You're right on saying that it's not because he's liberal or conservative, however clerking for someone doesn't automatically ascribe you to their political/judicial way of thinking. Rhenquist, not exactly a 9th circuit kinda judge, clerked for Robert Jackson, an FDR appointee. A SC clerkship is such a great job that you'd be a fool to reject it because you didn't always agree with legal decisions.
I also think this is an encouraging trend. That justices choose to surround themselves with people who will question their decisions rather than mindlessly pander to them is a trend I wish we could see in other branches of government. I doubt it though; try getting an internship with Bill Frist with recomendation letters from the ACLU.
That said don't expect someone who openly supported Edwards to be nominated by the same administration that nominated Miguel Estrada.
Maybe I'm missing what you're getting at, but the 802.11b definitions for channels aren't used by anything else, but the spectrums that they cover are still unregulated... which means that anything can use it.
Now if you're saying that you can't see those with a 802.11 aware device then yeah, but if I made some device that just broadcast randomness on the 2.4-2.5ghz range then that would interfere with all of those channels. It's also interesting to note that these ranges differ depending on the country. Japan's different than US/Canada.
The full ranges are in the kismet documentation if I remember correctly.
But the overlap is because the upper freqency for channel 1 is 2.423 while the lowest end for channel 6 is 2.426. 5 ranges from 2.421 to 2.443.
Still, the FCC doesn't have any say over what those channel mappings are; meaning that a cordless phone could easily interfere with those channels (and does).
I agree. I think it's a wired article that portrays him in less than favorable terms. The spin, on both sides, of this case is remarkable. It would be more so if it wasn't so common in these kinds of cases. We should be more careful however about making these guys into martyrs. IMHO there haven't been very honest accounts of this case outside of basic facts.
By "in the next few days" i think you mean to say, "back when the trial started"
There is no new evidence there ; the fbi already got their conviction and the author explains that he destroyed the originals. Also, i'm not sure of the arbitrary distinction between 'news' and 'web site'. It may be some justice department rhetoric but I'd want to see the case where a court substantially upheld a non-trivial difference between the two.
Ok this is getting old. Isn't it enough that every site on the internet feels the need to contribute its own april fools joke; slashdot has to do three dozen.
Just wait til someone puts an SCO article up. It'll be so bizzare nobody'll be able to figure out if it's real or not.
Re:great, let's shoot down another source
on
Usenet Audio
·
· Score: 1
yes i'm aware it's april fools btw, just to preempt any comments
great, let's shoot down another source
on
Usenet Audio
·
· Score: 2, Funny
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! this was the last domain that the plebian masses didn't know about. now they're goign to ruin hands down the best source out there.
napster was great and all but if your mom hadn't heard about it then we'd still be downloading from it.
Same thing happened to me, only with a laptop. I heard rumors that the screens are the real bottleneck in the supply chain. It took them nearly 5 weeks, but I wasn't disapointed once I got it.
That might be true if it was sitting idle, but you won't find any university with more than 100 users who don't have a pipe that's at full saturation. From experience, trust me.
Major university pipes are at near full saturation (95%), all of the time. Upstream is particularly bad. Downloads will ebb and flow, but in my experience upstream connections are overloaded to the point that there aren't any peaks and valleys anymore. Just loads and loads of traffic.
Not surprisingly bit torrent's is responsible for a large portion of it.
--"and every once in while I find myself in agreement with [Bill O'Reilly], like when he says the government should stay out of the bedroom, or when I'm drunk"--Al Franken
The 128 refers to the symmetrical encryption key that's used. SSL technically is a hybrid system, it uses public key, which is RSA, for the initial handshake, but it then uses RC4, AES, 3DES, blowfish, or whatever other symmetrical algorithm, for the rest of the transmission.
Public key involves coprime numbers (and the extreme difficulty in factoring them).
Symmetrical algorithms do not; they only require a key, hence the 128 bit key. Brute forcing a 128 bit key is computationally infeasible (that's an understatement), so you're right about it being in all practice, unbreakable.
SSL's real vulnerability is the public key infrastructure and the often poor implementations of it. The main holdout however is getting your key signed by a certificate authority (verisign, thwate, etc). I don't know any details but the posts would seem to suggest that plain-text isn't checked, or at least there's no popup warning.
This answer's probably longer than you wanted, but in principle ssl is cryptographically solid (to the extent of my understanding). Implementations are the problem.
Are you kidding? I work troubleshooting computers on a major college campus and I'd say there's some form of spy/adware on at least 90% of the machines I see. Dorms are by far the worst. Even people who are more adept than the average user seem to get it. Usually they call because their "computer is slow." I can't imagine how many people buy new computers because their old computer has "gotten slower."
Also, no one seems to realize they have to update adaware or spybot. They're using definitions from August and wonder why they're still getting popups. They usually conclude "the program just isn't very good." The same thing goes for virus scanners too.
Anybody who's designing a new system, whether security or UI, should spend a day looking at how most people use their computers. If you haven't, you might be surprised.
Like you say, lowered at most stores. My guess is these are retail discounts, not the label's decision to abandon their cartel. Even if they are decreasing prices (there's some indication they are) it doesn't change the fact that they settled for an amount substatially less than a judgement would have gotten. Lowering their prices doesn't absolve them of price fixing.
I have yet to find mention of this under MSFT finance news. I thought that apple'd do well when itunes was rumored to come out for windows, but the stock dropped the day after that rumor started circulating. I think that these issues have less salience with institutional investors than we'd all like to believe.
I love the idea but I worry about the first time someone commits some high profile crime from an unaccountable public network. Not that there's an inherent problem with anonymous networks, the contrary's probably more true. Still, there's less likely to be an outcry when it's small scale, or personal. A public internet in a major city means we place a lot of faith in the resolve of the courts to protect anonymity.
The real legal question that Kurzweil glosses over is equating thought to rights. Just because environmental artifacts receive legal protection, intelligent entities are not by default granted full legal rights. The long discussion about the distinction between suicide and removing life support is painfully premature in this case. There's no reason to believe that this convoluted area of law would be the relevant precedence either. If anything this body of law has more to fear from these kinds of questions than to inform them.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right on saying that it's not because he's liberal or conservative, however clerking for someone doesn't automatically ascribe you to their political/judicial way of thinking. Rhenquist, not exactly a 9th circuit kinda judge, clerked for Robert Jackson, an FDR appointee. A SC clerkship is such a great job that you'd be a fool to reject it because you didn't always agree with legal decisions.
I also think this is an encouraging trend. That justices choose to surround themselves with people who will question their decisions rather than mindlessly pander to them is a trend I wish we could see in other branches of government. I doubt it though; try getting an internship with Bill Frist with recomendation letters from the ACLU.
That said don't expect someone who openly supported Edwards to be nominated by the same administration that nominated Miguel Estrada.
Maybe I'm missing what you're getting at, but the 802.11b definitions for channels aren't used by anything else, but the spectrums that they cover are still unregulated... which means that anything can use it.
Now if you're saying that you can't see those with a 802.11 aware device then yeah, but if I made some device that just broadcast randomness on the 2.4-2.5ghz range then that would interfere with all of those channels. It's also interesting to note that these ranges differ depending on the country. Japan's different than US/Canada.
The full ranges are in the kismet documentation if I remember correctly.
But the overlap is because the upper freqency for channel 1 is 2.423 while the lowest end for channel 6 is 2.426. 5 ranges from 2.421 to 2.443.
Still, the FCC doesn't have any say over what those channel mappings are; meaning that a cordless phone could easily interfere with those channels (and does).
I agree. I think it's a wired article that portrays him in less than favorable terms. The spin, on both sides, of this case is remarkable. It would be more so if it wasn't so common in these kinds of cases. We should be more careful however about making these guys into martyrs. IMHO there haven't been very honest accounts of this case outside of basic facts.
or maybe the guy just rubs people the wrong way
By "in the next few days" i think you mean to say, "back when the trial started"
There is no new evidence there ; the fbi already got their conviction and the author explains that he destroyed the originals. Also, i'm not sure of the arbitrary distinction between 'news' and 'web site'. It may be some justice department rhetoric but I'd want to see the case where a court substantially upheld a non-trivial difference between the two.
-f not port 22
or something down those lines
Ok this is getting old. Isn't it enough that every site on the internet feels the need to contribute its own april fools joke; slashdot has to do three dozen.
Just wait til someone puts an SCO article up. It'll be so bizzare nobody'll be able to figure out if it's real or not.
yes i'm aware it's april fools btw, just to preempt any comments
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! this was the last domain that the plebian masses didn't know about. now they're goign to ruin hands down the best source out there.
napster was great and all but if your mom hadn't heard about it then we'd still be downloading from it.
Same thing happened to me, only with a laptop. I heard rumors that the screens are the real bottleneck in the supply chain. It took them nearly 5 weeks, but I wasn't disapointed once I got it.
That might be true if it was sitting idle, but you won't find any university with more than 100 users who don't have a pipe that's at full saturation. From experience, trust me.
Major university pipes are at near full saturation (95%), all of the time. Upstream is particularly bad. Downloads will ebb and flow, but in my experience upstream connections are overloaded to the point that there aren't any peaks and valleys anymore. Just loads and loads of traffic.
Not surprisingly bit torrent's is responsible for a large portion of it.
--"and every once in while I find myself in agreement with [Bill O'Reilly], like when he says the government should stay out of the bedroom, or when I'm drunk"--Al Franken
The 128 refers to the symmetrical encryption key that's used. SSL technically is a hybrid system, it uses public key, which is RSA, for the initial handshake, but it then uses RC4, AES, 3DES, blowfish, or whatever other symmetrical algorithm, for the rest of the transmission.
Public key involves coprime numbers (and the extreme difficulty in factoring them).
Symmetrical algorithms do not; they only require a key, hence the 128 bit key. Brute forcing a 128 bit key is computationally infeasible (that's an understatement), so you're right about it being in all practice, unbreakable.
SSL's real vulnerability is the public key infrastructure and the often poor implementations of it. The main holdout however is getting your key signed by a certificate authority (verisign, thwate, etc). I don't know any details but the posts would seem to suggest that plain-text isn't checked, or at least there's no popup warning.
This answer's probably longer than you wanted, but in principle ssl is cryptographically solid (to the extent of my understanding). Implementations are the problem.
Are you kidding? I work troubleshooting computers on a major college campus and I'd say there's some form of spy/adware on at least 90% of the machines I see. Dorms are by far the worst. Even people who are more adept than the average user seem to get it. Usually they call because their "computer is slow." I can't imagine how many people buy new computers because their old computer has "gotten slower."
Also, no one seems to realize they have to update adaware or spybot. They're using definitions from August and wonder why they're still getting popups. They usually conclude "the program just isn't very good." The same thing goes for virus scanners too.
Anybody who's designing a new system, whether security or UI, should spend a day looking at how most people use their computers. If you haven't, you might be surprised.
Like you say, lowered at most stores. My guess is these are retail discounts, not the label's decision to abandon their cartel. Even if they are decreasing prices (there's some indication they are) it doesn't change the fact that they settled for an amount substatially less than a judgement would have gotten. Lowering their prices doesn't absolve them of price fixing.
I have yet to find mention of this under MSFT finance news. I thought that apple'd do well when itunes was rumored to come out for windows, but the stock dropped the day after that rumor started circulating. I think that these issues have less salience with institutional investors than we'd all like to believe.
I love the idea but I worry about the first time someone commits some high profile crime from an unaccountable public network. Not that there's an inherent problem with anonymous networks, the contrary's probably more true. Still, there's less likely to be an outcry when it's small scale, or personal. A public internet in a major city means we place a lot of faith in the resolve of the courts to protect anonymity.
The real legal question that Kurzweil glosses over is equating thought to rights. Just because environmental artifacts receive legal protection, intelligent entities are not by default granted full legal rights. The long discussion about the distinction between suicide and removing life support is painfully premature in this case. There's no reason to believe that this convoluted area of law would be the relevant precedence either. If anything this body of law has more to fear from these kinds of questions than to inform them.