The truly disturbing part of this ongoing circus is the effect it has on the general population. It is easy for us to defend the actions of people interested in determining what CueCat is reporting about us. However, it is bothersome that the American public is beginning to believe they cannot control their environment and worse they cannot withstand the cost of the legal hassles involved in defending themselves.
While many here are of the opinion "we cannot be stopped". The marketing media are not trying too stop us. They are trying to stop Johnny from growing up and playing with the toaster. So when the "ViewCat" can begin taking photos, we do not concern ourselves with the fact the EULA says ViewCat Inc. owns them and may sell them as marketing information. Or, as we have seen with recent carnivore events, we find the government would like the ISPs to release those photos to them as part of an ongoing investigation.
It is very subtle, the approach was missed by many because the laws were changed before most people were anywhere near the Internet. They are being fed the lines they need to hear to support the positions of the few in status quo. We end up dismissed as "hackers," who are breaking the law (EULA), or radical conspiracy theorist.
Sadly, it is going to take some marketing site releasing information about a major player in the government before we see any type of real action. However, to do that would require that more than a few know how to traverse the Internet or have an experience with shopping on-line. Not a real optimistic prospect.
I spent six months being ignored, refiled, transferred, and errored off with Bell Atlantic; to the tune of nearly $5k. (You can see why I could not let this go).
I then contacted my PUC and a miracle happened. Within one day of the required dismissal period, their lawyer contacted me. Two weeks later I had a check, on the condition I would withdraw my complaint.
With the desire to get into the local and long distance markets, the phone companies do not want complaints on their records.
Try it, I was suprised by how quickly things turned around after the great run around.
When I started my process back in 1997 I was assured by my company confidently that the whole process will not take more than 15 months.
Apparently neither one of you understood the process, if you felt it could be accomplished in 15 months. Having been through this process a number of times, anything short of 24 is a wonder.
Please educate yourself prior to making comments that only make you sound like a fool.
Quite the contrary, your statements merely prove my point. Sadly, you have missed it too.
Clueless does not even begin to explain this attitude. Here we have a product, shipped to me without my asking, for the purpose of providing to them tracking data about me (through it serial number).
If I understand their position they would like to claim that the information, collected about me and my surfing/buying habits is theirs? Further, I do not have the right to this information which, realistically, could contain everything from bank account numbers to my address book. (How would I know, I am not allowed to look)
Worse than what these guys are smoking, is they are starting to share it with the goverment. It appears they are betting we will sit around and complain. But who cares if geeks complain?
Folks, if you have not helped the Electronic Frontier Foundation(EFF) in the past, now is the time. Stop sitting on the sidelines and whining. START DOING.
In one corner - those who feel the US is the haven of the huddled masses and anyone who disagrees is a bigot
In the other corner - those who feel US corporations are using these people as slave labor to force American developers to take pay cuts or into unemployment.
While you are both wrong, and right consider this before getting all rammed up. The people losing their visas did not qualify for green cards. Had they qualified they would not have to go. (I do not think Linus is going to have a problem in this area) This means the value they were suppose to bring, or the activities they were suppose to complete did not meet the standards.
You do not get a free pass because you are in technology nor should you. You are neither entitled too nor should you be prevented from meeting the same restrictions and conditions that everyone else seeking permanent status in this country must. Is it fair, just because you were not born in the US.? Life is not fair, stop whining and get over it.
Where would you expect to have this issue resolved, in the standards meetings? Do you believe your competitors (competitors who want to win business from you) would do anything but thank you for handing them the technology you developed?
They began discussing the design in the last six months that Rambus was attending the meetings. Does anyone here really believe that Rambus was able to go from concept to production, based only on a set of meetings in six months?
Did they take advantage of the information and a hole in the agreement. Looks like it. And it appears to be a quite a hole since they are winning.
Will it inflate the price of chips? I am sure we will hear it does. Much like the gas prices skyrocket the day after an oil price increase is announced. $.02 seems to go to $.10 in no time.
Emails - I cringe at the thought of someone sending me a voice created email. Just listen to the voicemail you get sent on a daily basis. Can you imagine it in writing and going on for two pages?
Coding - Try speaking a shell, PERL or C++ program. Did you remember all the "." and ";"? Did you remember to declare those variables? I recall a study about our ability to speak and reason at the same time. Humans are not very good at it. (Quite a statement there I just realized)
Perhaps we should just give up on the QWERTY board and go back to the most efficient design. Staying QWERTY helped when we were converting from typewriters and needed to make it easy on everyone. Now we need to jump ahead to efficient typing.
As for mice, something else is needed. I do not want to remove my hand from the keyboard while typing. While surfing, etc. I do not want to use my keyboard unless I am typing a URL. (Perhaps a laser pointer on my hand?). However, a mouse or "precision" instrument is going to continue to be needed for 3d rendering, graphics, etc.
Try putting a piece of paper on the wall and writing your name. See the problem? Pens are incredibly refined instruments. They relieve much of the pressure on your hand, provide a stable surface and are able to support writing in almost any direction for extended periods of time. I believe UI are going to evolve the same way, slowly, over time and to a simplified fashion combining multiple technologies.
Hopefully, discussions like this will give someone here an idea that we can all benefit from.
It can happen in cases where you have a certain level of expertise and the questions required to determine your ability to bring value would force the discussion of a company's products would put them at risk(i.e. Transmeta 12 months ago).
They may also feel the need to do this during the "quiet period" of a public offering, where the very nature of company information puts them at risk of disclosure.
The larger part of an IPO is raising capital, and they need it. They have a heavy debt load and a product. How many companies have done an IPO with only the former?
Transmeta is in a transition period, and it is a risk to buy. If you think it is too much a risk stay away, this is a financail decision for the individual investor. However there are many who will think the risk is low compared to others that have taken in the past 36 months.
If provided the capital Transmeta might create a foundation from which the concepts and prototypes could have an impact on the market. If so, those who invest will be rewarded. If not, they are punished. Isn't capitalism great?
Let's keep our perspective here. This company owns the building, machines, connection and the "good business". The could choose to keep all the machines off the net, it is theirs to do as they see fit. This business is providing a additional "service" with as much freedom as they choose to give. If people do not like the restrictions, they can go somewhere else.
Now for the tough part. We have an industry whose goal is to prevent people from preventing them from breaking the law. Re-mapping URLs, changing keys, and basically attempting to circumvent software someone purchased for the purpose of prevention makes this a tough wall to stay behind.
Any software you put in will be flawed to one degree or another. My guess is that the owners will not be that concerned that testicular exams are excluded with the porn. Surf for that stuff elsewhere. In addition, since you are unlikely to be able to control what minors see, you may be open to other problems if you let someone display porn to a minor. (I could see someone arguing that you provided the material that was displayed, you are not an ISP here)
I wonder what the FBI is concerned a review would find?
Anyone using PGP or some other encryption is going to require some horsepower to decrypt. So this means they are looking for the dumber crooks.
So what is it we would find? I can only think of a few reasons: Paranoia - if they tell us, we will hack it. (security through obscurity) Bad Code - the embarrassment factor when someone describes a flaw in the first 10 minutes of its release. Deception - we find it sniffs for more or keeps more than we are told
I am not of the group who thinks the FBI is defined by WACO. The issue is that sometimes in the face of a situation that is difficult to understand and even harder to control, you want to look like you can. In the end you jeopardize the very reason for being. To protect our freedoms, even at the risk of some security.
The difficulty you are going to face is that Peltiers need MORE fans not less. In order to be cold on one side, they are VERY hot on the other. This extra heat is needs to be moved out of the case as quickly as possible.
In addition, these have a host of other issues to deal with, especially condensation (see http://www.overclockers.com/)
You may want to consider the alternative of moving the entire box into another area and running a powered KVM module with long cables to it. There is a maximum distance from the machine before degradation becomes so bad it is useless.
Or when all else fails, try a cabinet that is vented or directly over an A/C vent. You can soundproof the cabinet and be done.
IANAL, however there is plenty of basis for barrier restrictions. Minors can be restricted from buying alcohol, going to "R" rated movies, buying guns, etc. We hold the suppliers responsible when parents make a reasonable effort, expecting them to do the same.
We have been telling parents to stop complaining about the environment concerning music, movies, video games, etc. for a long time. They are told to "PAY ATTENTION" you are "RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR CHILDREN".
They are now setting the same expectation across all adult activities. If we are watching our children do not drink, we feel the bar up the street has an obligation not to solicit there business. If this is an "adult" movie, or video game, or activity we do not want them providing it to children either.
This is just common sense, the laws get made because a few people fail to use any. It is not radical or exteme or new.
Would all TLD whiners please take a breath and think for a second.
The sited story said it best with: ICANN members, however, have said there are legal and other precedents to prevent widespread confusion.
How long do think it will be before Microsoft, IBM, Red Hat, and every other company paying for an ICANN vote tells their ICANN reps to change the rules, (or when all else fails, sue ICANN.)
Let's face it, if you cannot get it between the "WWW" and the "dot" does it really matter? How many suffixes are you willing to go through to find the correct "BobsAdventureTravel"? And if you are "BobsAdventureTravel" how many TLDs should you be forced to buy just to make sure people don't show up at porn site with your name on it?
The original list was simple, but became corrupt. How about we just refine the list and forbid duplicates before the suffix. .org - non profit or social organizations .com - commerical business .net - ISPs/networks/etc. .per - Personal web pages (Okay I made it up) .fam - family web pages(You can upgrade from.per for free, but you must prove you have a family (okay I made this one up too) .prn - lets face it, if the military gets their own, shouldn't the largest user of bandwidth too? (sorry I am just on a roll) .XX - lets keep all the countries too, just because it beats.gov.
At least this way, we do not have to find slashdot.org, or is it net? com? cc? tv? hv?
A penalty can only be applied in jurisdictions that care. If someone in China sets up a gambling website do you think they are going to care about a fine that can never be enforced? What about SEALAND?
We cannot seize assets because none exist to take. Electronic transfer sent the money before the gambling.
This is a perfect example why other countries think we are a few bricks short of a full load: Lottery gambling is good. Vegas/Atlanta/Reservation gambling is good. Internet gambling is bad. All of the above.
Having worked in the insurance industry (IT side) for many years, it is all a matter of risk/benefit analysis. Further, the actuarial guys and gals are just about anal at this stuff. Many can tell you, given a room of/. participants, how many are overweight, and by how much. How many drive cars over a certain value and what is the risk they will have an accident? How many work in a corporation and what is the risk of repetitive stress injury? And they are right at a nearly frightening rate. If it were gambling, you would never bet against the house.
Real life example: Like it or not, a 50 year old, buying a new Porsche is far less of a risk than a 22 year old. It is not personal, it is not specific to you, it says nothing about your parents or your abilities. So guess what, you pay more at 22, than at 50.
You may not even be able to get insurance at 22 on a certain type of car, until you enter the "risk pool". This would be the same for companies as it is for 22 years driving a Porsche. I may insure you but I am not taking the major risk. (i.e. $2000 deductible, $500/month payment and penalties for failure to pay)
Now, given some company "X", operating a type of business "Y", for a period of time "Z", what is the average number of security breeches (internal and external) you can be expected to incur? What varies the result the most? What kind of loss per incident can be expected? What factors contribute to a claim (i.e. how often is notoriety a cause versus failure to update patches?)
Now like your car, you are expected to take care of it. The "blue book" here however is what a company agrees to. Amazon out of commission for 12 hours is going to be a much bigger claim than slash dot. (No offense intended).
Further, the claimant cannot facilitate the action. Have you had a security audit in the last "X" timeframe?(security like Swiss cheese) Did you act on its findings? (no funding for upgrades) Are you using reasonable precautions to protect yourself, data, and business?(haven't done a backup this week) Was this a known threat you failed to act on? (ILOVEYOU attack two weeks after it made the news)
I think it is a great idea, because those with insurance must be attentive to collect on a loss. The more attentive people are the better it is for everyone.
While I appreciate the author's opinion, the discussion needs to move beyond how they compare to each other.
First, I agree with several of the replies indicating this was not a benchmark, but a starting point in the discussion. Not to undermine the effort taking place, but a benchmark is normally Specific, Attainable, Measurable and it must be able to be recreated. More detail would need to be provided, but that is beside the point right now.
With commercial benchmarks available we should be comparing MySQL and PostgreSQL to DB2 and Oracle. If we open source to a level we can play in that field we are well on the way to success. Comparing them to each other is comparing High School football players. It may be valuable in the next game, but it does indicate how they will be in the pros.
Because projects can vary in size and shape, consider the old standby of fiberglass forms. You can build the initial form in cardboard if you wish and then encase it as you see fit.
You are not restricted by the how the form has to be resolved (have you ever tried to form a circular case in metal?). In addition, you can make it as pleasing to look at as you have time to sand and paint.
And like all good things, remember to vent. Heat build up is a bad thing (regardless of most materials)
Cookiegate? Maybe "Stupidgate" would be a better name. Like finding a bug in software, no one who can boot their own machine is surprised. While it was easy to pass the law, the web site probably used an outside vendor who did what they always do. Now someone noticed and suddenly Congress wants to be involved. If they want to be involved, ban the collection of data or force opt-in. Oops, can't do that those people donate large sums of cash to election campaigns.
The thing with "saber rattling" is there is always the fear the other person may actually do something. Nothing is going to happen here. It's like Los Alamos, everyone wanted investigations, until they realized both parties had been in power through the time secrets were being sold. Write congress today, if they cannot load a piece of software on their computer without help, they should stay out of this.
Finally, I should not have to pay to put a lock on my door. It is inconvenient, costly, and frankly it just indicates the police are not doing their job. Get real, if I want to be protected, self protection is the only certain way.
Trusted Systems are built according to a formal specification and are tested and confirmed against a formal testing and standards process.
Trusted systems are tested and confirmed against formal processes. Formal specifications can go a long way in identifing flaws, but would hardly seem a requirement.
Until open source many of the specifications & design documents were considered propriatary or corporate secrets. Open source provides a method to ensure systems are being built exactly to specification. Otherwise, we are trusting the developing entity has actually coded what was defined in the specification.
How often has anyone coded complex systems EXACTLY to specification, the first time? With an open source system we not only know, but can correct those issues as quickly as anyone finds them.
My sister in law worked for a doctor a while back. He used his scanner to scan the forms and the scanner came with software to identify "fields" that could be entered.
I do not know the brand, but I have seen several scanners taht offered similar software in the past. IF they have one, look at the software theat came with it.
If you recall a story got "out" last year about a "working document" whereby Microsoft would begin charging yearly usage fees.
At the time it was dismissed, but other providers thought it would be the way software would have to be produced in order to protect the consumer form illegal and faulty software.
Well folks, wake up and smell the java, here is the next step. Once you do not have the software to install, then you cannot make an argument that you own anything. If you do not own it, then I am providing a "usage" license. If it is a usage license, it is not "forever".
This is not a Microsoft issue, it is a software issue. MS just provided the place we could observe it. When the projected rush to the next release does not occur (i.e. Windows 2000), what can the company do? They cannot force you to buy an upgrade or new release, today.
This will not be a problem in the future, when I can explain that next year's license is 3 times this years, because you are getting a new release. You do not need it? Sorry, we do not license old versions, and you have 15 days left before your current license expires. Have a nice day.
At one point, I had commented that MS should not expect cover from George W. Once Microsoft was convicted even GW would not want to touch the spoiled food. I was mistaken.
Politics are about to decide the outcome. Consider that Bill and his buddies have gotten over there disdain for Washington (D.C. that is). They have billions to spend on lobbying and who cares if they have to report doing it. So many Americans are cynical about government anyway, the expect lobbyists to buy it.
Now Consider: George W. rules, he will send the DOJ to work on more significant issues concerning the American public. Bill G. is very thankful and shows his respect by paying for the next billion dollar election.
Al G. rules, he will keep the DOJ plugging away because he has inherited this legacy, but does not want to talk about it. Perhaps Bill G. could stop by the next fund raiser so he could explain how unhappy he is with Microsoft.
Congress sees a sudden influx of election capital to spend. Gee, Bill's boys are not bad, they were just confused and misunderstood. What we really need to understand is where the DOJ is spending our money. And we do not want anyone making allegations until we "clean our own house". A nice 16 year audit should do the trick.
Even the politicians who were earlier demanding Microsoft be penalized and strung up (i.e. Orrin Hatch), now wonder if perhaps the DOJ has not been a little over zealous. Maybe we just need to understand them better. So much for providing cover.
I was hoping we would see Jackson take the short route and use Microsoft's own words. Fast track it to the Supreme Court because, as Microsoft has said, this will adversely impact the economy and the US. Seems like an immanent reason to send it past the appeals process and get to a resolution, without the politics.
I tend to agree with an earlier post that this information is probably listed in painful detail somewhere, however there is a bigger point you are making that is of great value.
If the only real function served by listing information may cause harm, should we anyway?
A credit card number, by itself cannot cause a problem. Providing it on your website would not be a crime but it may cause a financial burden for the person who owns it.
It would be of value to compare the scheme to determine security flaws, etc. that could then be acted upon. However, that is not the intent here.
Consider your willingness to respond with your credit card number, billing address and expiration date. We do not because that is not related to whether "XYZ" is the best method to use to validate the card.
However, an RFC on a new security method, card reader design, etc. is well worth posting. As is an observation that the current readers have flaws. It is a fine line in some places, but I would hope the general rule falls to "do no harm".
A recent news article describes the FOX network's efforts to overturn the 30% rule. FOX is claiming the 30% rule in a 3 network system (when the rule was adopted) no longer applies with 200 channels.
If they manage a win, the playing field will change significantly as the big players fight for the majority stake.
Slashdot Mirror
The truly disturbing part of this ongoing circus is the effect it has on the general population. It is easy for us to defend the actions of people interested in determining what CueCat is reporting about us. However, it is bothersome that the American public is beginning to believe they cannot control their environment and worse they cannot withstand the cost of the legal hassles involved in defending themselves.
While many here are of the opinion "we cannot be stopped". The marketing media are not trying too stop us. They are trying to stop Johnny from growing up and playing with the toaster. So when the "ViewCat" can begin taking photos, we do not concern ourselves with the fact the EULA says ViewCat Inc. owns them and may sell them as marketing information. Or, as we have seen with recent carnivore events, we find the government would like the ISPs to release those photos to them as part of an ongoing investigation.
It is very subtle, the approach was missed by many because the laws were changed before most people were anywhere near the Internet. They are being fed the lines they need to hear to support the positions of the few in status quo. We end up dismissed as "hackers," who are breaking the law (EULA), or radical conspiracy theorist.
Sadly, it is going to take some marketing site releasing information about a major player in the government before we see any type of real action. However, to do that would require that more than a few know how to traverse the Internet or have an experience with shopping on-line. Not a real optimistic prospect.
I spent six months being ignored, refiled, transferred, and errored off with Bell Atlantic; to the tune of nearly $5k. (You can see why I could not let this go).
I then contacted my PUC and a miracle happened. Within one day of the required dismissal period, their lawyer contacted me. Two weeks later I had a check, on the condition I would withdraw my complaint.
With the desire to get into the local and long distance markets, the phone companies do not want complaints on their records.
Try it, I was suprised by how quickly things turned around after the great run around.
When I started my process back in 1997 I was assured by my company confidently that the whole process will not take more than 15 months.
Apparently neither one of you understood the process, if you felt it could be accomplished in 15 months. Having been through this process a number of times, anything short of 24 is a wonder.
Please educate yourself prior to making comments that only make you sound like a fool.
Quite the contrary, your statements merely prove my point. Sadly, you have missed it too.
Clueless does not even begin to explain this attitude. Here we have a product, shipped to me without my asking, for the purpose of providing to them tracking data about me (through it serial number).
If I understand their position they would like to claim that the information, collected about me and my surfing/buying habits is theirs? Further, I do not have the right to this information which, realistically, could contain everything from bank account numbers to my address book. (How would I know, I am not allowed to look)
Worse than what these guys are smoking, is they are starting to share it with the goverment. It appears they are betting we will sit around and complain. But who cares if geeks complain?
Folks, if you have not helped the Electronic Frontier Foundation(EFF) in the past, now is the time. Stop sitting on the sidelines and whining. START DOING.
Support your rights with EFF
I can see the way this is going to go.
In one corner - those who feel the US is the haven of the huddled masses and anyone who disagrees is a bigot
In the other corner - those who feel US corporations are using these people as slave labor to force American developers to take pay cuts or into unemployment.
While you are both wrong, and right consider this before getting all rammed up. The people losing their visas did not qualify for green cards. Had they qualified they would not have to go. (I do not think Linus is going to have a problem in this area) This means the value they were suppose to bring, or the activities they were suppose to complete did not meet the standards.
You do not get a free pass because you are in technology nor should you. You are neither entitled too nor should you be prevented from meeting the same restrictions and conditions that everyone else seeking permanent status in this country must. Is it fair, just because you were not born in the US.? Life is not fair, stop whining and get over it.
You may now proceed with the next 564 responses.
Where would you expect to have this issue resolved, in the standards meetings? Do you believe your competitors (competitors who want to win business from you) would do anything but thank you for handing them the technology you developed?
They began discussing the design in the last six months that Rambus was attending the meetings. Does anyone here really believe that Rambus was able to go from concept to production, based only on a set of meetings in six months?
Did they take advantage of the information and a hole in the agreement. Looks like it. And it appears to be a quite a hole since they are winning.
Will it inflate the price of chips? I am sure we will hear it does. Much like the gas prices skyrocket the day after an oil price increase is announced. $.02 seems to go to $.10 in no time.
Consider the tasks we perform on a daily basis.
Emails - I cringe at the thought of someone sending me a voice created email. Just listen to the voicemail you get sent on a daily basis. Can you imagine it in writing and going on for two pages?
Coding - Try speaking a shell, PERL or C++ program. Did you remember all the "." and ";"? Did you remember to declare those variables? I recall a study about our ability to speak and reason at the same time. Humans are not very good at it. (Quite a statement there I just realized)
Perhaps we should just give up on the QWERTY board and go back to the most efficient design. Staying QWERTY helped when we were converting from typewriters and needed to make it easy on everyone. Now we need to jump ahead to efficient typing.
As for mice, something else is needed. I do not want to remove my hand from the keyboard while typing. While surfing, etc. I do not want to use my keyboard unless I am typing a URL. (Perhaps a laser pointer on my hand?). However, a mouse or "precision" instrument is going to continue to be needed for 3d rendering, graphics, etc.
Try putting a piece of paper on the wall and writing your name. See the problem? Pens are incredibly refined instruments. They relieve much of the pressure on your hand, provide a stable surface and are able to support writing in almost any direction for extended periods of time. I believe UI are going to evolve the same way, slowly, over time and to a simplified fashion combining multiple technologies.
Hopefully, discussions like this will give someone here an idea that we can all benefit from.
It can happen in cases where you have a certain level of expertise and the questions required to determine your ability to bring value would force the discussion of a company's products would put them at risk(i.e. Transmeta 12 months ago).
They may also feel the need to do this during the "quiet period" of a public offering, where the very nature of company information puts them at risk of disclosure.
The larger part of an IPO is raising capital, and they need it. They have a heavy debt load and a product. How many companies have done an IPO with only the former?
Transmeta is in a transition period, and it is a risk to buy. If you think it is too much a risk stay away, this is a financail decision for the individual investor. However there are many who will think the risk is low compared to others that have taken in the past 36 months.
If provided the capital Transmeta might create a foundation from which the concepts and prototypes could have an impact on the market. If so, those who invest will be rewarded. If not, they are punished. Isn't capitalism great?
Let's keep our perspective here. This company owns the building, machines, connection and the "good business". The could choose to keep all the machines off the net, it is theirs to do as they see fit. This business is providing a additional "service" with as much freedom as they choose to give. If people do not like the restrictions, they can go somewhere else.
Now for the tough part. We have an industry whose goal is to prevent people from preventing them from breaking the law. Re-mapping URLs, changing keys, and basically attempting to circumvent software someone purchased for the purpose of prevention makes this a tough wall to stay behind.
Any software you put in will be flawed to one degree or another. My guess is that the owners will not be that concerned that testicular exams are excluded with the porn. Surf for that stuff elsewhere. In addition, since you are unlikely to be able to control what minors see, you may be open to other problems if you let someone display porn to a minor. (I could see someone arguing that you provided the material that was displayed, you are not an ISP here)
I wonder what the FBI is concerned a review would find?
Anyone using PGP or some other encryption is going to require some horsepower to decrypt. So this means they are looking for the dumber crooks.
So what is it we would find? I can only think of a few reasons:
Paranoia - if they tell us, we will
hack it. (security through
obscurity)
Bad Code - the embarrassment factor when
someone describes a flaw in the
first 10 minutes of its release.
Deception - we find it sniffs for more or
keeps more than we are told
I am not of the group who thinks the FBI is defined by WACO. The issue is that sometimes in the face of a situation that is difficult to understand and even harder to control, you want to look like you can. In the end you jeopardize the very reason for being. To protect our freedoms, even at the risk of some security.
The difficulty you are going to face is that Peltiers need MORE fans not less. In order to be cold on one side, they are VERY hot on the other. This extra heat is needs to be moved out of the case as quickly as possible.
In addition, these have a host of other issues to deal with, especially condensation (see http://www.overclockers.com/)
You may want to consider the alternative of moving the entire box into another area and running a powered KVM module with long cables to it. There is a maximum distance from the machine before degradation becomes so bad it is useless.
Or when all else fails, try a cabinet that is vented or directly over an A/C vent. You can soundproof the cabinet and be done.
Good luck.
IANAL, however there is plenty of basis for barrier restrictions. Minors can be restricted from buying alcohol, going to "R" rated movies, buying guns, etc. We hold the suppliers responsible when parents make a reasonable effort, expecting them to do the same.
We have been telling parents to stop complaining about the environment concerning music, movies, video games, etc. for a long time. They are told to "PAY ATTENTION" you are "RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR CHILDREN".
They are now setting the same expectation across all adult activities. If we are watching our children do not drink, we feel the bar up the street has an obligation not to solicit there business. If this is an "adult" movie, or video game, or activity we do not want them providing it to children either.
This is just common sense, the laws get made because a few people fail to use any. It is not radical or exteme or new.
Would all TLD whiners please take a breath and think for a second.
.per .gov.
The sited story said it best with:
ICANN members, however, have said there are legal and other precedents to prevent widespread confusion.
How long do think it will be before Microsoft, IBM, Red Hat, and every other company paying for an ICANN vote tells their ICANN reps to change the rules, (or when all else fails, sue ICANN.)
Let's face it, if you cannot get it between the "WWW" and the "dot" does it really matter? How many suffixes are you willing to go through to find the correct "BobsAdventureTravel"? And if you are "BobsAdventureTravel" how many TLDs should you be forced to buy just to make sure people don't show up at porn site with your name on it?
The original list was simple, but became corrupt. How about we just refine the list and forbid duplicates before the suffix.
.org - non profit or social organizations
.com - commerical business
.net - ISPs/networks/etc.
.per - Personal web pages (Okay I made it up)
.fam - family web pages(You can upgrade from
for free, but you must prove you have a
family (okay I made this one up too)
.prn - lets face it, if the military gets their
own, shouldn't the largest user of
bandwidth too? (sorry I am just on a roll)
.XX - lets keep all the countries too, just because it beats
At least this way, we do not have to find slashdot.org, or is it net? com? cc? tv? hv?
A penalty can only be applied in jurisdictions that care. If someone in China sets up a gambling website do you think they are going to care about a fine that can never be enforced? What about SEALAND?
We cannot seize assets because none exist to take. Electronic transfer sent the money before the gambling.
This is a perfect example why other countries think we are a few bricks short of a full load:
Lottery gambling is good.
Vegas/Atlanta/Reservation gambling is good.
Internet gambling is bad.
All of the above.
Having worked in the insurance industry (IT side) for many years, it is all a matter of risk/benefit analysis. Further, the actuarial guys and gals are just about anal at this stuff. Many can tell you, given a room of /. participants, how many are overweight, and by how much. How many drive cars over a certain value and what is the risk they will have an accident? How many work in a corporation and what is the risk of repetitive stress injury? And they are right at a nearly frightening rate. If it were gambling, you would never bet against the house.
Real life example:
Like it or not, a 50 year old, buying a new Porsche is far less of a risk than a 22 year old. It is not personal, it is not specific to you, it says nothing about your parents or your abilities. So guess what, you pay more at 22, than at 50.
You may not even be able to get insurance at 22 on a certain type of car, until you enter the "risk pool". This would be the same for companies as it is for 22 years driving a Porsche. I may insure you but I am not taking the major risk. (i.e. $2000 deductible, $500/month payment and penalties for failure to pay)
Now, given some company "X", operating a type of business "Y", for a period of time "Z", what is the average number of security breeches (internal and external) you can be expected to incur? What varies the result the most? What kind of loss per incident can be expected? What factors contribute to a claim (i.e. how often is notoriety a cause versus failure to update patches?)
Now like your car, you are expected to take care of it. The "blue book" here however is what a company agrees to. Amazon out of commission for 12 hours is going to be a much bigger claim than slash dot. (No offense intended).
Further, the claimant cannot facilitate the action.
Have you had a security audit in the last "X" timeframe?(security like Swiss cheese)
Did you act on its findings? (no funding for upgrades)
Are you using reasonable precautions to protect yourself, data, and business?(haven't done a backup this week)
Was this a known threat you failed to act on? (ILOVEYOU attack two weeks after it made the news)
I think it is a great idea, because those with insurance must be attentive to collect on a loss. The more attentive people are the better it is for everyone.
While I appreciate the author's opinion, the discussion needs to move beyond how they compare to each other.
First, I agree with several of the replies indicating this was not a benchmark, but a starting point in the discussion. Not to undermine the effort taking place, but a benchmark is normally Specific, Attainable, Measurable and it must be able to be recreated. More detail would need to be provided, but that is beside the point right now.
With commercial benchmarks available we should be comparing MySQL and PostgreSQL to DB2 and Oracle. If we open source to a level we can play in that field we are well on the way to success. Comparing them to each other is comparing High School football players. It may be valuable in the next game, but it does indicate how they will be in the pros.
Because projects can vary in size and shape, consider the old standby of fiberglass forms. You can build the initial form in cardboard if you wish and then encase it as you see fit.
You are not restricted by the how the form has to be resolved (have you ever tried to form a circular case in metal?). In addition, you can make it as pleasing to look at as you have time to sand and paint.
And like all good things, remember to vent. Heat build up is a bad thing (regardless of most materials)
Cookiegate? Maybe "Stupidgate" would be a better name. Like finding a bug in software, no one who can boot their own machine is surprised. While it was easy to pass the law, the web site probably used an outside vendor who did what they always do. Now someone noticed and suddenly Congress wants to be involved. If they want to be involved, ban the collection of data or force opt-in. Oops, can't do that those people donate large sums of cash to election campaigns.
The thing with "saber rattling" is there is always the fear the other person may actually do something. Nothing is going to happen here. It's like Los Alamos, everyone wanted investigations, until they realized both parties had been in power through the time secrets were being sold. Write congress today, if they cannot load a piece of software on their computer without help, they should stay out of this.
Finally, I should not have to pay to put a lock on my door. It is inconvenient, costly, and frankly it just indicates the police are not doing their job. Get real, if I want to be protected, self protection is the only certain way.
Trusted Systems are built according to a formal specification and are tested and confirmed against a formal testing and standards process.
Trusted systems are tested and confirmed against formal processes. Formal specifications can go a long way in identifing flaws, but would hardly seem a requirement.
Until open source many of the specifications & design documents were considered propriatary or corporate secrets. Open source provides a method to ensure systems are being built exactly to specification. Otherwise, we are trusting the developing entity has actually coded what was defined in the specification.
How often has anyone coded complex systems EXACTLY to specification, the first time? With an open source system we not only know, but can correct those issues as quickly as anyone finds them.
My sister in law worked for a doctor a while back. He used his scanner to scan the forms and the scanner came with software to identify "fields" that could be entered.
I do not know the brand, but I have seen several scanners taht offered similar software in the past. IF they have one, look at the software theat came with it.
If you recall a story got "out" last year about a "working document" whereby Microsoft would begin charging yearly usage fees.
At the time it was dismissed, but other providers thought it would be the way software would have to be produced in order to protect the consumer form illegal and faulty software.
Well folks, wake up and smell the java, here is the next step. Once you do not have the software to install, then you cannot make an argument that you own anything. If you do not own it, then I am providing a "usage" license. If it is a usage license, it is not "forever".
This is not a Microsoft issue, it is a software issue. MS just provided the place we could observe it. When the projected rush to the next release does not occur (i.e. Windows 2000), what can the company do? They cannot force you to buy an upgrade or new release, today.
This will not be a problem in the future, when I can explain that next year's license is 3 times this years, because you are getting a new release. You do not need it? Sorry, we do not license old versions, and you have 15 days left before your current license expires. Have a nice day.
At one point, I had commented that MS should not expect cover from George W. Once Microsoft was convicted even GW would not want to touch the spoiled food. I was mistaken.
Politics are about to decide the outcome. Consider that Bill and his buddies have gotten over there disdain for Washington (D.C. that is). They have billions to spend on lobbying and who cares if they have to report doing it. So many Americans are cynical about government anyway, the expect lobbyists to buy it.
Now Consider:
George W. rules, he will send the DOJ to work on more significant issues concerning the American public. Bill G. is very thankful and shows his respect by paying for the next billion dollar election.
Al G. rules, he will keep the DOJ plugging away because he has inherited this legacy, but does not want to talk about it. Perhaps Bill G. could stop by the next fund raiser so he could explain how unhappy he is with Microsoft.
Congress sees a sudden influx of election capital to spend. Gee, Bill's boys are not bad, they were just confused and misunderstood. What we really need to understand is where the DOJ is spending our money. And we do not want anyone making allegations until we "clean our own house". A nice 16 year audit should do the trick.
Even the politicians who were earlier demanding Microsoft be penalized and strung up (i.e. Orrin Hatch), now wonder if perhaps the DOJ has not been a little over zealous. Maybe we just need to understand them better. So much for providing cover.
I was hoping we would see Jackson take the short route and use Microsoft's own words. Fast track it to the Supreme Court because, as Microsoft has said, this will adversely impact the economy and the US. Seems like an immanent reason to send it past the appeals process and get to a resolution, without the politics.
I tend to agree with an earlier post that this information is probably listed in painful detail somewhere, however there is a bigger point you are making that is of great value.
If the only real function served by listing information may cause harm, should we anyway?
A credit card number, by itself cannot cause a problem. Providing it on your website would not be a crime but it may cause a financial burden for the person who owns it.
It would be of value to compare the scheme to determine security flaws, etc. that could then be acted upon. However, that is not the intent here.
Consider your willingness to respond with your credit card number, billing address and expiration date. We do not because that is not related to whether "XYZ" is the best method to use to validate the card.
However, an RFC on a new security method, card reader design, etc. is well worth posting. As is an observation that the current readers have flaws. It is a fine line in some places, but I would hope the general rule falls to "do no harm".
---------------------
A recent news article describes the FOX network's efforts to overturn the 30% rule. FOX is claiming the 30% rule in a 3 network system (when the rule was adopted) no longer applies with 200 channels.
If they manage a win, the playing field will change significantly as the big players fight for the majority stake.