Doesn't prove much. We know the Chinese are sensitive to a lot of "political" topics. But this article is claiming wholesale highjacking of commercial sites too. That would kill business with those industries. People already know the Chinese speak with two languages when cutting a deal. One is the obvious, the other is the hidden one you have to learn by feel. This would suggest that even a deal made in both languages isn't worth the paper it is printed on.
How does having the antenna "disappear" effect it's ability to circumvent jamming?
A metal antenna can be detected just like any other large metal object. When you kill the juice to this, it just disappears, so you don't have any large metal bits to stow.
What gets me is how the plasma isn't a signal emitter in its own right. I mean, we are talking electric arc discharge, like an neon sign, like a spark gap, like lightning. I had always thought an electric arc was a broadband RF transmission. That should be detectable in every direction.
In the UK, the rights of the people are what the Parliament decides. Tradition is what holds them back from being tyrants. Unwritten constitution and all that.
In the US, the rights of the people are written into the Constitution and it explicitly says there might be more. Traditionally, Congress ignores this and runs wherever the political wind blows them. They wait for the courts to save them, or for the political winds to shift again.
Either way, the only real saving grace is staying engaged politically. Keep the politicians from stealing everything you have in an effort to save it for you. There are still people who think that freedom is too precious to be given to the people they are protecting it for. Damn.
We stopped having serious technology NEEDS back around 1900! Trains, telegraphs, and flush toilets were supporting cities of millions. And still do in some parts of the world.
Wants and desires have been driving change for a very long time. Business is the process that feeds those desires. Welcome to free markets!
Show me the link where I can order XP based machine from DELL as end user (not business).
It isn't a link. You have to call the 800 number and tell them. They will push sell the Vista. You tell them XP or else. You get it.
Stupid business practice, but they aren't complete morons. They don't want people to walk away with money ready to spend. Maybe the Vista push is part of the MS contract they signed. Which by the way, they can get away with when they have monopolistic market clout.
Now, I wouldn't be sure that using content that can't be used to commercial gain would preclude advertising on the sites it would be hosted on.
And there is the main point. Is Wikia (and the previous owner) selling the Content of the wiki, or are they using the free wiki contents as a means to attract people to sell them other things? The first is clearly a commercial use: I sell the content and pocket the money. The second might be commercial, but not directly involving the copyright holders: I offer free content with pay ads surrounding it, you can still see the free content and pay nothing if you so choose.
To use the home seller analogy, if I build a house near a park or school, I can sell the house for more money than if the park or school were not there. Does that mean I owe some of the increased value to the park builder? No. They have done their work for their own purposes, and I have used that to my own benefit, but isn't a direct partnership.
The IT guy was accessing the content of transactions, presumably without authorization. The Porn fiend was using company equipment for, again presuambly, unauthorized and perhaps illegal purposes.
Some companies don't feel the need to actually lay out a code of ethics, but I can't think of a single boss that doesn't understand the importance of "improper use of company equipment". This isn't a technology issue. This is exactly what it sounds like, an ethics and conduct issue. If the mail room clerks were steaming envelopes open, or sending cocaine by FedEx, it would be exactly the same problem.
The big news will be when MS goes after the video poster for pirating its Intellectual Property. DOS 5 sales have plummeted worldwide, and displaying this video is clearly a contributing factor. I'm surprised they haven't triggered GPFs on any Windows box attempting to play it.
Stallman might be right. Can't let Linus be an idol unto himself, and become a distraction from the true path. I suppose this means that we need to bump off Linus, and perhaps Stallman too, then go our own way(s).
A single antenna can deal with 200+ computers.
It isn't an issue of numbers per antenna, it is view angles, polarization, signal propagation and blockages. 4 antennas per AP lets you set them at different locations (wired back to the switch) and at various inclination angles to be sure the signal covers the space you care about.
This is totally a replacement for wired connectivity, because in a building with three or four hundred computer users, there won't be any radio interference between wireless cards.
And when someone decides to fire up the microwave oven for coffee break or popcorn, all those other users can take a break with them. "Teaming" at its finest. This is Win-Win for all concerned! Synergize forward to the Wireless Productivity Revolution!!
I agree that wired LAN is more secure than WiFi. But can't you do some pretty scary signal reconstruction by reading electromagnetic noise coming off your network cable? It's my understanding that this can be done from X yards away, through walls, whatever. Where X is 1 - 3 meters. If you are running a Must Be Secure network in a single cubicle of a hostile cubicle farm, or up against the wall of an apartment, you might have trouble. The vast majority of people are inherently secure, at least against this particular threat.
Guess you could always wrap your cable in tin-foil.
Shielded Twisted Pair will deal with this for you. It has been on the market for the past 2 or 3 decades. Maybe more.
If the next guy "steals" the code for his own purposes, it may or may not hurt you. Assuming you really did give it away, then presumably you don't care about compensation, so no harm done. Unless he does something really stupid and blames you for it.
But it harms the third person in line. That guy is getting your good stuff, the second guy's questionable stuff, and has no way to distinguish the two. Or to give credit where credit (or blame) is due. The second guy in line took that opportunity away when he wrapped your stuff in his and made it all closed.
"Do no Evil" was never serious company policy at Google. And all the repeating in the world isn't going to retroactively make it so. It was just stroking fanservice to all the MS haters at the time. At best, it was an ideal they would have liked to aspire to, if it didn't get in the way of doing business.
And by the way, who runs the office of Evil Arbitration and Determination? Ask them if it more or less Evil to :
1. do business in China by China's rules (and thereby make money for the employees and investors, at the cost of some information being censored), or
2. do business in China by Outside rules (and fight every battle over every search result, and cost the company money, and do some undetermined good to the few people that see what they want), or
3. do business outside China by Outside rules, (and hope maybe something leaks through the Great Firewall into the fastest growing and soon to be largest market in the world. But be morally clean, if somewhat impoverished, warm in the knowledge that your uncensored information was seen by... no one).
Or known bug fixes taht have just gotten delayed, and delayed and delayed.
I like Mozilla and FF. But if this kind of attention is what it takes to get them to assign coders to all levels of bugs, from Highest Risk to Lowest, I am all for the heat. the little ones never go away until you actually fix them. Letting them get older is not the correct solution. Not from a technical point of view. Business-wise, you could just wait until the product is obsolete and no one cares. But that is just lazy practice.
("Don't worry now, just get this new version out before the deadline, we'll fix it later...")?
As much as I am annoyed by MS for their practices, that particular one is perfectly reasonable and acceptable.
If the overall program was not managed that way, they would have chaos. Every potential change to the main configuration has to be assigned to a given build and release. The place to attack the "problem" is in how they assign priorities to problems and bug fixes. The criteria for Critical and Non-Critical bugs, for High, Medium, and Low Risk threat and fixes are where software quality hinges. MS does it one way, Mozilla a different way. To some extent they will converge. Hopefully for us all, not too much. But definitely they will converge. If they don't do effective Configuration Management, they don't know what they have, and they can't be sure about what results they will get. The development process is tricky enough without deliberately adding random uncertainty to the process. If it means delaying a given fix for some period of time, so be it.
I would not be at all surprised to see Mozilla eventually adopt a variant of the MS "Update Tuesday" model. For all but the Most Critical changes, just hold all updates them bundle them and push them at the end of the next week/month/quarte. One thing they already do better than MS is to fully declare a new revision, rather than just issues a patch and updat a table with the information. Makes it easy for humans to know at a glance what revision they are at. (By the way, I got 1.5.0.10 shoved at me last night)
"it's got sucker written all over it"
Only if you don't know what you should be paying for something.
If you sign up to pay whatever is asked for the first thing you see, then yes, you are a sucker.
If you know the reasonable going price for a similar item in other places, then you have enough knowledge to decide if the one on Ebay is worth the price and the risks. You can get ripped off at Circuit City and Target as easily as on Ebay. The difference is brick'n'mortar stores are easier to complain to. But they typically cost more. And they should. Your risk reduction and purchase convenience cost money, and you pay for them.
Slashdot Mirror
And the hosts popping in at the end was just painful. A swear I expected to see Walt Disney show up along with Obi-wan and Anakin.
Doesn't prove much. We know the Chinese are sensitive to a lot of "political" topics. But this article is claiming wholesale highjacking of commercial sites too. That would kill business with those industries. People already know the Chinese speak with two languages when cutting a deal. One is the obvious, the other is the hidden one you have to learn by feel. This would suggest that even a deal made in both languages isn't worth the paper it is printed on.
Shot to the gonads perhaps?
Roswell or Sedona ? Or have they got that place in Nevada opened up again? The Steve Fossett flap made them go into deep cover.
A metal antenna can be detected just like any other large metal object. When you kill the juice to this, it just disappears, so you don't have any large metal bits to stow.
What gets me is how the plasma isn't a signal emitter in its own right. I mean, we are talking electric arc discharge, like an neon sign, like a spark gap, like lightning. I had always thought an electric arc was a broadband RF transmission. That should be detectable in every direction.
Common sense ... isn't
In the UK, the rights of the people are what the Parliament decides. Tradition is what holds them back from being tyrants. Unwritten constitution and all that.
In the US, the rights of the people are written into the Constitution and it explicitly says there might be more. Traditionally, Congress ignores this and runs wherever the political wind blows them. They wait for the courts to save them, or for the political winds to shift again.
Either way, the only real saving grace is staying engaged politically. Keep the politicians from stealing everything you have in an effort to save it for you. There are still people who think that freedom is too precious to be given to the people they are protecting it for. Damn.
Wants and desires have been driving change for a very long time. Business is the process that feeds those desires. Welcome to free markets!
It isn't a link. You have to call the 800 number and tell them. They will push sell the Vista. You tell them XP or else. You get it.
Stupid business practice, but they aren't complete morons. They don't want people to walk away with money ready to spend. Maybe the Vista push is part of the MS contract they signed. Which by the way, they can get away with when they have monopolistic market clout.
And there is the main point. Is Wikia (and the previous owner) selling the Content of the wiki, or are they using the free wiki contents as a means to attract people to sell them other things? The first is clearly a commercial use: I sell the content and pocket the money. The second might be commercial, but not directly involving the copyright holders: I offer free content with pay ads surrounding it, you can still see the free content and pay nothing if you so choose.
To use the home seller analogy, if I build a house near a park or school, I can sell the house for more money than if the park or school were not there. Does that mean I owe some of the increased value to the park builder? No. They have done their work for their own purposes, and I have used that to my own benefit, but isn't a direct partnership.
Some companies don't feel the need to actually lay out a code of ethics, but I can't think of a single boss that doesn't understand the importance of "improper use of company equipment". This isn't a technology issue. This is exactly what it sounds like, an ethics and conduct issue. If the mail room clerks were steaming envelopes open, or sending cocaine by FedEx, it would be exactly the same problem.
You can't buy one, but you can use one. Simply climb the superstructure of any of our Stalwart Naval vessels and wait until the dish comes around.
Seriously, 11n can run in both bands, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#802.11n
The big news will be when MS goes after the video poster for pirating its Intellectual Property. DOS 5 sales have plummeted worldwide, and displaying this video is clearly a contributing factor. I'm surprised they haven't triggered GPFs on any Windows box attempting to play it.
If you see the Buddha on the Road, kill him
Stallman might be right. Can't let Linus be an idol unto himself, and become a distraction from the true path. I suppose this means that we need to bump off Linus, and perhaps Stallman too, then go our own way(s).
A single antenna can deal with 200+ computers.
It isn't an issue of numbers per antenna, it is view angles, polarization, signal propagation and blockages. 4 antennas per AP lets you set them at different locations (wired back to the switch) and at various inclination angles to be sure the signal covers the space you care about.
And when someone decides to fire up the microwave oven for coffee break or popcorn, all those other users can take a break with them. "Teaming" at its finest. This is Win-Win for all concerned! Synergize forward to the Wireless Productivity Revolution!!
Where X is 1 - 3 meters. If you are running a Must Be Secure network in a single cubicle of a hostile cubicle farm, or up against the wall of an apartment, you might have trouble. The vast majority of people are inherently secure, at least against this particular threat.
Guess you could always wrap your cable in tin-foil.
Shielded Twisted Pair will deal with this for you. It has been on the market for the past 2 or 3 decades. Maybe more.
Snopes says it isn't true, http://www.snopes.com/military/reinwald.asp, but it should be!
Goatherds with sunstroke. You have to account for the visions and the voices.
If the next guy "steals" the code for his own purposes, it may or may not hurt you. Assuming you really did give it away, then presumably you don't care about compensation, so no harm done. Unless he does something really stupid and blames you for it.
But it harms the third person in line. That guy is getting your good stuff, the second guy's questionable stuff, and has no way to distinguish the two. Or to give credit where credit (or blame) is due. The second guy in line took that opportunity away when he wrapped your stuff in his and made it all closed.
"Do no Evil" was never serious company policy at Google. And all the repeating in the world isn't going to retroactively make it so. It was just stroking fanservice to all the MS haters at the time. At best, it was an ideal they would have liked to aspire to, if it didn't get in the way of doing business.
And by the way, who runs the office of Evil Arbitration and Determination? Ask them if it more or less Evil to :
1. do business in China by China's rules (and thereby make money for the employees and investors, at the cost of some information being censored), or
2. do business in China by Outside rules (and fight every battle over every search result, and cost the company money, and do some undetermined good to the few people that see what they want), or
3. do business outside China by Outside rules, (and hope maybe something leaks through the Great Firewall into the fastest growing and soon to be largest market in the world. But be morally clean, if somewhat impoverished, warm in the knowledge that your uncensored information was seen by... no one).
So if, for example, Coors paid to place a Budweiser ad into your favorite program, and you found it and boycotted Bud as a result ... Profit!
Or known bug fixes taht have just gotten delayed, and delayed and delayed.
I like Mozilla and FF. But if this kind of attention is what it takes to get them to assign coders to all levels of bugs, from Highest Risk to Lowest, I am all for the heat. the little ones never go away until you actually fix them. Letting them get older is not the correct solution. Not from a technical point of view. Business-wise, you could just wait until the product is obsolete and no one cares. But that is just lazy practice.
As much as I am annoyed by MS for their practices, that particular one is perfectly reasonable and acceptable.
If the overall program was not managed that way, they would have chaos. Every potential change to the main configuration has to be assigned to a given build and release. The place to attack the "problem" is in how they assign priorities to problems and bug fixes. The criteria for Critical and Non-Critical bugs, for High, Medium, and Low Risk threat and fixes are where software quality hinges. MS does it one way, Mozilla a different way. To some extent they will converge. Hopefully for us all, not too much. But definitely they will converge. If they don't do effective Configuration Management, they don't know what they have, and they can't be sure about what results they will get. The development process is tricky enough without deliberately adding random uncertainty to the process. If it means delaying a given fix for some period of time, so be it.
I would not be at all surprised to see Mozilla eventually adopt a variant of the MS "Update Tuesday" model. For all but the Most Critical changes, just hold all updates them bundle them and push them at the end of the next week/month/quarte. One thing they already do better than MS is to fully declare a new revision, rather than just issues a patch and updat a table with the information. Makes it easy for humans to know at a glance what revision they are at. (By the way, I got 1.5.0.10 shoved at me last night)
"it's got sucker written all over it" Only if you don't know what you should be paying for something. If you sign up to pay whatever is asked for the first thing you see, then yes, you are a sucker. If you know the reasonable going price for a similar item in other places, then you have enough knowledge to decide if the one on Ebay is worth the price and the risks. You can get ripped off at Circuit City and Target as easily as on Ebay. The difference is brick'n'mortar stores are easier to complain to. But they typically cost more. And they should. Your risk reduction and purchase convenience cost money, and you pay for them.