There is also the US attitude towards guns. In Switzerland, every young man (about 20 years) is required to keep a military assault rifle in their house -- part of being in the army. The swiss don't have the same attitude towards guns. They aren't for self-protection of no (generally) for fun. They are tools for doing their job in the army.
Keep in mind that while in the Swiss army you get to take your rifle home with you, the ammo you would use in that rifle is much more tightly regulated. You can't just go down to the local sporting goods store to get some ammo and then go out to a public shooting range.
Many states in the USA have "stand your ground" laws which are a recipe for disaster. Shoot someone and then just claim you were afraid, or defending yourself. Gang thugs in Chicago have successfully used these laws to get out of jail time for murdering other gang members. (Yes, your honor, I was terrified, and *had* to defend myself with lethal force. Otherwise I'd be going to jail!)
If your goal is to harden your wireless network then the simple answer is to set it up with WPA2 Enterprise using EAP-TLS. This will provide certificate authentication between your AP and your wireless clients which will protect you from the MITM attempts of him setting up another AP and will prevent brute force attempts.
If your contract doesn't cover this already, then you need to get a lawyer asap to fix the contract, and then try to get them to pay up and renegotiate the new contract.
See this video for examples on how your contract should be protecting you from this already: http://vimeo.com/22053820
The current reactor was designed to require active cooling as part of the shutdown cycle. The problems they are experiencing are due to the fact that the tsunami took out the back-up generators that were supplying power for the cooling pumps.
I think they may have attempted to get replacement generators on site to run the pumps but ran into issues either with the power the generators provided, connecting the generators up, or problems with the pumps themselves.
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (x) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (x) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it (x) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once (x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it (x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (x) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (x) Asshats (x) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes (x) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (x) Extreme profitability of spam ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft (x) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses (x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. (x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
---
Additionally, you underestimate how difficult it would be to completely screen out every potential botnet spammer, especially with the extreme profitability of spam allowing them to masquerade as something other than a spammer. How do you propose you screen someone who wants to spend $200 a month to rent a dedicated server?
I lied because I was tired of the DSL tech trying to get me to configure my SpeedStream 5100A as if it was a 5100B (the latter does routing and gives it an IP address with a web UI, the former is a dumb modem, so it's a big difference) and I just wanted some darned login credentials. Since you ask.
But that's just me.
I've had that happen before, the tier 1 tech was so clueless as to why it wasn't working that he told me that the modem was broken and that I needed a new one.
I proceeded to tell him that he was an idiot and that he needed to transfer me to a tier 2 tech who might be able to actually help me.
This assumes that the firmware in the SAN server will let you do this. I know for a fact that Dell MD3000 and EMC AX-4 hardware will refuse to use anything but vendor branded drives with special firmwares.
2) companies that do use non-GPL code tend to give back their improvements anyway, even though they are not legally obligated to do so. They may do it to keep good karma amongst developers rather than a strong believe in Free software, but who cares?
A good reason why a company would want to give the improvements back is so that they don't have to responsible for porting those improvements over to newer versions of the code.
Want future-proof network cabling? Run single-mode fiber and be done with it. That should be compatible with future networking standards for at least another 15-20 years. It'll be expensive, but that's they price you pay for cutting edge network technology.
Actually, your right to free speech does cover the right to yell fire in a crowded theater. With this right comes a responsibility. You have a responsibility to the panic raised by yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.(Remember that no one really yells out fire anymore, so relate the panic caused by such an action to pulling the fire alarm in a building) Similarly, when you say or write something about someone, you are responsible for the damage it caused if the statement isn't true. What people don't seem to understand is that every right comes with a responsibility. The main responsibility freedom of speech brings is to be truthful in your words. The definition of defamation is
the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. This case is where the Solicitor-General had the court put in an injunction against Siemer's website three years ago. Siemer has refused to take down the site and the Solicitor-General hasn't sued Siemer for defamation. From the article:
"No one's proved that the information is defamatory or incorrect," says Siemer. -- "No one in the courtroom has ever accused me of breaking the law. What they have accused me of is breaking or breaching the injunction which says that I can't speak truthfully about what Michael Stiassny is doing," says Siemer. It isn't clear from the article whether he ever has tried to get the injunction overturned, so you could maybe fault him for that, though the Solicitor-General could be abusing his power by trying to shut Siemer up without taking him to court and contesting him on the facts of his claims. But you shouldn't just assume that the content of his website is defamatory at first glance when everything he is saying could be true.
You need to get off of your high horse and realize that freedom of speech is much more expansive than those few parts you've exercised.
Slashdot Mirror
There is also the US attitude towards guns. In Switzerland, every young man (about 20 years) is required to keep a military assault rifle in their house -- part of being in the army. The swiss don't have the same attitude towards guns. They aren't for self-protection of no (generally) for fun. They are tools for doing their job in the army.
Keep in mind that while in the Swiss army you get to take your rifle home with you, the ammo you would use in that rifle is much more tightly regulated. You can't just go down to the local sporting goods store to get some ammo and then go out to a public shooting range.
Many states in the USA have "stand your ground" laws which are a recipe for disaster. Shoot someone and then just claim you were afraid, or defending yourself. Gang thugs in Chicago have successfully used these laws to get out of jail time for murdering other gang members. (Yes, your honor, I was terrified, and *had* to defend myself with lethal force. Otherwise I'd be going to jail!)
[citation needed]
If your goal is to harden your wireless network then the simple answer is to set it up with WPA2 Enterprise using EAP-TLS. This will provide certificate authentication between your AP and your wireless clients which will protect you from the MITM attempts of him setting up another AP and will prevent brute force attempts.
Actually it's not hardwired, it's merely a value coded into the EEPROM. You can overwrite that EEPROM to permanently change the MAC address.
If your contract doesn't cover this already, then you need to get a lawyer asap to fix the contract, and then try to get them to pay up and renegotiate the new contract.
See this video for examples on how your contract should be protecting you from this already:
http://vimeo.com/22053820
No it doesn't. There is an extension for Firefox Sync on Firefox 3.6.
Even better, make it so you start paying based on the hourly rate for the space at the moment you've reserved it.
The earthquake did no damage to the reactor.
The current reactor was designed to require active cooling as part of the shutdown cycle. The problems they are experiencing are due to the fact that the tsunami took out the back-up generators that were supplying power for the cooling pumps.
I think they may have attempted to get replacement generators on site to run the pumps but ran into issues either with the power the generators provided, connecting the generators up, or problems with the pumps themselves.
But the US Govt I think is not capable of differentiating between the marijuana plant and the use of marijuana as a narcotic.
They used to be able to.
http://www.archive.org/details/Hemp_for_victory_1942_FIXED
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp_for_Victory
But the US Govt I think is not capable of differentiating between the marijuana plant and the use of marijuana as a narcotic.
They used to be able to differentiate.
http://www.archive.org/details/Hemp_for_victory_1942_FIXED
Your post advocates a
(x) technical (x) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
(x) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
(x) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
(x) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(x) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(x) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(x) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
(x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
---
Additionally, you underestimate how difficult it would be to completely screen out every potential botnet spammer, especially with the extreme profitability of spam allowing them to masquerade as something other than a spammer. How do you propose you screen someone who wants to spend $200 a month to rent a dedicated server?
I lied because I was tired of the DSL tech trying to get me to configure my SpeedStream 5100A as if it was a 5100B (the latter does routing and gives it an IP address with a web UI, the former is a dumb modem, so it's a big difference) and I just wanted some darned login credentials. Since you ask.
But that's just me.
I've had that happen before, the tier 1 tech was so clueless as to why it wasn't working that he told me that the modem was broken and that I needed a new one.
I proceeded to tell him that he was an idiot and that he needed to transfer me to a tier 2 tech who might be able to actually help me.
I think he, like most of us, denies the existence of ME and Vista.
I don't think Vista is terrible enough to warrant that, but what's this ME that you are talking about?
This assumes that the firmware in the SAN server will let you do this. I know for a fact that Dell MD3000 and EMC AX-4 hardware will refuse to use anything but vendor branded drives with special firmwares.
2) companies that do use non-GPL code tend to give back their improvements anyway, even though they are not legally obligated to do so. They may do it to keep good karma amongst developers rather than a strong believe in Free software, but who cares?
A good reason why a company would want to give the improvements back is so that they don't have to responsible for porting those improvements over to newer versions of the code.
or what cable will mysteriously go bad.
or what cable will go bad because you tied the ziptie too tight and it was pinching the cable.
Want future-proof network cabling? Run single-mode fiber and be done with it. That should be compatible with future networking standards for at least another 15-20 years. It'll be expensive, but that's they price you pay for cutting edge network technology.
Blank media includes hard drives. You have to put those files somewhere.
You get charged by the VA? At my work we just get charged a flat rate per 20A circuit.
It may be optional, but it is marked as a critical update that would then get installed automatically on most systems.
Ah. So you think Microsoft should include it in Windows update?
So what exactly do you think this is?
There needs to be distros like Debian which, while always delayed, has all the important bugs ironed out.
..cough..OpenSSL vulnerability..cough
Don't use your ISP's DNS servers.
Find another public server or run your own.
See http://www.openbeacon.org/ for details on the design used at HOPE.
Should the technically savvy have to subsidize the people that abuse technical support?
The only problem with this is that you assume that there is anyone technically savvy still using AOL.
From the article: "No one's proved that the information is defamatory or incorrect," says Siemer.
--
"No one in the courtroom has ever accused me of breaking the law. What they have accused me of is breaking or breaching the injunction which says that I can't speak truthfully about what Michael Stiassny is doing," says Siemer. It isn't clear from the article whether he ever has tried to get the injunction overturned, so you could maybe fault him for that, though the Solicitor-General could be abusing his power by trying to shut Siemer up without taking him to court and contesting him on the facts of his claims. But you shouldn't just assume that the content of his website is defamatory at first glance when everything he is saying could be true.
You need to get off of your high horse and realize that freedom of speech is much more expansive than those few parts you've exercised.