The "copyrighted" material you are referring to is not as blatant as you so quickly assumed. It is people who think what they are writing down what they are hearing correctly. It is usually pretty close, but they are not the original artists so they do not actually know if it is 100% exact. But you seem to think they are getting the sheet music from the artists and posting exact copies. That is usually never the case with tabs posted online. If you would look at some of the sites instead of assuming, you would see how many different versions of the same tab exist. I don't think the artist wrote that many versions that seem to differ from each other, sometimes vastly. But you do. It is akin to someone retelling a story, by your standards. So any book synopsis should never be printed except by the publisher because you are infringing on someone's copyright by trying to convey what happened in a book.
...you might not of heard of: Google! Seriously, it is a search engine that allows you to type in a subject, or a question, and it in turn provides you with related subject material or actual answers to questions. You might want to keep this under your hat though, as we might not get good questions like this again if people know they can EASILY search for information on their own.
The count your lucky stars, because your wish has been granted. An excellent film that got overshadowed by a mediocre film by the name of "The Matrix".
Actually the specifically say the the 4 250GB, notice the large G and B, are RAID 0. Dump the drive to tape? Do tell how that would make the viewing better, as it is used to actually playback if you so desire. I just need enlightening on the use of sequential media to get to something quick.
Sounds like a stupid Windows user doesn't like Americans. I guess where you are from everyone knows how to use every computer system out there, since your country is obviously superior to the American computer user.
Incidentally - why does everybody feel the need to list the TV programmes they like to record
You know I always wondered about that too. You don't see me running around telling you what kind of toilet paper I use (Charmin) or anti-perspirant I use (Arid). Maybe there should be a study done on this kind of behavior. But I have a feeling they have no friends and are trying to make some on the net by spouting out shows that seem to be popular with all the other losers.
The bookmark icon looks like the Sun Microsystems logo, to me
A big "N" on the favicon makes you think of Sun? Did you just hear of the internet? Because it is hard for me to believe that you don't know what the Netscape logo looks like. That favicon on the urge site is no way no how even remotely similar to the Sun one, except it has blue in it - a little.
Hops were added by Dutch to modern German beer, not the church to slow drinking, exported by the Flemings...yadda yadda yadda. The rest of the world liked the taste and so began the smuggling of hops. The lower alcohol beers were made latter because of the taxation on malt.
I was replying to the post above that stated even modern homemade brews are cloudy and chunky. Hence my stating that he is not making his brews correctly, or not allowing enough time for his brew to clear. Or rousing everything up while he is siphoning.
I am quite aware of the history of beer and the cloudy ales enjoyed before the rise of clear lagers and the advent of glass that could be seen through.
You also do not *need* to cold condition for the beer to brighten, or for that matter mead. It is all in the technique and the important factor - water.
So, please, for future reference, look at the context of a reply before lambasting.
You might not be making them right if you feel the need for filtration is just. I have been brewing for quite awhile now and have rarely had cloudy brew, or for that matter "bits" floating around in it. You might want to brush up on your brewing habits.
http://www.howtobrew.com/
There is an instrument you use that bends the single fiber. The microbend that it puts into the fiber does actually interrupt the flow, but barely. some of the light actually escapes from the bend instead of refracting as normal. While not perfect in the sense that the end user will continue receiving all of the information, it is mainly used to intercept all the data that would be sent, thereby allowing someone to "spy" on sensitive data that "enemies" are sending. The time we used it was quite awhile ago and very rudimentary, but did work. Technology might have improved on it since then, but I am no longer in the field and have little interest of returning to it.
Yes I have. And it works. Although it would be a little more difficult to do it out in the field without causing at least some sort of damage to the rest of the fiber "wires".
What's easier? Finding my pair or capturing packets from/bound for my IP address?
Finding your pair is easier. At least for me it is. I only have to get a readily available list of numbers for an area and a pair count. Pop a manhole (or climb a pole for the breakout box), open a case and find your pair, tap in and listen away. Your pair never changes. VoIP I can do the same, unless you have broadband, then I have to figure out your IP address from hundreds(thousands?) then listen in. I don't like VoIP, but it is picking up steam and I worked with a guy that always proposed this as a way for communicating. Guess he knew it would pick up, but that does not mean it is better.
1. You don't have to "hanging off the pole outside" one's house to do this for POTS.
2. It is not hard to find a pair, they are twisted you know? Pick a pair and tap in.
3. Unless you were targeting one specific person, the above will work fine. Which would be the same way as trapping all kinds of VoIP packets anyway. You know Random.
The article was dealing with security, and the security for both is the same. You would have to do the same for VoIP as you do for POTS if you want security. Harden the conduit, and encrypt and decrypt the message at the TX side and RX side.
Did not read the story did you? It is apparent you did not. He TOOK the gun FROM the COP, that was his access to a gun. Not that his parents had a gun and he took it, went to the police station on his own and started shooting people.
Removing firearms? That will not solve anything. Just turn us into a nancy England clone.
Slashdot Mirror
The "copyrighted" material you are referring to is not as blatant as you so quickly assumed. It is people who think what they are writing down what they are hearing correctly. It is usually pretty close, but they are not the original artists so they do not actually know if it is 100% exact. But you seem to think they are getting the sheet music from the artists and posting exact copies. That is usually never the case with tabs posted online. If you would look at some of the sites instead of assuming, you would see how many different versions of the same tab exist. I don't think the artist wrote that many versions that seem to differ from each other, sometimes vastly. But you do. It is akin to someone retelling a story, by your standards. So any book synopsis should never be printed except by the publisher because you are infringing on someone's copyright by trying to convey what happened in a book.
...you might not of heard of: Google! Seriously, it is a search engine that allows you to type in a subject, or a question, and it in turn provides you with related subject material or actual answers to questions. You might want to keep this under your hat though, as we might not get good questions like this again if people know they can EASILY search for information on their own.
Actually the specifically say the the 4 250GB, notice the large G and B, are RAID 0. Dump the drive to tape? Do tell how that would make the viewing better, as it is used to actually playback if you so desire. I just need enlightening on the use of sequential media to get to something quick.
Sounds like a stupid Windows user doesn't like Americans. I guess where you are from everyone knows how to use every computer system out there, since your country is obviously superior to the American computer user.
Incidentally - why does everybody feel the need to list the TV programmes they like to record You know I always wondered about that too. You don't see me running around telling you what kind of toilet paper I use (Charmin) or anti-perspirant I use (Arid). Maybe there should be a study done on this kind of behavior. But I have a feeling they have no friends and are trying to make some on the net by spouting out shows that seem to be popular with all the other losers.
I'm using Firefox and I see the Netscape logo. You might want to think about getting some ocular devices from The Ocular Supplier and wearing them.
You beat me to it. I was going to ask the same exact question. I don't know what mp3 files have to do with administering a linux box at all.
Good job. Bringing Linux into something where it was not mentioned. But seeing you have been modded as a TROLL I can see why you would want to.
Guinness is filtered. Lack of yeast = lack of B12 and proteins It is flocculation not floctuation
Hops were added by Dutch to modern German beer, not the church to slow drinking, exported by the Flemings...yadda yadda yadda. The rest of the world liked the taste and so began the smuggling of hops. The lower alcohol beers were made latter because of the taxation on malt.
I was replying to the post above that stated even modern homemade brews are cloudy and chunky. Hence my stating that he is not making his brews correctly, or not allowing enough time for his brew to clear. Or rousing everything up while he is siphoning. I am quite aware of the history of beer and the cloudy ales enjoyed before the rise of clear lagers and the advent of glass that could be seen through. You also do not *need* to cold condition for the beer to brighten, or for that matter mead. It is all in the technique and the important factor - water. So, please, for future reference, look at the context of a reply before lambasting.
You might not be making them right if you feel the need for filtration is just. I have been brewing for quite awhile now and have rarely had cloudy brew, or for that matter "bits" floating around in it. You might want to brush up on your brewing habits. http://www.howtobrew.com/
There is an instrument you use that bends the single fiber. The microbend that it puts into the fiber does actually interrupt the flow, but barely. some of the light actually escapes from the bend instead of refracting as normal. While not perfect in the sense that the end user will continue receiving all of the information, it is mainly used to intercept all the data that would be sent, thereby allowing someone to "spy" on sensitive data that "enemies" are sending. The time we used it was quite awhile ago and very rudimentary, but did work. Technology might have improved on it since then, but I am no longer in the field and have little interest of returning to it.
Yes I have. And it works. Although it would be a little more difficult to do it out in the field without causing at least some sort of damage to the rest of the fiber "wires".
by old do you mean lead cable???
What's easier? Finding my pair or capturing packets from/bound for my IP address?
Finding your pair is easier. At least for me it is. I only have to get a readily available list of numbers for an area and a pair count. Pop a manhole (or climb a pole for the breakout box), open a case and find your pair, tap in and listen away. Your pair never changes. VoIP I can do the same, unless you have broadband, then I have to figure out your IP address from hundreds(thousands?) then listen in. I don't like VoIP, but it is picking up steam and I worked with a guy that always proposed this as a way for communicating. Guess he knew it would pick up, but that does not mean it is better.
1. You don't have to "hanging off the pole outside" one's house to do this for POTS. 2. It is not hard to find a pair, they are twisted you know? Pick a pair and tap in. 3. Unless you were targeting one specific person, the above will work fine. Which would be the same way as trapping all kinds of VoIP packets anyway. You know Random. The article was dealing with security, and the security for both is the same. You would have to do the same for VoIP as you do for POTS if you want security. Harden the conduit, and encrypt and decrypt the message at the TX side and RX side.
Wow, you do spout the same stuff don't you?
Did not read the story did you? It is apparent you did not. He TOOK the gun FROM the COP, that was his access to a gun. Not that his parents had a gun and he took it, went to the police station on his own and started shooting people. Removing firearms? That will not solve anything. Just turn us into a nancy England clone.
Now I am poorer than I originally thought? Damn.
Pretty neat, but the info they have on some of that stuff is pretty dated.