You have to remember that the targets of the propaganda are the other half of the IQ spectrum that also vote. For them science isn't really understanding it is belief, you really have to appreciate the difference in understanding between some one in the 125 plus range versus some one in the sub 100s still 50% of the population.
So out and out lies and distortions are targeted at them and they will accept what they 'want' to here rather than difficult truths. There is also the anti-intellect factor, it really does irritate them no end when someone with high IQ picks up a book, flips through it and grasps and understands it and no matter how much effort the lower end of the IQ spectrum put in. They never really understand it at all and lack of understanding is not their fault they just don't get the same brain chemical kick from thinking that/.ers do.
Then of course lies have always been to tool to sell anything and everything with high profit margins, ahh, the ways of the modern mass marketing PR=B$ machine.
The least 'evil' search engine, with out doubt, Wikipedia, often the answer will be right there without bothering with any additional links. Even when you have to use the links offered, at least it doesn't lead to some B$ psuedo search site littered with addwords, ebay links, sponsored sites you have no interest in or all the other SEO (shit eating organisms) rubbish hidden keyword sites littering the net.
Of course this points to valve's who business plan for L4D. Try it out with four maps, see how popular it is, promise more maps, gauge response and then charge for extra maps if demand is strong. Personally I think they waited too long, the game got a bit boring, players started to misbehave and the licence has taken a bit of a bruising. They even made it unnecessarily difficult to run custom maps all to give their pay per map a leg up on the free competition.
What they really needed was much more variety in the campaigns, from longer more complex campaigns to shorter quick campaigns, overall at least 10. Instead they seem to be trickling out content as battle of disinterest in the game, a solution that often leads to too little too late.
More likely maybe the judge was a tame sure bet and there was no way the copy extremists were going to lose this case, well at prior to an undoubtedly successful appeal and an 'accurate' interpretation of the law. There was no way they would take it to so public a trial with out being certain of the outcome. Well at a 'guess' that is my interpretation of the intent, who says the law is for sale;P.
From what I gather the best ones now are the ones that skulk around bank computer networks legally, catch is, if they are any good that are way out of the professionally paranoid price range as well as being a poor psychological fit. Of course there are likely quite a few failures from that market, you know the ones that were quietly let go but still have an untarnished resume. I am sure there is an internal banking security clique that keeps track of these not quite so good.
So they can start their recruiting efforts there, ex-bank computer network almost security 'er' professionals, better 2nd rate than none at all;D. As for "it's a trap", unless it's for prosecution, it is hardly worth while as one big 'payoff' and you end up with a gaping hole in your digital artery bleeding out secrets like there's no tomorrow. Best bet for finding security flaws, tasty irresistible honey pots http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing) at every network location, ones with known live monitored states, misinformation and data that can be tracked to the end use location (flagged credit card details etc.), "minefield";D.
You really shouldn't confuse religious dogma with out and out greed. So the non global warming sponsors are not impervious to science, they simply don't care, the lies they spread are all about them sustaining and increasing their profits, they are completely and utterly indifferent to damage they knowingly do, don't think for a second that they don't employ their own scientists to analyse the data coming out so that they, ever so perversely, more effectively target their lies at it to obscure and taint the truth.
The most tragic thing that is going on at the moment is these same people are now using global warming and CO2 as a misdirecting focus so they can continue to pollute our environment with a whole range of other toxic substances. They are basically using the more complex science of global warming as a means by which to obfuscate the whole issue of all the pollutants created by burning various fossil fuels as well as biofuels.
While global warming is definitely an issue it is still in reality second to other the other toxic results of the 'infernal' combustion engine and the carcinogens that result which are currently basically being sequestered in our bodies.
Yeah, you are so much safer with the government of China having full access to windows and office source code and you not having any, neither direct or indirect. You can bet the government of China will have the interest of western, freedom and democracy loving individuals when the audit windows and office code for bugs and security faults and this from a government that heavily sponsors and uses their own Linux distribution http://www.redflag-linux.com/en/index.php, obviously they are true believers in windows security or is that insecurity.
As for trust, c'mon really, M$ has demonstrated their complete willingness to lie to the end user over and over and over again, there ain't no trust there and to imply that there is, well, that is just so silly.
For all those governments around the world that have no access to M$ windows and office source code there really is no other choice than Linux for security and for all governments and I mean 'ALL' governments who have no control over the code that is in M$ windows and office, there really is no choice other than Linux even to the extent of creating their own secured and audited Linux distributions obviously based upon on widely accepted commercial distribution for compatibility.
What is much more interesting about this article, is not so much what MIT are doing with regard to typical network function monitoring, rather than data recording and individually targeted analysis, it is the way people are reacting. There has been a major shift in the general public view of digital privacy and the wild wild west days of invading the privacy of people, psychologically analysing them and personally targeting them with adds to manipulate their choices, is no longer considered acceptable.
So a real push to regaining the privacy of your digital connections, even minor perceived invasions of privacy are now being publicly exposed, derided and demands are being made to eliminate them. Emails as postcards really distasteful and way over the top, privacy invasive social networking sites only use them to create a publicly acceptable facade not for your private life, search recoding and analysis pretty sick and reaching end of acceptable life, complete network monitoring and interpretive analysis over the long term without full legal oversight via the courts will only create a very very angry populace.
It has been really interesting to watch the various changes in a developing industry, things that were once accepted are now considered unacceptable and, some peripheral lessons learned about necessary legislation to control the excesses of avaricious egomaniacal corporate executives will be taken from the financial sector and forcefully applied to the digital sector, expecting some sort of moral limits from corporations is really naive and demonstrably foolish.
Now that is just plain silly. A good operating system should be as near to invisible as possible. You shouldn't have to touch it, configure it, male it safe, patch it, fix it or anything else. It should simply be the bridge between the applications you want to use and the hardware, absolutely nothing more.
So the reality is refine it and refine it and refine it, don't dump it, don't get in the users face, don't make the users jump through hoops and don't continually try to force upgrade costs and retraining issues.
This decade has been a debacle for windows users, rather than continuing to develop win2kpro that pursued upgrade profits regardless of the costs forced upon customers, each cent of profit for M$ is becoming $1 of cost for the customer and customers are realising this and balking at the imposition. The reality is, that it is M$'s customer abusive business practices that is forcing a switch over to Linux in order to get away from a supplier who simply can not be trusted.
Beers fer drinkin not fer thinkin. For an intellectually minded company a pub is hardly the best gathering place for it's staff who thrive on intellect on not so well on alcohol. So a pub atmosphere ain't to bad, thinking of soft mood lighting, comfortable chairs, relaxing natural timber tones, even booths for congregating. It is likely that the environment is fine they just need to change the consumables from alcohol based to non alcohol based, fresh hot pub food, non alcoholic cocktails, teas and coffes etc. etc. Of course you can't do it anywhere near licensed premises as falling to temptation could prove disastrous.
Their biggest mistake is failing to understand the militant Islamic movement. It has far less to do with religion and far more to do with male chauvinist pigs, the misogynists. Their underlying hatred of the west has far more to do with the equality of women than it does with prophets and gods.
No amount of propaganda or reason will change their attitudes, there is no middle ground by which they can be approached. They see the independence of women on western media and they feel threatened and they know that their abusive lifestyles are at risk, life styles based upon dominance and abuse and that is the way they react to that threat, with arrogance and violence.
They simply use the masquerade of religious belief to hide behind, a mask to hide the violent lusts that drive actions. They have very reason to feel threatened, their immoral and unethical lifestyles are coming to an end and those that refuse to change will either spend the rest of their lives in prison or perish in their violent struggle.
So the government needs to basically get down and dirty, and break that association and expose the underlying motivation of destructive militant religious movements (to be fair here, the same can be said for fundamentalist Christianity as for Islam).
Whilst nuclear waste does represent some storage problems ie continued monitored storage over thousands of years it is still better than burning stuff and storing the pollutants in the air that your breath and the water that you drink. So nuclear energy is simply a means by which to transition away from fossil fuel burning as soon as possible and bridging the gap to developing other safer and cleaner methods of energy generation. So nuclear for the next hundred years (the waste is really concentrated and doesn't need all that much land area) while advances in nano technology, super conductors, on of course natural energy resources solar et al are developed along with much greater energy efficiency in products.
So nuclear, unfourtunately, as a necessary stop gap so we can basically stop burning stuff, well, today.
Well to be realistic on slashdot gadgets like politics is all about features/policies. So it is OK to note great features and what make particular features worth while and how they should be applied across all brands in order to ensure competitive prices and it is generally accepted to mention products (plural) that contain those features. However if it the post comes of as being to company focused, really who be juvenile victims of marketing outside of those with financial vested interests, actually cheer for corporations, it is not well treated.
Now open source appears to be treated differently on slashdot but, because it is feature available ie. features can be readily transplanted, added to and changed it is actually being treated the same.
So focus on policies and features, not silly B$=PR marketing ones,/.ers can tell the difference and you generally will be fine apart from of course the paid shills, government propagandists, juvenile victims of marketing etc. but that of course is what flame bait and troll moderation is all about.
As in 'training' costs for open source software versus proprietary closed source licence fees, it also allows money to spent spent on customising open source software for specific long term applications versus throwing away money on 'temporary' software licence fees (the reality being they often last no longer than two years in actual use).
Oddly enough this represents the whole danger of Anonymous. Not of course a dangerous organisation or even an actual organisation but, something that be be presented as a dangerous organisation, a illusions created to further the petty interests of incompetent political appointees.
Think of the flip side, how exactly o you prove you are not a member of an organisation that doesn't exist when they accuses of being one. Due you attempt to refute their illogic by accurately defining the nature of 'Anonymous', they would simply take that as proof that you are indeed a member of 'Anonymous', perhaps even a 'ring leader', umm, by the demonstration of your knowledgeable understanding.
So 'Anonymous' is the digital equivalent of the wind, it comes and goes, sometimes stronger, sometimes weaker, sometimes even a hurricane of activity, it has no centre (except of course for that hurricane simile but that comes and goes and shifts from issue to issue, disappears and reappears). So join an activity, anonymously, temporarily then for that time you also are a part of the 'Anonymous' faction that both does and doesn't exist;).
No how about companies wishing to sell digital content on line. This is all about creating content delivery monopolies. Want to sell 1 Gb of content then your customers will have to pay extra versus, what the monopoly service provider can charge. The underlying reality is that is what it is all about, network companies setting themselves up to be content delivery monopolies fro all digital content. They will simply shut down all competitors wishing to sell digital content by ramping up their costs and the cost to customers wishing to buy from competitors.
Consider the long term, a student can be taught open source software once in their life and use that knowledge for the next forty years, versus minimum 40 closed source proprietary software licence renewals (more likely up near the 200 mark), with re-eduction for changed interfaces, so new manuals can be sold and excuses can be made for upgrading, so neither here there, as the initial education can be done at school for exactly the same price (excluding of course 16 years of proprietary licence fees during the full education period, say another 40 odd closed source proprietary licence fees). So hey, that is something near fifty years of closed source proprietary licence fees for every person, something like fifty thousand dollars.
You of course miss the basic point, this represent continuous added exposure in 'ADDITION' to all the other sources of radiation. So all the background transmissions, added to additional interment personal transmissions and just to make it all the more interesting, add that to the EMR of all those power transmission lines. So everyone keeps adding 'ADDITIONAL' sources of exposure. So a bit of common sence before hand , rather than wringing your hands over future statistics where around 20% police officers of have tumours and 'duh' trying to find out why.
Retraining costs a neither here nor there as they are a one of cost versus continuing licence and security costs, basically going on forever. Quite simply they should go for parallel networks and external high risk network with strictly limited access and an internal network with no external access for all security work.
Which brings an interesting point to this patent suit. All M$ really needed to do was prove in court that it's method for preventing people from installing software upon mutiple computers doesn't work and as such does not infringe the patent which covers actually preventing it from happening rather than temporarily slowing down the process.
M$ should have no problem at all in demonstrating that windows is coded so poorly, pretty much in line with it unwarranty, that the software is not pretty much not really capable of doing anything in the legal sence;D.
You have to feel really sorry for Sarkozy, with his French equivalent of the RIAA approved wife, blow jobs for legislation, he treads a fine line, upset the the public too much and he loses the next election and his wife, fail to toe the line and the assembly chamber is more fun than the boudoir. In the end it is inevitable that he will end up losing on all fronts but, hey, that is as it should be for political sell outs.
Now that is creating a new problem. Is your video hosting competitor getting too much of the action, easy, issue take down notice after take down notice, so long as your competitor takes down without question any content annoying their end users, your video hosting solution starts looking better and better. So this is a real 'commercial' not a moral warning, as long a youtube keeps rolling over without question, so the number of take down notices will increase.
So youtube either fights and seeks financial remediation for the damage done to their revenues for unfair and fraudulent take down notices or it will start losing market share to their competitors who will use it to make competing video hosting sites more popular.
What really is needed is a special kind of auction that reflects the monopoly aspect of sole access to spectrum. So the bid should involve two items, how much they are willing to pay for that spectrum and how much they will charge for retail access to that spectrum. The winning bid is the one that provides the the best ration of buy price to rent access price. Otherwise the end user is just paying an enormous undisclosed tax bill to pay for the spectrum that was taken from them, really, WTF?
Not really a good idea. While it would be conceivably fine for the officer to activate tracking and recording (combine digital video recording) prior to the officer engaging in activity that involves any form of aggressive contact with a citizen, whether physical or verbal. It is not really appropriate to turn the officer into an eight hour a day test lab for exposure to radiation.
So while appropriate and useful in the collection of evidence for later use, it really needs to be limited, so minutes in the day rather than all day, and when the officer's exposure to radiation for the day exceeds maximum limits they go back to the station to conduct other activities, that don't require additional exposure to radiation ie. radio waves.
The reality is that high powered notebooks overheat and cook plus of course dropping one is really painful to the hip pocket, so a desktop is cheaper and last longer but ain't portable. So netbooks represent cheap portable computing with an acceptable drop factor price, the perfect 2nd computer compliment to a desktop.
As for numbers, schools all over the world are looking at making computers required for every child and budget school netbooks are the only realistic solution, so 100s of millions of units annually, in fact they will end up being the highest market share form factor.
Don't be surprised when they start throwing in a 'free' netbook with a desktop ie power with portability.
Slashdot Mirror
You have to remember that the targets of the propaganda are the other half of the IQ spectrum that also vote. For them science isn't really understanding it is belief, you really have to appreciate the difference in understanding between some one in the 125 plus range versus some one in the sub 100s still 50% of the population.
So out and out lies and distortions are targeted at them and they will accept what they 'want' to here rather than difficult truths. There is also the anti-intellect factor, it really does irritate them no end when someone with high IQ picks up a book, flips through it and grasps and understands it and no matter how much effort the lower end of the IQ spectrum put in. They never really understand it at all and lack of understanding is not their fault they just don't get the same brain chemical kick from thinking that /.ers do.
Then of course lies have always been to tool to sell anything and everything with high profit margins, ahh, the ways of the modern mass marketing PR=B$ machine.
The least 'evil' search engine, with out doubt, Wikipedia, often the answer will be right there without bothering with any additional links. Even when you have to use the links offered, at least it doesn't lead to some B$ psuedo search site littered with addwords, ebay links, sponsored sites you have no interest in or all the other SEO (shit eating organisms) rubbish hidden keyword sites littering the net.
Of course this points to valve's who business plan for L4D. Try it out with four maps, see how popular it is, promise more maps, gauge response and then charge for extra maps if demand is strong. Personally I think they waited too long, the game got a bit boring, players started to misbehave and the licence has taken a bit of a bruising. They even made it unnecessarily difficult to run custom maps all to give their pay per map a leg up on the free competition.
What they really needed was much more variety in the campaigns, from longer more complex campaigns to shorter quick campaigns, overall at least 10. Instead they seem to be trickling out content as battle of disinterest in the game, a solution that often leads to too little too late.
More likely maybe the judge was a tame sure bet and there was no way the copy extremists were going to lose this case, well at prior to an undoubtedly successful appeal and an 'accurate' interpretation of the law. There was no way they would take it to so public a trial with out being certain of the outcome. Well at a 'guess' that is my interpretation of the intent, who says the law is for sale ;P.
From what I gather the best ones now are the ones that skulk around bank computer networks legally, catch is, if they are any good that are way out of the professionally paranoid price range as well as being a poor psychological fit. Of course there are likely quite a few failures from that market, you know the ones that were quietly let go but still have an untarnished resume. I am sure there is an internal banking security clique that keeps track of these not quite so good.
So they can start their recruiting efforts there, ex-bank computer network almost security 'er' professionals, better 2nd rate than none at all ;D. As for "it's a trap", unless it's for prosecution, it is hardly worth while as one big 'payoff' and you end up with a gaping hole in your digital artery bleeding out secrets like there's no tomorrow. Best bet for finding security flaws, tasty irresistible honey pots http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing) at every network location, ones with known live monitored states, misinformation and data that can be tracked to the end use location (flagged credit card details etc.), "minefield" ;D.
You really shouldn't confuse religious dogma with out and out greed. So the non global warming sponsors are not impervious to science, they simply don't care, the lies they spread are all about them sustaining and increasing their profits, they are completely and utterly indifferent to damage they knowingly do, don't think for a second that they don't employ their own scientists to analyse the data coming out so that they, ever so perversely, more effectively target their lies at it to obscure and taint the truth.
The most tragic thing that is going on at the moment is these same people are now using global warming and CO2 as a misdirecting focus so they can continue to pollute our environment with a whole range of other toxic substances. They are basically using the more complex science of global warming as a means by which to obfuscate the whole issue of all the pollutants created by burning various fossil fuels as well as biofuels.
While global warming is definitely an issue it is still in reality second to other the other toxic results of the 'infernal' combustion engine and the carcinogens that result which are currently basically being sequestered in our bodies.
Yeah, you are so much safer with the government of China having full access to windows and office source code and you not having any, neither direct or indirect. You can bet the government of China will have the interest of western, freedom and democracy loving individuals when the audit windows and office code for bugs and security faults and this from a government that heavily sponsors and uses their own Linux distribution http://www.redflag-linux.com/en/index.php, obviously they are true believers in windows security or is that insecurity.
As for trust, c'mon really, M$ has demonstrated their complete willingness to lie to the end user over and over and over again, there ain't no trust there and to imply that there is, well, that is just so silly.
For all those governments around the world that have no access to M$ windows and office source code there really is no other choice than Linux for security and for all governments and I mean 'ALL' governments who have no control over the code that is in M$ windows and office, there really is no choice other than Linux even to the extent of creating their own secured and audited Linux distributions obviously based upon on widely accepted commercial distribution for compatibility.
What is much more interesting about this article, is not so much what MIT are doing with regard to typical network function monitoring, rather than data recording and individually targeted analysis, it is the way people are reacting. There has been a major shift in the general public view of digital privacy and the wild wild west days of invading the privacy of people, psychologically analysing them and personally targeting them with adds to manipulate their choices, is no longer considered acceptable.
So a real push to regaining the privacy of your digital connections, even minor perceived invasions of privacy are now being publicly exposed, derided and demands are being made to eliminate them. Emails as postcards really distasteful and way over the top, privacy invasive social networking sites only use them to create a publicly acceptable facade not for your private life, search recoding and analysis pretty sick and reaching end of acceptable life, complete network monitoring and interpretive analysis over the long term without full legal oversight via the courts will only create a very very angry populace.
It has been really interesting to watch the various changes in a developing industry, things that were once accepted are now considered unacceptable and, some peripheral lessons learned about necessary legislation to control the excesses of avaricious egomaniacal corporate executives will be taken from the financial sector and forcefully applied to the digital sector, expecting some sort of moral limits from corporations is really naive and demonstrably foolish.
Now that is just plain silly. A good operating system should be as near to invisible as possible. You shouldn't have to touch it, configure it, male it safe, patch it, fix it or anything else. It should simply be the bridge between the applications you want to use and the hardware, absolutely nothing more.
So the reality is refine it and refine it and refine it, don't dump it, don't get in the users face, don't make the users jump through hoops and don't continually try to force upgrade costs and retraining issues.
This decade has been a debacle for windows users, rather than continuing to develop win2kpro that pursued upgrade profits regardless of the costs forced upon customers, each cent of profit for M$ is becoming $1 of cost for the customer and customers are realising this and balking at the imposition. The reality is, that it is M$'s customer abusive business practices that is forcing a switch over to Linux in order to get away from a supplier who simply can not be trusted.
Beers fer drinkin not fer thinkin. For an intellectually minded company a pub is hardly the best gathering place for it's staff who thrive on intellect on not so well on alcohol. So a pub atmosphere ain't to bad, thinking of soft mood lighting, comfortable chairs, relaxing natural timber tones, even booths for congregating. It is likely that the environment is fine they just need to change the consumables from alcohol based to non alcohol based, fresh hot pub food, non alcoholic cocktails, teas and coffes etc. etc. Of course you can't do it anywhere near licensed premises as falling to temptation could prove disastrous.
So reasonable idea, just poor execution.
Their biggest mistake is failing to understand the militant Islamic movement. It has far less to do with religion and far more to do with male chauvinist pigs, the misogynists. Their underlying hatred of the west has far more to do with the equality of women than it does with prophets and gods.
No amount of propaganda or reason will change their attitudes, there is no middle ground by which they can be approached. They see the independence of women on western media and they feel threatened and they know that their abusive lifestyles are at risk, life styles based upon dominance and abuse and that is the way they react to that threat, with arrogance and violence.
They simply use the masquerade of religious belief to hide behind, a mask to hide the violent lusts that drive actions. They have very reason to feel threatened, their immoral and unethical lifestyles are coming to an end and those that refuse to change will either spend the rest of their lives in prison or perish in their violent struggle.
So the government needs to basically get down and dirty, and break that association and expose the underlying motivation of destructive militant religious movements (to be fair here, the same can be said for fundamentalist Christianity as for Islam).
Whilst nuclear waste does represent some storage problems ie continued monitored storage over thousands of years it is still better than burning stuff and storing the pollutants in the air that your breath and the water that you drink. So nuclear energy is simply a means by which to transition away from fossil fuel burning as soon as possible and bridging the gap to developing other safer and cleaner methods of energy generation. So nuclear for the next hundred years (the waste is really concentrated and doesn't need all that much land area) while advances in nano technology, super conductors, on of course natural energy resources solar et al are developed along with much greater energy efficiency in products.
So nuclear, unfourtunately, as a necessary stop gap so we can basically stop burning stuff, well, today.
Well to be realistic on slashdot gadgets like politics is all about features/policies. So it is OK to note great features and what make particular features worth while and how they should be applied across all brands in order to ensure competitive prices and it is generally accepted to mention products (plural) that contain those features. However if it the post comes of as being to company focused, really who be juvenile victims of marketing outside of those with financial vested interests, actually cheer for corporations, it is not well treated.
Now open source appears to be treated differently on slashdot but, because it is feature available ie. features can be readily transplanted, added to and changed it is actually being treated the same.
So focus on policies and features, not silly B$=PR marketing ones, /.ers can tell the difference and you generally will be fine apart from of course the paid shills, government propagandists, juvenile victims of marketing etc. but that of course is what flame bait and troll moderation is all about.
As in 'training' costs for open source software versus proprietary closed source licence fees, it also allows money to spent spent on customising open source software for specific long term applications versus throwing away money on 'temporary' software licence fees (the reality being they often last no longer than two years in actual use).
Oddly enough this represents the whole danger of Anonymous. Not of course a dangerous organisation or even an actual organisation but, something that be be presented as a dangerous organisation, a illusions created to further the petty interests of incompetent political appointees.
Think of the flip side, how exactly o you prove you are not a member of an organisation that doesn't exist when they accuses of being one. Due you attempt to refute their illogic by accurately defining the nature of 'Anonymous', they would simply take that as proof that you are indeed a member of 'Anonymous', perhaps even a 'ring leader', umm, by the demonstration of your knowledgeable understanding.
So 'Anonymous' is the digital equivalent of the wind, it comes and goes, sometimes stronger, sometimes weaker, sometimes even a hurricane of activity, it has no centre (except of course for that hurricane simile but that comes and goes and shifts from issue to issue, disappears and reappears). So join an activity, anonymously, temporarily then for that time you also are a part of the 'Anonymous' faction that both does and doesn't exist ;).
No how about companies wishing to sell digital content on line. This is all about creating content delivery monopolies. Want to sell 1 Gb of content then your customers will have to pay extra versus, what the monopoly service provider can charge. The underlying reality is that is what it is all about, network companies setting themselves up to be content delivery monopolies fro all digital content. They will simply shut down all competitors wishing to sell digital content by ramping up their costs and the cost to customers wishing to buy from competitors.
Consider the long term, a student can be taught open source software once in their life and use that knowledge for the next forty years, versus minimum 40 closed source proprietary software licence renewals (more likely up near the 200 mark), with re-eduction for changed interfaces, so new manuals can be sold and excuses can be made for upgrading, so neither here there, as the initial education can be done at school for exactly the same price (excluding of course 16 years of proprietary licence fees during the full education period, say another 40 odd closed source proprietary licence fees). So hey, that is something near fifty years of closed source proprietary licence fees for every person, something like fifty thousand dollars.
You of course miss the basic point, this represent continuous added exposure in 'ADDITION' to all the other sources of radiation. So all the background transmissions, added to additional interment personal transmissions and just to make it all the more interesting, add that to the EMR of all those power transmission lines. So everyone keeps adding 'ADDITIONAL' sources of exposure. So a bit of common sence before hand , rather than wringing your hands over future statistics where around 20% police officers of have tumours and 'duh' trying to find out why.
Retraining costs a neither here nor there as they are a one of cost versus continuing licence and security costs, basically going on forever. Quite simply they should go for parallel networks and external high risk network with strictly limited access and an internal network with no external access for all security work.
Which brings an interesting point to this patent suit. All M$ really needed to do was prove in court that it's method for preventing people from installing software upon mutiple computers doesn't work and as such does not infringe the patent which covers actually preventing it from happening rather than temporarily slowing down the process.
M$ should have no problem at all in demonstrating that windows is coded so poorly, pretty much in line with it unwarranty, that the software is not pretty much not really capable of doing anything in the legal sence ;D.
You have to feel really sorry for Sarkozy, with his French equivalent of the RIAA approved wife, blow jobs for legislation, he treads a fine line, upset the the public too much and he loses the next election and his wife, fail to toe the line and the assembly chamber is more fun than the boudoir. In the end it is inevitable that he will end up losing on all fronts but, hey, that is as it should be for political sell outs.
Now that is creating a new problem. Is your video hosting competitor getting too much of the action, easy, issue take down notice after take down notice, so long as your competitor takes down without question any content annoying their end users, your video hosting solution starts looking better and better. So this is a real 'commercial' not a moral warning, as long a youtube keeps rolling over without question, so the number of take down notices will increase.
So youtube either fights and seeks financial remediation for the damage done to their revenues for unfair and fraudulent take down notices or it will start losing market share to their competitors who will use it to make competing video hosting sites more popular.
What really is needed is a special kind of auction that reflects the monopoly aspect of sole access to spectrum. So the bid should involve two items, how much they are willing to pay for that spectrum and how much they will charge for retail access to that spectrum. The winning bid is the one that provides the the best ration of buy price to rent access price. Otherwise the end user is just paying an enormous undisclosed tax bill to pay for the spectrum that was taken from them, really, WTF?
Not really a good idea. While it would be conceivably fine for the officer to activate tracking and recording (combine digital video recording) prior to the officer engaging in activity that involves any form of aggressive contact with a citizen, whether physical or verbal. It is not really appropriate to turn the officer into an eight hour a day test lab for exposure to radiation.
So while appropriate and useful in the collection of evidence for later use, it really needs to be limited, so minutes in the day rather than all day, and when the officer's exposure to radiation for the day exceeds maximum limits they go back to the station to conduct other activities, that don't require additional exposure to radiation ie. radio waves.
The reality is that high powered notebooks overheat and cook plus of course dropping one is really painful to the hip pocket, so a desktop is cheaper and last longer but ain't portable. So netbooks represent cheap portable computing with an acceptable drop factor price, the perfect 2nd computer compliment to a desktop.
As for numbers, schools all over the world are looking at making computers required for every child and budget school netbooks are the only realistic solution, so 100s of millions of units annually, in fact they will end up being the highest market share form factor.
Don't be surprised when they start throwing in a 'free' netbook with a desktop ie power with portability.