I prefer to think that Canada took a look at the steep precipice to the left and scattered for the most accessible alternate route... which unfortunately happened to be to the right for the majority. At least it wasn't an NDP majority.
Also, to the OP: saying the snow is starting to melt in Canada at this time of year is like saying that people are starting to get out their surfboards in the US this time of year... the farmers in Idaho included;)
As your case points out, I was mentioning an exception to the rule, not a rule. Those suburbs are not the "such cities" my statement referred to.
Of course, I have also noticed a disturbing trend to making access routes vehicle-only in many suburbs, making travel by any other means (walking, biking, skateboarding, rollerblading, etc.) extremely hazardous. It is odd that some of this is still happening while many city planners are re-examining the supposed benefits of the car-centric city.
In all the cities near me, there are yellow diamond signs with a picture of an old brownie camera in black in the middle on all approaches to intersections with cameras.
The biggest solution to decreasing accidents at intersections is actually not to increase the amber light and provide more delay before the cross street's green -- the biggest solution is to decrease the number of light cycles per day. The fewer cycles, the fewer accidents per day, even if the same number of accidents occur per cycle.
The trick is to measure the volume of through traffic on both streets per hour on weekdays and weekends and adjust the light timings accordingly, finding the "sweet spot" between causing congestion due to long waits and causing accidents due to short waits.
The long amber and green light delays are only an aid that can help tweak the system once these other factors are accounted for.
Of course, in many cities, the amber light is referred to by drivers as the "go faster" light -- having a long amber actually promotes speeding through intersections in such cities, and results in more pedestrian injuries and deaths.
I don't take issue with word meaning and grammar changing -- it happens all the time. I take issue with the word meaning NOT changing, but words being used in a cliche that is then misused, to the point where the word itself no longer has any actual meaning in the sentence, other than that someone thought it sounded good.
Another example is "a tough row to hoe" (talking about potato farming) turning into "a tough road to hoe" (which makes no sense). The word "road" has not changed meaning, neither has the word "row" -- but people misuse it in a way that makes the word use and the sentence use cease to have any meaningful contribution to the conversation other than to make the speaker/writer sound more knowledgeable to those who don't know what they are actually trying to say.
For an example of a word that has undergone a myriad of transformations over the years, look at the word "nice". For a simpler example in recent history, there's "gay". For a different kind of transformation where the activity referenced has stayed the same but the connotations have changed, look at the word "jazz".
Surprisingly, the OP referred to irony in a correct fashion. The fact that this is called into question just shows how far popular culture has become out of touch with grammar.
I think you have that backwards: Either a) IP addresses are not admissable, so the RIAA's "evidence" has no standing and the case should be dropped without prejudice,
or
b) IP addresses are admissable, so the RIAA's "evidence" has no standing and the case should be dropped WITH prejudice.
Contrary to popular belief, internet service providers don't have common carrier status. Only Voice-over-POTS has common carrier status. If Verizon handles your voice and DSL, they only have common carrier on the voice... and only if they're not using FiOS. VoIP doesn't have common carrier protection either (at the IP level).
The problem is, some people will start throwing away 2 packets instead of 1 so that they can get more "throughput" on more limited hardware. Someone else will compete by tossing 3, and the arms race for data degradation will begin.
Will this method really offset the retransmits it triggers? Only if not everyone does it, unless I'm missing something.
What might work better is scaled drops: if a router and its immediate peers are nearing capacity, they start to drop a packet per cycle, automatically causing the routers at their perimeter to route around the problem, easing up on their traffic.
It still seems like a system where an untrusted party could take advantage to drop packets in this manner from non-preferred sources or to non-preferred destinations however.
A la carte TV would be nice, too. Isn't that called Bittorrent?:D
Seriously thoughb, sounds like a good plan. Why lease spectrum access though? The companies don't own that or control the infrastructure... the other guys just have to apply for access and be allocated a chunk. I could see mandatory leasing of assigned but unused chunks though; that would get the big boys to at least put SOMETHING on the bandwidth they've reserved.
OK... we ignore DSL/twisted copper/FiOS, we ignore Cable/co-axial...
What, pray tell, are you running your VoIP over? Satellite? Some cellular network that doesn't use Bell or Rogers trunk lines?
Spanking Bell profits Rogers. Spanking Rogers profits Bell. About the only thing you can do is stop using voice and data services altogether to avoid directly or indirectly paying one of those companies.
Actually, Bell "owns" the (last mile) wires... emphasis on the '"'. The wires were installed by Bell and paid for by Canadian Taxpayers. Bell is forced to lease them because they don't really belong to Bell in the first place. They just happen to be the government subsidized company that was hired to install and manage the infrastructure. Now they want to act like a private company without giving up their government-given priveleges.
It should make you more afraid because each nuclear warhead is tracked, guarded, and needs special permissions prior to firing. It's really hard to do all of that to knowledge (what software really is).
To recap: it's really hard to fire a nuclear weapon by accident; it's not that hard to shut off a city's electrical and water supply electronically by accident (in comparison).
It's not just CBC news, but all bit-torrent that's been throttled by all the Large ISPs in Canada for a while now. Funny... BT traffic doesn't appear to be throttled on Telus... Maybe change that to "all the large ISPs in the Metro TO area".
What it took was investors, via the board, hiring a CIO from outside the industry who had a clue. Now the trick is: will he actually be able to change things? He's only the CIO, not the CEO or CFO. It's good PR for EMI, but his views don't necessarily translate into company policy change. PR must love him though -- he can help offset all the negative publicity Legal is sending their way (at least in the short term).
Where I work, we have nobody in the #1 group, but plenty in the other 3. I've found a solution that works really well: all machines have VNC installed and all users know I have full access at the administrator level, VNC level and network traffic level. If my automated audits show that any one of these priveleges of mine vanishes, that person's computer gets a full in-person audit and they are unable to use it for a couple of hours.
This system works quite well to keep group 3 in line -- they know if they mess up, it will result in a full audit of what websites they've been browsing, what software they've installed, and probably other issues will come up as well.
The responsible users operate comfortably knowing that any questionable activity at the network level will be attended to immediately, and they won't be snooped on without good cause... and the "power users" know that they WILL be snooped on, and their computers will be restored to pristine condition if they do anything stupid... at the expense of their "productivity".
Management doesn't tend to like it when these "power users" can't get their job done because I have to audit/rebuild their computer every few days... and management can look at my printed reports showing that the issue was caused by that user browsing an inappropriate site or installing crapware on their computer, and the user's activities are made known to their managers and workmates.
Usually it only takes one or two instances of this happening for this group to fall in line. It probably helps that there's nobody from group #1 here for them to mislead.
No.They are not "valid answers" in a decentralized operation because there is no way you can backup the user's machines.
??? Have you never heard of BackupPC?
Combined with RSync, IPSec or even Hamachi, it allows you to do daily snapshots of ALL computers at ALL locations that are connected to the internet. It is even smart enough to find laptops that have been off the network and back them up as soon as they re-connect. And since the backups are stored on Linux in a compressed, hardlinked archive, you don't have to worry about local users hosing the backups by accident or corrupting them with Windows malware.
Not only that, but there have even been papers published on using unused parts of the IP packets to hide the data... this would work very well with VoIP, and this filtering system doesn't take THAT into account either.
Of course, it's even easier to just stego a message anonymously into Slashdot... I've even seen software for encoding full binary files into a collection of posts on here:) Some of the trolls/out of context posts might have just a bit more meaning than we think....
But you MUST admit, they are STEALING the music. If the law provides for retribution, either change the law as Sweden does and make it legal to pirate, or don't fucking break the law. Seems cut and dry to me. And I am a lawyer.
Hmm... let's parse this...
"But you MUST admit" - Why?
"they are STEALING the music." - If they've stolen it, how come I can still hear it?
"If the law provides for retribution," - Please name a country that provides for retribution in the law... must countries either provide for restitution and correction or punishment, NOT retribution.
"either change the law as Sweden does and make it legal to pirate..." - Bzzt. Sweden neither makes it legal to pirate nor did it "change the law" -- Sweden holds (and has always held) that publishing where something illegal might be found is not in itself illegal. Piracy is illegal in Sweden, and is covered under hijacking and armed robbery laws. Copyright infringement is an offence that is covered under Sweden's copyright laws. Theft is covered under Sweden's theft laws...."don't fucking break the law." - Whoa there... you probably just broke the indecency laws of a number of countries with that statement. You don't care? Why should others care about the laws of foreign states then?
"Seems cut and dry to me." - You need to get out more.
"And I am a lawyer." - I highly doubt that. If you are, please don't post anonymously, so I can make sure not to hire you in the future. I also notice you don't say what kind of lawyer you are or what country/state/province you are allowed to practice in. Trusting the opinion of a divorce attorney from Lithuania on a copyright case in the US is just insane. Plus, in most countries, lawyers have a code by which they do not publish opinions that could be construed as legal advice in public forums unless they feel qualified to defend that advice in a court of law. You can be disbarred for posting as you just did.
In most sane places, taking pictures of each page of a book is perfectly legal... distributing these pages to others is not, except for special exemptions.
Of course, there are fewer and fewer sane places in this world.
Let's say you're going on a business trip into hostile territory and want to be able to access data from HQ... all of your company could set up a darknet and keep all the sensitive data on it -- then when you're accessing it via your soon-to-be competitor's LAN, their sysadmin can's snoop in on the data you're accessing.
Also useful for Tibettan monks blogging about their current activities and trying to get the word out;)
This raises a good question (triggered by "parallelable": if the hardware supports raytracing, is Apple planning to add raytracing support too? How does this mix with OpenGL? I'm assuming that DX11 isn't coming to WINE any time soon.
I think part of what needs to be done is to change the definition of "health care" -- currently the US operates on a system of "symptom suppression" combined with "disaster repair". I think that if a federal body was put in place to provide education and programs that helped individuals and communities care for their own health, combined with penalties for blatant health abuses (mostly at a corporate level where companies make a profit at the expense of their employee's/customer's health), the costs for treating symptoms and major issues would decrease astronomically.
Decent healthcare education, more easily accessible healthy (non-processed) foods (kill the corn, beef and soya subsidies), employer responsibility and a crackdown on misleading advertising would go a long way towards creating a healthier USA.
That is exactly the issue here; the standard X11 clashes with the Aqua WM. Apple X11 can be configured to do FFM, but that really clashes with Aqua's Focus-follows-frontmost-app-window paradigm.
I guess this is a good place to point out that GIMP now supports CMYK. My only issue with GIMP nowadays is that the keybinding-follows-frontmost-window/focus feature really doesn't work well and clashes horrendiously with the OS X interface.
Modern Photoshop isn't a picnic either, but I don't spend time actively fighting against the UI to try to get things done like I do with GIMP. I don't care one bit about learning a different workflow, but it shouldn't involve workarounds to the UI itself.
Slashdot Mirror
I prefer to think that Canada took a look at the steep precipice to the left and scattered for the most accessible alternate route... which unfortunately happened to be to the right for the majority. At least it wasn't an NDP majority.
;)
Also, to the OP: saying the snow is starting to melt in Canada at this time of year is like saying that people are starting to get out their surfboards in the US this time of year... the farmers in Idaho included
As your case points out, I was mentioning an exception to the rule, not a rule. Those suburbs are not the "such cities" my statement referred to.
Of course, I have also noticed a disturbing trend to making access routes vehicle-only in many suburbs, making travel by any other means (walking, biking, skateboarding, rollerblading, etc.) extremely hazardous. It is odd that some of this is still happening while many city planners are re-examining the supposed benefits of the car-centric city.
In all the cities near me, there are yellow diamond signs with a picture of an old brownie camera in black in the middle on all approaches to intersections with cameras.
The biggest solution to decreasing accidents at intersections is actually not to increase the amber light and provide more delay before the cross street's green -- the biggest solution is to decrease the number of light cycles per day. The fewer cycles, the fewer accidents per day, even if the same number of accidents occur per cycle.
The trick is to measure the volume of through traffic on both streets per hour on weekdays and weekends and adjust the light timings accordingly, finding the "sweet spot" between causing congestion due to long waits and causing accidents due to short waits.
The long amber and green light delays are only an aid that can help tweak the system once these other factors are accounted for.
Of course, in many cities, the amber light is referred to by drivers as the "go faster" light -- having a long amber actually promotes speeding through intersections in such cities, and results in more pedestrian injuries and deaths.
I don't take issue with word meaning and grammar changing -- it happens all the time. I take issue with the word meaning NOT changing, but words being used in a cliche that is then misused, to the point where the word itself no longer has any actual meaning in the sentence, other than that someone thought it sounded good.
Another example is "a tough row to hoe" (talking about potato farming) turning into "a tough road to hoe" (which makes no sense). The word "road" has not changed meaning, neither has the word "row" -- but people misuse it in a way that makes the word use and the sentence use cease to have any meaningful contribution to the conversation other than to make the speaker/writer sound more knowledgeable to those who don't know what they are actually trying to say.
For an example of a word that has undergone a myriad of transformations over the years, look at the word "nice". For a simpler example in recent history, there's "gay". For a different kind of transformation where the activity referenced has stayed the same but the connotations have changed, look at the word "jazz".
Surprisingly, the OP referred to irony in a correct fashion. The fact that this is called into question just shows how far popular culture has become out of touch with grammar.
I think you have that backwards:
Either
a) IP addresses are not admissable, so the RIAA's "evidence" has no standing and the case should be dropped without prejudice,
or
b) IP addresses are admissable, so the RIAA's "evidence" has no standing and the case should be dropped WITH prejudice.
Contrary to popular belief, internet service providers don't have common carrier status. Only Voice-over-POTS has common carrier status. If Verizon handles your voice and DSL, they only have common carrier on the voice... and only if they're not using FiOS. VoIP doesn't have common carrier protection either (at the IP level).
The problem is, some people will start throwing away 2 packets instead of 1 so that they can get more "throughput" on more limited hardware. Someone else will compete by tossing 3, and the arms race for data degradation will begin.
Will this method really offset the retransmits it triggers? Only if not everyone does it, unless I'm missing something.
What might work better is scaled drops: if a router and its immediate peers are nearing capacity, they start to drop a packet per cycle, automatically causing the routers at their perimeter to route around the problem, easing up on their traffic.
It still seems like a system where an untrusted party could take advantage to drop packets in this manner from non-preferred sources or to non-preferred destinations however.
Seriously thoughb, sounds like a good plan. Why lease spectrum access though? The companies don't own that or control the infrastructure... the other guys just have to apply for access and be allocated a chunk. I could see mandatory leasing of assigned but unused chunks though; that would get the big boys to at least put SOMETHING on the bandwidth they've reserved.
OK... we ignore DSL/twisted copper/FiOS, we ignore Cable/co-axial...
What, pray tell, are you running your VoIP over? Satellite? Some cellular network that doesn't use Bell or Rogers trunk lines?
Spanking Bell profits Rogers. Spanking Rogers profits Bell. About the only thing you can do is stop using voice and data services altogether to avoid directly or indirectly paying one of those companies.
Or you can move.
Actually, Bell "owns" the (last mile) wires... emphasis on the '"'. The wires were installed by Bell and paid for by Canadian Taxpayers. Bell is forced to lease them because they don't really belong to Bell in the first place. They just happen to be the government subsidized company that was hired to install and manage the infrastructure. Now they want to act like a private company without giving up their government-given priveleges.
It should make you more afraid because each nuclear warhead is tracked, guarded, and needs special permissions prior to firing. It's really hard to do all of that to knowledge (what software really is).
To recap: it's really hard to fire a nuclear weapon by accident; it's not that hard to shut off a city's electrical and water supply electronically by accident (in comparison).
What it took was investors, via the board, hiring a CIO from outside the industry who had a clue. Now the trick is: will he actually be able to change things? He's only the CIO, not the CEO or CFO. It's good PR for EMI, but his views don't necessarily translate into company policy change. PR must love him though -- he can help offset all the negative publicity Legal is sending their way (at least in the short term).
This is an extremely good list.
Where I work, we have nobody in the #1 group, but plenty in the other 3. I've found a solution that works really well: all machines have VNC installed and all users know I have full access at the administrator level, VNC level and network traffic level. If my automated audits show that any one of these priveleges of mine vanishes, that person's computer gets a full in-person audit and they are unable to use it for a couple of hours.
This system works quite well to keep group 3 in line -- they know if they mess up, it will result in a full audit of what websites they've been browsing, what software they've installed, and probably other issues will come up as well.
The responsible users operate comfortably knowing that any questionable activity at the network level will be attended to immediately, and they won't be snooped on without good cause... and the "power users" know that they WILL be snooped on, and their computers will be restored to pristine condition if they do anything stupid... at the expense of their "productivity".
Management doesn't tend to like it when these "power users" can't get their job done because I have to audit/rebuild their computer every few days... and management can look at my printed reports showing that the issue was caused by that user browsing an inappropriate site or installing crapware on their computer, and the user's activities are made known to their managers and workmates.
Usually it only takes one or two instances of this happening for this group to fall in line. It probably helps that there's nobody from group #1 here for them to mislead.
???
Have you never heard of BackupPC?
Combined with RSync, IPSec or even Hamachi, it allows you to do daily snapshots of ALL computers at ALL locations that are connected to the internet. It is even smart enough to find laptops that have been off the network and back them up as soon as they re-connect. And since the backups are stored on Linux in a compressed, hardlinked archive, you don't have to worry about local users hosing the backups by accident or corrupting them with Windows malware.
Not only that, but there have even been papers published on using unused parts of the IP packets to hide the data... this would work very well with VoIP, and this filtering system doesn't take THAT into account either.
:) Some of the trolls/out of context posts might have just a bit more meaning than we think....
Of course, it's even easier to just stego a message anonymously into Slashdot... I've even seen software for encoding full binary files into a collection of posts on here
Hmm... let's parse this...
"But you MUST admit" - Why?
"they are STEALING the music." - If they've stolen it, how come I can still hear it?
"If the law provides for retribution," - Please name a country that provides for retribution in the law... must countries either provide for restitution and correction or punishment, NOT retribution.
"either change the law as Sweden does and make it legal to pirate..." - Bzzt. Sweden neither makes it legal to pirate nor did it "change the law" -- Sweden holds (and has always held) that publishing where something illegal might be found is not in itself illegal. Piracy is illegal in Sweden, and is covered under hijacking and armed robbery laws. Copyright infringement is an offence that is covered under Sweden's copyright laws. Theft is covered under Sweden's theft laws.
"Seems cut and dry to me." - You need to get out more.
"And I am a lawyer." - I highly doubt that. If you are, please don't post anonymously, so I can make sure not to hire you in the future. I also notice you don't say what kind of lawyer you are or what country/state/province you are allowed to practice in. Trusting the opinion of a divorce attorney from Lithuania on a copyright case in the US is just insane. Plus, in most countries, lawyers have a code by which they do not publish opinions that could be construed as legal advice in public forums unless they feel qualified to defend that advice in a court of law. You can be disbarred for posting as you just did.
In most sane places, taking pictures of each page of a book is perfectly legal... distributing these pages to others is not, except for special exemptions.
Of course, there are fewer and fewer sane places in this world.
Let's say you're going on a business trip into hostile territory and want to be able to access data from HQ... all of your company could set up a darknet and keep all the sensitive data on it -- then when you're accessing it via your soon-to-be competitor's LAN, their sysadmin can's snoop in on the data you're accessing.
;)
Also useful for Tibettan monks blogging about their current activities and trying to get the word out
This raises a good question (triggered by "parallelable": if the hardware supports raytracing, is Apple planning to add raytracing support too? How does this mix with OpenGL? I'm assuming that DX11 isn't coming to WINE any time soon.
I think part of what needs to be done is to change the definition of "health care" -- currently the US operates on a system of "symptom suppression" combined with "disaster repair". I think that if a federal body was put in place to provide education and programs that helped individuals and communities care for their own health, combined with penalties for blatant health abuses (mostly at a corporate level where companies make a profit at the expense of their employee's/customer's health), the costs for treating symptoms and major issues would decrease astronomically.
Decent healthcare education, more easily accessible healthy (non-processed) foods (kill the corn, beef and soya subsidies), employer responsibility and a crackdown on misleading advertising would go a long way towards creating a healthier USA.
That is exactly the issue here; the standard X11 clashes with the Aqua WM. Apple X11 can be configured to do FFM, but that really clashes with Aqua's Focus-follows-frontmost-app-window paradigm.
I guess I should have elaborated... it supports it by plugin:
http://cue.yellowmagic.info/softwares/separate.html
It also has CMYK palettes that get converted to RGB.
FWIW, I consider the plugin method to be the best way to handle CMYK in any case -- CMYK should be displayed on separate layers.
I guess this is a good place to point out that GIMP now supports CMYK. My only issue with GIMP nowadays is that the keybinding-follows-frontmost-window/focus feature really doesn't work well and clashes horrendiously with the OS X interface.
Modern Photoshop isn't a picnic either, but I don't spend time actively fighting against the UI to try to get things done like I do with GIMP. I don't care one bit about learning a different workflow, but it shouldn't involve workarounds to the UI itself.