But we shouldn't let our fear of these people stop us from trying new technologies. It's possible to take counter measures to prevent the evil hackers getting in while still enjoying the benefits of it.
You think there is no profit to be made in wiping people's cell phones? Ever hear of blackmail? How about terrorism? Think there is no profit to be made in selling technology to mass kill cell phones to terrorist groups who might want to cause problems? There is profit to be made in exploits if you really think about it hard enough.
I was referring to the parent post who said "deactivates and wipes EVERY PHONE", which would not be very useful. There are much softer targets already for people looking to cause mayhem, and even terrorists use cellphones.
I like how every time a new piece of technology comes up with integration into devices we have (phones, cars, toasters), the immediate response on/. is always "But what about the hackers!" as if there's a group of malicious hackers just waiting for the technology to appear so they could exploit it. There are plenty of vulnerable technologies out today (SCADA systems for one) but hackers aren't so interested in disrupting these systems because they're pure evil. Most systems get hacked because there's some profit to be made out of it or someone is trying to put a message out there. While beeping people's car horns or shutting off their cell phones might send A message, it's not sending a useful one, and unless T-Mobil or HTC is doing the hacking, there isn't a profit to be made from it.
It would also idle for half an hour while the update installed.
Hell no, it would rev up the engine to 5k RPM and refuse to let me turn on the radio while it checked all the previous components had been installed properly. Only after I towed it home would it finally idle when I went to turn it off.
Well most cable ISPs also provide advertising networks, so it's not a big jump to move to another one.
Google isn't actually an advertising company though, they just get revenue from advertising. Similarly Comcast is a cable company that also gets revenue from advertising.
I second this. I just got IPv6 through my ISP and most of my devices just picked up an address and started using it right away.
However, the GP is correct in that ISPs need to upgrade a lot of expensive routers to add support. The good news is they have to upgrade them regularly anyways, so if they just make the decision to go the IPv6 route, it'll happen. I imagine plenty are partially supporting IPv6 already, but that one stubborn switch won't die.
I just signed up for Comcast's 50mbps package. Got it hooked up and saw it was only getting to 15 at best, yet they still sell that (when they also have a 25mbps package that I switched to). The line's probably just overloaded, but it seems almost fraudulent that they'd sell two services that provide the same thing except one advertises higher and costs more.
Now if we can just invent floating orb technology, and stick some visible red lasers on the outside, we'll be in business for mapping alien spaceships!
Google is a search company that get revenue from advertising, not an advertising company. Similar to how newspapers gain revenue from ads, but are in the news business, not advertising.
It's a metadata profile definition that's linked to by lots of social media sites. It's pretty much just defined in the header (lets people add different attributes to html). For the same reason that w3.org is up there since people link to it when setting a doctype.
Might remember that Democrats only had a filibuster proof majoirty in the senate for a few months: From July 7th 2009 when Al Franken was finally sworn in to August 25th when Ted Kennedy died (Kennedy was terminally ill for much of that), then from September 24th to February 4, 2010 which includes the largest amount of holiday time for the Senate.
With the health care law being a priority, small items like Net Neutrality (which there was already an FCC rule for) weren't a priority.
It's just that I don't understand how anyone under 70 can listen to PHC and not want to drive into oncoming traffic.
It sounds like you aren't getting enough Catchup. Catchup contains natural mellowing agents that keep you from making irrational driving decisions and enjoy the small things in life.
But it also prevents heat from leaving the Earth which causes the planet to warm up and sea levels to rise and climate change with floods and droughts which kills the plants.
But carbon is a greenhouse gas, so an increase in CO2 would have a detrimental effect on the environment. Oxygen (the molecule) on the other hand is not a greenhouse gas. When they say "Carbon" they're actually referring to "Carbon Dioxide"
Actually I think the problem is the author is imagining platforms that aren't used or don't exist and working to make his software compatible with it. Modern clients aren't too hard to use the same code for, but the imaginary ones can be a real hassle.
Slashdot Mirror
More likely it would go down (as a % of GDP) as it has the past few years.
You think there is no profit to be made in wiping people's cell phones? Ever hear of blackmail? How about terrorism? Think there is no profit to be made in selling technology to mass kill cell phones to terrorist groups who might want to cause problems? There is profit to be made in exploits if you really think about it hard enough.
I was referring to the parent post who said "deactivates and wipes EVERY PHONE", which would not be very useful. There are much softer targets already for people looking to cause mayhem, and even terrorists use cellphones.
I like how every time a new piece of technology comes up with integration into devices we have (phones, cars, toasters), the immediate response on /. is always "But what about the hackers!" as if there's a group of malicious hackers just waiting for the technology to appear so they could exploit it. There are plenty of vulnerable technologies out today (SCADA systems for one) but hackers aren't so interested in disrupting these systems because they're pure evil. Most systems get hacked because there's some profit to be made out of it or someone is trying to put a message out there. While beeping people's car horns or shutting off their cell phones might send A message, it's not sending a useful one, and unless T-Mobil or HTC is doing the hacking, there isn't a profit to be made from it.
It would also idle for half an hour while the update installed.
Hell no, it would rev up the engine to 5k RPM and refuse to let me turn on the radio while it checked all the previous components had been installed properly. Only after I towed it home would it finally idle when I went to turn it off.
Apparently it was $4B in cash, $12B in stock, and $3B in vested stock.
Even if the stock tanks, I'd be happy with the $4B cash.
Well most cable ISPs also provide advertising networks, so it's not a big jump to move to another one.
Google isn't actually an advertising company though, they just get revenue from advertising. Similarly Comcast is a cable company that also gets revenue from advertising.
Well there's the old NAT-PMP, though not many support that. The real answer is IPv6, but then the game needs to support it and all the players.
Some games can do NAT hole punching.
I second this. I just got IPv6 through my ISP and most of my devices just picked up an address and started using it right away.
However, the GP is correct in that ISPs need to upgrade a lot of expensive routers to add support. The good news is they have to upgrade them regularly anyways, so if they just make the decision to go the IPv6 route, it'll happen. I imagine plenty are partially supporting IPv6 already, but that one stubborn switch won't die.
I just signed up for Comcast's 50mbps package. Got it hooked up and saw it was only getting to 15 at best, yet they still sell that (when they also have a 25mbps package that I switched to). The line's probably just overloaded, but it seems almost fraudulent that they'd sell two services that provide the same thing except one advertises higher and costs more.
Now if we can just invent floating orb technology, and stick some visible red lasers on the outside, we'll be in business for mapping alien spaceships!
Also worrying: If you were on the no fly list, why did they print you a boarding pass? Just because you didn't look like a terrorist?
Google is a search company that get revenue from advertising, not an advertising company. Similar to how newspapers gain revenue from ads, but are in the news business, not advertising.
It's a metadata profile definition that's linked to by lots of social media sites. It's pretty much just defined in the header (lets people add different attributes to html). For the same reason that w3.org is up there since people link to it when setting a doctype.
Remove the barriers? Like offer government subsidized fiber lines to residents?
Might remember that Democrats only had a filibuster proof majoirty in the senate for a few months: From July 7th 2009 when Al Franken was finally sworn in to August 25th when Ted Kennedy died (Kennedy was terminally ill for much of that), then from September 24th to February 4, 2010 which includes the largest amount of holiday time for the Senate.
With the health care law being a priority, small items like Net Neutrality (which there was already an FCC rule for) weren't a priority.
Well there is the transcript below it...
It's just that I don't understand how anyone under 70 can listen to PHC and not want to drive into oncoming traffic.
It sounds like you aren't getting enough Catchup. Catchup contains natural mellowing agents that keep you from making irrational driving decisions and enjoy the small things in life.
Convenient how you picked 17 years and not 20. I guess it must be a coincidence the strong correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures.
Because the difference between oxygen which is OK and carbon dioxide which is harmful, is carbon, and where does the carbon come from? Burning oil!
But it also prevents heat from leaving the Earth which causes the planet to warm up and sea levels to rise and climate change with floods and droughts which kills the plants.
When they say "Carbon" they're actually referring to "Carbon Dioxide"
My post was only three sentences long - you couldn't have at least read to the end of it?
But carbon is a greenhouse gas, so an increase in CO2 would have a detrimental effect on the environment. Oxygen (the molecule) on the other hand is not a greenhouse gas. When they say "Carbon" they're actually referring to "Carbon Dioxide"
Need a ground lift plug
Actually I think the problem is the author is imagining platforms that aren't used or don't exist and working to make his software compatible with it. Modern clients aren't too hard to use the same code for, but the imaginary ones can be a real hassle.