That's bullshit, pure and simple. Force = mass times accelleration. If you hit a wall at 15mph and then (in a different car of the same model) hit a similar wall at 75mph there is a LOT of difference. There's a lot of energy that has to get distributed into the body of the car and wall that wasn't there in the 15mph crash.
However Velocity is not Acceleration and Force is not Energy . (kinetic) Energy is 0.5 * m * v^2. Force is dU/dt (change in energy wrt time). Consequently, it is possible to be involved in a collision at 15 mph that exerts the same force on the occupant as a collision at 75 mph. Physics is a wonderfull thing.
Completely disagree with you on that one. Hiawatha has always struck me as a bloody idiot, albeat one with an article on the first page of the Boston Globe's business section. It's a pity that Simposon Garfinkle's column is burried inside.
Argh, when will people learn that security through obscurity is not security. Had photoad been closed source, the exploit still would have existed, but would have been much harder to find. However, if someone had stumbled across it, they could have exploited it maliciously for a while without people knowing. The open source model allows for this type of code review, which leads to products with better security.
My complaints with Nano are the same reasons it's given a positive review. The author went out of his way to portray the people involved in a positive light. I thought it would have made a good read for those who already believed in nano, but for those uncertain, it did more to alienate than to convince.
Very similar to my experiences. At work, my NT box is a glorified xterm (right now there's Netscape, Eudora Pro, and AIM running locally, and about 15 xterms, and xemacs from my Sun). When I tried to use Exceed's build in virtual destop, I had to reboot twice a day on average. Others that I tried were just as bad. Three - four week uptimes between reboots I can tolerate. 6 hours I can't.
Before you jump in a flame me for using NT, keep in mind these are just my comments on virtual desktops for that platform. I use Linux, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, OSF1 and Irix on a regular basis also. THey all have their faults.
Operating systems aren't certified C2, systems are. That means a particular operating system installed in a particular manner with particular software on a particular piece of hardware. When Microsoft says, "Oh boy, NT is now C2 certified", they're yanking your chain: it's C2 when installed in a specific way.
Specifically, NT 3.51 without a floppy drive or networking support. As for the actual certification, if you're interested, I highly recommend getting the appropriate book (My rainbow series is at home, can't remember whether it's orange or red). Price is right too (Assuming reader is US citizen - sorry).
"Government officials argue that they are not interested in eavesdropping, but rather are looking for patterns of behavior that suggest illegal activity."
What I want to know is: what sort of patterns suggest illegal activity? Based on previous nonsense, I wonder if use of encryption is enough to raise warning flags.
Erm, 4.x still lets you load imagines on a page by page basis. The "load images" button only appears if you have "auto-load images" unselected in preferences.
Slashdot Mirror
That's bullshit, pure and simple. Force = mass times accelleration. If you hit a wall at 15mph and then (in a different car of the same model) hit a similar wall at 75mph there is a LOT of difference. There's a lot of energy that has to get distributed into the body of the car and wall that wasn't there in the 15mph crash.
However Velocity is not Acceleration and Force is not Energy . (kinetic) Energy is 0.5 * m * v^2. Force is dU/dt (change in energy wrt time). Consequently, it is possible to be involved in a collision at 15 mph that exerts the same force on the occupant as a collision at 75 mph. Physics is a wonderfull thing.
Nope. For example, from my employers stand on that is: Employees who are not exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act... will be paid overtime.
:-)
However professionals are so-called "Exempt" employees, who don't have to be paid overtime.
Such is life...
(And don't call him Shirley)
Completely disagree with you on that one. Hiawatha has always struck me as a bloody idiot, albeat one with an article on the first page of the Boston Globe's business section. It's a pity that Simposon Garfinkle's column is burried inside.
Argh, when will people learn that security through obscurity is not security. Had photoad been closed source, the exploit still would have existed, but would have been much harder to find. However, if someone had stumbled across it, they could have exploited it maliciously for a while without people knowing.
The open source model allows for this type of code review, which leads to products with better security.
My complaints with Nano are the same reasons it's given a positive review. The author went out of his way to portray the people involved in a positive light. I thought it would have made a good read for those who already believed in nano, but for those uncertain, it did more to alienate than to convince.
Very similar to my experiences. At work, my NT box is a glorified xterm (right now there's Netscape, Eudora Pro, and AIM running locally, and about 15 xterms, and xemacs from my Sun). When I tried to use Exceed's build in virtual destop, I had to reboot twice a day on average. Others that I tried were just as bad. Three - four week uptimes between reboots I can tolerate. 6 hours I can't.
Before you jump in a flame me for using NT, keep in mind these are just my comments on virtual desktops for that platform. I use Linux, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, OSF1 and Irix on a regular basis also. THey all have their faults.
Specifically, NT 3.51 without a floppy drive or networking support. As for the actual certification, if you're interested, I highly recommend getting the appropriate book (My rainbow series is at home, can't remember whether it's orange or red). Price is right too (Assuming reader is US citizen - sorry).
"Government officials argue that they are not interested in eavesdropping, but rather are looking for patterns of behavior that suggest
illegal activity."
What I want to know is: what sort of patterns suggest illegal activity? Based on previous nonsense, I wonder if use of encryption is enough to raise warning flags.
Erm, 4.x still lets you load imagines on a page by page basis. The "load images" button only appears if you have "auto-load images" unselected in preferences.