You have to understand that it is a politician speaking. they open their mouth and out comes random sounds that make good sound bites but often have no bearing on real facts.
That being said, he is half correct in that diesel vehicles should not really be driving in most city centers, the other half is that petrol vehicles should not either.
The distances in such are so short that fully electric or plug in hybrids that will mostly run on electricity in such places are a much better solution.
Further really in tightly built places like London public transportation should be built to cover most travel needs.
Indeed, city centers are specific places where cars and similar vehicles have very little reason to be in if your public transportation works well. Note that that requirement does include the need for easy access "park and ride" for switching between public transit and cars.
Another major reason is the speed. So many web sites are so much faster with adds blocked. I am not talking about small change, but something that is clearly visible.
Indeed. That is the thing that has kept me in firefox despite the utter stupidity of trying harder and harder to make firefox unusable. Classic theme restorer fixes enough to make it mostly usable. Without it firefox is just unusable.
None of our bigger customers have any plans to update to windows 10 within next 5 years at minimum(most that I have talked to are hoping that windows 10 is just another windows 8 that will go away so they can get a proper windows as next version when it finally comes time to end using windows 7)
The only cases of windows 10 update in our customers is the accidental updates in smaller customers. In most such cases the thing has failed somehow(that is something vital does not work) so we have had quite a lot of work from the reverts and in some cases reinstalls of computers to windows 7 after the revert did not work.
The thing is, I used to find advertising a good thing back in the days before internet was what it is today.
A lot things like computer/electronics magazines had a lot of ads about products that I would never have found out about without them. The editorial staff could not go through that many different things and write articles about them all.
And now that I think about it, the same was true for many other things too like newspapers.
But now in the world of search engines, news aggregators and so on the need is a lot less.
And add the fact that now ads try to be too smart on showing things related to something magic instead of things related to the thing being viewed.
But if there were actually non-intrusive ads that were related to the thing I was looking at they could add actual value. As example when I am looking at reviews of product A and there was a small sidebar/footer with "you are looking at A, are you aware that there is also a product B that might fill your needs" it might actually be a benefit.
After talking to many Americans about the fascination of the Superbowl that I could not understand.. apparently the ads are the main point for several people and the actual Superbowl being the skip over content..
A packet is not a byte. A packet is a sequence of bits including a address, other header information and the actual payload.
IPv4 packet will as example have 20 bytes(160 bits) header and a maximum payload of 65,515 bytes(though often lower in practice)
If you were to send a lot of packets with only a single byte payload then each packet will be 168 bits and your 100 Mb/s will result in about 600 000 packets. But at a gigabit connection the actual limit will start to hit for such strange traffic.
Note that normally you would send more than a single byte of information/packet so in most real applications you would need much higher speeds to hit the limit. At 105 bytes of information you would have a total length of 1000, bits so would be at about the limit on gigabit hardware. But still most high bandwidth traffic tends to have much more information in each packet and thus not usually hit such limits.
The limit has really started to hit due to the high availability of 10 gigabit and faster network cards coming down in price.
Re:Yes, we should give up because it is hard..
on
Let's Not Go To Mars
·
· Score: 1
>I'm unconvinced there really are very many people willing to try.
There never has been many. If you take the total number of people involved in any such endeavor the number is low.
As a random example of exploration: if you count the people willing to do things like polar explorations in the early 1900s the number is really low, yet they existed and while many perished, like in any exploration and it was a tragedy to them, for the humankind as whole explorations have opened new possibilities and expanded our knowledge.
In fact the site is not hosted from "A server located in America"
When I run anything against www.google com from Europe I usually get response times of 100ms.
So your questions should likely thus be: "So what you're saying is that the French law should apply to an American company hosting American data on an American server located in Europe hosted by an American domain, like www.google.com"
So it is like saying: "So you are saying an European person holding something Legal in Europe, bought in Europe and visiting America should apply US law to the possession of the item?"
So if they did indeed move it out of Europe the question would go back to: "So you are saying an European company selling something legal in Europe, But illegal in US by mail to US should not stop doing that when told to by US authorities"
So you think it is perfectly ok for such companies to knowingly continue breaking USPS safety regulations and US laws?
The reason why I wrote that is that you equated two things: Something a company can do easily to a reasonably high degree and something that is just on experimental status now. Further geolocation techniques have been in use for quite a long time by Google itself.
Can any web company company today easily do geolocation on web services reliably enough to block 90%+ of such request: Yes and they have been able to do that for more than a decade and has been widely used for other things.
Can any automotive company today do speed limit detection well enough to stop speeding in 90%+ of such cases: No. It is a technology that is "almost here", that is it is available on certain models of certain car brands but has not had any wide deployment.
When the second technology has been in wide use for more than a decade, ask if car manufacturers will be liable to have the technology in all cars then. My guess is a yes.
As for fines: No, The French do not want Google to be liable for the thing their customers use, but they do want Google to actually do an effort at blocking that illegal use.
In the same way I do not think the car companies will be liable for the fines, but they will be liable of they did not do an effort to stop such once the technology to do so is commonplace.
You may want to look at something like adsense, where google is selling adverts claiming to be able to limit impressions to a given town. In reality it does not of course work that well, but just implementing the same level of detection on this and they could well say "we have done our best" and have it stick.
Well, it depends on what country's Tax payer money you are talking, but for US the NASA spending is less than 3% of the military spending.
Thus shaving of even 1% of the military spending would help more than 25% from NASA spending and and there should be something to shave in the Military budget as US spends about 1/3 of the world total military spending.
So if you want to save those lives, you may want to start looking somewhere else.
As for the vanity achievement.. well, you might want to read what all benefits came from the Apollo program.
>Ford make it possible for me to exceed the speed limit. That doesn't make Ford liable for my tickets. Flag as Inappropriate
We are only now entering a stage where some cars can detect speed limits. It is a technology that is not yet widely available but it will in not far long future,
If you think that within a few years of that technology being commonly available there will not be a requirement for new cars to start nagging about going over speed limits and then some years later stopping you then I guess our views of how governments work is fundamentally different.
And if you think that some company setting up a webshop and selling you a car across the borders including transport inside your borders will not be liable for not having such a device because it was sold from a shop outside your borders and you are breaking the law by using the car in your country.. well, it must be a nice fantasy world you live in.
Yes, we should give up because it is hard..
on
Let's Not Go To Mars
·
· Score: 0
.. but actually not.
Great discoveries and advancements come about because there are humans willing to try to do hard things. Often when you do those you fail, but in the end when enough tries succeed the humankind is better off.
There have always been naysayers and there will always be naysayers, luckily for us there have been enough people willing to try.
They want Google to apply them to all searched from France regardless of the domain name. Today you can just type in google.com or any other national domain and bypass the law.
But the logging in with default passwords is. Even though the person that did not change the password is stupid, it is still cracking to take advantage of that stupidity.
>Tell you what: let the ARMY design the test. Then we'll see.
But.. But.. that would be like the customer getting what they asked for. That cannot be allowed in the military any more than it can be allowed outside...
A lot of areas are covered by cellphone data service. So if you go to such areas you would likely only need a cellphone with tethering, laptop with as long run time as possible and a solar charger.
Basically you would charge our phone with the solar charger and have your laptop off until needed.
Slashdot Mirror
You have to understand that it is a politician speaking. they open their mouth and out comes random sounds that make good sound bites but often have no bearing on real facts.
That being said, he is half correct in that diesel vehicles should not really be driving in most city centers, the other half is that petrol vehicles should not either.
The distances in such are so short that fully electric or plug in hybrids that will mostly run on electricity in such places are a much better solution.
Further really in tightly built places like London public transportation should be built to cover most travel needs.
Indeed, city centers are specific places where cars and similar vehicles have very little reason to be in if your public transportation works well. Note that that requirement does include the need for easy access "park and ride" for switching between public transit and cars.
That costs $3.14?
Another major reason is the speed. So many web sites are so much faster with adds blocked. I am not talking about small change, but something that is clearly visible.
Indeed. That is the thing that has kept me in firefox despite the utter stupidity of trying harder and harder to make firefox unusable. Classic theme restorer fixes enough to make it mostly usable. Without it firefox is just unusable.
At least in business use.
None of our bigger customers have any plans to update to windows 10 within next 5 years at minimum(most that I have talked to are hoping that windows 10 is just another windows 8 that will go away so they can get a proper windows as next version when it finally comes time to end using windows 7)
The only cases of windows 10 update in our customers is the accidental updates in smaller customers. In most such cases the thing has failed somehow(that is something vital does not work) so we have had quite a lot of work from the reverts and in some cases reinstalls of computers to windows 7 after the revert did not work.
The fully things is.. I read the exactly same thing.
I think it is a perception issue, with windows 10 being a major fail overall, the cognitive process made that association.
The thing is, I used to find advertising a good thing back in the days before internet was what it is today.
A lot things like computer/electronics magazines had a lot of ads about products that I would never have found out about without them. The editorial staff could not go through that many different things and write articles about them all.
And now that I think about it, the same was true for many other things too like newspapers.
But now in the world of search engines, news aggregators and so on the need is a lot less.
And add the fact that now ads try to be too smart on showing things related to something magic instead of things related to the thing being viewed.
But if there were actually non-intrusive ads that were related to the thing I was looking at they could add actual value. As example when I am looking at reviews of product A and there was a small sidebar/footer with "you are looking at A, are you aware that there is also a product B that might fill your needs" it might actually be a benefit.
After talking to many Americans about the fascination of the Superbowl that I could not understand.. apparently the ads are the main point for several people and the actual Superbowl being the skip over content..
A packet is not a byte. A packet is a sequence of bits including a address, other header information and the actual payload.
IPv4 packet will as example have 20 bytes(160 bits) header and a maximum payload of 65,515 bytes(though often lower in practice)
If you were to send a lot of packets with only a single byte payload then each packet will be 168 bits and your 100 Mb/s will result in about 600 000 packets. But at a gigabit connection the actual limit will start to hit for such strange traffic.
Note that normally you would send more than a single byte of information/packet so in most real applications you would need much higher speeds to hit the limit. At 105 bytes of information you would have a total length of 1000, bits so would be at about the limit on gigabit hardware. But still most high bandwidth traffic tends to have much more information in each packet and thus not usually hit such limits.
The limit has really started to hit due to the high availability of 10 gigabit and faster network cards coming down in price.
>I'm unconvinced there really are very many people willing to try.
There never has been many. If you take the total number of people involved in any such endeavor the number is low.
As a random example of exploration: if you count the people willing to do things like polar explorations in the early 1900s the number is really low, yet they existed and while many perished, like in any exploration and it was a tragedy to them, for the humankind as whole explorations have opened new possibilities and expanded our knowledge.
In fact the site is not hosted from "A server located in America"
When I run anything against www.google com from Europe I usually get response times of 100ms.
So your questions should likely thus be:
"So what you're saying is that the French law should apply to an American company hosting American data on an American server located in Europe hosted by an American domain, like www.google.com"
So it is like saying:
"So you are saying an European person holding something Legal in Europe, bought in Europe and visiting America should apply US law to the possession of the item?"
So if they did indeed move it out of Europe the question would go back to:
"So you are saying an European company selling something legal in Europe, But illegal in US by mail to US should not stop doing that when told to by US authorities"
So you think it is perfectly ok for such companies to knowingly continue breaking USPS safety regulations and US laws?
Like taking things out of context?
The reason why I wrote that is that you equated two things:
Something a company can do easily to a reasonably high degree and something that is just on experimental status now. Further geolocation techniques have been in use for quite a long time by Google itself.
Can any web company company today easily do geolocation on web services reliably enough to block 90%+ of such request: Yes and they have been able to do that for more than a decade and has been widely used for other things.
Can any automotive company today do speed limit detection well enough to stop speeding in 90%+ of such cases: No. It is a technology that is "almost here", that is it is available on certain models of certain car brands but has not had any wide deployment.
When the second technology has been in wide use for more than a decade, ask if car manufacturers will be liable to have the technology in all cars then. My guess is a yes.
As for fines: No, The French do not want Google to be liable for the thing their customers use, but they do want Google to actually do an effort at blocking that illegal use.
In the same way I do not think the car companies will be liable for the fines, but they will be liable of they did not do an effort to stop such once the technology to do so is commonplace.
You may want to look at something like adsense, where google is selling adverts claiming to be able to limit impressions to a given town. In reality it does not of course work that well, but just implementing the same level of detection on this and they could well say "we have done our best" and have it stick.
Well, it depends on what country's Tax payer money you are talking, but for US the NASA spending is less than 3% of the military spending.
Thus shaving of even 1% of the military spending would help more than 25% from NASA spending and and there should be something to shave in the Military budget as US spends about 1/3 of the world total military spending.
So if you want to save those lives, you may want to start looking somewhere else.
As for the vanity achievement.. well, you might want to read what all benefits came from the Apollo program.
>Ford make it possible for me to exceed the speed limit. That doesn't make Ford liable for my tickets.
Flag as Inappropriate
We are only now entering a stage where some cars can detect speed limits. It is a technology that is not yet widely available but it will in not far long future,
If you think that within a few years of that technology being commonly available there will not be a requirement for new cars to start nagging about going over speed limits and then some years later stopping you then I guess our views of how governments work is fundamentally different.
And if you think that some company setting up a webshop and selling you a car across the borders including transport inside your borders will not be liable for not having such a device because it was sold from a shop outside your borders and you are breaking the law by using the car in your country.. well, it must be a nice fantasy world you live in.
.. but actually not.
Great discoveries and advancements come about because there are humans willing to try to do hard things. Often when you do those you fail, but in the end when enough tries succeed the humankind is better off.
There have always been naysayers and there will always be naysayers, luckily for us there have been enough people willing to try.
The French do not try to apply them worldwide.
They want Google to apply them to all searched from France regardless of the domain name. Today you can just type in google.com or any other national domain and bypass the law.
This story is about approximately 35 years old stuff. (I think Rogue came out in 1980)
Correct.
But the logging in with default passwords is. Even though the person that did not change the password is stupid, it is still cracking to take advantage of that stupidity.
The problem is that most people do not think about security and thus will not demand that in products. So the market place will not demand such.
Thus in the future with IoT, we will soon see a lot of stuff, the current small scale thing is just the beginning.
In the long run I expect there will be laws and liabilities, but that is still a long way off at this point.
>Tell you what: let the ARMY design the test. Then we'll see.
But.. But.. that would be like the customer getting what they asked for. That cannot be allowed in the military any more than it can be allowed outside...
A lot of areas are covered by cellphone data service. So if you go to such areas you would likely only need a cellphone with tethering, laptop with as long run time as possible and a solar charger.
Basically you would charge our phone with the solar charger and have your laptop off until needed.
Basically $30/month. No I do not think you would get all that many takers.
But at $10/month, yes I would think you would get quite many interested people. That guess is based on the pricing of things like Spotify and Netflix.
At least Google used to allow only running text adds if you wanted. Have not followed the development of that though.