No browser "has" to implement it, but at least there is a 'standard' way of doing it so web developers will start asking whether/how they can be using it instead of using Flash/Silverlight.
There are plenty of standards the W3C has that aren't implemented across browsers (even simple things like input types) and there is another standards group WHATWG that has an entirely different implementation of HTML (which is what WebKit etc uses)
That still implies the existence of a license and agreement. He is arguing that left-wingers can use his copyright while right-wingers can't, in both cases without any sort of agreement or explicit license. If he had an explicit license (eg. CC-NOT-THE-RIGHT), then you could potentially go ahead and invalidate the contract (depending on locality) for discriminatory business practices.
Him and his lawyers basically shot themselves in the foot with that expression. You either enforce your copyright or you don't. Selecting a group of people regardless of definition, means you're not enforcing your copyright consistently and you are going to lose it.
Yes, I understand that, I was pointing out that with Blockchains, the entire transaction including settlement has to happen at the same time. If VISA were to settle at every transaction AND eat the transactions that would put you in overdraft, it wouldn't be nearly as fast and efficient.
With VISA, a bank basically tells VISA you have the money or credit, but if you don't, they simply give you a negative balance and the merchant is guaranteed to get the money. It's very evident when you do overseas transactions, even transaction holds, which show up in a matter of seconds/minutes in the US won't show up on your card for days and you can easily reach the limit of a credit or debit card especially when gas stations put on something like $50 hold, make the charge and then won't clear it for a week, you can have $1000 in holds and $800 in charges all counting towards your "available balance".
Prepaid cards are a different ballgame altogether and can often not be used for offline or overseas transactions.
You should understand how that 'feature' works though. A bank debit card allows your funds to be overdrawn and can be used as a credit card as well, sure it checks more frequently against your available balance but offline transactions would still process and put your account in 'the red'.
VISA doesn't have to wait for a transaction to propagate in order to do the next one. Blockchains do.
VISA allows you to overdraw your account because inherently that's what they want you to do (Credit) while with Blockchains, you can't spend money you don't have (Debit).
If all VISA transactions were distributed (they somewhat are but are geographically centralized) and converted to direct Debit and eat the transactions that would put a customer in an overdrawn account, they would have nowhere the capacity they do today. Every time you do a transaction, they would have to query your bank whether you have enough money, then they would allow your transaction and post it to your bank account as if you wrote a check. That takes about 2-3 days to "propagate" so a VISA card would allow you to make 1 transaction every 2-3 days. Blockchains allow you to do 1 transaction every ~10 minutes.
For a blockchain to work in the real world, you need to have people take risks, assess your "credit" and allow you to build up a credit of transactions which you would pay back to the blockchain over 1, 6, 12 months.
This is merely interpreting the muscles/nerve signals, not the brain signals - it's not converting concepts. If it were a brain interface, you would only have to think about doing the typing (already done in the lab) and/or think about the words/sentences (quite a bit harder problem).
That's because most people are misinterpreting open source. Open source doesn't mean you are obliged to redistribute the code to the world for free and rely on hobbyist communities to support your software. It simply means that your clients can take your code elsewhere if you disappear or fuck them over. If your clients keep leaving you, you're simply not offering value and it doesn't matter whether your license is open or not, if it's not, it simpy means they will feel more screwed.
I write exclusively open source software and am not needing to beg for food. Red Hat, IBM, Google, Facebook are largely writing, using and distributing open source software, it is entirely possible to set up a Facebook or Google clone, CentOS and Fedora give you access to the entire Red Hat ecosystem free. Even Apple and Microsoft have significant portions of code publicly released. Putting the open source systems together and associated support and inertia are making them rich.
27 pages is an awful lot of document to just state that. The agreement does include unspecified "contributions" of which China and the US will bear nearly half of the world's. Signed agreements are binding even if it's just a 'shame' thing, media pressure and future reinterpretation based on personal beliefs rather than science are a real risk, you complain about Trump for doing it but imagine someone like our current VP or anyone in the Republican party for that matter reinterpret the needs of the world based on their faith and associated bloodlust - nuking all non-Christian countries would definitely help climate in the long run.
Agreements with shoddy wording and no enforceability nor accountability is bad. You see what Trump can do with it, pray nobody that actually interprets the rhetoric like gospel comes in power.
Because they don't understand lower languages like C or someone told them that Object Oriented programming is a good paradigm.
Java is indeed a PITA but it abstracts away the complicated stuff and by the time you've come to the conclusion that Java is the wrong choice for pretty much every project beyond a certain complexity, you're in too deep to make the switch.
Given it's an office space as well as a living space, if what you're saying is correct, the sounds are most likely emanating from the CIA goon in the basement making hot pockets while he's burning the midnight oil, not international interference.
The problem with HTTP is that range requests are a bit of a hack, there is a huge amount of protocol overhead and it does not work universally especially since there is no universal session state mechanism in HTTP, so when your session expires, often so does your download.
Equifax Inc. has requested 96 H1B visa over the last 5 years all for $90k salary jobs (job market average there is ~$125k) for their Atlanta, GA offices.
In 2010 they outsourced their call centers overseas and 100 H1B's in the IT for a company of only 9500 employees means, yes, their entire IT department has been outsourced.
FTPS is relatively standard, I never have had an issue with it although you are right that there are various shoddy closed source FTP servers, the only "problem" is that most use self-signed certificates.
I'm currently trying to download 300GB via HTTP on a server that limits each user to a single connection of 128kbps (yay, academia). I know it supports range requests but as I said, they are particularly flaky on many non-Apache servers (looking at you IIS) and many admins misconfigure it, especially on nginx . Then there are session issues, which if your session expires, you can't continue your download.
From a server end you can't just use pipes to push data from eg. a compression algorithm over HTTP unless you custom script something (eg. in PHP), with FTP the remote behaves just like a local disk drive, which means you can open remote pipes or devices even.
Yes, yes it is, it is the same protocol. You obviously have no clue and attempting to argue with a 20+ year Linux/Unix veteran is only going to embarrass you further.
FTP can be done using TLS and there is also SSH-FTP. FTPS is no more or less secure than HTTPS.
Have you ever downloaded large files over HTTP? It's not built for it, you practically need a download manager because the browsers will just choke or won't be able to continue unfinished downloads and there are hacks that make it work but many configurations aren't set up right to continue partial downloads.
The NSA isn't the government. NSA does have its plugs in lots of systems e.g. I know they do in large(r) academia networks but they can only reach the higher ups, sysadmin level people aren't supposed to know about the existence of a black box on their network partially because they aren't vetted and it's too many people with little to lose and loose lips.
If the NSA directly interfered with government operations, people would have a fit especially on the smaller, local levels. Federal buildings often share space with non-federal government agencies (e.g. Where I live, federal buildings double as DMV and state and DA offices), solely for political posturing it would be a shitstorm.
People that are critical about their entertainment or have a broader taste simply don't go to the cinema. I personally would never go, family and friends that kind of want to relive their childhood with all of the last few years' remakes, still go.
Especially on MetaCritic you can find the difference between general population and review critics. What critics find good, the general population doesn't and vice versa.
Personally, I don't find most critics very useful because they often do not understand the subtleties behind things like Kingsman or they are pushing the stuff from major studios (most of the recent Bay movies or comic book adaptations get amazing reviews from critics).
Let's Encrypt so far hasn't yet gotten their hands caught in the cookie jar and they are infinitely more transparent than most paid cert providers. Certificate providers in general do not put up a public ledger of all certificates it has signed, they barely even verify whether you are the owner of a domain and/or site. LE at least requires valid domain setups and unless you've been rooted (at which all bets are off regardless of your CA) you have to put up a challenge to make sure you can renew and certs are short enough in length that it both encourages automation and reduces the timespan attackers have to attack the weaker protocols.
The rest of your post is BS - you can do LetsEncrypt specifically via HTTPS (TLS-SNI-01 challenge which is described in the RFC) and most places have port 80 forwarded to port 443 being handled by the same daemon (apache or nginx) but it's also entirely possible to set up your own ACME CA protocol for internal usage or that uses alternative methods of verification.
Basically, what happened is that Symantec allowed "foreign entities" (in countries like China, Italy, Brazil, Korea, Japan, Spain etc) to create certificates using it's root certificate.
Initially someone pointed out that they were just signing a bunch of test domains that were actually registered but both internal and external audits eventually found that they had delegated signing through cross-certificates to various banks and telecom agencies and ~30,000 certs were being issued by these "Regional Authorities" including google.com and various of it's subdomains.
Symantec has proven to not be trustworthy, initially it appeared to whitelist NSA malware, now we see that it's just giving away signing authority to international agencies and governments.
Slashdot Mirror
It plays a piano, should've given it an accordion, then it would be Baby Weird AI
No browser "has" to implement it, but at least there is a 'standard' way of doing it so web developers will start asking whether/how they can be using it instead of using Flash/Silverlight.
There are plenty of standards the W3C has that aren't implemented across browsers (even simple things like input types) and there is another standards group WHATWG that has an entirely different implementation of HTML (which is what WebKit etc uses)
That still implies the existence of a license and agreement. He is arguing that left-wingers can use his copyright while right-wingers can't, in both cases without any sort of agreement or explicit license. If he had an explicit license (eg. CC-NOT-THE-RIGHT), then you could potentially go ahead and invalidate the contract (depending on locality) for discriminatory business practices.
Him and his lawyers basically shot themselves in the foot with that expression. You either enforce your copyright or you don't. Selecting a group of people regardless of definition, means you're not enforcing your copyright consistently and you are going to lose it.
Yes, I understand that, I was pointing out that with Blockchains, the entire transaction including settlement has to happen at the same time. If VISA were to settle at every transaction AND eat the transactions that would put you in overdraft, it wouldn't be nearly as fast and efficient.
With VISA, a bank basically tells VISA you have the money or credit, but if you don't, they simply give you a negative balance and the merchant is guaranteed to get the money. It's very evident when you do overseas transactions, even transaction holds, which show up in a matter of seconds/minutes in the US won't show up on your card for days and you can easily reach the limit of a credit or debit card especially when gas stations put on something like $50 hold, make the charge and then won't clear it for a week, you can have $1000 in holds and $800 in charges all counting towards your "available balance".
Prepaid cards are a different ballgame altogether and can often not be used for offline or overseas transactions.
You should understand how that 'feature' works though. A bank debit card allows your funds to be overdrawn and can be used as a credit card as well, sure it checks more frequently against your available balance but offline transactions would still process and put your account in 'the red'.
VISA doesn't have to wait for a transaction to propagate in order to do the next one. Blockchains do.
VISA allows you to overdraw your account because inherently that's what they want you to do (Credit) while with Blockchains, you can't spend money you don't have (Debit).
If all VISA transactions were distributed (they somewhat are but are geographically centralized) and converted to direct Debit and eat the transactions that would put a customer in an overdrawn account, they would have nowhere the capacity they do today. Every time you do a transaction, they would have to query your bank whether you have enough money, then they would allow your transaction and post it to your bank account as if you wrote a check. That takes about 2-3 days to "propagate" so a VISA card would allow you to make 1 transaction every 2-3 days. Blockchains allow you to do 1 transaction every ~10 minutes.
For a blockchain to work in the real world, you need to have people take risks, assess your "credit" and allow you to build up a credit of transactions which you would pay back to the blockchain over 1, 6, 12 months.
You don't, you use self-signed certificates and put the CA into /etc/ssl/certs
This is merely interpreting the muscles/nerve signals, not the brain signals - it's not converting concepts. If it were a brain interface, you would only have to think about doing the typing (already done in the lab) and/or think about the words/sentences (quite a bit harder problem).
This is just a glorified laser keyboard. Remember those: http://www.ctxtechnologies.com... - $55 on Amazon.
That's because most people are misinterpreting open source. Open source doesn't mean you are obliged to redistribute the code to the world for free and rely on hobbyist communities to support your software. It simply means that your clients can take your code elsewhere if you disappear or fuck them over. If your clients keep leaving you, you're simply not offering value and it doesn't matter whether your license is open or not, if it's not, it simpy means they will feel more screwed.
I write exclusively open source software and am not needing to beg for food. Red Hat, IBM, Google, Facebook are largely writing, using and distributing open source software, it is entirely possible to set up a Facebook or Google clone, CentOS and Fedora give you access to the entire Red Hat ecosystem free. Even Apple and Microsoft have significant portions of code publicly released. Putting the open source systems together and associated support and inertia are making them rich.
27 pages is an awful lot of document to just state that. The agreement does include unspecified "contributions" of which China and the US will bear nearly half of the world's. Signed agreements are binding even if it's just a 'shame' thing, media pressure and future reinterpretation based on personal beliefs rather than science are a real risk, you complain about Trump for doing it but imagine someone like our current VP or anyone in the Republican party for that matter reinterpret the needs of the world based on their faith and associated bloodlust - nuking all non-Christian countries would definitely help climate in the long run.
Agreements with shoddy wording and no enforceability nor accountability is bad. You see what Trump can do with it, pray nobody that actually interprets the rhetoric like gospel comes in power.
Because they don't understand lower languages like C or someone told them that Object Oriented programming is a good paradigm.
Java is indeed a PITA but it abstracts away the complicated stuff and by the time you've come to the conclusion that Java is the wrong choice for pretty much every project beyond a certain complexity, you're in too deep to make the switch.
Some (most) people would say NAT is a ridiculous situation. The protocol isn't broken, NAT is.
Given it's an office space as well as a living space, if what you're saying is correct, the sounds are most likely emanating from the CIA goon in the basement making hot pockets while he's burning the midnight oil, not international interference.
Mains hum at 50/60Hz, not particularly infrasound.
FTPS =/= SSH-FTP. Either way, even "anonymous" FTP is authenticated, you just authenticate with a bogus username/password.
The problem with HTTP is that range requests are a bit of a hack, there is a huge amount of protocol overhead and it does not work universally especially since there is no universal session state mechanism in HTTP, so when your session expires, often so does your download.
Equifax Inc. has requested 96 H1B visa over the last 5 years all for $90k salary jobs (job market average there is ~$125k) for their Atlanta, GA offices.
In 2010 they outsourced their call centers overseas and 100 H1B's in the IT for a company of only 9500 employees means, yes, their entire IT department has been outsourced.
FTPS is relatively standard, I never have had an issue with it although you are right that there are various shoddy closed source FTP servers, the only "problem" is that most use self-signed certificates.
I'm currently trying to download 300GB via HTTP on a server that limits each user to a single connection of 128kbps (yay, academia). I know it supports range requests but as I said, they are particularly flaky on many non-Apache servers (looking at you IIS) and many admins misconfigure it, especially on nginx . Then there are session issues, which if your session expires, you can't continue your download.
From a server end you can't just use pipes to push data from eg. a compression algorithm over HTTP unless you custom script something (eg. in PHP), with FTP the remote behaves just like a local disk drive, which means you can open remote pipes or devices even.
Yes, yes it is, it is the same protocol. You obviously have no clue and attempting to argue with a 20+ year Linux/Unix veteran is only going to embarrass you further.
FTP can be done using TLS and there is also SSH-FTP. FTPS is no more or less secure than HTTPS.
Have you ever downloaded large files over HTTP? It's not built for it, you practically need a download manager because the browsers will just choke or won't be able to continue unfinished downloads and there are hacks that make it work but many configurations aren't set up right to continue partial downloads.
The NSA isn't the government. NSA does have its plugs in lots of systems e.g. I know they do in large(r) academia networks but they can only reach the higher ups, sysadmin level people aren't supposed to know about the existence of a black box on their network partially because they aren't vetted and it's too many people with little to lose and loose lips.
If the NSA directly interfered with government operations, people would have a fit especially on the smaller, local levels. Federal buildings often share space with non-federal government agencies (e.g. Where I live, federal buildings double as DMV and state and DA offices), solely for political posturing it would be a shitstorm.
People that are critical about their entertainment or have a broader taste simply don't go to the cinema. I personally would never go, family and friends that kind of want to relive their childhood with all of the last few years' remakes, still go.
Especially on MetaCritic you can find the difference between general population and review critics. What critics find good, the general population doesn't and vice versa.
Personally, I don't find most critics very useful because they often do not understand the subtleties behind things like Kingsman or they are pushing the stuff from major studios (most of the recent Bay movies or comic book adaptations get amazing reviews from critics).
Let's Encrypt so far hasn't yet gotten their hands caught in the cookie jar and they are infinitely more transparent than most paid cert providers. Certificate providers in general do not put up a public ledger of all certificates it has signed, they barely even verify whether you are the owner of a domain and/or site. LE at least requires valid domain setups and unless you've been rooted (at which all bets are off regardless of your CA) you have to put up a challenge to make sure you can renew and certs are short enough in length that it both encourages automation and reduces the timespan attackers have to attack the weaker protocols.
The rest of your post is BS - you can do LetsEncrypt specifically via HTTPS (TLS-SNI-01 challenge which is described in the RFC) and most places have port 80 forwarded to port 443 being handled by the same daemon (apache or nginx) but it's also entirely possible to set up your own ACME CA protocol for internal usage or that uses alternative methods of verification.
Basically, what happened is that Symantec allowed "foreign entities" (in countries like China, Italy, Brazil, Korea, Japan, Spain etc) to create certificates using it's root certificate.
Initially someone pointed out that they were just signing a bunch of test domains that were actually registered but both internal and external audits eventually found that they had delegated signing through cross-certificates to various banks and telecom agencies and ~30,000 certs were being issued by these "Regional Authorities" including google.com and various of it's subdomains.
Symantec has proven to not be trustworthy, initially it appeared to whitelist NSA malware, now we see that it's just giving away signing authority to international agencies and governments.