Except that, by definition, transport layer protocols must be observable by all hosts between client and server, else you wouldn't know where to send any packets (encrypted or otherwise). I think you'll find that censorship will usually attack that layer, blocking connections by blacklisting particular servers.
Is the UK entry level model street legal in the US? Does it meet US emissions and safety requirements? Theres a classic example of USian ignorance and hubris. Of course, us Americans have much more stringent safety and emissions standards than other nations. Even our gallon is safer than the UK gallon, since there's less flammable inventory in our gallon.
It's the asians who squat on a sit-toilet that get me annoyed. In certain industrial locations, you'll find the seat down (or broken/missing) with two great greasy-dirty footprints, one on each side of the seat or bowl rim.
Except that refining and distribution (downstream operations) is not where the money is made. It is exploration and production where all the profits are. As verticaly integrated as the oil business is, you'll find that refining is almost always a separate business unit, and its profitiability is similar to the auto industry.
When corporations monitor and know all the gory details of their product's market penetration, surely it is not too much of an imposition to ask for them to also monitor and understand the public health consequences of attaining such market share.
Why does it take documentaries like Super Size Me and the like to force corporations to consider the social and community health effects of their efforts.
The only way to stop spam is to increase the burden on everyone who sends mail, rather than passing the burden onto those receiving it. Mail servers of the sender should store the message until it is retrieved by the receiver. That way, the spammers would have to keep their mail server online till a significant number of recipients have downloaded their mail. This would increase the time available to law enforcement (or vigilantes) to shut down the server before the spammer acheives his objective. It also means that the spammer's mail server must have sufficient bandwidth to accommodate the multiple requests. Yes, the load could be distributed across a botnet, but this would add to the complications and load on the botnet, still making life more difficult, and less profitable, for the spammers.
Perhaps a better analogy would be: Leaving the seat next to you vacant while travelling on public transport, and getting shitty because somebody actually sat next to you.
The question I'd be asking is: What is the procedure for obtaining authorisation for use of the WiFi? I would contend that merely entering the coffee shop does not constitute authorisation, unless there is specifically a sign advertising the WiFi access, and that it is free to customers.
Hear hear. I can never work out why farmers don't include the opportunity cost of their inherited land in their cost of production calculations. If it is impossible to buy land and start an agricultural business, then obviously the same enterprise with inherited land is just subisidising production costs.
I can see why. Electrical generation capacity doesn't just sit around idle. It's usually put in place because there's a demand i.e. it's already allocated. Adding another demand on the electricity infrastructure won't magically make more electricity appear.
I find it interesting that road and highway infrastructure is put in place more or less pre-emtively to accommodate urban sprawl, but government investment in public transport is only considered when there is likely to be enough paying passengers to break even.
I bet if all new urban-fringe highways were installed as tollways, then they "idyllic lifestyle" advertised by land subdivision developers would be a little more difficult to sell.
I don't know what everyone is banging on about. Everyone here knows that if you go Bush the mobile coverage is piss poor, no matter how good the propaganda from Telstra.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that, by definition, transport layer protocols must be observable by all hosts between client and server, else you wouldn't know where to send any packets (encrypted or otherwise). I think you'll find that censorship will usually attack that layer, blocking connections by blacklisting particular servers.
On Slashdot, you'll get two articles for the price of one...
Give me a break.
It's the asians who squat on a sit-toilet that get me annoyed. In certain industrial locations, you'll find the seat down (or broken/missing) with two great greasy-dirty footprints, one on each side of the seat or bowl rim.
...the vernier of a registered corporation... Perhaps their forward looking statements need some re-calibration?That's right. I seem to keep hearing that all the time. It just won't stop.
Except that refining and distribution (downstream operations) is not where the money is made. It is exploration and production where all the profits are. As verticaly integrated as the oil business is, you'll find that refining is almost always a separate business unit, and its profitiability is similar to the auto industry.
And Slashdot will ensure you get to read it, if you missed it the first time...
When corporations monitor and know all the gory details of their product's market penetration, surely it is not too much of an imposition to ask for them to also monitor and understand the public health consequences of attaining such market share.
Why does it take documentaries like Super Size Me and the like to force corporations to consider the social and community health effects of their efforts.
If it's a pane of one way glass at a peep show? That'd make it a pro pane, and it'd let you see naked women...
This already happens. Why do you think banks sit on deposited cheques till they clear before crediting the cheque amount to your balance?
The only way to stop spam is to increase the burden on everyone who sends mail, rather than passing the burden onto those receiving it. Mail servers of the sender should store the message until it is retrieved by the receiver. That way, the spammers would have to keep their mail server online till a significant number of recipients have downloaded their mail. This would increase the time available to law enforcement (or vigilantes) to shut down the server before the spammer acheives his objective. It also means that the spammer's mail server must have sufficient bandwidth to accommodate the multiple requests. Yes, the load could be distributed across a botnet, but this would add to the complications and load on the botnet, still making life more difficult, and less profitable, for the spammers.
And Microsoft? A company of short dick men holding scrips for Viagra?
Perhaps a better analogy would be: Leaving the seat next to you vacant while travelling on public transport, and getting shitty because somebody actually sat next to you.
The question I'd be asking is: What is the procedure for obtaining authorisation for use of the WiFi? I would contend that merely entering the coffee shop does not constitute authorisation, unless there is specifically a sign advertising the WiFi access, and that it is free to customers.
By 2009, it'll be just another reality TV show.
You're only a terrorist suspect if you nibble your discoveries...
Hear hear. I can never work out why farmers don't include the opportunity cost of their inherited land in their cost of production calculations. If it is impossible to buy land and start an agricultural business, then obviously the same enterprise with inherited land is just subisidising production costs.
I think there is already far too much money spent on roads and crime fighting... Bigger budgets for these will only suffer diminishing returns.
If you want to sign up for a myspace account, first check the sex offenders registers for a suitable identity to use...
I can see why. Electrical generation capacity doesn't just sit around idle. It's usually put in place because there's a demand i.e. it's already allocated. Adding another demand on the electricity infrastructure won't magically make more electricity appear.
I find it interesting that road and highway infrastructure is put in place more or less pre-emtively to accommodate urban sprawl, but government investment in public transport is only considered when there is likely to be enough paying passengers to break even.
I bet if all new urban-fringe highways were installed as tollways, then they "idyllic lifestyle" advertised by land subdivision developers would be a little more difficult to sell.
But if you're watching it on your 19" LCD, then there's no tubes anymore... ...oh. Um, er, hello there Mr Stevens!
I don't know what everyone is banging on about. Everyone here knows that if you go Bush the mobile coverage is piss poor, no matter how good the propaganda from Telstra.