I'm confused as to what DNS server these Belkin routers were originally pointed at. And why not using that DNS server has fixed the heartbeat ping issue.
In the future I expect more and more small businesses and boutiques.
Small businesses fail/close at an extremely high rate. It's something like 25% after 1 year and 50% after 4 years. After that, there's a roughly 5% attrition rate per year.
Of course, this varies by industry, but for the most part, it's +/- 5%. If you want exact numbers, you'd have to dig them up at SBA.gov
In two tense meetings last June and July [2013] the cabinet secretary, Jeremy Heywood, explicitly warned the Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, to return the Snowden documents.
Heywood, sent personally by David Cameron, told the editor to stop publishing articles based on leaked material from American's National Security Agency and GCHQ. At one point Heywood said: "We can do this nicely or we can go to law". He added: "A lot of people in government think you should be closed down."
I would no longer consider England a safe country to use as a backup for documents that the American government wants back.
Most of the accused "counterfeit" chips I've read about aren't "counterfeit" at all.
Please feel free to share what you've been reading.
The general term in the industry is "gray market"... gray because it's not purely black market, and because of the difficulty in distinguishing what the illegality is when a Chinese factory has substituted a working used part for an OEM part.
I'd like to know where you read that Chinese vendors have "substituted a working used part for an OEM part" Here's where I read that counterfeit chips are a problem:
Am I really the only one who looked at the actual FAA Directive?
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, and Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by testing reports on certain Honeywell phase 3 display units (DUs). These DUs exhibited susceptibility to radio frequency emissions in WiFi frequency bands at radiated power levels below the levels that the displays are required to tolerate for certification of WiFi system installations.
Clarification of Cause of Unsafe Condition The cause of the unsafe condition stated in the Discussion section of this AD is a known susceptibility of the Phase 3 DUs to RF transmissions inside and outside of the airplane. This susceptibility has been verified to exist in a range of RF spectrum (mobile satellite communications, cell phones, air surveillance and weather radar, and other systems), and is not limited to WiFi transmissions.
Request to Withdraw the NPRM (78 FR 58487, September 24, 2013) [Virgin Australia] VOZ stated that during testing of the WiFi inflight entertainment system on the VOZ Model 737NG fleet, it noted that the DU blanking occurred only when the WiFi radiated power source (set-up in the flight deck) was increased to a high level. VOZ also stated that under normal operating conditions of the WiFi radiated power, there was no blanking of the DU, but interference was present only at a certain frequency. [...]
Request to Disclose Underlying Data in Support of the NPRM (78 FR 58487,September 24, 2013)
[...]
The susceptibility of phase 3 DUs to RF transmissions was initially identified during a WiFi STC installation by an operator and a WiFi vendor and reported to the FAA. As a result of this discovery, we performed a risk assessment for in-service airplanes equipped with phase 3 DUs using our established COS process, which determined that an AD action was warranted for this issue. In addition, Boeing did an independent safety review and also determined that the DU blanking was a safety issue using its own risk assessment process.
I only got half way through the 23 page directive. Feel free to give it a full examination.
You can also use this as an opportunity to educate your customers. Start including text about 'why we are open' on the website and on the bug tracker. Maybe push it out with marketing materials.
The best sales pitch I ever got was while traveling overseas: "I'll rip you off, but not too much" He was honest that tourists don't get the best price and offered not to take too much advantage.
Software has bugs. Being honest about it can be part of the sales pitch.
This is the first of more than 60 coal-to-gas plants China wants to build, mostly in remote parts of the country where ethnic minorities have farmed and herded for centuries. Fired up in December, the multibillion-dollar plant bombards millions of tons of coal with water and heat to produce methane, which is piped to Beijing to generate electricity.
It's part of a controversial energy revolution China hopes will help it churn out desperately needed natural gas and electricity while cleaning up the toxic skies above the country's eastern cities. However, the plants will also release vast amounts of heat-trapping carbon dioxide, even as the world struggles to curb greenhouse gas emissions and stave off global warming.
If all of the plants start up, the carbon dioxide they'd release would equal three-quarters of all energy-related carbon emissions in the U.S., according to U.S. government data and energy experts from Duke and Stanford universities. That is far more than now produced in China by burning coal, the country's main source of power.
And the nuclear plants they have under construction will produce more power than the USA's (#1) and France's (#2) nuclear power combined. Yet they will still need all that dirty coal power to meet their energy demands.
Dude, you didn't even read the article you linked:
However, amid the renewed hype over the easily cracked code, a crucial element has been largely overlooked: Though the physical code preventing an unauthorized missile launch may have been all zeroes, the process of arming the actual nuclear warhead was much more involved, according to the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force. This is the seemingly made-for-Hollywood process involving the simultaneous turning of keys, "Emergency War Order" safes and verified launch codes, which presumably were not all zeros.
Why do the ISP's want to break net neutrality? It's related to an ongoing fight between Netflix and pretty much every ISP on earth.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the point of Net Neutrality. It's not just about the Netflix fight.
The biggest ISPs are increasingly turning into content providers and this puts them in direct competition with online service providers.
The idea behind Net Neutrality is to prevent these conglomerates from using their control of the network to either force payments from other companies (extracting rent from Netflix) or to force consumers into using co-branded offerings.
If you look at the wireless world, where the same rules don't apply, carriers are already taking money from other corporations to give you Facebook access (a co-branded offering) with no data charges.
Net Neutrality is fundamentally about preventing monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior. Just because a market is "free" does not magically make it competitive.
Search engines are absolutely awful at finding reviews. Try goggling "reviews for X", absolutely zero useful content.
Reviews for hotels (no parenthesis) brought up this slashdot article on the last page of google's (some results omitted) search results. Such is the power of/.
When you are looking at reviews of hotels or restaurants you have almost nothing to judge the comments against.
I think the idea is to tie their reviews into the larger ecosystem of online comments. So if they are assholes in the comments section of [online news article] and get downvoted, then that would be reflected in the data your site gets from the "third party reputation system." Then it's up to you how you want your site to weight their asshole behavior.
Ideally, this system would support one identification, but multiple user names, in the sense that I can be Bob on one website and Alice on another, but the reputation reflects all my online comments.
That said, while I see how it could be useful, I actually hate the idea. Having ALL my online comments concentrated in 1 easy to hack/subpoena place is discomfiting.
What? Obama's new wonder-plan is what TOOK AWAY our low deductible plan and forced us, for more money, to buy one that will cost us thousands more each year in premiums, and ten thousand more a year in deductibles.
The health law allowed plans that existed back in March 2010, when it became a law, to keep selling coverage. These are known as "grandfathered plans:" They don't meet the health law's requirements, but as long as they don't change much, insurers can keep offering them.
Insurance companies typically do like to change their insurance plans, making changes to cost-sharing or the benefits they offer. That means that grandfathered plans have disappeared. [...]
These cancellations are, essentially, a lot of grandfathered plans exiting the insurance marketplace. From an insurance company's vantage point, grandfathered plans are a bit of a dead end: They can't enroll new subscribers and are really constrained in their ability to tweak the benefit package or cost-sharing structure. There's not a whole lot of business sense, for a managed care company, in maintaining a health plan that doesn't meet the health law's new requirements.
The law took away your plan, only so far as your insurance company decided to get rid of it.
Because of how the math is working out, we're told to expect that next year's premiums will go up by another 45-55%. Thanks, Mr. Obamacare Cheerleader, if you're one of the people who helped to empower the people who snuck this 100% partisan monstrosity through congress on Pelosi's "deeming" technique. Thanks a lot.
In all seriousness, if the facts are as you claim, go to the media or write your congressman.
Fox News and Republican politicians have embarrassed themselves repeatedly by publicizing Obamacare horror stories that completely fall apart when verified. They'd love to have a solid example of someone who really did get shafted and can't get a lower cost plan.
P.S. You say "Were forced to go to a new plan," if you didn't go through the exchange, your insurance company may be the one shafting you.
Instead of your napkin calculations, maybe you should look for legitimate estimates. Here's the Congressional Budget Office: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45231
If you dig around some more, you'll find plenty of other people who have actually run the numbers and explained their forecasts.
In 2013, we saw the following rate increases due to Obamacare:
And if the insurance company doesn't spend 80% or 85% of those premiums on healthcare, they have to cut a check and return the excess to their customers. Thanks Obama!
Also, here's a fact check for your numbers: http://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/how-not-to-use-a-survey/ There's a link to the original survey in there. Four of fifty states had a sample size of 8 or greater. The other 46 states had sample sizes of 6 or less. There's either fuck all for competition in 46/50 states, or maybe the numbers you quoted aren't very useful for drawing conclusions.
Moreover the issue was always that USA people had control of the data: because Microsoft could access and retrieve the requested documents from a terminal within the United States, even though the actual search and retrieval would occur abroad, the data was still under Microsoftâ(TM)s control in the United States, and thus properly subject to the SCA warrant.
Microsoft USA has access to the data. Microsoft Ireland has control of the data.
If there's no distinction between access and control, then why bother with multinational subsidiaries?
"Alibaba -- open sesame. Alibaba -- 40 thieves," Ma said. "Alibaba is not a thief. Alibaba is a kind, smart business person, and he helped the village. So...easy to spell, and global know. Alibaba opens sesame for small- to medium-sized companies. We also registered the name AliMama, in case someone wants to marry us!"
Sometimes pages serves content from a different domain but that is rare enough to manage manually.
Not anymore. Far too many sites (/. included) have or use a CDN for content. And they will fetch at least half a dozen scripts for bookmarking/sharing with facebook/linkedin/tumblr/twitter/pinterest/googlehangouts/etc Then, they'll try and fetch a non-zero number of tracking/website monitoring scripts.
Governments' legitimate interest in regulation is in product safety and fraud prevention, not in deciding who gets to do business with whom and at what price.
That's a nice statement of "scope," to bad it completely ignores reality. Government (in most states) sets the prices for utilities. Government sets build out requirements for utilities. Government prevents discrimination in the offering of services. Government requires handicap accessibility in public accommodations. Government prevents excessive interest rates being charged on loans. I could go on.
Government has a legitimate interest in deciding who gets to do business with whom and at what price. Unless you want to abandon all the existing protections of the law, you might want to redefine what you consider to be the appropriate scope of government regulation.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm confused as to what DNS server these Belkin routers were originally pointed at.
And why not using that DNS server has fixed the heartbeat ping issue.
In the future I expect more and more small businesses and boutiques.
Small businesses fail/close at an extremely high rate.
It's something like 25% after 1 year and 50% after 4 years.
After that, there's a roughly 5% attrition rate per year.
Of course, this varies by industry, but for the most part, it's +/- 5%.
If you want exact numbers, you'd have to dig them up at SBA.gov
Your both wrong the democrats and the republicans are exactly the same. They are just two sides of a authoritarian expansionist kleptocratic coin.
Well the Democrats want it to be a gay authoritarian expansionist kleptocratic coin.
So that's a small difference.
When something is actually secure,
That's like saying "when we have world peace."
Programmers make coding mistakes. It is inevitable.
Even the best coding techniques can only reduce errors, not stop them completely.
Footage released of Guardian editors destroying Snowden hard drives
In two tense meetings last June and July [2013] the cabinet secretary, Jeremy Heywood, explicitly warned the Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, to return the Snowden documents.
Heywood, sent personally by David Cameron, told the editor to stop publishing articles based on leaked material from American's National Security Agency and GCHQ. At one point Heywood said: "We can do this nicely or we can go to law". He added: "A lot of people in government think you should be closed down."
I would no longer consider England a safe country to use as a backup for documents that the American government wants back.
Most of the accused "counterfeit" chips I've read about aren't "counterfeit" at all.
Please feel free to share what you've been reading.
The general term in the industry is "gray market"... gray because it's not purely black market, and because of the difficulty in distinguishing what the illegality is when a Chinese factory has substituted a working used part for an OEM part.
I'd like to know where you read that Chinese vendors have "substituted a working used part for an OEM part"
Here's where I read that counterfeit chips are a problem:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/11/25/1940247/man-pleads-guilty-to-selling-fake-chips-to-us-navy
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/11/09/0255231/us-military-trying-to-weed-out-counterfeit-parts
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/03/29/0038231/gao-sting-finds-more-fake-military-parts-from-china
Polite language: red herring
Otherwise: I call BullShite
Am I really the only one who looked at the actual FAA Directive?
SUMMARY:
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing
Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, and
Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by testing reports on certain Honeywell
phase 3 display units (DUs). These DUs exhibited susceptibility
to radio frequency emissions in WiFi
frequency bands at radiated power levels below the levels that the
displays are required to tolerate for certification of WiFi system installations.
Clarification of Cause of Unsafe Condition
The cause of the unsafe condition stated in the Discussion section of this AD is a
known susceptibility of the Phase 3 DUs to RF transmissions inside and outside of the
airplane. This susceptibility has been verified to exist in a range of RF spectrum (mobile
satellite communications, cell phones, air surveillance and
weather radar, and other systems), and is not limited to WiFi transmissions.
Request to Withdraw the NPRM
(78 FR 58487, September 24, 2013)
[Virgin Australia] VOZ stated that during testing of the WiFi inflight entertainment system on the
VOZ Model 737NG fleet, it noted that the DU blanking occurred only when the WiFi
radiated power source (set-up in the flight deck) was increased to a high level. VOZ also
stated that under normal operating conditions of the WiFi radiated power, there was no
blanking of the DU, but interference was present only at a certain frequency. [...]
Request to Disclose Underlying Data
in Support of the NPRM (78 FR 58487,September 24, 2013)
[...]
The susceptibility of phase 3 DUs to RF transmissions was initially identified
during a WiFi STC installation by an operator and a WiFi vendor and reported to the
FAA. As a result of this discovery, we performed a risk assessment for in-service
airplanes equipped with phase 3 DUs using our established COS process, which
determined that an AD action was warranted for this issue. In addition, Boeing did an
independent safety review and also determined that the DU blanking was a safety issue
using its own risk assessment process.
I only got half way through the 23 page directive.
Feel free to give it a full examination.
They're not skipping a version number.
Windows 9 is basically going to be a Service Pack for Windows 8.
Confirmed: Windows 9 to be a free upgrade for Windows 8 users
Releasing Win10 so quickly supports the idea that Win9 is just an update.
Win10 is really what they want all the Win7 users to move to.
Stop with the search engine, its alexa rank is ten fold lower than yahoo and its results are worse than awful.
Heh.
Yahoo Search has been Powered by Bing (TM) since 2011.
It will remain Powered by Bing (TM) until 2021.
/Yahoo's advertising is also done through Microsoft's Bing Ads.
You can also use this as an opportunity to educate your customers.
Start including text about 'why we are open' on the website and on the bug tracker.
Maybe push it out with marketing materials.
The best sales pitch I ever got was while traveling overseas: "I'll rip you off, but not too much"
He was honest that tourists don't get the best price and offered not to take too much advantage.
Software has bugs. Being honest about it can be part of the sales pitch.
The UK press release is more informative.
https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/40912.wss
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/uk/en/pressrelease/44972.wss
There's also a video of a TED@IBM talk (which I haven't watched)
http://fora.tv/2014/09/23/Solving_the_Energy_Crisis_One_Sunflower_at_a_Time
China is kicking the worlds ass when it comes to clean air generation progress.
China is moving its dirty coal burning plants away from the cities, not getting rid of them
Coal gas boom in China holds climate change risks
This is the first of more than 60 coal-to-gas plants China wants to build, mostly in remote parts of the country where ethnic minorities have farmed and herded for centuries. Fired up in December, the multibillion-dollar plant bombards millions of tons of coal with water and heat to produce methane, which is piped to Beijing to generate electricity.
It's part of a controversial energy revolution China hopes will help it churn out desperately needed natural gas and electricity while cleaning up the toxic skies above the country's eastern cities. However, the plants will also release vast amounts of heat-trapping carbon dioxide, even as the world struggles to curb greenhouse gas emissions and stave off global warming.
If all of the plants start up, the carbon dioxide they'd release would equal three-quarters of all energy-related carbon emissions in the U.S., according to U.S. government data and energy experts from Duke and Stanford universities. That is far more than now produced in China by burning coal, the country's main source of power.
And the nuclear plants they have under construction will produce more power than the USA's (#1) and France's (#2) nuclear power combined.
Yet they will still need all that dirty coal power to meet their energy demands.
Dude, you didn't even read the article you linked:
However, amid the renewed hype over the easily cracked code, a crucial element has been largely overlooked: Though the physical code preventing an unauthorized missile launch may have been all zeroes, the process of arming the actual nuclear warhead was much more involved, according to the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force. This is the seemingly made-for-Hollywood process involving the simultaneous turning of keys, "Emergency War Order" safes and verified launch codes, which presumably were not all zeros.
An unarmed missile is barely a dirty bomb.
Why do the ISP's want to break net neutrality? It's related to an ongoing fight between Netflix and pretty much every ISP on earth.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the point of Net Neutrality.
It's not just about the Netflix fight.
The biggest ISPs are increasingly turning into content providers and this puts them in direct competition with online service providers.
The idea behind Net Neutrality is to prevent these conglomerates from using their control of the network to either force payments from other companies (extracting rent from Netflix) or to force consumers into using co-branded offerings.
If you look at the wireless world, where the same rules don't apply, carriers are already taking money from other corporations to give you Facebook access (a co-branded offering) with no data charges.
Net Neutrality is fundamentally about preventing monopolistic and anti-competitive behavior.
Just because a market is "free" does not magically make it competitive.
Search engines are absolutely awful at finding reviews. Try goggling "reviews for X", absolutely zero useful content.
Reviews for hotels (no parenthesis) brought up this slashdot article on the last page of google's (some results omitted) search results. /.
Such is the power of
When you are looking at reviews of hotels or restaurants you have almost nothing to judge the comments against.
I think the idea is to tie their reviews into the larger ecosystem of online comments.
So if they are assholes in the comments section of [online news article] and get downvoted,
then that would be reflected in the data your site gets from the "third party reputation system."
Then it's up to you how you want your site to weight their asshole behavior.
Ideally, this system would support one identification, but multiple user names,
in the sense that I can be Bob on one website and Alice on another,
but the reputation reflects all my online comments.
That said, while I see how it could be useful, I actually hate the idea.
Having ALL my online comments concentrated in 1 easy to hack/subpoena place is discomfiting.
What? Obama's new wonder-plan is what TOOK AWAY our low deductible plan and forced us, for more money, to buy one that will cost us thousands more each year in premiums, and ten thousand more a year in deductibles.
Here's a decent article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/29/this-is-why-obamacare-is-cancelling-some-peoples-insurance-plans/
The health law allowed plans that existed back in March 2010, when it became a law, to keep selling coverage. These are known as "grandfathered plans:" They don't meet the health law's requirements, but as long as they don't change much, insurers can keep offering them.
Insurance companies typically do like to change their insurance plans, making changes to cost-sharing or the benefits they offer. That means that grandfathered plans have disappeared. [...]
These cancellations are, essentially, a lot of grandfathered plans exiting the insurance marketplace. From an insurance company's vantage point, grandfathered plans are a bit of a dead end: They can't enroll new subscribers and are really constrained in their ability to tweak the benefit package or cost-sharing structure. There's not a whole lot of business sense, for a managed care company, in maintaining a health plan that doesn't meet the health law's new requirements.
The law took away your plan, only so far as your insurance company decided to get rid of it.
Because of how the math is working out, we're told to expect that next year's premiums will go up by another 45-55%. Thanks, Mr. Obamacare Cheerleader, if you're one of the people who helped to empower the people who snuck this 100% partisan monstrosity through congress on Pelosi's "deeming" technique. Thanks a lot.
In all seriousness, if the facts are as you claim, go to the media or write your congressman.
Fox News and Republican politicians have embarrassed themselves repeatedly by publicizing Obamacare horror stories that completely fall apart when verified.
They'd love to have a solid example of someone who really did get shafted and can't get a lower cost plan.
P.S. You say "Were forced to go to a new plan," if you didn't go through the exchange, your insurance company may be the one shafting you.
Let's assume
Instead of your napkin calculations, maybe you should look for legitimate estimates.
Here's the Congressional Budget Office: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45231
If you dig around some more, you'll find plenty of other people who have actually run the numbers and explained their forecasts.
In 2013, we saw the following rate increases due to Obamacare:
And if the insurance company doesn't spend 80% or 85% of those premiums on healthcare, they have to cut a check and return the excess to their customers.
Thanks Obama!
Also, here's a fact check for your numbers: http://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/how-not-to-use-a-survey/
There's a link to the original survey in there.
Four of fifty states had a sample size of 8 or greater.
The other 46 states had sample sizes of 6 or less.
There's either fuck all for competition in 46/50 states,
or maybe the numbers you quoted aren't very useful for drawing conclusions.
There are a lot of companies in addition to Apple that have a manufacturing infrastructure that would be hard for a startup to emulate.
The point is that Apple's design choices inspire people and those design choices are near impossible to emulate.
Illegal jammers.
It's only illegal if you can't get a waiver from the FCC
I imagine the Secret Service would have less trouble than most in getting permission.
Moreover the issue was always that USA people had control of the data: because Microsoft could access and retrieve the requested documents from a terminal within the United States, even though the actual search and retrieval would occur abroad, the data was still under Microsoftâ(TM)s control in the United States, and thus properly subject to the SCA warrant.
Microsoft USA has access to the data.
Microsoft Ireland has control of the data.
If there's no distinction between access and control, then why bother with multinational subsidiaries?
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/alibaba-chinese-company/story?id=25591454
"Alibaba -- open sesame. Alibaba -- 40 thieves," Ma said. "Alibaba is not a thief. Alibaba is a kind, smart business person, and he helped the village. So...easy to spell, and global know. Alibaba opens sesame for small- to medium-sized companies. We also registered the name AliMama, in case someone wants to marry us!"
Sometimes pages serves content from a different domain but that is rare enough to manage manually.
Not anymore.
Far too many sites (/. included) have or use a CDN for content.
And they will fetch at least half a dozen scripts for bookmarking/sharing with facebook/linkedin/tumblr/twitter/pinterest/googlehangouts/etc
Then, they'll try and fetch a non-zero number of tracking/website monitoring scripts.
Ghostery says http://slashdot.org/images/njs.gif is a 1x1 pixel tracker for WebTrends.
Governments' legitimate interest in regulation is in product safety and fraud prevention, not in deciding who gets to do business with whom and at what price.
That's a nice statement of "scope," to bad it completely ignores reality.
Government (in most states) sets the prices for utilities.
Government sets build out requirements for utilities.
Government prevents discrimination in the offering of services.
Government requires handicap accessibility in public accommodations.
Government prevents excessive interest rates being charged on loans.
I could go on.
Government has a legitimate interest in deciding who gets to do business with whom and at what price.
Unless you want to abandon all the existing protections of the law, you might want to redefine what you consider to be the appropriate scope of government regulation.