This isn't exactly what you're looking for, but I think this Slashdot article is closer than some of the other suggestions.
Dept. ofDefense Adopts StarOffice
Tangentially, somebody mentioned impatient desktop users power cycling their linux boxes, and then suffering through a long fsck. Sounds like lots of users I know. (This is one reason that server rooms have locks on the doors.) I think some of the journaling filesystems coming into popularity now will help make Linux _far_ more usable as a desktop machine.
So, this brings up the question of how to support an Airport.
You thought it was secure, but were mistaken. Eek! What did you do wrong?
Base station passworded & hidden, network password on Airport, WEP encryption, possibly with uprated Orinoco card, (although that might be of dubious usefulness, considering the state of WEP security,) and otherwise just good network security upstream, (first a private subnet for the wireless users,) but What else can one do?
I do like the SSH tunneling idea. That seems to discourage both hitchhikers and eavesdroppers, but might be a little unweildy.
Other suggestions, particularly airport & wireless specific please. I have done a search, but haven't been very impressed.
My suspicion is that quantum computers, will turn out to be impossible in principle, because some of the mathematical implications are as spooky as action at a distance.
Don't working quantum computers, (in addition to easy factoring of large composites,) imply easy solution of all NP Complete problems? Some of the other mathematical implications are ever stranger. Whole classes of problems would go from insouble over the age of the universe, to trivial.
One flaw in the idea that the mind uses quantum effects as a quantum computer would, is that we don't have any special skill at solving the sorts of problems that quantum computers could. Personally, I can't factor large numbers quicker than a slow 8 bit micro could.
I'd prefer that OpenSSH keep their name. It might be nice to respect the author's (childish & greedy) wishes 'cause he wants his (freely given & freely accepted,) name back, but OpenSSH has in my opinion created more of the value associated with the name at this point, than the author has. It would be nice for OpenSSH to reap the benefits of their good work, and not have to change their name & pretend to be someone else.
OpenSSH accepted a the gift of the code & name, & ran with it, and deserve to use a name to whose popularity OpenSSH have contributed so much. If their implementation had been called SHiT, then you can bet that SSH would be aggressively making the point that they were the real SHiT.
Where would SSH's precious name be without OpenSSH? It wouldn't be worth protecting. Oh, wait. Maybe it's not worth protecting anyway, since they're not bugging anyone but OpenSSH.
Microsoft's fall has not happened yet. My bet is that it won't. I'd bet that their legal costs so far will exceed the cost of whatever punishment our new (conservative religion of big money,) government allows to be stuck to them. Dubya won't stand by while billionaires are insulted by the state.
Microsoft fall? Ha! More likely is to look forward to Microsoft ownership of whatever nannyware is mandated for you to use. Instead of being forced to buy MS whenever you buy a built PC, you might be mandated to buy MS to comply with the law.
Welcome to a world where business has the rights that you gave up.
It amused me most of all that the local news channels tried to cover this, but the bug was completely obscured by fog for most of the morning.
I think it's curious to assert that it's the authorities fault for blocking traffic because they decided to pull it down promptly, (probably since it was over an active shipping channel.)
Apparently the authorities should have just left it until later, because after all, it was engineers what put it up there, and they must know what they were doing. Yeah, just like the engineers who designed the giant bonfire at Texas A&M. Oops, engineering students in both cases.
Imagine this: You're getting a citation, and somebody zooms by at 90, so the officer points out that he knows him. "Don't worry, he's almost a civil engineer. He probably knows better than we do what speeds are appropriate for this road."
I also don't appreciate more crap in the bay, but apparently that's the authorities fault too.
Many of the same bright sparks who think suspending a VW bug from the bridge qualifies as an engineering feat, assert that those students shouldn't be responsible for the bug in the bay, because the authorities could have just hauled it up. Now, if getting it down there was a feat for engineers, getting it back up would qualify as something of a feat as well. Too bad those engineers weren't around to help out.
Actions have consequences. The Canadian engineering students actions had unpleasant consequences for a lot of people. You don't just go around littering & blocking (or causing to be blocked,) traffic just for amusement. At least, I don't.
To me, an early suspension bridge in deep water is an engineering feat, but crap dangling from a rope is not.
The engineering students have allowed us a lovely insight into the origin of the word sophomoric.
How narrow is Google's definition of Authority, or how broadly does a high ranking apply?
If it isn't narrow enough, it would be easier for all the random Yahoos to skew Google's results away from genuinely good medical sites.
I suspect this is a matter of tuning, and Google has massively skewed their data collection by adding Yahoo, so they will need some time to correct for it.
I still highly doubt that Google is selling ranking postions, as that would send us off to the next search engine, (and there will be more & more intellegent search engines.)
Once Yahoo links to Google:
Yahoo users significantly increase their use of Google, and submit URLs. These URLs will be Yahoo biased, because after all, these are Yahoo users. This bias changes Google's ratings, without any other intervention.
Hell, Google was probably good largely because it was popular with geeks. Like the Net at large, it will become diluted by pr0n surfers & greed. I hope Google and Yahoo both are looking at other methods of automatic category building, since there are lots of interesting approaches to that problem.
Re:Useful for trauma, not for illness
on
Blood Type: NULL
·
· Score: 1
This would be most useful in the situation an orderly friend witnessed, when a severe injury came in. The doctor demanded some huge quantity of blood, & when the nurse asked what type the doctor pointed out that it didn't matter. Patient did not survive, & probably wasn't expected to.
Your brain doesn't like being deprived of oxygen. (In fact, it consumes a large proportion of your total calories too. Processing those calories requires O2.)
Regarding the abuse topics above: Can't excess O2 be poisonous?
Is there any perl more obfuscated than the implementation of RSA in 2 lines? That's unbelievable. It was impressive years ago when it was 5 lines. Of course, it could be argued that it belongs in an Obfuscated dc contest instead.
Mechanical computers can be faster, but unfortunately the setup time is far worse. The consequence of this is that you can demonstrate a fast analog solution of a simple case of a hard problem, but you lose on the setup time as the solution space gets larger.
Instantly finding the largest number of a set where numbers are represented by lengths of uncooked spaghetti is as easy as setting them on end, & holding the longest while letting all the others fall away, but after a few thousand different numbers, accurately trimming all that spaghetti becomes difficult.
I'd like to know how mathematically well supported this idea is. I regard it as a basic theorem, because otherwise it seems to allow easy solution of NP-Complete problems, but would love to see it investigated.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't exactly what you're looking for, but I think this Slashdot article is closer than some of the other suggestions.
Dept. ofDefense Adopts StarOffice
Tangentially, somebody mentioned impatient desktop users power cycling their linux boxes, and then suffering through a long fsck. Sounds like lots of users I know. (This is one reason that server rooms have locks on the doors.) I think some of the journaling filesystems coming into popularity now will help make Linux _far_ more usable as a desktop machine.
So, this brings up the question of how to support an Airport.
You thought it was secure, but were mistaken. Eek! What did you do wrong?
Base station passworded & hidden, network password on Airport, WEP encryption, possibly with uprated Orinoco card, (although that might be of dubious usefulness, considering the state of WEP security,) and otherwise just good network security upstream, (first a private subnet for the wireless users,) but What else can one do?
I do like the SSH tunneling idea. That seems to discourage both hitchhikers and eavesdroppers, but might be a little unweildy.
Other suggestions, particularly airport & wireless specific please. I have done a search, but haven't been very impressed.
My suspicion is that quantum computers, will turn out to be impossible in principle, because some of the mathematical implications are as spooky as action at a distance.
Don't working quantum computers, (in addition to easy factoring of large composites,) imply easy solution of all NP Complete problems? Some of the other mathematical implications are ever stranger. Whole classes of problems would go from insouble over the age of the universe, to trivial.
One flaw in the idea that the mind uses quantum effects as a quantum computer would, is that we don't have any special skill at solving the sorts of problems that quantum computers could. Personally, I can't factor large numbers quicker than a slow 8 bit micro could.
I'd prefer that OpenSSH keep their name. It might be nice to respect the author's (childish & greedy) wishes 'cause he wants his (freely given & freely accepted,) name back, but OpenSSH has in my opinion created more of the value associated with the name at this point, than the author has. It would be nice for OpenSSH to reap the benefits of their good work, and not have to change their name & pretend to be someone else.
OpenSSH accepted a the gift of the code & name, & ran with it, and deserve to use a name to whose popularity OpenSSH have contributed so much. If their implementation had been called SHiT, then you can bet that SSH would be aggressively making the point that they were the real SHiT.
Where would SSH's precious name be without OpenSSH? It wouldn't be worth protecting. Oh, wait. Maybe it's not worth protecting anyway, since they're not bugging anyone but OpenSSH.
...Generalizations are unreliable...
Microsoft's fall has not happened yet. My bet is that it won't. I'd bet that their legal costs so far will exceed the cost of whatever punishment our new (conservative religion of big money,) government allows to be stuck to them. Dubya won't stand by while billionaires are insulted by the state.
Microsoft fall? Ha! More likely is to look forward to Microsoft ownership of whatever nannyware is mandated for you to use. Instead of being forced to buy MS whenever you buy a built PC, you might be mandated to buy MS to comply with the law.
Welcome to a world where business has the rights that you gave up.
It amused me most of all that the local news channels tried to cover this, but the bug was completely obscured by fog for most of the morning.
I think it's curious to assert that it's the authorities fault for blocking traffic because they decided to pull it down promptly, (probably since it was over an active shipping channel.)
Apparently the authorities should have just left it until later, because after all, it was engineers what put it up there, and they must know what they were doing. Yeah, just like the engineers who designed the giant bonfire at Texas A&M. Oops, engineering students in both cases.
Imagine this: You're getting a citation, and somebody zooms by at 90, so the officer points out that he knows him. "Don't worry, he's almost a civil engineer. He probably knows better than we do what speeds are appropriate for this road."
I also don't appreciate more crap in the bay, but apparently that's the authorities fault too.
Many of the same bright sparks who think suspending a VW bug from the bridge qualifies as an engineering feat, assert that those students shouldn't be responsible for the bug in the bay, because the authorities could have just hauled it up. Now, if getting it down there was a feat for engineers, getting it back up would qualify as something of a feat as well. Too bad those engineers weren't around to help out.
Actions have consequences. The Canadian engineering students actions had unpleasant consequences for a lot of people. You don't just go around littering & blocking (or causing to be blocked,) traffic just for amusement. At least, I don't.
To me, an early suspension bridge in deep water is an engineering feat, but crap dangling from a rope is not.
The engineering students have allowed us a lovely insight into the origin of the word sophomoric.
How narrow is Google's definition of Authority, or how broadly does a high ranking apply?
If it isn't narrow enough, it would be easier for all the random Yahoos to skew Google's results away from genuinely good medical sites.
I suspect this is a matter of tuning, and Google has massively skewed their data collection by adding Yahoo, so they will need some time to correct for it.
I still highly doubt that Google is selling ranking postions, as that would send us off to the next search engine, (and there will be more & more intellegent search engines.)
Once Yahoo links to Google:
Yahoo users significantly increase their use of Google, and submit URLs. These URLs will be Yahoo biased, because after all, these are Yahoo users. This bias changes Google's ratings, without any other intervention.
Hell, Google was probably good largely because it was popular with geeks. Like the Net at large, it will become diluted by pr0n surfers & greed. I hope Google and Yahoo both are looking at other methods of automatic category building, since there are lots of interesting approaches to that problem.
This would be most useful in the situation an orderly friend witnessed, when a severe injury came in. The doctor demanded some huge quantity of blood, & when the nurse asked what type the doctor pointed out that it didn't matter. Patient did not survive, & probably wasn't expected to.
Your brain doesn't like being deprived of oxygen. (In fact, it consumes a large proportion of your total calories too. Processing those calories requires O2.)
Regarding the abuse topics above: Can't excess O2 be poisonous?
Is there any perl more obfuscated than the implementation of RSA in 2 lines? That's unbelievable. It was impressive years ago when it was 5 lines. Of course, it could be argued that it belongs in an Obfuscated dc contest instead.
Mechanical computers can be faster, but unfortunately the setup time is far worse. The consequence of this is that you can demonstrate a fast analog solution of a simple case of a hard problem, but you lose on the setup time as the solution space gets larger.
Instantly finding the largest number of a set where numbers are represented by lengths of uncooked spaghetti is as easy as setting them on end, & holding the longest while letting all the others fall away, but after a few thousand different numbers, accurately trimming all that spaghetti becomes difficult.
I'd like to know how mathematically well supported this idea is. I regard it as a basic theorem, because otherwise it seems to allow easy solution of NP-Complete problems, but would love to see it investigated.