Filesystems change, and the fundamental nature of how our computers boot is always up for grabs. If there's no maintainer I don't think that it will remain viable for all that long.
I don't think that's going to stop people from cord-cutting though. I have probably 30 channels or subchannels with OTA DTV, including older TV shows and older movies. There's plenty to watch for free.
I actually like physical media for old TV. If there's a technical problem I can probably still watch them and if I know I'm going somewhere that I'll be without service I can watch them if I take them along or rip them to file.
If you don't contribute to their ratings then they get cancelled, even if they're funded. Funding can be withdrawn and applied to other programs, leaving a TV series orphaned without a resolution.
The drying cycle takes the longest, is of variable length, and has a buzzer that works if I'm in the house but not so well if I'm outside or in the workshop.
The wash cycle takes longer than 24 minutes. It's timing is based on the load size and the wash setting, ie, how dirty the clothes are going in. It's relatively easy to start the wash cycle, forget that there's something in there, and only remember a couple of hours later. That's why I want some kind of notification.
Microsoft eventually merged the consumer and business operating systems, but I think they missed a real opportunity. Windows 2000 should have been that merge point. Millennium never should have happened, and Windows 2000 should have had the functionality that was eventually put into XP, but with the less annoying multicolor taskbar.
Yep. 111-11111111 or something like that actually worked. There were other variants that were easy to remember at-the-time too.
Of course, that was back before every OS phoned-home or required registration, so it didn't matter if everyone on the planet used the same key. I suspect that Microsoft didn't make it hard because while piracy hurt their short-term bottom-lines it fostered a culture used to using Windows even though there were, at the time, several other choices, so those kids using Windows 95 continued on to become computing professionals that used the NT-based products at work when again, there were other options available.
While you're not going to stop the extralegal beat-the-password-out-of-you vector, if you're not one of the few-hundred people on the planet that have been pushed that direction, right now in the United States there's no requirement to surrender passwords. Currently in the 11th circuit the court has found that the Fifth Amendment prohibits the requirement to produce passwords, and the rest of the circuits are not as yet ruled. Should there be conflicting rulings this would find its way to the Supreme Court. One would hope that they too would not require passwords to be produced as a matter of privacy, but until that time it's simply not settled.
You are correct that it's much more likely that this AP will be up-to-date, but there still isn't exactly good precedent for devices running Google's OSes being updated like they should be, or for features to not become abandoned when their backend cloud-side stuff is written out from underneath. It might be up-to-date, or it might be abandoned and the few owners left to their own devices.
'cause I have all kinds of things that I deal with on a daily basis on my network. HVAC EMS controllers, freezer/fridge temp monitors, security access controllers, cameras, signboards, just to name what I can think of off of the top of my head.
The common thread among these things is that they're all based on communication being useful or essential before the medium is decided upon. It's useful for commercial freezers to alert when the temps approach the liquid point of water. It's useful for HVAC temperature programming to change when building use schedules change. It's useful for a central directory services system to authenticate keycard door access. It's useful to update the marquee sign from any PC with the right software and credentials as opposed to having to go out there with a ladder or to even be restricted to a single PC with a serial link.
I want the Internet of Things to tell me that the clothes wash cycle or dry cycle has completed, so I can be out in the workshop while laundry is being cleaned or dried. I want the yard sprinkler controller to alert me when it goes into 'rain' mode and pauses watering the yard so I would have the option to override if I choose to do so, and when it comes out of rain mode.
It doesn't have to be complicated, which is why most corporate approaches are wrong, they needlessly complicate it when simple notifications are all we need.
That actually is a good approach when it comes to meeting people.
Look at the population of a given society and its wealth/income. It's a curve, with more people toward the lower-end of the spectrum. If one wants to function in circles among more people, one's behavior needs to relate and be relatable to those people. On the other hand, there are people that one probably doesn't want to associate with down in that end because they're physical risks or mooches. At the other end there are fewer people, but those people understand the nature of the money and how it applies. The dangerous people there are those that promise to do good for you with your money, but essentially use legal means to steal it.
This is essentially the same kind of problem that the United Kingdom's Prince William had, and there was a lot of time spent courting Ms. Middleton before their marriage. She came from a family that had some wealth, so there was an understanding of money, and my guess is that there was a whole lot of vetting on his side of her side before his side would bless the marriage. They also met in college, which is a very good place for people from disparate backgrounds that otherwise may have something in common to get to know each other, where wealth or the lack of it may not matter as much.
Back to the subject of this discussion, he can either not disclose his money (the approach of the character Tom Bookman had in How To Marry A Millionaire) and court without getting into the details until the relationship seems to be working, assuming that his tastes are still affordably reasonable to the average person so his extreme wealth is not obvious, or he can look for 'society' circles to try to operate in, hoping that despite the smaller candidate pool that he finds people to interact with that he likes, and women that aren't out-for or uncomfortable-with his money. The former is difficult to do because if anyone learns of the wealth the game in that particular scene is up, but being wealthy, it's not hard to stop and start again elsewhere. The latter is hard because there could be a lot of boorish people or a lot of gold-diggers even among the already wealthy.
The problem is the cost per item. This is more than just a subsidy, it's simply paying for getting the entire job done and if that were the case, why doesn't the government just contract that job out.
No matter what the Federal government does, someone will be dissatisfied with the result...
- Contract to a big existing player like Century Link where CL owns the resulting network, see the arguments we see now about federal dollars being wasted on the profits of private companies
- Contract a big player to build-out the Government's infrastructure, find complaints that the Government shouldn't be in the telco business, and that the Government could spy, and is playing favorites with the big player
- Contract to a smaller company to build-out, complaints that the smaller entity doesn't have the technical expertise to get the job done
- Build it out where the government acts as the prime contractor and subs-out the discrete jobs directly - accusations of Socialism
May as well go with a company that at least has a chance of knowing what they're doing. Century Link is by no means my favorite, but they're not Comcast either.
Generally in economies of scale, the greater the scale of production the less per-unit the cost to assemble, assuming that the manufacturing facilities are running efficiently and aren't idled due to a lack of orders.
That's why Mr. Musk's "Gigafactory" is such a big deal; if quality batteries can be produced on a massive scale and for less money per-unit, suddenly it makes using batteries for general-purpose applications more affordable. You might see racks upon racks of lead-acid batteries providing infrastructure support for telco rooms be replaced with smaller, longer-lived Lithium-Ion batteries, you might find homes receive whole-house battery backups because they're relatively maintenance-free and are easier to work with than Group-27 batteries that look more at home under the hood of a car.
That's my entire point. Until they're actually using the aircraft for combat we won't know how they truly perform. Hell, until they're engaging targets they don't know how they'll use the aircraft, how they'll patrol, what kind of approach they have to take to the target to blow the hell out of it without taking fire, etc. I'm not optimistic about the F-35, but I'm also not even a pilot, let alone a military pilot.
Google's services are very much about communicating back with Google's servers. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this service is any different until we hear otherwise.
If all of our stuff is going to be networked, having us be the gatekeepers for our own security is paramount.
Because you can't design something intended to be remotely accessible and not expect there is a likelihood of someone else being able to access it.
The problem is there's currently no model of security that works for nontechnical users that doesn't involve an outside party. As long as there's an outside party there's a vector of exploit, even if it's simply the field service consultant jotting-down the passwords and keeping his notes as he leaves.
What we need is a standard that allows for local-control to the exclusion of the original vendor or manufacturer for those of us that are capable of managing our own devices, while allowing nontechnical owner-users to use that vendor-provided support if they're unable or unwilling to do it themselves or to pay someone else to set it up privately. Right now we're not seeing that, and consuming these made-for-marketing brochures won't show us that even if the local-control aspect did exist.
In large installations it's common to use layer 3 switches instead of routers at the service entrance simply because they're going to distribute to remote telecom closets, so it's more cost-effective to enter into an L3 switch through a routed port, then leave the switch through the trunked fiber ports for the various remote closets. Otherwise they'd have to leave the L3 router for an L2 fiber distribution switch, to then leave through the trunked fiber ports.
Granted, these are for campuses that have leased lines back to the central office so they're not live on the Internet and they don't have to have the same service entrance security as an Internet-facing router.
The F-35 will simply require different doctrine than the A-10. I really like the A-10, and it's apparently very good for the morale of the ground troops to whom it's providing support, but that's in-part because it's a known quantity to them. Right now the F-35 is unknown to them and to us; there aren't that many people that know how operates in these quarters and I would not be surprised if its procedures and doctrine are still evolving. Hopefully it won't be as poorly performing as Vietnam-era fighters lacking machine guns were, but we'll just have to see how things turn out.
Honestly I expect that such tests would simply be engage-the-target timed tests, with each aircraft loitering in its traditional way at a rough predetermined distance from the target. If time to reach the target is the primary criteria I expect the F-35 to win simply because as an air-to-air jet it's faster.
Every time I grow concerned that I've gone from skeptic to cynic something inevitably vindicates my position.
This situation with Mr. Assange is strange enough that I'm simply going to watch what happens. I also have a hard time believing that there is no way for him to leave the Embassy if Ecuador wanted to get him out of the Embassy. I have no doubt that they have either diplomatic means to move him or they have the ability to smuggle him in a way that the Brits could not investigate without causing a major diplomatic incident. If that's true then a lot of what we're seeing is theatrics on both sides.
It depends on how rural they're expected to go. It's not exactly cheap to upgrade infrastructure that's probably PTSN or at most ISDN, and service providers have not done so because it will literally cost them more to do the install than they can guarantee they'll make back out of it. There's still a lot of copper backbone out there, with the associated problems that old copper has with corrosion and other line degredation that can be worked around with voice (anyone remember pair gain?) but will play havoc on any sort of high-speed data.
I don't think that those that live in rural areas don't deserve to have Internet access, but everywhere we live we make trade-offs. I have to put up with high property costs (relatively speaking), pollution in several forms, traffic, restrictions on the kinds of things I'm allowed to do on my property and in the surrounding area, and being forced to interact with others. On the other hand I get inexpensive shopping, relatively short travel distances, numerous entertainment options, and access to infrastructure and utilities that require a certain minimum density to have.
Those that live in rural areas generally have more peace and quiet, less traffic, less pollution, fewer rules on property use and other activities, and lower property costs, but have longer drives, more expensive shopping, more expensive or nonexistent utilities or infrastructure, and less in the way of entertainment choices. Them's the breaks. That's also why we have taxes that pay for infrastructure in rural areas, like roads, power distribution (yes, the electrification of rural America was subsidized), telephone, mail, and depending on the area sanitation and water. Even with those subsidies there will still be a dearth of some services though.
Only character that I would like to use on Slashdot that doesn't work is the Degree symbol, Alt-248. Even then I can work around that without major problems.
That only works if the instructor specifically makes a point of ridiculing the use of the specific buzzwords.
Part of the trouble that I've observed in groups is that at least a slight majority of the group will go with the slickest, most optimistic presentation or performer and will be taken-in to agree even when they either have no understanding of what's going on. These same people will often accept buzzwords despite there already being generic terms for what's described. Worse, after drinking the kool-aid these people get upset if one attempts to correct the misconception.
I would like to see real studies on the effects of the EM spectrum, but such studies would be extremely hard to perform given both the lack of controls with everything else being equal, and given that the ramp-up of the use of radio in general has been slow and steady as opposed to instantly punctuated.
Slashdot Mirror
Filesystems change, and the fundamental nature of how our computers boot is always up for grabs. If there's no maintainer I don't think that it will remain viable for all that long.
I don't think that's going to stop people from cord-cutting though. I have probably 30 channels or subchannels with OTA DTV, including older TV shows and older movies. There's plenty to watch for free.
I actually like physical media for old TV. If there's a technical problem I can probably still watch them and if I know I'm going somewhere that I'll be without service I can watch them if I take them along or rip them to file.
If you don't contribute to their ratings then they get cancelled, even if they're funded. Funding can be withdrawn and applied to other programs, leaving a TV series orphaned without a resolution.
The drying cycle takes the longest, is of variable length, and has a buzzer that works if I'm in the house but not so well if I'm outside or in the workshop.
The wash cycle takes longer than 24 minutes. It's timing is based on the load size and the wash setting, ie, how dirty the clothes are going in. It's relatively easy to start the wash cycle, forget that there's something in there, and only remember a couple of hours later. That's why I want some kind of notification.
Microsoft eventually merged the consumer and business operating systems, but I think they missed a real opportunity. Windows 2000 should have been that merge point. Millennium never should have happened, and Windows 2000 should have had the functionality that was eventually put into XP, but with the less annoying multicolor taskbar.
Yep. 111-11111111 or something like that actually worked. There were other variants that were easy to remember at-the-time too.
Of course, that was back before every OS phoned-home or required registration, so it didn't matter if everyone on the planet used the same key. I suspect that Microsoft didn't make it hard because while piracy hurt their short-term bottom-lines it fostered a culture used to using Windows even though there were, at the time, several other choices, so those kids using Windows 95 continued on to become computing professionals that used the NT-based products at work when again, there were other options available.
While you're not going to stop the extralegal beat-the-password-out-of-you vector, if you're not one of the few-hundred people on the planet that have been pushed that direction, right now in the United States there's no requirement to surrender passwords. Currently in the 11th circuit the court has found that the Fifth Amendment prohibits the requirement to produce passwords, and the rest of the circuits are not as yet ruled. Should there be conflicting rulings this would find its way to the Supreme Court. One would hope that they too would not require passwords to be produced as a matter of privacy, but until that time it's simply not settled.
You are correct that it's much more likely that this AP will be up-to-date, but there still isn't exactly good precedent for devices running Google's OSes being updated like they should be, or for features to not become abandoned when their backend cloud-side stuff is written out from underneath. It might be up-to-date, or it might be abandoned and the few owners left to their own devices.
Define "things".
'cause I have all kinds of things that I deal with on a daily basis on my network. HVAC EMS controllers, freezer/fridge temp monitors, security access controllers, cameras, signboards, just to name what I can think of off of the top of my head.
The common thread among these things is that they're all based on communication being useful or essential before the medium is decided upon. It's useful for commercial freezers to alert when the temps approach the liquid point of water. It's useful for HVAC temperature programming to change when building use schedules change. It's useful for a central directory services system to authenticate keycard door access. It's useful to update the marquee sign from any PC with the right software and credentials as opposed to having to go out there with a ladder or to even be restricted to a single PC with a serial link.
I want the Internet of Things to tell me that the clothes wash cycle or dry cycle has completed, so I can be out in the workshop while laundry is being cleaned or dried. I want the yard sprinkler controller to alert me when it goes into 'rain' mode and pauses watering the yard so I would have the option to override if I choose to do so, and when it comes out of rain mode.
It doesn't have to be complicated, which is why most corporate approaches are wrong, they needlessly complicate it when simple notifications are all we need.
Floating off the coast of Florida right now, waiting for another attempt to land on it.
That actually is a good approach when it comes to meeting people.
Look at the population of a given society and its wealth/income. It's a curve, with more people toward the lower-end of the spectrum. If one wants to function in circles among more people, one's behavior needs to relate and be relatable to those people. On the other hand, there are people that one probably doesn't want to associate with down in that end because they're physical risks or mooches. At the other end there are fewer people, but those people understand the nature of the money and how it applies. The dangerous people there are those that promise to do good for you with your money, but essentially use legal means to steal it.
This is essentially the same kind of problem that the United Kingdom's Prince William had, and there was a lot of time spent courting Ms. Middleton before their marriage. She came from a family that had some wealth, so there was an understanding of money, and my guess is that there was a whole lot of vetting on his side of her side before his side would bless the marriage. They also met in college, which is a very good place for people from disparate backgrounds that otherwise may have something in common to get to know each other, where wealth or the lack of it may not matter as much.
Back to the subject of this discussion, he can either not disclose his money (the approach of the character Tom Bookman had in How To Marry A Millionaire) and court without getting into the details until the relationship seems to be working, assuming that his tastes are still affordably reasonable to the average person so his extreme wealth is not obvious, or he can look for 'society' circles to try to operate in, hoping that despite the smaller candidate pool that he finds people to interact with that he likes, and women that aren't out-for or uncomfortable-with his money. The former is difficult to do because if anyone learns of the wealth the game in that particular scene is up, but being wealthy, it's not hard to stop and start again elsewhere. The latter is hard because there could be a lot of boorish people or a lot of gold-diggers even among the already wealthy.
The problem is the cost per item. This is more than just a subsidy, it's simply paying for getting the entire job done and if that were the case, why doesn't the government just contract that job out.
No matter what the Federal government does, someone will be dissatisfied with the result...
May as well go with a company that at least has a chance of knowing what they're doing. Century Link is by no means my favorite, but they're not Comcast either.
Generally in economies of scale, the greater the scale of production the less per-unit the cost to assemble, assuming that the manufacturing facilities are running efficiently and aren't idled due to a lack of orders.
That's why Mr. Musk's "Gigafactory" is such a big deal; if quality batteries can be produced on a massive scale and for less money per-unit, suddenly it makes using batteries for general-purpose applications more affordable. You might see racks upon racks of lead-acid batteries providing infrastructure support for telco rooms be replaced with smaller, longer-lived Lithium-Ion batteries, you might find homes receive whole-house battery backups because they're relatively maintenance-free and are easier to work with than Group-27 batteries that look more at home under the hood of a car.
That's my entire point. Until they're actually using the aircraft for combat we won't know how they truly perform. Hell, until they're engaging targets they don't know how they'll use the aircraft, how they'll patrol, what kind of approach they have to take to the target to blow the hell out of it without taking fire, etc. I'm not optimistic about the F-35, but I'm also not even a pilot, let alone a military pilot.
Google's services are very much about communicating back with Google's servers. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this service is any different until we hear otherwise.
If all of our stuff is going to be networked, having us be the gatekeepers for our own security is paramount.
Because you can't design something intended to be remotely accessible and not expect there is a likelihood of someone else being able to access it.
The problem is there's currently no model of security that works for nontechnical users that doesn't involve an outside party. As long as there's an outside party there's a vector of exploit, even if it's simply the field service consultant jotting-down the passwords and keeping his notes as he leaves.
What we need is a standard that allows for local-control to the exclusion of the original vendor or manufacturer for those of us that are capable of managing our own devices, while allowing nontechnical owner-users to use that vendor-provided support if they're unable or unwilling to do it themselves or to pay someone else to set it up privately. Right now we're not seeing that, and consuming these made-for-marketing brochures won't show us that even if the local-control aspect did exist.
In large installations it's common to use layer 3 switches instead of routers at the service entrance simply because they're going to distribute to remote telecom closets, so it's more cost-effective to enter into an L3 switch through a routed port, then leave the switch through the trunked fiber ports for the various remote closets. Otherwise they'd have to leave the L3 router for an L2 fiber distribution switch, to then leave through the trunked fiber ports.
Granted, these are for campuses that have leased lines back to the central office so they're not live on the Internet and they don't have to have the same service entrance security as an Internet-facing router.
It's not much of a router if it only has 2 ports.
My Cisco 2821 router has only two Ethernet ports. It routes packets just fine.
The F-35 will simply require different doctrine than the A-10. I really like the A-10, and it's apparently very good for the morale of the ground troops to whom it's providing support, but that's in-part because it's a known quantity to them. Right now the F-35 is unknown to them and to us; there aren't that many people that know how operates in these quarters and I would not be surprised if its procedures and doctrine are still evolving. Hopefully it won't be as poorly performing as Vietnam-era fighters lacking machine guns were, but we'll just have to see how things turn out.
Honestly I expect that such tests would simply be engage-the-target timed tests, with each aircraft loitering in its traditional way at a rough predetermined distance from the target. If time to reach the target is the primary criteria I expect the F-35 to win simply because as an air-to-air jet it's faster.
That's what he wants you to believe.
Every time I grow concerned that I've gone from skeptic to cynic something inevitably vindicates my position.
This situation with Mr. Assange is strange enough that I'm simply going to watch what happens. I also have a hard time believing that there is no way for him to leave the Embassy if Ecuador wanted to get him out of the Embassy. I have no doubt that they have either diplomatic means to move him or they have the ability to smuggle him in a way that the Brits could not investigate without causing a major diplomatic incident. If that's true then a lot of what we're seeing is theatrics on both sides.
It depends on how rural they're expected to go. It's not exactly cheap to upgrade infrastructure that's probably PTSN or at most ISDN, and service providers have not done so because it will literally cost them more to do the install than they can guarantee they'll make back out of it. There's still a lot of copper backbone out there, with the associated problems that old copper has with corrosion and other line degredation that can be worked around with voice (anyone remember pair gain?) but will play havoc on any sort of high-speed data.
I don't think that those that live in rural areas don't deserve to have Internet access, but everywhere we live we make trade-offs. I have to put up with high property costs (relatively speaking), pollution in several forms, traffic, restrictions on the kinds of things I'm allowed to do on my property and in the surrounding area, and being forced to interact with others. On the other hand I get inexpensive shopping, relatively short travel distances, numerous entertainment options, and access to infrastructure and utilities that require a certain minimum density to have.
Those that live in rural areas generally have more peace and quiet, less traffic, less pollution, fewer rules on property use and other activities, and lower property costs, but have longer drives, more expensive shopping, more expensive or nonexistent utilities or infrastructure, and less in the way of entertainment choices. Them's the breaks. That's also why we have taxes that pay for infrastructure in rural areas, like roads, power distribution (yes, the electrification of rural America was subsidized), telephone, mail, and depending on the area sanitation and water. Even with those subsidies there will still be a dearth of some services though.
Only character that I would like to use on Slashdot that doesn't work is the Degree symbol, Alt-248. Even then I can work around that without major problems.
That only works if the instructor specifically makes a point of ridiculing the use of the specific buzzwords.
Part of the trouble that I've observed in groups is that at least a slight majority of the group will go with the slickest, most optimistic presentation or performer and will be taken-in to agree even when they either have no understanding of what's going on. These same people will often accept buzzwords despite there already being generic terms for what's described. Worse, after drinking the kool-aid these people get upset if one attempts to correct the misconception.
Sounds like they're allergic to going in to work.
I would like to see real studies on the effects of the EM spectrum, but such studies would be extremely hard to perform given both the lack of controls with everything else being equal, and given that the ramp-up of the use of radio in general has been slow and steady as opposed to instantly punctuated.