Most of the cheaper ones are embedded in the glass of the rearview mirror. Not completely environment-proof, but not something that I would say would wear out or need to be replaced regularly.
Micro Center will straight up match Newegg prices. Last week, I got a $229 ASUS Wi-Fi router for $179, and Newegg didn't even have it in stock. I used to work there, and the owner has a very distinct philosophy. They don't (or at least they didn't) take on investors, and they pay for their expansion up front rather than borrowing for it and paying interest on loans. It's much slower growth that way, but they can keep their prices lower without having to constantly impress their investors and driving up their profits. From what I gather from former co-workers that I keep in touch with, they are doing fine financially. I didn't care for working there, but as an IT professional who's constantly in need of same-day parts, I thank the maker that I have one ten minutes drive from me.
How do you define losing? The three best selling phones in Q4 among all carriers were: iPhone 4s, iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, in that order. More than half of all phones sold by Verizon in Q4 were iPhones, and they're currently the largest carrier. It would be safe to assume that the numbers would be at least similar with AT&T and Sprint, although they have not published their numbers.
If that's your version of "losing in the smart phone market" then how would you define winning?
If I were to physically deprive an artist of his or her only copy of his or her intellectual property, then we'd be making an apt comparison. As it is, it seems like you're just trolling for the **AA. In the Megaupload case, I would guess that with the amount of data taken down, at least one person, probably thousands, have been deprived of their only copy of data, which is real property. If I download a copy of Michael Jackson's Thriller album from LimeWire, I'm not depriving anyone of anything.
I'm not defending copyright infringement here, I'm just pointing out your terrible logic.
The major difference here is that Stuxnet was a piece of software (allegedly) designed to cause specific hardware failure. They didn't have access to the hardware in question, and it was on a non-Windows system, connected to Windows systems by serial cables. Once it was in the system in question, it wasn't trying to phone home, just disrupt the centrifuge timing enough to destroy it and make it look like an accident. Quite impressive and pretty difficult. On the other hand, the Chinese are manufacturing all of the hardware used in our cell phones. They don't have to worry about secretly installing code on anything. They can just change the chip design in the fab and put whatever they want in there, in addition to what the client ordered. A small hardware daemon that could intercept keystrokes and send them, encrypted, to a series of proxy servers would be nearly impossible to differentiate from legitimate SSL traffic.
Don't forget that these factories could conceivably have the full support of the Chinese government in their actions. That's a lot of resources that could be brought to bear on a relatively simple problem.
Salt is bad for you. The government should outlaw salt because it increases healthcare premiums. And alcohol. And ice cream sandwiches. And swearing. You can see where I'm going with this...
Why would you choose not to ride with an unobtrusive safety device that is statistically proven to increase your odds of surviving a crash by an order of magnitude? I mean, I wholeheartedly agree with the premise that it's none of the government's business whether or not you choose to wear a seatbelt, but honestly, logic and sense should compel you to wear one.
According to TFA, it's not really about enforcing some sort of moral code. They developed this machine so that it only dispenses free marketing samples to their target demographic. I mean, from a really wide angle, I can sort of understand what they were thinking, but really? It all sounds like something that someone would shout out in a brainstorming meeting and everyone would get in a good chuckle and move on. Why not just pay someone minimum wage to dispense samples? It's a marketing gimmick, and it's a really stupid use of technology. I could also see it backfiring because it can't be 100% accurate. How insulted would you be if you stepped up to this machine and it identified you as a child? "NO PUDDING FOR YOU!" What if you had some sort of condition that caused your facial proportions to be childlike? What if there was a random software error? I can't believe they spent time, effort and money actually developing this.
Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz Al-Omari boarded at the Portland International Jetway in Maine. I wouldn't call that a "large airport." If you need to secure one of them, you need to secure them all equally. Either that, or make passengers go through security just before they board the plane, at every leg of every flight. It's a mesh network, so the cost doesn't scale linearly.
I hate to defend the MAFIAA, but they really should post a link to the original video in the summary. We should watch what they put out before biasing ourselves with a (probably very accurate) edited version of the video. I'm a believe that more information is better than less. We can't form good opinions of ignorance.
That being said, the original video is crap. You can watch it here.
In Zimbabwe a few years ago, their national currency lost its value at a rate much higher than Bitcoin over the 2 day example provided above. And I'm pretty sure that's even a real country with a president and an army and everything. Currency changes value over time. The amount of time varies based on the stability of whatever is backing the currency.
So to answer your question, yes, it's directly comparable.
California Penal Code section 485:
One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him
knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who
appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another
person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just
efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is
guilty of theft.
VERY easy to prove intent here, as he sold a phone worth, maybe, $800 tops, for $5000. He knew exactly what he had, and he acted criminally in not returning it to the bar owner or Apple itself. Moreover, he clearly tried to profit from his theft. He's lucky he didn't get jail time.
Think what you want about the morality of the law. However, it's clearly spelled out, and he clearly broke it.
GP might mean that there will be less arable land in the United States. That's probably true. Guess we'd all better start learning to speak Canadian, Eh?
I concede most of your points, and I'm didn't mean to imply that the NSA document was in any way wrong. Those are the people who are literally charged with protecting nuclear and diplomatic secrets, and they deserve every bit of paranoia they show in that document. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way a little bit when we view good security practices as something that are either "off" or "on." I can remember when I started learning Linux, I was very intimidated by all the things you had to do to "properly" secure a box. I think that we, as admins, should acknowledge that there are different levels of security for different situations. If you're running a LAMP at home, and it's behind a NAT firewall with only port 80 forwarded, you really don't need to do much to secure it except keep your installation up to date. If you're new to Linux, it's a good idea to get in the habit of running as a non-privileged user. If we tell noobs that they need to adhere to NSA level standards, we're setting an impossibly high barrier to entry that will discourage lots of good folks from learning. We'll have them thinking "Meh... I'll just use Windows, that's much easier to secure."
At some point in their career, every new admin is going to do something stupid and make a mistake. Whether it's leaving some service open to attack or deleting a critical folder by accident, it's going to happen. I think it's far more important to know why we do things, and constantly evaluate them to make sure they still make sense. Best practices are good, but if we just follow them blindly without knowing the purpose behind them, we're turning off our brains and opening ourselves up to hackers who are constantly figuring ways around them.
That same document you quoted also recommends disabling SSH, X Windows, avahi, CUPS, DHCP, (client and server) NFS, DNS server, vsftp, apache, dovecot, samba, squid, and SNMP. I mean, sure, if you're protecting nuclear launch codes from the red Chinese, there really isn't an unreasonable security precaution you can take, but everything you disable limits the utility of your server. Every unjustifiable security precaution you implement wastes time you could be spending doing something useful. I completely understand there are instances where you need an audit trail, and this really is a good case for restricting root logins, but we're talking about a guy here who wants to set up a LAMP server at home. I doubt he needs an audit trail for privileged functions.
Read online tutorials, use strong passwords, disable services you aren't using, and make plenty of backups. You'll be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
You must be new here...
Most of the cheaper ones are embedded in the glass of the rearview mirror. Not completely environment-proof, but not something that I would say would wear out or need to be replaced regularly.
What is this "film" of which you speak?
Micro Center will straight up match Newegg prices. Last week, I got a $229 ASUS Wi-Fi router for $179, and Newegg didn't even have it in stock. I used to work there, and the owner has a very distinct philosophy. They don't (or at least they didn't) take on investors, and they pay for their expansion up front rather than borrowing for it and paying interest on loans. It's much slower growth that way, but they can keep their prices lower without having to constantly impress their investors and driving up their profits. From what I gather from former co-workers that I keep in touch with, they are doing fine financially. I didn't care for working there, but as an IT professional who's constantly in need of same-day parts, I thank the maker that I have one ten minutes drive from me.
I'm pretty sure most of that was English, but you lost me pretty early on there...
How do you define losing? The three best selling phones in Q4 among all carriers were: iPhone 4s, iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, in that order. More than half of all phones sold by Verizon in Q4 were iPhones, and they're currently the largest carrier. It would be safe to assume that the numbers would be at least similar with AT&T and Sprint, although they have not published their numbers.
If that's your version of "losing in the smart phone market" then how would you define winning?
If I were to physically deprive an artist of his or her only copy of his or her intellectual property, then we'd be making an apt comparison. As it is, it seems like you're just trolling for the **AA. In the Megaupload case, I would guess that with the amount of data taken down, at least one person, probably thousands, have been deprived of their only copy of data, which is real property. If I download a copy of Michael Jackson's Thriller album from LimeWire, I'm not depriving anyone of anything.
I'm not defending copyright infringement here, I'm just pointing out your terrible logic.
Hahaha.... I'll just set up my network on 172.16.1.x. Muahahahahaha!!
The major difference here is that Stuxnet was a piece of software (allegedly) designed to cause specific hardware failure. They didn't have access to the hardware in question, and it was on a non-Windows system, connected to Windows systems by serial cables. Once it was in the system in question, it wasn't trying to phone home, just disrupt the centrifuge timing enough to destroy it and make it look like an accident. Quite impressive and pretty difficult. On the other hand, the Chinese are manufacturing all of the hardware used in our cell phones. They don't have to worry about secretly installing code on anything. They can just change the chip design in the fab and put whatever they want in there, in addition to what the client ordered. A small hardware daemon that could intercept keystrokes and send them, encrypted, to a series of proxy servers would be nearly impossible to differentiate from legitimate SSL traffic.
Don't forget that these factories could conceivably have the full support of the Chinese government in their actions. That's a lot of resources that could be brought to bear on a relatively simple problem.
What makes you think that his personal feelings on the matter would in anyway affect his political support for it?
Salt is bad for you. The government should outlaw salt because it increases healthcare premiums. And alcohol. And ice cream sandwiches. And swearing. You can see where I'm going with this...
You, sir, are correct. My apologies to Qzukk.
Why would you choose not to ride with an unobtrusive safety device that is statistically proven to increase your odds of surviving a crash by an order of magnitude? I mean, I wholeheartedly agree with the premise that it's none of the government's business whether or not you choose to wear a seatbelt, but honestly, logic and sense should compel you to wear one.
I'm going to skip the whole 3D TV craze and hold out for a 4D one. One extra D has to be better, right?
According to TFA, it's not really about enforcing some sort of moral code. They developed this machine so that it only dispenses free marketing samples to their target demographic. I mean, from a really wide angle, I can sort of understand what they were thinking, but really? It all sounds like something that someone would shout out in a brainstorming meeting and everyone would get in a good chuckle and move on. Why not just pay someone minimum wage to dispense samples? It's a marketing gimmick, and it's a really stupid use of technology. I could also see it backfiring because it can't be 100% accurate. How insulted would you be if you stepped up to this machine and it identified you as a child? "NO PUDDING FOR YOU!" What if you had some sort of condition that caused your facial proportions to be childlike? What if there was a random software error? I can't believe they spent time, effort and money actually developing this.
It's not a cup holder you moran. It's where you put the shiny circle. I seen one of those "Geek Nerd" guys up at the Best Buy do it once.
Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz Al-Omari boarded at the Portland International Jetway in Maine. I wouldn't call that a "large airport." If you need to secure one of them, you need to secure them all equally. Either that, or make passengers go through security just before they board the plane, at every leg of every flight. It's a mesh network, so the cost doesn't scale linearly.
I once had a corporate accountant tell me "In the business world, there is no 'right' and 'wrong,' there is only 'legal' and 'illegal.'"
I hate to defend the MAFIAA, but they really should post a link to the original video in the summary. We should watch what they put out before biasing ourselves with a (probably very accurate) edited version of the video. I'm a believe that more information is better than less. We can't form good opinions of ignorance.
That being said, the original video is crap. You can watch it here.
In Zimbabwe a few years ago, their national currency lost its value at a rate much higher than Bitcoin over the 2 day example provided above. And I'm pretty sure that's even a real country with a president and an army and everything. Currency changes value over time. The amount of time varies based on the stability of whatever is backing the currency.
So to answer your question, yes, it's directly comparable.
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/485.html
IANAL, but it's spelled out pretty clearly in black and white. He's lucky he didn't get jail time.
California Penal Code section 485: One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.
VERY easy to prove intent here, as he sold a phone worth, maybe, $800 tops, for $5000. He knew exactly what he had, and he acted criminally in not returning it to the bar owner or Apple itself. Moreover, he clearly tried to profit from his theft. He's lucky he didn't get jail time.
Think what you want about the morality of the law. However, it's clearly spelled out, and he clearly broke it.
GP might mean that there will be less arable land in the United States. That's probably true. Guess we'd all better start learning to speak Canadian, Eh?
I concede most of your points, and I'm didn't mean to imply that the NSA document was in any way wrong. Those are the people who are literally charged with protecting nuclear and diplomatic secrets, and they deserve every bit of paranoia they show in that document. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way a little bit when we view good security practices as something that are either "off" or "on." I can remember when I started learning Linux, I was very intimidated by all the things you had to do to "properly" secure a box. I think that we, as admins, should acknowledge that there are different levels of security for different situations. If you're running a LAMP at home, and it's behind a NAT firewall with only port 80 forwarded, you really don't need to do much to secure it except keep your installation up to date. If you're new to Linux, it's a good idea to get in the habit of running as a non-privileged user. If we tell noobs that they need to adhere to NSA level standards, we're setting an impossibly high barrier to entry that will discourage lots of good folks from learning. We'll have them thinking "Meh... I'll just use Windows, that's much easier to secure."
At some point in their career, every new admin is going to do something stupid and make a mistake. Whether it's leaving some service open to attack or deleting a critical folder by accident, it's going to happen. I think it's far more important to know why we do things, and constantly evaluate them to make sure they still make sense. Best practices are good, but if we just follow them blindly without knowing the purpose behind them, we're turning off our brains and opening ourselves up to hackers who are constantly figuring ways around them.
That same document you quoted also recommends disabling SSH, X Windows, avahi, CUPS, DHCP, (client and server) NFS, DNS server, vsftp, apache, dovecot, samba, squid, and SNMP. I mean, sure, if you're protecting nuclear launch codes from the red Chinese, there really isn't an unreasonable security precaution you can take, but everything you disable limits the utility of your server. Every unjustifiable security precaution you implement wastes time you could be spending doing something useful. I completely understand there are instances where you need an audit trail, and this really is a good case for restricting root logins, but we're talking about a guy here who wants to set up a LAMP server at home. I doubt he needs an audit trail for privileged functions.
Read online tutorials, use strong passwords, disable services you aren't using, and make plenty of backups. You'll be fine.