The MD5 sum of the secret Cyber Command PR effort to get geeks to talk about it without delving too deep into the actual workings and mission of the Cyber Command. Hmm, I wonder if it will work?
I want nuclear fusion that can fit in my pocket. That, combined with my Quasimodo-esque looks, will almost certainly guarantee that I never reproduce (which could only result further degradation of the planet's gene pool);-)
6 TeraFlops is nothing to sneeze at, but this is just an experimental implementation... and it only uses 10 liters of water for cooling (a pump ensures a flow rate of roughly 30 liters per minute). I'm sure they can easily handle a larger water system which could cool many servers which would eventually produce several Supercalifragilflops of computing power;-)
I disagree with TFA that "it raises the specter of some future administration using that power to crack down on its opponents". The bigger concern is that it could be used to stop the flow of information to the public during a severe crisis (natural disaster, military, political, etc). A large portion of US residents have become addicted to the flow of information arriving via the internet (myself included). Disrupting it would lead to a greater panic than just about anything the government might be trying to "protect us from" (ie, hide from us).
When one of your biggest clients happens to be GM or Blue Cross, it doesn't happen very quickly or ever. I think there are still quite a few Win 2000 machines over there.
Those monsters make changes at a glacial pace. You'll be on IE 7 by 2015. Good luck and invest in lots of ice cold beer.
We absolutely can provide 'basic' or better support for IE 6 but we make sure the entire site works the same in all browsers. The real questions is "how many man hours, and how much of our client's money, should we spend trying to handle IE 6 compatibility and functionality?"
Some of our sites are relatively simple and use formats & javascript libraries we've developed that support IE 6 without any issues at all. If a new or existing client wants this kind of site we don't "break" the IE 6 support - we simply let them know that any future upgrades or additions may not be able to do everything they want (either we can't add the 'fancy' stuff because it would require reworking of the infrastructure or it would break IE 6 compatibility). We always give them the option and if they are willing to spend the extra money on IE 6 compatibility we'll do it but we design the entire site to work the same in all browsers so they have a limited feature set to choose from.
We see dwindling IE 6 visitors but we're also aware that some of our clients still have a large percentage of IE 6 visitors. Because of that we don't offer certain features or enhancements to them. We're upfront about it and they are willing to live with the less fancy site as long as it meets the needs of their visitors.
I'll be writing shit web code for IE6 forever anyway.
That really blows. We're informing our web clients that we're no longer supporting IE 6 and that any IE 6 visitor will land on a "nice, soft" page requesting that they upgrade to one of the many other available browsers. We just got one client to agree to upgrade their 25 employees from IE 6 to IE 8 (they already had FF installed but they have some 3rd party sites that require ActiveX).
If you're stuck doing it for an employer or client you may be better served by spending some time nudging them away from IE 6 because it will save you painful hours in the long run.
At least IE 9 will be much closer to "standards compliant" that all the other versions of IE combined.
Dear Microsoft, IE9 supports many royalty-free, web compatible formats out of the box (HTML, CSS, WOFF, PNG, and the like) so why not at least one more?
I guess it can't hurt to ask, but I doubt MS is going to come that far in just one major version upgrade.
Dear AC,
I submitted this story because I found it interesting, not because I agreed with its conclusions nor those of the 'threat report'. I also attempted to submit the 'iOS/Safari gives away your location' story yesterday but I had the same source/URL as someone who had already submitted it so it was rejected. Keep in mind I only passed along the link and copy & pasted content from the CNet story. If you think someone is being biased you should point an anonymous finger at CNet or the folks at smobilesystems. You should have submitted your decent review as a submission rather than just dropping it in a post.
Are all security vulnerabilities being exploited? Of course not. That's true for Android, Linux, Apple and even Microsoft. Had they changed the name from 'Android' to 'Apple' you would have been standing on your anonymous soapbox deriding Apple for it. Yes, Android alerts users and requires their approval when these apps are installed just like Apple alerts users and requires their approval before any location data is provided to an app. Does it mean that either or both platforms are insecure because they can provide this type of information when the user blindly agrees? Yes and no. If the app uses it for the wrong purpose then yes. Can and 'do' are completely separate things. The same holds true for Windows when it asks if it's OK for an app to run, etc.
I've submitted plenty of stories (my favorites were 20 Worst Superheroes and Tactical-Nuclear-Penguin-Beer, about half of which have been accepted. That doesn't mean I endorse them, it only means I thought others might find them interesting too.
Though I did give an iPad to my web design's kids for 'half Christmas' it doesn't make me biased. My posts are usually opinionated but fair, usually pro Linux, pro or anti Apple (depending on the subject) and usually (but not always) anti Microsoft. Though I'm sure you already know that if you're following my posts enough to quote from them.
You sir, do not read the news, 2 million units sold in 59 days is not a failure, no matter how much you want it to be.
You obviously missed the point of my post. I was repeating all of the proclamations thrown about declaring the death and demise of Apple, even ones as recent as "The iPad's failure will kill Apple". I don't buy into them and I don't see an end to Apple's success as long as Steve Jobs is guiding the company. I even sent an iPad to my web designer's kids for 'half Christmas'.
The iPad sold 3 million units in 80 days. That's pretty impressive and certainly not the iFailure declared by many.
I'm not suggesting that Apple can force existing Mac owners to adopt iOS, but they amount of money they can make from a locked down user is so much more then for a regular free user that I would expect that eventually, all Apple products will come with iOS.
I thought Apple would release an "iPhone Runtime Environment" application with 10.6 (obviously I was wrong) but I won't rule it out for the future. It would allow Apple to take their 30% cut of people buying additional copies of their iDevice apps so they can run it on their desktops and save/exchange/sync data. Apple's rumored 'Wacom-type' touch pad would work hand and hand with it.
I don't know if Apple would ever release a Windows version of the iOS runtime. On one hand it would expand the market to include a lot more desktops that could buy & use iOS apps but it would hurt the "buy a Mac because you can only get this type of functionality on a Mac so buy a Mac" hook.
If it's not one thing it's another. Apple is dying. Apple is dead. Apple can't recover. The iPod can't save Apple. The Mac can't come back. The iPhone can't save Apple. The 'walled garden' will be the death of Apple. The iPad's failure will kill Apple... and now the MacOS & iOS are going to merge resulting in pushback, backlash and eventually Apple's demise.
These are different markets and different products. I can't rule out an "Apple appliance" that will serve as a desktop type of computer with iOS running on it... phasing out MacOS over the next decade? maybe... but merging the two? Not very likely.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like it is the same length as an MD5 sum...
The MD5 sum of the secret Cyber Command PR effort to get geeks to talk about it without delving too deep into the actual workings and mission of the Cyber Command. Hmm, I wonder if it will work?
It's like a leap year, only for technology ... which I think makes it technically a leap year.
I want nuclear fusion that can fit in my pocket. That, combined with my Quasimodo-esque looks, will almost certainly guarantee that I never reproduce (which could only result further degradation of the planet's gene pool) ;-)
6 TeraFlops is nothing to sneeze at, but this is just an experimental implementation ... and it only uses 10 liters of water for cooling (a pump ensures a flow rate of roughly 30 liters per minute). I'm sure they can easily handle a larger water system which could cool many servers which would eventually produce several Supercalifragilflops of computing power ;-)
I find the more I observe /. the less I understand it. Is that what you meant?
Abandon ship!!
As for other wildlife, I would assume that birds and such would learn to avoid the area the same way people would.
You mean by seeing the bodies of their comrades slow-roasting in the fields?
Its a protocol people, find a different way or medium to transmit your information.
Of course! I'll get right on that ... ;-)
I disagree with TFA that "it raises the specter of some future administration using that power to crack down on its opponents". The bigger concern is that it could be used to stop the flow of information to the public during a severe crisis (natural disaster, military, political, etc). A large portion of US residents have become addicted to the flow of information arriving via the internet (myself included). Disrupting it would lead to a greater panic than just about anything the government might be trying to "protect us from" (ie, hide from us).
When one of your biggest clients happens to be GM or Blue Cross, it doesn't happen very quickly or ever. I think there are still quite a few Win 2000 machines over there.
Those monsters make changes at a glacial pace. You'll be on IE 7 by 2015. Good luck and invest in lots of ice cold beer.
We absolutely can provide 'basic' or better support for IE 6 but we make sure the entire site works the same in all browsers. The real questions is "how many man hours, and how much of our client's money, should we spend trying to handle IE 6 compatibility and functionality?"
Some of our sites are relatively simple and use formats & javascript libraries we've developed that support IE 6 without any issues at all. If a new or existing client wants this kind of site we don't "break" the IE 6 support - we simply let them know that any future upgrades or additions may not be able to do everything they want (either we can't add the 'fancy' stuff because it would require reworking of the infrastructure or it would break IE 6 compatibility). We always give them the option and if they are willing to spend the extra money on IE 6 compatibility we'll do it but we design the entire site to work the same in all browsers so they have a limited feature set to choose from.
We see dwindling IE 6 visitors but we're also aware that some of our clients still have a large percentage of IE 6 visitors. Because of that we don't offer certain features or enhancements to them. We're upfront about it and they are willing to live with the less fancy site as long as it meets the needs of their visitors.
I'll be writing shit web code for IE6 forever anyway.
That really blows. We're informing our web clients that we're no longer supporting IE 6 and that any IE 6 visitor will land on a "nice, soft" page requesting that they upgrade to one of the many other available browsers. We just got one client to agree to upgrade their 25 employees from IE 6 to IE 8 (they already had FF installed but they have some 3rd party sites that require ActiveX).
If you're stuck doing it for an employer or client you may be better served by spending some time nudging them away from IE 6 because it will save you painful hours in the long run.
Dear Microsoft, IE9 supports many royalty-free, web compatible formats out of the box (HTML, CSS, WOFF, PNG, and the like) so why not at least one more?
I guess it can't hurt to ask, but I doubt MS is going to come that far in just one major version upgrade.
I know who can use this type of network speed: the guys trying to make a quadrillion-flop computer. What good is all that CPU horsepower if it can't be used to serve up, um, web pages?
Call me when they get to googleflops ;-)
She sounds like she might just be Fire Marshal Bill's sister.
Dear AC,
I submitted this story because I found it interesting, not because I agreed with its conclusions nor those of the 'threat report'. I also attempted to submit the 'iOS/Safari gives away your location' story yesterday but I had the same source/URL as someone who had already submitted it so it was rejected. Keep in mind I only passed along the link and copy & pasted content from the CNet story. If you think someone is being biased you should point an anonymous finger at CNet or the folks at smobilesystems. You should have submitted your decent review as a submission rather than just dropping it in a post.
Are all security vulnerabilities being exploited? Of course not. That's true for Android, Linux, Apple and even Microsoft. Had they changed the name from 'Android' to 'Apple' you would have been standing on your anonymous soapbox deriding Apple for it. Yes, Android alerts users and requires their approval when these apps are installed just like Apple alerts users and requires their approval before any location data is provided to an app. Does it mean that either or both platforms are insecure because they can provide this type of information when the user blindly agrees? Yes and no. If the app uses it for the wrong purpose then yes. Can and 'do' are completely separate things. The same holds true for Windows when it asks if it's OK for an app to run, etc.
I've submitted plenty of stories (my favorites were 20 Worst Superheroes and Tactical-Nuclear-Penguin-Beer, about half of which have been accepted. That doesn't mean I endorse them, it only means I thought others might find them interesting too.
Though I did give an iPad to my web design's kids for 'half Christmas' it doesn't make me biased. My posts are usually opinionated but fair, usually pro Linux, pro or anti Apple (depending on the subject) and usually (but not always) anti Microsoft. Though I'm sure you already know that if you're following my posts enough to quote from them.
You sir, do not read the news, 2 million units sold in 59 days is not a failure, no matter how much you want it to be.
You obviously missed the point of my post. I was repeating all of the proclamations thrown about declaring the death and demise of Apple, even ones as recent as "The iPad's failure will kill Apple". I don't buy into them and I don't see an end to Apple's success as long as Steve Jobs is guiding the company. I even sent an iPad to my web designer's kids for 'half Christmas'.
The iPad sold 3 million units in 80 days. That's pretty impressive and certainly not the iFailure declared by many.
I'm not suggesting that Apple can force existing Mac owners to adopt iOS, but they amount of money they can make from a locked down user is so much more then for a regular free user that I would expect that eventually, all Apple products will come with iOS.
Actually, Apple doesn't make that much from the App store.
I thought Apple would release an "iPhone Runtime Environment" application with 10.6 (obviously I was wrong) but I won't rule it out for the future. It would allow Apple to take their 30% cut of people buying additional copies of their iDevice apps so they can run it on their desktops and save/exchange/sync data. Apple's rumored 'Wacom-type' touch pad would work hand and hand with it.
I don't know if Apple would ever release a Windows version of the iOS runtime. On one hand it would expand the market to include a lot more desktops that could buy & use iOS apps but it would hurt the "buy a Mac because you can only get this type of functionality on a Mac so buy a Mac" hook.
If it's not one thing it's another. Apple is dying. Apple is dead. Apple can't recover. The iPod can't save Apple. The Mac can't come back. The iPhone can't save Apple. The 'walled garden' will be the death of Apple. The iPad's failure will kill Apple ... and now the MacOS & iOS are going to merge resulting in pushback, backlash and eventually Apple's demise.
... phasing out MacOS over the next decade? maybe ... but merging the two? Not very likely.
These are different markets and different products. I can't rule out an "Apple appliance" that will serve as a desktop type of computer with iOS running on it
Excellent Simpsons reference.
I hope they throw the book at them. They're basically holding their customers hostage.
If RIAAlliance wanted to show me reason they shouldn't have sent an assasshole lawyer.
I think those are called proctlawyergists.
Tweets are uninformative, self-promoting and often useless? I could have told you that without a 'study'.