It can drive. Imagine that. Call me old-fashioned but that is about the most amazing thing I expect from my automobile. Likewise, the ony amazing thing I expect from my phone is making phone calls. Yes, I that uncool.
Could anyone post a list of websites which might have downloaded and installed that backdoor so we could avoid posting any sensitive information there until we know for sure that the problem has already been resolved?
Yes... so we can avoid them...;)
Yes, so we can avoid them.
There is nothing funny about that.
The point is that all of them should be immediately shut down
until the backdoors are closed and the issues are resolved.
Do you really think that it was an amateur script kiddie job?
Do you think that someone who managed to backdoor that software
will be unable to find affected websites?
Let's stop being so naïve.
I believe it is more important for people to know
that someone might steal their credit card number
than the temporary
inconvenience of website owners which would
be pressed to shut down their websites to
quickly resolve the issue.
Keeping vulnerable websites secret is not even
a security through obscurity,
because attackers can already find those websites
without any problems.
Meanwhile, normal users are not notified when someone
installs a backdoor.
Normal users don't run network scanners.
Normal users cannot read webserver download logs.
And those very normal users are at risk here.
They have the right to know who is serious about protecting them
from credit card theft and who is not.
They have the right to choose who
do they prefer doing business with.
Could anyone post a list of websites which might have downloaded and installed that backdoor so we could avoid posting any sensitive information there until we know for sure that the problem has already been resolved? Just looking on a website it is not always obvious which content management software is being used and whether any such software was installed on that server at all (e.g. there can be lots of virtual servers on any physical host, some of them using that software, while other do not). I wouldn't want to send my credit card number (or even an email address) to any website hosted on a backdored server.
If my calculations are correct then when you run another Debian emulated on top of the Mac OS X Panther, which itself runs under PearPC on the underlying Debian, then when you run apt-get dist-upgrade there is already a new stable version of Debian released.
The best compliment I've gotten for CPR is when my ActiveState coworker Adam Turoff said, "I feel like my head has just been wrapped around a brick". I hope this next example makes you feel that way too:
Using the eval() call this CPR program calls Perl and tells it to use Inline C to add a new function, which the CPR program subsequently calls. I think I have a headache myself.
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.
Hopefully my explanation will dilute those "junk characters" and will let me post this comment. It's interesting that this lame filter stops me from quoting programs but doesn't stop anyone from posting full-screen ASCII-art swastikas and pornography.
But anyway...
Thanks to the Inline module, it is possible to include fragments of C code in Perl programs.
You can write part of your Perl program in C (for example
one speed-critical subroutine) and it is automatically compiled
to native binary machine code
and linked as a shared object (see
this comment of mine and read the paragraph starting from "Actually, inlining other languages...").
CPR stands for "C Perl Run." From the description:
Is it C? Is it Perl? It's neither, it's both. It's CPR!
CPR (C Perl Run) is a "new language" that looks like C. You don't need to compile it. You just run it, much like Perl. As an added bonus, you'll get access to the full internals of Perl via the CPR API.
The idea is that you just put a CPR hashbang at the top of your C program and run it like a script. The CPR interpreter will run your C code under Perl.
In other words, CPR program is a C program which is run by Perl,
just as if it was a C code inlined in a Perl program.
Now, in this case, the C program I quoted (which is itself run by Perl),
includes a Perl code inlined in C by CPR_eval(). What is inside that inlined Perl code is an inlined C code (use Inline...) which is a C function greet() that returns a C pointer to C string "Hello world".
The next part of the original (outermost) C program is a C printf() function printing two C strings. Those C strings, arguments to printf(), are returned by two invocations of CPR_eval(), both of which inline Perl code. The second one just returns Perl interpreter version, but the first one is more interesting. The first CPR_eval() returns a C string to printf() which is converted from a Perl string returned by the Perl code inlined in that CPR_eval(), which is a call to Perl greet() subroutine which was defined earlier by the C function inlined in the Perl code inlined in the C code by the first CPR_eval() invocation. It all happen inside a C main() fu
First of all, I am a happy user of Debian Woody on the desktops and servers. And let me tell you something: it is stable. And it is stable not only in the sense that the system per se has never crashed during 24h/day heavy load for years, but what is even more important for large networks and offices, it is stable in the sense that no API or system behaviour change while the patches are applied. There are no new featuritis after a stable Debian is released, no version of any program changes to a newer one with even slightly different interface or semantics. There are only isolated security patches.
Period.
If any software has fixed a vulnerability in a newer version of the program, the Debian team backports that security fix to older versions,
and that security fix alone.
What does it mean? That in addition to the system itself being rock solid, I can be quite sure that my custom applications will not break after patching. And we all know that this is the real reason that makes administrators not patch their systems on time. No one will patch a system if the patches break everything, there would be no point, why not shut down the network in the first place and be done with it.
But with stable Debian this is a non-issue. And in my opinion, this the reason why real-world Debian installations tend to be generally more secure. As a Debian lover I would love to say otherwise, but Debian is not inherently more secure than Red Hat or Mandrake; Debian admins are not generally smarter than anyone else. Even the APT packaging system is not so important. It is not important who, how or with which tools applies patches. It is even not that important if those very patches are available after ten hours or ten days after disclosing the vulnerability. It is, however, important what happens after applying those patches. Does anything break? Does anything start working different than before? Does it need extensive testing and rewriting of local custom software? If the answer is "yes" then you can be sure that those patches will be rolled back and will not get applied for months.
That is the real issue.
That is the real difference.
So now going back to the question:
"What's holding up Debian Sarge from release to stable? It's those lazy maintainers..... no actually it's just a few issues..."
I would like to ask a more important question:
what does it actually mean
that Debian Sarge is released as stable?
And as it turns out,
it means changing the
"stable"
symlink from
"woody"
to
"sarge."
That's right. Sarge is already released and you can use it before that symlink is changed if you need software newer than Woody.
The only other thing that will change after the "release" is that feature updates will stop and only security updates will get backported.
But the security updates are already available in Sarge, maybe even faster. The only difference is that before the "stable" symlink is redirected to Sarge, you are also getting feature updates of the software in addition to security patches. If that is not an issue for you, then nothing is stopping you from "releasing" Sarge today.
I hope this will help to understand why Debian
users and developers are often outraged when people ask
when the new version of Debian is released.
It may be not clear from the summary, but the Lunar will not actually be "eclipsed" by anything--there will be no astronomical body between the Lunar and us. It is only a shadow of Earth we will see and that will explain the soft gradient instead of a hard edge observable during real eclipses. Furthermore, it will be observable only in some parts of Earth.
It is interesting to note that
0.05MHz = 50kHz which means that
you can basically use your powerline socket
as a cheap source of clock signal
connected directly to your CPU.
Be careful with 60Hz overclocking, though.
Also, watercooling such a setup is generally not recommended.
I don't think I want to know what happens when you try to install or update fink on that machine...
If my calculations are correct then when you run
another Debian emulated on top of the Mac OS X Panther,
which itself runs under PearPC on the underlying Debian,
then when you run apt-get dist-upgrade
there is already a new stable version of Debian released.
The only problem with tiny wireless cameras we face today is that some of the people can only see the negative consequences of their omnipresence, like industrial espionage, blackmail, or even worse, voyeurism, which while clearly controversial is not even nearly as important as the anti-fascist tasks described in the article. This very article, however, sadly fails to address those concerns, which might be percieved as a bias for those who are against such an intrusive technology and violation of privacy in the first place. In my opinion this article would be perfect if it didn't lack the arguments refuting the concerns I outlined. "Don't ask me what Sweeping Social Changes will be caused by such pervasive cameras; my ability to foresee techno-consequences stops at the certainty that it's a bad idea to let anyone called Brundle near a teleporter." This, I believe, is not enough to convince the sceptics.
Kerry's survey response said he is "open to examining" whether to change current law "to ensure that a person who lawfully obtains or receives a transmission of a digital work may back up a copy of it for archival purposes" or transfer it to another device. CompTIA's open-ended question had merely asked "What should federal policy be toward protecting intellectual property on the Internet?"--without mentioning backup copies. [emphasis added]
People, let's don't get so excited just yet. This statement is so broad that in reality can mean almost anything. He is not even examining it yet, much less has any opinion on this subject. Please, however, don't read this as an answer "no" either. It basically mean "I'm not telling" but using a very intelligent and polite wording. Please keep in mind that saying that he is open to the change itself rather than marely examining its merits, might be disastrous for the campain, so we won't hear it even if he was strongly against the entire DMCA. Please remember that DMCA is a gift for media barons. Those very same barons who control public TV debates. So let's stay calm and try to understand that this answer, or the lack thereof, was the only reasonable move in those circumstances.
If releasing a censored version of Half Life 2 turns out to be the only option in Australia, wouldn't it be catastrophic? It might mean that instead of buying the censored version, kids will rather download the real thing from the Internet. Aren't such restrictions quite pointless in general? Because less sales mean not only less profits for Australian retailers, but also less taxes for the Australia itself.
Last time I tried water cooling my computer, the pipe started leaking, there was a short circuit and I accidentally set my computer on fire, which needless to say was neither cooling nor cool... After that accident I gave up altogether and do you know what I did? Instead of overclocking my CPUs, I started to underclock them. I noticed that in many cases even a 15-20% lower c;ock speed may eliminate the need of having any fan at all, as long as there is a large radiator with good contact and a reasonable air flow in the case. Sacrificing those few percents of megahertzes might sound very "not elite" but guess what? It still can display websites faster than I can read.
"Touching is good" is the suggestive theme of the launch campaign for the Nintendo DS handheld, which appears designed to help Nintendo go beyond its kid-friendly image and appeal to older gamers. It's also advertising in Maxim with a campaign titled "How To Score."
Such childish references to sex can only appeal precisely to kids. Older gamers don't need sex in advertisements because they can have real sex any time. I assume that they know that the culture in Japan and the attitude towards sex is completely different than that in the United States. (An outrage caused by a piece of breast during softball, anyone?) Neither the nonchalant attitude towards lawsuits in general remains insignificant. Have they done any studies to assure them that they will not get sued by mothers concerned that their children are being bombarded with produts with sexual overtones? I really hope they know what they are doing because I really wouldn't like their prices to increase to cover the expences of frivolous and irresponsible lawsuits.
You are an expert on the issues related to promoting Linux and open source software. What do you think should we as a community focus on to make Linux percieved as an operating system capable of reliably controlling space shuttles and space stations? Would you have visited the International Space Station in 2002 if you had known it was controlled by Linux? Would you visit it now in 2004? How in your opinion the perception of Linux among people in big business and politics changed during those years? How do you think it will change in the future and what do we have to do to make it change as you would like it to and why? Also, as a matter of comparison, would you visit a space station controlled by Microsoft? Would you feel safe? Thank you very much for all of the outstanding work you are doing. We need much more dedicated and influential people devoted to the propagation of the free software and open source movement as yourself. Thank you very much indeed.
Are there any plans for Doom 4 on horizon? Any screenshots of pre-alpha concept art etc.? Even though I rarely have time to play games these days, I always track the unbelievable evolution of id games. I remember when Wolfenstein 3D completely amazed me. Then Doom likewise. Then I've heard that Quake was going to be so much better than Doom, as Doom was better than Wolfenstein. Of course I didn't believe it, but when I saw it, it turned out to be true. Those games essentially created market for consumer 3D GPUs. It is a great experience to watch them evolve, always ahead of their times, always setting targets for future computers. Those games are the very thing that drives the market. People wouldn't need so enormous power on their desktops without them, and those who don't play them wouldn't have so cheap computers without such a fast progress.
To understand genes of a lesser level, say some deformation that doesn't allow the fetus to come to term - such as if the bones of the body does not develop.
our best ability to do so is to "knock out" the suspected gene with "junk DNA" and grow a fetus. If the fetus shows the deformity, then it is such gene.
Would it be possible to grow a fetus not without bones but without a brain using a similar method? If so, would it be still considered unethical to perform experiments on it or use its organs for transplants even though it would be consciously equivalent to just any other organ, like heart or liver, taken from a patient after the death of his brain? Unlikely. The studies you are referring to should definitely continue, because one day it might provide a method for easy transplants. Today there are basically two most important problems with transplanting organs: finding an organ in the first place and avoiding the rejection. The surgery itself is already on a satisfactory level. Cloning the entire set of spare organs with patient's own DNA would be an amazing breakthrough and a sure Nobel Prize.
I would love to see a similar idea for books and print media. Printing/binding on request would save a LOT of storage and manufacturing costs, even if it does increase the cost of maufacturing each book.
Something like
Lulu or
iUniverse
should probably be possible to set up nearly some large book store.
It wouldn't be as fast as burning a CD but probably doable
in some reasonable time.
And GNUStep/OpenStep looks like shit compared to OS X (or even GNOME/KDE).
It's just yet another project that people work on but nothing ever seems to happen (HURD?).
Actually I am using it right now as we speak. Please give some credit where it is due.
Of course we all know that it is only a pre-election PR stunt which will most probably get forgotten by most of people few months after the election, however it will continue silently violating privacy and after reading this article I must say that it sounds frightening. It is frightening because it goes much further than necessary, mostly affecting honest people. When new supposedly anti-terrorist security measures such as this one are introduced, Bruce Schneier always asks a great question: "would it have stopped 9/11 if we'd had it in place then?" Good question.
"As with the 600 there will be a dualband CDMA 1xRTT and a quadband GSM/GPRS/EDGE version."
For anyone who doesn't understand the technical jargon, here's a handy explanation:
CDMA -- Code Division Multiple Access, any use of any form of spread spectrum by multiple transmitters to send to the same receiver on the same frequency channel at the same time without harmful interference. GSM -- Global System for Mobile Communications, the most popular standard for mobile phones in the world. GPRS -- General Packet Radio Service, a digital mobile phone technology. It is considered as 2.5G, between the second and third generation. It provides moderate speed data transfer, by using unused TDMA channels GSM network. EDGE -- Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution, a digital mobile phone technology technology which acts as a bolt-on enhancement to 2G and 2.5G (a.k.a.GPRS) networks. This technology is compatible with TDMA and GSM networks. EDGE uses the same spectrum allocated for GSM850, GSM900, GSM1800 and GSM1900 operation.
Click the links for more info.
To editors: please provide at least some links to explain the terms you use in the story next time. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
Wasn't it a public knowledge that the election will take place? It was all over the news.
It can drive. Imagine that. Call me old-fashioned but that is about the most amazing thing I expect from my automobile. Likewise, the ony amazing thing I expect from my phone is making phone calls. Yes, I that uncool.
Yes, so we can avoid them. There is nothing funny about that. The point is that all of them should be immediately shut down until the backdoors are closed and the issues are resolved.
Do you really think that it was an amateur script kiddie job? Do you think that someone who managed to backdoor that software will be unable to find affected websites?
Let's stop being so naïve. I believe it is more important for people to know that someone might steal their credit card number than the temporary inconvenience of website owners which would be pressed to shut down their websites to quickly resolve the issue.
Keeping vulnerable websites secret is not even a security through obscurity, because attackers can already find those websites without any problems. Meanwhile, normal users are not notified when someone installs a backdoor. Normal users don't run network scanners. Normal users cannot read webserver download logs. And those very normal users are at risk here. They have the right to know who is serious about protecting them from credit card theft and who is not. They have the right to choose who do they prefer doing business with.
Could anyone post a list of websites which might have downloaded and installed that backdoor so we could avoid posting any sensitive information there until we know for sure that the problem has already been resolved? Just looking on a website it is not always obvious which content management software is being used and whether any such software was installed on that server at all (e.g. there can be lots of virtual servers on any physical host, some of them using that software, while other do not). I wouldn't want to send my credit card number (or even an email address) to any website hosted on a backdored server.
You mean so many extortion attempts at the same time that the law enforcement is unable to track them all and the victims are unable to pay so fast?
Oh, really? Than you should think about this:
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. Hopefully my explanation will dilute those "junk characters" and will let me post this comment. It's interesting that this lame filter stops me from quoting programs but doesn't stop anyone from posting full-screen ASCII-art swastikas and pornography. But anyway...
Thanks to the Inline module, it is possible to include fragments of C code in Perl programs. You can write part of your Perl program in C (for example one speed-critical subroutine) and it is automatically compiled to native binary machine code and linked as a shared object (see this comment of mine and read the paragraph starting from "Actually, inlining other languages..."). CPR stands for "C Perl Run." From the description:
In other words, CPR program is a C program which is run by Perl, just as if it was a C code inlined in a Perl program.
Now, in this case, the C program I quoted (which is itself run by Perl), includes a Perl code inlined in C by CPR_eval(). What is inside that inlined Perl code is an inlined C code (use Inline...) which is a C function greet() that returns a C pointer to C string "Hello world". The next part of the original (outermost) C program is a C printf() function printing two C strings. Those C strings, arguments to printf(), are returned by two invocations of CPR_eval(), both of which inline Perl code. The second one just returns Perl interpreter version, but the first one is more interesting. The first CPR_eval() returns a C string to printf() which is converted from a Perl string returned by the Perl code inlined in that CPR_eval(), which is a call to Perl greet() subroutine which was defined earlier by the C function inlined in the Perl code inlined in the C code by the first CPR_eval() invocation. It all happen inside a C main() fu
Why even bother with 10% when after Google releases the G-browser (Google branded Firefox) it will shoot for 90%?
the election outcome should already be obvious to anyone.
First of all, I am a happy user of Debian Woody on the desktops and servers. And let me tell you something: it is stable. And it is stable not only in the sense that the system per se has never crashed during 24h/day heavy load for years, but what is even more important for large networks and offices, it is stable in the sense that no API or system behaviour change while the patches are applied. There are no new featuritis after a stable Debian is released, no version of any program changes to a newer one with even slightly different interface or semantics. There are only isolated security patches. Period.
If any software has fixed a vulnerability in a newer version of the program, the Debian team backports that security fix to older versions, and that security fix alone. What does it mean? That in addition to the system itself being rock solid, I can be quite sure that my custom applications will not break after patching. And we all know that this is the real reason that makes administrators not patch their systems on time. No one will patch a system if the patches break everything, there would be no point, why not shut down the network in the first place and be done with it.
But with stable Debian this is a non-issue. And in my opinion, this the reason why real-world Debian installations tend to be generally more secure. As a Debian lover I would love to say otherwise, but Debian is not inherently more secure than Red Hat or Mandrake; Debian admins are not generally smarter than anyone else. Even the APT packaging system is not so important. It is not important who, how or with which tools applies patches. It is even not that important if those very patches are available after ten hours or ten days after disclosing the vulnerability. It is, however, important what happens after applying those patches. Does anything break? Does anything start working different than before? Does it need extensive testing and rewriting of local custom software? If the answer is "yes" then you can be sure that those patches will be rolled back and will not get applied for months.
That is the real issue. That is the real difference. So now going back to the question:
"What's holding up Debian Sarge from release to stable? It's those lazy maintainers..... no actually it's just a few issues..."
I would like to ask a more important question: what does it actually mean that Debian Sarge is released as stable? And as it turns out, it means changing the "stable" symlink from "woody" to "sarge."
That's right. Sarge is already released and you can use it before that symlink is changed if you need software newer than Woody. The only other thing that will change after the "release" is that feature updates will stop and only security updates will get backported. But the security updates are already available in Sarge, maybe even faster. The only difference is that before the "stable" symlink is redirected to Sarge, you are also getting feature updates of the software in addition to security patches. If that is not an issue for you, then nothing is stopping you from "releasing" Sarge today.
I hope this will help to understand why Debian users and developers are often outraged when people ask when the new version of Debian is released.
It may be not clear from the summary, but the Lunar will not actually be "eclipsed" by anything--there will be no astronomical body between the Lunar and us. It is only a shadow of Earth we will see and that will explain the soft gradient instead of a hard edge observable during real eclipses. Furthermore, it will be observable only in some parts of Earth.
It is interesting to note that 0.05MHz = 50kHz which means that you can basically use your powerline socket as a cheap source of clock signal connected directly to your CPU. Be careful with 60Hz overclocking, though. Also, watercooling such a setup is generally not recommended.
If my calculations are correct then when you run another Debian emulated on top of the Mac OS X Panther, which itself runs under PearPC on the underlying Debian, then when you run apt-get dist-upgrade there is already a new stable version of Debian released.
The only problem with tiny wireless cameras we face today is that some of the people can only see the negative consequences of their omnipresence, like industrial espionage, blackmail, or even worse, voyeurism, which while clearly controversial is not even nearly as important as the anti-fascist tasks described in the article. This very article, however, sadly fails to address those concerns, which might be percieved as a bias for those who are against such an intrusive technology and violation of privacy in the first place. In my opinion this article would be perfect if it didn't lack the arguments refuting the concerns I outlined. "Don't ask me what Sweeping Social Changes will be caused by such pervasive cameras; my ability to foresee techno-consequences stops at the certainty that it's a bad idea to let anyone called Brundle near a teleporter." This, I believe, is not enough to convince the sceptics.
Kerry's survey response said he is "open to examining" whether to change current law "to ensure that a person who lawfully obtains or receives a transmission of a digital work may back up a copy of it for archival purposes" or transfer it to another device. CompTIA's open-ended question had merely asked "What should federal policy be toward protecting intellectual property on the Internet?"--without mentioning backup copies. [emphasis added]
People, let's don't get so excited just yet. This statement is so broad that in reality can mean almost anything. He is not even examining it yet, much less has any opinion on this subject. Please, however, don't read this as an answer "no" either. It basically mean "I'm not telling" but using a very intelligent and polite wording. Please keep in mind that saying that he is open to the change itself rather than marely examining its merits, might be disastrous for the campain, so we won't hear it even if he was strongly against the entire DMCA. Please remember that DMCA is a gift for media barons. Those very same barons who control public TV debates. So let's stay calm and try to understand that this answer, or the lack thereof, was the only reasonable move in those circumstances.
If releasing a censored version of Half Life 2 turns out to be the only option in Australia, wouldn't it be catastrophic? It might mean that instead of buying the censored version, kids will rather download the real thing from the Internet. Aren't such restrictions quite pointless in general? Because less sales mean not only less profits for Australian retailers, but also less taxes for the Australia itself.
Last time I tried water cooling my computer, the pipe started leaking, there was a short circuit and I accidentally set my computer on fire, which needless to say was neither cooling nor cool... After that accident I gave up altogether and do you know what I did? Instead of overclocking my CPUs, I started to underclock them. I noticed that in many cases even a 15-20% lower c;ock speed may eliminate the need of having any fan at all, as long as there is a large radiator with good contact and a reasonable air flow in the case. Sacrificing those few percents of megahertzes might sound very "not elite" but guess what? It still can display websites faster than I can read.
"Touching is good" is the suggestive theme of the launch campaign for the Nintendo DS handheld, which appears designed to help Nintendo go beyond its kid-friendly image and appeal to older gamers. It's also advertising in Maxim with a campaign titled "How To Score."
Such childish references to sex can only appeal precisely to kids. Older gamers don't need sex in advertisements because they can have real sex any time. I assume that they know that the culture in Japan and the attitude towards sex is completely different than that in the United States. (An outrage caused by a piece of breast during softball, anyone?) Neither the nonchalant attitude towards lawsuits in general remains insignificant. Have they done any studies to assure them that they will not get sued by mothers concerned that their children are being bombarded with produts with sexual overtones? I really hope they know what they are doing because I really wouldn't like their prices to increase to cover the expences of frivolous and irresponsible lawsuits.
You are an expert on the issues related to promoting Linux and open source software. What do you think should we as a community focus on to make Linux percieved as an operating system capable of reliably controlling space shuttles and space stations? Would you have visited the International Space Station in 2002 if you had known it was controlled by Linux? Would you visit it now in 2004? How in your opinion the perception of Linux among people in big business and politics changed during those years? How do you think it will change in the future and what do we have to do to make it change as you would like it to and why? Also, as a matter of comparison, would you visit a space station controlled by Microsoft? Would you feel safe? Thank you very much for all of the outstanding work you are doing. We need much more dedicated and influential people devoted to the propagation of the free software and open source movement as yourself. Thank you very much indeed.
Are there any plans for Doom 4 on horizon? Any screenshots of pre-alpha concept art etc.? Even though I rarely have time to play games these days, I always track the unbelievable evolution of id games. I remember when Wolfenstein 3D completely amazed me. Then Doom likewise. Then I've heard that Quake was going to be so much better than Doom, as Doom was better than Wolfenstein. Of course I didn't believe it, but when I saw it, it turned out to be true. Those games essentially created market for consumer 3D GPUs. It is a great experience to watch them evolve, always ahead of their times, always setting targets for future computers. Those games are the very thing that drives the market. People wouldn't need so enormous power on their desktops without them, and those who don't play them wouldn't have so cheap computers without such a fast progress.
It's time to buy stock of tinfoil producers, I guess.
Would it be possible to grow a fetus not without bones but without a brain using a similar method? If so, would it be still considered unethical to perform experiments on it or use its organs for transplants even though it would be consciously equivalent to just any other organ, like heart or liver, taken from a patient after the death of his brain? Unlikely. The studies you are referring to should definitely continue, because one day it might provide a method for easy transplants. Today there are basically two most important problems with transplanting organs: finding an organ in the first place and avoiding the rejection. The surgery itself is already on a satisfactory level. Cloning the entire set of spare organs with patient's own DNA would be an amazing breakthrough and a sure Nobel Prize.
Something like Lulu or iUniverse should probably be possible to set up nearly some large book store. It wouldn't be as fast as burning a CD but probably doable in some reasonable time.
Actually I am using it right now as we speak. Please give some credit where it is due.
Of course we all know that it is only a pre-election PR stunt which will most probably get forgotten by most of people few months after the election, however it will continue silently violating privacy and after reading this article I must say that it sounds frightening. It is frightening because it goes much further than necessary, mostly affecting honest people. When new supposedly anti-terrorist security measures such as this one are introduced, Bruce Schneier always asks a great question: "would it have stopped 9/11 if we'd had it in place then?" Good question.
"As with the 600 there will be a dualband CDMA 1xRTT and a quadband GSM/GPRS/EDGE version."
For anyone who doesn't understand the technical jargon, here's a handy explanation:
CDMA -- Code Division Multiple Access, any use of any form of spread spectrum by multiple transmitters to send to the same receiver on the same frequency channel at the same time without harmful interference.
GSM -- Global System for Mobile Communications, the most popular standard for mobile phones in the world.
GPRS -- General Packet Radio Service, a digital mobile phone technology. It is considered as 2.5G, between the second and third generation. It provides moderate speed data transfer, by using unused TDMA channels GSM network.
EDGE -- Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution, a digital mobile phone technology technology which acts as a bolt-on enhancement to 2G and 2.5G (a.k.a.GPRS) networks. This technology is compatible with TDMA and GSM networks. EDGE uses the same spectrum allocated for GSM850, GSM900, GSM1800 and GSM1900 operation.
Click the links for more info.
To editors: please provide at least some links to explain the terms you use in the story next time. Thanks.