too small, then they cannot hold so much charge. The more charge a pixel can hold, the more light it takes to saturate it. The more light it takes to saturate it, the better the available contrast and the less likely you are to get pictures that look under- or over-exposed. My 1.92 megapixel Fuji 2800 has a good quality lens and a whacking huge image sensor; and it takes better pictures than any 4 megapixel camera you can buy today.
No it isn't.
Look, I can sort of understand that space was a bit limited on the Mayflower, and that there were certain requirements that were, shall we say, rather more pressing than a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary.
But this is 2004, and there's no excuse anymore. OK? English is the language spoken in England. {Even the Taffs, the Paddies and the Jocks -- who are British but not English -- each have their own language [which almost certainly include disparaging words for English people], primarily so we don't have to talk to them.}
We really should have been a bit more Apache-like. You know -- if you want to make serious changes to the spelling or the grammar, you have to change the name of the language.
A "high street" is the main shopping street in a city. Usually characterised -- and high streets are full of character -- by buildings of different ages and styles, with combinations of backlit, neon, vinyl appliqué and hand-painted signs at slightly different heights, not to mention various exotic odours, each one competing for your undivided attention. A high street evolves continually over the years, as shops change hands, have re-fits, burn down, flood out, get rebuilt and so forth. Small independent and large national retailers jostle side by side, peddling an array of wares: there are necessarily variations from one town to another, but you might find a take-away food outlet next to an electrical appliance warehouse, an art gallery next to a motor factor or a café above a second-hand record shop. Often, unlicenced street vendors may be found {at least, till the Old Bill move them along}. Whereas a shopping centre is purpose-built, and each unit is designed to look just like the ones either side and opposite.
You can see an excellent example of each kind of shopping development in Lewisham.
If you want to talk of banning people from the Internet, I think it would be far more productive to ban anyone under the age of 18 from using the Internet.
..... which it actually does. The initial burst of "static" and the series of rising and falling pitches which follow are basically the modem's full repertoire of carrier signals. The modem on the other end picks one it recognises, and sends back a "ready" signal on that carrier. The first modem then either continues the conversation using that carrier frequency, or re-starts the negotiation. Unless both modems are programmed to retry indefinitely, one or the other will hang up on its own after too many abortive attempts.
.....
Speed negotiation could be regarded as communication. You'd just have to hope that two people on the jury knew how a modem works
This is indeed a point. Why can't we simply set up and enforce "child-free zones"? I'm thinking simply of housing estates designed for adults only. Not just for paedophiles, but for paedophobes as well! There would be no schools, for instance, and certain "family friendly" measures would be waived {pr0n on low shelves! Beer in vending machines!} Residents would not be allowed to keep children in their homes, subject to criminal penalties. Landlords would be obliged to re-house you elsewhere -- or pay for corrective surgery -- if you fell pregnant.
It's not perfect; but then again, most thing aren't. We should try setting one up as an experiment.
..... which is why they should just freakin' legalise the stuff already. Get this: People do not generally commit crimes whilst under the influence of controlled substances. Most "drug-related crime" is just simple theft, committed by people seeking to obtain controlled substances -- which is expensive and awkward precisely because those substances are illegal {and therefore really should be referred to as "drug-prohibition-related crime"}. Heroin gives non-users the horrors, but it's actually quite a benign substance if it's pharmaceutical grade and if you can afford to feed your habit. A heroin habit is really no more likely to "spiral" out of control than a tobacco habit; most people could reach a comfortable level and regulate their dosage. Obstacles being unknown dosage due to unknown purity {which is only an issue in the first place because the stuff is illegal} and cost {a £10 wrap actually costs pennies to manufacture; but dealing with illegality adds costs right, left and centre}. The drug that is actually most likely to make people behave in an anti-social way is alcohol, which is legal {if you're eighteen, or in your own home, at any rate}. Adults should be trusted with the decision of what they put into their own bodies -- and it's up to them to deal with the consequences. Chocolate is harmful; but if you banned chocolate, people would still be making it, selling it and enjoying it. It'd just be more expensive and probably poorer quality.
Precisely.
But just you wait, because all the indications are that a real live decompiler is just around the corner. It will turn compiled object code into source code, although probably without the original variable and function names {Some compilers even leave the variable and function names in the code -- almost as though they want you to be able to decompile stuff!} Once all the extension modules are finished, you will even be able to decompile something originally written in C into BASIC.
And it will be the beginning of the end for closed source software -- not something I expect to be pretty by any stretch of the imagination, but something I think historians will later agree was very necessary in the long run.
Quick recap about energy: Turning a generator with an electrical load on its output {meaning energy is changing state from spin KE in the armature to electrical energy in the circuit} requires more effort than turning the same generator with no electrical load {rule 1}. You can verify this experimentally using a bicycle generator. Prop up the bike wheel so it turns freely, engage the generator but disconnect the bulbs in both lights. Spin the wheel. Replace one of the bulbs. The wheel immediately slows down and stops. You just invented remote control braking! While the bulb is disconnected, the generator is turning KE into electricity, but nothing is happening to the electricity -- so it changes back to KE {rule 3}. Or it may never have changed to electricity in the first place, but there's absolutely no way to tell the difference. Rule 2 still holds either way. Friction is also turning KE into heat, so the wheel slows down eventually. When the bulb is connected, it begins changing electrical energy from the generator into heat and light; so the wheel loses KE {i.e., it slows down}.
The turbines on the central reservation impose a frictional drag, so the cars have to burn more fuel to reach a given speed than if the turbines were not there. It takes even more energy to power a load from them than just to move them round against their own friction {rules 1+3}, so the cars will have to burn more fuel when demand is heavy.
Something like this would be a good idea on the approach to an intersection or roundabout, where vehicles are wanting to slow down anyway; since that energy would just have ended up as heat otherwise. It would actually help cars slow down. But all along the roads -- no way!
Just change their job description under them, like it says {in very tiny print} in your company handbook that you reserve the right to do ..... Learning how to use and admin a Linux system most certainly comes under the heading of "perform any other duties assigned to you by your manager". Then you aren't, strictly speaking, making them redundant -- and so don't need to provide a severance package. If they don't walk out of their own free will {which would negate any obligation on your part to provide anything more than a reference} but stay on and do particularly badly, then you can put them on verbal warning {then written warning, then final written warning} for incompetence. If it goes all the way to dismissal, you don't even need to provide them with a reference. At least, not one that will stand in their favour with future employers .....
If I were a company like AOL, and I wanted to put out "premium content" that only paying subscribers could access, I'd put it on its own subnet with my modem servers, on "unroutable" addresses; and make my own DNS entries that would not be exported to the root servers.
I also know exactly how that could be defeated.
If AOL now want to create access to "AOL-only" areas of the internet from machines that aren't directly on AOL's own little subnet, then they must be prepared that that content will not be restricted to AOL users only for much longer.
There is a replacement for MS Access, it's called phpMyAdmin. Any database used often enough and widely enough can have a dedicated frontend {PHP, Perl or Python} knocked up in an afternoon.
I have a Palm Tungsten E precisely because I did not wish to give money to Microsoft. It was very reliable. Too reliable in fact, and as a consequence I got sloppy with taking backups.
.....
Then somehow I managed to do a factory reset, which lost me my data and my applications. Worst of all, the applications had been installed from my old Windows 98SE machine at work, which is no longer there. This means I am now going to have to find somebody who has a Windows PC {or a Mac?}, and get them to install the Palm stuff just to re-load my apps. {Unless someone knows of a bootable Windows CD, kind of like Slax but Windows-based?}
And this time, I will copy all my Palm applications to the memory card, then -- using my trusty slot reader -- archive them off, probably in the same place as my bz2 images of various size empty memory cards {IMLX using dd is the quickest way of formatting them}.
As an aside, I believe the newest member of the Tungsten family actually has a "drive mode" where it behaves more or less like a standard USB storage device. Long overdue IMHO {but I'm still not going to get this one, I'll get the next one which should answer some of the criticisms this one is bound to attract}. If only some device would emulate a USB-Ethernet adaptor, plugged into a computer with various servers such as HTTP, SSH and database