it's a big ball of gas. I'm as interested in Jupiter as any nerd, but it's not as likely a source of life as other places in the solar system.
Still its Our Ball of Gas, (until some one/thing capable of stating otherwise shows up), and it would be pretty cool to go looking.
Is the atmosphere such that some sort of balloon with a payload could not float around in it for a considerable time scavenging energy from the winds themselves? I've read where the wind speeds are horrendously fast, but that might not affect something designed specifically to float in the atmosphere.
If the OP thinks this is somehow different in social sciences vs the "hard" sciences, he is badly mistaken. In fact he might broaden his horizons a little to learn how to handle those experimental designs where you have no perfect control group since you can't just go out and give people cancer just to test in the real world, nor kill them just to autopsy them after the experiment has run its course.
He might end up losing some of his elitist attitude before the course is over. It would be better if lost the attitude ahead of time, and approached the experience like he was at least teaching the same species.
English is what it is because of history. It is the most eclectic language on earth.
Esperanto? Please. Most people don't know ONE person that speaks or understands it. I know people that are fluent in languages from all over the world, (Yes, even Inupiat), I can throw a stone and hit the windows of people who speak Russian, German, Italian, French, Spanish, Norwegian, Tlingit, Swedish, Dutch, and a few others. Not one Esperanto.
The world will speak one language when Aliens arrive and teach it to us. Not a moment before.
A lot of our thought process is based on associations and if you know a couple of languages (for me Swedish, English, Dutch and German - in order of proficiency) you also know that nuances are very hard to translate - there is simply no 1:1 perfect relationship between certain concepts within different languages. Those ambigous meanings and cultural associations are a fundamental part of the thought process.
I agree with this, but only to the extent the "to be saved" language was a written language.
There are several languages and dialects that are vanishing which were never written, and the only sample of them is the few examples of recorded speech by people trying to save the language. Most, if not all of the native speakers of these languages have passed, except a very few individuals.
In this case you have nothing but a curiosity, a museum piece like an old rusty shovel. There is no body of literature upon which to apply it, and (at least among north american native and Eskimo populations) its historical legacy consisted of aural traditions, embellish and modified stories which change with each generation (if not each telling), so at best you have something that bears no resemblance to the original story.
Most of these 3000 languages are merely dialects of some common root language, and have very little value either to the study of linguists, or history unless there exists a fairly large body of writing.
And that worked for a long, long time, until they forgot what the agreement was.
Why is it always THEY who forgot what the agreement was? Why isn't it YOU who forgot what the agreement was?
After all, are you claiming that you ONLY make and distribute copies of songs older than 14 years, or even 7 years?
Or are you (fess up now) copying (or obtaining without payment) songs that are FRESH off the presses, released THIS YEAR?
You rail against the creeping term of copyrights, while at the same time ripping off music and movies on which the ink hasn't even dried yet.
I submit that YOU forgot what the agreement was long before They did.
Quite frankly, I doubt you ever honored the terms of the agreement. Fess up, you started pirating before you EVER purchased any music or movies didn't you? Now you come around cring about the terms of the agreement that you never honored in the first place.
Lets face it, you have, in your mind, and in your actions, repudiated the agreement, declared it null and void, and appropriated the artists works as you saw fit, always blaming someone else for breaking the agreement first.
You are not alone, there seems to be a lot of people like you who have never created anything of value but feel entitled to everything created by others simply because a) you want it, and b) you can get it easily. I would say your view is becoming the prevalent view, especially here on slashdot, and among those under the age of 25.
There is no agreement. You denied it. Your generation has broken it beyond repair. You take as you wish. So why cling to the lofty goals of "advancing the useful arts"? You thru that out with the "exclusive rights".
I have no delusions that this post will not be modded to minus 200 in about 2 minutes flat. Because arguments that show you for what you are can't be tolerated.
We covered this topic a few days ago in a side rant about the cost of education expanding to absorb all available funding. Upon further digging into the scarce data on the subject I found that it does appear that many universities are shifting the total cost to the student (and thereby to Federal Student Loans).
State funding levels (for state run institutions) have remained largely the same in many cases, while university budgets have mushroomed, (mushroomed all out of proportion to enrollment, out of proportion to salaries).
The budgets are being inflated for new dorms, buildings, and equipment, all funded by student tuition. Professors aren't getting much beyond cost of living raises. But I need only look back at my school to see expansion of physical plant way beyond the size of enrollment, and a huge increase in the annual budget.
There will be those (arriving here in about ten seconds) that insist we can't know if the cost of an education has increased without a detailed analyses, seeking to hand waive the problem away. But the bottom line numbers suggest that the cost of 4 year post secondary programs have indeed expanded to absorb all available funds, while the cost of the prior 4 years (high school) have not expanded significantly beyond inflation in over 20 years.
I'm not even sure there is a conspiracy, simply each institution seeing an apparently inexhaustible pool of funding, and figuring out how best to tap it.
Why is it people who quote the constitution never bother quoting the whole sentence:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
That some artists sign stupid contracts while young and inexperienced is not germane to the issue at hand. Stop throwing that out there like it matters.
The negative part is I've been doing this since the very early 90s, offline and online, and now its patented,
You had me fooled. Here I thought all this time your parents had a weird sens of humor giving you a three letter name with no vowels, only to find out that VLM is not your real name!
Face unlock is not intended to be industrial grade security. By its nature it has to be tolerant to unlocks (it would suck if you couldn't unlock your phone after a haircut or beard trim, for example). It's intended to prevent casual perusal by someone who finds the phone sitting around. They've added some little things like requiring some movement in the face (eg, blinking), so it's mildly surprising that a static photo can trick it. But it's not especially worrying either - again, it's meant to be one step above slide to unlock.
It's almost like stating that the standard "slide to unlock" is insecure because anyone can slide that button! The statement is true, but it misses the point.
Also, a quote from Samsung taken directly FTFA:
"Therefore, users with sensitive information on their phone are advised to use higher-protection security features, such as pattern, pin, or password unlock."
Further this is a standard feature of ICS, and nothing to do with Samsung. Its on all the HTC phones that ship with a front facing camera and ICS installed. Want to blame someone, blame Google for adding this silly feature to Android.
Looking at the Map there is nothing to worry about.
His building is far from any significant stand of trees. Two guys with chainsaws and another driving a 4 wheel drive truck can drop every tree close to the building in 20 minutes, and tow them to an open field.
Use a backup generator to keep his well pumping (if no city water) and put a lawn sprinkers on the roof. One wonders if this wasn't just out out there to drive traffic to his website.
But if it were specific to a type of AP, people would soon figure this out. People on various message boards and forums are comparing router models, encryption settings, etc.
You glossed over the point about it working fine, then you walk out of range, and later walk back into range and the handset can't connect. Change nothing in your settings, connect to an un-encryption AP, then you can again connect to your encrypted AP. It has nothing to do with permanently recalcitrant routers. Those find their way to the scrap heap in no time.
encrypted email, text messages, phone calls, and videoconferencing
With the proper encryption software on the endpoints, and properly encrypted storage, why does the server location even matter?
If nothing was actually stored on the server (or if everything stored there was encrypted with keys unknown to the operators) there would be no point in any government agency grabbing the server other than to shut it down. And nothing prevents that better than multiple sites.
It would seem to me the best solution would be for that server to have zero knowledge about the content of any data, and serve as a store and forward repository for content where one or the other party is off line (file transfer or email). For Video conferencing and text messages the servers might serve only as a routing agent for firewall piercing (where each participant is behind a firewall). But in no case should it contain un-encrypted data, and all logging should be to/dev/null.
Almost all of this is available today using a variety of off the shelf software with PGP keys, etc.
Wouldn't concentrating this traffic in a single place make it easier to monitor? If nothing else, a monitoring agency can gain the equivalent of pen register data simply by doing packet analysis at the upstream of such a service provider.
Wouldn't merely subscribing to such a service (and leaving a money trail) become a red flag?
Considering that every ICS handset manufacturer seems to see this problem, why is anyone releasing any ICS build without testing for this specific issue? Are they so internally focused that they are unaware that this is going on in the market as a whole?
This _is_ Sony, right?... Let's see... rootkits, Playstation network security problems... Nope, not surprised.
Its not Sony's fault. (Well, its no ONLY Sony's fault).
This is a long standing problem with Android and certain wifi chip sets and ICS. It first reared its head in the Nook first edition a long time ago, then it disappeared for quite a while only to come back with a vengeance with ICS.
Simply google the words: connecting authenticating obtaining ip loop
and you will see this is common to a LOT of Android handsets and tablets.
The entire flagship HTC One line has similar problems. Samsung has the same problem, as does ZTE, Achros, Huawei and several others. Some of these vendors (HTC) have promised fixes (and all have failed to deliver as best as I can tell).
If you fiddle with it long enough it will connect, eventually. Often rebooting your router will work, but you can't always do that.
Often connecting to your neighbor's "guest" network will work, and then subsequently reconnecting to your own network will also work fine. (especially if said guest account is an open network with no encryption).
Its never a problem of a bad password. Its not something you can fix with a static IP. The problem is in the actual authentication layer of the wifi connection, before it even gets around to asking for an IP Address. Seems to affect 802.11G routers more than others. Its not specific to certain router brands.
I've alogcated my self into a stupor and dug thru some of the opensource code. The only thing I can see is that it appears some token is supposed to be incremented by the handset with each authentication attempt, and it is not being incremented, so the router disconnects the client. But so much of wpa_suplicant is running in binary blobs that the end user is at a serious disadvantage trying to dig through this stuff.
I can induce this error at will on my HTC One X, and I can recover from it by simply connecting to an unprotected wifi "guest" account near by, then wait 30 seconds, and re-connect to my wpa2 secured router. I also solved it by running a spare router with no security and leaving the router unconnected to anything. I use this for connection, wait 30 seconds, then reconnect to my home router.
Its a major pain. But its not SONY's fault, I suspect its Google's fault or the wifi chipset manufacturer's fault.
Slashdot Mirror
it's a big ball of gas. I'm as interested in Jupiter as any nerd, but it's not as likely a source of life as other places in the solar system.
Still its Our Ball of Gas, (until some one/thing capable of stating otherwise shows up), and it would be pretty cool to go looking.
Is the atmosphere such that some sort of balloon with a payload could not float around in it for a considerable time scavenging energy from the winds themselves?
I've read where the wind speeds are horrendously fast, but that might not affect something designed specifically to float in the atmosphere.
My thoughts exactly.
Statistics is just math.
If the OP thinks this is somehow different in social sciences vs the "hard" sciences, he is badly mistaken. In fact he might broaden his horizons a little to learn how to handle those experimental designs where you have no perfect control group since you can't just go out and give people cancer just to test in the real world, nor kill them just to autopsy them after the experiment has run its course.
He might end up losing some of his elitist attitude before the course is over. It would be better if lost the attitude ahead of time, and approached the experience like he was at least teaching the same species.
English is what it is because of history.
It is the most eclectic language on earth.
Esperanto? Please. Most people don't know ONE person that speaks or understands it.
I know people that are fluent in languages from all over the world, (Yes, even Inupiat), I can throw a stone and
hit the windows of people who speak Russian, German, Italian, French, Spanish, Norwegian, Tlingit, Swedish, Dutch, and a few others.
Not one Esperanto.
The world will speak one language when Aliens arrive and teach it to us. Not a moment before.
A lot of our thought process is based on associations and if you know a couple of languages (for me Swedish, English, Dutch and German - in order of proficiency) you also know that nuances are very hard to translate - there is simply no 1:1 perfect relationship between certain concepts within different languages. Those ambigous meanings and cultural associations are a fundamental part of the thought process.
I agree with this, but only to the extent the "to be saved" language was a written language.
There are several languages and dialects that are vanishing which were never written, and the only sample of them is the few examples of recorded speech by people trying to save the language. Most, if not all of the native speakers of these languages have passed, except a very few individuals.
In this case you have nothing but a curiosity, a museum piece like an old rusty shovel. There is no body of literature upon which to apply it, and (at least among north american native and Eskimo populations) its historical legacy consisted of aural traditions, embellish and modified stories which change with each generation (if not each telling), so at best you have something that bears no resemblance to the original story.
Most of these 3000 languages are merely dialects of some common root language, and have very little value either to the study of linguists, or history unless there exists a fairly large body of writing.
The drive unit looks like two torpedoes. Look at the out of water picture.
This is not a submarine.
FTA: like a high-tech torpedo, except part of the craft is above water—
And the picture shows the entire boat is above water except the drive.
And that worked for a long, long time, until they forgot what the agreement was.
Why is it always THEY who forgot what the agreement was?
Why isn't it YOU who forgot what the agreement was?
After all, are you claiming that you ONLY make and distribute copies of songs older than 14 years, or even 7 years?
Or are you (fess up now) copying (or obtaining without payment) songs that are FRESH off the presses, released THIS YEAR?
You rail against the creeping term of copyrights, while at the same time ripping off music and movies on which the ink hasn't even dried yet.
I submit that YOU forgot what the agreement was long before They did.
Quite frankly, I doubt you ever honored the terms of the agreement. Fess up, you started pirating before you EVER purchased any music or movies didn't you? Now you come around cring about the terms of the agreement that you never honored in the first place.
Lets face it, you have, in your mind, and in your actions, repudiated the agreement, declared it null and void, and appropriated the artists works as you saw fit, always blaming someone else for breaking the agreement first.
You are not alone, there seems to be a lot of people like you who have never created anything of value but feel entitled to everything created by others simply because a) you want it, and b) you can get it easily.
I would say your view is becoming the prevalent view, especially here on slashdot, and among those under the age of 25.
There is no agreement. You denied it. Your generation has broken it beyond repair. You take as you wish.
So why cling to the lofty goals of "advancing the useful arts"? You thru that out with the "exclusive rights".
I have no delusions that this post will not be modded to minus 200 in about 2 minutes flat. Because arguments that show you for what you are can't be tolerated.
We covered this topic a few days ago in a side rant about the cost of education expanding to absorb all available funding. Upon further digging into the scarce data on the subject I found that it does appear that many universities are shifting the total cost to the student (and thereby to Federal Student Loans).
State funding levels (for state run institutions) have remained largely the same in many cases, while university budgets have mushroomed, (mushroomed all out of proportion to enrollment, out of proportion to salaries).
The budgets are being inflated for new dorms, buildings, and equipment, all funded by student tuition. Professors aren't getting much beyond cost of living raises.
But I need only look back at my school to see expansion of physical plant way beyond the size of enrollment, and a huge increase in the annual budget.
There will be those (arriving here in about ten seconds) that insist we can't know if the cost of an education has increased without a detailed analyses, seeking to hand waive the problem away. But the bottom line numbers suggest that the cost of 4 year post secondary programs have indeed expanded to absorb all available funds, while the cost of the prior 4 years (high school) have not expanded significantly beyond inflation in over 20 years.
I'm not even sure there is a conspiracy, simply each institution seeing an apparently inexhaustible pool of funding, and figuring out how best to tap it.
Why is it people who quote the constitution never bother quoting the whole sentence:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
That some artists sign stupid contracts while young and inexperienced is not germane to the issue at hand. Stop throwing that out there like it matters.
The negative part is I've been doing this since the very early 90s, offline and online, and now its patented,
You had me fooled.
Here I thought all this time your parents had a weird sens of humor giving you a three letter name with no vowels,
only to find out that VLM is not your real name!
Face unlock is not intended to be industrial grade security. By its nature it has to be tolerant to unlocks (it would suck if you couldn't unlock your phone after a haircut or beard trim, for example). It's intended to prevent casual perusal by someone who finds the phone sitting around. They've added some little things like requiring some movement in the face (eg, blinking), so it's mildly surprising that a static photo can trick it. But it's not especially worrying either - again, it's meant to be one step above slide to unlock.
It's almost like stating that the standard "slide to unlock" is insecure because anyone can slide that button! The statement is true, but it misses the point.
Also, a quote from Samsung taken directly FTFA:
Further this is a standard feature of ICS, and nothing to do with Samsung. Its on all the HTC phones that ship with a front facing camera and ICS installed.
Want to blame someone, blame Google for adding this silly feature to Android.
Obligatory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqVBKO_QM3o
Looking at the Map there is nothing to worry about.
His building is far from any significant stand of trees. Two guys with chainsaws and another driving a 4 wheel drive truck can
drop every tree close to the building in 20 minutes, and tow them to an open field.
Use a backup generator to keep his well pumping (if no city water) and put a lawn sprinkers on the roof.
One wonders if this wasn't just out out there to drive traffic to his website.
You had logs and were still penetrated? What OS has logs and gets penetrated?
I hate that I have to point this out, but please, those of sound mind, repeat after me -
Defense is NOT the same thing as reactive offense.
I note that no longer do we hear government officials suggesting we should just sit quietly in our seats as
aircraft are hijacked anymore.
Also for an IM presence server and you have to put e-mail servers SOMEWHERE. E-mail isn't p2p.
With proper encryption, it doesn't matter where that is, and concentrating it in one place isn't going to help.
Ask Blackberry.
Well, if they were providing the authentication, then that would suggest that they would have way too much knowledge if you ask me.
Different problem.
But if it were specific to a type of AP, people would soon figure this out. People on various message boards and forums are comparing router models, encryption settings, etc.
You glossed over the point about it working fine, then you walk out of range, and later walk back into range and the handset can't connect. Change nothing in your settings, connect to an un-encryption AP, then you can again connect to your encrypted AP. It has nothing to do with permanently recalcitrant routers. Those find their way to the scrap heap in no time.
encrypted email, text messages, phone calls, and videoconferencing
With the proper encryption software on the endpoints, and properly encrypted storage, why does the server location even matter?
If nothing was actually stored on the server (or if everything stored there was encrypted with keys unknown to the operators) there would be no point in any government agency grabbing the server other than to shut it down. And nothing prevents that better than multiple sites.
It would seem to me the best solution would be for that server to have zero knowledge about the content of any data, and serve as a store and forward repository for content where one or the other party is off line (file transfer or email). For Video conferencing and text messages the servers might serve only as a routing agent for firewall piercing (where each participant is behind a firewall). But in no case should it contain un-encrypted data, and all logging should be to /dev/null.
Almost all of this is available today using a variety of off the shelf software with PGP keys, etc.
Wouldn't concentrating this traffic in a single place make it easier to monitor? If nothing else, a monitoring agency can gain the equivalent of pen register data simply by doing packet analysis at the upstream of such a service provider.
Wouldn't merely subscribing to such a service (and leaving a money trail) become a red flag?
As I stated, this happens on a wide variety of handset from multiple makers. Are those all Sony's fault too?
Just because your device hasn't exhibited this does not mean that all those others posting about it are lying.
Climb down off your pedestal hot shot.
Or, you might actually take the time to click the link I posted and broaden your experience.
Absolutely the manufacturer's fault.
Considering that every ICS handset manufacturer seems to see this problem, why is anyone releasing any ICS build without testing for this specific issue? Are they so internally focused that they are unaware that this is going on in the market as a whole?
Oh, the token I mentioned was the EAPOL replay counter. (What ever the hell that is).
See this thread http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=177798 where the resolution (near the bottom) was as I mentioned, connecting to any unsecured router than connecting back again.
This _is_ Sony, right?... Let's see... rootkits, Playstation network security problems... Nope, not surprised.
Its not Sony's fault. (Well, its no ONLY Sony's fault).
This is a long standing problem with Android and certain wifi chip sets and ICS. It first reared its head in the Nook first edition
a long time ago, then it disappeared for quite a while only to come back with a vengeance with ICS.
Simply google the words: connecting authenticating obtaining ip loop
and you will see this is common to a LOT of Android handsets and tablets.
Google search click here.
The entire flagship HTC One line has similar problems. Samsung has the same problem, as does ZTE, Achros, Huawei and several others.
Some of these vendors (HTC) have promised fixes (and all have failed to deliver as best as I can tell).
If you fiddle with it long enough it will connect, eventually. Often rebooting your router will work, but you can't always do that.
Often connecting to your neighbor's "guest" network will work, and then subsequently reconnecting to your own network will also work fine.
(especially if said guest account is an open network with no encryption).
Its never a problem of a bad password. Its not something you can fix with a static IP.
The problem is in the actual authentication layer of the wifi connection, before it even gets around to asking for an IP Address.
Seems to affect 802.11G routers more than others. Its not specific to certain router brands.
I've alogcated my self into a stupor and dug thru some of the opensource code.
The only thing I can see is that it appears some token is supposed to be incremented by the handset with each authentication attempt, and it is not
being incremented, so the router disconnects the client. But so much of wpa_suplicant is running in binary blobs that the end user is at a
serious disadvantage trying to dig through this stuff.
I can induce this error at will on my HTC One X, and I can recover from it by simply connecting to an unprotected wifi "guest" account
near by, then wait 30 seconds, and re-connect to my wpa2 secured router. I also solved it by running a spare router with no security
and leaving the router unconnected to anything. I use this for connection, wait 30 seconds, then reconnect to my home router.
Its a major pain. But its not SONY's fault, I suspect its Google's fault or the wifi chipset manufacturer's fault.
Ah, no, it is a general purpose word, used in print since at least 1865.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swoosh
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/swoosh
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/swoosh
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/swoosh
http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/swoosh
Not one of those dictionaries mentions Nike.