> There's no way a rational person will accuse you of trying to sneak in a camera.
We are talking about a security guard.
You know, the same guy that use to beat you up in 10th grade just because he could. The guy that couldn't pass the police physical or the written test.
Getting caught (by what ever means) with a camera you KNEW was there, AND one that you tried to hide can cost you big time. Your Job. Your security clearance. Maybe a couple years of your freedom.
Telling them you read it on SlashDot won't save your sorry hide.
The a third party "repair" sites that specialize in removing cameras from phones, such as the iPhone. (Your warranty is removed along with the camera).
These guys do a pretty good business around military bases where high value assets are located, such as most Navy Bases and some Air Force bases. You often can not have a cell phone with a camera on such bases, (especially if you are a civilian employee/contractor).
> The faster we can get a strong secular leader in power there, the better the odds of Iran returning to the peaceful international fold.
Its too late.
We are well into the second generation of forced islam fundamentalism in Iran, and those that remember anything else are the "aging hippies" of their culture.
I doubt the terrorist plot claim hold much water in the US any more.
No, these days you can hear the plaintive wail of "Won't someone please think of the Children" anytime someone speaks out against censorship.
Child porn is the major excuse for excessive censorship today, but Australia proposed to block thousands of legitimate sites in the pursuit of child porn, and Minnesota wants to block gambling sites.
Most censorship in the US is not done by the Federal Government, but rather by over zealous ISPs, Schools, and in the work-place.
The US government is large enough that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.
However, don't expect this inconsistency to last if those pushing for more censorship gain the ear of the current administration.
That being said, I will bet you Dollars to Donunts that government censorship will arrive in the EU before it arrives in the US on any comparable scale.
This is because, when you strip away the rhetoric, the EU is based on the notion that people can not govern themselves, and the elite must assume this burden. The US has historically espoused the concept of self government.
How long either can be true to their founding principals is anyone's guess.
We hated those miserable image anomalies back in the day, and it hasn't become more endearing to have it fuzzed up with modern technology just to look old again.
Is this the new definition of progress? Use the best new technology we can find to generate the same old crap we already grew tired of?
> I find this to be the most pointless waste of time and effort I've heard about since Twitter.
Actually Twitter has some valid uses, but spending our courts' time on imaginary problems of imaginary crimes against imaginary property in an imaginary world ought to be forbidden by congress.
What further evidence do you need that there are way too many lawyers in the world?
Its way past time for some people to get a life (a flesh and blood life) and grow the fuck up!
There! I've vented on Slash dot. I feel better now.
Since non-writable media such as CD-ROMs generally aren't avenues for malicious software propagation
Because no that's infected ever burns a CD, nope, never.
Its been my general observation that most people capable of burning an auto-run CD are capable of installing a virus scanner.
Admittedly, that STILL leaves those with malicious intent such as Sony and the purveyors of hoards of CDs full of crapware found in so many Asian street markets.
A "home server" would not need any incoming ports open via the broadband card.
I'm sure the OP meant to use the mobile broadband card as the EXTERNAL nic of a NAT router, with the other nic being either wifi or wired, serving other machines in his household.
These are harder to detect, (sometimes impossible), and I see no reason why they should be prohibited as long as he lives under the cap or pays the fees.
So what good does it do you to know who sold your address? The horse is out of the barn by the time you start getting spam. They've already sold your address. You were planning to call them up and have them un-ring the bell?
Plus addressing is trivial to evade (as you correctly pointed out). You still get all the spam. Besides, I find Gmail pretty good at filtering spam without all that plus addressing nonsense.
What is needed is "one-time addresses", or addresses that cease to exist after n messages arrive, where n is some low number suitable for you verification email to be mailed and maybe a couple more. Then it goes dark, and the mail server disavows any knowledge of you.
But the thread is about commercial airliners. Posting about an experimental aircraft (and ignoring the examples above from that same page) is hardly germane.
> I would also guess that it is more likely that the weapons would be used on each other than on pirates.
Guns locked in gun safe in the captains quarters and the keys held by the captain and his second some how reach out and spur the crew to homicidal violence.
Once you've surrendered I suppose your method makes sense. I'm sure your sister is just fine with your "lay back and take it" advice.
Why to you assume they are "definitely going to board you" unless your plan is surrender at first sight?
Just how many pirates do you think can fit in an open 18 foot motor boat?
Please explain why it would be impossible for just ONE rifleman on the Alabama shooting from a stable platform to ward off 4 pirates in a pitching small boat with inaccurate arms.
Please explain what the source of arms that the pirates would deploy in answer to the "escalation" of ship-board shoulder arms.
How many three inch deck guns can you mount on an 18 foot motor boat?
You trot out the escalation boogie-man because you know it raises the specter of heavily armed warships in the hands of people who can't even read or write. Maybe even nuclear weapons.
Slashdot Mirror
> There's no way a rational person will accuse you of trying to sneak in a camera.
We are talking about a security guard.
You know, the same guy that use to beat you up in 10th grade just because he could. The guy that couldn't pass the police physical or the written test.
Getting caught (by what ever means) with a camera you KNEW was there, AND one that you tried to hide can cost you big time. Your Job. Your security clearance. Maybe a couple years of your freedom.
Telling them you read it on SlashDot won't save your sorry hide.
The a third party "repair" sites that specialize in removing cameras from phones, such as the iPhone. (Your warranty is removed along with the camera).
These guys do a pretty good business around military bases where high value assets are located, such as most Navy Bases and some Air Force bases. You often can not have a cell phone with a camera on such bases, (especially if you are a civilian employee/contractor).
> The faster we can get a strong secular leader in power there, the better the odds of Iran returning to the peaceful international fold.
Its too late.
We are well into the second generation of forced islam fundamentalism in Iran, and those that remember anything else are the "aging hippies" of their culture.
I doubt the terrorist plot claim hold much water in the US any more.
No, these days you can hear the plaintive wail of "Won't someone please think of the Children" anytime someone speaks out against censorship.
Child porn is the major excuse for excessive censorship today, but Australia proposed to block thousands of legitimate sites in the pursuit of child porn, and Minnesota wants to block gambling sites.
Most censorship in the US is not done by the Federal Government, but rather by over zealous ISPs, Schools, and in the work-place.
The US government is large enough that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.
However, don't expect this inconsistency to last if those pushing for more censorship gain the ear of the current administration.
That being said, I will bet you Dollars to Donunts that government censorship will arrive in the EU before it arrives in the US on any comparable scale.
This is because, when you strip away the rhetoric, the EU is based on the notion that people can not govern themselves, and the elite must assume this burden. The US has historically espoused the concept of self government.
How long either can be true to their founding principals is anyone's guess.
We hated those miserable image anomalies back in the day, and it hasn't become more endearing to have it fuzzed up with modern technology just to look old again.
Is this the new definition of progress? Use the best new technology we can find to generate the same old crap we already grew tired of?
Approves != Write.
And by the time he sees it you can bet it has been vetted by people he trusts.
> I find this to be the most pointless waste of time and effort I've heard about since Twitter.
Actually Twitter has some valid uses, but spending our courts' time on imaginary problems of imaginary crimes against imaginary property in an imaginary world ought to be forbidden by congress.
What further evidence do you need that there are way too many lawyers in the world?
Its way past time for some people to get a life (a flesh and blood life) and grow the fuck up!
There! I've vented on Slash dot. I feel better now.
> Today, any site of substance is really a cluster of servers fronted by load balancers.
Dude: We are talking NetBSD here, why would there be a "site of substance" for a product that is simultaneously:
1) not used by anyone
2) able to server the world running on an HP 35 Calculator
??
Your numbers are off by a factor of ten.
You are far too optimistic when quoting such low bug levels
1 bug / 10K lines?
Jesus H. Coder can't do that well.
So the lesser gods that wrote NetBsd are probably going to have error rates ten times as high.
Since non-writable media such as CD-ROMs generally aren't avenues for malicious software propagation
Because no that's infected ever burns a CD, nope, never.
Its been my general observation that most people capable of burning an auto-run CD are capable of installing a virus scanner.
Admittedly, that STILL leaves those with malicious intent such as Sony and the purveyors of hoards of CDs full of crapware found in so many Asian street markets.
A "home server" would not need any incoming ports open via the broadband card.
I'm sure the OP meant to use the mobile broadband card as the EXTERNAL nic of a NAT router, with the other nic being either wifi or wired, serving other machines in his household.
These are harder to detect, (sometimes impossible), and I see no reason why they should be prohibited as long as he lives under the cap or pays the fees.
Does Mr Giraffe reach over and grab the phone and call the publisher each time you read the book, reporting your name and address each time it does?
Or install any of the other PDF readers available and remove the spyware/call-home laden Adobe Reader once and for all.
That's not entirely true. Most LCD TVs have speakers and most have paper cones. (Ok, most have metal or plastic support structures).
Thin speakers are not particularly new.
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2009/04/paperthin_speakers_for_advertising.html (also covered by Slash dot here: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/03/147246
And see also:
http://www.eurekalert.org/features/kids/2008-12/acs-tps121508.php
If you disable plus addressing in Gmail if falls into your regular email box. How is that an improvement.
http://www.googletutor.com/2005/06/11/gmail-plus-aliases/
Best you can do is filter it direct to trash, but as stated above, spammers then just drop the plus.
So what good does it do you to know who sold your address? The horse is out of the barn by the time you start getting spam. They've already sold your address. You were planning to call them up and have them un-ring the bell?
Plus addressing is trivial to evade (as you correctly pointed out). You still get all the spam.
Besides, I find Gmail pretty good at filtering spam without all that plus addressing nonsense.
What is needed is "one-time addresses", or addresses that cease to exist after n messages arrive, where n is some low number suitable for you verification email to be mailed and maybe a couple more. Then it goes dark, and the mail server disavows any knowledge of you.
Lack of need perhaps?
(Not to state the blatantly obvious).
Indeed they will:
1997:
http://asia.cnet.com/photogallery/0,3800005208,62032380-005p,00.htm
1947:
http://asia.cnet.com/photogallery/0,3800005208,62032380-005p,00.htm
Almost exactly 50 years apart.
But the thread is about commercial airliners. Posting about an experimental aircraft (and ignoring the examples above from that same page) is hardly germane.
We had delta SSTs. We quit them. I reiterate:
"Airplanes look the way they do because that is how something needs to look to do the job it does at the price we are willing to pay."
We are not willing to pay for SSTs. They lost money. If you don't do SSTs you don't need scissor wings.
We can't afford the fuel expense and risk of VTOL, and saucery things just don't fly worth squat.
We will have aircraft that look like what we have today until we develop radically better engine technology, and or run out of Jet A fuel.
They are not likely to get much bigger that the biggest Airbus. They are not likely to get much faster.
We had no reason then or now to expect anything but incremental changes.
Rockets are so 60's.
Its time to break out of that sandbox and fly into space like pilots instead of spam in a can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Composites_White_Knight_Two
> Nobody would have guessed in 1969 that commercial airliners would still look exactly the same 40 years later.
And they will look exactly the same in another 40 years. Minor cosmetics and incremental differences in size not withstanding.
Airplanes look the way they do because that is how something needs to look to do the job it does at the price we are willing to pay.
Oh, I know, some people still think moon rockets would not look so much like like a phallus if they were designed by women.
But Horatio Greenough had it right. Form follows function.
> I would also guess that it is more likely that the weapons would be used on each other than on pirates.
Guns locked in gun safe in the captains quarters and the keys held by the captain and his second some how reach out and spur the crew to homicidal violence.
Is that the theory you are going with?
> The inventors are working to increase the percentage of carrot based material
Why?
Isn't carbon sequestration all the rage today?
More carbon fiber please!
I'm not sure it pays to get too precise with our mythological references ye mangie dogs.
Avast there, and allow me a little rhetorical leeway me buckos!
> definitely going to board you no matter what
Once you've surrendered I suppose your method makes sense. I'm sure your sister is just fine with your "lay back and take it" advice.
Why to you assume they are "definitely going to board you" unless your plan is surrender at first sight?
Just how many pirates do you think can fit in an open 18 foot motor boat?
Please explain why it would be impossible for just ONE rifleman on the Alabama shooting from a stable platform to ward off 4 pirates in a pitching small boat with inaccurate arms.
Please explain what the source of arms that the pirates would deploy in answer to the "escalation" of ship-board shoulder arms.
How many three inch deck guns can you mount on an 18 foot motor boat?
You trot out the escalation boogie-man because you know it raises the specter of heavily armed warships in the hands of people who can't even read or write. Maybe even nuclear weapons.
Oh the fear.