I believe you will be found correct--the key is the government funding. The US Supreme Court just upheld that college campuses can choose not to allow military recruiters on their sites if they receive no direct government funding as a result of anti-discrimination policies at said schools that conflict with the the US government policy of "don't ask don't tell". While these are two different things, I can see the same policy being applied.
You do realize that slashdot probably has a nice queue of stories, they don't post them as soon as they get accepted, and they probably get the same stories posted all the time. They space the release of stories so as to give each time for comments, as well as to drive continuous traffic to the website for advertising. As such, you probably wern't rejected exactly, but flagged as a dupe pending being posted. I always find it irritating when people complain about their story being rejected only to show up a few days later, but in reality, it was probably sitting in the queue until there was nothing else better to post per the editors.
a Prius is exempt from a 8 pound a day fee to drive inside the center of London. If you have to drive say 3 days a week in London, that is over 1200 pounds. Not a bad deducation.
Don't you know? Tamiflu variants have already been detected. Get a grip, there is only one drug to help beyond AIDS to be honest. It isn't the flu that kills you but your own immune system. If you don't have one, how can it kill you?
LOL, if you thing SARS, West Nile or even AIDS has ever shown the potential for what this has in store for humans, you have a lot to learn. Read up on the 1918 Spanish flu before you comment on this. It will inspire the fear of god in you, and and I'm an athiest.
You really don't have a clue what is up do you? Please don't comment on what you don't know about. The issue is NOT about birds in ANY way. The point is that if/WHEN (note the caps on when) this mutates to a form that does not require birds, it will be passed from person to person. It has already been stated by many reputible doctors that this change WILL occur based on history, the question is when. Now let us tackle your other statement that general living conditions are very different than in 1918? Do you have less or more contact with people that have traversed the world in a short span (more!). What caused many of the outbreaks in 1918? Oh, yes... soldiers moving from one place to another due to the completion of WWI. Hmmm. Who died more that were infected in 1918, the old and young or the healty individuals (health people!). Hmmm. Looks like we have on our hands a pretty bad situation if this disease makes the migration to people and is infected at a high rate between individuals. We have a more mobile of a population then we had in 1918 even with the closure of WW1, we have tons of baby boomers in the US that fit in the "healthy" population that would have the worst casualty rate, and we don't have any sort of vaccine for this that can be mobilized in any speed. If this hits before such a vaccine can be developed, the number of people that will be hit FAR surpass the number that can be treated in a hospital, and living conditions will be far **worse** for it's spread now as compared as then because there are more people moving around the world then before. Please read up on this before posting your uneducated comments.
On the last statement, you are summarizing 1-1 nat vs. 1-many. In most cases, it is 1-many (even if the many==1) and outside in, if there is no connection in place, the packet is dropped out of necessity. Why? It doesn't know what machine on the back is supposed to receive the packet.
That said, what you are considering a "network and transport layer" firewall will do exactly what a nat device in 1-many mode will. This 1-many behavior happens to be the vast majority of nat devices on the market from d-link to linksys.
How true, but when you cobble a bunch of expensive new stuff together with no history of how long it will work, and you are going to charge an arm and a leg for it already, will you risk blowing the whole thing on a cheap capacitor? The point is that at the introduction of a totally new product from a major player, in particular when they don't know how well they are going to sell, they don't want to ruin the market with a bad product launch. They use the cheap stuff (like the ipod nano screen issue) after the initial marketing info is known.
OR, it's total crap from the start and you can tell by feeling it.
Actually, I would go against this--something totally new and expensive will probably make use of better quality components. It is after they have been in the market for a while that they go cheap as they sell in mass and drive price down. Ever notice how old CD's lived forever, but new CD's scratch if you breath on them? I had one of the original 42 inch plasma screens, and it was built like a brick, I don't think I trust the new ones, they are lighter, thinner, and IMHO, built to be cheap, not last forever.
Firewall==keeps track of what is going in and coming out, and potentially does filtering of some sort. In general, they allow you to setup complex rules of what is allowed to access what.
Nat==a device that lets inside devices access outside networks using a shared IP, and in some cases, lets you define rules to map outside ports to inside IP's.
Reality: Most firewalls in organizations are being used as oversided nat devices. Few do (or are configured to do) protocol level analysis of say HTTP traffic looking for sql injection which would really give better security than a nat device would. The truth in the matter is that once you prevent inbound access you have provided 95% of the benefit that any firewall will to any typical user. You can't compare what a firewall COULD do to what they normally do, because even most experienced admins configure firewalls to JUST let port 80 to this IP from this range. Nat is just an easy way to say: inbound: Deny all, outbound: Allow all
As a network engineer, I see your statement and laugh. NAT is the only thing keeping the internet together. Without NAT, the impact of worms and vulnerabilities would be so much worse than it is now the results would be unspeakable. NAT is the best way in general for networks to attach to the internet because it creates a "protected" zone where inbound transactions can't get to--and this is GOOD.
While noting that.zip security may be fairly easy to violate, if you create random names, unbrowsable directories (so the client needs to know the name of the file to download it) and password protected files, then it is easy to send ftp links with passwords for each purchase and be guaranteed fair security. As such, this is probably "good enough" for what is needed, and 100% security need not apply, if there is such a thing.
You need to look at the quote you quoted: "High-definition". DVD's are NOT high-def. That said, I'm happy with my $99 (per prices 2 years ago) ATI 9600 SE that was passive at the time.
Ok, to answer some of my comments, Redhat Enterprise 3.0 (certified by SAP), and Linux certified IBM servers... BUT quoted from Redhat: "We asked the customer to do a diagnostic test and the customer never responded, so it was impossible for us to address the issue," Mr McLaren says.
They also comment that the Redhat update system is "unacceptible" because SAP may not support a particular patch, then comment that Microsoft's similar system (which does the same thing) is a key reason to change. HUH? If SAP hasn't stated they will support a MS update vs. a RH update, who is at fault when running a "certified" operating system with a standard means of performing updates as part of the OS.
Personally, this feels like a "SAP supports Windows as a server OS better than they support Linux" statement vs. a Windows vs. Linux argument. In situations where you are buying servers just to support a single app, the golden rule is "call the support line, ask for a level 2 engineer, and ask them if THEY had to support an install, what OS would they use". That will give you the answer that in the long run will save you money.
Installing SAP on Linux in the first place? My guess is that the second time around (on any system) is much easier than the first. How long have they run SAP on windows yet, and have they had the time to see if it would blue-screen? How much of a dependence did they place on potentially lower-level or unsupported drivers on higher end hardware where the vendor focused on Windows instead of Linux? What vendor's hardware did they use in the first place?
All these questions point out to: Not enough information to make an informed opinion on what acutally happened. Disclaimer: I haven't read the article yet, just the summary.
As a 1 year old player, while I agree with some points (about how long it takes to train up to the battleship (BS) for example), the point of the game is that you don't HAVE to participate in that. I play a combat character, and don't fly BS's, but instead have focused on smaller ships and in doing so could take out most battleships. Pretty much nobody is perfect in any given aread, which if you could be a perfect player, it would completely ruin the game. In the flip side, because the skills are not tied to "kill, get exp, kill more, get exp, level, continue", the game can be enjoyable for even the casual player, as they can keep up with the die-hard players that play for hours every day. This is also one of the few games where you can play the game and not even focus on combat at all, but instead focus on trade, research, mining, etc. And to be clear, I haven't mined for ages, and haven't had to, so your characterization of having to mine is somewhat misleading, because it is what YOU have chosen to do to make ISK (the monetary unit in the game). Yes, this game does have some flaws, but so do every game, but the game iself makes for a very good game. Why else has it been out for several YEARS, yet continue to have more and more players joining it, as opposed to most games that are loosing players after this much time.
Personally, I think there should be an ammendment to the constitution that would disallow that, one vote by congress, ONE fundamental thing they are voting on--if they can't summarize what the vote is about in spirit completely in a single page document, then chances are there is pork and hidden provisions tucked away in stuff like this. If a court finds that a provision in a bill is not at least summarized in the one page summary, then that provision should be struck down.
I'll say it again, a domain name is NOT intellectual property. Owning it is NOT the same as owning a trademark, it is not protected by any laws, and if you loose it you have no recourse. Everybody including google seems to think the opposite, but the law indicates otherwise. If you loose it, you loose it, and as long as contractual responsibilities of managing it are honored, if you don't renew you are fucked. Nobody put in your contract they have to notify you 30 days prior to expiration, did they?
to quote the article that someone referenced in reply to my post:
"LSU lost all of its 8,000 lab animals, including mice, rats, dogs and monkeys. Many drowned"
Now, if they drowned, that means that potentially infected animals were exposed to flood water, meaning whatever germs they carried may have been carried by the water to others outside as the water level lowered. The fact that they had to AFTER the flood terminate the samples means there was plenty of situations where the environment may have been contaminated with the samples. So, as I said, nobody knows WHAT people will be exposed to down there.
How many labs were flooded during Katrina? How many of those were doing research of this type? What, you can't answer that? Point is, nobody knows WHAT people will be exposed to down there. Three rats with Plague is nothing compared with what could be unleashed.
I think you mis-read what I had said--it was that the more radioactive a particular type of waste, the shorter it's half-life. I may stand corrected on the Granite issue, although it is still a fact that Granite has higher levels of radioactivity than what would be allowed to be released if it were program generated materials. My main point is that you can't say never, and the timeframes people quote for the materials to degenerate completely are far longer than would be needed for the materials to degenerate to the point of background levels because of what levels are acceptible.
If you read the arguments in the article, you would know the answer: Because if bluetooth supported internet connections over it, then it would kill the market for their cards they sell for this same service. Just another example of companies trying to optimize their profit at the expense of the consumer.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe you will be found correct--the key is the government funding. The US Supreme Court just upheld that college campuses can choose not to allow military recruiters on their sites if they receive no direct government funding as a result of anti-discrimination policies at said schools that conflict with the the US government policy of "don't ask don't tell". While these are two different things, I can see the same policy being applied.
You do realize that slashdot probably has a nice queue of stories, they don't post them as soon as they get accepted, and they probably get the same stories posted all the time. They space the release of stories so as to give each time for comments, as well as to drive continuous traffic to the website for advertising. As such, you probably wern't rejected exactly, but flagged as a dupe pending being posted. I always find it irritating when people complain about their story being rejected only to show up a few days later, but in reality, it was probably sitting in the queue until there was nothing else better to post per the editors.
a Prius is exempt from a 8 pound a day fee to drive inside the center of London. If you have to drive say 3 days a week in London, that is over 1200 pounds. Not a bad deducation.
Don't you know? Tamiflu variants have already been detected. Get a grip, there is only one drug to help beyond AIDS to be honest. It isn't the flu that kills you but your own immune system. If you don't have one, how can it kill you?
LOL, if you thing SARS, West Nile or even AIDS has ever shown the potential for what this has in store for humans, you have a lot to learn. Read up on the 1918 Spanish flu before you comment on this. It will inspire the fear of god in you, and and I'm an athiest.
You really don't have a clue what is up do you? Please don't comment on what you don't know about. The issue is NOT about birds in ANY way. The point is that if/WHEN (note the caps on when) this mutates to a form that does not require birds, it will be passed from person to person. It has already been stated by many reputible doctors that this change WILL occur based on history, the question is when. Now let us tackle your other statement that general living conditions are very different than in 1918? Do you have less or more contact with people that have traversed the world in a short span (more!). What caused many of the outbreaks in 1918? Oh, yes... soldiers moving from one place to another due to the completion of WWI. Hmmm. Who died more that were infected in 1918, the old and young or the healty individuals (health people!). Hmmm. Looks like we have on our hands a pretty bad situation if this disease makes the migration to people and is infected at a high rate between individuals. We have a more mobile of a population then we had in 1918 even with the closure of WW1, we have tons of baby boomers in the US that fit in the "healthy" population that would have the worst casualty rate, and we don't have any sort of vaccine for this that can be mobilized in any speed. If this hits before such a vaccine can be developed, the number of people that will be hit FAR surpass the number that can be treated in a hospital, and living conditions will be far **worse** for it's spread now as compared as then because there are more people moving around the world then before. Please read up on this before posting your uneducated comments.
On the last statement, you are summarizing 1-1 nat vs. 1-many. In most cases, it is 1-many (even if the many==1) and outside in, if there is no connection in place, the packet is dropped out of necessity. Why? It doesn't know what machine on the back is supposed to receive the packet.
That said, what you are considering a "network and transport layer" firewall will do exactly what a nat device in 1-many mode will. This 1-many behavior happens to be the vast majority of nat devices on the market from d-link to linksys.
How true, but when you cobble a bunch of expensive new stuff together with no history of how long it will work, and you are going to charge an arm and a leg for it already, will you risk blowing the whole thing on a cheap capacitor? The point is that at the introduction of a totally new product from a major player, in particular when they don't know how well they are going to sell, they don't want to ruin the market with a bad product launch. They use the cheap stuff (like the ipod nano screen issue) after the initial marketing info is known.
OR, it's total crap from the start and you can tell by feeling it.
Actually, I would go against this--something totally new and expensive will probably make use of better quality components. It is after they have been in the market for a while that they go cheap as they sell in mass and drive price down. Ever notice how old CD's lived forever, but new CD's scratch if you breath on them? I had one of the original 42 inch plasma screens, and it was built like a brick, I don't think I trust the new ones, they are lighter, thinner, and IMHO, built to be cheap, not last forever.
Firewall==keeps track of what is going in and coming out, and potentially does filtering of some sort. In general, they allow you to setup complex rules of what is allowed to access what.
Nat==a device that lets inside devices access outside networks using a shared IP, and in some cases, lets you define rules to map outside ports to inside IP's.
Reality: Most firewalls in organizations are being used as oversided nat devices. Few do (or are configured to do) protocol level analysis of say HTTP traffic looking for sql injection which would really give better security than a nat device would. The truth in the matter is that once you prevent inbound access you have provided 95% of the benefit that any firewall will to any typical user. You can't compare what a firewall COULD do to what they normally do, because even most experienced admins configure firewalls to JUST let port 80 to this IP from this range. Nat is just an easy way to say: inbound: Deny all, outbound: Allow all
As a network engineer, I see your statement and laugh. NAT is the only thing keeping the internet together. Without NAT, the impact of worms and vulnerabilities would be so much worse than it is now the results would be unspeakable. NAT is the best way in general for networks to attach to the internet because it creates a "protected" zone where inbound transactions can't get to--and this is GOOD.
Maybe they mean the lifetime of the memory. How convienent. :)
Actually, they have created a pill that does that--it's called meth. It has it's own problems though...
While noting that .zip security may be fairly easy to violate, if you create random names, unbrowsable directories (so the client needs to know the name of the file to download it) and password protected files, then it is easy to send ftp links with passwords for each purchase and be guaranteed fair security. As such, this is probably "good enough" for what is needed, and 100% security need not apply, if there is such a thing.
That's because there is STILL a wold trade center station dumbass.
You need to look at the quote you quoted: "High-definition". DVD's are NOT high-def. That said, I'm happy with my $99 (per prices 2 years ago) ATI 9600 SE that was passive at the time.
Ok, to answer some of my comments, Redhat Enterprise 3.0 (certified by SAP), and Linux certified IBM servers... BUT quoted from Redhat: "We asked the customer to do a diagnostic test and the customer never responded, so it was impossible for us to address the issue," Mr McLaren says.
They also comment that the Redhat update system is "unacceptible" because SAP may not support a particular patch, then comment that Microsoft's similar system (which does the same thing) is a key reason to change. HUH? If SAP hasn't stated they will support a MS update vs. a RH update, who is at fault when running a "certified" operating system with a standard means of performing updates as part of the OS.
Personally, this feels like a "SAP supports Windows as a server OS better than they support Linux" statement vs. a Windows vs. Linux argument. In situations where you are buying servers just to support a single app, the golden rule is "call the support line, ask for a level 2 engineer, and ask them if THEY had to support an install, what OS would they use". That will give you the answer that in the long run will save you money.
Installing SAP on Linux in the first place? My guess is that the second time around (on any system) is much easier than the first. How long have they run SAP on windows yet, and have they had the time to see if it would blue-screen? How much of a dependence did they place on potentially lower-level or unsupported drivers on higher end hardware where the vendor focused on Windows instead of Linux? What vendor's hardware did they use in the first place?
All these questions point out to: Not enough information to make an informed opinion on what acutally happened. Disclaimer: I haven't read the article yet, just the summary.
As a 1 year old player, while I agree with some points (about how long it takes to train up to the battleship (BS) for example), the point of the game is that you don't HAVE to participate in that. I play a combat character, and don't fly BS's, but instead have focused on smaller ships and in doing so could take out most battleships. Pretty much nobody is perfect in any given aread, which if you could be a perfect player, it would completely ruin the game. In the flip side, because the skills are not tied to "kill, get exp, kill more, get exp, level, continue", the game can be enjoyable for even the casual player, as they can keep up with the die-hard players that play for hours every day. This is also one of the few games where you can play the game and not even focus on combat at all, but instead focus on trade, research, mining, etc. And to be clear, I haven't mined for ages, and haven't had to, so your characterization of having to mine is somewhat misleading, because it is what YOU have chosen to do to make ISK (the monetary unit in the game). Yes, this game does have some flaws, but so do every game, but the game iself makes for a very good game. Why else has it been out for several YEARS, yet continue to have more and more players joining it, as opposed to most games that are loosing players after this much time.
Personally, I think there should be an ammendment to the constitution that would disallow that, one vote by congress, ONE fundamental thing they are voting on--if they can't summarize what the vote is about in spirit completely in a single page document, then chances are there is pork and hidden provisions tucked away in stuff like this. If a court finds that a provision in a bill is not at least summarized in the one page summary, then that provision should be struck down.
I'll say it again, a domain name is NOT intellectual property. Owning it is NOT the same as owning a trademark, it is not protected by any laws, and if you loose it you have no recourse. Everybody including google seems to think the opposite, but the law indicates otherwise. If you loose it, you loose it, and as long as contractual responsibilities of managing it are honored, if you don't renew you are fucked. Nobody put in your contract they have to notify you 30 days prior to expiration, did they?
to quote the article that someone referenced in reply to my post:
"LSU lost all of its 8,000 lab animals, including mice, rats, dogs and monkeys. Many drowned"
Now, if they drowned, that means that potentially infected animals were exposed to flood water, meaning whatever germs they carried may have been carried by the water to others outside as the water level lowered. The fact that they had to AFTER the flood terminate the samples means there was plenty of situations where the environment may have been contaminated with the samples. So, as I said, nobody knows WHAT people will be exposed to down there.
How many labs were flooded during Katrina? How many of those were doing research of this type? What, you can't answer that? Point is, nobody knows WHAT people will be exposed to down there. Three rats with Plague is nothing compared with what could be unleashed.
I think you mis-read what I had said--it was that the more radioactive a particular type of waste, the shorter it's half-life. I may stand corrected on the Granite issue, although it is still a fact that Granite has higher levels of radioactivity than what would be allowed to be released if it were program generated materials. My main point is that you can't say never, and the timeframes people quote for the materials to degenerate completely are far longer than would be needed for the materials to degenerate to the point of background levels because of what levels are acceptible.
If you read the arguments in the article, you would know the answer: Because if bluetooth supported internet connections over it, then it would kill the market for their cards they sell for this same service. Just another example of companies trying to optimize their profit at the expense of the consumer.