From what I remember (it's only been 4 years, don't you remember anything? Or were you too young?) is that Microsoft started to grow a clue about security and had to bring out a patch to their Operating System as good as every single day (for ME, XP,...). Of course this was to the great amusement of press, Netcraft and *nix sysadmins that boast 100's of years of uptime and Microsoft's marketing machine decided that: if we bring them out only once a month, we can combine them in a roll-up and it won't look all that bad anymore. They gave it the spin of 'easier for sysadmins' but real sysadmins knew you could schedule them (at least back then, haven't been using Windows lately but I noticed my parents' machine automagically reboots at night - creepy isn't it) either within your organization or locally.
The only problem is, it's the Boston PD's word against CN's word. In the great country we live in, where the government is both judge (supreme court judges are appointed by the political entity that approves this law, as are many other judges that are going to handle these cases), jury (in such cases you don't have 11 randomly chosen peers as a jury), prosecutor (because they are the ones that go after you) and self-declared victim (because they 'lost' money on their own stupidity) combined with the Patriot Act (in which you aren't entitled neither a judge nor a jury and if you are, it's going to be, again one of their own), you don't stand a chance.
and I think that is where the poster misses the point is that the GPL exists because copyright exists. Now if copyright wouldn't exist and everything is by law in accessible public domain, there would be no need for a GPL since everything ever created will need to be in public domain. The loopholes being used in GPL **cough**TiVo**cough** would then also be circumvented as would all the who-ha about GPLv3, the DMCA, DRM etc.
I know that Unix had a bunch of holes that we used to like to exploit, back when computers were a scientific gadget that you saw only in universities and big companies. Heck, I remember all e-mail servers by default being an open relay and usually left that way so we could send e-mail around the world. But we also had Windows, with the same exact security holes back then.
In the mean time though the Unix environments had a LOT of improvements towards security as time progressed. The problem with Microsoft however was that it kept everything closed and no-one could improve or fork to get a more secure version while Unix/BSD/Linux had a lot of forks that went later back into mainstream and forked again, rebuilt from scratch etc.. Over the same time period, Microsoft Windows has thus been slower in developing a more secure and stable version of their products and that what's the industry, geeks and everybody else is blaming Microsoft for. Back in the day, they gained mainstream market and just as they did with IE/NS once they had their mainstream desktop goals, they stopped improving because they didn't need to anymore (what really improved from 95-ME? (5 years) or from Server NT4-2003? (7 years?) or from XP-Vista? (4 years?), I don't mean just fixes, but real groundbreaking (security) improvements like Apple when they switched to Darwin or when Torvalds decided to rebuild from scratch for 2.6).
You're forgetting the actual Jack tools (not the command line, the graphical ones), wonderful especially if you have large setups with lots of inputs/outputs
It's the RIAA's mistake because they go after people knowingly using little and bad evidence and then hoping they can settle for cash. If they really wanted to go after 'pirates' they would have to build their cases stronger before litigating.
Somebody used the dog analogy above, I can use it again. Say you get bit by a bull terrier (pit-bulls that are not trained to fight in a pit) and the dog runs off, no owner to be found. Would you then go around and sue everybody in the street with a dog hoping somebody will settle for your medical bills? What do you think the judge would say if you're suing a homeless person you found on that street that happens to have a German shepherd because you know they wouldn't be able to pay the legal fees?
This is what the RIAA does likewise, they would go after anybody that has a computer, but if you have a lawyer firm for you or money, they'll back off. If you're a single mother or otherwise simpler off paying their extortion^W 'settlement' fee, they will sue you.
The 'hack' is actually just telling the chip that is responsible for decryption of the content to not look at the revoked key list (skipping the whole function that does that and automatically returning a boolean 1)
It's still the same problem as with any form of DRM: you have to give people the public key(s) for both parties, the private key(s) for both parties the encrypted content AND the code that says HOW to use those keys and encryption.
Hah, I remember slinging a hammer out to the person that was bullying me in a workshop. They yelled I was crazy, that they were just messing with me. I said: Well, that's when I get slightly aggressive imagine if I get mad at you. They didn't do anything anymore, the next year they even became pretty good friends.
Another day I got beat up for no apparent reason by 5 tough guys on crack (literally) about 5 sizes broader than me (you know, the really heavy gang member type, I am a geek). After 2 slaps with a boxing iron by one of them and my cheek being punctured by something, I got mad, held one of them by his collar kicking in the air while chucking around punches to the other ones. They were literally standing around me like I was an angry bull until the teachers came between it and I got to go to the hospital. They got kicked out of school (because we threatened the school with leaving and with us a lot more parents).
My uncle told me once, if a gang of people is coming after you with no way out and you're alone, knock out or better yet, kill their leader, the rest will most likely become afraid and back off.
Microsoft won't make.NET available to other platforms than their own, just because it's the only thing that keeps developers and architects from moving to a more stable Unix-like solution.
Another problem is that Windows is not POSIX compatible. Sure you can get the add-on that makes it a bit more POSIX-like but still.NET developers (unless they're knowledgeable on the subject) won't use the POSIX-compatible definitions in.NET/C# because they're fed/learned to use the 'simple' Windows way. Eg. defining a path. You could define a path as follows (yes, in.NET): (pseudocode): $userdrive + $platformseparator + dirname + $platformseparator + filename. Every developer though uses $DRIVENAME + \DIRNAME\FILENAME making it utterly inflexible to be used on another platform.
Again, it is the user that allows this to happen. First of all, you can't do it the 'official' way because even if you use some AppleScript to display it, you don't get the password. If you however draw a dialog box, it's probably going to look different than the 'Apple' way. Also, there is an obligatory link on the underside of your 'login' box, and if you care to check it (of course, people should care) it will tell you exactly which program requested the password. If it's different than the one you're using to install, (eg. a shell script instead of the Cocoa app.) it will show up there.
But that's all just social engineering, if done correctly, very difficult to stop because users are stupid and just trust anybody. I don't trust any screensaver to request my password, because in OS X as opposed to Windows, you can both install and run everything from your personal user folder, no passwords required. That is (or should be) the default for all things you do, so any decent Apple user should get weary as soon as something requests their password (especially a screen saver, heck anything that requests a password on my Mac is suspicious to me). Only certain tools from which I am sure they are trustworthy (like nmap and the like) get me to get my password keyed in.
a) Ballmer is filthy rich but also very stingy so that his own family can't AFFORD a Zune or iPod
b) Ballmer doesn't have a very good relationship with his family so he doesn't get invited to the parties where he could GIVE the Zune (or iPod)
c) His family knows from 'inside' around-the-campfire stories that the Zune actually sucks and that very incompetent people have been working on it.
d) His family just think the Zune sucks
e) Ballmer's mother had a three-some with Linus Torvalds and Steve Jobs, got pregnant and then abandoned him. Now all Apple and open source products make him suck his thumb and make him react violently.
f) His family knows Ballmer's mental state and just reacts to everything he says with, "sure, of course we will look at the Zune, now just eat your peas and we'll all be happy. Yell: *Would somebody please get him a bib and clean off his drool*. Behind his back: *haha, ever heard of a device that squirted, haha, ahum, well you can't laugh at it, he's still a good boy, doesn't do any drugs or so*"
I don't know about where you live, but in most factories I have been to, the way I learned it in school (yes, I have studied PLC controllers) and I think even governments require emergency stops, cords and the like to be switches serial to (one or all of) the main power lines. Somebody trips any emergency stop or the emergency switch breaks and the power gets cut off to the machine (not necessarily the controller, just the power that juices the motors for example).
Nobody in the right mind would let a programmer or a program make the decision whether or not an emergency switch has been activated, they are too prone to bugs and have too many points of failure either from the programmer that made a mistake or a bug in the firmware or even hardware that breaks.
What I've understood on it is this: The LED's will go about double, maybe triple the lifetime of a CFL. If you get the cheap ones, they will burn out (not enough heat dissipation, too much overdriving). The light will look better sometimes (the reproduced spectrum is smaller though) although for coloring you can't just use a filter, you'll have to get that color of LED (and white/blue/orange are more expensive as is and have less light-upbringing than standard). There is also the issue of controlling them, especially if you combine colors, the current for the different ones do differ. They have about the same power usage for the amount of light put out by a similar CFL (although better ones are being researched) and the angle of the light is usually smaller (again, depending on the product your results might differ). They might be just as heavy on the environment during production (the silicon and other products need refined highly and a bunch of plastic for the lens), disposal however (depending on your stand on the whole mercury debate) might be a little better for the environment than the CFL.
I have gotten the advice over again to use LED's as accent and mood lighting while using CFL's, plain FL's or high-efficient halogen if you want/need a lot of 'natural' light
I am not a doctor, but having lived near a very touristic beach, it's not necessary the exposure to the sun that generates skin cancer, but the repeatedly roasting of your skin for hours on end (as most do in the middle of summer) in the hottest temperatures of the sun. We saw bunches of tourists coming from the beach looking like boiled lobsters for days on end, we were recommended to go in the morning and the evening and stay out of the sun in the hottest parts of the day (between 1pm and 4pm). It's not only less dangerous, it's also more fun (less tourists, the sun going down in the sea and if it gets dark afterwards you get fluorescent algae on your skin and you can go skinny-dipping)
Maybe there is another reason for it. As I see in your graph, the rates have been dropping while drunk driving seems to have gone up (the morality of people has gone down, new types of drugs, new type of parties, people mixing drugs and alcohol and a more expanded use of it).
Maybe drunk driving is not the main culprit of traffic fatalities. Of course, you tend to hear more about accidents with drunk people involved than other fatal accidents and that's just the media where it's not as interesting to report that 2 people were just not watching out than a sensational story where one was drunk/drugged.
It's still not safe driving around drunk since in case you have to react fast, you don't which could make the accident more severe. I think it also has to do that if you're drunk and in an accident, due to the alcohol, you might get into shock faster and your body doesn't react as well or reverse to the drugs and medical help applied to you in the initial emergency procedures.
Accidents are usually caused by 2 persons, both might not be watching out as well, the one because he is drunk, the other because he's on the phone or thinking/talking about something else. But if both persons were on the same road, and not drunk, the accident might have happened as well, because both were thinking or not watching out enough, just as severe. It's just easier to blame an accident on the alcohol which is an obvious indicator, just as it's easier to blame disappearing bees on cell phones instead of fungi
I have driven around once while I was drunk. I knew I was drunk and adjusted my driving style accordingly and made it a very short trip because I was scared as hell. On another occasion, I knew I was over the limit but I was not impaired, still, I heightened my senses, turned off the radio etc. to make sure I wasn't missing anything on the road that could cause an accident.
Again, I do not endorse drunk or impaired driving since you'll lose the concentration but saying it is the CAUSE of an accident is silly. Radio's and CD-players are just as good a cause of accidents as drunk driving or cell phones. Should we ban all CD-players now too? A family member of mine was in a severe accident because he was messing around with the CD-player and talking to friends in the car, his crash even appeared in the local paper and tv-newscasts because his car was total-loss but it wasn't blamed on the CD-player, it was blamed on them coming back from a party (and he was the designated driver, so he didn't have any alcohol in him according to the police report).
Really, and what could I have done about it? Vote for extreme-left or ultra-left (or was it right, I don't know). There's only 2 parties in the US and both of them already have their flock of sheep that will vote for them. This elections going to be the same thing, nothing you can do there. There are way too many 'interests' and 'religious' groups in the US that will back a certain candidate. And then there is of course the inevitable fraud that goes on with your vote, Diebold for example can't get their act straight and has blatantly and obviously messed up the last elections, what makes this any different.
As I told before, political parties and runners for any public office should not be allowed to receive any extra contributions (or you could call it legal bribes) than what they already get paid from the state for doing their job. They should not have any interest position anymore in any company or group. If you really want into politics, that should be the sacrifice you'll have to make for doing the RIGHT thing.
Yeah, but if you spend $50 on drinks with a girl, you can be pretty sure she'll be going home with you but if she has to take YOU home you'll find out she's a man.
I would take renting the house over the buy anytime. And I might do it for a car too, if it weren't too expensive and here you see the choice between rent and buy: People would love to rent music if the price were reasonable low enough to make it worth the while. If you spend a few cents more to OWN it, I would also choose to OWN it.
The house is different. A house here costs avg. $100,000. Include into that homeowners insurance, taxes, interest, maintenance, water purification and other costs and over the course of the next say 30 years, your house will have cost roughly $250,000. I rent the same house for $700/mo. If something happens, I call my landlord and they'll fix it. I had 2 times groundwater in my finished basement, 1 broken fridge and snow shoveling service throughout this winter (been here since Dec.). I work, so I can't fix it, and I probably couldn't afford paying a contractor to do it for me. Next to that I can move out whenever I want if my job changes or something like that. If I would have bought it, I would have to sell it again and probably lose out on a lot of money because of the mortgage. Sure, within 250 months or so (which is a little over 10 years) I would have been better off buying the house but it's not worth it to me.
And there you see that different people weigh buying against renting on different criteria. Is it worth it? What about my freedom? What if I stop renting? What if I like the place so much I would stay forever? What is the risk of having a major disaster the next x-number of years and having to fix it? How much money will it cost to rent and how much to buy? You see, with media a lot of answers are clear and it's usually not worth renting the stuff unless you're a DJ or a radio station that only wants to play the latest tunes and need special licensing. Then I could understand renting, because what do you do with obsolete music? Keeping it and never playing it is useless. Individuals like certain music and most likely are going to repeatedly play it over the next x-number of months, even years depending on memory's they've attached to it.
I see more and more in common media that everybody tries to blame everything on new technology going from cancer to depression, blamed on cell phones to video games. Yet, they don't bother looking or trying to understand the deeper reasons like our old friends in the mushroom... euhm, fungi world.
Is it an artifact of ancient religion or superstition maybe? (Like the sun and moon worshipers, or offerers of livestock and enemies, witchhunting?)
What are the consequences of exercising your freedom of speech to post this here? I think it's disorderly so I should get you arrested? No, the constitution are absolute minimum rights, the freedom of speech being one of them. I can say whatever I want, I can wear a hoodie and yell out white power for all anybody cares, there is nothing wrong with it, I shouldn't get punished for it.
If I write a horror story, and you find it disturbing, or a lot of people find it disturbing (like Horrorfest or Quentin Tarantino movies) should I be arrested?
I think the author is a little pre-disposed of his results here:
First page: -I need to load extra drivers for Vista before I can even install the thing I have to use another computer to download it on a USB stick, I go through a simple installation procedure for both systems, I can run Ubuntu in Live or Repair mode or install it, I don't know how to save things like settings to the hard drive for re-use in Live mode, it has memory and media integrity and backup tools though. I can restore a Vista backup and run Vista for free... for 30 days...
Result: Well, Ubuntu has a slight edge, but only because of the live mode.
Second page: -I need to load extra drivers for Ubuntu because I have a cheap-ass printer, I can just download them, but djee, I have to look for them and read how to install them on my machine. I forgot all about the STORAGE drivers on the previous page, but anyway, I have to do the same for Windows, but I don't seem to mind as much. I plug in some stuff, it works on both machines. I try cheap-ass rebranded Lexmark scanner that doesn't identify itself properly and it doesn't work.
Result: Well, Windows works simpler with Plug-n-Pray hardware although I have to go through the same actions on both systems. Stupid hardware manufacturers make trouble.
Third page: -The Synaptic interface (that has been around for years) seems to have been ripped off of Vista (that has been around for...2 months?). On Windows I see my installed software, on Ubuntu I can also download and install millions of software packages.
Result: It's a tie
[verbatim quote]: -Ubuntu's default e-mail client is Evolution, which contains calendaring and contact management; it's not hard to switch to another client (like Thunderbird) if needed. -Vista's default e-mail client, the newly-designed Microsoft Mail, sports a calendaring application but is, on the whole, still highly limited.
Result: Windows, but only by a hair. [/verbatim quote]
Page 7: [again verbatim] -Ubuntu's Konserve program is a simple directory-to-directory backup that works across a variety of media, including FTP. -Vista's backup tool has been derided for having some terrible limitations
Result: A tie [/again verbatim]
Total result (this is again a verbatim quote):
Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff. Vista has a level of completeness and polish that some people find it hard to do without.
Okay, even IF the little one installed Kazaa on her computer (which I highly doubt) consider the following:
Parents (especially those on welfare) don't ever use a computer, let alone have a great knowledge of all what is happening on the computer, so they can't possibly guide their children, how much intent they might have to do so.
This is the USA, not Korea (although...) so you'll first have to prove that it was either the mom or the little one that installed Kazaa (consider that the computer could come from another party that might have installed it before and tried uninstalling it or so, but didn't succeed, then gave away the computer). Then you'll have to prove that either the mom or the kid was knowledgeable enough that they knew they were a) downloading and b) sharing "illegal" media and that it was thus wrong to do so (I can't imagine a 7-year old knowing the distinction between illegal and legal music or the implications of downloading media, using Kazaa or the Internet as a whole).
What if they had a 'wireless' internet connection... Currently the RIAA just accuses everybody and everyone and hope you'll bend over and pull down your pants while holding your *** open too. If you bite back, they either file a motion to dismiss the case or they try holding on the long end of the case hoping you'll give up and roll over (like what Microsoft did with their monopoly cases and they succeeded in the US although Europe is a little more steadfast). Look at the different cases: refusing to pay up the other parties lawyers if they lose, dismissing the case if they see somebody with some more dough popping up to defend the case, accusing minors, bullying, extorting,...
Slashdot Mirror
Same here, although mine is a 6 digit number, starting with 112...
From what I remember (it's only been 4 years, don't you remember anything? Or were you too young?) is that Microsoft started to grow a clue about security and had to bring out a patch to their Operating System as good as every single day (for ME, XP, ...). Of course this was to the great amusement of press, Netcraft and *nix sysadmins that boast 100's of years of uptime and Microsoft's marketing machine decided that: if we bring them out only once a month, we can combine them in a roll-up and it won't look all that bad anymore. They gave it the spin of 'easier for sysadmins' but real sysadmins knew you could schedule them (at least back then, haven't been using Windows lately but I noticed my parents' machine automagically reboots at night - creepy isn't it) either within your organization or locally.
The only problem is, it's the Boston PD's word against CN's word. In the great country we live in, where the government is both judge (supreme court judges are appointed by the political entity that approves this law, as are many other judges that are going to handle these cases), jury (in such cases you don't have 11 randomly chosen peers as a jury), prosecutor (because they are the ones that go after you) and self-declared victim (because they 'lost' money on their own stupidity) combined with the Patriot Act (in which you aren't entitled neither a judge nor a jury and if you are, it's going to be, again one of their own), you don't stand a chance.
and I think that is where the poster misses the point is that the GPL exists because copyright exists. Now if copyright wouldn't exist and everything is by law in accessible public domain, there would be no need for a GPL since everything ever created will need to be in public domain. The loopholes being used in GPL **cough**TiVo**cough** would then also be circumvented as would all the who-ha about GPLv3, the DMCA, DRM etc.
I know that Unix had a bunch of holes that we used to like to exploit, back when computers were a scientific gadget that you saw only in universities and big companies. Heck, I remember all e-mail servers by default being an open relay and usually left that way so we could send e-mail around the world. But we also had Windows, with the same exact security holes back then.
In the mean time though the Unix environments had a LOT of improvements towards security as time progressed. The problem with Microsoft however was that it kept everything closed and no-one could improve or fork to get a more secure version while Unix/BSD/Linux had a lot of forks that went later back into mainstream and forked again, rebuilt from scratch etc.. Over the same time period, Microsoft Windows has thus been slower in developing a more secure and stable version of their products and that what's the industry, geeks and everybody else is blaming Microsoft for. Back in the day, they gained mainstream market and just as they did with IE/NS once they had their mainstream desktop goals, they stopped improving because they didn't need to anymore (what really improved from 95-ME? (5 years) or from Server NT4-2003? (7 years?) or from XP-Vista? (4 years?), I don't mean just fixes, but real groundbreaking (security) improvements like Apple when they switched to Darwin or when Torvalds decided to rebuild from scratch for 2.6).
You're forgetting the actual Jack tools (not the command line, the graphical ones), wonderful especially if you have large setups with lots of inputs/outputs
It's the RIAA's mistake because they go after people knowingly using little and bad evidence and then hoping they can settle for cash. If they really wanted to go after 'pirates' they would have to build their cases stronger before litigating.
Somebody used the dog analogy above, I can use it again. Say you get bit by a bull terrier (pit-bulls that are not trained to fight in a pit) and the dog runs off, no owner to be found. Would you then go around and sue everybody in the street with a dog hoping somebody will settle for your medical bills? What do you think the judge would say if you're suing a homeless person you found on that street that happens to have a German shepherd because you know they wouldn't be able to pay the legal fees?
This is what the RIAA does likewise, they would go after anybody that has a computer, but if you have a lawyer firm for you or money, they'll back off. If you're a single mother or otherwise simpler off paying their extortion^W 'settlement' fee, they will sue you.
The 'hack' is actually just telling the chip that is responsible for decryption of the content to not look at the revoked key list (skipping the whole function that does that and automatically returning a boolean 1)
It's still the same problem as with any form of DRM: you have to give people the public key(s) for both parties, the private key(s) for both parties the encrypted content AND the code that says HOW to use those keys and encryption.
Security through obscurity at it's best.
Hah, I remember slinging a hammer out to the person that was bullying me in a workshop. They yelled I was crazy, that they were just messing with me. I said: Well, that's when I get slightly aggressive imagine if I get mad at you. They didn't do anything anymore, the next year they even became pretty good friends.
Another day I got beat up for no apparent reason by 5 tough guys on crack (literally) about 5 sizes broader than me (you know, the really heavy gang member type, I am a geek). After 2 slaps with a boxing iron by one of them and my cheek being punctured by something, I got mad, held one of them by his collar kicking in the air while chucking around punches to the other ones. They were literally standing around me like I was an angry bull until the teachers came between it and I got to go to the hospital. They got kicked out of school (because we threatened the school with leaving and with us a lot more parents).
My uncle told me once, if a gang of people is coming after you with no way out and you're alone, knock out or better yet, kill their leader, the rest will most likely become afraid and back off.
Microsoft won't make .NET available to other platforms than their own, just because it's the only thing that keeps developers and architects from moving to a more stable Unix-like solution.
.NET developers (unless they're knowledgeable on the subject) won't use the POSIX-compatible definitions in .NET/C# because they're fed/learned to use the 'simple' Windows way. Eg. defining a path. You could define a path as follows (yes, in .NET): (pseudocode): $userdrive + $platformseparator + dirname + $platformseparator + filename. Every developer though uses $DRIVENAME + \DIRNAME\FILENAME making it utterly inflexible to be used on another platform.
Another problem is that Windows is not POSIX compatible. Sure you can get the add-on that makes it a bit more POSIX-like but still
Again, it is the user that allows this to happen. First of all, you can't do it the 'official' way because even if you use some AppleScript to display it, you don't get the password. If you however draw a dialog box, it's probably going to look different than the 'Apple' way. Also, there is an obligatory link on the underside of your 'login' box, and if you care to check it (of course, people should care) it will tell you exactly which program requested the password. If it's different than the one you're using to install, (eg. a shell script instead of the Cocoa app.) it will show up there.
But that's all just social engineering, if done correctly, very difficult to stop because users are stupid and just trust anybody. I don't trust any screensaver to request my password, because in OS X as opposed to Windows, you can both install and run everything from your personal user folder, no passwords required. That is (or should be) the default for all things you do, so any decent Apple user should get weary as soon as something requests their password (especially a screen saver, heck anything that requests a password on my Mac is suspicious to me). Only certain tools from which I am sure they are trustworthy (like nmap and the like) get me to get my password keyed in.
Make your choice:
a) Ballmer is filthy rich but also very stingy so that his own family can't AFFORD a Zune or iPod
b) Ballmer doesn't have a very good relationship with his family so he doesn't get invited to the parties where he could GIVE the Zune (or iPod)
c) His family knows from 'inside' around-the-campfire stories that the Zune actually sucks and that very incompetent people have been working on it.
d) His family just think the Zune sucks
e) Ballmer's mother had a three-some with Linus Torvalds and Steve Jobs, got pregnant and then abandoned him. Now all Apple and open source products make him suck his thumb and make him react violently.
f) His family knows Ballmer's mental state and just reacts to everything he says with, "sure, of course we will look at the Zune, now just eat your peas and we'll all be happy. Yell: *Would somebody please get him a bib and clean off his drool*. Behind his back: *haha, ever heard of a device that squirted, haha, ahum, well you can't laugh at it, he's still a good boy, doesn't do any drugs or so*"
g) All of the above.
I don't know about where you live, but in most factories I have been to, the way I learned it in school (yes, I have studied PLC controllers) and I think even governments require emergency stops, cords and the like to be switches serial to (one or all of) the main power lines. Somebody trips any emergency stop or the emergency switch breaks and the power gets cut off to the machine (not necessarily the controller, just the power that juices the motors for example).
Nobody in the right mind would let a programmer or a program make the decision whether or not an emergency switch has been activated, they are too prone to bugs and have too many points of failure either from the programmer that made a mistake or a bug in the firmware or even hardware that breaks.
I've read and seen a bunch of calculations.
What I've understood on it is this: The LED's will go about double, maybe triple the lifetime of a CFL. If you get the cheap ones, they will burn out (not enough heat dissipation, too much overdriving). The light will look better sometimes (the reproduced spectrum is smaller though) although for coloring you can't just use a filter, you'll have to get that color of LED (and white/blue/orange are more expensive as is and have less light-upbringing than standard). There is also the issue of controlling them, especially if you combine colors, the current for the different ones do differ. They have about the same power usage for the amount of light put out by a similar CFL (although better ones are being researched) and the angle of the light is usually smaller (again, depending on the product your results might differ). They might be just as heavy on the environment during production (the silicon and other products need refined highly and a bunch of plastic for the lens), disposal however (depending on your stand on the whole mercury debate) might be a little better for the environment than the CFL.
I have gotten the advice over again to use LED's as accent and mood lighting while using CFL's, plain FL's or high-efficient halogen if you want/need a lot of 'natural' light
I am not a doctor, but having lived near a very touristic beach, it's not necessary the exposure to the sun that generates skin cancer, but the repeatedly roasting of your skin for hours on end (as most do in the middle of summer) in the hottest temperatures of the sun. We saw bunches of tourists coming from the beach looking like boiled lobsters for days on end, we were recommended to go in the morning and the evening and stay out of the sun in the hottest parts of the day (between 1pm and 4pm). It's not only less dangerous, it's also more fun (less tourists, the sun going down in the sea and if it gets dark afterwards you get fluorescent algae on your skin and you can go skinny-dipping)
Maybe there is another reason for it. As I see in your graph, the rates have been dropping while drunk driving seems to have gone up (the morality of people has gone down, new types of drugs, new type of parties, people mixing drugs and alcohol and a more expanded use of it).
Maybe drunk driving is not the main culprit of traffic fatalities. Of course, you tend to hear more about accidents with drunk people involved than other fatal accidents and that's just the media where it's not as interesting to report that 2 people were just not watching out than a sensational story where one was drunk/drugged.
It's still not safe driving around drunk since in case you have to react fast, you don't which could make the accident more severe. I think it also has to do that if you're drunk and in an accident, due to the alcohol, you might get into shock faster and your body doesn't react as well or reverse to the drugs and medical help applied to you in the initial emergency procedures.
Accidents are usually caused by 2 persons, both might not be watching out as well, the one because he is drunk, the other because he's on the phone or thinking/talking about something else. But if both persons were on the same road, and not drunk, the accident might have happened as well, because both were thinking or not watching out enough, just as severe. It's just easier to blame an accident on the alcohol which is an obvious indicator, just as it's easier to blame disappearing bees on cell phones instead of fungi
I have driven around once while I was drunk. I knew I was drunk and adjusted my driving style accordingly and made it a very short trip because I was scared as hell. On another occasion, I knew I was over the limit but I was not impaired, still, I heightened my senses, turned off the radio etc. to make sure I wasn't missing anything on the road that could cause an accident.
Again, I do not endorse drunk or impaired driving since you'll lose the concentration but saying it is the CAUSE of an accident is silly. Radio's and CD-players are just as good a cause of accidents as drunk driving or cell phones. Should we ban all CD-players now too? A family member of mine was in a severe accident because he was messing around with the CD-player and talking to friends in the car, his crash even appeared in the local paper and tv-newscasts because his car was total-loss but it wasn't blamed on the CD-player, it was blamed on them coming back from a party (and he was the designated driver, so he didn't have any alcohol in him according to the police report).
Really, and what could I have done about it? Vote for extreme-left or ultra-left (or was it right, I don't know). There's only 2 parties in the US and both of them already have their flock of sheep that will vote for them. This elections going to be the same thing, nothing you can do there. There are way too many 'interests' and 'religious' groups in the US that will back a certain candidate. And then there is of course the inevitable fraud that goes on with your vote, Diebold for example can't get their act straight and has blatantly and obviously messed up the last elections, what makes this any different.
As I told before, political parties and runners for any public office should not be allowed to receive any extra contributions (or you could call it legal bribes) than what they already get paid from the state for doing their job. They should not have any interest position anymore in any company or group. If you really want into politics, that should be the sacrifice you'll have to make for doing the RIGHT thing.
Yeah, but if you spend $50 on drinks with a girl, you can be pretty sure she'll be going home with you but if she has to take YOU home you'll find out she's a man.
I would take renting the house over the buy anytime. And I might do it for a car too, if it weren't too expensive and here you see the choice between rent and buy: People would love to rent music if the price were reasonable low enough to make it worth the while. If you spend a few cents more to OWN it, I would also choose to OWN it.
The house is different. A house here costs avg. $100,000. Include into that homeowners insurance, taxes, interest, maintenance, water purification and other costs and over the course of the next say 30 years, your house will have cost roughly $250,000. I rent the same house for $700/mo. If something happens, I call my landlord and they'll fix it. I had 2 times groundwater in my finished basement, 1 broken fridge and snow shoveling service throughout this winter (been here since Dec.). I work, so I can't fix it, and I probably couldn't afford paying a contractor to do it for me. Next to that I can move out whenever I want if my job changes or something like that. If I would have bought it, I would have to sell it again and probably lose out on a lot of money because of the mortgage. Sure, within 250 months or so (which is a little over 10 years) I would have been better off buying the house but it's not worth it to me.
And there you see that different people weigh buying against renting on different criteria. Is it worth it? What about my freedom? What if I stop renting? What if I like the place so much I would stay forever? What is the risk of having a major disaster the next x-number of years and having to fix it? How much money will it cost to rent and how much to buy? You see, with media a lot of answers are clear and it's usually not worth renting the stuff unless you're a DJ or a radio station that only wants to play the latest tunes and need special licensing. Then I could understand renting, because what do you do with obsolete music? Keeping it and never playing it is useless. Individuals like certain music and most likely are going to repeatedly play it over the next x-number of months, even years depending on memory's they've attached to it.
remove the comma between which would be lethal and to the US Army for fun reading!
I see more and more in common media that everybody tries to blame everything on new technology going from cancer to depression, blamed on cell phones to video games. Yet, they don't bother looking or trying to understand the deeper reasons like our old friends in the mushroom... euhm, fungi world.
Is it an artifact of ancient religion or superstition maybe? (Like the sun and moon worshipers, or offerers of livestock and enemies, witchhunting?)
What are the consequences of exercising your freedom of speech to post this here? I think it's disorderly so I should get you arrested? No, the constitution are absolute minimum rights, the freedom of speech being one of them. I can say whatever I want, I can wear a hoodie and yell out white power for all anybody cares, there is nothing wrong with it, I shouldn't get punished for it.
If I write a horror story, and you find it disturbing, or a lot of people find it disturbing (like Horrorfest or Quentin Tarantino movies) should I be arrested?
I think the author is a little pre-disposed of his results here:
...2 months?). On Windows I see my installed software, on Ubuntu I can also download and install millions of software packages.
First page:
-I need to load extra drivers for Vista before I can even install the thing I have to use another computer to download it on a USB stick, I go through a simple installation procedure for both systems, I can run Ubuntu in Live or Repair mode or install it, I don't know how to save things like settings to the hard drive for re-use in Live mode, it has memory and media integrity and backup tools though. I can restore a Vista backup and run Vista for free... for 30 days...
Result: Well, Ubuntu has a slight edge, but only because of the live mode.
Second page:
-I need to load extra drivers for Ubuntu because I have a cheap-ass printer, I can just download them, but djee, I have to look for them and read how to install them on my machine. I forgot all about the STORAGE drivers on the previous page, but anyway, I have to do the same for Windows, but I don't seem to mind as much. I plug in some stuff, it works on both machines. I try cheap-ass rebranded Lexmark scanner that doesn't identify itself properly and it doesn't work.
Result: Well, Windows works simpler with Plug-n-Pray hardware although I have to go through the same actions on both systems. Stupid hardware manufacturers make trouble.
Third page:
-The Synaptic interface (that has been around for years) seems to have been ripped off of Vista (that has been around for
Result: It's a tie
[verbatim quote]:
-Ubuntu's default e-mail client is Evolution, which contains calendaring and contact management; it's not hard to switch to another client (like Thunderbird) if needed.
-Vista's default e-mail client, the newly-designed Microsoft Mail, sports a calendaring application but is, on the whole, still highly limited.
Result: Windows, but only by a hair.
[/verbatim quote]
Page 7:
[again verbatim]
-Ubuntu's Konserve program is a simple directory-to-directory backup that works across a variety of media, including FTP.
-Vista's backup tool has been derided for having some terrible limitations
Result: A tie
[/again verbatim]
Total result (this is again a verbatim quote):
Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff. Vista has a level of completeness and polish that some people find it hard to do without.
Now a whole 4 people are using it! In related news, the sale and downloads of XP have gone up proportionally with OEM Vista.
Okay, even IF the little one installed Kazaa on her computer (which I highly doubt) consider the following:
Parents (especially those on welfare) don't ever use a computer, let alone have a great knowledge of all what is happening on the computer, so they can't possibly guide their children, how much intent they might have to do so.
This is the USA, not Korea (although...) so you'll first have to prove that it was either the mom or the little one that installed Kazaa (consider that the computer could come from another party that might have installed it before and tried uninstalling it or so, but didn't succeed, then gave away the computer). Then you'll have to prove that either the mom or the kid was knowledgeable enough that they knew they were a) downloading and b) sharing "illegal" media and that it was thus wrong to do so (I can't imagine a 7-year old knowing the distinction between illegal and legal music or the implications of downloading media, using Kazaa or the Internet as a whole).
What if they had a 'wireless' internet connection... Currently the RIAA just accuses everybody and everyone and hope you'll bend over and pull down your pants while holding your *** open too. If you bite back, they either file a motion to dismiss the case or they try holding on the long end of the case hoping you'll give up and roll over (like what Microsoft did with their monopoly cases and they succeeded in the US although Europe is a little more steadfast). Look at the different cases: refusing to pay up the other parties lawyers if they lose, dismissing the case if they see somebody with some more dough popping up to defend the case, accusing minors, bullying, extorting,...