Microcode has kind of blurred that line. The CPU is responsible for bootstrapping the system to some extent, but then the OS is responsible for bootstrapping parts of the CPU.
XHCI is (slightly) older than Windows 7 and was worked on in part by Microsoft, you'd think they at least include support in a 2016 Windows 7 build. It's the OS that has to deliver the drivers, not the hardware stuck on some old interface just because some OS'es are braindead.
The/. title is implying something different though. Intel and AMD chips only supporting Windows is different than Windows only supporting Intel and AMD chips
Then why the hell are you still using Exchange? You must be the BOFH - mwahaha: the system I manage is neat and concise, the system my users use is a pile of crap.
The "victims" here would be the banks. Swift is a consortium of banks that facilitates international (or at least EU) bank-to-bank transfers. It's basically the routing number banks use for international transfers. From what I remember from using it, the transfer itself does not contain account numbers. If the swift network is what is compromised, the hackers could initiate fraudulent no-origin transfers.
I've seen the same problem on cheap SSD's like the Samsung "Pro" lines. I've had much better results with the Intel DC line though, they seem to be able to sustain their "average" read and write speeds.
Netflix has ~4,000 movies and ~1,000 TV shows, any server thus seems to handle just 1 movie and about 1000 connections each (if 5% of their user base is actively streaming at any one point)? This just seems like an awful lot of servers for what I find to be a relatively low load for simply streaming data.
I'm sure Netflix could save a lot of money and network headaches by using a BitTorrent type approach, it would also alleviate the "problems" with the providers, most traffic would stay within their network.
No he wasn't. He was simply providing a platform to host online files. All he did was not bend to US media cartels the way YouTube or Dropbox did nor give the US government control over the systems the way Amazon or Microsoft does. At one point his system was considered the best file upload facility as it was fully encrypted so no company or government could see what actually was on it.
The US government wanted him, a company not even based out of the US, to implement DMCA controls similar to YouTube's (where any one could claim infringement and the content taken down), he refused and his site was taken offline and he was arrested.
So the EU can just come down and tell it's member countries who they are and aren't allowed to give tax breaks to. This would be an interesting ruling though as ANY tax breaks would become illegal in the EU and thus there would be no viable way for companies to keep their business in the richer EU countries.
I don't think Trump has the political clout to make it happen. He doesn't have the support of any Republican old-timers. Regardless of whether he wins the popular vote, he's losing because the game has already been decided in favor of Clinton at this point.
FreeNAS would do what you want it to do. You can then back up to another disk or set of disks or somewhere online. As far as online goes, I'd choose a good VPS provider with sufficient disk space or rsync.net for sending ZFS streams. You could also go with a 'cheap' backup provider like BackBlaze or CrashPlan, both have their ups and downs but for that amount of space, a file-based backup (which is what rsync is) is typically insufficient especially if you're planning on growing.
File-based backups on some of my systems can take a month or so to complete over gigabit, I'd shudder to think the time it takes for 10Mbps or lower speed Internet connections. With rsync.net you can send them a physical set of disks, have them import it and ZFS sends literally takes overnight to "backup" a 100TB+ system.
"Storage Spaces" is one of those techs that MS will (has) abandon(ed), it's too buggy and slow to be usable and is/was part of MS Home Server. It's basically a very high overhead software-based RAID.
Who is really using BR or any optical media at this point? Blu-Ray was the winner in the optical media war but nobody wants to use it. DVD is 'good enough' for most people and the headaches of hooking up a BR player so it allows DRM to work is too much work for many.
Who would ever buy from Sony again, they've bungled many a product. BetaMax, MemoryCard, UMD, MiniDisc, BMG Rootkit, PS3 OtherOS, PS Vita, PSN hacks and pretty much all of their products are more expensive and have less features than competitors.
Price fixing happens for most monopolies, a free market wouldn't allow for many monopolies on high margin products. A truly free market wouldn't have licenses, FDA, copyright or patents. Price fixing protects the poor from abuse by government granted monopolies.
The problem is the decisions are disproportionately favored in the mother in contested cases. Actually go to family court once, as a father you have to prove that your ex is truly incompetent and incapable of taking care. It takes a very expensive 3-way psych eval in most cases meaning a full psych eval of all people involved for the plaintiff, defense and for the court; a single one costs $2000/pp on average and the cost is solely carried by the plaintiff (father). That is $12-20k simply to prove your ex has the condition she often has been prescribed medication for but never takes and then you still only have a 75% chance of success.
It doesn't matter who spends more time with the kids before, the mother has often kidnapped or been granted temporary full custody the children and is refusing to allow court ordered visitation and as a result she gets to claim she spent more time with the kids.
When the statistics surrounding temporary custody do not go 90% in the mothers favor (the court is supposed to be ignorant of any unfounded accusations until they hear the case), then fathers may see a chance.
"the rules aren't subject to congressional approval" - a lot of "laws" have passed since Bush onwards that are no longer subject to congressional approval. They're just a source of comedic entertainment any other time, why do we even have congress or a judiciary for that matter? It didn't pass congress properly, let's just make it a presidential order.
If anything, you should vote for Trump because he's too stupid to realize he can pull legalistic shit like this, perhaps "the people" can restore some of the balance and take it away from the attorneys-in-charge. That or Gary Johnson/Jill Stein - may not be ideal but anything is better than an extension of these Bush-Obama policies.
Either way, I'm sure this won't be abused. Come to the US, get $500k in funds, you just have to promise us to create some jobs in the next 5 years even though our own startups fail 90% of the time this won't be a problem for you. If anything, give ANY startup in the US access to the same funds. I sure could use them, I'm an immigrant even.
The 'true' pay gap is 0.1-0.01% or something like that (a statistical error) in the western world and that may be due to (70-80% paid) maternity leave. The "problem" is the lifetime income gap, which has been closing but is somewhere on the order of -5 to 15% depending on the field. Educated women no longer stop work to take care of children and it's no longer odd that the father stops working these days as well.
Obviously employers would get an all-female workforce if it were legal for them to pay them even 1% less than equally qualified men.
This agreement is just White House endorsed commercial advertisement. It gets everybody in the news one last time.
Sorry, but you must be looking at different stats:
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17% Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
The only articles I can find that say otherwise are ALL pointing to the same HuffPo article (not even a scholarly backed piece).
The "majority" of parents does indeed reach an agreement out of court, a little over 50% (Macooby & Mnookin) reaches a so-called uncontested agreement, that means at least 49% is contested. In SJW-world this would mean any contested cases should automatically go to the father right? Equality in numbers and all.
In a study of 705 cases, an uncontested request for maternal physical custody was made in 500 cases. The outcome matched the request for maternal custody in nearly 90% of such cases. In contrast, paternal physical custody was awarded in only 75% of the 47 cases in which there was an uncontested request for sole paternal physical custody. - So EVEN in uncontested cases (the mother agrees), the courts will 25% of the time override the parents' wishes and still grant the mother custody.
There are some 40,000 disputed custody cases every year which are decided by family court judges. These judges will listen to recommendations from court welfare officers who visit the family and write 35,000 reports every year. The welfare officers work in the probation service which deals with mostly male criminals, this makes it difficult to see fathers in a positive light. The result is that family courts award mothers sole custody in 71% of cases and fathers sole custody in 7% of all cases, joint custody is awarded in the remaining 21% of cases. Many fathers report giving up an expensive custody fight for their children after advice from lawyers who say they can't win. It is very common for mothers during custody battles to receive state funded legal aid. A custody battle is therefore a very unequal war of attrition. Many fathers report that efforts to have contact with their children are blocked by mothers, and the courts will not enforce the right of children to have contact with their fathers.
And how would they check that? Sure they can filter IPSEC traffic but there are many more VPN types, over HTTP, SOCKS, SSL and quite a few 'experimental' ones (encapsulated in DNS or ICMP).
Criminal investigations don't use 'undelete'. They use electron microscopes to read areas that were microscopically out of alignment the next time the drive passed it's head. It's very expensive to actually recover large amounts of data this way, but for 'spy agency' needs it's trivial.
This isn't about proper disposal. The e-mails were destroyed after the server had gone offline and the inquiry had started. She was ORDERED to turn the drives over, instead she wiped the drives and then turned them over.
Slashdot Mirror
Microcode has kind of blurred that line. The CPU is responsible for bootstrapping the system to some extent, but then the OS is responsible for bootstrapping parts of the CPU.
XHCI is (slightly) older than Windows 7 and was worked on in part by Microsoft, you'd think they at least include support in a 2016 Windows 7 build. It's the OS that has to deliver the drivers, not the hardware stuck on some old interface just because some OS'es are braindead.
The /. title is implying something different though. Intel and AMD chips only supporting Windows is different than Windows only supporting Intel and AMD chips
Then why the hell are you still using Exchange? You must be the BOFH - mwahaha: the system I manage is neat and concise, the system my users use is a pile of crap.
The "victims" here would be the banks. Swift is a consortium of banks that facilitates international (or at least EU) bank-to-bank transfers. It's basically the routing number banks use for international transfers. From what I remember from using it, the transfer itself does not contain account numbers. If the swift network is what is compromised, the hackers could initiate fraudulent no-origin transfers.
I've seen the same problem on cheap SSD's like the Samsung "Pro" lines. I've had much better results with the Intel DC line though, they seem to be able to sustain their "average" read and write speeds.
Perhaps people would notice and demand at least 3rd world country level Internet from their shitty providers then.
Netflix has ~4,000 movies and ~1,000 TV shows, any server thus seems to handle just 1 movie and about 1000 connections each (if 5% of their user base is actively streaming at any one point)? This just seems like an awful lot of servers for what I find to be a relatively low load for simply streaming data.
I'm sure Netflix could save a lot of money and network headaches by using a BitTorrent type approach, it would also alleviate the "problems" with the providers, most traffic would stay within their network.
No he wasn't. He was simply providing a platform to host online files. All he did was not bend to US media cartels the way YouTube or Dropbox did nor give the US government control over the systems the way Amazon or Microsoft does. At one point his system was considered the best file upload facility as it was fully encrypted so no company or government could see what actually was on it.
The US government wanted him, a company not even based out of the US, to implement DMCA controls similar to YouTube's (where any one could claim infringement and the content taken down), he refused and his site was taken offline and he was arrested.
So the EU can just come down and tell it's member countries who they are and aren't allowed to give tax breaks to. This would be an interesting ruling though as ANY tax breaks would become illegal in the EU and thus there would be no viable way for companies to keep their business in the richer EU countries.
I don't think Trump has the political clout to make it happen. He doesn't have the support of any Republican old-timers. Regardless of whether he wins the popular vote, he's losing because the game has already been decided in favor of Clinton at this point.
FreeNAS would do what you want it to do. You can then back up to another disk or set of disks or somewhere online. As far as online goes, I'd choose a good VPS provider with sufficient disk space or rsync.net for sending ZFS streams. You could also go with a 'cheap' backup provider like BackBlaze or CrashPlan, both have their ups and downs but for that amount of space, a file-based backup (which is what rsync is) is typically insufficient especially if you're planning on growing.
File-based backups on some of my systems can take a month or so to complete over gigabit, I'd shudder to think the time it takes for 10Mbps or lower speed Internet connections. With rsync.net you can send them a physical set of disks, have them import it and ZFS sends literally takes overnight to "backup" a 100TB+ system.
"Storage Spaces" is one of those techs that MS will (has) abandon(ed), it's too buggy and slow to be usable and is/was part of MS Home Server. It's basically a very high overhead software-based RAID.
Who is really using BR or any optical media at this point? Blu-Ray was the winner in the optical media war but nobody wants to use it. DVD is 'good enough' for most people and the headaches of hooking up a BR player so it allows DRM to work is too much work for many.
Who would ever buy from Sony again, they've bungled many a product. BetaMax, MemoryCard, UMD, MiniDisc, BMG Rootkit, PS3 OtherOS, PS Vita, PSN hacks and pretty much all of their products are more expensive and have less features than competitors.
Price fixing by the government which what parent post was referring to.
Price fixing happens for most monopolies, a free market wouldn't allow for many monopolies on high margin products. A truly free market wouldn't have licenses, FDA, copyright or patents. Price fixing protects the poor from abuse by government granted monopolies.
The problem is the decisions are disproportionately favored in the mother in contested cases. Actually go to family court once, as a father you have to prove that your ex is truly incompetent and incapable of taking care. It takes a very expensive 3-way psych eval in most cases meaning a full psych eval of all people involved for the plaintiff, defense and for the court; a single one costs $2000/pp on average and the cost is solely carried by the plaintiff (father). That is $12-20k simply to prove your ex has the condition she often has been prescribed medication for but never takes and then you still only have a 75% chance of success.
It doesn't matter who spends more time with the kids before, the mother has often kidnapped or been granted temporary full custody the children and is refusing to allow court ordered visitation and as a result she gets to claim she spent more time with the kids.
When the statistics surrounding temporary custody do not go 90% in the mothers favor (the court is supposed to be ignorant of any unfounded accusations until they hear the case), then fathers may see a chance.
"the rules aren't subject to congressional approval" - a lot of "laws" have passed since Bush onwards that are no longer subject to congressional approval. They're just a source of comedic entertainment any other time, why do we even have congress or a judiciary for that matter? It didn't pass congress properly, let's just make it a presidential order.
If anything, you should vote for Trump because he's too stupid to realize he can pull legalistic shit like this, perhaps "the people" can restore some of the balance and take it away from the attorneys-in-charge. That or Gary Johnson/Jill Stein - may not be ideal but anything is better than an extension of these Bush-Obama policies.
Either way, I'm sure this won't be abused. Come to the US, get $500k in funds, you just have to promise us to create some jobs in the next 5 years even though our own startups fail 90% of the time this won't be a problem for you. If anything, give ANY startup in the US access to the same funds. I sure could use them, I'm an immigrant even.
The 'true' pay gap is 0.1-0.01% or something like that (a statistical error) in the western world and that may be due to (70-80% paid) maternity leave. The "problem" is the lifetime income gap, which has been closing but is somewhere on the order of -5 to 15% depending on the field. Educated women no longer stop work to take care of children and it's no longer odd that the father stops working these days as well.
Obviously employers would get an all-female workforce if it were legal for them to pay them even 1% less than equally qualified men.
This agreement is just White House endorsed commercial advertisement. It gets everybody in the news one last time.
Start a Equal Opportunity lawsuit, you should win.
Sorry, but you must be looking at different stats:
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
The only articles I can find that say otherwise are ALL pointing to the same HuffPo article (not even a scholarly backed piece).
The "majority" of parents does indeed reach an agreement out of court, a little over 50% (Macooby & Mnookin) reaches a so-called uncontested agreement, that means at least 49% is contested. In SJW-world this would mean any contested cases should automatically go to the father right? Equality in numbers and all.
In a study of 705 cases, an uncontested request for maternal physical custody was made in 500 cases. The outcome matched the request for maternal custody in nearly 90% of such cases. In contrast, paternal physical custody was awarded in only 75% of the 47 cases in which there was an uncontested request for sole paternal physical custody. - So EVEN in uncontested cases (the mother agrees), the courts will 25% of the time override the parents' wishes and still grant the mother custody.
There are some 40,000 disputed custody cases every year which are decided by family court judges. These judges will listen to recommendations from court welfare officers who visit the family and write 35,000 reports every year. The welfare officers work in the probation service which deals with mostly male criminals, this makes it difficult to see fathers in a positive light. The result is that family courts award mothers sole custody in 71% of cases and fathers sole custody in 7% of all cases, joint custody is awarded in the remaining 21% of cases. Many fathers report giving up an expensive custody fight for their children after advice from lawyers who say they can't win. It is very common for mothers during custody battles to receive state funded legal aid. A custody battle is therefore a very unequal war of attrition. Many fathers report that efforts to have contact with their children are blocked by mothers, and the courts will not enforce the right of children to have contact with their fathers.
And how would they check that? Sure they can filter IPSEC traffic but there are many more VPN types, over HTTP, SOCKS, SSL and quite a few 'experimental' ones (encapsulated in DNS or ICMP).
Criminal investigations don't use 'undelete'. They use electron microscopes to read areas that were microscopically out of alignment the next time the drive passed it's head. It's very expensive to actually recover large amounts of data this way, but for 'spy agency' needs it's trivial.
That is not how FBI investigations work. You can't just turn over the data, there is a chain of evidence.
This isn't about proper disposal. The e-mails were destroyed after the server had gone offline and the inquiry had started. She was ORDERED to turn the drives over, instead she wiped the drives and then turned them over.