Umm... I think you're reading too much into this. It's clearly just a proof of concept idea, nowhere does anything indicate these guys are trying to bring this to market anytime in the near future. For one thing, it would not be anywhere near economical - rapid prototyping is still expensive.
It's just a really cool demo of the kinds of things you may see in use in 5-10 years. I can see an interface where one would wear some 3-D goggles that would let them see what they were drawing not being too difficult to add, for example. In order for this to work though you would need to have in your toolset some primitives, like straight lines, circles, cubes, spheres, bezier curves, etc. Otherwise you'll end up with a mess.
While all these technologies have been around for a few years, this has to be the coolest combination of them I have ever seen.
This is the type of story that kind of makes you sit back and realize what a wonderful age we're living in right now. Image - you can draw something in thin air and have it created on demand in a matter of hours. Sure - it's not perfect, and it's not economical to the average consumer, but neither were mobile telephones as little as 25 years ago.
A keyboard isn't left or right handed. And the only mouse I have ever used that is more geared toward righties is the MS intelli-mouse. But there are plenty of excellent mice not geared for either hand. The 5 button Compaq mouse I am using right now is perfectly symmetrical - as someone who is ambidextrous I always think about that before I buy a mouse.
I can't believe the government is so upset over what si literally a fill-in-the-blank HTMl generator.
ANYONE who knows HTML can fak a printable boarding pass AT ANY TIME. Hell you don't even need ot know HTML if you're good at photoshop!
Why was his really even classified as big news to the security community?
It's so dumb that it's laughable. I mean if this was in curt I would like to be up on the witness stand with a laptop justs o I can show the judge or jury how easy it is to fake not just this boarding pass, but any. Or fake anything printable online for that matter.
People need to wake up and realize anything printable is easily forge able. if it isn't later checked against some kind of database.
I mean, all he really did is expose flaws in the process (that the guards didn't barcode-scan the passes).
He didn't fake a boarding pass. In fact if you RTFA he specifically says he has never printed one of these pases.
All he is doing is showing you *HOW* to make a fake pass. In this way his site is no different from the anarchists's cookbook or many other works.
Nevermind the fact that any frigging web monkey who knows how to edit a Geocities page knows how to do this anyway... its not fucking rocket science, its a bit of HTML editing.
Other examples - Yahoo! Mail Beta, Google Home Page, Windows Live!, Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps. All of these allow you to take content from either themselves or someone else and stick it into a different page. That is the crux of "Web 2.0" - mashups of content.
Something I have been wondering.... GCC now accepts Java source and emits either native binaries or Java bytecode. Can it take C/C++/etc and emit bytecode?
No.
If it is treating bytecode as just another target what if a C# frontend were written? Could gcc take C# on input and emit Java bytecode on the other end? And if a mono backend were added could it compile Java source to it? And if this all came to pass would it be a sure sign the end of times were at hand?
Mono can already do all of this - mono can run Java apps in it's CIL VM, and Java apps can talk to mono apps.
I have never hard the GCJ web plugin actually *work* for a single site I visit. All it seems to know how to do is pop up a window with exceptions in it.
The idea that a company like GM woudl go bankrupt in any kind of reasonable timeframe is pretty ridiculous.
GM is not an Enron or Worldcom, with billions of billions of net worth tied up in "IP" and "market rights" (aka fake money). Gm's value is largely badsed on real world assets. They have a huge number of plants, huge real estate holdings, global infrastructure. If they really got the screws turned on them they could just shut down 50% of the company, focus on a nieche US-only market, and they'd still be well wtihin the Fortune 500.
If GM doesn't get it's act together soon, it will be facing a buyout by Toyota or Honda, sure... but bankrupcy is far far off.
There is a good argument for the environment there though - more expensive razors typically have blades that can go through more shaves than the cheap disposeables. As well you are only replacing the blade not the whole plastic razor. So while you may be saving money buying those huge bags of disposeables, it's generating a lot more garbage. You're also using more resources to make them too (when you buy the expensiv erazors you're mostly paying for marketing not material).
More recently, "begs the question" has been used as a synonym for "invites the question" or "raises the question", or to indicate that "the question really ought to be addressed". In this usage, "the question" is stated in the next phrase. For example: "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" This usage is often sharply criticized by proponents of the traditional meaning, but it has nonetheless come into common use as a result of its use in the media, especially by people ignorant of its original use. Argument over whether this usage should be considered incorrect is an example of the debate between linguistic prescription and description.
Personally I fall srongly on the description side. Perscrition is useful when you are a studentand learning language, but language is a construct for humans to communicate, and as such, description should be the primary motivation for a linguist. Language is how the majority use it, not how scholars define it.
The fact of the matter is all of these semi-rare stones are just different crystal formations that can be replicated in the lab.
The only reason you see such a push for it in diamons is because diamonds have lots of industrial applications, so even if the jewlery market crashes they stil have a market. But if there was a huge switch in jewlery from diamons to rubies/sappires because of their percieved "rarity", you can bet those would start being made artifically as well.
Gold and Silver are *not* artificially rare, they are elements and we aren't going to be economically creating those in a lab anytime soon.
The National Summit on Video Games, Youth, and Public Policy was this weekend...
I am sorry, but anyone from game media should not be attending any conference called "The National Summit on Video Games, Youth, and Public Policy". Why? Because it will only give more credit to the conference.
The fact of the matter is there should not be an public policy relating to games and youth at all. They're games for Christ sake. don't you think the government has more important things to set policy on? Like oh say, warrantless searches at airports?
Games and game content can not and should not be regulated any more than art or films.
You're forgetting from my point of view the OS was fried and I did a re-install. I never thought "oh I should back up my entire portage tree beforehanrd', because it never occured to me that the maintainers would do something like totally replace an ecryption method in portage without allowing for backwards compatability. SO I had totally wiped the OS partition and re-installed before I knew that I could not mount the encrypted home parition.
.. and that's "What happens if and when something goes wrong with the encryption solution and you lose all your data"?
When I was issued a company laptop, I jumped right on the encryption bandwagon. I used Linux, so I encrypted umy home directory sing loop-aes. Unfortunatly I was usin Gentoo at the time, and this was early in the 2.6 kernel series, before loopback encryption was standard in the kernel. So I was using some kind of third-party kernel AES crypto module (still not exactly sure what it wasusing, emerge took care of the details).
Anyways, months later, my OS install goes haywire. For what reason now I don't remember. No big deal I thought, I will just re-install.
Problem was, with the current Gentoo, I couldn't decrypt my drive.
Skip ahead 4 days later. I have tried *everything* to decrypt this data - posted in forums, talked to crypt developers, even tried writing an AES routine myself to get the raw volume at least. Nada. I ended up giving up and starting over - after all, nothing *important* was lost, but I did lose 2 years woth of archived emails I really would have liked to keep.
Oh, what about backups you say? Well security-consious as I was, I decided to back up the encrypted volume.
Needless to say I remain very wary of full-disk encryption in any form. And I always back up unencryupted. Secure? maybe not. But at least I know that if I have a filesystem crash I can use standard ext2 recoveryt ools to get my essential files back.
There is a big difference between being against change and being against marketing buzzspeak.
If you read the authors comment (and most around those lines here), you will see what we hate is not the change, but the false labels associated to it.
WTF is "Web 2.0"? It's nothing. Everything going on today has been done before, its nothing new, it's just buzzwords.
People point to MySpace and YouTube, and I point to Geocities and Shoutcast. Only difference between the two is that we have more hardware and bandwidth today so we can deliver richer content (richer interface for developing personal pages, richer media - video vs. audio) - there is nothing *fundamentally* new or revolutionary about most of the web now compared to the web 5 years ago. Sure, there are some bright spots, like Google Maps/GMail/Flickr. But these things emerged gradually - some have been around in one form or another since the 90s. You can't just pick some point in time and go "Oh, it's web 2.0 now".
It's just marketspeak. And we hate marketspeak cause it is meaningless.
Accenture was an individual company totally distinct from Attur Anderson for yeatrs and years before Enron even existed and in fact it was re-named to Accenture long before the whole Enron scandal even erupted.
People in the First World complain because we are driving their wages downward, but what is being lost is globalization is driving wages and employment standards in the third world upward.
Sure, the wages are low compared to here. Sure, the employment standards are lower. But change does not happen overnight - the amount of improvements seen over the last 25 years are more than were seen in the first 50 years of the industrial revolution in the first world.
Eventually, what will happen is the wages and employment standards of the entire world will meet somewhere in the middle. Then, they will only go up, as competition for skilled labour drives them that way.
You have to think long term - like on the 50-100 year scale.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm... I think you're reading too much into this. It's clearly just a proof of concept idea, nowhere does anything indicate these guys are trying to bring this to market anytime in the near future. For one thing, it would not be anywhere near economical - rapid prototyping is still expensive.
It's just a really cool demo of the kinds of things you may see in use in 5-10 years. I can see an interface where one would wear some 3-D goggles that would let them see what they were drawing not being too difficult to add, for example. In order for this to work though you would need to have in your toolset some primitives, like straight lines, circles, cubes, spheres, bezier curves, etc. Otherwise you'll end up with a mess.
While all these technologies have been around for a few years, this has to be the coolest combination of them I have ever seen.
This is the type of story that kind of makes you sit back and realize what a wonderful age we're living in right now. Image - you can draw something in thin air and have it created on demand in a matter of hours. Sure - it's not perfect, and it's not economical to the average consumer, but neither were mobile telephones as little as 25 years ago.
A keyboard isn't left or right handed. And the only mouse I have ever used that is more geared toward righties is the MS intelli-mouse. But there are plenty of excellent mice not geared for either hand. The 5 button Compaq mouse I am using right now is perfectly symmetrical - as someone who is ambidextrous I always think about that before I buy a mouse.
I imagine he is using the term as in "mega-watt-years-" just like "kilo-watt-hours".
I am not sure about where Wiki got the figure from though.
Me either, but the truthiness of it is undeniable!
It's hard to tell since FF 2.0 formats *all* RSS neatly anyways.
I can't believe the government is so upset over what si literally a fill-in-the-blank HTMl generator.
ANYONE who knows HTML can fak a printable boarding pass AT ANY TIME. Hell you don't even need ot know HTML if you're good at photoshop!
Why was his really even classified as big news to the security community?
It's so dumb that it's laughable. I mean if this was in curt I would like to be up on the witness stand with a laptop justs o I can show the judge or jury how easy it is to fake not just this boarding pass, but any. Or fake anything printable online for that matter.
People need to wake up and realize anything printable is easily forge able. if it isn't later checked against some kind of database.
I mean, all he really did is expose flaws in the process (that the guards didn't barcode-scan the passes).
Forging the passes is mindless.
He didn't fake a boarding pass. In fact if you RTFA he specifically says he has never printed one of these pases.
All he is doing is showing you *HOW* to make a fake pass. In this way his site is no different from the anarchists's cookbook or many other works.
Nevermind the fact that any frigging web monkey who knows how to edit a Geocities page knows how to do this anyway... its not fucking rocket science, its a bit of HTML editing.
Other examples - Yahoo! Mail Beta, Google Home Page, Windows Live!, Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps. All of these allow you to take content from either themselves or someone else and stick it into a different page. That is the crux of "Web 2.0" - mashups of content.
Something I have been wondering.... GCC now accepts Java source and emits either native binaries or Java bytecode. Can it take C/C++/etc and emit bytecode?
No.
If it is treating bytecode as just another target what if a C# frontend were written? Could gcc take C# on input and emit Java bytecode on the other end? And if a mono backend were added could it compile Java source to it? And if this all came to pass would it be a sure sign the end of times were at hand?
Mono can already do all of this - mono can run Java apps in it's CIL VM, and Java apps can talk to mono apps.
mono can't build Java code to CIL though, it doesn't understand the syntax. http://www.mono-project.com/Java.
I have never hard the GCJ web plugin actually *work* for a single site I visit. All it seems to know how to do is pop up a window with exceptions in it.
The idea that a company like GM woudl go bankrupt in any kind of reasonable timeframe is pretty ridiculous.
GM is not an Enron or Worldcom, with billions of billions of net worth tied up in "IP" and "market rights" (aka fake money). Gm's value is largely badsed on real world assets. They have a huge number of plants, huge real estate holdings, global infrastructure. If they really got the screws turned on them they could just shut down 50% of the company, focus on a nieche US-only market, and they'd still be well wtihin the Fortune 500.
If GM doesn't get it's act together soon, it will be facing a buyout by Toyota or Honda, sure... but bankrupcy is far far off.
There is a good argument for the environment there though - more expensive razors typically have blades that can go through more shaves than the cheap disposeables. As well you are only replacing the blade not the whole plastic razor. So while you may be saving money buying those huge bags of disposeables, it's generating a lot more garbage. You're also using more resources to make them too (when you buy the expensiv erazors you're mostly paying for marketing not material).
Modern usage
More recently, "begs the question" has been used as a synonym for "invites the question" or "raises the question", or to indicate that "the question really ought to be addressed". In this usage, "the question" is stated in the next phrase. For example: "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" This usage is often sharply criticized by proponents of the traditional meaning, but it has nonetheless come into common use as a result of its use in the media, especially by people ignorant of its original use. Argument over whether this usage should be considered incorrect is an example of the debate between linguistic prescription and description.
Personally I fall srongly on the description side. Perscrition is useful when you are a studentand learning language, but language is a construct for humans to communicate, and as such, description should be the primary motivation for a linguist. Language is how the majority use it, not how scholars define it.
The fact of the matter is all of these semi-rare stones are just different crystal formations that can be replicated in the lab.
The only reason you see such a push for it in diamons is because diamonds have lots of industrial applications, so even if the jewlery market crashes they stil have a market. But if there was a huge switch in jewlery from diamons to rubies/sappires because of their percieved "rarity", you can bet those would start being made artifically as well.
Gold and Silver are *not* artificially rare, they are elements and we aren't going to be economically creating those in a lab anytime soon.
The National Summit on Video Games, Youth, and Public Policy was this weekend...
I am sorry, but anyone from game media should not be attending any conference called "The National Summit on Video Games, Youth, and Public Policy". Why? Because it will only give more credit to the conference.
The fact of the matter is there should not be an public policy relating to games and youth at all. They're games for Christ sake. don't you think the government has more important things to set policy on? Like oh say, warrantless searches at airports?
Games and game content can not and should not be regulated any more than art or films.
Kopete supports MSN Webcam audio and video, and Google Talk Jingle upport works as well (experimental only)
#1 non-European country baby! ...er.. yeah :)
LCARS is a touch screen interface. It was in Star Trek and it is in these designs.
Anything that looks like a button can be pressed.
Can anyone tell me if Firefox will auto-update itself to 2.0 once it is released? Or os that only done for point releases?
I can't find any info on the Firefox site.
Yes, you're missing something I said...
You're forgetting from my point of view the OS was fried and I did a re-install. I never thought "oh I should back up my entire portage tree beforehanrd', because it never occured to me that the maintainers would do something like totally replace an ecryption method in portage without allowing for backwards compatability. SO I had totally wiped the OS partition and re-installed before I knew that I could not mount the encrypted home parition.
.. and that's "What happens if and when something goes wrong with the encryption solution and you lose all your data"?
When I was issued a company laptop, I jumped right on the encryption bandwagon. I used Linux, so I encrypted umy home directory sing loop-aes. Unfortunatly I was usin Gentoo at the time, and this was early in the 2.6 kernel series, before loopback encryption was standard in the kernel. So I was using some kind of third-party kernel AES crypto module (still not exactly sure what it wasusing, emerge took care of the details).
Anyways, months later, my OS install goes haywire. For what reason now I don't remember. No big deal I thought, I will just re-install.
Problem was, with the current Gentoo, I couldn't decrypt my drive.
Skip ahead 4 days later. I have tried *everything* to decrypt this data - posted in forums, talked to crypt developers, even tried writing an AES routine myself to get the raw volume at least. Nada. I ended up giving up and starting over - after all, nothing *important* was lost, but I did lose 2 years woth of archived emails I really would have liked to keep.
Oh, what about backups you say? Well security-consious as I was, I decided to back up the encrypted volume.
Needless to say I remain very wary of full-disk encryption in any form. And I always back up unencryupted. Secure? maybe not. But at least I know that if I have a filesystem crash I can use standard ext2 recoveryt ools to get my essential files back.
There is a big difference between being against change and being against marketing buzzspeak.
If you read the authors comment (and most around those lines here), you will see what we hate is not the change, but the false labels associated to it.
WTF is "Web 2.0"? It's nothing. Everything going on today has been done before, its nothing new, it's just buzzwords.
People point to MySpace and YouTube, and I point to Geocities and Shoutcast. Only difference between the two is that we have more hardware and bandwidth today so we can deliver richer content (richer interface for developing personal pages, richer media - video vs. audio) - there is nothing *fundamentally* new or revolutionary about most of the web now compared to the web 5 years ago. Sure, there are some bright spots, like Google Maps/GMail/Flickr. But these things emerged gradually - some have been around in one form or another since the 90s. You can't just pick some point in time and go "Oh, it's web 2.0 now".
It's just marketspeak. And we hate marketspeak cause it is meaningless.
Accenture was an individual company totally distinct from Attur Anderson for yeatrs and years before Enron even existed and in fact it was re-named to Accenture long before the whole Enron scandal even erupted.
People in the First World complain because we are driving their wages downward, but what is being lost is globalization is driving wages and employment standards in the third world upward.
Sure, the wages are low compared to here. Sure, the employment standards are lower. But change does not happen overnight - the amount of improvements seen over the last 25 years are more than were seen in the first 50 years of the industrial revolution in the first world.
Eventually, what will happen is the wages and employment standards of the entire world will meet somewhere in the middle. Then, they will only go up, as competition for skilled labour drives them that way.
You have to think long term - like on the 50-100 year scale.