My SSD is encrypted with AES in hardware. As I understand it, you only have to send one ATA command to the disk to tell it to generate a new key and thereby make the existing data unreadable to anyone.
Personally I'd prefer a 'wipe key' button on my laptop to a cyanide pill in my teeth.
Getting the oppertunity to send that one key is tricky if you are in handcuffs.
Better to have a key you hand over after a suitable number of threats which does the new key generation. You can always blame the cops for being technological cavemen and damaging your computer. He who touches it last acquires all blame.
If you can add a phone to your cell plan and pay cell service, why in hell would you want to build something? The phone companies will GIVE you an entry level smart phone and there is an APP for that.
You won't find a cheaper way to cover the loss and there is no way to prevent it from being stolen for a reasonable amount of money. As it can be lifted into a truck, taken out and dismantled and any anti=theft system defeated before you can finish reading this response...
If you can track it on the truck that would be good enough. Most thieves will not start tearing it down on site.
A cheap add on smartphone with a minimal dataplan and a free find-my-phone app or child tracking app would report its last position. Permanently wired to the battery and hidden under a plastic part (seat) it would likely survive long enough to provide a location of the chop shop it was taken too.
I rather suspect it is the casual thief might (as opposed to the professional) might never discover such an installation.
That and learning where campus security cameras are focused should be cheaper than theft insurance.
Well all I am trying to point out is that "Technically free" is a pointless argument, not supported by any rational business case.
Nothing that uses your infrastructure is technically free.
It has been stated that the reason many people experience calls going direct to voice mail is because of signaling channel congestion. Some links to this phenomena appear here, and here.
(Signaling channel (probably not the right term, but someone is sure to jump in with the correct one) is the common channel signaling system that the towers talk to the handsets with. This channel is also used by the tower indicate it has a call for that handset.).
SMS is technically free. The only cost is counting/bill.
If you consider only the radio spectrum involved in delivery, you could make that argument.
But the messages have to be routed, handed off to other carriers, stored and forwarded, etc. This has a real cost, even if the last mile imposes no additional burden on the cell tower.
Further, you must amortize your network, every switch, tower, transmitter, fiber optic. You spread these costs over every service you provide. If people dropped their voice plans and kept only their sms plans, you STILL end up having to maintain the same towers, networks, and switching centers.
So SMS messages are essentially free as long as you look ONLY at that segment of open air between the tower an your phone.
That being said, the rate charged for these things are beyond all measure of the actual costs. I'm not defending the pricing. I'm simply calling into question the rather myopic view that they come down the same pre-existing signaling channel and are therefore free.
Is that the data messaging probably costs the carrier more than SMS...
Maybe, maybe not.
As we move to LTE, there may no longer be any need for a signaling channel (which is what SMS rides on for free). The carriers, while bemoaning the lost revenue are probably just as happy to see SMS disappear as anyone else.
Data messaging (data in general) is just another few packets in the data stream, where the routing is not their problem. Throw it on the internet and forget about it.
The story linked to in the summary more or less hints at this:
“This is one of the primary reasons the industry is currently moving towards an all-IP converged core network accelerated by the deployment of LTE technology. By allowing users to place high definition voice and video calls, chat, share content, and discover new services as part of a globally connected framework, operators can retain and even grow their share of customer communication spend.”
Carriers are setting prices and data tiers now so as to be properly positioned for what is coming in the future. They realize they will end up being dumb TCP/IP pipes covering the last mile(s) of open air, and they won't be selling you minutes or messages; Just Megabytes.
Yup, but the protocols for their own video calling system are open and published. You are welcome to implement your own alternative. Which no one did so far, AFAIK.
If you are bothered by it, did you do something?
Published, maybe, Free, not.
With a zillion protocols to choose from why did apple invent their own.
XMPP (Jabber) was there all along, and its under active development and enhancement, its free, cross platform and is being extended to handle video, voice, and multimedia with the formalization of LibJingle. In addition to a world wide network of free servers, it can now work with no server at all.
Google uses it. Microsoft uses it. Why did Apple have to invent their own?
Could it be that XMPP could reach out beyond the garden walls?
I suspect in large part because most companies' lawyers basically tell them "Paying the licensing fee is cheaper and surer means to an end than fighting." So far as I can tell, it basically amounts to a vast conspiracy of legal departments on both sides of the fence.
Also a possible reason is that B&N is a US company and could go directly after Microsoft in a court of its choice. HTC, Samsung, et al may have subsidiaries here but they are headquartered elsewhere and can't directly access US courts as easily.
MS and Apple are trying to use their patents to make competing products prohibitively expensive. Also reprehensible, but a distinct activity from patent trolling.
Except when you follow the links and read the article (I Know, I know) you see that trolling is exactly what is going on here. Microsoft is trolling by proxy, using MOSAID in Canada as a non-practicing third party holder of these patents.
They (MOSAID) specifically state that they can't be counter sued for infringements because all they do is license patents that Microsoft purchased from Nokia and deposited with MOSAID (after assigning themselves a free license to use them). MOSAID does not practice these patents. They fit perfectly your definition of a TROLL.
Further Microsoft themselves don't practice most of these patents either, because they don't make phones. But because they licensed these patents they are attempting to use them as a club to beat Android. So Troll again.
Nokia, not party to this action, retained a license when they sold these patents to Microsoft and their sock puppet MOSAID. They practice all of these patents, and therefore have stayed out of the way and kept their mouth shut on this issue.
Doesn't explain why some of the structures have heavy bomb damage.
Assuming no foreign power has been bombing China- I can't fathom why China would bomb their own calibration units.
(unless it was to test what would happen- before an enemy did it to them)
Its pretty clear this is a heavily bombed area, the whole vicinity is riddled with bomb craters. Just a few clicks away from the strange lines is a runway mock-up, with a shadow mock-up offset from it. Exploring this area you can zoom in on this target ad see what appears to b missile booster stages laying around, generally facing east-to-west. They can't be tanker trucks, because they are narrower than the nearby dirt road tracks.
Zooming out from that link shows the two mock airfields.
I'm sure all the major intelligence agencies of the world have very much better photos than these.
Was the 1% reduction on Wednesday a reduction of one percent of the previously reduced Tuesday results or a 1% of some long ago starting point.
Look, words have meaning, and a scientific article is no place to laps into valley girl speak. This is what happens when journalism majors try to report on scientific programs.
It it took on 1 hour to charge, then 10 times one hour is 10 hours, but since it was a reduction it must now charge in a negative 9 hours. Perpetual energy!!!
If they mean 1/10th they should say 1/10, not ten times less. Its just plain syntactically incorrect. 10 times always implies multiplication.
Microsoft has been a rather stable investment over the years, and held its value well during the recent crunch.
That said, some years ago, after Microsoft paid off my house and put my kid thru college, I jumped ship to Apple. Now I'm looking for somewhere else to jump, because I figure Apple has run its course.
It's not going to change the fact that in virtually every market *except Toronto* you're buying your connection from your phone company or your cable company directly. Toronto seems to be the only city with the critical mass and regulatory structure to allow third party providers to survive and flourish. It hasn't happened here in Vancouver.
But that's not unusual anywhere in north america. You have the phone company or the cable company. Every other option pretty much disappeared when Dial Up vanished.
The article is not that clear on which portion of networks services Jobs planned to put on his un-licensed wifi. Clearly Calls would have to bridge the gap between his network and the POTS system somewhere.
Perhaps he was only planning for the data portion on his network. Even then, its clear he had no idea of the enormous size of the task at hand. Even using mesh network topology the cost of APs would have been enormous.
Still you can't fault him for trying to end-run the bastards. We will eventually end up with a "dumb pipe" network from the carriers, where they stop selling us minutes or data, and just sell bandwidth.
I suspect Google is much closer to being able to allow you to forego minutes altogether, by handling calls over data on their Google Voice service via what ever data connection you might have. I suspect the only thing holding them back is not wanting to piss off the carriers.
I pay to be connected to the ISP's on an unlimited supply, a claim they make on every fucking advert and website they have (as does every competitor) - yet they tell me that I have to share and it's only as 'unlimited' as they can manage....
Seriously? Can you post one single advertisement where they claim you have unlimited data? Please only post those where you have taken the time to read the fine print you overlooked the first time.
Reversely, being a knight in shining armor in the battle for truth and justice on a global scale doesn't mean you can't be a pain or even a rapist on a small personal scale.
Wise move, posting that as an AC.... (snort).
Please explain how one is a rapist on a personal scale.
Funny enough, that already happened. In 1811 a similar underwater eruption near the Azores.
While this island lies clearly within the territorial limits of the Canary Islands (Spain) the question of Lo'ihi is not so certain.
Lo'ihi is still some distance (~969 meters) below the surface, but growing steadily, and when it breaks the surface it will be 30km from the Big Island in Hawaii, which is well outside the US claimed 22km territorial limit. The chances of the US allowing anyone else to claim it are slim to none, but the precedent set in 1811 would pretty much assure the US will have boots on the ground before anyone else gets a chance.
While Hawaiian volcanoes are typically slow growing, Lo'ihi is thought to be fed by the same lava plume feeding the Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes. Should the plume find easier going to the east, Lo'ihi could draw upon pretty vast resources and grow much faster.
Slashdot Mirror
No good. Some of us venture out of the basement once in a while.
My SSD is encrypted with AES in hardware. As I understand it, you only have to send one ATA command to the disk to tell it to generate a new key and thereby make the existing data unreadable to anyone.
Personally I'd prefer a 'wipe key' button on my laptop to a cyanide pill in my teeth.
Getting the oppertunity to send that one key is tricky if you are in handcuffs.
Better to have a key you hand over after a suitable number of threats which does the new key generation. You can always blame the cops for being technological cavemen and damaging your computer. He who touches it last acquires all blame.
After all, you've paid for it via your ISP, right?
If you can add a phone to your cell plan and pay cell service, why in hell would you want to build something?
The phone companies will GIVE you an entry level smart phone and there is an APP for that.
You won't find a cheaper way to cover the loss and there is no way to prevent it from being stolen for a reasonable amount of money. As it can be lifted into a truck, taken out and dismantled and any anti=theft system defeated before you can finish reading this response...
If you can track it on the truck that would be good enough.
Most thieves will not start tearing it down on site.
A cheap add on smartphone with a minimal dataplan and a free find-my-phone app or child tracking app would report its last position.
Permanently wired to the battery and hidden under a plastic part (seat) it would likely survive long enough to provide a location of the
chop shop it was taken too.
I rather suspect it is the casual thief might (as opposed to the professional) might never discover such an installation.
That and learning where campus security cameras are focused should be cheaper than theft insurance.
Where does microsoft use jabber?
See this :
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2009/oct09/10-01ucinterop.mspx
Please re-read the post to which you are replying. Everything you've said is implicit in that post.
But again you are making the mistake of looking at one TINY portion of the entire network and ignoring the end-to-end costs.
Well all I am trying to point out is that "Technically free" is a pointless argument, not supported by any rational business case.
Nothing that uses your infrastructure is technically free.
It has been stated that the reason many people experience calls going direct to voice mail is because of signaling channel congestion.
Some links to this phenomena appear here, and here.
(Signaling channel (probably not the right term, but someone is sure to jump in with the correct one) is the common channel signaling system that the towers talk to the handsets with. This channel is also used by the tower indicate it has a call for that handset.).
Right, because $5 extra dollars on a $200+ purchase makes it "prohibitively expensive".
Citation needed.
Nobody has yet stated the actual cost per handset.
Mostly because Microsoft stipulates in contract that they must NOT reveal EITHER the patents they are licensing
OR the actual dollar value.
The second part is par for the course, but refusing to allow the licensees to specify EXACTLY which patents they
are licensing is very very suspect.
SMS is technically free. The only cost is counting/bill.
If you consider only the radio spectrum involved in delivery, you could make that argument.
But the messages have to be routed, handed off to other carriers, stored and forwarded, etc. This has a real cost, even if the last mile imposes no additional burden on the cell tower.
Further, you must amortize your network, every switch, tower, transmitter, fiber optic. You spread these costs over every service you provide. If people dropped their voice plans and kept only their sms plans, you STILL end up having to maintain the same towers, networks, and switching centers.
So SMS messages are essentially free as long as you look ONLY at that segment of open air between the tower an your phone.
That being said, the rate charged for these things are beyond all measure of the actual costs. I'm not defending the pricing.
I'm simply calling into question the rather myopic view that they come down the same pre-existing signaling channel and are therefore free.
Is that the data messaging probably costs the carrier more than SMS...
Maybe, maybe not.
As we move to LTE, there may no longer be any need for a signaling channel (which is what SMS rides on for free).
The carriers, while bemoaning the lost revenue are probably just as happy to see SMS disappear as anyone else.
Data messaging (data in general) is just another few packets in the data stream, where the routing is not their problem. Throw it on the internet and forget about it.
The story linked to in the summary more or less hints at this:
“This is one of the primary reasons the industry is currently moving towards an all-IP converged core network accelerated by the deployment of LTE technology. By allowing users to place high definition voice and video calls, chat, share content, and discover new services as part of a globally connected framework, operators can retain and even grow their share of customer communication spend.”
Carriers are setting prices and data tiers now so as to be properly positioned for what is coming in the future. They realize they will end up being dumb TCP/IP pipes covering the last mile(s) of open air, and they won't be selling you minutes or messages; Just Megabytes.
Yup, but the protocols for their own video calling system are open and published. You are welcome to implement your own alternative. Which no one did so far, AFAIK.
If you are bothered by it, did you do something?
Published, maybe, Free, not.
With a zillion protocols to choose from why did apple invent their own.
XMPP (Jabber) was there all along, and its under active development and enhancement, its free, cross platform and is being extended to handle video, voice, and multimedia with the formalization of LibJingle. In addition to a world wide network of free servers, it can now work with no server at all.
Google uses it. Microsoft uses it. Why did Apple have to invent their own?
Could it be that XMPP could reach out beyond the garden walls?
all microsoft wants is money.
Apple doesn't care about money from patent suits, they are out to see the their competitors burn.
Microsoft does not care about money. At best they will only obtain 1/3 of the license fees, the rest go to Nokia and the canadian patent troll MOSAID.
Microsoft wants to make it prohibitively expensive to produce any Android phone.
I suspect in large part because most companies' lawyers basically tell them "Paying the licensing fee is cheaper and surer means to an end than fighting." So far as I can tell, it basically amounts to a vast conspiracy of legal departments on both sides of the fence.
Also a possible reason is that B&N is a US company and could go directly after Microsoft in a court of its choice. HTC, Samsung, et al may have subsidiaries here but they are headquartered elsewhere and can't directly access US courts as easily.
MS and Apple are trying to use their patents to make competing products prohibitively expensive. Also reprehensible, but a distinct activity from patent trolling.
Except when you follow the links and read the article (I Know, I know) you see that trolling is exactly what is going on here.
Microsoft is trolling by proxy, using MOSAID in Canada as a non-practicing third party holder of these patents.
They (MOSAID) specifically state that they can't be counter sued for infringements because all they do is license patents
that Microsoft purchased from Nokia and deposited with MOSAID (after assigning themselves a free license to use them).
MOSAID does not practice these patents. They fit perfectly your definition of a TROLL.
Further Microsoft themselves don't practice most of these patents either, because they don't make phones. But because they licensed
these patents they are attempting to use them as a club to beat Android. So Troll again.
Nokia, not party to this action, retained a license when they sold these patents to Microsoft and their sock puppet MOSAID. They practice all of these patents, and therefore have stayed out of the way and kept their mouth shut on this issue.
Doesn't explain why some of the structures have heavy bomb damage.
Assuming no foreign power has been bombing China- I can't fathom why China would bomb their own calibration units.
(unless it was to test what would happen- before an enemy did it to them)
Its pretty clear this is a heavily bombed area, the whole vicinity is riddled with bomb craters. Just a few clicks away from the strange lines is a
runway mock-up, with a shadow mock-up offset from it. Exploring this area you can zoom in on this target ad see what appears to b missile booster stages laying around, generally facing east-to-west. They can't be tanker trucks, because they are narrower than the nearby dirt road tracks.
Zooming out from that link shows the two mock airfields.
I'm sure all the major intelligence agencies of the world have very much better photos than these.
Even that is not totally non-obvious.
Was the 1% reduction on Wednesday a reduction of one percent of the previously reduced Tuesday results or a 1% of some long ago starting point.
Look, words have meaning, and a scientific article is no place to laps into valley girl speak. This is what happens when journalism majors try to report on scientific programs.
It it took on 1 hour to charge, then 10 times one hour is 10 hours, but since it was a reduction it must now charge in a negative 9 hours. Perpetual energy!!!
If they mean 1/10th they should say 1/10, not ten times less. Its just plain syntactically incorrect. 10 times always implies multiplication.
This reduced the time it takes the battery to recharge by up to 10 times.
I just cringe when I read that kind of stuff coming from an article about scientific fields.
Does that mean 1/10 the time?
Market cap is beauty contest, and nothing more.
Depends on "when" and how long you got in.
Look at a charts more representative of the long term investor:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=my&s=MSFT&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=aapl&c=%5EGSPC&c=%5EIXIC
Microsoft has been a rather stable investment over the years, and held its value well during the recent
crunch.
That said, some years ago, after Microsoft paid off my house and put my kid thru college, I jumped ship to Apple.
Now I'm looking for somewhere else to jump, because I figure Apple has run its course.
It's not going to change the fact that in virtually every market *except Toronto* you're buying your connection from your phone company or your cable company directly. Toronto seems to be the only city with the critical mass and regulatory structure to allow third party providers to survive and flourish. It hasn't happened here in Vancouver.
But that's not unusual anywhere in north america.
You have the phone company or the cable company.
Every other option pretty much disappeared when Dial Up vanished.
The article is not that clear on which portion of networks services Jobs planned to put on his un-licensed wifi.
Clearly Calls would have to bridge the gap between his network and the POTS system somewhere.
Perhaps he was only planning for the data portion on his network. Even then, its clear he had no idea of the enormous size of the
task at hand. Even using mesh network topology the cost of APs would have been enormous.
Still you can't fault him for trying to end-run the bastards. We will eventually end up with a "dumb pipe" network from the carriers,
where they stop selling us minutes or data, and just sell bandwidth.
I suspect Google is much closer to being able to allow you to forego minutes altogether, by handling calls over data on their Google Voice service via what ever data connection you might have. I suspect the only thing holding them back is not wanting to piss off the carriers.
I pay to be connected to the ISP's on an unlimited supply, a claim they make on every fucking advert and website they have (as does every competitor) - yet they tell me that I have to share and it's only as 'unlimited' as they can manage....
Seriously?
Can you post one single advertisement where they claim you have unlimited data?
Please only post those where you have taken the time to read the fine print you overlooked the first time.
Reversely, being a knight in shining armor in the battle for truth and justice on a global scale doesn't mean you can't be a pain or even a rapist on a small personal scale.
Wise move, posting that as an AC.... (snort).
Please explain how one is a rapist on a personal scale.
Funny enough, that already happened. In 1811 a similar underwater eruption near the Azores.
While this island lies clearly within the territorial limits of the Canary Islands (Spain) the question of Lo'ihi is not so certain.
Lo'ihi is still some distance (~969 meters) below the surface, but growing steadily, and when it breaks the surface it will be 30km from the Big Island in Hawaii, which is well outside the US claimed 22km territorial limit. The chances of the US allowing anyone else to claim it are slim to none, but the precedent set in 1811 would pretty much assure the US will have boots on the ground before anyone else gets a chance.
While Hawaiian volcanoes are typically slow growing, Lo'ihi is thought to be fed by the same lava plume feeding the Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes. Should the plume find easier going to the east, Lo'ihi could draw upon pretty vast resources and grow much faster.