To pay for your Google Adsense, you use Paypal - so eBay get a slice of Google's action. Taking Paypal out of the Adsense picture will automatically raise
Google's profit.
Can students from UK (or to generalize - non-USA) universities participate? Would you still pay the equivalent amount in their home currency?
Thanks
Simon
On one hand, the article claims that "With such information, sophisticated intruders would potentially be able to compromise security on router computers of Cisco customers running the affected programs" and on the other hand that Cisco itself claims that "the improper publication of this information does not create increased risk to customers' networks".
These statements are, IMHO, in direct contradiction of each other. Who the hell should we believe?
Nor original. Someone usually tries this, or some variant, every once in a while. Usually, it's some second-rate, embittered author sending off a novel by Dickens and getting it rejected - then announcing all publishers are crap.
I would be more worried if it was an ACM or IEEE conference they had been accepted to.
Citeseer (www.citeseer.com) is fairly similar, providing keyword search on scientific articles. It also caches copies of papers for easy (!) access. Its disadvantages are: (i) you have to submit references manually by providing citeseer with URLs, (ii) it sometimes generates garbage titles of papers (don't know why) and (iii) after you've submitted a URL, it takes forever for citeseer to index them.
Slashdot Mirror
To pay for your Google Adsense, you use Paypal - so eBay get a slice of Google's action. Taking Paypal out of the Adsense picture will automatically raise Google's profit.
Not in the England I'm from.
Can students from UK (or to generalize - non-USA) universities participate? Would you still pay the equivalent amount in their home currency? Thanks Simon
On one hand, the article claims that "With such information, sophisticated intruders would potentially be able to compromise security on router computers of Cisco customers running the affected programs" and on the other hand that Cisco itself claims that "the improper publication of this information does not create increased risk to customers' networks". These statements are, IMHO, in direct contradiction of each other. Who the hell should we believe?
Nor original. Someone usually tries this, or some variant, every once in a while. Usually, it's some second-rate, embittered author sending off a novel by Dickens and getting it rejected - then announcing all publishers are crap. I would be more worried if it was an ACM or IEEE conference they had been accepted to.
Haven't we had this exact discussion before? Just a few months ago, I believe. Is this another example of Slashdot's self-referential nature??
Citeseer (www.citeseer.com) is fairly similar, providing keyword search on scientific articles. It also caches copies of papers for easy (!) access. Its disadvantages are: (i) you have to submit references manually by providing citeseer with URLs, (ii) it sometimes generates garbage titles of papers (don't know why) and (iii) after you've submitted a URL, it takes forever for citeseer to index them.