And there will continue to be an eternal struggle between privacy, right to association, and the government's need to know. I lean away from the government's rights, and lean towards the people's. That's what the Bill of Rights states.
But what's onerous about Schmidt's stated opinion is that it serves his business model perfectly. Give up your rights, and the world (google) will be saved. Somehow google was supposed to eschew evil. I believe with all my heart that Schmidt's declaration is self-serving, and for people's sake, plainly horrible.
Does this mean I side with Microsoft, Apple, or fill-in-the-blank of some other organization's fanboi-club-of-religious-fervor? No way. But does mean that I stay away from all things google when I can. Their CEO doesn't repect my privacy, so I have to cook my cookies, use something else beside google applications, and not buy a dreaded droid phone. I won't use chrome, won't use their stuff. Their business model, the corporate zombie model, is to use my identity against me when I transverse the Interent.
Before plunking down good $$, I'd wait and see what sort of equipment is *really* needed. Scopes are a nice tool, but there are other tools like good spectrum analyzers (with waveform analysers) and other gear that can add up quickly. I'd say, let the need present itself, then invest to the need.
You could look at this conversely. Telcos and ISPs are used to being common carriers for transport of other calls, where costs are shared through agreements, meaning SS7 interchange, and so on-- at prices that they're free to gouge (or not).
The Internet, however, wasn't built on this model at all, and the underlying transports are to give the maximum available throughput at all times, 24/7. Therefore, any protocol throttling is both a violation of the presumed full share of available bandwidth, and also potentially a threat to free speech, and right to assemble. Further, the fifth amendment and due process also mean that if I'm robbed of my bandwidth by protocol throttling, then I want compensation from the robbers (are you listening, Comcast?).
Android is an alternative to IOS, certainly. It has but a fraction of the ecosystem that Apple has, and the fact that Android products are somewhat egalitarian (mindless locks like those found in Droid X aside), that's a good thing.
In the case of Android, you have to trust Google. Google != open source, except where it suits Google. This statement usually gets me modded as flamebait, but it has to continue to be said. You get jail with Apple, and someone that's sampling the very air you breathe with Google. Microsoft sits like a spider in a lair waiting to pounce on you.
Were Android not a branch of Linux, I'd have still deeper questions. Android needs app sandboxing. Though there are developers with diligence and good consciences, I'll imagine that there are those that don't. Apple vets their developers to a small extent. Microsoft hasn't figured out civilian/user ecosystems beyond Windows XP/7/servers, IMHO. The choices aren't particularly good.
Eventually, there are Android products on the horizon for me. The platform is still somewhat fresh and while vastly unconstrained when compared to Apple and IOS, still needs to go thru puberty first. Cross-platform compatibility still isn't assured, upwards compatibility is somewhat reasonable from 1.6-->2.2, but Google's sponsorship leaves me cold.
I feel strange here, defending Apple, but your inference isn't correct.
Fujitsu and other tablet PC makers based their products on Windows, not (as Seinfeld might say) there's anything wrong with that. The actual form fact was larger, heavier and had more cubic displacement in prior models having similar functionality. Kindles don't fall into the iPad category in terms of overall functionality, but they're good media playback devices.... unless you need storage and decent video playback. The iPad is smaller than notebook/tablets, does have a longer battery life, and comes with an ecosystem of stuff you can put it inside that Apple largely has to vet for ostensible wholesomeness (not that there's anything wrong with that). You have to be willing to either user WiFi or AT&T's plan, so you need to have some masochism, unlike the Fujitsus (et al).
Apple's iPad also syncs up in some ways with Apple's other wholesome products and has familiar Apple media consumption stuff, something that the Windows-based machines don't have. Oh, wait....
Some people need walls and prisons. Reminds me of the end of Kubric/Clark's 2001, A Space Odyssey.
You can still make money by not innovating, and sucking the blood and energy out of a marketplace that you don't own by doing it patiently. It takes Microsoft a half-dozen versions to get close to 'right'.
Then you put your heal on the throats of your OEMs, and banish them from the money kingdom if they don't tote the line. You pour FUD where possible, get sued successfully in many jurisdictions, and don't believe that anything you didn't think up could be any good.
The black-widow effect is famous for decades at Microsoft. Go back to 3Com.... SQL Server, even Windows then MS-DOS itself. There. Now let's see. Was Ballmer there when all of that stuff happened? Yes. Did he help architect the insanity of Windows code? No, that guy retired, and the people that drank the koolaid, like Allchin.
If Ballmer leaves, it's a good thing. Fresh blood, blocks of Microsoft as new business units, somebody taking all that cash and making astute acquisitions that would in a post-tracking stock era, pass the FTC and SEC and maybe even EU smell tests.
It's not like he needs any money..... or reputation.
BT radios are common, but ones with easily accessible obex files would be even more suspicious. Cracking such things isn't difficult, as there are usually only a thousand association codes-- easily dictionary attacked and done by a simple script.
To drive that point home, take a look at BSD kernel source code, libs, headers, etc etc.
There was this litigation, long ago, University of California Regents, if I recall.... and it caused this schism.... and more free code than had probably ever been produced with C before Torvalds and RMS came along.
No. I'd like to educate them, using scientific evidence rather than the insanity of Leviticus. Liberty is commonality that's experienced both personally, and also as a societal more.
Some of us need orthodoxy to lead us. Others see the human animal and know that it's not intelligent, and needs education to make choices that aren't hormonal... that won't lead to devastating consequences. We help educate; the choices are theirs. Withholding education, withholding funding for condoms and needles is what causes the crises we have: untold abortion/unwanted pregnancy, poverty, HIV and STDs at peak levels, and some smug dumbass believing that they did right by their Maker.
God is on their side. I've found that negotiating with the pseudo-Christian mafia always boils down to insipid scriptural citations.
You can wave the evidence right under their noses, and they'll deny its existence, or cite trickery.
What results is that a minority of mostly WASconvervativePs make rules for what's become a heavily diverse constituency. As Dorothy might say, we're not in Kansas anymore.
Coalition building is a nice concept. There are constituencies that aren't going to be able to be considered 'mainstream' any more, and their participation appears to them as being marginalized. That is a reality: they cannot impose their religious views on those that won't accept them.
Yes, moral components are still a strong piece how the mainstream lives. Dominating them, evangelizing them, imposing luridly awful religious restrictions, isn't the crux of liberty. Commonality is.... composed of democracy within this republic. Marginalizing thought isn't a good place to start.
More preventable pregnancies== more health and real costs.
Censoring the information did little good. Do you think people were abstinent? Can I sell you property in the Gulf?
It's censorship. The info needs to be out there. There are lots of people that would make different decisions based on 1) real information about STD and pregnancy mitigation rationales (said more plainly than I am) and giving people condoms and needles.
And to add to this line of reasoning, in the US, the abstinence neo-cons have censored, by removing funds from adequate sex education in the US. SO we have as a result, far more STDs, unwanted pregnancies, children in poverty, and the emotional and financial toll for these.
The Bush Administration did it by withholding funds, condom education, free needles, and many other action that would appear on the surface to condone their visage of immoral behavior, but instead, just abetted stupidity.
Try as you will, you won't stop people form having sex. A rational expectation is to make people educated about choices, and push them as much as is rational towards making choices that don't cause pregnancy or spread disease. The Chinese, in this case, are in denial, just as George Bush was.
Yeah, no one said that people can't strangle themselves and do foolish stuff. Big production apps need to be written by people that know what they're doing.
But your citations are at the edge of the curve. You're a black belt, and your stuff better run fast and cleanly or your creds are dirt. These are civilians. They learn, and hopefully know when it's time to get a pro into the equation before they hurt themselves.
Some won't, but the same can be said for car repair and even nuclear physics (viz the LHC forehead slappers).
Your kewl self knows this stuff cold. Let other people learn, even if they get hurt. If they have to pay to get stuff fixed, it's a risk that they likely knowingly take from the onset.
I wish there were real tools with real front ends that you could give to a civilian, knowing they couldn't hurt themselves. But like a chainsaw, you have to hope that when they fire things up, they know a little about what they're doing.
One advantage of Access is that you can export its tables to something else more rational. Unless you were weaned on Codd and Date, then you learn one step at a time. Yes, there are messes. That's what backups are for. Soon people learn what real data processing is, and how to protect data, make it usable, and deal with its maintenance.
The thing about Access that it, plus HyperCard and other junior RDBMS apps is-- they're approachable by civilians. People need that.... as well as training and experience.
Perhaps that's what it looks like to you, on its surface.
Microsoft tried to seed as much a they could into universities with really low prices on everything, including developer tools. NGOs got cheap stuff as well in many cases.
Microsoft did something more onerous, however: their software had poor quality, and they fought with abounding obfuscation, the FOSS movement. Add in to the equation lots of bad press about their bad behavior (and legal posturing) in the US, Canada, and the EU, to mention just a few jurisdictions. Salt the mess with mind-boggling security problems *of their own making*. Add in way too many versions of everything, requiring developers to have to constantly recode for variants.
Sprinkle in losing momentum in telephony, smartphones, gaming, search, and everything else they got their fingers on. Wanna be a part of a winning team? It used to be a meal ticket to sign on to Windows. No more.
This only works if there's an assured/static IP address on the home network. Lots of them change and you never really realize it unless you're doing home access.
With home access, you'll need to setup a port proxy if you're using a router. May I suggest the above mentioned SSL proxies are great and easy to setup, but set them up on a port NOT 443 (so it doesn't get pounded by cracks) somewhere above 8000; little else is up there to interfere.
Then use a VNC client to get a remote desktop screen (or similar protocol) so that you can just send screens back and forth, rather than cram the connections with bidirectional traffic. Think VDI/remote desktop. It's not good for video, but non-latency sensitive apps ought to work without a hitch, and while your screen might paint oddly from time to time, at least you're able to use dicey connections (or oversubscribed ones, like free wifi hotspots).
If a machine can run Linux kernels 2.6.18+, then it can use cpufreq to take advantage of processor slowdown techniques.
Windows Vista+ can do some of the same thing to save power, also Windows 2008+.
The second you add in a hypervisor kernel, however, throw away all of your green savings as they grab systicks to themselves and you'll save nothing, kvm-in-the-kernel notwithstanding.
The number of older machines that can save juice is somewhere between zero and none if they're 32-bit or less.
Slashdot Mirror
And there will continue to be an eternal struggle between privacy, right to association, and the government's need to know. I lean away from the government's rights, and lean towards the people's. That's what the Bill of Rights states.
But what's onerous about Schmidt's stated opinion is that it serves his business model perfectly. Give up your rights, and the world (google) will be saved. Somehow google was supposed to eschew evil. I believe with all my heart that Schmidt's declaration is self-serving, and for people's sake, plainly horrible.
Does this mean I side with Microsoft, Apple, or fill-in-the-blank of some other organization's fanboi-club-of-religious-fervor? No way. But does mean that I stay away from all things google when I can. Their CEO doesn't repect my privacy, so I have to cook my cookies, use something else beside google applications, and not buy a dreaded droid phone. I won't use chrome, won't use their stuff. Their business model, the corporate zombie model, is to use my identity against me when I transverse the Interent.
Before plunking down good $$, I'd wait and see what sort of equipment is *really* needed. Scopes are a nice tool, but there are other tools like good spectrum analyzers (with waveform analysers) and other gear that can add up quickly. I'd say, let the need present itself, then invest to the need.
You could look at this conversely. Telcos and ISPs are used to being common carriers for transport of other calls, where costs are shared through agreements, meaning SS7 interchange, and so on-- at prices that they're free to gouge (or not).
The Internet, however, wasn't built on this model at all, and the underlying transports are to give the maximum available throughput at all times, 24/7. Therefore, any protocol throttling is both a violation of the presumed full share of available bandwidth, and also potentially a threat to free speech, and right to assemble. Further, the fifth amendment and due process also mean that if I'm robbed of my bandwidth by protocol throttling, then I want compensation from the robbers (are you listening, Comcast?).
Android is an alternative to IOS, certainly. It has but a fraction of the ecosystem that Apple has, and the fact that Android products are somewhat egalitarian (mindless locks like those found in Droid X aside), that's a good thing.
In the case of Android, you have to trust Google. Google != open source, except where it suits Google. This statement usually gets me modded as flamebait, but it has to continue to be said. You get jail with Apple, and someone that's sampling the very air you breathe with Google. Microsoft sits like a spider in a lair waiting to pounce on you.
Were Android not a branch of Linux, I'd have still deeper questions. Android needs app sandboxing. Though there are developers with diligence and good consciences, I'll imagine that there are those that don't. Apple vets their developers to a small extent. Microsoft hasn't figured out civilian/user ecosystems beyond Windows XP/7/servers, IMHO. The choices aren't particularly good.
Eventually, there are Android products on the horizon for me. The platform is still somewhat fresh and while vastly unconstrained when compared to Apple and IOS, still needs to go thru puberty first. Cross-platform compatibility still isn't assured, upwards compatibility is somewhat reasonable from 1.6-->2.2, but Google's sponsorship leaves me cold.
Sadly, not so.
I feel strange here, defending Apple, but your inference isn't correct.
Fujitsu and other tablet PC makers based their products on Windows, not (as Seinfeld might say) there's anything wrong with that. The actual form fact was larger, heavier and had more cubic displacement in prior models having similar functionality. Kindles don't fall into the iPad category in terms of overall functionality, but they're good media playback devices.... unless you need storage and decent video playback. The iPad is smaller than notebook/tablets, does have a longer battery life, and comes with an ecosystem of stuff you can put it inside that Apple largely has to vet for ostensible wholesomeness (not that there's anything wrong with that). You have to be willing to either user WiFi or AT&T's plan, so you need to have some masochism, unlike the Fujitsus (et al).
Apple's iPad also syncs up in some ways with Apple's other wholesome products and has familiar Apple media consumption stuff, something that the Windows-based machines don't have. Oh, wait....
Some people need walls and prisons. Reminds me of the end of Kubric/Clark's 2001, A Space Odyssey.
You can still make money by not innovating, and sucking the blood and energy out of a marketplace that you don't own by doing it patiently. It takes Microsoft a half-dozen versions to get close to 'right'.
Then you put your heal on the throats of your OEMs, and banish them from the money kingdom if they don't tote the line. You pour FUD where possible, get sued successfully in many jurisdictions, and don't believe that anything you didn't think up could be any good.
The black-widow effect is famous for decades at Microsoft. Go back to 3Com.... SQL Server, even Windows then MS-DOS itself. There. Now let's see. Was Ballmer there when all of that stuff happened? Yes. Did he help architect the insanity of Windows code? No, that guy retired, and the people that drank the koolaid, like Allchin.
If Ballmer leaves, it's a good thing. Fresh blood, blocks of Microsoft as new business units, somebody taking all that cash and making astute acquisitions that would in a post-tracking stock era, pass the FTC and SEC and maybe even EU smell tests.
It's not like he needs any money..... or reputation.
No.
Parody != stupidity on all and any levels.
Stupidity might be the fodder for parody.
Parody might make juicy fun of stupdity.
Neither relies on the other.
BT radios are common, but ones with easily accessible obex files would be even more suspicious. Cracking such things isn't difficult, as there are usually only a thousand association codes-- easily dictionary attacked and done by a simple script.
To drive that point home, take a look at BSD kernel source code, libs, headers, etc etc.
There was this litigation, long ago, University of California Regents, if I recall.... and it caused this schism.... and more free code than had probably ever been produced with C before Torvalds and RMS came along.
No. I'd like to educate them, using scientific evidence rather than the insanity of Leviticus. Liberty is commonality that's experienced both personally, and also as a societal more.
Some of us need orthodoxy to lead us. Others see the human animal and know that it's not intelligent, and needs education to make choices that aren't hormonal... that won't lead to devastating consequences. We help educate; the choices are theirs. Withholding education, withholding funding for condoms and needles is what causes the crises we have: untold abortion/unwanted pregnancy, poverty, HIV and STDs at peak levels, and some smug dumbass believing that they did right by their Maker.
God is on their side. I've found that negotiating with the pseudo-Christian mafia always boils down to insipid scriptural citations.
You can wave the evidence right under their noses, and they'll deny its existence, or cite trickery.
What results is that a minority of mostly WASconvervativePs make rules for what's become a heavily diverse constituency. As Dorothy might say, we're not in Kansas anymore.
Coalition building is a nice concept. There are constituencies that aren't going to be able to be considered 'mainstream' any more, and their participation appears to them as being marginalized. That is a reality: they cannot impose their religious views on those that won't accept them.
Yes, moral components are still a strong piece how the mainstream lives. Dominating them, evangelizing them, imposing luridly awful religious restrictions, isn't the crux of liberty. Commonality is.... composed of democracy within this republic. Marginalizing thought isn't a good place to start.
More STDs== more health costs.
More preventable pregnancies== more health and real costs.
Censoring the information did little good. Do you think people were abstinent? Can I sell you property in the Gulf?
It's censorship. The info needs to be out there. There are lots of people that would make different decisions based on 1) real information about STD and pregnancy mitigation rationales (said more plainly than I am) and giving people condoms and needles.
And to add to this line of reasoning, in the US, the abstinence neo-cons have censored, by removing funds from adequate sex education in the US. SO we have as a result, far more STDs, unwanted pregnancies, children in poverty, and the emotional and financial toll for these.
The Bush Administration did it by withholding funds, condom education, free needles, and many other action that would appear on the surface to condone their visage of immoral behavior, but instead, just abetted stupidity.
Try as you will, you won't stop people form having sex. A rational expectation is to make people educated about choices, and push them as much as is rational towards making choices that don't cause pregnancy or spread disease. The Chinese, in this case, are in denial, just as George Bush was.
Yeah, no one said that people can't strangle themselves and do foolish stuff. Big production apps need to be written by people that know what they're doing.
But your citations are at the edge of the curve. You're a black belt, and your stuff better run fast and cleanly or your creds are dirt. These are civilians. They learn, and hopefully know when it's time to get a pro into the equation before they hurt themselves.
Some won't, but the same can be said for car repair and even nuclear physics (viz the LHC forehead slappers).
Your kewl self knows this stuff cold. Let other people learn, even if they get hurt. If they have to pay to get stuff fixed, it's a risk that they likely knowingly take from the onset.
I wish there were real tools with real front ends that you could give to a civilian, knowing they couldn't hurt themselves. But like a chainsaw, you have to hope that when they fire things up, they know a little about what they're doing.
One advantage of Access is that you can export its tables to something else more rational. Unless you were weaned on Codd and Date, then you learn one step at a time. Yes, there are messes. That's what backups are for. Soon people learn what real data processing is, and how to protect data, make it usable, and deal with its maintenance.
The thing about Access that it, plus HyperCard and other junior RDBMS apps is-- they're approachable by civilians. People need that.... as well as training and experience.
Programming is like cooking: recipes.
Statistics aside, it's strongly believed that the xbox doesn't make any real profit..... and developers are starting to move away.
Bricked xboxes seem to occur at a higher rate than other products, too.
It's not a matter of hate, really. It's watching Microsoft die of not-invented-here poisoning, with morbid obesity.
Perhaps that's what it looks like to you, on its surface.
Microsoft tried to seed as much a they could into universities with really low prices on everything, including developer tools. NGOs got cheap stuff as well in many cases.
Microsoft did something more onerous, however: their software had poor quality, and they fought with abounding obfuscation, the FOSS movement. Add in to the equation lots of bad press about their bad behavior (and legal posturing) in the US, Canada, and the EU, to mention just a few jurisdictions. Salt the mess with mind-boggling security problems *of their own making*. Add in way too many versions of everything, requiring developers to have to constantly recode for variants.
Sprinkle in losing momentum in telephony, smartphones, gaming, search, and everything else they got their fingers on. Wanna be a part of a winning team? It used to be a meal ticket to sign on to Windows. No more.
The reason for the Buffalo NY address is that they bought Midland Marine Bank years ago.
Groovy. Try updating Comcast that way.
This only works if there's an assured/static IP address on the home network. Lots of them change and you never really realize it unless you're doing home access.
With home access, you'll need to setup a port proxy if you're using a router. May I suggest the above mentioned SSL proxies are great and easy to setup, but set them up on a port NOT 443 (so it doesn't get pounded by cracks) somewhere above 8000; little else is up there to interfere.
Then use a VNC client to get a remote desktop screen (or similar protocol) so that you can just send screens back and forth, rather than cram the connections with bidirectional traffic. Think VDI/remote desktop. It's not good for video, but non-latency sensitive apps ought to work without a hitch, and while your screen might paint oddly from time to time, at least you're able to use dicey connections (or oversubscribed ones, like free wifi hotspots).
There's the generational trade off.
If a machine can run Linux kernels 2.6.18+, then it can use cpufreq to take advantage of processor slowdown techniques.
Windows Vista+ can do some of the same thing to save power, also Windows 2008+.
The second you add in a hypervisor kernel, however, throw away all of your green savings as they grab systicks to themselves and you'll save nothing, kvm-in-the-kernel notwithstanding.
The number of older machines that can save juice is somewhere between zero and none if they're 32-bit or less.
You presume that the spontaneously written essay isn't going to be shortcut with serious paste jobs.
And there are vetting apps to watch submissions for various plaigarism. The sword cuts both ways.
No. Ideas aren't patentable. Ideas, when expressed in media protected by copyright, are goods. I can sell a car, I can sell a copyright.
Plagiarism copies previous expression verbatim.