"The substance of the arms control provisions is in Article IV. This article restricts activities in two ways:
First, it contains an undertaking not to place in orbit around the Earth, install on the moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise station in outer space, nuclear or any other weapons of mass destruction.
Second, it limits the use of the moon and other celestial bodies exclusively to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for establishing military bases, installation, or fortifications; testing weapons of any kind; or conducting military maneuvers.
After the Treaty entered into force, the United States and the Soviet Union collaborated in jointly planned and manned space enterprises."
If you've ever seen the movie about the Tour de France, Stars and Water Carriers, you'd know they drink alot during the Tour. In fact, Tommy Simpson had a water bottle full of gin and tonic when he keeled over during the tour.
Merckx, the greatest racer ever, smoked supposedly to get his lungs ready for the indoor track season.
the term athlete, quite literally, is from the greek meaning "one who competes". I suppose you could go with the most narrow of definitions, and say that athletics is only track and field events... but really, anything can be a competition, and sport is supposedly a noble form of competition -- it is organized and to be played fairly. So really, you could have organized staple competitions where atheletes come together to enjoy the sport of competitively assembling documents... which would be about as exciting as watching some guy play with his joystick.
If I want to watch a sport where the athletes can smoke and drink while participating, I'll stick to curling. Now that's a sport! There's nothing like listening to Women's Curling on tv... just a bunch of girls moaning and yelling "harder! harder!".
Wierdly, that Johnathan Wendel looks alot like the American showboat in that Curling movie, Men with Brooms... and somehow, that sort of seems like the kind of sport competitive gaming would be like -- guys in flashy outfits, stobelights, smoke machines, loud disco and a lot of atitude duking it out at a big event in a mall. Yeah, I'll stick to watching other sports.
When microsoft just airbrushed apple off of their satellite maps it may have been an attempt to be funny but it was basically petty.
If yahoo had done this to Google's own maps on the Google site that would have been vandalism not necesarily a prank.
That they went to the trouble of putting up a fake voicemail and other humourous details puts it in the realm of a prank rather than a childish tantrum. Whether you find it funny, that's up to you. There's a thin line between humour and malice, but basically humour is important because it is a legitimate way to air a grievence in a relatively socially acceptable manner.
I don't think this totally undermines Yahoo's credibility. If you needed to get to the Google campus you still could. If you were looking for the Google number, you'd probably Google it anyways.
If anything it actually gives them credibility because it brings them back to the roots of what Yahoo! and the early net was about when it was built in the dorms -- fun.
For some of the online programs I have investigated, for example Boston University, Finals are proctored at Prometric/ACT Sites.
Yes, you probably could google answers for an exam at many online institutions but this is probably factored in. Have you ever attempted to bluff a brainbench exam with Google? The time limit would kill most except the brilliant.
I have taken tests at bricks and mortar school that allowed googling, but the tests were difficult enough that if you didn't know your shit it wouldn't help you much. Our prof rationalized that in the real world Google is available so have at it.
The thing is most HR people who interview wouldn't know how to ask the right questions or analyze the OSS code. While this seems harsh, sometimes tech interviewers are just too cranky to adequetly weed out candidates. I have been just toasted in interviews where I was highly qualified but was being asked esoteric questions that I answered correctly and was told I was wrong (maybe they wanted to see how I fought, or maybe they wanted to maintain their spot in the pecking order) Other times I have gotten jobs where I have totally fucked up on the tech's grill nervously rambling incoherent and incorrect responses. I have no Idea how I was hired. I did a great job so they must of had some intuition.
There is usually little correlation between knowlege and getting a job, but if you have the credentials it makes an HR person's job easier to cover their ass and say, "He had the credentials" when the applicant chosen turns out to be a chair moistener. Your method is definitely preferable and is a huge asset to your company. It's a shame that most companies are unable to take such a critical approach.
I just wonder though,despite your rigor, are there candidates that you choose or relegate simply in the first few seconds of the interview? I guess that's number three. Yeah, I bet you have a pretty kick ass team.
You're right 100%. Really it doesn't matter where you learn, but that you learn. It's possible to get an A.A. degree at a community college and know more than an M.I.T. graduate. Whatever you decide to do, go and do the best possible.
Now for my $ 0.02 on the Gates and Jobs -- they are the exception, not the rule. And for the most part they are managers not techies. Gates was groomed from generations of money and influence to be an executive. Jobs on the otherhand is a self made man. Either way, they just as well could have been another joe in the faceless masses of 'dropouts that coulda been contenders'. Their success is not to be taken lightly in either case. They are phenomenons who did the work.
Earning a degree shows you're serious and is a great way to keep you honest in your pursuit of knowledge. Just as a counterpoint to the Jobs/Gates story, Woz, an undeniable demigod of computing, went back to school and got his degree under a psuedonym after his sucess with Apple because he wanted to learn.
Encrypted volumes within encrypted volumes.... that's a good idea!
In my scenario, yes you would have a separate key for each file. With the dummyfiles, you wouldn't even need to know the password. You would only have to remember ten keys for the important ten files and a variation of specific keys for less important files. People get really keyed-up on remembering short esoteric passphrases -- but what if they were using really long passphrases that were easier to remember and harder to crack(i.e. "1stgradeMr.JohnsonWasMyT3acher" -- that's a hard pw to brute force or even guess.)Or do a BibleCode where you use the first letter of lines 10-32 on page 89 of Moby Dick -- it's not too hard to make a mnemonic formula to follow that would be difficult to crack.
Windows may let you set up an encrypted volume, but as I recall (and this may have changed since I played around with it a couple of years ago) copying the volume to another directory loses the encryption therefore you cannot send an encrypted file to another computer without loosing the encryption.
It would be better to have the data destroyed itself if copied or a brute force attack is attempted.
it has long been suspected that the NSA doesn't approve any encryption that they don't have the ability to break in some reasonable time frame...
This is definitely plausible if you believe in the rumoured quantum encryption and a few other such concepts. But I believe it was one of Phil Zimmerman's reasonings to release PGP, or at least a meme that developed from its release, that the more stuff that is encrypted the less effective decrypting becomes since even with advanced techniques it will still be too difficult to decrypt everything if everything is ecrypted.
If you not only incrypted important documents, but every file from your mp3's on up and also ran a program that randomly generates encrypted noise files so a harddrive has maybe 10 critical documents and 500,000 noise documents -- it would be sort of like throwing your shredded documents into the compost bin.
With this methodology, even if a file could be cracked in ten minutes, your still looking at over 9 years of work to find 10 documents. And say the files could be cracked in 30 seconds each you are still looking at 6 months of work and then however long it would take to analyze the noise from signal.
In the end, however, this sort of tactic would probably give a court a valid reason under this ruling to keep you locked up for a long time without any real evidence. Not like this isn't happening already. In the end it would sort of be a reverse tactic of wounding, not killing, the enemy -- the more techs that are busy trying to decode garbage and take care of pawns in jail the less enemy you have to deal with. And if people are willing to blow themselves up for a cause, I think it wouldn't be to hard to get volunteers for this sort of occupation.
Narus unified IP Management and Security is deployed by some of the largest carriers and IP service providers in the world, such as AT&T, KDDI, U.S. Cellular, Korea Telecom, T-Mobile and Telecom Egypt. Carriers rely on Narus solutions to provide them with real-time IP knowledge to create, manage and protect their services and revenues. With solutions for protecting critical infrastructure from attack, traffic analysis and management, lawful interception and content-based billing, Narus offers a full suite of IP applications all on a single platform. This approach provides a total network view of IP traffic, demonstrating unparalleled performance, while saving carriers tens of millions of dollars in capital and operational costs.
I don't know how well it works, but it's a one stop shop for "security" concerns from losing revenue to VoIP to complying with new wiretap regulations. It sounds like rather than just sabotaging VoIP ATT or any broadband provider might start billing you for using your connection to access voice communications. Yow.
-- Well, here I am in AMERICA.. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I
LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE.. EMOTIONS are SWEEPING over me!!
There is software that can detect VoIP traffic and even identify the carrier. Telcos use this to *protect their networks*, but it can also be extended to protect their profits.
While it is illegal for Witacre to drop all VoIP traffic, it doesn't mean he won't be identifying this traffic and providing it with highly degraded service with added noise, especially if the call's destination is one of his clients. This way he can do his best to maintain his customer base since the average customer will believe that using VoIP is like talking through a tincan.
Sure in the end the buggywhip tech of the old Ma bell will loose out, but it will be a prolonged fight. Witacre rebuilt ATT, he's pretty shrewd. -- the guy just single-handedly overturned one of the largest anti-trust cases ever. I don't think he's going to be easy to presuade with some little "laws".
No, that's too good to make up. When the Onion first started online it was frequently being mistaken for real. Not as much anymore, but it's not hard to see it being done.
My kid has to do news summaries for her high school class and she often turns in Onion articles and I don't think her teacher knows they are parodies.
Okay, now you're really twisting my words. I said, and I hold to be true, that the book On Capitalism by Milton Friedman sounds great in theory, but doesn't work in practise. I gave an example, the University of Chicago Chile experiment that was an utter failure right up there with Stalin's interpretation of Communism. I went on to say that the Monist econmic theory of Friedman is a complete polar opposite to the Keynesian principles. Both are Capitalism, however Keynes is much more sensible. I never said Capitalism is great in theory, but not in practice. I am a hardcore Capitalist, but I tend to lean toward the Keynesian ways that believe a healthy economy is based on healthy consumer, business and government spending.
Just for another example, let's look at the differences between Reagan and Thatcher. Both claimed to be Monists, however Reagan was in many ways a closet Keynesian who was dramatically increasing military spending while on the surface was hacking to the bone all social spending. Thatcher only cut spending and the result for Britain was recession and a gutted infrastructure wheras the Reagan spending was the springboard for the economic boom of the late 90's.
Keynes's principles were greatly adopted after WWII when the wisdom of his interpretation of Versailles and the resulting Great Depression was understood. In effect, it was his policies that laid the groundwork for the Marshall Plan and the corollary work by MacArthur in post-war Japan. So if you want to analyze their success, yes it was due to Capitalism but a Keynesian Capitalism. The cost of rebuilding the world after the war was phenomenal,but the wisdom to do so, as proscribed by Keynes, was much more affordable than the cost of another Versailles.
So to look at the difference you point out between East Germany and West, is a clear case of the wisdom of Keynesian Economic principle, particularly as the West contrasted Stalin's rape of the East removing factories and ignoring infrastructure. Even today you can get a Russian motorcycle that is built in a stolen BMW factory removed by the Soviets. In the west we did the contrary, we paid to rebuild the German economy and because of this the Russians are driving around on fifty year old technology wheras Mercedes grew to the dominance that it was able to buy one of the largest auto manufactuers in the US and creates some phenomenally futuristic vehicles.
Much of your arguements seem to be based on the notion that I am anti-capitalist. Much of your motivation is to prove to me that the U.S. is the greatest economy in the world, ever. The fact is, it isn't and right now it is amazing everyone that it keeps going. The U.S. economy has been based for some time on people selling each other houses with Chinese money. But I will take your bait, look at the success that is Sweden. They are hardcore socialist. Something like 90% of your income goes back to the government but yet they have consistantly maintained one of the highest standard of living for decades. Finland is much the same story. It happens. The American way is not always right, look at what is happening in Iraq. Hell, over there George Bush is making concession he would never make here -- the U.S. is footing the bill for a fairly comprehensive Iraqi healthcare program.
The other countries you assess as being either a threat to us or not are generally all a threat to us. Finland has the strongest economy in the world and is one of the most technically advanced cultures in the world. Look at their flagship, Nokia if you have any questions. Canada has a much stronger economy than the US and more oil reserves than the US. Canada can spend on ifrastructure rather than military because it doesn't need to invade Iraq, it has more oil than Saudi Arabia. Additionally their strong investment in healthcare, education and technology has positioned them well ahead of the US for the long haul. Look at the reasons Toyota decided to build their new plant in Ontario rather than the US south: healthcare cos
East Indians comprise a good deal of labor for the Middle East I would guess they work hard to become merchants in the Middle East as well. - it's just a much harder road. Many come as laborers through brokers and are exploited. A good deal of US support workers are hired this way and are exposed to very dangerous conditions in Iraq and are less defended than U.S. soldiers since they are cheap and don't count in the body count.
http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/printer_101305LA .shtml
I read On Capitalism by Friedman and thought it was great, but it doesn't work in the real world. Look at what a disgrace the whole Chicago experiment in Chile was from Santiago stadium onward. It was an embarassing failure.
In your small government dream world the interstate highway system wouldn't exist and neither would the internet because the government shouldn't spend money on that. You're world would be like Potterville with muddy streets and crappy infrastructure and everyone's mom would be a hooker.
While Reagan said he was doing small government he was doing massive military spending and building a bigger government. Why should we pay for Star Wars when most americans can't even read the constitution? Is that democracy or facism?
Communities have a right to be served by their utilities. Small towns usually give a monopoly to a phone company for the privilege of profiting in exchange for service. If all they want is the privilege of profit without the service the community has the responsibility to provide for themselves. Why should they just say oh, that's capitalism and loose the company they built and worked with for generations just because there is no broadband? It's ridiculous and yes it can kill a community. Just look at towns who were bypassed by the railroad or the expressway -- they died and never came back. And a community has a responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen, especially when the answer of bringing in high speed is so easy.
Basically, that's your whole arguement -- "why bother when it's so much easier to give up to the natural hand of capitalism." The thing is, you have to set your own priorities. If the museum is too far away, figure out a way to get there whether it's bike, train, or saving up for the gas money or a community bus trip. Same thing with math camp, if you plan for it and forgo a latte a week and maybe get the kids to do some odd jobs or fundraising it can happen. So what if Richard Feynmann is dead, I bought several of his books and a slew of lectures on CD at ebay for $20 after I noticed my kid really liked the copy of Feynmann's Rainbow I got at the library. For less than the price of taking the family to McDonalds they are now intimately knowledgeable with one of the brightest minds of physics. But that's the thing, it's somehow easier to spend the money at McDonalds or Starbucks or $80/month cable bill and just say the ideals are out of reach. Have some backbone lad or your going to get crushed.
Sure Capitalism has Milton Friedman on one side, but it also has Maynard Keynes on the other and in the middle there is we the people. Capitalism fails if any of these three points are skewd.
The reason America is falling off the tech wagon is because we have collectively lost the dream. All the justification that that is the way capitalism works won't change that fact. Because in essense, the whole telecom fiasco that is happening is exactly how capitalism and democracy can fail. Greed can be good, but so can self control. And when your going up against a greedy bastard like a lazy telco your community has to have the foresight and self control to fight back and survive or perish. That is what Democracy and Capitalism is all about.
The fact of the matter is that the resources are there, even more than enough after being overbuilt in the late 1990's. They just aren't being used because the controlling corporations make more money not providing to the public they are supposedly serving and when communities try to do it themselves the corporate deep pockets work to legislate against this.
Recently I saw a show on PBS about how small markets are frequently refused service by the telcom industry because they aren't profitable while at the same time those telcos are using big money to buy off legistaltures to make it illegal for local governments to provide internet access because they claim it is anticompetitive.
The case used on the program involved a mid-sized community whose main employer was unable to compete without broadband since they were required to have the connectivity to fulfill government contracts. Without broadband the community's main industry would be forced to leave. When the town brought in broadband they had to fight the same telcos who originally said it was unprofitable to provide them with broadband were now saying that municipally provided broadband was anti-competetive.
U.S. taxpayers have already paid a high price for the communications infrastructure and it is not fair that they are unable to use it and it is not wise. In the long run it will be detrimental to the country's ability to be economically competitive.
I am lucky to have one broadband option where I live in Wisconsin. This is the case I hear frequently here on slashdot and elsewhere: many U.S. communities don't even have one option for broadband.
If you think that dialup is so great for education, download a Nova program or take an online course that requires video lectures. Or try to browse Wikipedia with the standard spyware riddled dialup computer that keeps getting knocked offline.
Several years ago, I helped build an application that enabled Inuits and other Canadians to connect classrooms over the internet with video and whiteboard to collaborate in an effective and innovative literacy program where childern draw pictures together for stories they read each other.
Last year, my cousins in one of the top rated Chicago schools where doing a similar lesson plan except they were mailing their drawings back and forth because they did not have high speed in the classroom. Do you not see a disparity that substance hunters far north of the Arctic Circle have better access to technology than rich childern of one of the largest cities in the country? Of course that year the whole Chicago school system was shut down for rat problems, unfortunately the main rat problem was a dysfunctional bureaucracy and they weren't poisoned or trapped...they just got raises.
It is a travesty to the people of the United States that this oligarchy is allowed to emerge and that long term prosperity is being sold for short term profits.
Then why have remote fly-in communities in Canada been using broadband longer than most folks in Large U.S. cities?
The answer is still $$$ but not in the direction you are thinking -- it's the phone companies and media conglomerates that are threatened by a population of broadband users who don't pay long distance and use P2P. Countries like Canada and Finland don't have those concerns, they are concerned about their citizens being competitive in the 'New Economy' and their politicians aren't encumbered by their commitments to the Old Economics.
So really the apples and oranges are those countries who are tied to the old economy and those who are leapfrogging industrialism.
Canada, the largest country in the world, has much better internet access even in remote communities -- communities that would make what Americans consider remote seem down right cosmopolitan.
I moved from a job in NW Ontario where I provided service for the Hudson Basin -- towns that were hundreds of miles from roads, hours by plane -- these towns had better broadband access than most of rural Wisconsin.
The average household in NWO has better access than the average household in Chicago... but of course, they had broadband available many years before most people in Chicago. The difference is the politicians, both local and national, see the value of providing their citizens with connectivity.
Finland had a much higher percentage of landline-less communities a little over a decade ago. They responded by building one of the best cellular networks in the world. Additionally, they saw the value of broadband and integrated that into their infrastructure too, despite very low population densities and long, cold distances.
Whereas in the US, politicians seem to find it better to leave it to the "freemarket", as dictated to them by the deep pocketed telecoms and media conglomerates who tell the elected official what is best...and they brazenly go along with it because that's what the market dictates to be the best value for their campaign war chest...
I remember hearing David Suzuki talk about taking an ice breaker to the North Pole with a bunch of EcoTourists and finding open water there and being suprised.
And I thought, "Duh! If you keep driving Ice Breakers doesn't that destroy the Ice Caps and doesn't that sort of diminish the goals of eco-tourism?"
Shouldn't there have been a ban on ice breakers a long time ago...
Read the whole doc and they tell how solid the tables are:
Sleepycat Software has provided MySQL with the Berkeley DB transactional storage engine. This storage engine typically is called BDB for short. Support for the BDB storage engine is included in MySQL source distributions is activated in MySQL-Max binary distributions.
BDB tables may have a greater chance of surviving crashes and are also capable of COMMIT and ROLLBACK operations on transactions. The MySQL source distribution comes with a BDB distribution that is patched to make it work with MySQL. You cannot use a non-patched version of BDB with MySQL.
It works quite nicely and I hope they take the opportunity to improve from both mySQL and Sleepycat sides. It's always been my favorite table choice with mySQL.
Mostly I bring it up to get out of the Oracle bought InnoDB rut because one of the cool features of mySQL is the availability of tables to use. And I guess that is one of the great features of open source in general.
What has always been nice about mySQL is the ability to use different table types for different needs. If you can't use Inno, use Sleepy Cat's Berkeley DB.
It's offensive to think that people have sex with their pants on (especially dirty gansta jeans), it's like believing Ricky and Lucy Ricardo slept in twin beds.
But seriously, who'd want to go camping without an ax, frypan, tent, sleeping bag or towel???
My camping philosophy is more Admundsen than Scott -- you do it right and you can go to Antarctica in style or you can be a survival dork and get there last and die miserably.
Why focus on being a survivalist when you can set your horizon a bit higher? Besides, I am an overachiever.
When I made the decision to get a CS degree, I figured the only way I could afford to do so was to not pay rent... so I camped for three and a half years. I didn't tell most of my class mates and they were none the wiser. If I did tell them they thought I was joking since I made a point of always wearing clean clothes and shaving regularly (unlike my classmates). I didn't bring honey, I had beehives. I had a garden and a woodstove.
It was nice, but I like living in a house now. However, it's good to know that if the house was destroyed I wouldn't have trouble living well because living well is an intangible that is a part of one's self not an inventory gleaned from some lifestyle magazine.
---
When life gives you lemons, make organic lemon extract...
Slashdot Mirror
The U.S. has signed treaties to treat space like the Antarctic and pursue only peaceful exploration:
http://www.state.gov/t/ac/trt/5181.htm
"The substance of the arms control provisions is in Article IV. This article restricts activities in two ways:
First, it contains an undertaking not to place in orbit around the Earth, install on the moon or any other celestial body, or otherwise station in outer space, nuclear or any other weapons of mass destruction.
Second, it limits the use of the moon and other celestial bodies exclusively to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for establishing military bases, installation, or fortifications; testing weapons of any kind; or conducting military maneuvers.
After the Treaty entered into force, the United States and the Soviet Union collaborated in jointly planned and manned space enterprises."
It's libel if you can't afford the lawyers to fight it.
If you've ever seen the movie about the Tour de France, Stars and Water Carriers, you'd know they drink alot during the Tour. In fact, Tommy Simpson had a water bottle full of gin and tonic when he keeled over during the tour.
Merckx, the greatest racer ever, smoked supposedly to get his lungs ready for the indoor track season.
the term athlete, quite literally, is from the greek meaning "one who competes". I suppose you could go with the most narrow of definitions, and say that athletics is only track and field events... but really, anything can be a competition, and sport is supposedly a noble form of competition -- it is organized and to be played fairly. So really, you could have organized staple competitions where atheletes come together to enjoy the sport of competitively assembling documents... which would be about as exciting as watching some guy play with his joystick.
If I want to watch a sport where the athletes can smoke and drink while participating, I'll stick to curling. Now that's a sport! There's nothing like listening to Women's Curling on tv... just a bunch of girls moaning and yelling "harder! harder!".
Wierdly, that Johnathan Wendel looks alot like the American showboat in that Curling movie, Men with Brooms... and somehow, that sort of seems like the kind of sport competitive gaming would be like -- guys in flashy outfits, stobelights, smoke machines, loud disco and a lot of atitude duking it out at a big event in a mall. Yeah, I'll stick to watching other sports.
Really? The address was one infinite loop which has been their address for some time. They must use some really old photos.
When microsoft just airbrushed apple off of their satellite maps it may have been an attempt to be funny but it was basically petty.
If yahoo had done this to Google's own maps on the Google site that would have been vandalism not necesarily a prank.
That they went to the trouble of putting up a fake voicemail and other humourous details puts it in the realm of a prank rather than a childish tantrum. Whether you find it funny, that's up to you. There's a thin line between humour and malice, but basically humour is important because it is a legitimate way to air a grievence in a relatively socially acceptable manner.
I don't think this totally undermines Yahoo's credibility. If you needed to get to the Google campus you still could. If you were looking for the Google number, you'd probably Google it anyways.
If anything it actually gives them credibility because it brings them back to the roots of what Yahoo! and the early net was about when it was built in the dorms -- fun.
For some of the online programs I have investigated, for example Boston University, Finals are proctored at Prometric/ACT Sites.
Yes, you probably could google answers for an exam at many online institutions but this is probably factored in. Have you ever attempted to bluff a brainbench exam with Google? The time limit would kill most except the brilliant.
I have taken tests at bricks and mortar school that allowed googling, but the tests were difficult enough that if you didn't know your shit it wouldn't help you much. Our prof rationalized that in the real world Google is available so have at it.
The thing is most HR people who interview wouldn't know how to ask the right questions or analyze the OSS code. While this seems harsh, sometimes tech interviewers are just too cranky to adequetly weed out candidates. I have been just toasted in interviews where I was highly qualified but was being asked esoteric questions that I answered correctly and was told I was wrong (maybe they wanted to see how I fought, or maybe they wanted to maintain their spot in the pecking order) Other times I have gotten jobs where I have totally fucked up on the tech's grill nervously rambling incoherent and incorrect responses. I have no Idea how I was hired. I did a great job so they must of had some intuition.
There is usually little correlation between knowlege and getting a job, but if you have the credentials it makes an HR person's job easier to cover their ass and say, "He had the credentials" when the applicant chosen turns out to be a chair moistener. Your method is definitely preferable and is a huge asset to your company. It's a shame that most companies are unable to take such a critical approach.
I just wonder though,despite your rigor, are there candidates that you choose or relegate simply in the first few seconds of the interview? I guess that's number three. Yeah, I bet you have a pretty kick ass team.
You're right 100%. Really it doesn't matter where you learn, but that you learn. It's possible to get an A.A. degree at a community college and know more than an M.I.T. graduate. Whatever you decide to do, go and do the best possible.
Now for my $ 0.02 on the Gates and Jobs -- they are the exception, not the rule. And for the most part they are managers not techies. Gates was groomed from generations of money and influence to be an executive. Jobs on the otherhand is a self made man. Either way, they just as well could have been another joe in the faceless masses of 'dropouts that coulda been contenders'. Their success is not to be taken lightly in either case. They are phenomenons who did the work.
Earning a degree shows you're serious and is a great way to keep you honest in your pursuit of knowledge. Just as a counterpoint to the Jobs/Gates story, Woz, an undeniable demigod of computing, went back to school and got his degree under a psuedonym after his sucess with Apple because he wanted to learn.
Encrypted volumes within encrypted volumes.... that's a good idea!
In my scenario, yes you would have a separate key for each file. With the dummyfiles, you wouldn't even need to know the password. You would only have to remember ten keys for the important ten files and a variation of specific keys for less important files. People get really keyed-up on remembering short esoteric passphrases -- but what if they were using really long passphrases that were easier to remember and harder to crack(i.e. "1stgradeMr.JohnsonWasMyT3acher" -- that's a hard pw to brute force or even guess.)Or do a BibleCode where you use the first letter of lines 10-32 on page 89 of Moby Dick -- it's not too hard to make a mnemonic formula to follow that would be difficult to crack.
Windows may let you set up an encrypted volume, but as I recall (and this may have changed since I played around with it a couple of years ago) copying the volume to another directory loses the encryption therefore you cannot send an encrypted file to another computer without loosing the encryption.
It would be better to have the data destroyed itself if copied or a brute force attack is attempted.
it has long been suspected that the NSA doesn't approve any encryption that they don't have the ability to break in some reasonable time frame...
This is definitely plausible if you believe in the rumoured quantum encryption and a few other such concepts. But I believe it was one of Phil Zimmerman's reasonings to release PGP, or at least a meme that developed from its release, that the more stuff that is encrypted the less effective decrypting becomes since even with advanced techniques it will still be too difficult to decrypt everything if everything is ecrypted.
If you not only incrypted important documents, but every file from your mp3's on up and also ran a program that randomly generates encrypted noise files so a harddrive has maybe 10 critical documents and 500,000 noise documents -- it would be sort of like throwing your shredded documents into the compost bin.
With this methodology, even if a file could be cracked in ten minutes, your still looking at over 9 years of work to find 10 documents. And say the files could be cracked in 30 seconds each you are still looking at 6 months of work and then however long it would take to analyze the noise from signal.
In the end, however, this sort of tactic would probably give a court a valid reason under this ruling to keep you locked up for a long time without any real evidence. Not like this isn't happening already. In the end it would sort of be a reverse tactic of wounding, not killing, the enemy -- the more techs that are busy trying to decode garbage and take care of pawns in jail the less enemy you have to deal with. And if people are willing to blow themselves up for a cause, I think it wouldn't be to hard to get volunteers for this sort of occupation.
From their press release:
http://www.narus.com/press/2005/0725.html
Narus unified IP Management and Security is deployed by some of the largest carriers and IP service providers in the world, such as AT&T, KDDI, U.S. Cellular, Korea Telecom, T-Mobile and Telecom Egypt. Carriers rely on Narus solutions to provide them with real-time IP knowledge to create, manage and protect their services and revenues. With solutions for protecting critical infrastructure from attack, traffic analysis and management, lawful interception and content-based billing, Narus offers a full suite of IP applications all on a single platform. This approach provides a total network view of IP traffic, demonstrating unparalleled performance, while saving carriers tens of millions of dollars in capital and operational costs.
I don't know how well it works, but it's a one stop shop for "security" concerns from losing revenue to VoIP to complying with new wiretap regulations. It sounds like rather than just sabotaging VoIP ATT or any broadband provider might start billing you for using your connection to access voice communications. Yow.
--
Well, here I am in AMERICA.. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE it. I HATE it. I LIKE.. EMOTIONS are SWEEPING over me!!
There is software that can detect VoIP traffic and even identify the carrier. Telcos use this to *protect their networks*, but it can also be extended to protect their profits.
While it is illegal for Witacre to drop all VoIP traffic, it doesn't mean he won't be identifying this traffic and providing it with highly degraded service with added noise, especially if the call's destination is one of his clients. This way he can do his best to maintain his customer base since the average customer will believe that using VoIP is like talking through a tincan.
Sure in the end the buggywhip tech of the old Ma bell will loose out, but it will be a prolonged fight. Witacre rebuilt ATT, he's pretty shrewd. -- the guy just single-handedly overturned one of the largest anti-trust cases ever. I don't think he's going to be easy to presuade with some little "laws".
No, that's too good to make up. When the Onion first started online it was frequently being mistaken for real. Not as much anymore, but it's not hard to see it being done.
My kid has to do news summaries for her high school class and she often turns in Onion articles and I don't think her teacher knows they are parodies.
Okay, now you're really twisting my words. I said, and I hold to be true, that the book On Capitalism by Milton Friedman sounds great in theory, but doesn't work in practise. I gave an example, the University of Chicago Chile experiment that was an utter failure right up there with Stalin's interpretation of Communism. I went on to say that the Monist econmic theory of Friedman is a complete polar opposite to the Keynesian principles. Both are Capitalism, however Keynes is much more sensible. I never said Capitalism is great in theory, but not in practice. I am a hardcore Capitalist, but I tend to lean toward the Keynesian ways that believe a healthy economy is based on healthy consumer, business and government spending.
Just for another example, let's look at the differences between Reagan and Thatcher. Both claimed to be Monists, however Reagan was in many ways a closet Keynesian who was dramatically increasing military spending while on the surface was hacking to the bone all social spending. Thatcher only cut spending and the result for Britain was recession and a gutted infrastructure wheras the Reagan spending was the springboard for the economic boom of the late 90's.
Keynes's principles were greatly adopted after WWII when the wisdom of his interpretation of Versailles and the resulting Great Depression was understood. In effect, it was his policies that laid the groundwork for the Marshall Plan and the corollary work by MacArthur in post-war Japan. So if you want to analyze their success, yes it was due to Capitalism but a Keynesian Capitalism. The cost of rebuilding the world after the war was phenomenal,but the wisdom to do so, as proscribed by Keynes, was much more affordable than the cost of another Versailles.
So to look at the difference you point out between East Germany and West, is a clear case of the wisdom of Keynesian Economic principle, particularly as the West contrasted Stalin's rape of the East removing factories and ignoring infrastructure. Even today you can get a Russian motorcycle that is built in a stolen BMW factory removed by the Soviets. In the west we did the contrary, we paid to rebuild the German economy and because of this the Russians are driving around on fifty year old technology wheras Mercedes grew to the dominance that it was able to buy one of the largest auto manufactuers in the US and creates some phenomenally futuristic vehicles.
Much of your arguements seem to be based on the notion that I am anti-capitalist. Much of your motivation is to prove to me that the U.S. is the greatest economy in the world, ever. The fact is, it isn't and right now it is amazing everyone that it keeps going. The U.S. economy has been based for some time on people selling each other houses with Chinese money. But I will take your bait, look at the success that is Sweden. They are hardcore socialist. Something like 90% of your income goes back to the government but yet they have consistantly maintained one of the highest standard of living for decades. Finland is much the same story. It happens. The American way is not always right, look at what is happening in Iraq. Hell, over there George Bush is making concession he would never make here -- the U.S. is footing the bill for a fairly comprehensive Iraqi healthcare program.
The other countries you assess as being either a threat to us or not are generally all a threat to us. Finland has the strongest economy in the world and is one of the most technically advanced cultures in the world. Look at their flagship, Nokia if you have any questions. Canada has a much stronger economy than the US and more oil reserves than the US. Canada can spend on ifrastructure rather than military because it doesn't need to invade Iraq, it has more oil than Saudi Arabia. Additionally their strong investment in healthcare, education and technology has positioned them well ahead of the US for the long haul. Look at the reasons Toyota decided to build their new plant in Ontario rather than the US south: healthcare cos
East Indians comprise a good deal of labor for the Middle East I would guess they work hard to become merchants in the Middle East as well. - it's just a much harder road.A .shtml
Many come as laborers through brokers and are exploited. A good deal of US support workers are hired this way and are exposed to very dangerous conditions in Iraq and are less defended than U.S. soldiers since they are cheap and don't count in the body count. http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/printer_101305L
I read On Capitalism by Friedman and thought it was great, but it doesn't work in the real world. Look at what a disgrace the whole Chicago experiment in Chile was from Santiago stadium onward. It was an embarassing failure.
In your small government dream world the interstate highway system wouldn't exist and neither would the internet because the government shouldn't spend money on that. You're world would be like Potterville with muddy streets and crappy infrastructure and everyone's mom would be a hooker.
While Reagan said he was doing small government he was doing massive military spending and building a bigger government. Why should we pay for Star Wars when most americans can't even read the constitution? Is that democracy or facism?
Communities have a right to be served by their utilities. Small towns usually give a monopoly to a phone company for the privilege of profiting in exchange for service. If all they want is the privilege of profit without the service the community has the responsibility to provide for themselves. Why should they just say oh, that's capitalism and loose the company they built and worked with for generations just because there is no broadband? It's ridiculous and yes it can kill a community. Just look at towns who were bypassed by the railroad or the expressway -- they died and never came back. And a community has a responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen, especially when the answer of bringing in high speed is so easy.
Basically, that's your whole arguement -- "why bother when it's so much easier to give up to the natural hand of capitalism." The thing is, you have to set your own priorities. If the museum is too far away, figure out a way to get there whether it's bike, train, or saving up for the gas money or a community bus trip. Same thing with math camp, if you plan for it and forgo a latte a week and maybe get the kids to do some odd jobs or fundraising it can happen. So what if Richard Feynmann is dead, I bought several of his books and a slew of lectures on CD at ebay for $20 after I noticed my kid really liked the copy of Feynmann's Rainbow I got at the library. For less than the price of taking the family to McDonalds they are now intimately knowledgeable with one of the brightest minds of physics. But that's the thing, it's somehow easier to spend the money at McDonalds or Starbucks or $80/month cable bill and just say the ideals are out of reach. Have some backbone lad or your going to get crushed.
Sure Capitalism has Milton Friedman on one side, but it also has Maynard Keynes on the other and in the middle there is we the people. Capitalism fails if any of these three points are skewd.
The reason America is falling off the tech wagon is because we have collectively lost the dream. All the justification that that is the way capitalism works won't change that fact. Because in essense, the whole telecom fiasco that is happening is exactly how capitalism and democracy can fail. Greed can be good, but so can self control. And when your going up against a greedy bastard like a lazy telco your community has to have the foresight and self control to fight back and survive or perish. That is what Democracy and Capitalism is all about.
The fact of the matter is that the resources are there, even more than enough after being overbuilt in the late 1990's. They just aren't being used because the controlling corporations make more money not providing to the public they are supposedly serving and when communities try to do it themselves the corporate deep pockets work to legislate against this.
Recently I saw a show on PBS about how small markets are frequently refused service by the telcom industry because they aren't profitable while at the same time those telcos are using big money to buy off legistaltures to make it illegal for local governments to provide internet access because they claim it is anticompetitive.
The case used on the program involved a mid-sized community whose main employer was unable to compete without broadband since they were required to have the connectivity to fulfill government contracts. Without broadband the community's main industry would be forced to leave. When the town brought in broadband they had to fight the same telcos who originally said it was unprofitable to provide them with broadband were now saying that municipally provided broadband was anti-competetive.
U.S. taxpayers have already paid a high price for the communications infrastructure and it is not fair that they are unable to use it and it is not wise. In the long run it will be detrimental to the country's ability to be economically competitive.
I am lucky to have one broadband option where I live in Wisconsin. This is the case I hear frequently here on slashdot and elsewhere: many U.S. communities don't even have one option for broadband.
If you think that dialup is so great for education, download a Nova program or take an online course that requires video lectures. Or try to browse Wikipedia with the standard spyware riddled dialup computer that keeps getting knocked offline.
Several years ago, I helped build an application that enabled Inuits and other Canadians to connect classrooms over the internet with video and whiteboard to collaborate in an effective and innovative literacy program where childern draw pictures together for stories they read each other.
Last year, my cousins in one of the top rated Chicago schools where doing a similar lesson plan except they were mailing their drawings back and forth because they did not have high speed in the classroom. Do you not see a disparity that substance hunters far north of the Arctic Circle have better access to technology than rich childern of one of the largest cities in the country? Of course that year the whole Chicago school system was shut down for rat problems, unfortunately the main rat problem was a dysfunctional bureaucracy and they weren't poisoned or trapped...they just got raises.
It is a travesty to the people of the United States that this oligarchy is allowed to emerge and that long term prosperity is being sold for short term profits.
Then why have remote fly-in communities in Canada been using broadband longer than most folks in Large U.S. cities?
The answer is still $$$ but not in the direction you are thinking -- it's the phone companies and media conglomerates that are threatened by a population of broadband users who don't pay long distance and use P2P. Countries like Canada and Finland don't have those concerns, they are concerned about their citizens being competitive in the 'New Economy' and their politicians aren't encumbered by their commitments to the Old Economics.
So really the apples and oranges are those countries who are tied to the old economy and those who are leapfrogging industrialism.
Canada, the largest country in the world, has much better internet access even in remote communities -- communities that would make what Americans consider remote seem down right cosmopolitan.
...and they brazenly go along with it because that's what the market dictates to be the best value for their campaign war chest...
I moved from a job in NW Ontario where I provided service for the Hudson Basin -- towns that were hundreds of miles from roads, hours by plane -- these towns had better broadband access than most of rural Wisconsin.
The average household in NWO has better access than the average household in Chicago... but of course, they had broadband available many years before most people in Chicago. The difference is the politicians, both local and national, see the value of providing their citizens with connectivity.
Finland had a much higher percentage of landline-less communities a little over a decade ago. They responded by building one of the best cellular networks in the world. Additionally, they saw the value of broadband and integrated that into their infrastructure too, despite very low population densities and long, cold distances.
Whereas in the US, politicians seem to find it better to leave it to the "freemarket", as dictated to them by the deep pocketed telecoms and media conglomerates who tell the elected official what is best
I remember hearing David Suzuki talk about taking an ice breaker to the North Pole with a bunch of EcoTourists and finding open water there and being suprised.
And I thought, "Duh! If you keep driving Ice Breakers doesn't that destroy the Ice Caps and doesn't that sort of diminish the goals of eco-tourism?"
Shouldn't there have been a ban on ice breakers a long time ago...
It works quite nicely and I hope they take the opportunity to improve from both mySQL and Sleepycat sides. It's always been my favorite table choice with mySQL.
Mostly I bring it up to get out of the Oracle bought InnoDB rut because one of the cool features of mySQL is the availability of tables to use. And I guess that is one of the great features of open source in general.
What has always been nice about mySQL is the ability to use different table types for different needs. If you can't use Inno, use Sleepy Cat's Berkeley DB.
Just do an ALTER TABLE with a TYPE clause.
ALTER TABLE table_name TYPE = BDB;
It's that easy.
It's offensive to think that people have sex with their pants on (especially dirty gansta jeans), it's like believing Ricky and Lucy Ricardo slept in twin beds.
I'd like to see those emails... they were probably like most late night alcoholic inspirations -- really great until the booze wore off.
"Be what you is. Not what you is not. Those who do this. Is the happiest lot." Mr. Wizard from Tutor the Turtle
But seriously, who'd want to go camping without an ax, frypan, tent, sleeping bag or towel???
My camping philosophy is more Admundsen than Scott -- you do it right and you can go to Antarctica in style or you can be a survival dork and get there last and die miserably.
Why focus on being a survivalist when you can set your horizon a bit higher? Besides, I am an overachiever.
When I made the decision to get a CS degree, I figured the only way I could afford to do so was to not pay rent... so I camped for three and a half years. I didn't tell most of my class mates and they were none the wiser. If I did tell them they thought I was joking since I made a point of always wearing clean clothes and shaving regularly (unlike my classmates). I didn't bring honey, I had beehives. I had a garden and a woodstove.
It was nice, but I like living in a house now. However, it's good to know that if the house was destroyed I wouldn't have trouble living well because living well is an intangible that is a part of one's self not an inventory gleaned from some lifestyle magazine.
---
When life gives you lemons, make organic lemon extract...