Maybe, but I think a lot of people would just go party or something instead of using the time off to vote. And companies are required by law to let their employees have time off to go vote. With all of the news coverage on election day, I think that just about everyone is aware of what is going on, even if they don't care enough to vote. It also wouldn't be possible for all companies to close. What about news stations, telecommunications providers, restaurants, security and custodial staff in many companies, etc.
I'm not saying that making it a holiday would hurt, I just don't think it would actually get too many more people to vote.
It's a marketing change. Unless you base the quality of products off of the logo on the side, it doesn't matter. Most of the products will probably be kept separate. You can't exactly market Catalyst 6500's towards consumers, and no large business will by little five port Linksys switches.
I highly doubt at MS will release any future OS's that will install on 32 bit hardware. By the time the next version of Windows will be released (we're probably talking 2010 at the absolute earliest), most of the 32 bit hardware will probably have been replaced by newer x86_64 stuff. Even if they are still running 32 bit OS's at first. Most of my hardware is 32 bit, but most I'll probably replace most of it in the next few years. By the time Windows 7 actually rolls around, you probably won't be able to by pure 32 bit hardware from any major OEM's.
Regardless of the technical challenges that many other people have mentioned, parachutes would be completely useless for the vast majority of crashes. Most crashes happen within a fairly short period of time. It would probably take atleast five or ten minutes to get a hundred people to put on parachutes, stand in line, and jump. And that's if the plane is flying straight and level, at the right altitude, made for jumping out of, and if everyone is calm. People will be scared, some won't want to jump or will get to the door and freeze up. In the case of a mechanical failure on the aircraft, when being able to parachute out of the plane would probably be most useful, the plane will most likely not be flying straight and level. High g-forces would also make it much more difficult for people to move around the plane, as would shaking and turbulence.
In very few accidents do the crew know five or ten minute ahead of time that they will be crashing. If the crew knows that long ahead of time, they could probably do something about it. Most planes could probably go from cruising altitude to landing on the ground with ten or fifteen minutes warning in an emergency.
Also, the crew would have to be almost certain that the aircraft is going to crash. Otherwise, it would probably be much safer to try to land the plane. With hundreds of scared, inexperienced people jumping out of a plane, there is a pretty good chance that some of them will not survive. Someone else mentioned something about having them automatically deploy when people go out of the door. I'm not exactly sure of how that would work, but I would assume that they would either have to have the parachutes connected to a wire during normal flight (which would be kind of awkward, if not impossible), or connected during the emergency, which would be difficult to do in a short time period.
Other thoughts:
What about kids? I'm sure it would be possible to have them be connected to their parents but that's an additional complexity and risk. What about young kids traveling along?
I guess these could work on long, over-water flights where the plane cannot land in a short period of time, but then you would have to make sure everyone took a flotation device thing with them or integrate them into the parachute, making them larger, and more complicated. However, then people would be scattered over a fairly long distance in the ocean, more likely than not by themselves. If the plane could be ditched in the water, atleast people would be together. If a plane is ditched at low speed and not going down too quickly it is possible for most of the people to survive. And I think that larger trans-oceanic aircraft carry inflatable rafts (though I could be wrong on that. I can't remember where I heard that)
In conclusion I doubt that this would save more people than it would kill. And space wise, if given the option to take carry-on bag with stuff to do so I wouldn't be wasting hours of my time, or have a parachute stored in that space, that arguably *might* increase my chances of survival in the extremely unlikely event of an emergency where I would have the time to use it, I would take a carry-on bag without a second thought.
Back then you didn't have a whole lot of switches (they were much more expensive than hubs) so you could sniff packets for other hosts easier,
Would that really be considered a flaw in TCP/IP though? That's really Ethernet's (L2/L1) fault, TCP/UDP (Layer 4) and IP (Layer 3) aren't really involved with hubs/non-L3 switches (Layer 1 and 2 respectively).
On another note:
How many of the major flaws/security issues have been entirelly the fault of the protocol's specification? I honestly don't know, I usually don't look that much into the details about security flaws, but it would seem like more of the problems would be in the implementation of the protocols.
OpenOffice.org in no way supports the 2007 file format
Wrong, Novell's free version of OpenOffice for Windows includes OpenXML plugins (though I honestly couldn't tell you how well they work). I would assume that the version of OOo they have in SuSE supports OpenXML as well, though I could be wrong. The latest versions of NeoOffice for OS X also support OpenXML.
What MS products have blank default passwords? Off the top of my head, I can't think of a MS software that has a default password, atleast as far as major software goes. Windows asks you for it during the installation, unless you or your OEM has made a customized disk. SQL Server's sa account also does not have a default password - you specify it during the installation. If you chose to use only Windows auth for SQL Server, then it disables the sa account and I think it gives it a random password. What MS stuff are you referring to?
While winds on Mars are faster than they are here on Earth, the density of the air on Mars is much, much lower than it is on Earth (Mars has less mass, so it has less atmosphere). So, there would be less air actually pushing on the sail.
Not specifically for the iPhone. Maybe a simple low graphics version for PDA's and phones in general, but I'm not going to do anything special for the iPhone. If the mobile version of pages is simple/lite and standards compliant, then it should work with pretty much all mobile devices. If it doesn't, then it's probably the device maker's fault for using a shitty browser/rendering engine.
Realistically, the normal non-mobile versions of websites are not going to work well on mobile devices, period, because of the small size of their screens and limit forms of input. And the iPhones certainly not going to change that, especially given its lack of true 3G which will make the full versions of most sites horribly slow as well.
Mobile browsing is nothing new - Most major sites that people would frequently access from a mobile device (ie webmail, news/homepages, search engines, etc) already have mobile versions of their sites that work reasonably well. With its pretty high price tag, lack of 3G, and very few third party apps (compared with BB, Windows Mobile, and Palm), I highly doubt that it will spark a "revolution" in web browsing. It may look very slick, but technologically speaking it probably won't be earth-shattering.
It seems like EMI is, or is atleast trying to be, one of the least anti-technology major record labels. Hopefully these sort of things will start a trend, or at least encourage people to demand that the others in the entertainment industry get with it already and stop fighting every new technology that comes around.
Wow, I knew that people couldn't use the icon and stuff, but even the useragent? Granted, it is very easy for me to change it via FrontMotion's group policy extensions, so it is Firefox on all our computers, but I'm surprised that they would care about the useragent.
I know that FrontMotion's releases had it as Firefox at one point in time, because I had to change it in order to get to my high school's Blackboard site(hehe, one of the network people tried to block people using portable Firefox to get around their web "security" proxy server by blocking the Firefox useragent. I'm not sure if they were aware that it only takes about literally about three seconds to change that. They eventually did it the right way and got an application level firewall).
Yeah, someone else posted something about that. It works find in Firefox, except that in my copy of Firefox 2.0 (actually the repackaged version by FrontMotion, that I can deploy and manage via Group Policy), the useragent is BonEcho, as opposed to Firefox. And if its not set to Firefox, then it takes me to the "old" ugly map. I'm not sure if its just with FrontMotion that the useragent is not Firefox, or if its with all Firefox 2.0 releases. I've found references to both user-agents with BonEcho/2.0.x.x, and Firefox/2.0.x.x.
Interesting, it didn't work for me with Firefox 2.0. But I looked at the useragent, and apparently FF 2.0 uses a useragent like BonEcho/2.0.0.1, instead of Firefox/2.0.0.1. When I changed it to Firefox (like it was in previous releases) it worked fine. With BonEcho it just showed a small, boring looking map. Same thing with Opera. I wonder why the Mozilla folks changed the useragent in 2.0.
Its not exactly the same thing, but MS's map thing (whatever they call all their MSN/"Live" stuff these days), does have what they call "birds eye" view. It only works in IE, and its not ground level, but it still works fairly well. You can easily see landmarks and stuff to help you find places. And its a lot better quality than the satellite photos (and not straight down), you can easily see people and stuff in the photos. I think they have their birds eye view thing for around six months if my memory serves me, so I would give MS a little credit. They do make some cool stuff occasionally.
Its not available everywhere, but I'm sure its available more places than Google's street view is(it looks like only Manhattan, Miami, Denver, San Francisco and Vegas have it now). Google maps has a lot of cool stuff, but it would be nice if they offered some of the cooler stuff in places other than just the five or ten biggest cities. Granted, some of it wouldn't be as helpful in smaller cities or in the suburbs, but it would still be make it more useful to a lot of the population.
If that's what the people there want, then I don't really have a problem with a state wanting to secede. I can't imagine anything like that happening today, however. The rest of the nation might be better off though if Texas was in a different country.:P
The Indian land thing is a good point though. Granted, we do have some Indian reserverations, but I'm sure that they are just small fractions of what they used to have. It would be really interesting to see how things would have played out if we let the Indians keep their land, or atleast more of it.
I never said that it only happens in China. I was merely saying that China is not just interested in "China" (atleast in the last sixty or seventy years), they do see some other places as their territory, rightly or wrongly. China is certainly not the only nation to do this. No one in their right mind could claim that America doesn't try to influence other nations or regions.
I absolutely agree. It would be interesting to see how many total IP addresses companies like Apple, and Boeing, and MIT, etc, have that could be allocated to service providers or someone who would actually have a need for them. Is there anything other than politics stopping IANA from doing this? Even if they are not using NAT they can't possibly justify having 16.7 million IP addresses.
Granted, its not just people with entire Class A's that are causing the problem, for example, my former school district has 512 public IP addresses. They have absolutely no need for those at all - they use NAT. There are only maybe three of four servers that have public IP addresses, in addition to the ones used by NAT. When the big Class A's have been reassigned and organizations aren't able to keep public IP addresses if they don't use them, then I'll consider switching to IPv6 a realistic option.
To obtain a block of IP addresses, don't you have to show that you have some sort of need for them? Why is this not being followed through on? I think organizations should be required to have a host actually set up at the address if they want to keep it. Atleast for 25% of the time or something.
Are you kidding me? Are you actually saying that it would be more difficult for IANA to pull the class A's from organizations who have absolutely no use for it whatsoever, than it would be to upgrade every device connected to or part of the Internet infrastructure and configure it to communicate/route an almost entirely new protocol?
I've heard that having them on Tuesdays made it easier for businesses to stop their employees from voting (way back in the day). I'm not sure if there's any truth to that, or not. Today, that wouldn't matter - employers have to give their employees time off to vote if they want.
How long until people post their iTunes DRM-free purchases for P2P sharing? Tomorrow. Maybe the next day at the most. Why would anyone purchase from iTunes when you can get the same, identical product for free elsewhere?
How would iTunes having DRM free music do anything at all to stop this? Guess what, search for just about any song on a torrent tracker, or other P2P client, and I'm sure you'll find it. As long as CD's are sold, it will happen. iTunes getting rid of DRM will do nothing at all for this, except giving people who don't mind purchasing music, but don't want to put up with DRM another option. That's a Good Thing.
Yeah, I agree. Especially that stupid theme with the notebook spiral type thing on it.
Powerpoint 2007's seem like they can be tweaked a little more than previous versions (like changing the background for instance - gradient, pattern, etc.). And so far, most people don't use Office 2007 so my presentations don't look like anyone else's (yet).
Granted, too fancy of themes could detract from the actual information in the presentation, but I think most of the themes that I've used do a fairly good job of that. This is one area that OOo Impress really lacks in (especially when compared to PPT 2007 or Keynote). The themes it ships with honestly suck balls, and while I have found some that aren't too bad on the web, they still aren't anywhere close to the quality of the ones in Keynote or Powerpoint 2007.
To an extent that might possibly be true, however, unlike Vista, Office '07 actually has some useful features that companies would benefit from. As far as the OS itself goes - XP is more than enough for most companies. And most of the problems that Vista addresses can already be solved with Windows XP, just by using some 3rd party software or chaning some configuration things. Meeting Space is interesting, but most companies aren't going to be switching to IPv6 anytime soon, and if you're close enough in location to be on the same subnet, then why not just actually meet in person? Office 2007's features aren't necessarily "must-have" but there are some things that are pretty cool, and do make it easier to create sharp-looking documents and presentations. (For example, Powerpoint 2007 has themes that actually look professional and well designed, graphically speaking, unlike previous versions. Charts in Excel look a lot better, and many of the themes can be used throughout the core Office applications.) Vista on the other hand is useless for businesses, and doesn't offer much for consumers either. Aero Glass is slick, but it isn't going to help business at all, and it'll get old after a few days.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but I think a lot of people would just go party or something instead of using the time off to vote. And companies are required by law to let their employees have time off to go vote. With all of the news coverage on election day, I think that just about everyone is aware of what is going on, even if they don't care enough to vote. It also wouldn't be possible for all companies to close. What about news stations, telecommunications providers, restaurants, security and custodial staff in many companies, etc.
I'm not saying that making it a holiday would hurt, I just don't think it would actually get too many more people to vote.
It's a marketing change. Unless you base the quality of products off of the logo on the side, it doesn't matter. Most of the products will probably be kept separate. You can't exactly market Catalyst 6500's towards consumers, and no large business will by little five port Linksys switches.
I highly doubt at MS will release any future OS's that will install on 32 bit hardware. By the time the next version of Windows will be released (we're probably talking 2010 at the absolute earliest), most of the 32 bit hardware will probably have been replaced by newer x86_64 stuff. Even if they are still running 32 bit OS's at first. Most of my hardware is 32 bit, but most I'll probably replace most of it in the next few years. By the time Windows 7 actually rolls around, you probably won't be able to by pure 32 bit hardware from any major OEM's.
While I would agree in general with your post, Windows 98 does not support NTFS (NTFS is supported by NT, 2k, XP, etc). Did you mean 2k or something?
You can go hunter2 my hunter2ing hunter2!
In very few accidents do the crew know five or ten minute ahead of time that they will be crashing. If the crew knows that long ahead of time, they could probably do something about it. Most planes could probably go from cruising altitude to landing on the ground with ten or fifteen minutes warning in an emergency.
Also, the crew would have to be almost certain that the aircraft is going to crash. Otherwise, it would probably be much safer to try to land the plane. With hundreds of scared, inexperienced people jumping out of a plane, there is a pretty good chance that some of them will not survive. Someone else mentioned something about having them automatically deploy when people go out of the door. I'm not exactly sure of how that would work, but I would assume that they would either have to have the parachutes connected to a wire during normal flight (which would be kind of awkward, if not impossible), or connected during the emergency, which would be difficult to do in a short time period.
Other thoughts:
- What about kids? I'm sure it would be possible to have them be connected to their parents but that's an additional complexity and risk. What about young kids traveling along?
- I guess these could work on long, over-water flights where the plane cannot land in a short period of time, but then you would have to make sure everyone took a flotation device thing with them or integrate them into the parachute, making them larger, and more complicated. However, then people would be scattered over a fairly long distance in the ocean, more likely than not by themselves. If the plane could be ditched in the water, atleast people would be together. If a plane is ditched at low speed and not going down too quickly it is possible for most of the people to survive. And I think that larger trans-oceanic aircraft carry inflatable rafts (though I could be wrong on that. I can't remember where I heard that)
In conclusion I doubt that this would save more people than it would kill. And space wise, if given the option to take carry-on bag with stuff to do so I wouldn't be wasting hours of my time, or have a parachute stored in that space, that arguably *might* increase my chances of survival in the extremely unlikely event of an emergency where I would have the time to use it, I would take a carry-on bag without a second thought.Back then you didn't have a whole lot of switches (they were much more expensive than hubs) so you could sniff packets for other hosts easier,
Would that really be considered a flaw in TCP/IP though? That's really Ethernet's (L2/L1) fault, TCP/UDP (Layer 4) and IP (Layer 3) aren't really involved with hubs/non-L3 switches (Layer 1 and 2 respectively).
On another note:
How many of the major flaws/security issues have been entirelly the fault of the protocol's specification? I honestly don't know, I usually don't look that much into the details about security flaws, but it would seem like more of the problems would be in the implementation of the protocols.
OpenOffice.org in no way supports the 2007 file format
Wrong, Novell's free version of OpenOffice for Windows includes OpenXML plugins (though I honestly couldn't tell you how well they work). I would assume that the version of OOo they have in SuSE supports OpenXML as well, though I could be wrong. The latest versions of NeoOffice for OS X also support OpenXML.
I get the impression that the core of it wasn't written by MS way back when, though.
MS licensed Sybase's database for Windows back in the late eighties/early nineties and eventually MS SQL Server grew out of that.
What MS products have blank default passwords? Off the top of my head, I can't think of a MS software that has a default password, atleast as far as major software goes. Windows asks you for it during the installation, unless you or your OEM has made a customized disk. SQL Server's sa account also does not have a default password - you specify it during the installation. If you chose to use only Windows auth for SQL Server, then it disables the sa account and I think it gives it a random password. What MS stuff are you referring to?
While winds on Mars are faster than they are here on Earth, the density of the air on Mars is much, much lower than it is on Earth (Mars has less mass, so it has less atmosphere). So, there would be less air actually pushing on the sail.
Not specifically for the iPhone. Maybe a simple low graphics version for PDA's and phones in general, but I'm not going to do anything special for the iPhone. If the mobile version of pages is simple/lite and standards compliant, then it should work with pretty much all mobile devices. If it doesn't, then it's probably the device maker's fault for using a shitty browser/rendering engine.
Realistically, the normal non-mobile versions of websites are not going to work well on mobile devices, period, because of the small size of their screens and limit forms of input. And the iPhones certainly not going to change that, especially given its lack of true 3G which will make the full versions of most sites horribly slow as well.
Mobile browsing is nothing new - Most major sites that people would frequently access from a mobile device (ie webmail, news/homepages, search engines, etc) already have mobile versions of their sites that work reasonably well. With its pretty high price tag, lack of 3G, and very few third party apps (compared with BB, Windows Mobile, and Palm), I highly doubt that it will spark a "revolution" in web browsing. It may look very slick, but technologically speaking it probably won't be earth-shattering.
It seems like EMI is, or is atleast trying to be, one of the least anti-technology major record labels. Hopefully these sort of things will start a trend, or at least encourage people to demand that the others in the entertainment industry get with it already and stop fighting every new technology that comes around.
Wow, I knew that people couldn't use the icon and stuff, but even the useragent? Granted, it is very easy for me to change it via FrontMotion's group policy extensions, so it is Firefox on all our computers, but I'm surprised that they would care about the useragent.
I know that FrontMotion's releases had it as Firefox at one point in time, because I had to change it in order to get to my high school's Blackboard site(hehe, one of the network people tried to block people using portable Firefox to get around their web "security" proxy server by blocking the Firefox useragent. I'm not sure if they were aware that it only takes about literally about three seconds to change that. They eventually did it the right way and got an application level firewall).
Yeah, someone else posted something about that. It works find in Firefox, except that in my copy of Firefox 2.0 (actually the repackaged version by FrontMotion, that I can deploy and manage via Group Policy), the useragent is BonEcho, as opposed to Firefox. And if its not set to Firefox, then it takes me to the "old" ugly map. I'm not sure if its just with FrontMotion that the useragent is not Firefox, or if its with all Firefox 2.0 releases. I've found references to both user-agents with BonEcho/2.0.x.x, and Firefox/2.0.x.x.
Interesting, it didn't work for me with Firefox 2.0. But I looked at the useragent, and apparently FF 2.0 uses a useragent like BonEcho/2.0.0.1, instead of Firefox/2.0.0.1. When I changed it to Firefox (like it was in previous releases) it worked fine. With BonEcho it just showed a small, boring looking map. Same thing with Opera. I wonder why the Mozilla folks changed the useragent in 2.0.
Its not exactly the same thing, but MS's map thing (whatever they call all their MSN/"Live" stuff these days), does have what they call "birds eye" view. It only works in IE, and its not ground level, but it still works fairly well. You can easily see landmarks and stuff to help you find places. And its a lot better quality than the satellite photos (and not straight down), you can easily see people and stuff in the photos. I think they have their birds eye view thing for around six months if my memory serves me, so I would give MS a little credit. They do make some cool stuff occasionally.
Its not available everywhere, but I'm sure its available more places than Google's street view is(it looks like only Manhattan, Miami, Denver, San Francisco and Vegas have it now). Google maps has a lot of cool stuff, but it would be nice if they offered some of the cooler stuff in places other than just the five or ten biggest cities. Granted, some of it wouldn't be as helpful in smaller cities or in the suburbs, but it would still be make it more useful to a lot of the population.
If that's what the people there want, then I don't really have a problem with a state wanting to secede. I can't imagine anything like that happening today, however. The rest of the nation might be better off though if Texas was in a different country. :P
The Indian land thing is a good point though. Granted, we do have some Indian reserverations, but I'm sure that they are just small fractions of what they used to have. It would be really interesting to see how things would have played out if we let the Indians keep their land, or atleast more of it.
I never said that it only happens in China. I was merely saying that China is not just interested in "China" (atleast in the last sixty or seventy years), they do see some other places as their territory, rightly or wrongly. China is certainly not the only nation to do this. No one in their right mind could claim that America doesn't try to influence other nations or regions.
Also, China historically is mostly interested in China.
Yes, but their definition of "China" includes Taiwan, Tibet, and the Spratly islands.
I absolutely agree. It would be interesting to see how many total IP addresses companies like Apple, and Boeing, and MIT, etc, have that could be allocated to service providers or someone who would actually have a need for them. Is there anything other than politics stopping IANA from doing this? Even if they are not using NAT they can't possibly justify having 16.7 million IP addresses.
Granted, its not just people with entire Class A's that are causing the problem, for example, my former school district has 512 public IP addresses. They have absolutely no need for those at all - they use NAT. There are only maybe three of four servers that have public IP addresses, in addition to the ones used by NAT. When the big Class A's have been reassigned and organizations aren't able to keep public IP addresses if they don't use them, then I'll consider switching to IPv6 a realistic option.
To obtain a block of IP addresses, don't you have to show that you have some sort of need for them? Why is this not being followed through on? I think organizations should be required to have a host actually set up at the address if they want to keep it. Atleast for 25% of the time or something.
"harder to do"
Are you kidding me? Are you actually saying that it would be more difficult for IANA to pull the class A's from organizations who have absolutely no use for it whatsoever, than it would be to upgrade every device connected to or part of the Internet infrastructure and configure it to communicate/route an almost entirely new protocol?
I've heard that having them on Tuesdays made it easier for businesses to stop their employees from voting (way back in the day). I'm not sure if there's any truth to that, or not. Today, that wouldn't matter - employers have to give their employees time off to vote if they want.
How long until people post their iTunes DRM-free purchases for P2P sharing? Tomorrow. Maybe the next day at the most. Why would anyone purchase from iTunes when you can get the same, identical product for free elsewhere?
How would iTunes having DRM free music do anything at all to stop this? Guess what, search for just about any song on a torrent tracker, or other P2P client, and I'm sure you'll find it. As long as CD's are sold, it will happen. iTunes getting rid of DRM will do nothing at all for this, except giving people who don't mind purchasing music, but don't want to put up with DRM another option. That's a Good Thing.
Yeah, I agree. Especially that stupid theme with the notebook spiral type thing on it.
Powerpoint 2007's seem like they can be tweaked a little more than previous versions (like changing the background for instance - gradient, pattern, etc.). And so far, most people don't use Office 2007 so my presentations don't look like anyone else's (yet).
Granted, too fancy of themes could detract from the actual information in the presentation, but I think most of the themes that I've used do a fairly good job of that. This is one area that OOo Impress really lacks in (especially when compared to PPT 2007 or Keynote). The themes it ships with honestly suck balls, and while I have found some that aren't too bad on the web, they still aren't anywhere close to the quality of the ones in Keynote or Powerpoint 2007.
To an extent that might possibly be true, however, unlike Vista, Office '07 actually has some useful features that companies would benefit from. As far as the OS itself goes - XP is more than enough for most companies. And most of the problems that Vista addresses can already be solved with Windows XP, just by using some 3rd party software or chaning some configuration things. Meeting Space is interesting, but most companies aren't going to be switching to IPv6 anytime soon, and if you're close enough in location to be on the same subnet, then why not just actually meet in person? Office 2007's features aren't necessarily "must-have" but there are some things that are pretty cool, and do make it easier to create sharp-looking documents and presentations. (For example, Powerpoint 2007 has themes that actually look professional and well designed, graphically speaking, unlike previous versions. Charts in Excel look a lot better, and many of the themes can be used throughout the core Office applications.) Vista on the other hand is useless for businesses, and doesn't offer much for consumers either. Aero Glass is slick, but it isn't going to help business at all, and it'll get old after a few days.