Why don't we go search that planet. If there a greater chance to find evidence of life there? Why deal with a "dead" planet when we have another planet with oxygen and carbon dioxide.
The atmospheric pressure at Venus' surface is 90 times that of Earth's. It's like being under 1000 meters of water. Furthermore, the surface temperature is hot enough to melt lead, and clouds of sulfuric acid cover the surface.
In other words, space probes don't last very long on Venus. Thus, it's better to go places where you can actually spend time getting data.
I think everyone who writes sploits should include a small quiz at the front. If the script kiddie is dumb enough to not know that 127.0.0.1 is a loopback address, they should not be allowed to run the sploit.
I disagree. You should be able to run the sploit against yourself for testing purposes.
Maybe if he riced it up a bit, and camouflaged the solar panel as a big-ass aftermarket wing or something; that and one of those "battery life extender" stickers that says "R-Type" on it
Why would Linux make the next Nintendo system suddenly capture marketshare when
It most likely wouldn't. If Nintendo designed it correctly, most people probably wouldn't even know it had Linux in it.
nobody even cared that the PS2 had a Linux kit?
That's probably because Sony created the PS2 Linux kit for game developers/hobbyists and not the normal consumer. It was available through Sony's website, but it was definitely designed to be an inexpensive T10K. It even comes with the developer documentation.
It did, however, sell out in both the U.S. and Japan, so somebody must have cared.
In his new book, von Hippel, discusses how open source projects draw on the creativity of "lead users," who are often ahead of the curve on technology and marketplace trends.
If it's not cost effective to wire up a town of 100000 people, explain why I have cable internet, DSL and wireless available in my town of 11000 and have had it since the population was lower than 10000. The next town over of 30000 has the same options as well.
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. My town of 36,000 supposedly has broadband too, however, there are hundreds of homes (even new homes) in my town without broadband access. These homes probably won't ever be wired, because it's just not cost effective to upgrade the lines.
The real problem is that the shiftless bastards running the ILECs and RBOCs keep throwing money at congress to give them the kind of rules that allow them to maintain monopoly-level pricing and outrageous profit margins (for the stockholders of course).
Yes, that is definitely part of the problem, and it's been an issue since forever. I've worked for the phone company and for an comm equipment manufacturer, so I see additional issues that other people don't like to think about.
Witness the recent outlawing of government-sponsored broadband across Pennsylvania, and campaigns to stop it in other states.
The article never once mentions exactly which law it was that did that. Do you happen to know? I would be interested in exactly what the wording of this law is, because I find it hard to believe that it simple bans the local government from providing broadband access. It probably has to do with the local government giving the ISP prior notice before changing their infrastructure to one it manages itself. IIRC, there's already a law in place that says that the government has to give fair notice before switching its communications infrastructure to a different ISP. This is probably more of the same, and blown way out of proportion.
The only thing standing in the way of getting this fixed in the US is the phone company's mouth on the cock of congress.
It's almost certain that all tetrachromats would have to be women.
Yeah, because men know that if it's not in the Crayola 64 pack, it doesn't exist!
This has to be the reason that women somehow know the actual colors that correspond to those fake names like "taupe" and "loden" that designers make up.
Men can't tell the difference between beige and taupe, but apparently there is one, and it's a huge difference.
The lines in Canada are just as old as the US. Maybe older.
I bet you're right. Several years ago, there was an initiative to replace all the aging infrastructure in the U.S. Subsequently, pretty much everything was replaced except fot the all important last mile - the line to the customer premises was never updated.
In Canada we've taken the initiative to replace them.
I envy you, for that alone! The phone companies here certainly aren't going to take the initiative, and the Government pretty much can't tell them to do it.
In Canada most towns have it. I know some places that don't have it, but they are very low populated, and many of the residents who live in these areas could care less about broadband internet access.
Most towns here have it too. However, it is embarrasingly spotty! A house in the center of town may have it, but a house 5 miles away won't. There are also some suburbs of major metropolitan areas that don't have it either, while the rest of the city does. Horrible.
All they had to do was install the equipment at the local phone exchange, then we coul;d plug in our DSL modems.
You're lucky. In the U.S. they usually have to replace all the wire to the street. Sometimes they have to rewire an entire community of thousands of people that may be separated by more than a few kilometers. Furthermore, the phone company usually has to build one or more new CO's because the distance from these communities to the current CO are usually more than 6000m. Even at fifty bucks a month per subscriber, it still costs more to upgrade the infrastructure than would be provided by the few customers that would get broadband.
As TFAs point out, the problem isn't that providing broadband is unprofitable; but that it will eat into the profits of the phone companies (by allowing IP telephony) and cable companies (by allowing downloading or streaming of video content).
Phone and cable companies in the U.S. offer IP telephony packages, so the fear of VOIP eating into their profits is a myth. If anyone should be worried it's the VOIP providers.
So they're delaying installing broadband as long as they can get away with it, while doing everything to block other providers using their circuits.
The phone companies in the U.S. have been blocking CLECs using their circuits since before broadband. It's nothing new. They don't want to allow anyone else to use their infrastructure, simply because they spent millions of dollars to build that infrastructure.
The real problem is that the pricing war between the ILECs and RBOCs has lowered rates so much that the phone companies can't afford to build any more infrastructure. The last-mile infrastructure in the U.S. is in much need of improvement, but the cost of fixing it far outweighs what the phone companies are willing to pay for the meager revenue it would generate.
Slashdot Mirror
No! Never burn your old papers. When paper is burned, the smoke emitted by the fire can be intercepted and the data recovered.
Come on, haven't you ever heard of smoke signals?
Wrong.
Agreed.
The newest version of WinAMP (5.08) supports the SHOUTcast plugin just fine. You don't need to get an old version.
We did:
- Venera 9 - Jun. 8, 1975
- Venera 10 - Jun. 14, 1975
- Pioneer Venus 1 - May 20, 1978
- Venera 11 - Sep. 9, 1978
- Venera 12 - Sep. 14, 1978
- Venera 13 - Oct. 30, 1981
- Venera 14 - Nov. 4, 1981
- Venera 15 - Jun. 2, 1983
- Venera 16 - Jun. 7, 1983
- Magellan - May 4, 1989
And if it is so hot, don't we have some steel or somekind of substance which would not melt?We sent landers to Venus and they lasted about an hour. That's the point, the landers don't last very long even when they are designed to.
The atmospheric pressure at Venus' surface is 90 times that of Earth's. It's like being under 1000 meters of water. Furthermore, the surface temperature is hot enough to melt lead, and clouds of sulfuric acid cover the surface.
In other words, space probes don't last very long on Venus. Thus, it's better to go places where you can actually spend time getting data.
Here's some stats for both aircraft:
A380-800
Hughes Flying Boat H-4 (HK-1) Hercules ("Spruce Goose")
iBook -> Book
iTunes -> Tunes
iMac -> Mac
iCon -> Con
Got it?
Oh, I get it! Lemme try:
iPod -> Pod
Nuts...
I disagree. You should be able to run the sploit against yourself for testing purposes.
Oh wait...
Considering what you wrote in the rest of your post, it should be obvious why we need them.
Besides, the Second Amendment is the only one we have left!
No it doesn't. It says, "used under authorization".
Yotta is at the other end of the scale, you want yocto.
R-Type sticker?????
It most likely wouldn't. If Nintendo designed it correctly, most people probably wouldn't even know it had Linux in it.
nobody even cared that the PS2 had a Linux kit?
That's probably because Sony created the PS2 Linux kit for game developers/hobbyists and not the normal consumer. It was available through Sony's website, but it was definitely designed to be an inexpensive T10K. It even comes with the developer documentation.
It did, however, sell out in both the U.S. and Japan, so somebody must have cared.
You know people have way too much disk space when a SATA drive article only garners three posts after an hour and a half.
Hell, if it compiles, we ship it!
I'm made of copper, you insensitive clod!
Because you don't have anything left to rm?
W00T!!! Which UT2004 bot allows you to pick up chicks???
gg
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. My town of 36,000 supposedly has broadband too, however, there are hundreds of homes (even new homes) in my town without broadband access. These homes probably won't ever be wired, because it's just not cost effective to upgrade the lines.
Thanks for the info. The good news is that the bill didn't kill the network.
Yes, that is definitely part of the problem, and it's been an issue since forever. I've worked for the phone company and for an comm equipment manufacturer, so I see additional issues that other people don't like to think about.
Witness the recent outlawing of government-sponsored broadband across Pennsylvania, and campaigns to stop it in other states.
The article never once mentions exactly which law it was that did that. Do you happen to know? I would be interested in exactly what the wording of this law is, because I find it hard to believe that it simple bans the local government from providing broadband access. It probably has to do with the local government giving the ISP prior notice before changing their infrastructure to one it manages itself. IIRC, there's already a law in place that says that the government has to give fair notice before switching its communications infrastructure to a different ISP. This is probably more of the same, and blown way out of proportion.
The only thing standing in the way of getting this fixed in the US is the phone company's mouth on the cock of congress.
Congressional cockmasters?
Yeah, because men know that if it's not in the Crayola 64 pack, it doesn't exist!
This has to be the reason that women somehow know the actual colors that correspond to those fake names like "taupe" and "loden" that designers make up.
Men can't tell the difference between beige and taupe, but apparently there is one, and it's a huge difference.
I bet you're right. Several years ago, there was an initiative to replace all the aging infrastructure in the U.S. Subsequently, pretty much everything was replaced except fot the all important last mile - the line to the customer premises was never updated.
In Canada we've taken the initiative to replace them.
I envy you, for that alone! The phone companies here certainly aren't going to take the initiative, and the Government pretty much can't tell them to do it.
In Canada most towns have it. I know some places that don't have it, but they are very low populated, and many of the residents who live in these areas could care less about broadband internet access.
Most towns here have it too. However, it is embarrasingly spotty! A house in the center of town may have it, but a house 5 miles away won't. There are also some suburbs of major metropolitan areas that don't have it either, while the rest of the city does. Horrible.
You're lucky. In the U.S. they usually have to replace all the wire to the street. Sometimes they have to rewire an entire community of thousands of people that may be separated by more than a few kilometers. Furthermore, the phone company usually has to build one or more new CO's because the distance from these communities to the current CO are usually more than 6000m. Even at fifty bucks a month per subscriber, it still costs more to upgrade the infrastructure than would be provided by the few customers that would get broadband.
As TFAs point out, the problem isn't that providing broadband is unprofitable; but that it will eat into the profits of the phone companies (by allowing IP telephony) and cable companies (by allowing downloading or streaming of video content).
Phone and cable companies in the U.S. offer IP telephony packages, so the fear of VOIP eating into their profits is a myth. If anyone should be worried it's the VOIP providers.
So they're delaying installing broadband as long as they can get away with it, while doing everything to block other providers using their circuits.
The phone companies in the U.S. have been blocking CLECs using their circuits since before broadband. It's nothing new. They don't want to allow anyone else to use their infrastructure, simply because they spent millions of dollars to build that infrastructure.
The real problem is that the pricing war between the ILECs and RBOCs has lowered rates so much that the phone companies can't afford to build any more infrastructure. The last-mile infrastructure in the U.S. is in much need of improvement, but the cost of fixing it far outweighs what the phone companies are willing to pay for the meager revenue it would generate.