1. Response time is only a small part of the equation.
2. It's not all about what YOU want.
It's a matter of public health - if self driving cars will save lives, they should be required. Just like vaccines. Of course, there will be the anti-robot-cars movement, but they'll have to stay on private property with their old fashioned manually driving cars -- with steering wheels if you can imagine such a thing! How quaint!
No human-driven car that was legally licensed to be used on the road will ever be forced to not be used on the road.
I know someone with a 1911 EMF. It's still licensed to drive. It has no seatbelts, no turn signals, no cornering lamps, no highway headlights, it's basically as close as one can get to a horseless-carriage after the true automobile as invented. Despite these deficiencies by modern standards, so long as it meets the standards that were required of-it when it was made it will be allowed on the road.
Governments in this country do not force noncommercial vehicles out-of-service so long as they meet the requirements as-set when they were made. To do otherwise would hurt those that can least-afford new vehicles, and would face an additional barrier in the automotive enthusiast. Auto enthusiasts have been very succesful in actually pushing the other direction, they've gotten emissions and safety laws loosened over the years, especially on older vehicles.
If you attempt to push an agenda against human-driven cars you will probably find that a large portion of the 75% referenced in the article pushing back, and those overwhelming numbers will set your cause back by decades. You're better off just waiting-out until there simply aren't very many human-driven cars on the roads anymore, just like there aren't very many 1911 EMFs on the road anymore either.
The FBI should copy the contents of the storage medium to another storage medium and attempt to brute-force it. That's what the lawmaker is saying in a nutshell. This lawmaker is actually making our case, that it's not Apple or any other vendor's job to break their own security, that it's the investigating agency's job to essentially prove its case by doing that work itself. Stop attacking the person actually trying to help by nitpicking what they say.
Even if ads were hosted on the same server of the website, and were as little as a simple jpg, people would still block them. Tracking/malware etc are just scare tactics, the real issue is people just want stuff for free.
I block ads for two interrelated reasons. First, they do something to my computer that is more than an in-line image on a web page. Second, they're visually obnoxious and make the site that I'm trying to visit unusable.
I can accept ads that are a simple still-image or simple animated image in-line on the page. The image needs to not detract from the use of the page. The image needs to not cause some kind of epileptic fit. The image needs to have content that is suitable for the site on which it is displayed and for a reasonable expectation of the age of the average user of the page.
I will not accept ads with sound, ads that hover-over content, ads that block access to content until active user-action, ads that require a significant time-delay before allowing access to content, ads that spawn a new window or tab, ads that use excessive animation, ads that resize the browser window, ads that use high-speed high-contrast color swapping, ads that are wholly inappropriate for the content of a website, ads that install anything on my computer, or ads that linger past the display of the web page on which they are associated.
I will accept ads that are essentially the electronic equivalent of newspaper ads. Those are acceptable. Those are really the only kind that are acceptable. Early-on I allowed ads. then ads started hijacking my browser, and eventually ad-delivered malware through a site that required the use of IE broke the DNS on a particular computer, and I decided that from that point forth I was not going to allow any Internet-based ads until they fixed the problem. They have not fixed the problem so I still do not allow ads.
I'm curious of the makeup of the group now. As someone tasked with fixing technology I know that it doesn't usuall fail unless it's actually in-service, and the more cutting-edge and the more pressed for service it is, the more likely it is to fail when it's needed most.
You can't get a hundred people out of a burning building by having each of them screaming at the others to shut up and follow.
No, but you can get yourself out by looking for those legally required "EXIT->" signs that are supposed to be posted, and by remembering how you got into the building in the first place and any other obvious exits that you saw along the way.
If I'm in an emergency I concern myself with my loved-ones and myself first. If I still have ability/opportunity/time I may concern myself with anyone else. After all, if I don't concern myself with me, then I'm not going to be a lot of good for anyone else either.
Today, people who don't own a car and/or don't want to drive just take a taxi or Uber. If they buy a self-driving car instead, how does that lead to more trips and more pollution?
If one doesn't have to drive one's self to work then one might be inclined to take a job with a much longer commute-time because that time could be spent doing something else while being conveyed to work.
Hell, at my salaried job, legally I have to be here six hours a day even though they strongly encourage everyone to work their eight+. If I have an hour-commute one-way, and if I can do actual productive work during that hour to-the-office and the hour from-the-office and would not be needed in the office itself the whole eight hours, I could both shorten my leave-to-return day *and* travel much farther in order to go to work. That extra time in-vehicle would be consuming energy, and depending on what supplies that energy it would be more pollution.
WEP does not prevent people from reading traffic. WEP is broken to the point that it can be decrypted with a userland program that merely has to be run. It's harder to actually capture network traffic than it is to break WEP.
Otherwise I would agree, provisionally, with your statement. Making the traffic hard to view is normally good enough for the vast majority of cases, it doesn't hve to be impossible to view. The problem though, like the aforementioned WEP example, is when the tools to break that weak encryption become automated user processes that don't even need technical expertise. It's one thing if someone has to fire-up a bunch of cloud-hosted virtual machines or has to build a significant box full of GPUs to break a password after several weeks or months of effort, but if their tablet or smartphone can run software that exploits a fundamental flaw in the encryption itself such then clearly weak encryption is not useful.
You mean, not everyone in the country understands the technical aspects of encryption, how that encryption is used, how backdoors cause exploits that are not limited to 'authorized' users, and how their right to privacy and security in their papers and effects are affected by those kinds of backdoors?
I've been acquainted with lots of men that haven't pushed for more because they're concerned about losing it if something goes badly, and I've known women that have used charm and charisma in addition to their mental faculties to advance to the bleeding-edge of their career capabilities.
This is all anecdotal, there's no hard-fast rule here.
Actually yes. Not Florida specifically, but having extra body fat offers no biological advantage in a warm environment compared to a cold environment, all other things being equal.
On the flip side, extra body fat can be advantageous in cold climates. The person with extra body fat may survive more comfortably in lower temperatures, or it might be the difference between living and dying if it's sufficiently cold.
Not eBay, but browsing TVs on Craigslist I once saw an ad for a very, very large tube TV that had a reflection of a naked woman on the glass. Given what the TV was priced-at it was probably prostitution using the sale of a useless TV as cover.
I can't even think of a way to check the gender of the merchant.
When I buy something on eBay I'm looking at item condition, item price, shipping price, sometimes originating location, and if there are any glaring negative reviews of the seller. I can't think of any circumstances in which I've not made a purchase based on the seller's username.
I don't see how women are making less than men on eBay transactions specifically because of gender.
That's commercially available. There was a box-set that had at least two versions of the film, including the original theatrical release and the stock footage of the mountains that was borrowed from The Shining.
I have a Laserdisc set too, The problem is that because its a 2.35:1 image matted onto a 4:3 frame, the actual content uses a pathetically small number of rows. I had done the math and it was something like 200 rows out of the ~480 because of the letterboxing.
Getting the Olympics is a winning proposition less than 50% of the time. It costs more to put on the olympics than the revenues from them. It only financially works if the facilities are used after the Olympics are over, which means that the facilities have to be built well enough to stand for decades, which means that they cost even more to build. There are lot more Sarajevos than there are Lake Placids.
I don't think it's practical to get rid of lasers capable of being used to harass pilots. There are too many products with lasers in them and too many applications for handheld lasers for that to work.
Could a windshield be designed with polarization that mitigates the laser? If the problem of laser usage can't be avoided, maybe its effect can be mitigated through technology.
Those are my thoughts too. Hell, it would be possible with a Lunar base to have both an Earth-based rescue vehicle on standby, waiting to be fueled similar to how ICBMs were/are kept on standby, and given the proximity and the Moon and the relatively small amount of fuel needed to reach it compared to Mars, it would probably be feasible to place emergency escape vehicles and fueling equipment on the Moon so that a lunar base could be evacuated quickly.
I'm betting that those that are good for the Navy's Submarine Service would also have a good chance. Being locked in one metal tube for months on-end versus being locked in another metal tube for months on-end, plus having an elevated amount of responsibility and the ever-present risk that an otherwise-small problem having drastic consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
disc and disk are used to describe a flat cylinder. That's where the terms originated.
1. Response time is only a small part of the equation. 2. It's not all about what YOU want.
It's a matter of public health - if self driving cars will save lives, they should be required. Just like vaccines. Of course, there will be the anti-robot-cars movement, but they'll have to stay on private property with their old fashioned manually driving cars -- with steering wheels if you can imagine such a thing! How quaint!
No human-driven car that was legally licensed to be used on the road will ever be forced to not be used on the road.
I know someone with a 1911 EMF. It's still licensed to drive. It has no seatbelts, no turn signals, no cornering lamps, no highway headlights, it's basically as close as one can get to a horseless-carriage after the true automobile as invented. Despite these deficiencies by modern standards, so long as it meets the standards that were required of-it when it was made it will be allowed on the road.
Governments in this country do not force noncommercial vehicles out-of-service so long as they meet the requirements as-set when they were made. To do otherwise would hurt those that can least-afford new vehicles, and would face an additional barrier in the automotive enthusiast. Auto enthusiasts have been very succesful in actually pushing the other direction, they've gotten emissions and safety laws loosened over the years, especially on older vehicles.
If you attempt to push an agenda against human-driven cars you will probably find that a large portion of the 75% referenced in the article pushing back, and those overwhelming numbers will set your cause back by decades. You're better off just waiting-out until there simply aren't very many human-driven cars on the roads anymore, just like there aren't very many 1911 EMFs on the road anymore either.
Now you're just being pedantic.
The FBI should copy the contents of the storage medium to another storage medium and attempt to brute-force it. That's what the lawmaker is saying in a nutshell. This lawmaker is actually making our case, that it's not Apple or any other vendor's job to break their own security, that it's the investigating agency's job to essentially prove its case by doing that work itself. Stop attacking the person actually trying to help by nitpicking what they say.
Even if ads were hosted on the same server of the website, and were as little as a simple jpg, people would still block them. Tracking/malware etc are just scare tactics, the real issue is people just want stuff for free.
I block ads for two interrelated reasons. First, they do something to my computer that is more than an in-line image on a web page. Second, they're visually obnoxious and make the site that I'm trying to visit unusable.
I can accept ads that are a simple still-image or simple animated image in-line on the page. The image needs to not detract from the use of the page. The image needs to not cause some kind of epileptic fit. The image needs to have content that is suitable for the site on which it is displayed and for a reasonable expectation of the age of the average user of the page.
I will not accept ads with sound, ads that hover-over content, ads that block access to content until active user-action, ads that require a significant time-delay before allowing access to content, ads that spawn a new window or tab, ads that use excessive animation, ads that resize the browser window, ads that use high-speed high-contrast color swapping, ads that are wholly inappropriate for the content of a website, ads that install anything on my computer, or ads that linger past the display of the web page on which they are associated.
I will accept ads that are essentially the electronic equivalent of newspaper ads. Those are acceptable. Those are really the only kind that are acceptable. Early-on I allowed ads. then ads started hijacking my browser, and eventually ad-delivered malware through a site that required the use of IE broke the DNS on a particular computer, and I decided that from that point forth I was not going to allow any Internet-based ads until they fixed the problem. They have not fixed the problem so I still do not allow ads.
I'm curious of the makeup of the group now. As someone tasked with fixing technology I know that it doesn't usuall fail unless it's actually in-service, and the more cutting-edge and the more pressed for service it is, the more likely it is to fail when it's needed most.
You can't get a hundred people out of a burning building by having each of them screaming at the others to shut up and follow.
No, but you can get yourself out by looking for those legally required "EXIT->" signs that are supposed to be posted, and by remembering how you got into the building in the first place and any other obvious exits that you saw along the way.
If I'm in an emergency I concern myself with my loved-ones and myself first. If I still have ability/opportunity/time I may concern myself with anyone else. After all, if I don't concern myself with me, then I'm not going to be a lot of good for anyone else either.
Today, people who don't own a car and/or don't want to drive just take a taxi or Uber. If they buy a self-driving car instead, how does that lead to more trips and more pollution?
If one doesn't have to drive one's self to work then one might be inclined to take a job with a much longer commute-time because that time could be spent doing something else while being conveyed to work.
Hell, at my salaried job, legally I have to be here six hours a day even though they strongly encourage everyone to work their eight+. If I have an hour-commute one-way, and if I can do actual productive work during that hour to-the-office and the hour from-the-office and would not be needed in the office itself the whole eight hours, I could both shorten my leave-to-return day *and* travel much farther in order to go to work. That extra time in-vehicle would be consuming energy, and depending on what supplies that energy it would be more pollution.
Circuses are only good if you've already had enough bread to sate your hunger.
No! Stop! Don't say his name two more times! We don't want to summon him!
My point is that the effort to read WEP traffic is almost nil. The effort to capture packets and interpret them is greater.
Or to put it another way, if they're coming equipped to capture your traffic, WEP is absolutely no barrier whatsoever.
WEP does not prevent people from reading traffic. WEP is broken to the point that it can be decrypted with a userland program that merely has to be run. It's harder to actually capture network traffic than it is to break WEP.
Otherwise I would agree, provisionally, with your statement. Making the traffic hard to view is normally good enough for the vast majority of cases, it doesn't hve to be impossible to view. The problem though, like the aforementioned WEP example, is when the tools to break that weak encryption become automated user processes that don't even need technical expertise. It's one thing if someone has to fire-up a bunch of cloud-hosted virtual machines or has to build a significant box full of GPUs to break a password after several weeks or months of effort, but if their tablet or smartphone can run software that exploits a fundamental flaw in the encryption itself such then clearly weak encryption is not useful.
You mean, not everyone in the country understands the technical aspects of encryption, how that encryption is used, how backdoors cause exploits that are not limited to 'authorized' users, and how their right to privacy and security in their papers and effects are affected by those kinds of backdoors?
What are they teaching in these civics classes?
I've been acquainted with lots of men that haven't pushed for more because they're concerned about losing it if something goes badly, and I've known women that have used charm and charisma in addition to their mental faculties to advance to the bleeding-edge of their career capabilities.
This is all anecdotal, there's no hard-fast rule here.
Sounds to me like she was an auto mechanic in a previous life...
That would be Dogecoin actually.
Actually yes. Not Florida specifically, but having extra body fat offers no biological advantage in a warm environment compared to a cold environment, all other things being equal.
On the flip side, extra body fat can be advantageous in cold climates. The person with extra body fat may survive more comfortably in lower temperatures, or it might be the difference between living and dying if it's sufficiently cold.
Not eBay, but browsing TVs on Craigslist I once saw an ad for a very, very large tube TV that had a reflection of a naked woman on the glass. Given what the TV was priced-at it was probably prostitution using the sale of a useless TV as cover.
I can't even think of a way to check the gender of the merchant.
When I buy something on eBay I'm looking at item condition, item price, shipping price, sometimes originating location, and if there are any glaring negative reviews of the seller. I can't think of any circumstances in which I've not made a purchase based on the seller's username.
I don't see how women are making less than men on eBay transactions specifically because of gender.
That's commercially available. There was a box-set that had at least two versions of the film, including the original theatrical release and the stock footage of the mountains that was borrowed from The Shining.
Im still waiting for the remastered Ewok movies and the remastered Holiday Special.
I have a Laserdisc set too, The problem is that because its a 2.35:1 image matted onto a 4:3 frame, the actual content uses a pathetically small number of rows. I had done the math and it was something like 200 rows out of the ~480 because of the letterboxing.
Stupid, no. The got the Olympics
Getting the Olympics is a winning proposition less than 50% of the time. It costs more to put on the olympics than the revenues from them. It only financially works if the facilities are used after the Olympics are over, which means that the facilities have to be built well enough to stand for decades, which means that they cost even more to build. There are lot more Sarajevos than there are Lake Placids.
I don't think it's practical to get rid of lasers capable of being used to harass pilots. There are too many products with lasers in them and too many applications for handheld lasers for that to work.
Could a windshield be designed with polarization that mitigates the laser? If the problem of laser usage can't be avoided, maybe its effect can be mitigated through technology.
Those are my thoughts too. Hell, it would be possible with a Lunar base to have both an Earth-based rescue vehicle on standby, waiting to be fueled similar to how ICBMs were/are kept on standby, and given the proximity and the Moon and the relatively small amount of fuel needed to reach it compared to Mars, it would probably be feasible to place emergency escape vehicles and fueling equipment on the Moon so that a lunar base could be evacuated quickly.
I'm betting that those that are good for the Navy's Submarine Service would also have a good chance. Being locked in one metal tube for months on-end versus being locked in another metal tube for months on-end, plus having an elevated amount of responsibility and the ever-present risk that an otherwise-small problem having drastic consequences.