Really? Illegal? How do the various salary caps for teams get by in sports leagues?
Or are you trying to say that you had to work at one of those companies because they are the only places that you can work and you are incapable of doing something else? For it to be illegal they'd have to control the market. Those companies do not control the IT job market, they don't even control a tiny percentage of it. So it doesn't really matter what deals they make, there are plenty of other companies not making any such agreement which could pay more if they wanted too and you were worth it.
So its okay for the NFL, NBA, and MLB to have salary caps, and they pretty much are monopolies, but its not okay for a tiny percentage of the market to agree not start a wage war with each other...
The reality of it is this is simply a side effect of the laws of supply and demand. The demand for workers is far lower than the supply, so they simply don't need to poach to get qualified employees.
Sorry, but its not these companies fault that you're in a field with people that are just as qualified as you are that don't have some sort of entitlement issue and are more than happy to work for a reasonable wage.
If their wages were so terrible, people wouldn't be tripping over themselves to work at these companies when there are clearly alternatives available. No one is forced to work at Intel. Every single person at Intel is capable of getting a job elsewhere by just saying the worked at Intel. Hell, they could get fired and have it spread all over the Internet and they'd STILL get hired by SOMEONE just by name dropping, its not like these people don't have options, and in fact have MORE options by working at these companies which are supposedly 'hurting' them.
Maybe... just MAYBE... you aren't really worth what you think you're worth.
How is it legal for a carrier to block messages from a legitimate customer unless the messages were spam?
The fact that they can block spam stems from the fact that they can randomly pick what they want to let through and what they don't. Not the other way around.
You can also randomly pick where you want to do business.
What you don't get to do is tell someone else how to run their business.
For once someone on slashdot has a nickname that seems fitting.
I'm a religious person, raised catholic actually...
With that in mind... you do realize that you are so clearly over the top a religious nut job that no one anywhere will ever possibly take you seriously unless they too happen to be off their rockers... right?
You seriously just posted that silly drivel on slashdot, a place with plenty of anti-religion nutjobs who wlll be happy to rip you a new one for talking silly...
The only thing surprising about your post is that I'm the only one so far that has responded.
You need some perspective, and you need to learn how to integrate religion into your life, not make it your entire life, even priests know the difference. I'm probably just getting sucked into your troll but... you really don't want to come off as such a complete and total religious nutjob if you want people to listen to what you have to say. The first part of that is not throwing religion into discussions that have nothing to do with it for no reason other than to promote your own agenda, that tends to piss people off, religious or non-religious.
The reason you get automatic rejection is because the common person has a bullshit detector built in, and when they see your level of bullshit flowing they tend to realize its probably just a mask you use to cover the fact that you'll be the first one to 'do evil' except it'll be 'gods will' or 'for the children'.
Seriously, tone it down. You just make it really hard on those of us who are religious yet not completely bat shit insane.
Just go to google, type in some random letters and hit I'm feeling lucky.
I'm fairly sure that even doing that once will result in at least 10 times the amount of useful information on the first results page than contained in every bit of data that twitter has.
Seriously... using the word focused in relation to a website/service that doesn't allow messages long enough to really even complete a thought in writing?
Twitter is entirely about serving people with absolutely no focus what so ever. Seems like 'focusing' would be exactly what they don't want to do.
Of course, I think twitter is about the dumbest service I've ever seen. It was a retard solution to the fact that phones had a no useful email client really because for some odd reason, no one has realized that a proper imap setup is all thats needed to get 'push' messaging. Twitter made sense before everyone that texted had phones that were more than capable of using a real alternative that actually allows to you complete at least one thought in a single message.
The single biggest shot across the bow to privacy in HTML5 is the ping attribute [w3.org]. It may seem innocuous at first glance, but according to MozillaZine [mozillazine.org], it sends an HTTP POST request to each url. Why not GET instead?
Why does it matter if its a GET or POST? I mean, why would you want GET? More chances that the URL will contain sensitive data that gets logged in more places. My webservers log GETs with all their encoded data by default, but the only thing I know about posts in the log is that they were posts and I know nothing about whats in them. My browser did, and so did the proxy that brought that post into the actual web servers, so its not like they can 'hide' information in there that you 'cant' see.
From the link you gave:
The a and area elements have a new attribute called ping that specifies a space-separated list of URLs which have to be pinged when the hyperlink is followed. Currently user tracking is mostly done through redirects. This attribute allows the user agent to inform users which URLs are going to be pinged as well as giving privacy-conscious users a way to turn it off.
Emphasis mine. You can bet it will default to prompt initially in most browsers. Makes it fairly easy to control. Much has been learned since cookies came out, and the ping attribute is an attempt to use that experience.
You're worried about how it can be abused and completely ignore that its really simple for a browser to not allow anything you mentioned to happen. You could already do a DDOS with hidden iframes that would accomplish the same thing for instance.
Its no worse thank cookies, is just as controllable as cookies in every way, and is designed to fill a specific roll that is already filled using a bunch of kludges.
The only advantage virtual currency has over physical non-traceable currency is that virtual currency can be used electronically.
Otherwise virtual currency is worse in every way and offers no other advantages.
The idea that 'fraud' can be prevented is simply bogus as there are plenty of people who loose money, through no fault of their own, every day when card companies refuse to handle it properly.
You can't take my cash without prying it out of my hands, and its relatively hard to trace my cash flow with physical currency.
You may not care, but I really don't want people knowing what I do, even if I don't do anything illegal.
As silly as this sounds, Walmart isn't nearly as evil as Verizon and DirectTV. Verizon is a phone company, know for being evil. DirectTV is a failing business that pulls any scam it can trying to stay in business, much like XM/Sirius radio, who recently billed my CC after being told not to because I wanted an invoice and no automatic deduction... then when I called to get that fixed, they told me they couldn't give me a refund because they didn't have my CC number... and they couldnt' give me a full refund since I had the service 'activated' for a couple of days... even though I have logged several calls complaining that the radio never re-authorized regardless of how long I left it on.
In your particular case, if verizon doesn't have something signed saying you'll pay them, then you can tell them to stuff off. If they put it on your credit, sue them in small claims.
If you just bend over and take it then yes, everyone that can get buy with it will fuck you in the ass.
In the end, the result is that you've made a protocol more complex trying to make it obscure... but its an open protocol so obscuring it is pointless, anyone can tell you how to unobscure it...
An added part of that is that you then what the CC clearing houses to deal with a much larger number of CC numbers so you can use them as one time numbers. They'd have to keep all those numbers stored if they are randomly generated, OR they have to use a clearly defined way to generate the numbers, in which case, again being an open protocol, you just need to get the right information to make the next step. Basically you want CCs to act something like key fobs for cars.
Storing all the extra data is of no value to the CC companies, they're going to make you pay them in most cases anyway so its just not worth the effort.
One time pad is the simplest and safest (currently anyway) solution to the problem if you're going to add electronics to the cards themselves.
The user swipes their card. Enters their pin ON THE CARD and the card gives them a one time pad to use with the clerk.
If you stop using magnetic cards and switch to some kind of smart card that can communicate back with the reader then you can actually make it in such a way that regardless of what the vendor you're buying stuff from wants to do, they can't change what you authorize because the card is required to generate the required validation code.
If you want something more secure than a credit card there are several ways to do it that are actually more secure, rather than just more complex.
Skyhook uses multiple data sources to determine your location.
Mac addresses aren't unique on a global scale.
They also use the IP address you have and the cell tower you are connected to if available.
Its much more difficult to fool Skyhook than you think, though it isn't that uncommon for it to be off about a thousand miles.
There is no '5 sats minimum' for GPS. 5 will get you a somewhat accurate altitude as well, but 4 will get you a pretty accurate fix, only three are required theoretically, but the actual accuracy won't be that great. Jamming and making GPS devices give out the wrong location is trivial with the right equipment, not sure what you're going to accomplish long term by doing so though, its also really easy to track you down.
Thats the great thing about selling 'SuSE' to someone else... they still keep it for themselves as well. They can just restaff ( or keep staff depending on the deal ) and do the same thing.
As a general rule, 'buying a linux company' is an absolutely retarded idea.
You must be, otherwise you'd know that Apple did far better from an 'openness' perspective in a consumer level device than pretty much any provider had ever allowed before then.
Apple forced an unlimited data plan on AT&T.
Apple forced a real browser on AT&T.
Apple forced AT&T to use the Apple app store, NOT an AT&T controlled app store.
Apple brought the phone, out of the box, with all hardware on the device working, without additional monthly charges to access things like the GPS.
Apple however, still followed along with a lot of the retarded shit that providers MAKE them do.
Apple still didn't make tethering available without AT&Ts ok.
Apple still doesn't let certain Apps onto the App Store that are simply competition rather than bad apps.
Apple does a lot of bad things too.
And so does Android.
And both are far more open than any popular (at least in America, Europe was probably different) phone that existed before they did. Before smartphones where the norm, mobile carriers locked you in tighter than... well, tight. Both of these devices give you substantially more freedom than any popular device before them.
Neither Apple nor Google own the mobile phone market, they are still at the 'I REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS MARKET!!@$!' stage, so they don't get to make the rules. They can only push so far. Apple pushed pretty hard. There probably wasn't a lot left that Google could do, the unlimited data forced on AT&T burned them bad since the phone was the first popular device with a real browser. The carriers aren't going to make that mistake twice just to jump on the hype.
As far as 'running wild with THEIR codebase'... well I'm fairly sure you have no fucking clue how OPEN source works. One of the rules of the 'open' part is not placing restrictions on what you are calling 'open'. Everyone has different definitions from public domain to GPL to normal peoples definition of open.
Had they choice a different license, one that was far less open, then they could reign the carriers in.
So which one do you want? Do you want open or not? You want everyone to be open and let you do whatever you want. You probably also expect them to give it to you for free. You are unrealistic and will never be pleased. No one cares about customers with opinions like yours. There is no reason to care, you simply can't be pleased so there is no value in listening to your input. You can threaten to 'take your money elsewhere', but they'll be some other lunatic like yourself 'taking their money elsewhere' to replace you. And you'll be back, whenever the new company you're fawning over pisses you off and you rant off to someplace else... again...
You wanted open, and thats what you got, now you're pissed off because someone went and did something you don't like... guess what, thats what freedom is all about! It doesn't mean you get control over everything and no one can do anything without your explicit permission, at least, not by a normal persons definition of open. You probably realize that there isn't really any truely 100% 'open' computing device on the planet. Theres proprietary and closed in ever device you use, and none of them would exist without it.
You say Google made a bad judgement call. I say your judgement is clouded by an irrational set of ideals (selfishness really) that can not be satisfied in reality.
All iPhones and iPod touch devices are more or less identical hardware.
Sure there are minor differences in hardware options as newer models come out, but for the most part they are all the same hardware.
Android devices on the other hand are more like PCs. LOTS of different hardware configurations, so everyone has to maintain their own distribution.
The fragmentation in the Android product line is EXACTLY like the PC line, and its problems match it perfectly. It all pretty much relates around getting the OS to work right on a given hardware platform.
You can't depend on Google to solve that problem because they simply don't make all the hardware.
You can depend on Apple to solve that problem because they are the only ones who make the hardware. Just like Macs. There are very few options (relative to the competition) in Apple hardware. A direct result of this limited set hardware platforms is that both OSX and iOS run on pretty much all of the devices you'd want to run them on. Yes, at some age they stop working, but even then its been long enough that the normal person has been through 2 or 3 replacements since then ANYWAY, the only complaints are from people with something far past what most would consider a 'useful' life span.
Android is just like Windows for your phone as far as upgrade issues. You're at the mercy of the guys who make the hardware drivers. If you're luck and the hardware was really popular or was OSS friendly, then you'll probably be able to upgrade for a while... but this is probably pretty limited as most devices are going to be sold just as any junk PC hardware. You'll get a device that works at that point in time, but forget upgrading to new OS revisions because they won't make the drivers for that device. Its just like finding Windows 7 drivers for your 3 year old scanner, printer, or non-popular video card. Sure you can get drivers for an nVidia card, but some random cheapass emachines integrated chipset on some no-name motherboard that no ones ever heard of before... or will ever hear of again aren't going to be upgraded.
Just imagine the "I'm a Mac and I'm a PC" commercials, but replace most of it with "I'm an iPhone and I'm an Android phone", you still need to change the details since I'm not really aware of any Android viruses and such yet, but otherwise the point is about the same. You get a bunch of issues that normal users don't want to deal with, eventually they'll figure it out and pick the one that works best for them. The PC has the advantage of software lock-in, people have apps they can't replace if they switch to a Mac. Android has no such advantage over the iPhone. Again, the few geeks on slashdot that MUST HAVE A XXX APP BECAUSE THEY WOULD DIE WITHOUT IT OMFG don't really actually count to anyone who makes the decisions, regardless of how loudly they shout.
Shrug, maybe I'm just waxing on... but if I was Google and realized this... I'd make it my top priority to not allow Android to follow the same path as Windows.
Open Solaris is dead, and there are kernel bugs in the latest version, so good luck with that.
OpenSolaris is dead, thank god, it was a shining example of just how well OSS doesn't work for everything. It was a rather stupid idea in the first place but it did manage to put a kink in a few other companies plans so good for them, but yes, its dead.
As for kernel bugs... welp, if you think the kernel of your OS doesn't have bugs, you're an idiot. Second, you have the source, fix OpenSolaris yourself... thats the response we see out of so many OSS zealots here so I figured I'd throw in my two cents.
Google luck on finding solutions to your problems that are based on logic and rational thinking, I doubt you can pull it off judging by your statements so far.
And even Mach 10 isn't enough, orbital velocity is close to Mach 25.
At what distance from the Earth?
Orbital velocity is entirely dependent on your distance from the gravitational source and its gravitational pull.
You already have 'some' orbital velocity just standing on the planet, in fact, you have enough to orbit if you go far enough away from the planet, though it wouldn't probably last very long.
LIMs are 'theoretically' unlimited, you just have to space them out properly and sequence them fast enough. In practice of course, its entirely different. I think for most practical purposes of terrestrial motion, they will be practically unlimited until we invent inertial dampeners of some sort.
GPL gets rather sticky in where the limitation ends on whats required to be included.
For instance one of the GPL requirements is a bit about the scripts and toolchain required to compile the code.
Its not entirely clear to what extent that goes. My interpretation of it is that you couldn't distribute something that required say an MS CC specific option because you would also be required to distribute the MS CC in some what (source or binary is also unclear).
The general consensus however from the OSS community at large is that it means you have to distribute the scripts that call special tools, but not the tools themselves. You would have to include your batch file that builds using MS CC, but not MS CC itself.
GPL wants to consume everything it touches where ever possible. Unfortunately, that wouldn't go over well and would have required basically someone to invent a GPL'd computer that you could then start making GPL'd software on, but you'd have to base that on a GPL'd universe. Which... clearly is a ludicrous idea, so rather than try to enforce that to its fullest extent, the community generally accepts a certain, not carved in stone, cutoff point that generally leaves build tools out of the distribution chain.
If those bits are ever challenged it could cause significant problems for GPL and its users. Rather than going to court over such things, both sides don't want to risk the potential outcome of a court case going wrong, so both sides (GPL users and proprietary license users) generally meet in the middle to avoid hassle. Only occasionally does something get big enough to cause a community uproar to get the lines more clearly drawn. This thing with Dell is an example of Dell not wanting to push the issue really after the community pushed back.
Most of the community are not likely to push much harder as most people accept that certain bits of code for hardware can't be released even if Dell wants to because they simply don't have the right to do so. Rather than forcing Dell to play by the rules, which would mean the end of Android on that particular device, the community backs off and lets them get by.
Most everyone wins in the end, with a few rare corner cases and a handful of geeks that bitch about 'not getting everything' because they want to convince people they really do need to tweak some driver because they 'know better'... never mind the fact that their fully 'tweaked' systems have uptimes too short to post a message this long on slashdot before it crashes.
You can't please everyone, this is the middle ground.
You do realize that 'a cluster' is really just 'a bunch of mirrors' that you're distributing the query across... right? So yes, two is more than one, and two can be faster than one. Thats true regardless of what you call it. Two mirrored machines ARE a cluster. Hell the summary makes it sound like they want to run virtual machines as part of the cluster... probably running on the same VM server...
Clusters REALLY AREN'T DOING ANYTHING WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING FOR 50 YEARS.
STOP PRETENDING THIS IS NEW.
Just because you just started to become aware of the exact same things that have been done since the 60-70s doesn't mean its actually NEW.
Consider that Google, Yahoo, and Facebook were all once small companies that leveraged their data and understanding of the relationships in that data to grow significantly.
Because their business is based entirely on how that data correlates.
99.999999999% of the rest of the world do other things as their primary business model. Small businesses aren't going to do this because it requires a staff that KNOWS how to work with this software and get the data out.
Walmart might care, but they aren't a small business.
The local auto mechanic, or plumber, or even small companies like lawn services or maid services simply aren't big enough to justify having a staff of nerds to make the data useful to them, and they really don't have enough data to matter. It simply is too expensive on the small scale.
Companies that can REALLY benefit from the ability to comb vast quantities of data have been doing it for well over a hundred years. Insurance companies are a prime example. You know what? They aren't small in general, so they have the staff to do the data correlation and find out useful information because it works on that scale.
Anyone who cares about churning through massive amounts of data already has ways to do it. Computing will make it faster, but its not going to change the business model.
I'm kind puzzled why virtualization has anything to do with this, unless someone is implying that a smart thing to do is setup a VM server, and then run a bunch of VMs on it to get a 'cluster' to run distributed apps on... if thats the point being made then I think someone needs to turn in their life card (they clearly never had a geek card).
So now that I've written all that, I went and read the article.
Now I realize that article is written by someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about and simply read a wikipedia page or two and threw in a bunch of names and buzzwords.
Hadoop doesn't help the IT department do anything with the data at all.
Its the teams of analyists and developers that write the code to make Hadoop (which is only mentioned because of its OSS nature here) and a bunch of other technologies and code all work together and produce useful output.
This article is basically written like the invention of the hammer made it so everyone would want to build their own homes because they could. Thats a stupid assumption and statement.
Slashdot should be fucking ashamed that this is posted anywhere, let alone front page.
I think that the real innovation will be a variation of SQL that allows for the persistence of queries
Thats been done for years, materialized views, using triggers on INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE to update the views on the fly.
Streaming results as needed is done with cursors.
I know you think you're probably talking about something that 'materialized views and cursors don't do'. Fortunately, you're wrong and just don't understand how to use them.
It really bothers me how people who talk about problems with SQL really have no fucking clue what they are talking about or how to work with the data in the first place.
While that might sound a bit been there, done that, the Inspiron Duo can be used as a tablet or opened up to offer a keyboard.
Not only does it sound a bit like been there, done that, it was done... several times... by several different manufacures.
They all failed. Touch interfaces fucking suck. Apple has a nice one on the iPhone for what its for, but you don't sit around using an iPhone for hours on end to accomplish things.
Touch is good for short, dedicated, standardized input, like picking a phone number out of a list to call.
Touch freaking sucks for any sort of data input, your hands get tired VERY quickly regardless of how big the screen is. Holding a tablet and trying to input data on it sucks, try holding your laptop while standing and entering data while its closed like you were touching a touch screen. Just stand there for 5 minutes holding it in your arm and you'll be exhausted. When its sitting on a desk with the screen open, now you have to hold you hands in the air to touch the screen, again, your arms will be exhausted in short order.
When you get to the size of a tablet, just using the keyboard is far easier. Smaller than a tablet and it starts to get a little different, but thats because you're going to do less overall on the smaller device so the UI can be streamlined and made more useful and less of a chore, and the entire device gets shrunk and form factored to make holding it not a chore. Think about the scanning guns stock boys use in grocery store, tablet would suck to carry around and work on, but a smaller, fewer option, form factor device is actually good to work with.
Tables fail because, contrary to the current belief, using touch interfaces fucking suck. I was using touch interfaces 20 years ago, they still have the exact same problem, its still a shitty input interface for anything more than a tiny subset of functionality.
Touch tablets are an invention without a use. Touch is great for kiosks that users use for 20-60 seconds max, after that, its a hassle.
Its like to to be far more realistic since its based on the real physics of the universe, rather than the simulations which are based on simulations of made up rules for the universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? Illegal? How do the various salary caps for teams get by in sports leagues?
Or are you trying to say that you had to work at one of those companies because they are the only places that you can work and you are incapable of doing something else? For it to be illegal they'd have to control the market. Those companies do not control the IT job market, they don't even control a tiny percentage of it. So it doesn't really matter what deals they make, there are plenty of other companies not making any such agreement which could pay more if they wanted too and you were worth it.
So its okay for the NFL, NBA, and MLB to have salary caps, and they pretty much are monopolies, but its not okay for a tiny percentage of the market to agree not start a wage war with each other ...
The reality of it is this is simply a side effect of the laws of supply and demand. The demand for workers is far lower than the supply, so they simply don't need to poach to get qualified employees.
Sorry, but its not these companies fault that you're in a field with people that are just as qualified as you are that don't have some sort of entitlement issue and are more than happy to work for a reasonable wage.
If their wages were so terrible, people wouldn't be tripping over themselves to work at these companies when there are clearly alternatives available. No one is forced to work at Intel. Every single person at Intel is capable of getting a job elsewhere by just saying the worked at Intel. Hell, they could get fired and have it spread all over the Internet and they'd STILL get hired by SOMEONE just by name dropping, its not like these people don't have options, and in fact have MORE options by working at these companies which are supposedly 'hurting' them.
Maybe ... just MAYBE ... you aren't really worth what you think you're worth.
The fact that they can block spam stems from the fact that they can randomly pick what they want to let through and what they don't. Not the other way around.
You can also randomly pick where you want to do business.
What you don't get to do is tell someone else how to run their business.
For once someone on slashdot has a nickname that seems fitting.
I'm a religious person, raised catholic actually ...
With that in mind ... you do realize that you are so clearly over the top a religious nut job that no one anywhere will ever possibly take you seriously unless they too happen to be off their rockers ... right?
You seriously just posted that silly drivel on slashdot, a place with plenty of anti-religion nutjobs who wlll be happy to rip you a new one for talking silly ...
The only thing surprising about your post is that I'm the only one so far that has responded.
You need some perspective, and you need to learn how to integrate religion into your life, not make it your entire life, even priests know the difference. I'm probably just getting sucked into your troll but ... you really don't want to come off as such a complete and total religious nutjob if you want people to listen to what you have to say. The first part of that is not throwing religion into discussions that have nothing to do with it for no reason other than to promote your own agenda, that tends to piss people off, religious or non-religious.
The reason you get automatic rejection is because the common person has a bullshit detector built in, and when they see your level of bullshit flowing they tend to realize its probably just a mask you use to cover the fact that you'll be the first one to 'do evil' except it'll be 'gods will' or 'for the children'.
Seriously, tone it down. You just make it really hard on those of us who are religious yet not completely bat shit insane.
Just go to google, type in some random letters and hit I'm feeling lucky.
I'm fairly sure that even doing that once will result in at least 10 times the amount of useful information on the first results page than contained in every bit of data that twitter has.
Seriously ... using the word focused in relation to a website/service that doesn't allow messages long enough to really even complete a thought in writing?
Twitter is entirely about serving people with absolutely no focus what so ever. Seems like 'focusing' would be exactly what they don't want to do.
Of course, I think twitter is about the dumbest service I've ever seen. It was a retard solution to the fact that phones had a no useful email client really because for some odd reason, no one has realized that a proper imap setup is all thats needed to get 'push' messaging. Twitter made sense before everyone that texted had phones that were more than capable of using a real alternative that actually allows to you complete at least one thought in a single message.
Why does it matter if its a GET or POST? I mean, why would you want GET? More chances that the URL will contain sensitive data that gets logged in more places. My webservers log GETs with all their encoded data by default, but the only thing I know about posts in the log is that they were posts and I know nothing about whats in them. My browser did, and so did the proxy that brought that post into the actual web servers, so its not like they can 'hide' information in there that you 'cant' see.
From the link you gave:
Emphasis mine. You can bet it will default to prompt initially in most browsers. Makes it fairly easy to control. Much has been learned since cookies came out, and the ping attribute is an attempt to use that experience.
You're worried about how it can be abused and completely ignore that its really simple for a browser to not allow anything you mentioned to happen. You could already do a DDOS with hidden iframes that would accomplish the same thing for instance.
Its no worse thank cookies, is just as controllable as cookies in every way, and is designed to fill a specific roll that is already filled using a bunch of kludges.
The only advantage virtual currency has over physical non-traceable currency is that virtual currency can be used electronically.
Otherwise virtual currency is worse in every way and offers no other advantages.
The idea that 'fraud' can be prevented is simply bogus as there are plenty of people who loose money, through no fault of their own, every day when card companies refuse to handle it properly.
You can't take my cash without prying it out of my hands, and its relatively hard to trace my cash flow with physical currency.
You may not care, but I really don't want people knowing what I do, even if I don't do anything illegal.
As silly as this sounds, Walmart isn't nearly as evil as Verizon and DirectTV. Verizon is a phone company, know for being evil. DirectTV is a failing business that pulls any scam it can trying to stay in business, much like XM/Sirius radio, who recently billed my CC after being told not to because I wanted an invoice and no automatic deduction ... then when I called to get that fixed, they told me they couldn't give me a refund because they didn't have my CC number ... and they couldnt' give me a full refund since I had the service 'activated' for a couple of days ... even though I have logged several calls complaining that the radio never re-authorized regardless of how long I left it on.
In your particular case, if verizon doesn't have something signed saying you'll pay them, then you can tell them to stuff off. If they put it on your credit, sue them in small claims.
If you just bend over and take it then yes, everyone that can get buy with it will fuck you in the ass.
Make the 'buttons' display numbers on them electronically, then just make the numbers move around every use.
Next
In the end, the result is that you've made a protocol more complex trying to make it obscure ... but its an open protocol so obscuring it is pointless, anyone can tell you how to unobscure it ...
An added part of that is that you then what the CC clearing houses to deal with a much larger number of CC numbers so you can use them as one time numbers. They'd have to keep all those numbers stored if they are randomly generated, OR they have to use a clearly defined way to generate the numbers, in which case, again being an open protocol, you just need to get the right information to make the next step. Basically you want CCs to act something like key fobs for cars.
Storing all the extra data is of no value to the CC companies, they're going to make you pay them in most cases anyway so its just not worth the effort.
One time pad is the simplest and safest (currently anyway) solution to the problem if you're going to add electronics to the cards themselves.
The user swipes their card. Enters their pin ON THE CARD and the card gives them a one time pad to use with the clerk.
If you stop using magnetic cards and switch to some kind of smart card that can communicate back with the reader then you can actually make it in such a way that regardless of what the vendor you're buying stuff from wants to do, they can't change what you authorize because the card is required to generate the required validation code.
If you want something more secure than a credit card there are several ways to do it that are actually more secure, rather than just more complex.
Skyhook uses multiple data sources to determine your location.
Mac addresses aren't unique on a global scale.
They also use the IP address you have and the cell tower you are connected to if available.
Its much more difficult to fool Skyhook than you think, though it isn't that uncommon for it to be off about a thousand miles.
There is no '5 sats minimum' for GPS. 5 will get you a somewhat accurate altitude as well, but 4 will get you a pretty accurate fix, only three are required theoretically, but the actual accuracy won't be that great. Jamming and making GPS devices give out the wrong location is trivial with the right equipment, not sure what you're going to accomplish long term by doing so though, its also really easy to track you down.
Thats the great thing about selling 'SuSE' to someone else ... they still keep it for themselves as well. They can just restaff ( or keep staff depending on the deal ) and do the same thing.
As a general rule, 'buying a linux company' is an absolutely retarded idea.
I'm fairly sure you're less than 3 years old.
You must be, otherwise you'd know that Apple did far better from an 'openness' perspective in a consumer level device than pretty much any provider had ever allowed before then.
Apple forced an unlimited data plan on AT&T.
Apple forced a real browser on AT&T.
Apple forced AT&T to use the Apple app store, NOT an AT&T controlled app store.
Apple brought the phone, out of the box, with all hardware on the device working, without additional monthly charges to access things like the GPS.
Apple however, still followed along with a lot of the retarded shit that providers MAKE them do.
Apple still didn't make tethering available without AT&Ts ok.
Apple still doesn't let certain Apps onto the App Store that are simply competition rather than bad apps.
Apple does a lot of bad things too.
And so does Android.
And both are far more open than any popular (at least in America, Europe was probably different) phone that existed before they did. Before smartphones where the norm, mobile carriers locked you in tighter than ... well, tight. Both of these devices give you substantially more freedom than any popular device before them.
Neither Apple nor Google own the mobile phone market, they are still at the 'I REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS MARKET!!@$!' stage, so they don't get to make the rules. They can only push so far. Apple pushed pretty hard. There probably wasn't a lot left that Google could do, the unlimited data forced on AT&T burned them bad since the phone was the first popular device with a real browser. The carriers aren't going to make that mistake twice just to jump on the hype.
As far as 'running wild with THEIR codebase' ... well I'm fairly sure you have no fucking clue how OPEN source works. One of the rules of the 'open' part is not placing restrictions on what you are calling 'open'. Everyone has different definitions from public domain to GPL to normal peoples definition of open.
Had they choice a different license, one that was far less open, then they could reign the carriers in.
So which one do you want? Do you want open or not? You want everyone to be open and let you do whatever you want. You probably also expect them to give it to you for free. You are unrealistic and will never be pleased. No one cares about customers with opinions like yours. There is no reason to care, you simply can't be pleased so there is no value in listening to your input. You can threaten to 'take your money elsewhere', but they'll be some other lunatic like yourself 'taking their money elsewhere' to replace you. And you'll be back, whenever the new company you're fawning over pisses you off and you rant off to someplace else ... again ...
You wanted open, and thats what you got, now you're pissed off because someone went and did something you don't like ... guess what, thats what freedom is all about! It doesn't mean you get control over everything and no one can do anything without your explicit permission, at least, not by a normal persons definition of open. You probably realize that there isn't really any truely 100% 'open' computing device on the planet. Theres proprietary and closed in ever device you use, and none of them would exist without it.
You say Google made a bad judgement call. I say your judgement is clouded by an irrational set of ideals (selfishness really) that can not be satisfied in reality.
All iPhones and iPod touch devices are more or less identical hardware.
Sure there are minor differences in hardware options as newer models come out, but for the most part they are all the same hardware.
Android devices on the other hand are more like PCs. LOTS of different hardware configurations, so everyone has to maintain their own distribution.
The fragmentation in the Android product line is EXACTLY like the PC line, and its problems match it perfectly. It all pretty much relates around getting the OS to work right on a given hardware platform.
You can't depend on Google to solve that problem because they simply don't make all the hardware.
You can depend on Apple to solve that problem because they are the only ones who make the hardware. Just like Macs. There are very few options (relative to the competition) in Apple hardware. A direct result of this limited set hardware platforms is that both OSX and iOS run on pretty much all of the devices you'd want to run them on. Yes, at some age they stop working, but even then its been long enough that the normal person has been through 2 or 3 replacements since then ANYWAY, the only complaints are from people with something far past what most would consider a 'useful' life span.
Android is just like Windows for your phone as far as upgrade issues. You're at the mercy of the guys who make the hardware drivers. If you're luck and the hardware was really popular or was OSS friendly, then you'll probably be able to upgrade for a while ... but this is probably pretty limited as most devices are going to be sold just as any junk PC hardware. You'll get a device that works at that point in time, but forget upgrading to new OS revisions because they won't make the drivers for that device. Its just like finding Windows 7 drivers for your 3 year old scanner, printer, or non-popular video card. Sure you can get drivers for an nVidia card, but some random cheapass emachines integrated chipset on some no-name motherboard that no ones ever heard of before ... or will ever hear of again aren't going to be upgraded.
Just imagine the "I'm a Mac and I'm a PC" commercials, but replace most of it with "I'm an iPhone and I'm an Android phone", you still need to change the details since I'm not really aware of any Android viruses and such yet, but otherwise the point is about the same. You get a bunch of issues that normal users don't want to deal with, eventually they'll figure it out and pick the one that works best for them. The PC has the advantage of software lock-in, people have apps they can't replace if they switch to a Mac. Android has no such advantage over the iPhone. Again, the few geeks on slashdot that MUST HAVE A XXX APP BECAUSE THEY WOULD DIE WITHOUT IT OMFG don't really actually count to anyone who makes the decisions, regardless of how loudly they shout.
Shrug, maybe I'm just waxing on ... but if I was Google and realized this ... I'd make it my top priority to not allow Android to follow the same path as Windows.
Plan 9 could have the cure for cancer too but still no one gives a shit about it.
Dedup is a good 30 years old at least, if you want to point out that it isn't new.
Only slashdotters and Linux children get excited at silly things like this.
OpenSolaris is dead, thank god, it was a shining example of just how well OSS doesn't work for everything. It was a rather stupid idea in the first place but it did manage to put a kink in a few other companies plans so good for them, but yes, its dead.
As for kernel bugs ... welp, if you think the kernel of your OS doesn't have bugs, you're an idiot. Second, you have the source, fix OpenSolaris yourself ... thats the response we see out of so many OSS zealots here so I figured I'd throw in my two cents.
Google luck on finding solutions to your problems that are based on logic and rational thinking, I doubt you can pull it off judging by your statements so far.
At what distance from the Earth?
Orbital velocity is entirely dependent on your distance from the gravitational source and its gravitational pull.
You already have 'some' orbital velocity just standing on the planet, in fact, you have enough to orbit if you go far enough away from the planet, though it wouldn't probably last very long.
LIMs are 'theoretically' unlimited, you just have to space them out properly and sequence them fast enough. In practice of course, its entirely different. I think for most practical purposes of terrestrial motion, they will be practically unlimited until we invent inertial dampeners of some sort.
GPL gets rather sticky in where the limitation ends on whats required to be included.
For instance one of the GPL requirements is a bit about the scripts and toolchain required to compile the code.
Its not entirely clear to what extent that goes. My interpretation of it is that you couldn't distribute something that required say an MS CC specific option because you would also be required to distribute the MS CC in some what (source or binary is also unclear).
The general consensus however from the OSS community at large is that it means you have to distribute the scripts that call special tools, but not the tools themselves. You would have to include your batch file that builds using MS CC, but not MS CC itself.
GPL wants to consume everything it touches where ever possible. Unfortunately, that wouldn't go over well and would have required basically someone to invent a GPL'd computer that you could then start making GPL'd software on, but you'd have to base that on a GPL'd universe. Which ... clearly is a ludicrous idea, so rather than try to enforce that to its fullest extent, the community generally accepts a certain, not carved in stone, cutoff point that generally leaves build tools out of the distribution chain.
If those bits are ever challenged it could cause significant problems for GPL and its users. Rather than going to court over such things, both sides don't want to risk the potential outcome of a court case going wrong, so both sides (GPL users and proprietary license users) generally meet in the middle to avoid hassle. Only occasionally does something get big enough to cause a community uproar to get the lines more clearly drawn. This thing with Dell is an example of Dell not wanting to push the issue really after the community pushed back.
Most of the community are not likely to push much harder as most people accept that certain bits of code for hardware can't be released even if Dell wants to because they simply don't have the right to do so. Rather than forcing Dell to play by the rules, which would mean the end of Android on that particular device, the community backs off and lets them get by.
Most everyone wins in the end, with a few rare corner cases and a handful of geeks that bitch about 'not getting everything' because they want to convince people they really do need to tweak some driver because they 'know better' ... never mind the fact that their fully 'tweaked' systems have uptimes too short to post a message this long on slashdot before it crashes.
You can't please everyone, this is the middle ground.
You do realize that 'a cluster' is really just 'a bunch of mirrors' that you're distributing the query across ... right? So yes, two is more than one, and two can be faster than one. Thats true regardless of what you call it. Two mirrored machines ARE a cluster. Hell the summary makes it sound like they want to run virtual machines as part of the cluster ... probably running on the same VM server ...
Clusters REALLY AREN'T DOING ANYTHING WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING FOR 50 YEARS.
STOP PRETENDING THIS IS NEW.
Just because you just started to become aware of the exact same things that have been done since the 60-70s doesn't mean its actually NEW.
Because their business is based entirely on how that data correlates.
99.999999999% of the rest of the world do other things as their primary business model. Small businesses aren't going to do this because it requires a staff that KNOWS how to work with this software and get the data out.
Walmart might care, but they aren't a small business.
The local auto mechanic, or plumber, or even small companies like lawn services or maid services simply aren't big enough to justify having a staff of nerds to make the data useful to them, and they really don't have enough data to matter. It simply is too expensive on the small scale.
Companies that can REALLY benefit from the ability to comb vast quantities of data have been doing it for well over a hundred years. Insurance companies are a prime example. You know what? They aren't small in general, so they have the staff to do the data correlation and find out useful information because it works on that scale.
Anyone who cares about churning through massive amounts of data already has ways to do it. Computing will make it faster, but its not going to change the business model.
I'm kind puzzled why virtualization has anything to do with this, unless someone is implying that a smart thing to do is setup a VM server, and then run a bunch of VMs on it to get a 'cluster' to run distributed apps on ... if thats the point being made then I think someone needs to turn in their life card (they clearly never had a geek card).
So now that I've written all that, I went and read the article.
Now I realize that article is written by someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about and simply read a wikipedia page or two and threw in a bunch of names and buzzwords.
Hadoop doesn't help the IT department do anything with the data at all.
Its the teams of analyists and developers that write the code to make Hadoop (which is only mentioned because of its OSS nature here) and a bunch of other technologies and code all work together and produce useful output.
This article is basically written like the invention of the hammer made it so everyone would want to build their own homes because they could. Thats a stupid assumption and statement.
Slashdot should be fucking ashamed that this is posted anywhere, let alone front page.
Thats been done for years, materialized views, using triggers on INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE to update the views on the fly.
Streaming results as needed is done with cursors.
I know you think you're probably talking about something that 'materialized views and cursors don't do'. Fortunately, you're wrong and just don't understand how to use them.
It really bothers me how people who talk about problems with SQL really have no fucking clue what they are talking about or how to work with the data in the first place.
Not only does it sound a bit like been there, done that, it was done ... several times ... by several different manufacures.
They all failed. Touch interfaces fucking suck. Apple has a nice one on the iPhone for what its for, but you don't sit around using an iPhone for hours on end to accomplish things.
Touch is good for short, dedicated, standardized input, like picking a phone number out of a list to call.
Touch freaking sucks for any sort of data input, your hands get tired VERY quickly regardless of how big the screen is. Holding a tablet and trying to input data on it sucks, try holding your laptop while standing and entering data while its closed like you were touching a touch screen. Just stand there for 5 minutes holding it in your arm and you'll be exhausted. When its sitting on a desk with the screen open, now you have to hold you hands in the air to touch the screen, again, your arms will be exhausted in short order.
When you get to the size of a tablet, just using the keyboard is far easier. Smaller than a tablet and it starts to get a little different, but thats because you're going to do less overall on the smaller device so the UI can be streamlined and made more useful and less of a chore, and the entire device gets shrunk and form factored to make holding it not a chore. Think about the scanning guns stock boys use in grocery store, tablet would suck to carry around and work on, but a smaller, fewer option, form factor device is actually good to work with.
Tables fail because, contrary to the current belief, using touch interfaces fucking suck. I was using touch interfaces 20 years ago, they still have the exact same problem, its still a shitty input interface for anything more than a tiny subset of functionality.
Touch tablets are an invention without a use. Touch is great for kiosks that users use for 20-60 seconds max, after that, its a hassle.
It does, and it uses that proper input to emulate mouse movements which every app for the past 20 years has been written to expect on Windows.
When you start running apps with UIs designed for touch and not a mouse, then you can stop using touch as if its a mouse emulation layer.
Current apps are not designed for touch so having OS support means nothing.
Its like to to be far more realistic since its based on the real physics of the universe, rather than the simulations which are based on simulations of made up rules for the universe.