Recent model BMWs have been hacked wireless from 30 ft away. That is enough for the thief to hide the device used for the hack near a spot where the owner would normally park the car. They would sniff/block the central locking, so they would be able to gain access to the inside of the car. They would then trigger a buffer overflow by removing and replacing certain fuses in a certain sequence and that would gain them access to the key secrets stored inside the car's computer. They would use a device to have the car's own transponder clone one of those IDs into a blank key and as a result, they would drive away with the car, with a functioning key and no damage to it whatsoever.
I'm fairly certain that with bigger antennas and a more powerful transmitter, you would be able to do this trick at 300 feet, but I doubt that'd make a difference. By the way, the hacker doesn't have to hide under the dashboard, they have access to the CAN bus on the outside of the car too. All light units and the plug for the trailer hitch are connected to this bus. Wires for the bus are usually exposed on the underside of the car, or easily accessible with the removal of a panel only held on by a few screws. Even if one of those notoriously leaky programmed BT enabled center consoles wouldn't be pwnable, physical access would be 2 minutes and a philips screwdriver away.
No, it's not universal for all brands yet, but current developments and product announcements indicate that it won't be long before that *will* happen, unless the car industry starts asking security professionals how to deal with this instead of reinventing the wheel themselves.
This is bad for car manufacturers. Why? Because they have to warrant that cars live a long time and will be emissions compliant too. If people can hack around in these systems, all sorts of things can happen that will make them unable to do this. I'm all for having the systems open and being able to tinker with them myself, but from a manufacturer standpoint, this is bad.
Cars come with different wheel/tire size combinations. In the past, getting another circumference wheel on your car meant that your odometer/speedo was off and you had to fiddle with magnetic fields or gear boxes in the cable to correct that. Because you want a different size/width tire for winter tires (narrower, higher side) than for summer (wide tire, low profile) you will eventually have to deal with this somehow if you want optimal grip during both summer and winter. Car manufacturers chose to deal with this by making the tire size programmable, so there would be an electronic correction for this.
No, forward facing eyes are not to recognise snakes. Prey species, especially the ones that are "snake bite size" tend to have eyes on the sides of their heads, so they have a bigger peripheral to detect predators. Forward facing eyes are only seen in predators and omnivores that rely on eyesight to capture their prey.
Snakes are just one form of predator or danger to humans or mammals in general. Humans, as most mammals, are very inaccurate at detecting snakes, unless they move. They are not more accurate at detecting snakes than they are at detecting any other animal, providing the level of camouflage of that animal is similar to that of the snakes. Singling out snakes to come up with a bunch of generic treats that we and other mammals have as the cause of these is bullcrap and there is no way to prove any of it. Maybe this is the sort of research a recently converted creationist or someone with a snake phobia would come up with. Snakes are nothing more than lizards that evolved to have no legs and the development of mammals saw many more forms and shapes of predators and dangers throughout their evolution that required exactly the same sort of adaptation. I challenge the writers of this paper to do a double blind test and evolve mammals again, both with and without snakes in their world and see what differences occur. Only then I will accept their proof, until then, go back to school and read up before you publish.
The PM wants the newspaper to stop publishing because it will be a "threat to national security". Well, maybe they should have thought of that before they did all the things that are now being published. If they'd not done those things and not have been so clumsy with their dirty little secrets, national security wouldn't be at stake now. They clearly brought this problem on themselves and the publishing of these facts is just a symptom of their own threatening national security with their own actions. Don't blame a newspaper for publishing news. Blame the people that did the stupid things that are now being published.
Does this mean that the boards of these organizations will get prosecuted for membership of a criminal organization? Will all profits (including the ones made abroad) be ceased? After all, this is large scale fixing of prices (for labor) by large, evidently criminal organizations. If the Mafia bosses go to jail for stuff like this and all their money taken, why not these companies?
Yes, running broadband in the USA costs more per household than some of the cheaper countries mentioned, on average. However, since there is no regulation, you'd expect the locations where you actually have a population density to be thriving with competition and low prices.
This is where legislation comes in. In at least Europe, there is a law mandating that there should be a fair and actual competition going and if there isn't, the government gets to set a price for whatever company chooses to provide service, will have to deliver that service. It's not a perfect system and companies still make way more than you would get with a truly competitive market, but at least it's limited.
Here in the Netherlands we basically have two cable companies that divided the country in 2 regions (a few niche players have less than 10 percent of the country) and one former state owned telco that owns the copper pair stuff. That company is mandated to provide access "at cost price" to any ISP that wants access, but they managed to both add a lot of charges to whatever "at cost price" is and also for the uplink point and all that. To add insult to injury, they own most of the glass fibre FTTH stuff and are pulling a similar stunt there. In practice, that leaves most homes that have access to broadband a choice between 2 parties they have to depend on. One of the two cable companies and the former state company. If they choose to not go for cable, they are still going to be using the former state company, even if they get their IP connectivity (and a single bill) from another ISP.
That leaves us with basically at least two major competitors for over 80% of households, that all offer triple play services at a price point starting around 30-40 euros monthly. For that, you typically get 20Mbit or so in internet access (or less if only lower speed DSL is available in your area) some free minutes to selected phones and about 50 channels of digital television. If you're willing to pay around 100 euros monthly and if you can get it, you can get up to 500/500Mbit (yes, that's 500Mbit uplink) with no data limit. I think the current coverage for that is around 15-20% of the people in the Netherlands.
This may sound like a dream to most people in the USA, but believe me, there's a lot of "we're not going to offer anything more competitive if they aren't". There's nobody offering single play internet at the highest speeds, or an a-la-carte solution that would be in place if there was more competition. These three companies more or less are making all the profit that's in this market and the rest is there just as a vehicle to deliver the money to them. Since the cable companies are not mandated to open up their network to third party providers, only two competing companies per household is obviously still not enough to get a truly competing market. The prices are a lot better than they are in the USA, but all three are showing "very healthy" profits and that's not what you'd expect if there was a permanent cut-throat competition going on.
It's about time the USA stopped worrying about communism or "too much regulation" and started to mandate price limits unless at least three independent services would offer full service for something as important as access to the internet. We're past the point that it was a luxury and a hobby thing; you are deprived of many benefits if you don't have a broadband internet connection these days. Just as you want running water, electricity and some sort of sewage system in your home. If a single company would win a contract to be the only gasoline provider in an entire state for 10 years in the future, people would revolt. When it's about internet access, there should not be a difference, even if it's only a single municipality. You can get get gas in the next town, not the next state. With internet, you don't have the luxury to travel to get some, so every home in the USA should have a choice between several providers.
I'm not saying the USA should slavishly copy Europe, but the
8 yards sounds perfectly plausible as long as you define what scale your yard is in. It's not as if the USA is bound to use the metric system or even an international standard of the yard. Even better, why not have all states have their individual system of measurements. That way Texas can have the biggest yard in the world, California the largest number of yards in the entire USA and so on.
They don't because of terrorists. Once the USA government pulls the "terrorism trump card" all rights are null and void. Your government managed to get a few very un-American laws instated and you need to work on getting those reversed. Fighting terrorism doesn't work this way, 12 years after 9-11 none of these laws have made a significant change in USA domestic terrorism attacks but they have greatly influenced daily life. It's time to end these laws and mend the country and it's people.
This is the sort of government that they envisioned when they made up the amendment about the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, that right isn't very useful against this sort of government any more. What other rights would the USA need to conquer this sort of threat to her very being?
If you did that, no US patents would be valid anywhere else in the world. Monsanto, MicroSoft, Apple, and Motorola would be dead instantly. Google might stand a small chance, but you'd basically kill the complete USA economy the second this would come into effect.
It's the peoples law. If the people want a law to exist, they should be willing to deal with it's consequences. If the people want a certain punishment, they should be willing to be the person to administer it, on behalf of all the others. This is how a "free country" is supposed to work.
The USA chose to divide these tasks and responsibilities, so there could be people that specialise in only a small part of this whole process and power wouldn't be too concentrated within a few people. Having a jury to determine guilt is a legacy of a system that was supposed to prevent corruption, just like a lot of the other divisions of tasks are. One of the problems of juries is that people tend to be incredibly presumptuous, unskilled and emotional about the whole thing. Prosecutors are professionals that are skilled and trained in influencing jurors, while jurors get no training or experience to deal with that. The net result is that a lot of people get either very high legal bills to defend themselves, or get screwed by the jury system and get either convicted while innocent, or get a much higher penalty than they would have gotten with proper defence.
The current legal system in the USA obviously has some serious flaws in it that could be improved by some major changes. Those changes won't make the system perfect, but the amount of people ending up in jail and having the rest of their lives ruined for something they didn't do, or that's hardly worth prosecuting will be a lot less. The cost to the society is just too damn high if you have so much people in prison or out of a job. The prison industry (because that is what it is, it's a commercial industry) will hurt if you change the system, but you may actually get the economy going again if you get these people working on infrastructure like bridges and roads, instead of playing crook and guard all day long.
I can't speak for the 2XX series, but the 7XXX series I went for, swapped out and swapped back in again is now much better than it was in January. I purchased it, found out it wasn't stable and wouldn't drive two dual link DVI screens, put an old NVidia 8600GT in and felt frustrated for a few months. Then I bought a displayport-DVI adapter that had dual link capability and put the 7XXX back in. It was two major releases further in driver version and the stability problems I had running Linux were gone. I'm sure some people will disagree with me because the bugs they encounter are still not fixed, but the ones I was having seem to be gone now.
Seriously, there *was* no bad code. What happened was that one of their systems didn't get upgraded and they re-used a variable that was previously used to make systems to keep buying until they were told to stop by a master system. When the server that didn't get upgraded got that variable switched, it just started buying and nobody told it to stop. They knew something was wrong for 45 minutes and kept on letting it buy stuff, didn't just switch it off because there was nobody authoritative that could make that decision available. This was not caused by the code at all, purely procedure and bad organizational design.
I have no idea where you live, but in modern countries, you can get dark fiber, capable of hundreds of gigabits for less than you are quoting for OC48. Even if you lease the equipment to actually put data through at those rates, you will pay probably not more per month than what you are talking about.
Maybe the prices you are referring to are including full internet connectivity and an SLA of 99.8% availability or better and no more than 4 hours of consecutive downtime per interruption to a business end user? That's where ISPs make money. The risk is higher, because they'll have a huge financial problem if they won't meet the SLA and they have to dedicate their resources to just one line (they still overbook the hell out of it) but the rewards if nothing goes wrong are much bigger. Consumer lines turn a little profit each month, per line, but the large number of lines adds up.
If you're out of silicon to work with, you can't just keep on going to throw transistors at a performance problem. You will have to get smarter with what you do with the transistors. If the GFX card makers add innovative features to the on-board chips, they could solve many bottlenecks we still face with utilizing the massive parallel performance we have on these cards. Both for science and for GFX I'm sure there is a list of "most wanted features" or "biggest hotspots" they could work on. For example, the speed at which you can calculate hashes with OCLhashcat differs extremely for NVidia and AMD graphics. NVidia clearly is missing something they don't need a smaller silicon process for. There must be plenty of this sort of improvements both AMD and NVidia can make.
When people have a nice steambox already there and running, they will want to run other apps on it too. Check facebook, read webmail, play youtube, soundcloud, stuff like that. That's a web browser that will most certainly be running a lot on those steamboxes. Next thing you know it, they'll be running XBMC for media too. Once they have all that, why have a PC for only office stuff, if you can run it on the steambox? Even if you have a PC for desktop use, you already know how to use linux, it's cheaper (free) than Windows and practically all your apps run on it anyway.
This is how home users will learn about linux on the desktop and use it without much thinking about it. Once it's commonplace in the home, BYOD and other business uses will follow. They will do that anyway, since only supporting windows won't ever work with the plethora of web clients and mobile devices people use these days, regardless of the client will be Linux on the desktop.
You have lost, because there is no benefit whatsoever to doing all this. The terrorists still attack all over the place and all these measures taken "to guard against terrorism" have zero net results. Sure, some incidental victories have been made, but nothing structurally beneficial has been achieved. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt have been controlling the USA and 99% of all the money and trouble they have been going through, have been wasted on chasing ghosts. It's time to stop this, accept the fact that some religious idiots will sometimes manage to kill a few people every now and then. Staying out of trouble has proven far more effective to over 90% of countries than the USA way of dealing with this, maybe the USA should try that approach for a while. It's a whole lot cheaper and it hardly can be less effective than the current policy.
You only submit your public key to the certificate authority (CA) to be signed. Your private key, required to decode the signal, never leaves your server.
We should first make it illegal to do this. In fact, we should making gathering or selling credit info and social security numbers illegal for anyone but the government themselves. The only use is for companies to charge you, the USA people, more money for their services. They do it under the pretence that if you check out, you get a discount, but you never do. If you don't check out, you don't get a service at all, except with companies that charge way more because they want to counter the risk somehow. A law that contra-beneficial to over 90% of the people is not in anybodies interest, so it should be made illegal that this is possible at all.
You say you are comparing on the same hardware, but there is no hardware in common for all the OSes you state. Sure, there is the option to run windows on a Mac that normally runs OSX, but that's hindered by 3rd party drivers, so it's not a fair comparison. Comparing windows to IOS that runs on a totally different processor architecture even, isn't close to a fair comparison. Comparing WindowsRT to IOS may run on the same architecture, but again, no identical hardware where both are optimized for.
I'm no windows fanboy, but right now, you're just not making sense with your comparison. Windows isn't bad at power usage. It may not be great, but it's not meant to be as energy efficient as the phone/tablet OSes and the hardware it's running on isn't meant to be as efficient either. Compare WindowsRT to apple or Android devices with similar hardware specs and battery size and then you may have a point. I seriously doubt you'll see a big difference there, but if you do, please come back and tell us all about that.
No, any IP based filtering is bad if you want to only block websites. As just explained in TFA, the http protocol is used to put more than one website on a single IP address. You will block other websites if you are blocking entire IP addresses.
The big catch here is that to do this "properly" ISPs will have to put up transparent HTTP proxies and MitM https as well, just to be able to block these websites. This will effectively make the entire internet insecure for any serious stuff like banking or purchasing goods, since anyone will be able to spoof https. Not only that, but ISPs will suddenly have complete records of your complete web browsing history. There is no way to deny it, those logs will end up in the hands of the government sooner or later. Having ISPs block web sites is like having road workers make sytems that block foreign people that commit traffic violations, it's just not a feasible concept.
Slashdot Mirror
Recent model BMWs have been hacked wireless from 30 ft away. That is enough for the thief to hide the device used for the hack near a spot where the owner would normally park the car. They would sniff/block the central locking, so they would be able to gain access to the inside of the car. They would then trigger a buffer overflow by removing and replacing certain fuses in a certain sequence and that would gain them access to the key secrets stored inside the car's computer. They would use a device to have the car's own transponder clone one of those IDs into a blank key and as a result, they would drive away with the car, with a functioning key and no damage to it whatsoever.
I'm fairly certain that with bigger antennas and a more powerful transmitter, you would be able to do this trick at 300 feet, but I doubt that'd make a difference. By the way, the hacker doesn't have to hide under the dashboard, they have access to the CAN bus on the outside of the car too. All light units and the plug for the trailer hitch are connected to this bus. Wires for the bus are usually exposed on the underside of the car, or easily accessible with the removal of a panel only held on by a few screws. Even if one of those notoriously leaky programmed BT enabled center consoles wouldn't be pwnable, physical access would be 2 minutes and a philips screwdriver away.
No, it's not universal for all brands yet, but current developments and product announcements indicate that it won't be long before that *will* happen, unless the car industry starts asking security professionals how to deal with this instead of reinventing the wheel themselves.
This is bad for car manufacturers. Why? Because they have to warrant that cars live a long time and will be emissions compliant too. If people can hack around in these systems, all sorts of things can happen that will make them unable to do this. I'm all for having the systems open and being able to tinker with them myself, but from a manufacturer standpoint, this is bad.
Cars come with different wheel/tire size combinations. In the past, getting another circumference wheel on your car meant that your odometer/speedo was off and you had to fiddle with magnetic fields or gear boxes in the cable to correct that. Because you want a different size/width tire for winter tires (narrower, higher side) than for summer (wide tire, low profile) you will eventually have to deal with this somehow if you want optimal grip during both summer and winter. Car manufacturers chose to deal with this by making the tire size programmable, so there would be an electronic correction for this.
No, forward facing eyes are not to recognise snakes. Prey species, especially the ones that are "snake bite size" tend to have eyes on the sides of their heads, so they have a bigger peripheral to detect predators. Forward facing eyes are only seen in predators and omnivores that rely on eyesight to capture their prey.
Snakes are just one form of predator or danger to humans or mammals in general. Humans, as most mammals, are very inaccurate at detecting snakes, unless they move. They are not more accurate at detecting snakes than they are at detecting any other animal, providing the level of camouflage of that animal is similar to that of the snakes. Singling out snakes to come up with a bunch of generic treats that we and other mammals have as the cause of these is bullcrap and there is no way to prove any of it. Maybe this is the sort of research a recently converted creationist or someone with a snake phobia would come up with. Snakes are nothing more than lizards that evolved to have no legs and the development of mammals saw many more forms and shapes of predators and dangers throughout their evolution that required exactly the same sort of adaptation. I challenge the writers of this paper to do a double blind test and evolve mammals again, both with and without snakes in their world and see what differences occur. Only then I will accept their proof, until then, go back to school and read up before you publish.
The PM wants the newspaper to stop publishing because it will be a "threat to national security". Well, maybe they should have thought of that before they did all the things that are now being published. If they'd not done those things and not have been so clumsy with their dirty little secrets, national security wouldn't be at stake now. They clearly brought this problem on themselves and the publishing of these facts is just a symptom of their own threatening national security with their own actions. Don't blame a newspaper for publishing news. Blame the people that did the stupid things that are now being published.
Does this mean that the boards of these organizations will get prosecuted for membership of a criminal organization? Will all profits (including the ones made abroad) be ceased? After all, this is large scale fixing of prices (for labor) by large, evidently criminal organizations. If the Mafia bosses go to jail for stuff like this and all their money taken, why not these companies?
Think Europa is prickly? Unless it's freshly shaven, how about Uranus? *badum tish* (gets his coat)
Yes, running broadband in the USA costs more per household than some of the cheaper countries mentioned, on average. However, since there is no regulation, you'd expect the locations where you actually have a population density to be thriving with competition and low prices.
This is where legislation comes in. In at least Europe, there is a law mandating that there should be a fair and actual competition going and if there isn't, the government gets to set a price for whatever company chooses to provide service, will have to deliver that service. It's not a perfect system and companies still make way more than you would get with a truly competitive market, but at least it's limited.
Here in the Netherlands we basically have two cable companies that divided the country in 2 regions (a few niche players have less than 10 percent of the country) and one former state owned telco that owns the copper pair stuff. That company is mandated to provide access "at cost price" to any ISP that wants access, but they managed to both add a lot of charges to whatever "at cost price" is and also for the uplink point and all that. To add insult to injury, they own most of the glass fibre FTTH stuff and are pulling a similar stunt there. In practice, that leaves most homes that have access to broadband a choice between 2 parties they have to depend on. One of the two cable companies and the former state company. If they choose to not go for cable, they are still going to be using the former state company, even if they get their IP connectivity (and a single bill) from another ISP.
That leaves us with basically at least two major competitors for over 80% of households, that all offer triple play services at a price point starting around 30-40 euros monthly. For that, you typically get 20Mbit or so in internet access (or less if only lower speed DSL is available in your area) some free minutes to selected phones and about 50 channels of digital television. If you're willing to pay around 100 euros monthly and if you can get it, you can get up to 500/500Mbit (yes, that's 500Mbit uplink) with no data limit. I think the current coverage for that is around 15-20% of the people in the Netherlands.
This may sound like a dream to most people in the USA, but believe me, there's a lot of "we're not going to offer anything more competitive if they aren't". There's nobody offering single play internet at the highest speeds, or an a-la-carte solution that would be in place if there was more competition. These three companies more or less are making all the profit that's in this market and the rest is there just as a vehicle to deliver the money to them. Since the cable companies are not mandated to open up their network to third party providers, only two competing companies per household is obviously still not enough to get a truly competing market. The prices are a lot better than they are in the USA, but all three are showing "very healthy" profits and that's not what you'd expect if there was a permanent cut-throat competition going on.
It's about time the USA stopped worrying about communism or "too much regulation" and started to mandate price limits unless at least three independent services would offer full service for something as important as access to the internet. We're past the point that it was a luxury and a hobby thing; you are deprived of many benefits if you don't have a broadband internet connection these days. Just as you want running water, electricity and some sort of sewage system in your home. If a single company would win a contract to be the only gasoline provider in an entire state for 10 years in the future, people would revolt. When it's about internet access, there should not be a difference, even if it's only a single municipality. You can get get gas in the next town, not the next state. With internet, you don't have the luxury to travel to get some, so every home in the USA should have a choice between several providers.
I'm not saying the USA should slavishly copy Europe, but the
8 yards sounds perfectly plausible as long as you define what scale your yard is in. It's not as if the USA is bound to use the metric system or even an international standard of the yard. Even better, why not have all states have their individual system of measurements. That way Texas can have the biggest yard in the world, California the largest number of yards in the entire USA and so on.
They don't because of terrorists. Once the USA government pulls the "terrorism trump card" all rights are null and void. Your government managed to get a few very un-American laws instated and you need to work on getting those reversed. Fighting terrorism doesn't work this way, 12 years after 9-11 none of these laws have made a significant change in USA domestic terrorism attacks but they have greatly influenced daily life. It's time to end these laws and mend the country and it's people.
By generating so much metadata, the NSA will overflow and your real messages' metadata will be overwritten!!!1!.
This is the sort of government that they envisioned when they made up the amendment about the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, that right isn't very useful against this sort of government any more. What other rights would the USA need to conquer this sort of threat to her very being?
If you did that, no US patents would be valid anywhere else in the world. Monsanto, MicroSoft, Apple, and Motorola would be dead instantly. Google might stand a small chance, but you'd basically kill the complete USA economy the second this would come into effect.
It's the peoples law. If the people want a law to exist, they should be willing to deal with it's consequences. If the people want a certain punishment, they should be willing to be the person to administer it, on behalf of all the others. This is how a "free country" is supposed to work.
The USA chose to divide these tasks and responsibilities, so there could be people that specialise in only a small part of this whole process and power wouldn't be too concentrated within a few people. Having a jury to determine guilt is a legacy of a system that was supposed to prevent corruption, just like a lot of the other divisions of tasks are. One of the problems of juries is that people tend to be incredibly presumptuous, unskilled and emotional about the whole thing. Prosecutors are professionals that are skilled and trained in influencing jurors, while jurors get no training or experience to deal with that. The net result is that a lot of people get either very high legal bills to defend themselves, or get screwed by the jury system and get either convicted while innocent, or get a much higher penalty than they would have gotten with proper defence.
The current legal system in the USA obviously has some serious flaws in it that could be improved by some major changes. Those changes won't make the system perfect, but the amount of people ending up in jail and having the rest of their lives ruined for something they didn't do, or that's hardly worth prosecuting will be a lot less. The cost to the society is just too damn high if you have so much people in prison or out of a job. The prison industry (because that is what it is, it's a commercial industry) will hurt if you change the system, but you may actually get the economy going again if you get these people working on infrastructure like bridges and roads, instead of playing crook and guard all day long.
I can't speak for the 2XX series, but the 7XXX series I went for, swapped out and swapped back in again is now much better than it was in January. I purchased it, found out it wasn't stable and wouldn't drive two dual link DVI screens, put an old NVidia 8600GT in and felt frustrated for a few months. Then I bought a displayport-DVI adapter that had dual link capability and put the 7XXX back in. It was two major releases further in driver version and the stability problems I had running Linux were gone. I'm sure some people will disagree with me because the bugs they encounter are still not fixed, but the ones I was having seem to be gone now.
Is his mothers name Sarah Conner?
Seriously, there *was* no bad code. What happened was that one of their systems didn't get upgraded and they re-used a variable that was previously used to make systems to keep buying until they were told to stop by a master system. When the server that didn't get upgraded got that variable switched, it just started buying and nobody told it to stop. They knew something was wrong for 45 minutes and kept on letting it buy stuff, didn't just switch it off because there was nobody authoritative that could make that decision available. This was not caused by the code at all, purely procedure and bad organizational design.
I have no idea where you live, but in modern countries, you can get dark fiber, capable of hundreds of gigabits for less than you are quoting for OC48. Even if you lease the equipment to actually put data through at those rates, you will pay probably not more per month than what you are talking about.
Maybe the prices you are referring to are including full internet connectivity and an SLA of 99.8% availability or better and no more than 4 hours of consecutive downtime per interruption to a business end user? That's where ISPs make money. The risk is higher, because they'll have a huge financial problem if they won't meet the SLA and they have to dedicate their resources to just one line (they still overbook the hell out of it) but the rewards if nothing goes wrong are much bigger. Consumer lines turn a little profit each month, per line, but the large number of lines adds up.
If you're out of silicon to work with, you can't just keep on going to throw transistors at a performance problem. You will have to get smarter with what you do with the transistors. If the GFX card makers add innovative features to the on-board chips, they could solve many bottlenecks we still face with utilizing the massive parallel performance we have on these cards. Both for science and for GFX I'm sure there is a list of "most wanted features" or "biggest hotspots" they could work on. For example, the speed at which you can calculate hashes with OCLhashcat differs extremely for NVidia and AMD graphics. NVidia clearly is missing something they don't need a smaller silicon process for. There must be plenty of this sort of improvements both AMD and NVidia can make.
When people have a nice steambox already there and running, they will want to run other apps on it too. Check facebook, read webmail, play youtube, soundcloud, stuff like that. That's a web browser that will most certainly be running a lot on those steamboxes. Next thing you know it, they'll be running XBMC for media too. Once they have all that, why have a PC for only office stuff, if you can run it on the steambox? Even if you have a PC for desktop use, you already know how to use linux, it's cheaper (free) than Windows and practically all your apps run on it anyway.
This is how home users will learn about linux on the desktop and use it without much thinking about it. Once it's commonplace in the home, BYOD and other business uses will follow. They will do that anyway, since only supporting windows won't ever work with the plethora of web clients and mobile devices people use these days, regardless of the client will be Linux on the desktop.
You have lost, because there is no benefit whatsoever to doing all this. The terrorists still attack all over the place and all these measures taken "to guard against terrorism" have zero net results. Sure, some incidental victories have been made, but nothing structurally beneficial has been achieved. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt have been controlling the USA and 99% of all the money and trouble they have been going through, have been wasted on chasing ghosts. It's time to stop this, accept the fact that some religious idiots will sometimes manage to kill a few people every now and then. Staying out of trouble has proven far more effective to over 90% of countries than the USA way of dealing with this, maybe the USA should try that approach for a while. It's a whole lot cheaper and it hardly can be less effective than the current policy.
You only submit your public key to the certificate authority (CA) to be signed. Your private key, required to decode the signal, never leaves your server.
We should first make it illegal to do this. In fact, we should making gathering or selling credit info and social security numbers illegal for anyone but the government themselves. The only use is for companies to charge you, the USA people, more money for their services. They do it under the pretence that if you check out, you get a discount, but you never do. If you don't check out, you don't get a service at all, except with companies that charge way more because they want to counter the risk somehow. A law that contra-beneficial to over 90% of the people is not in anybodies interest, so it should be made illegal that this is possible at all.
You say you are comparing on the same hardware, but there is no hardware in common for all the OSes you state. Sure, there is the option to run windows on a Mac that normally runs OSX, but that's hindered by 3rd party drivers, so it's not a fair comparison. Comparing windows to IOS that runs on a totally different processor architecture even, isn't close to a fair comparison. Comparing WindowsRT to IOS may run on the same architecture, but again, no identical hardware where both are optimized for.
I'm no windows fanboy, but right now, you're just not making sense with your comparison. Windows isn't bad at power usage. It may not be great, but it's not meant to be as energy efficient as the phone/tablet OSes and the hardware it's running on isn't meant to be as efficient either. Compare WindowsRT to apple or Android devices with similar hardware specs and battery size and then you may have a point. I seriously doubt you'll see a big difference there, but if you do, please come back and tell us all about that.
No, any IP based filtering is bad if you want to only block websites. As just explained in TFA, the http protocol is used to put more than one website on a single IP address. You will block other websites if you are blocking entire IP addresses.
The big catch here is that to do this "properly" ISPs will have to put up transparent HTTP proxies and MitM https as well, just to be able to block these websites. This will effectively make the entire internet insecure for any serious stuff like banking or purchasing goods, since anyone will be able to spoof https. Not only that, but ISPs will suddenly have complete records of your complete web browsing history. There is no way to deny it, those logs will end up in the hands of the government sooner or later. Having ISPs block web sites is like having road workers make sytems that block foreign people that commit traffic violations, it's just not a feasible concept.