The fact that you have that choice is itself a consequence of a legal framework that gives you that choice. Completely unregulated, your phone company would be the only DSL provider, and they'd charge monopoly prices (actually, completely unregulated, you'd be on a 19.2kbps dial-up line, if you're lucky).
Unlikely - it's too expensive to dig copper to everyone's house, so without government's previous investment that gave them the monopoly, it wouldn't be there. And it it weren't too expensive, others could compete by digging copper too, etc.
You post a vacuous comment, starting a vacuous thread, in a large fraction of stories, every time posting that URL that isn't in a signature so that people who have signatures disabled, such as myself, get spammed with it nonetheless.
Minix will need some more features though, my guess is paging and threading are the major sticking points. Probably more system calls too but VM and threading are more work.
Being able to 'leverage' the enormous existing amount of software once Minix matures a bit would let Minix 'leapfrog' its 'competition'.
You have a point on the first one, however, and it's true that neither of those technologies are particularly "easy". Nevertheless, they're possible.
Light cancels out like other waves do, as early quantum mechanical experiments show, so in theory antilight should be possible (although the 'antilight' would be regular light with a phase shift, so not antilight in the intended sense).
There is no more powerful and silent lobby in this country than the banking industry. They are making a (not small) fortune off of these loans and will eventually own this country outright, if they don't already.
I'm sorry, but you should always have a slight level of distrust with regards to your government. The day you give that up is the day you allow for tyrany.
You're saying that as if distrusting your government will not allow tyranny. See the US for a counterexample.
While I agree totally with your post, there is a correction I'd like to suggest
to "Demonizing the other side is not right, and will get us no where.".
Having sides is not right, and will get us no where.
Did you miss the memo? A true American holds only one opinion on any subject. Holding multiple opinions, or recognising the complexity of any issue, is "flip-flopping", and only weak men and terrorists do that. People have lost elections for less.
Well put. Had I had md points, I would've modded you up. If you hadn't posted anonymously, I would've put you on my friends list.
Given even the small chance of someone attempting to do something on a plane when i'm flying, i don't see a problem with them checking my or anyone elses ID and denying someone that flight based on a suspision.
Why does knowing someone's ID - assuming it can't be forged, which it can easily (remember all 9/11 hijackers had valid ID) - help against them "doing something on a plane"?
Does this vague sense of security weigh up against the risk of false positives? ("Denying someone that
flight based on a suspision [sic]".)
To me, either of these points weigh up to "no". It's not a good tradeoff, to speak in Schneier's terms.
Slashdot Mirror
do they get to eat it?
I'm wondering that too. Maybe the joke is that the author can't count in binary either.
Nonsense. As /. (and blogs etc, usually) link with 'rel="nofollow"', this will do nothing to GP's pagerank.
You can't have it both ways.
It annoys me. What is it you want to achieve?
Minix will need some more features though, my guess is paging and threading are the major sticking points. Probably more system calls too but VM and threading are more work.
Being able to 'leverage' the enormous existing amount of software once Minix matures a bit would let Minix 'leapfrog' its 'competition'.
Disclaimer: I am involved with the Minix project.
Please, enlighten me. Which software ownership was violated?
Heh, it's comic book guy on slashdot.
It does, because it's such a huge waste of money.
Light cancels out like other waves do, as early quantum mechanical experiments show, so in theory antilight should be possible (although the 'antilight' would be regular light with a phase shift, so not antilight in the intended sense).
That would be the Chinese government.
Good luck with that.
You're saying that as if distrusting your government will not allow tyranny. See the US for a counterexample.
I Think You Mean feces meet rotating blades, Hope That Helped, Have A Nice Day ;-)
Also, how are we (not that I'd use this stuff) to know he would know if it were (going to be) the case?
Relevant in the marketplace != best
That's a roundabout way of saying "couldn't"
Not to spelling nitpick, but that would be cue. As it's the central theme of your post, I thought you'd want to know ;)
Having sides is not right, and will get us no where.
That would be wonderful. But also a first. Just look at the history and current state of affairs of telcos and their customers.
Well put. Had I had md points, I would've modded you up. If you hadn't posted anonymously, I would've put you on my friends list.
Accepted I assume, otherwise it isn't a problem. I assume this guy gets the papers rejected with his software.
Could you repeat that?
Why does knowing someone's ID - assuming it can't be forged, which it can easily (remember all 9/11 hijackers had valid ID) - help against them "doing something on a plane"?
Does this vague sense of security weigh up against the risk of false positives? ("Denying someone that flight based on a suspision [sic]".)
To me, either of these points weigh up to "no". It's not a good tradeoff, to speak in Schneier's terms.