The one I have is the Neo PlusS2, which has an Allwinner CPU. I only got it yesterday, and don't have a flash card for it yet, so I haven't had a chance to try it.:)
Well, to be fair, you probably don't know what "I," "want" and "up" mean either. I guess you probably know what "up" means. So does the bird, or it wouldn't interesting to it to make noises that brought about that result. The bird also has a notion of itself as an entity, and you as an entity that will respond to sounds it makes. That's pretty much how you relate to other entities too. As for "want," do you really know what it is to want in a way that is different than the bird?
If what you are saying is that the bird doesn't know that "I" refers to the bird, "want" refers to the feeling of knowing something is possible and "up" is the process of hopping on to your hand, that may be so, but how do you think you know these things? Why do you know that "I" refers to the entity that is reading this? How is your knowing of the meanings of words different than the parrot's? I suspect that you can't answer this question, despite being sure that is different.
If you really think about this, it's quite a reverie.
I'm currently experimenting with the NanoPi, which I think has better I/O (it has gigabit ethernet and comes with an antenna). I haven't gotten openwrt running on it yet, but am working on it: http://nanopi.org/NanoPi-2_Fea...
The best thing about it is that if it doesn't suck, I can just scatter a bunch of them around the house--they are ridiculously cheap compared to typical WiFi routers.
If you want something a lot beefier, consider getting a Turris Omnia. Not cheap, but it's practically a server, and will draw a lot less power than your 10-year-old PC. They are working on FCC certification, should be available in the U.S. in a few months. I have one from the kickstarter...:)
You misunderstand. They don't succeed, but you get the mail anyway. Later, they realize they fucked up and correct the typo (or don't) but that doesn't do you any good. Trust me, I know whereof I speak--I have a name with no number on gmail because I got an early invite.
I very naively registered "cdr" on twitter, and I am constantly getting @tted by people who think that CDR stands for some organization. Most of these come from LATAM for some reason, but I have no idea why.:)
The problem is that there are so many people that just a typo will do it. This is why big email aggregators are a bad idea (there are reasons why they are a good idea, of course, or they wouldn't exist, but this is one of the reasons why they aren't).
Unfortunately there is no way to prevent these--there's no test that will reveal them as errors.
This is the real question. Why do people still run software from router vendors, which is usually insanely out of date and often has poorly designed security models, even disregarding this particular issue?
I agree with you that it's user friendly to be able to see the password, but then again why do people have legible passwords anyway? Why is the router asking for a password? It should really be using public-key encryption and/or shared secrets, which are never seen by the user. And really I think that's where this is going--if you look at the work being done in the IETF on token binding, that's the future. Visible passwords aren't the future, because passwords are on the way out.
Yes, I'm so fucking stupid that I can't figure out the w3c concensus process by reading that web page. What a fucking maroon I am. The IETF process is buried in documents and lore, and fairly impenetrable if you don't have a day to spend on it. It looks like the w3c process is too. So I asked, figuring somebody would answer. And look, you did! Not quite the helpful answer I was hoping for, but you can't look a gift horse in the mouth, I guess.
No, I was literally asking why an individual gets to make the decision, because that's what the article says. If it's not the case that an individual gets to make the decision, then what is the actual process. I don't know, and the article doesn't say. The reporting on this has generally said that it was up to TBL. That doesn't make sense to me. Coming from the IETF, we do not believe in individuals making decisions, and we don't believe in voting either. We decide based on rough consensus, which is based on the technical merits, not on who can send the most people to the meeting, or who can afford to buy the most votes. I thought the W3C operated on similar principles, but if so, this article is doing a poor job of communicating that process.
No. Neither of those is a reason. I mean an actual reason. W3C is supposedly an open standards body. Why is one person making decisions? Or is that not actually what's going on, and this was (as often seems to be the case) badly summarized?:)
The Terms of Service are actually pretty strict, and Google has extremely good data center security hygiene. The ToS on gmail are much more lax, even though it's the same software.
Knee jerk much? No, it's not lies. If the grid had no renewables, nuclear would be a good solution. But that ship has sailed, and the reason it's sailed is that nuclear has high fixed costs and significant risk that's hard to quantify. So we're getting renewables; the question is whether nuclear is a good thing to have alongside the renewables. Given that Germany and France's nuclear plants can mostly operate in a load-following mode, if it were the case that that were true, we wouldn't be reading these headlines.
What will probably happen instead is that we'll figure out ways to use peak load efficiently, as I described in the article that you're calling "lies." Spot pricing can flatten peaks both in the demand curve and the production curve if you have smart consumers of power. This can result in reduced costs for everyone. It's hard to make bank on the cash that is thrown off by an inefficient power grid once you make it efficient, but the power grid isn't there for people to make bank on. It's there to provide electrical power. Doing so more economically isn't very good for the banksters, but it's great for everyone else.
Actually nuclear has the same problem. It's a fairly expensive base load, but when demand drops prices still go negative, because you still need the grid to absorb the excess. You can't just ramp up and ramp down on a dime: that's why they call it base load. Your base load should always be less than total demand.
In fact what this news is pointing to is that the smarter we can be about using power when it's available, the more efficient we can be. Run your hot water heater and your home heater or air conditioner when prices go negative, turn it off when they go positive, keep the temperature under control but don't be stupid about it, and you need a lot less base load capacity.
Slight clarification: obviously, the corollary to this is that things that aren't to do with your political career, like who you sleep with or what kind of porn you buy, should not be politically harmful. Yet at present they are. This is a bug that needs fixed. But it's not a reason to treat whistle-blowing and espionage as equivalent.
Slashdot Mirror
The one I have is the Neo PlusS2, which has an Allwinner CPU. I only got it yesterday, and don't have a flash card for it yet, so I haven't had a chance to try it. :)
Well, to be fair, you probably don't know what "I," "want" and "up" mean either. I guess you probably know what "up" means. So does the bird, or it wouldn't interesting to it to make noises that brought about that result. The bird also has a notion of itself as an entity, and you as an entity that will respond to sounds it makes. That's pretty much how you relate to other entities too. As for "want," do you really know what it is to want in a way that is different than the bird?
If what you are saying is that the bird doesn't know that "I" refers to the bird, "want" refers to the feeling of knowing something is possible and "up" is the process of hopping on to your hand, that may be so, but how do you think you know these things? Why do you know that "I" refers to the entity that is reading this? How is your knowing of the meanings of words different than the parrot's? I suspect that you can't answer this question, despite being sure that is different.
If you really think about this, it's quite a reverie.
I'm currently experimenting with the NanoPi, which I think has better I/O (it has gigabit ethernet and comes with an antenna). I haven't gotten openwrt running on it yet, but am working on it: http://nanopi.org/NanoPi-2_Fea...
The best thing about it is that if it doesn't suck, I can just scatter a bunch of them around the house--they are ridiculously cheap compared to typical WiFi routers.
If you want something a lot beefier, consider getting a Turris Omnia. Not cheap, but it's practically a server, and will draw a lot less power than your 10-year-old PC. They are working on FCC certification, should be available in the U.S. in a few months. I have one from the kickstarter... :)
You misunderstand. They don't succeed, but you get the mail anyway. Later, they realize they fucked up and correct the typo (or don't) but that doesn't do you any good. Trust me, I know whereof I speak--I have a name with no number on gmail because I got an early invite.
I very naively registered "cdr" on twitter, and I am constantly getting @tted by people who think that CDR stands for some organization. Most of these come from LATAM for some reason, but I have no idea why. :)
The problem is that there are so many people that just a typo will do it. This is why big email aggregators are a bad idea (there are reasons why they are a good idea, of course, or they wouldn't exist, but this is one of the reasons why they aren't).
Unfortunately there is no way to prevent these--there's no test that will reveal them as errors.
Heh.
The thing is, you can get a nano-pi for $29 that has the same performance as your fancy router, and doesn't even have proprietary firmware.
This is the real question. Why do people still run software from router vendors, which is usually insanely out of date and often has poorly designed security models, even disregarding this particular issue?
I agree with you that it's user friendly to be able to see the password, but then again why do people have legible passwords anyway? Why is the router asking for a password? It should really be using public-key encryption and/or shared secrets, which are never seen by the user. And really I think that's where this is going--if you look at the work being done in the IETF on token binding, that's the future. Visible passwords aren't the future, because passwords are on the way out.
Clearly his best and most memorable role! :)
Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?
Yes, I'm so fucking stupid that I can't figure out the w3c concensus process by reading that web page. What a fucking maroon I am. The IETF process is buried in documents and lore, and fairly impenetrable if you don't have a day to spend on it. It looks like the w3c process is too. So I asked, figuring somebody would answer. And look, you did! Not quite the helpful answer I was hoping for, but you can't look a gift horse in the mouth, I guess.
Impressive—this article hasn't been up very long. You can look at the web site, but the order page is the sad.
No, I was literally asking why an individual gets to make the decision, because that's what the article says. If it's not the case that an individual gets to make the decision, then what is the actual process. I don't know, and the article doesn't say. The reporting on this has generally said that it was up to TBL. That doesn't make sense to me. Coming from the IETF, we do not believe in individuals making decisions, and we don't believe in voting either. We decide based on rough consensus, which is based on the technical merits, not on who can send the most people to the meeting, or who can afford to buy the most votes. I thought the W3C operated on similar principles, but if so, this article is doing a poor job of communicating that process.
No. Neither of those is a reason. I mean an actual reason. W3C is supposedly an open standards body. Why is one person making decisions? Or is that not actually what's going on, and this was (as often seems to be the case) badly summarized? :)
I take it that you are implying that he has a right to decide because he invented HTTP and HTML. Why would that be so?
Why is it just up to Tim Berners-Lee to decide yes or no on this?
Wouldn't it have been just as good if that car had just had the same system installed that yours does?
More than that, what about when a really bad guy uses the attack surface presented by the cars talking to each other to cause a _major_ accident.
The Terms of Service are actually pretty strict, and Google has extremely good data center security hygiene. The ToS on gmail are much more lax, even though it's the same software.
Beat me to it. Yup. :)
Your utility made out like bandits because Enron came up with a scheme to banksterize the power grid, not because there was an actual problem.
Knee jerk much? No, it's not lies. If the grid had no renewables, nuclear would be a good solution. But that ship has sailed, and the reason it's sailed is that nuclear has high fixed costs and significant risk that's hard to quantify. So we're getting renewables; the question is whether nuclear is a good thing to have alongside the renewables. Given that Germany and France's nuclear plants can mostly operate in a load-following mode, if it were the case that that were true, we wouldn't be reading these headlines.
What will probably happen instead is that we'll figure out ways to use peak load efficiently, as I described in the article that you're calling "lies." Spot pricing can flatten peaks both in the demand curve and the production curve if you have smart consumers of power. This can result in reduced costs for everyone. It's hard to make bank on the cash that is thrown off by an inefficient power grid once you make it efficient, but the power grid isn't there for people to make bank on. It's there to provide electrical power. Doing so more economically isn't very good for the banksters, but it's great for everyone else.
Actually nuclear has the same problem. It's a fairly expensive base load, but when demand drops prices still go negative, because you still need the grid to absorb the excess. You can't just ramp up and ramp down on a dime: that's why they call it base load. Your base load should always be less than total demand.
In fact what this news is pointing to is that the smarter we can be about using power when it's available, the more efficient we can be. Run your hot water heater and your home heater or air conditioner when prices go negative, turn it off when they go positive, keep the temperature under control but don't be stupid about it, and you need a lot less base load capacity.
Slight clarification: obviously, the corollary to this is that things that aren't to do with your political career, like who you sleep with or what kind of porn you buy, should not be politically harmful. Yet at present they are. This is a bug that needs fixed. But it's not a reason to treat whistle-blowing and espionage as equivalent.
The part where secretly violating the constitution isn't violating the constitution, apparently, because it's done in secret, and can't be spoken of.