You may not wear shorts, tank tops, beach shoes or t-shirts, or any clothing with offensive language or logos. Don't do this, and for heaven's sake, don't do that!
Not from the South, I take it?
You will wear appropriate attire. In my courtroom, son, that's a suit and tie. This court will now recess while this...this..."juror" returns appropriately attired! *slam*
Now get out of here and don't ever return to my courtroom dressed like that!
Great, you've got my credit card number if I bought something through iTMS but do you really think I'm going to wake up that memory and resource hog on my Windows partition just to get to a social networking site when I can hit Facebook through Linux or (nearly) any mobile device? I might be a small minority but that's not for me.
You're obviously not a True Believer in The Black Turtlenecked One of the Great Apple, and therefore Ping does not want you.
Screw that. This is patent lotto. Some company selling a million articles with a wrong or expired patent number and you get to split half a billion bucks with good ol' Uncle Sam! And it only goes up from there!
Why follow the source, be practical, or go through the work of making a cheap knockoff? This is free money. It's the American way, buddy!
Do you think that it's that different here in the States? For most wired broadband Internet connections, you're going to need to give them a real service address (they need to know where to string the wires, right?), and a real billing address (these are the same for most people, of course, but they need to know who/where to send the bill). They're expecting a real name, but I imagine you could give them an alias, as none of my wired ISPs have ever asked for ID. Not sure how much good that would do, however, as they know where you live.
You'll send a C&D, I'll tell you to take me to court or STFU. That's SOP for anyone in a domain name dispute, which is what this is. Nobody can mistake teachbook with facebook. For one thing, teachbook sounds like a place for people with a bit of an education.
It's a bit like when cops do a drug bust and quote the value of the seizure as if it were all chopped up into single gramme baggies and sold at full street price...
And how is it that you'd be knowin' the price of single gramme baggies, now laddie?
Right. 1911. That's a century ago. I think that qualifies - as the parent stated - as archaic.
The 1911 pattern.45 ACP is still produced today and is still one of the most popular and commonly-used pistols on the market.. Not archaic, just a classic.
Trademarks don't work like that. Barnes & Noble isn't exactly an online social network; they're a bookseller. Since they're considered to be in different businesses, under law there is no conflict.
Also, there is no concept of "prior art" in trademarks. If, for example, I have a registered trademark that I've used to identify my business, and I've used it successfully in commerce, it doesn't really matter whether or not you used the same thing or something similar first; I may still be able to successfully sue you after issuing you a cease and desist.
Read the article again. The subject is entirely controversial. Most of the controversy revolves around the design of the S-boxes, but they were proven to be very resistant to direct cryptanalysis:
Some of the suspicions about hidden weaknesses in the S-boxes were allayed in 1990, with the independent discovery and open publication by Eli Biham and Adi Shamir of differential cryptanalysis, a general method for breaking block ciphers. The S-boxes of DES were much more resistant to the attack than if they had been chosen at random, strongly suggesting that IBM knew about the technique back in the 1970s. This was indeed the case — in 1994, Don Coppersmith published some of the original design criteria for the S-boxes.
Most of the rest is just supposition as to NSA's motives for being involved. That NSA pushed for security in all other attacks but brute force attacks isn't, in and of itself, suspicious. It just means that NSA knew in the 1970s what cryptographers know today: you can't really secure against brute force attacks other than by increasing the key length.
But what if IBM did push the key length to 64-bits? DES would have much slower and, hence, less readily adopted commercial. Since DES was designed to promote the use of crypto commercially, that would have spelled failure for the algorithm. As it stands now, pushing the key length to 64-bits would have only bought DES maybe a few more years of viability.
So you're taking the stance that DES was crippled on purpose? Or what? The reality is that DES was simply held up on too high a pedestal for too long because it had government endorsement. NSA's involvement in DES isn't unusual or abnormal; developing good, usable encryption technology is part of NSA's charter as
Bear in mind history. DES was developed in in the late 1970s. Computers were far, far slower back then. The then-popular Apple II series were running a 1 MHz 8-bit CPU. They came standard with 4KB of RAM, and the CPU could only address 64K of RAM at a time. That's several orders of magnitude less computing power than any 20-year-old desktop computer today. A 56-bit key was chosen for DES mostly because adding bits to the key increases the amount of processing power required to perform encryption and decryption exponentially.
DES is simply obsolete and it should have been deprecated sooner than it was. It was not ever really an attempt by NSA to produce inferior encryption.
Yep.The WARN Act is practically pointless. You can always tell when massive layoffs are starting because the company will do things like institute a freeze on all hiring, stop buying office supplies, refuse requests for purchase orders, cancel projects previously thought to be important, etc.
Seriously, though, this is exactly why Intel would buy McAfee. They're not interested in the consumer product; hell McAfee isn't very interested in their consumer product anymore. They make big bucks selling magic security fairy dust to corporate IT folks without a clue.
Do you honestly think that Microsoft would do nothing if there was a non-patched privilege escalation exploit in Windows?
Yes. Microsoft's track record certainly speaks for itself. There have been plenty of instances where known non-patched privelege escalation exploits in Windows went unpatched by Microsoft for years. (One I'm thinking of in particular affected GDI).
The problem you are experiencing is likely related to memory usage. The longer you use it and the more tabs/windows you open, the more memory it consumers. Eventually your OS starts swapping stuff out. Chrome is a bit better in regards to memory management; it's eventually sucks up as much memory -- actually, usually more since each tab runs in its own thread -- but one advantage is that if you close a tab, the memory it is consuming is released.
Opera is a little bit better than both Firefox and Chrome in terms of memory management, but it seriously lags behind both Chrome and Firefox in terms of extensibility. And I refuse to comment on Safari on the grounds that rabid Apple fans will hunt me down and kill me.
No, parent is correct as to whether it's a stimulant or depressive; it's a stimulant.
As to the mechanism, you're almost right. Ritalin actually increases the level of dopamine in the brain, which improves the neural signal-to-noise ratio and cuts down on 'background firing' in the brain.
The term you're looking for isn't 'depressing' that part of the brain. It's 'antagonist'. The mechanism you're describing is for a serotonin reuptake inhibitor. SSRIs are seratonin receptor antagonists; they prevent the reuptake of serotonin. Ritalin is similarly a dopamine receptor antagonist.
(Disclaimer: my wife is a psychological specializing in drug addictions.)
Well, as I've been intensely following TPB and the legal matters surrounding it for quite some time now, the only thing I can say is that it is apparent from discussions on TPB forums that TPB is mostly self-running these days. I think it's pretty likely that various other members of the Pirate Party are running it.
To clarify, the Standard only has 1 NIC, not one 1 Gb NIC + 1 100 MB NIC.
I still wouldn't hold Globalscale's (who is a retailer/distributor for the devices, they are not the device's manufacturer) against the hardware device itself. I'd certainly say that the manufacturer didn't do adequate testing, but do understand that at around $100, these are the cheapest things available with this much horsepower. I know, I've been researching small embedded general-purpose Linux devices for about 3 months now, because I think the GuruPlug would be an ideal candidate for mesh networking.
Slashdot Mirror
You may not wear shorts, tank tops, beach shoes or t-shirts, or any clothing with offensive language or logos. Don't do this, and for heaven's sake, don't do that!
Not from the South, I take it?
You will wear appropriate attire. In my courtroom, son, that's a suit and tie. This court will now recess while this...this..."juror" returns appropriately attired! *slam*
Now get out of here and don't ever return to my courtroom dressed like that!
-- Hon. Morgan Greywolf, aka "The Hangin' Judge"
Great, you've got my credit card number if I bought something through iTMS but do you really think I'm going to wake up that memory and resource hog on my Windows partition just to get to a social networking site when I can hit Facebook through Linux or (nearly) any mobile device? I might be a small minority but that's not for me.
You're obviously not a True Believer in The Black Turtlenecked One of the Great Apple, and therefore Ping does not want you.
Screw that. This is patent lotto. Some company selling a million articles with a wrong or expired patent number and you get to split half a billion bucks with good ol' Uncle Sam! And it only goes up from there!
Why follow the source, be practical, or go through the work of making a cheap knockoff? This is free money. It's the American way, buddy!
Do you think that it's that different here in the States? For most wired broadband Internet connections, you're going to need to give them a real service address (they need to know where to string the wires, right?), and a real billing address (these are the same for most people, of course, but they need to know who/where to send the bill). They're expecting a real name, but I imagine you could give them an alias, as none of my wired ISPs have ever asked for ID. Not sure how much good that would do, however, as they know where you live.
Or 1981.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082340/plotsummary
Now get off my lawn!
For certain products, that makes absolute sense. Take, for example, network-attached storage devices. If you bought one, you might buy others.
MTV vs. Adam Curry.
And people might very well mistakenly get the idea that 'Teachbook' is somehow affiliated with 'Facebook'. That's Facebook's main case right there.
And how is it that you'd be knowin' the price of single gramme baggies, now laddie?
The 1911 pattern .45 ACP is still produced today and is still one of the most popular and commonly-used pistols on the market.. Not archaic, just a classic.
Trademarks don't work like that. Barnes & Noble isn't exactly an online social network; they're a bookseller. Since they're considered to be in different businesses, under law there is no conflict.
Also, there is no concept of "prior art" in trademarks. If, for example, I have a registered trademark that I've used to identify my business, and I've used it successfully in commerce, it doesn't really matter whether or not you used the same thing or something similar first; I may still be able to successfully sue you after issuing you a cease and desist.
IANAL, etc.
I already addressed this in this post.
Read the article again. The subject is entirely controversial. Most of the controversy revolves around the design of the S-boxes, but they were proven to be very resistant to direct cryptanalysis:
Most of the rest is just supposition as to NSA's motives for being involved. That NSA pushed for security in all other attacks but brute force attacks isn't, in and of itself, suspicious. It just means that NSA knew in the 1970s what cryptographers know today: you can't really secure against brute force attacks other than by increasing the key length.
But what if IBM did push the key length to 64-bits? DES would have much slower and, hence, less readily adopted commercial. Since DES was designed to promote the use of crypto commercially, that would have spelled failure for the algorithm. As it stands now, pushing the key length to 64-bits would have only bought DES maybe a few more years of viability.
So you're taking the stance that DES was crippled on purpose? Or what? The reality is that DES was simply held up on too high a pedestal for too long because it had government endorsement. NSA's involvement in DES isn't unusual or abnormal; developing good, usable encryption technology is part of NSA's charter as
Bear in mind history. DES was developed in in the late 1970s. Computers were far, far slower back then. The then-popular Apple II series were running a 1 MHz 8-bit CPU. They came standard with 4KB of RAM, and the CPU could only address 64K of RAM at a time. That's several orders of magnitude less computing power than any 20-year-old desktop computer today. A 56-bit key was chosen for DES mostly because adding bits to the key increases the amount of processing power required to perform encryption and decryption exponentially.
DES is simply obsolete and it should have been deprecated sooner than it was. It was not ever really an attempt by NSA to produce inferior encryption.
Tabletop fusors only need energies in excess of 20keV. I'm sure that's no big deal at all.
However, hydrogen, unlike helium, is a resource that is very, very abundant on our planet. It's quite literally everywhere.
Yep.The WARN Act is practically pointless. You can always tell when massive layoffs are starting because the company will do things like institute a freeze on all hiring, stop buying office supplies, refuse requests for purchase orders, cancel projects previously thought to be important, etc.
Illinois doesn't have a monopoly on dirty politics. They're just much worse there at hiding it.
Seriously, though, this is exactly why Intel would buy McAfee. They're not interested in the consumer product; hell McAfee isn't very interested in their consumer product anymore. They make big bucks selling magic security fairy dust to corporate IT folks without a clue.
Do you honestly think that Microsoft would do nothing if there was a non-patched privilege escalation exploit in Windows?
Yes. Microsoft's track record certainly speaks for itself. There have been plenty of instances where known non-patched privelege escalation exploits in Windows went unpatched by Microsoft for years. (One I'm thinking of in particular affected GDI).
Yep. JavaScript :: Firefox as Lisp :: Emacs
The problem you are experiencing is likely related to memory usage. The longer you use it and the more tabs/windows you open, the more memory it consumers. Eventually your OS starts swapping stuff out. Chrome is a bit better in regards to memory management; it's eventually sucks up as much memory -- actually, usually more since each tab runs in its own thread -- but one advantage is that if you close a tab, the memory it is consuming is released.
Opera is a little bit better than both Firefox and Chrome in terms of memory management, but it seriously lags behind both Chrome and Firefox in terms of extensibility. And I refuse to comment on Safari on the grounds that rabid Apple fans will hunt me down and kill me.
The real problem? All browsers suck.
No, parent is correct as to whether it's a stimulant or depressive; it's a stimulant.
As to the mechanism, you're almost right. Ritalin actually increases the level of dopamine in the brain, which improves the neural signal-to-noise ratio and cuts down on 'background firing' in the brain.
The term you're looking for isn't 'depressing' that part of the brain. It's 'antagonist'. The mechanism you're describing is for a serotonin reuptake inhibitor. SSRIs are seratonin receptor antagonists; they prevent the reuptake of serotonin. Ritalin is similarly a dopamine receptor antagonist.
(Disclaimer: my wife is a psychological specializing in drug addictions.)
Sounds like a good way to get sued.
1. Publish someone else's book on Lulu
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
4. Get sued!
Well, as I've been intensely following TPB and the legal matters surrounding it for quite some time now, the only thing I can say is that it is apparent from discussions on TPB forums that TPB is mostly self-running these days. I think it's pretty likely that various other members of the Pirate Party are running it.
To clarify, the Standard only has 1 NIC, not one 1 Gb NIC + 1 100 MB NIC.
I still wouldn't hold Globalscale's (who is a retailer/distributor for the devices, they are not the device's manufacturer) against the hardware device itself. I'd certainly say that the manufacturer didn't do adequate testing, but do understand that at around $100, these are the cheapest things available with this much horsepower. I know, I've been researching small embedded general-purpose Linux devices for about 3 months now, because I think the GuruPlug would be an ideal candidate for mesh networking.