Pirivacy. Those who practice it will be Silicon Pirites:D
I can see CMA and ESAC being behind this, but the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association is food for thought... if they're behind it, that means we're talking about legal spyware on smartphones. Bundled by the carriers. Sound familiar? Unless you don't use a smartphone, these groups just did an end-run around your privacy with this proposal.
Basically, the groups advocating this, if they were allowed to implement it, would have you coming and going; there'd be almost no way to use electronics in Canada without the worry that spyware was either bundled in, or a conduit was in place to load it without your knowledge.
First rule about the internet: it's all open; the only question is as to how open.
If that were true, it would make the internet unusable. Fortunately, it's bollocks. Do you really think that there would be any e-commerce if the internet was essentially open? Would you give your credit card details to Amazon or whoever if there was an expectation that they would be available to the whole world?
Same with personal pictures.
cayenne8 covered most of the issues with your response; I'll build on what he said.
Having a deep background in e-commerce and credit processing that is completely separate from any knowledge I have of network design, plus having implemented online processing gateways back in the early days of the Internet, I can assure you that it's not bollocks. Payment processing is designed on the premise that the information WILL become freely available. It has checks and balances in place to mitigate this, but payment processing at its heart is about gambling that you will take in significantly more than you will be defrauded of, purely via human nature and volume of transactions. This is why Visa, Mastercard etc. changed the liability model a decade or so ago so that the merchants become liable instead of the credit companies, merchant banks or processors.
Having also worked retail, I can assure you that MANY people have all your payment details. The systems in place track purchasing trends and habits and will lock your card down if something unusual occurs; this is why you are supposed to let your credit card company know if you're going travelling (although they usually already know if you use your card to purchase pre-travel items).
This doesn't mean that some information isn't more difficult to access than other information, but I have no doubt that the credit card I currently use on Amazon, plus all the information associated with it, will be around on the internet long after I'm dead, assuming it doesn't atrophy. Of course, after my current card expires, this information will be essentially useless. So the trick the payments industry uses is to try to obscure the information as much as possible until it is no longer useful.
It is actually true that e-commerce on the Internet would be unusable if the Internet were NOT open. If some information was de-facto unable to travel through the network due to access restrictions at the gateway or at the peer (remember network neutrality?), you would never be able to even register on Amazon's web-site, let alone use one-click purchasing (which implies that some server farm somewhere has full access to your purchasing credentials and does not actually need anything from you to make purchases in your name).
The internet is open. The only thing protecting "private" information you send over the internet is a shared secret (usually SSL/TLS encryption on the wire, and hopefully some sort of AES encryption at the database). That shared secret can be guessed, brute forced, or avoided (by attacking the point where the TLS stream is decoded and the data is processed prior to encryption in the DB). Privacy is a mirage; it is really only a set of many gentlemen's agreements, and you have to trust everyone involved.
A simple way of explaining this: Most people think of Internet transactions (Amazon purchase, sending an email, downloading a file) as a 1:1 transaction, sort of like two tin cans and a string: you send a request down the transmission medium, and the guy at the other end sends back a response. In reality, it's more like the whispering game you played as a kid where you pass a message around a circle and it comes back to you completely changed. Redundancy checks and obfuscation are used (yes, at its core, encryption is just a complex form of obfuscation) to verify the content so that it doesn't degrade, but everyone along the line has access to the information in some manner, and also has the ability to modify the information, or draw conclus
They might pay full tuition for the facilities and salaries, but theoretically our colleges have unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with students (that's the reason to attend an elite university). If they weren't why would everybody want to attend from around the world? If an education was as good in India as the United States why spend so much on a US University just to return? We're presumably teaching foreigners our competitive insights and then failing to profit from their applications.
I agree, I think we should keep successful students around and have them employ Americans to help develop their new ideas. But I would argue that they are getting a bargain even paying full tuition.
The US has unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with students in the same way that Facebook has unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with members -- the capital is the people themselves -- just as much the students as the professors and graduate students. Everyone goes to the US for this education because it is where everyone goes; this is due to the US, in the past, not having the same limitations on who could come as established European schools did. Limiting who can attend promotes intellectual stagnation.
Also, sharing information with other countries *should* just raise the bar -- unless the performance of local students is really degrading based on the same education that is being exported (along with culture and the demand for cultural artifacts) under the current system.
Wow... that brought back memories. It got especially bad when the Gandalfs got overloaded limiting usability of the satellite vt102s -- everyone had to go to the main labs, which, as you said, were camped by the international students. I think I can count on my fingers the number of times I got to use a terminal in one of the main labs; usually I connected via 300/1200baud dialup (yeah! we actually had a small pool of 1200! cutting edge stuff!). I still remember the class that required submitted printouts be from the lab printers - I actually did one of those assignments by hand (including running the fsm simulations) while standing/sitting in line waiting to get access to a terminal. Got to a terminal, entered everything, printed. After that, I just worked remotely and sent my print job to the labs printer pool to be released, bypassing the local terminals.
Anyway, I presume the international students, not having off-campus access, were in an even tougher situation -- hence the camping and the closed-off feeling. Maybe if they didn't feel so threatened/pressured, it wouldn't have been an issue.
No, delusional. "Overqualified" is usually a bad quality to have in an employee. It means they're not fully using their abilities, will be bored at the job, and will ultimately leave as soon as better prospects present themselves.
Specifically and deliberately staffing your company with overqualified employees is a recipe for poor performance and high turnover. Anyone who thinks that's a good idea is delusional.
...except that in some employment markets, having people who work the positions for more than a couple of years becomes an added expense that outweighs the extra skill set the person has; so in these markets, employers prefer to have high turnover, or if they're allowed, part-time workers who don't get benefits etc.
The same job that a highschool drop-out can do (and is likely overqualified for) can be done by an overqualified person with a master's degree... with the bonus that the person with the master's degree is likely to want a good reference when they eventually leave, and won't be lighting the cooking oil on fire for kicks.
Really: some jobs ALWAYS induce poor performance and high turnover; there just aren't many people motivated to excel in those areas compared to the number of positions available.
"To discuss operating system security is to marvel at the diversity of deployed access-control models: Unix and Windows NT multiuser security.. This diversity is the result of a stunning transition from the narrow 1990s Unix and NT status quo to security localization"
To mention Unix and Windows NT security in the one sentence, just begs credulity...
"Windows NT and its successors.. were not initially designed with Internet security in mind"
I think you're confusing Windows NT the operating system (NT3, NT4, 2000, XP, etc.) with NT the kernel and security model, which was designed to be POSIX compliant, which implies lining up with "unix multi-user security" and is also done in such a way as to be tweakable to mimic many of the SELinux advancements. The OS I could do without; the security model as originally baked in (and then ignored in preference of interoperability with DOS/9x -- but it's still there) is actually pretty network-savvy. It's not the architecture team's fault that the OS team dumped a sieve on top of their nicely designed core and taped over some of the main security features on which the architecture hinges.
Not meant to sound like an apologist; it's just that I'm really impressed with a lot of the work that early team did. They did it well enough that you can, even now, modify the commercial OSes that Microsoft releases to run in a manner that reflects the original network-savvy security architecture, without resorting to Active Directory etc. Of course, a lot of "Made for Windows" software won't run on it in that configuration, but we've learned to expect that with every MS OS after XP anyway.
Second, your suggestion that possessing nude photos of one's self voids one's expectation of privacy is sexist and objectionable.
He's not suggesting that; he's suggesting that uploading nude photos of yourself to a third party whose explicit raison d'etre is to share information with others voids one's expectation of privacy. Nothing sexist about it (although I'm sure some could object).
Once something is "posted to the internet" (read, once some data leaves your servers to travel to some unknown location), expectation of privacy drops (or *should drop*) significantly When the only thing protecting your private information from being accessible to 76% of the known world is a password and a corporation's pledge not to make that information accessible to people you don't provide access to, the expectation should be that at some point, that data will leak and become available to someone who you don't want to have it -- possibly millions of someones.
This is basic statistics, and has nothing to do with morality, "shadiness" of said corporation, or anything else. When you have that many assets each with their own access controls, at some point the access control mechanism will fail to protect some of the data in the retrospectively appropriate manner. In the current story, we don't find out how many women he failed to trick with this method; we only get the statistically significant portion of his targets that he DID trick. He obviously tricked people who for some reason thought it made sense to provide more material to someone who was threatening them with exposing existing material.
It's really the misuse of private data that's at issue here -- there are cases every day where someone gains access to nude photos of "friends" on facebook that don't have the proper privacy settings, and threaten to share those with specific people the victim wouldn't want to see them (parents/friends/siblings/etc.). None of this depends on a person's sex. It depends on social mores and local culture, which this perp was taking advantage of for personal "gain".
First rule about the internet: it's all open; the only question is as to how open. If you connect your home network to it, your home network becomes a part of it. Second rule about the internet: if it isn't stored solely on your servers, you've lost control of the information. You now share that control with whoever else has it stored. Those rules might not be "nice", and you might object to them, taking advantage of them in certain ways may be illegal where you live, but it doesn't change that that's how the internet works.
Actually, this gave me an idea: why not back up your files steganographically in torrent files? Yes, the torrent files themselves -- let the trackers be your backup. It'd require a huge number of torrents for large files, but for anything small that you want to last a long time and be accessible anywhere, this could work quite well. Magnet files would probably work too.
...It also would serve as a major impediment to foreign investment in the Antiguan economy, particularly in high-tech industries,” the U.S. added. Antigua doesn’t appear to be impressed much by these threats and is continuing with its plan.
LOL? Who gives a rat's ass for high-tech in Antigua? I suspect life there is about tourism, boobs and booze!
High-tech to Antigua is like McAfee or Kim Dotcom parking his yacht there!
Actually, considering the percentage of workers in Antigua who supported the online gambling sites before the US blockade, I'd say that High-Tech, at least inasmuch as it pertains to running the world's largest gambling websites, is highly important to Antigua. Of course, right now they've already been prevented by the US from profiting from High-Tech, so the threat's a bit hollow.
Actually no, they can't. Because of the Helms/Burton act any company that trades with Cuba cannot trade with the Untied States. Any Mexican or Canadian company which sells to Cuba is prohibited access to the US market. Which market are they going to go after, do you think?
This is why Delaware does such brisk business... Canadian and Mexican companies trade with Cuba all the time... and their sister companies trade with the US. NAFTA and Helms/Burton keep the actual *goods* from going to the US from Cuba (legally), but the same people trade with both countries all the time via shell corporations set up precisely because of the US embargo.
It's almost like the US lost the paperwork that explained this whole situation, and has since found it more profitable to keep the embargo going (not to mention politically beneficial for those who want the Florida vote).
Ultimately, the answer will probably involve a mini guest OS isolated by something like KVM where each applet gets it's own VM and any changes on the client side roll back when the applet exits.
Well, this would at least have the effect of hardening KVM over time as flaws were found allowing similar attacks via message passing routines. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, although it would make life more painful for those of us who already use KVM in relative obscurity.
The APC Scissors will have superior specs and and be priced above the APC Paper's cost of $99, although it will also be inferior to and priced below Rock's cost of $79.
How is this possible? The answer is that they'll push it out at $119 dollars and then have to cut the price to $49 due to the Rock crushing it in sales.
So a shirt that you essentially can't wash? You get charcoal or some other dust and you're out of luck!
Charcoal acts as a fluid (yay carbon!) so that shouldn't be an issue. If you only coat the outside, you should still be able to clean the fabric from the inside.
Any place we currently use a lubricant would find this useful, as coating the parts in this prior to lubrication *should* decrease wear through a decrease in friction. Theoretically, this surface should also wear extremely well provided it's always coated in a lubricant.
Two layers of this with an oil layer in between would be a performance and durability boost for most things that have moving parts.
Now we just need to decrease production cost/increase production and discover how it stands up to *other* forces (such as radiation [heat, light, etc], corrosion, and motion) and what effects it has on its environment (carcinogenic etc).
Can I place copyright infringements with Verizon to get people blocked? We all know that the MPAA and RIAA use their internet connections for infringement, so it should be no problem for us to throttle their access.
Somehow I bet that only a select anointed few will be allowed to make these evidence-free complaints against the rest of us.
This is for Verizon's home plans; I doubt the MPAA and RIAA use those plans, except for snooping on torrents (which may get them throttled unless Verizon has those IPs flagged as "investigatory")..
Whoever did the reasearch for this needs to take this course: https://www.coursera.org/course/foe - "Fundamentals of Online Education: Planning and Application"
furthermore, it is patently absurd to expect to find a single, simple chemical cause for the myriad complex and varied set of behaviors which fall under the umbrella of "violent crime".
it's the kind of childishly simplistic worldview that i'd expect of a libertarian, not Mother Jones.
...but then again, this is the same sort of rhetoric levied against the Australian pair who discovered that ulcers were caused by gut bacteria. Yet they proved to be (mostly) correct.
Sometimes a simple answer is true, even though it's rejected by common wisdom as being "too simple" and "unproven". Of course, something this complex is going to have MANY causes and factors, but this does seem to call for a test of brawl-happy rodents drinking from leaded water containers.
Slashdot Mirror
This will spawn an entirely new term:
Pirivacy. Those who practice it will be Silicon Pirites :D
I can see CMA and ESAC being behind this, but the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association is food for thought... if they're behind it, that means we're talking about legal spyware on smartphones. Bundled by the carriers. Sound familiar? Unless you don't use a smartphone, these groups just did an end-run around your privacy with this proposal.
Basically, the groups advocating this, if they were allowed to implement it, would have you coming and going; there'd be almost no way to use electronics in Canada without the worry that spyware was either bundled in, or a conduit was in place to load it without your knowledge.
First rule about the internet: it's all open; the only question is as to how open.
If that were true, it would make the internet unusable. Fortunately, it's bollocks. Do you really think that there would be any e-commerce if the internet was essentially open? Would you give your credit card details to Amazon or whoever if there was an expectation that they would be available to the whole world?
Same with personal pictures.
cayenne8 covered most of the issues with your response; I'll build on what he said.
Having a deep background in e-commerce and credit processing that is completely separate from any knowledge I have of network design, plus having implemented online processing gateways back in the early days of the Internet, I can assure you that it's not bollocks. Payment processing is designed on the premise that the information WILL become freely available. It has checks and balances in place to mitigate this, but payment processing at its heart is about gambling that you will take in significantly more than you will be defrauded of, purely via human nature and volume of transactions. This is why Visa, Mastercard etc. changed the liability model a decade or so ago so that the merchants become liable instead of the credit companies, merchant banks or processors.
Having also worked retail, I can assure you that MANY people have all your payment details. The systems in place track purchasing trends and habits and will lock your card down if something unusual occurs; this is why you are supposed to let your credit card company know if you're going travelling (although they usually already know if you use your card to purchase pre-travel items).
This doesn't mean that some information isn't more difficult to access than other information, but I have no doubt that the credit card I currently use on Amazon, plus all the information associated with it, will be around on the internet long after I'm dead, assuming it doesn't atrophy. Of course, after my current card expires, this information will be essentially useless. So the trick the payments industry uses is to try to obscure the information as much as possible until it is no longer useful.
It is actually true that e-commerce on the Internet would be unusable if the Internet were NOT open. If some information was de-facto unable to travel through the network due to access restrictions at the gateway or at the peer (remember network neutrality?), you would never be able to even register on Amazon's web-site, let alone use one-click purchasing (which implies that some server farm somewhere has full access to your purchasing credentials and does not actually need anything from you to make purchases in your name).
The internet is open. The only thing protecting "private" information you send over the internet is a shared secret (usually SSL/TLS encryption on the wire, and hopefully some sort of AES encryption at the database). That shared secret can be guessed, brute forced, or avoided (by attacking the point where the TLS stream is decoded and the data is processed prior to encryption in the DB). Privacy is a mirage; it is really only a set of many gentlemen's agreements, and you have to trust everyone involved.
A simple way of explaining this: Most people think of Internet transactions (Amazon purchase, sending an email, downloading a file) as a 1:1 transaction, sort of like two tin cans and a string: you send a request down the transmission medium, and the guy at the other end sends back a response. In reality, it's more like the whispering game you played as a kid where you pass a message around a circle and it comes back to you completely changed. Redundancy checks and obfuscation are used (yes, at its core, encryption is just a complex form of obfuscation) to verify the content so that it doesn't degrade, but everyone along the line has access to the information in some manner, and also has the ability to modify the information, or draw conclus
I see you were under the delusion that "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters" were referencing the intersection as opposed to the union.
...and what's wrong with a donkey enjoying your good mood?
They might pay full tuition for the facilities and salaries, but theoretically our colleges have unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with students (that's the reason to attend an elite university). If they weren't why would everybody want to attend from around the world? If an education was as good in India as the United States why spend so much on a US University just to return? We're presumably teaching foreigners our competitive insights and then failing to profit from their applications.
I agree, I think we should keep successful students around and have them employ Americans to help develop their new ideas. But I would argue that they are getting a bargain even paying full tuition.
The US has unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with students in the same way that Facebook has unique and valuable intellectual capital that is being shared with members -- the capital is the people themselves -- just as much the students as the professors and graduate students. Everyone goes to the US for this education because it is where everyone goes; this is due to the US, in the past, not having the same limitations on who could come as established European schools did. Limiting who can attend promotes intellectual stagnation.
Also, sharing information with other countries *should* just raise the bar -- unless the performance of local students is really degrading based on the same education that is being exported (along with culture and the demand for cultural artifacts) under the current system.
Wow... that brought back memories. It got especially bad when the Gandalfs got overloaded limiting usability of the satellite vt102s -- everyone had to go to the main labs, which, as you said, were camped by the international students. I think I can count on my fingers the number of times I got to use a terminal in one of the main labs; usually I connected via 300/1200baud dialup (yeah! we actually had a small pool of 1200! cutting edge stuff!). I still remember the class that required submitted printouts be from the lab printers - I actually did one of those assignments by hand (including running the fsm simulations) while standing/sitting in line waiting to get access to a terminal. Got to a terminal, entered everything, printed. After that, I just worked remotely and sent my print job to the labs printer pool to be released, bypassing the local terminals.
Anyway, I presume the international students, not having off-campus access, were in an even tougher situation -- hence the camping and the closed-off feeling. Maybe if they didn't feel so threatened/pressured, it wouldn't have been an issue.
No, delusional. "Overqualified" is usually a bad quality to have in an employee. It means they're not fully using their abilities, will be bored at the job, and will ultimately leave as soon as better prospects present themselves.
Specifically and deliberately staffing your company with overqualified employees is a recipe for poor performance and high turnover. Anyone who thinks that's a good idea is delusional.
...except that in some employment markets, having people who work the positions for more than a couple of years becomes an added expense that outweighs the extra skill set the person has; so in these markets, employers prefer to have high turnover, or if they're allowed, part-time workers who don't get benefits etc.
The same job that a highschool drop-out can do (and is likely overqualified for) can be done by an overqualified person with a master's degree... with the bonus that the person with the master's degree is likely to want a good reference when they eventually leave, and won't be lighting the cooking oil on fire for kicks.
Really: some jobs ALWAYS induce poor performance and high turnover; there just aren't many people motivated to excel in those areas compared to the number of positions available.
"To discuss operating system security is to marvel at the diversity of deployed access-control models: Unix and Windows NT multiuser security .. This diversity is the result of a stunning transition from the narrow 1990s Unix and NT status quo to security localization"
To mention Unix and Windows NT security in the one sentence, just begs credulity ...
"Windows NT and its successors .. were not initially designed with Internet security in mind"
I think you're confusing Windows NT the operating system (NT3, NT4, 2000, XP, etc.) with NT the kernel and security model, which was designed to be POSIX compliant, which implies lining up with "unix multi-user security" and is also done in such a way as to be tweakable to mimic many of the SELinux advancements. The OS I could do without; the security model as originally baked in (and then ignored in preference of interoperability with DOS/9x -- but it's still there) is actually pretty network-savvy. It's not the architecture team's fault that the OS team dumped a sieve on top of their nicely designed core and taped over some of the main security features on which the architecture hinges.
Not meant to sound like an apologist; it's just that I'm really impressed with a lot of the work that early team did. They did it well enough that you can, even now, modify the commercial OSes that Microsoft releases to run in a manner that reflects the original network-savvy security architecture, without resorting to Active Directory etc. Of course, a lot of "Made for Windows" software won't run on it in that configuration, but we've learned to expect that with every MS OS after XP anyway.
Second, your suggestion that possessing nude photos of one's self voids one's expectation of privacy is sexist and objectionable.
He's not suggesting that; he's suggesting that uploading nude photos of yourself to a third party whose explicit raison d'etre is to share information with others voids one's expectation of privacy. Nothing sexist about it (although I'm sure some could object).
Once something is "posted to the internet" (read, once some data leaves your servers to travel to some unknown location), expectation of privacy drops (or *should drop*) significantly When the only thing protecting your private information from being accessible to 76% of the known world is a password and a corporation's pledge not to make that information accessible to people you don't provide access to, the expectation should be that at some point, that data will leak and become available to someone who you don't want to have it -- possibly millions of someones.
This is basic statistics, and has nothing to do with morality, "shadiness" of said corporation, or anything else. When you have that many assets each with their own access controls, at some point the access control mechanism will fail to protect some of the data in the retrospectively appropriate manner. In the current story, we don't find out how many women he failed to trick with this method; we only get the statistically significant portion of his targets that he DID trick. He obviously tricked people who for some reason thought it made sense to provide more material to someone who was threatening them with exposing existing material.
It's really the misuse of private data that's at issue here -- there are cases every day where someone gains access to nude photos of "friends" on facebook that don't have the proper privacy settings, and threaten to share those with specific people the victim wouldn't want to see them (parents/friends/siblings/etc.). None of this depends on a person's sex. It depends on social mores and local culture, which this perp was taking advantage of for personal "gain".
First rule about the internet: it's all open; the only question is as to how open. If you connect your home network to it, your home network becomes a part of it.
Second rule about the internet: if it isn't stored solely on your servers, you've lost control of the information. You now share that control with whoever else has it stored.
Those rules might not be "nice", and you might object to them, taking advantage of them in certain ways may be illegal where you live, but it doesn't change that that's how the internet works.
Actually, this gave me an idea: why not back up your files steganographically in torrent files? Yes, the torrent files themselves -- let the trackers be your backup. It'd require a huge number of torrents for large files, but for anything small that you want to last a long time and be accessible anywhere, this could work quite well. Magnet files would probably work too.
Antigua doesn’t appear to be impressed much by these threats and is continuing with its plan.
LOL? Who gives a rat's ass for high-tech in Antigua? I suspect life there is about tourism, boobs and booze!
High-tech to Antigua is like McAfee or Kim Dotcom parking his yacht there!
Actually, considering the percentage of workers in Antigua who supported the online gambling sites before the US blockade, I'd say that High-Tech, at least inasmuch as it pertains to running the world's largest gambling websites, is highly important to Antigua. Of course, right now they've already been prevented by the US from profiting from High-Tech, so the threat's a bit hollow.
Actually no, they can't. Because of the Helms/Burton act any company that trades with Cuba cannot trade with the Untied States. Any Mexican or Canadian company which sells to Cuba is prohibited access to the US market. Which market are they going to go after, do you think?
This is why Delaware does such brisk business... Canadian and Mexican companies trade with Cuba all the time... and their sister companies trade with the US. NAFTA and Helms/Burton keep the actual *goods* from going to the US from Cuba (legally), but the same people trade with both countries all the time via shell corporations set up precisely because of the US embargo.
It's almost like the US lost the paperwork that explained this whole situation, and has since found it more profitable to keep the embargo going (not to mention politically beneficial for those who want the Florida vote).
Double whoosh
I hope that was the rock and scissors; leaving X0563511 to be plastered by the paper.
Ultimately, the answer will probably involve a mini guest OS isolated by something like KVM where each applet gets it's own VM and any changes on the client side roll back when the applet exits.
Well, this would at least have the effect of hardening KVM over time as flaws were found allowing similar attacks via message passing routines. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, although it would make life more painful for those of us who already use KVM in relative obscurity.
To be fair, coding your way out of a paper bag sounds pretty difficult.
Unless you have a robot with poking capabilities inside the bag with you, of course.
You just have to press hard when writing the 1's. After enough iterations, you'll be out.
The APC Scissors will have superior specs and and be priced above the APC Paper's cost of $99, although it will also be inferior to and priced below Rock's cost of $79.
How is this possible? The answer is that they'll push it out at $119 dollars and then have to cut the price to $49 due to the Rock crushing it in sales.
I think that about wraps it up.
So a shirt that you essentially can't wash? You get charcoal or some other dust and you're out of luck!
Charcoal acts as a fluid (yay carbon!) so that shouldn't be an issue. If you only coat the outside, you should still be able to clean the fabric from the inside.
Or, just dry-clean ;)
Any place we currently use a lubricant would find this useful, as coating the parts in this prior to lubrication *should* decrease wear through a decrease in friction. Theoretically, this surface should also wear extremely well provided it's always coated in a lubricant.
Two layers of this with an oil layer in between would be a performance and durability boost for most things that have moving parts.
Now we just need to decrease production cost/increase production and discover how it stands up to *other* forces (such as radiation [heat, light, etc], corrosion, and motion) and what effects it has on its environment (carcinogenic etc).
Napolean already gave Fourier the patent on that.
But this version is transformative! And Faster!
Can I place copyright infringements with Verizon to get people blocked? We all know that the MPAA and RIAA use their internet connections for infringement, so it should be no problem for us to throttle their access.
Somehow I bet that only a select anointed few will be allowed to make these evidence-free complaints against the rest of us.
This is for Verizon's home plans; I doubt the MPAA and RIAA use those plans, except for snooping on torrents (which may get them throttled unless Verizon has those IPs flagged as "investigatory")..
Whoever did the reasearch for this needs to take this course:
https://www.coursera.org/course/foe - "Fundamentals of Online Education: Planning and Application"
tomorrow? I'm pretty sure I read it on slashdot today.
Don't worry; it'll be on the main page tomorrow as well.
Does this answer those questions at all?
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Huawei-ZTE%20Investigative%20Report%20(FINAL).pdf
(Dated October 8, 2012)
all of this, yes.
furthermore, it is patently absurd to expect to find a single, simple chemical cause for the myriad complex and varied set of behaviors which fall under the umbrella of "violent crime".
it's the kind of childishly simplistic worldview that i'd expect of a libertarian, not Mother Jones.
...but then again, this is the same sort of rhetoric levied against the Australian pair who discovered that ulcers were caused by gut bacteria. Yet they proved to be (mostly) correct.
Sometimes a simple answer is true, even though it's rejected by common wisdom as being "too simple" and "unproven". Of course, something this complex is going to have MANY causes and factors, but this does seem to call for a test of brawl-happy rodents drinking from leaded water containers.
False Lead
Also known as Plumbum Pirates....