If you describe the project correctly, there will be plenty of safeties built in to guarantee quality, budget and timeline. If your chosen contractor manages to mess it up and still stay within contract terms, you have yourself to blame.
Porn
Video games
Marijuana
Birth control pills
Rock and Roll
Alcohol
News Papers
Democracy
The list goes on and on. In fact you'll probably find Sanskrit clay tablets where older people claim that something is ruining some generation and the world is doomed.
You know what, they are right, we're just too stubborn to fold to the concept and keep adding generations going over the top of the previous ones in ruining the planet. Maybe we'll be at it for many more generations and maybe some fad will be the actual end of human existence. Who really cares anyway, not the current generation.
WINS and netbios broadcasts are used to transmit windows hostnames over your home network. DNS has nothing to do with it. Maybe you should start learning about how networking works, before you start bitching about IPv6
They already know that the drugs are going by that road. They already stop people when they are suspect. What is scanning plates going to change, except violate peoples privacy and cost money? What is the cost-benefit analysis of this whole thing? If they don't publish that, it's either not researched and should never be allowed, or it's so bad that if it were to become public, nobody would want it to happen.
You'll never be able to filter the scammers completely no matter what you try. If you can't detect a scammer right away yourself, doing so afterwards by processing log files won't change that, you'll still get scammed. At best you'll be able to filter 99% or so of SPAM email and some known malware and viruses. Expecting a mini-barebone to be able to handle any serious internet filtering is also not realistic. Stuff that will filter even a minimum of multi protocol internet access, requires quite a lot of CPU power and plenty of real-time access to internet databases to check traffic/files for malicious content.
Either yank the Internet plug, or make sure your client gets educated on scams, malware and such. Education and common sense have stopped more scammers, malware and such than all firewalls and virusscanners combined.
Non-exclusive distribution is what Tenenbaum did. That is worth a lot less than exclusive distribution. You do the exact same thing, but because you are paying someone to promise that they won't let your competitors have a fair go at the market, the price is higher. Actually, there no longer is any realistic option for "exclusive distribution" anymore, since digital copies are everywhere, so what is the actual value of an agreement the seller can not possibly uphold?
Right, how can someone ever explain this whole media rights thing without making a fool of himself and showing that it has nothing to do with free market and protecting the interests of "we the people"?
What a big steaming pile of DUH. Even Ants are known to do their road layout by "instinct" and still come up with mathematically sound solutions for the most economic tracks. Why would subway layouts be any different? Because they are usually government projects and governments are mathematically proven to be extremely inefficient, compared to ants?
The current data plans are not about now, but about the future. If they start capping the main body of users to squeeze more money out of them right now, there will be wide uproar. Right now it's only a few geeks and mobile workers that are protesting.
Everyone is shifting from text messaging and voice phone calls to IP based alternatives. People watch media on mobile devices more and more. If the phone companies don't start charging for IP traffic, their business models will fail in the future. If they wait too long, they will not get away with it because everyone will be suddenly influenced. Now people are eased into the business model and once they go over their plan, are already used to pay for the extra usage.
The real problem here is market dominance. The few players that actually have coverage or roaming agreements for areas big enough to matter, can basically charge what they want. Because of the high investments in setting up networks and the lack of requirement to roam/peer with other providers for the current big providers, that situation will not change. Either the USA will have to put up with it, or cut up their "too big to compete" telephone companies again and do the mini-bell model once over. I'm not saying that is a good solution, but there may come a time that it will be a better solution than the status quo you will be in otherwise.
Yeah, because the USA doesn't have something like laws that are valid through the entire country and is able to uphold those. If it can and is done in Michigan, it will never happen anywhere else in the USA, or is it just the first city and will it only be a matter of time for the rest of the USA to have this equipment available as well?
Narcissism is in genaral about one self, not about the USA, so what does narcissism have to do with it? Also, how bad is it to compare something that happens in one country that is viewed as "evil" by the majority of people on this site to something that happens in another country that is in fact home to a very large part of the visitors of this website? Even if just to put something in perspective to what happens "back home" and how evil or non evil the other country, or "home" is when you look at the facts without the propaganda attached to it. Maybe people jump at the opportunity to point out that the USA is not a perfect place and that pointing fingers at "evil" nations while being the pot that calls the kettle black isn't really convincing to smarter folks on this planet. If you don't like that, if you already know that is going to happen, why bother reading the topic, let alone comment on it at all? Offense is taken much more often than that it's given.
As if ISPs would want more government regulation crap in their network. Their business is to connect hosts via a network, not to prevent that from happening. The most profitable ISP is one that will spend enough money on the network to be redundant and keep their customers happy about the provided uplink, not one that will have to deal with loads of extra technology that does nothing to keep their customers happy. I very much doubt you'll find an ISP that is not owned by a MAFIAA member that is willing to use equipment like this without a legal requirement.
The USA has a history of not stopping at it's own border to arrest "criminals" that were doing something that was illegal in the USA. However, in this case I think the US government will find it way too convenient that their campaign sponsors get "voluntary" help from "unidentified" individuals in Russia. Mind you, it'd be a totally different thing if some company was found to be funding illegal activities that were taking place outside of the USA, right?
You can try and poison a torrent, but you'll get blacklisted by other seed members once the checksums don't add up. With the current amount of IPv4 addresses in the state it is, you can't get unlimited addresses anymore, so it's only a matter of time before your netblocks will be globally blocked by bittorrent clients. Sure, it's an arms race, but one that will keep them very busy and with very limited results.
Mind you, that's with current technology already.Once BitTorrent clients will get exposed to poisoning more, I'm fairly certain mechanisms to mitigate that will become far more effective.
How can chkdisk fix corrupted hardware? Yes, "disk corruption" is about hardware, not about a filesystem. It would need low level interfaces to the actual controllers (these days inside the drive) and do things most vendor support software doesn't even do. So the summary is blatantly wrong, you can't fix a broken disk with chkdsk, not even the new version.
What they are actually doing is classifying 18 different forms of filesystem corruptions and are building the OS and filesystem drivers in such a way that they can fix a few of them online and do analysis of the ones they can't fix while the filesystem is online, so they can fix them later without having to scan the entire filesystem. That means that only the actual repair might require the filesystem to be put offline for a limited time and in general does not need a reboot. How they plan to do this without accidental overwriting of lost clusters is a mystery to me, but they must have thought about this.
Twitter would have to answer if they have an account from this person, if they have tweets by him, if those tweets were "deleted" and some other meta-information, if they were given a subpoena in the state of California. However, they would not have to reveal the actual content of those tweets, until a warrant was properly issued by a Judge.
Before a Judge should give such an order, there should be at least indications that the content would be incriminating for the person and as such, that the tweets would in fact contain information about him, or were certified to be made by him and not somebody else that had access to the account at the time. If he said "someone else tweeted those, I don't know who, others had access to that account", the burden of proof would lay with the prosecution. I'd say the prosecution won't find it easy to convince a judge it's not merely a fishing trip. Not impossible, but they'd have to work for it.
The Internet was set up in such a way that administrators/owners of infrastructure were supposed to make sure their users wouldn't abuse facilities. As long as all admins and abuse-departments were upholding Internet rules (nothing about laws of any specific country) things would be marry. The whole problem started when local law enforcement started happening and disconnecting hosts/networks that were misbehaving wasn't an option anymore due to commercial interests.
Even if it has influence on music sales, the actual artists don't get significantly less money than before. The main people that suffer are the RIAA executives, the people at the record companies and the physical record stores. The people in the record stores suffer anyway, since legal sales all happen online now, so it's only the RIAA executives and the people at the record company that are the victim of piracy. Why aren't the artist victim here? Because they already got almost nothing out of record sales anyway, with all of the money going to the RIAA and the record company.
The whole copyright thing was intended to protect the artists and it's being used against them, so the only way to solve this is to change copyright legislation to make it work for the artists again. Protecting the little man, not the big corporations is what it's for and how it should be.
Slashdot Mirror
If you describe the project correctly, there will be plenty of safeties built in to guarantee quality, budget and timeline. If your chosen contractor manages to mess it up and still stay within contract terms, you have yourself to blame.
Porn Video games Marijuana Birth control pills Rock and Roll Alcohol News Papers Democracy The list goes on and on. In fact you'll probably find Sanskrit clay tablets where older people claim that something is ruining some generation and the world is doomed. You know what, they are right, we're just too stubborn to fold to the concept and keep adding generations going over the top of the previous ones in ruining the planet. Maybe we'll be at it for many more generations and maybe some fad will be the actual end of human existence. Who really cares anyway, not the current generation.
WINS and netbios broadcasts are used to transmit windows hostnames over your home network. DNS has nothing to do with it. Maybe you should start learning about how networking works, before you start bitching about IPv6
See subject
They already know that the drugs are going by that road. They already stop people when they are suspect. What is scanning plates going to change, except violate peoples privacy and cost money? What is the cost-benefit analysis of this whole thing? If they don't publish that, it's either not researched and should never be allowed, or it's so bad that if it were to become public, nobody would want it to happen.
I get my best ideas while on vacation. Unfortunately, my employer fails to realize that, so I'm stuck being unproductive in an office 40 hours a week.
You'll never be able to filter the scammers completely no matter what you try. If you can't detect a scammer right away yourself, doing so afterwards by processing log files won't change that, you'll still get scammed. At best you'll be able to filter 99% or so of SPAM email and some known malware and viruses. Expecting a mini-barebone to be able to handle any serious internet filtering is also not realistic. Stuff that will filter even a minimum of multi protocol internet access, requires quite a lot of CPU power and plenty of real-time access to internet databases to check traffic/files for malicious content.
Either yank the Internet plug, or make sure your client gets educated on scams, malware and such. Education and common sense have stopped more scammers, malware and such than all firewalls and virusscanners combined.
I presume you have wikipedia to back up this claim?
Non-exclusive distribution is what Tenenbaum did. That is worth a lot less than exclusive distribution. You do the exact same thing, but because you are paying someone to promise that they won't let your competitors have a fair go at the market, the price is higher. Actually, there no longer is any realistic option for "exclusive distribution" anymore, since digital copies are everywhere, so what is the actual value of an agreement the seller can not possibly uphold?
Right, how can someone ever explain this whole media rights thing without making a fool of himself and showing that it has nothing to do with free market and protecting the interests of "we the people"?
Did they ask the bots what was the best smartphone? We all know it's a bot if they didn't answer the N900
What a big steaming pile of DUH. Even Ants are known to do their road layout by "instinct" and still come up with mathematically sound solutions for the most economic tracks. Why would subway layouts be any different? Because they are usually government projects and governments are mathematically proven to be extremely inefficient, compared to ants?
The current data plans are not about now, but about the future. If they start capping the main body of users to squeeze more money out of them right now, there will be wide uproar. Right now it's only a few geeks and mobile workers that are protesting.
Everyone is shifting from text messaging and voice phone calls to IP based alternatives. People watch media on mobile devices more and more. If the phone companies don't start charging for IP traffic, their business models will fail in the future. If they wait too long, they will not get away with it because everyone will be suddenly influenced. Now people are eased into the business model and once they go over their plan, are already used to pay for the extra usage.
The real problem here is market dominance. The few players that actually have coverage or roaming agreements for areas big enough to matter, can basically charge what they want. Because of the high investments in setting up networks and the lack of requirement to roam/peer with other providers for the current big providers, that situation will not change. Either the USA will have to put up with it, or cut up their "too big to compete" telephone companies again and do the mini-bell model once over. I'm not saying that is a good solution, but there may come a time that it will be a better solution than the status quo you will be in otherwise.
Yeah, because the USA doesn't have something like laws that are valid through the entire country and is able to uphold those. If it can and is done in Michigan, it will never happen anywhere else in the USA, or is it just the first city and will it only be a matter of time for the rest of the USA to have this equipment available as well?
Narcissism is in genaral about one self, not about the USA, so what does narcissism have to do with it? Also, how bad is it to compare something that happens in one country that is viewed as "evil" by the majority of people on this site to something that happens in another country that is in fact home to a very large part of the visitors of this website? Even if just to put something in perspective to what happens "back home" and how evil or non evil the other country, or "home" is when you look at the facts without the propaganda attached to it. Maybe people jump at the opportunity to point out that the USA is not a perfect place and that pointing fingers at "evil" nations while being the pot that calls the kettle black isn't really convincing to smarter folks on this planet. If you don't like that, if you already know that is going to happen, why bother reading the topic, let alone comment on it at all? Offense is taken much more often than that it's given.
As if ISPs would want more government regulation crap in their network. Their business is to connect hosts via a network, not to prevent that from happening. The most profitable ISP is one that will spend enough money on the network to be redundant and keep their customers happy about the provided uplink, not one that will have to deal with loads of extra technology that does nothing to keep their customers happy. I very much doubt you'll find an ISP that is not owned by a MAFIAA member that is willing to use equipment like this without a legal requirement.
The USA has a history of not stopping at it's own border to arrest "criminals" that were doing something that was illegal in the USA. However, in this case I think the US government will find it way too convenient that their campaign sponsors get "voluntary" help from "unidentified" individuals in Russia. Mind you, it'd be a totally different thing if some company was found to be funding illegal activities that were taking place outside of the USA, right?
You can try and poison a torrent, but you'll get blacklisted by other seed members once the checksums don't add up. With the current amount of IPv4 addresses in the state it is, you can't get unlimited addresses anymore, so it's only a matter of time before your netblocks will be globally blocked by bittorrent clients. Sure, it's an arms race, but one that will keep them very busy and with very limited results.
Mind you, that's with current technology already.Once BitTorrent clients will get exposed to poisoning more, I'm fairly certain mechanisms to mitigate that will become far more effective.
How can chkdisk fix corrupted hardware? Yes, "disk corruption" is about hardware, not about a filesystem. It would need low level interfaces to the actual controllers (these days inside the drive) and do things most vendor support software doesn't even do. So the summary is blatantly wrong, you can't fix a broken disk with chkdsk, not even the new version.
What they are actually doing is classifying 18 different forms of filesystem corruptions and are building the OS and filesystem drivers in such a way that they can fix a few of them online and do analysis of the ones they can't fix while the filesystem is online, so they can fix them later without having to scan the entire filesystem. That means that only the actual repair might require the filesystem to be put offline for a limited time and in general does not need a reboot. How they plan to do this without accidental overwriting of lost clusters is a mystery to me, but they must have thought about this.
Only poor people would do that. Rich people don't pay taxes, they collect them.
What it says on the box is "voting machine". What else would you expect it to do? It votes!
Twitter would have to answer if they have an account from this person, if they have tweets by him, if those tweets were "deleted" and some other meta-information, if they were given a subpoena in the state of California. However, they would not have to reveal the actual content of those tweets, until a warrant was properly issued by a Judge.
Before a Judge should give such an order, there should be at least indications that the content would be incriminating for the person and as such, that the tweets would in fact contain information about him, or were certified to be made by him and not somebody else that had access to the account at the time. If he said "someone else tweeted those, I don't know who, others had access to that account", the burden of proof would lay with the prosecution. I'd say the prosecution won't find it easy to convince a judge it's not merely a fishing trip. Not impossible, but they'd have to work for it.
The Internet was set up in such a way that administrators/owners of infrastructure were supposed to make sure their users wouldn't abuse facilities. As long as all admins and abuse-departments were upholding Internet rules (nothing about laws of any specific country) things would be marry. The whole problem started when local law enforcement started happening and disconnecting hosts/networks that were misbehaving wasn't an option anymore due to commercial interests.
Those people trying to put nukes on meteors aren't real, that was a movie.
Are you telling me that if you copy bad music often enough, it might turn into good music?
Even if it has influence on music sales, the actual artists don't get significantly less money than before. The main people that suffer are the RIAA executives, the people at the record companies and the physical record stores. The people in the record stores suffer anyway, since legal sales all happen online now, so it's only the RIAA executives and the people at the record company that are the victim of piracy. Why aren't the artist victim here? Because they already got almost nothing out of record sales anyway, with all of the money going to the RIAA and the record company.
The whole copyright thing was intended to protect the artists and it's being used against them, so the only way to solve this is to change copyright legislation to make it work for the artists again. Protecting the little man, not the big corporations is what it's for and how it should be.