If they could somehow program it for those of us who , (guilty) surf the web for hours on end, sitting in front of the computer... Until then, I will continue to wander the net...
Assuming these military industrial complex string pullers get their way, we will probably find ourselves in another version of the Starwars type programs Ronald Reagan tried to push during the 80's. It will for sure cost tens/hundreds of billions of dollars, makes go deeper in debt, and will bring nothing but space war stalemate.
It has a nice small form factor, as well as ethernet, USB, and video output in various formats, and a PCMCIA slot for removable media."
Sounds like it would be an excellent, albeit pricy makeshift firewall!
Personally, I type in random asdjkenjwjksjknewj. But I am talking about Mr. Joe average user who simply logs onto www.nytimes.com. He may not think twice about submitting his real information to NYtimes.com, thinking that since they are a well respected newspaper that they would not send you promotion stuff.
The Times also posted a more detailed explanation (registration required) for their decision.
As expected. Seems the NYT is going more and more subscription oriented. I must really ask...What is the benifit on their side for the public to register to read articles online? Just to be able to sell their emails?
Would be racks and racks of laptops! No need to by expensive low-power servers, just pump money into high-end laptops that already run low on power. And the best thing is, I don't have to pay for APC's, as they all come with batteries!
While it may be an obvious way to get the schools attention on the matter, it is, as the article said, a good way to get yourself expelled, etc. Maybe if they took the issue with the IT staff, and showed them one-on-one how it could be done, they would not be in any harms way.
We are just going to place this little...device in you and everything will be all right. Just take a deep breath, relax, and don't worry about what we're doing....
It seemsthat diebold, at least during the 2004 elections, had some SERIOUS mixups/malfunctions. To list a few: (According to this site)
The Diebold voting machine. Is there any evidence that these machines went haywire on Tuesday? Nationally, there were more than 1,100 reports of electronic voting machine malfunctions. A few examples:
In Broward County, Florida, election workers were shocked to discover that their shiny new machines were counting backwards. "Tallies should go up as more votes are counted," according to this report. "That's simple math. But in some races, the numbers had gone down. Officials found the software used in Broward can handle only 32,000 votes per precinct. After that, the system starts counting backward."
In Franklin County, Ohio, electronic voting machines gave Bush 3,893 extra votes in one precinct alone. "Franklin County's unofficial results gave Bush 4,258 votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry's 260 votes in Precinct 1B," according to this report. "Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, said Bush received 365 votes there. The other 13 voters who cast ballots either voted for other candidates or did not vote for president."
In Craven County, North Carolina, a software error on the electronic voting machines awarded Bush 11,283 extra votes. "The Elections Systems and Software equipment," according to this report, "had downloaded voting information from nine of the county's 26 precincts and as the absentee ballots were added, the precinct totals were added a second time. An override, like those occurring when one attempts to save a computer file that already exists, is supposed to prevent double counting, but did not function correctly."
In Carteret County, North Carolina, "More than 4,500 votes may be lost in one North Carolina county because officials believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. Local officials said UniLect Corp., the maker of the county's electronic voting system, told them that each storage unit could handle 10,500 votes, but the limit was actually 3,005 votes. Officials said 3,005 early votes were stored, but 4,530 were lost."
In LaPorte County, Indiana, a Democratic stronghold, the electronic voting machines decided that each precinct only had 300 voters. "At about 7 p.m. Tuesday," according to this report, "it was noticed that the first two or three printouts from individual precinct reports all listed an identical number of voters. Each precinct was listed as having 300 registered voters. That means the total number of voters for the county would be 22,200, although there are actually more than 79,000 registered voters."
In Sarpy County, Nebraska, the electronic touch screen machines got generous. "As many as 10,000 extra votes," according to this report, "have been tallied and candidates are still waiting for corrected totals. Johnny Boykin lost his bid to be on the Papillion City Council. The difference between victory and defeat in the race was 127 votes. Boykin says, 'When I went in to work the next day and saw that 3,342 people had shown up to vote in our ward, I thought something's not right.' He's right. There are not even 3,000 people registered to vote in his ward. For some reason, some votes were counted twice."
Stories like this have been popping up in many of the states that put these touch-screen voting machines to use. Beyond these reports are the folks who attempted to vote for one candidate and saw the machine give their vote to the other candidate. Sometimes, the flawed machines were taken off-line, and sometimes they were not. As for the reports above, the mistakes described were caught and corrected. How many mistakes made by these machines were not caught, were not corrected, and have now become part of the record?
One possible answer would be to use Sattelite internet. This way you could bypass any oppressive filtering the government may be doing on the internet they supply.
It be best to buy the satellite internet reciever, hardware,etc. in the USA (or other free country), and then ship it into the country in question. You could then set up the reciever almost anywhere (including middle of the desert, rooftops,etc.), and still be able to get to the internet. Best of all, the company that owns the satellite is the one that is providing the internet, and therefore would probably not filter it. Also, it is almost impossible for the oppressive govnerment to know that you are using satellite internet, as long as you keep your interent presence anonymous (and you keep your physical location a guarded secret).
This is the same guy who calculated the 1 Quadrillionth hexadigit of Pi (no, not digit. It is in base 16). His project was called PiHex.
According to his currently short but illustrious trackrecord, along with this current announcement, he is destined for being a big-name IT security guru.
According to Skype's FAQ, all of their VoIP calls are encrypted:
Calls between Skype software users (PC-to-PC calls) are secure and encrypted. Calls to standard telephone or mobile numbers are encrypted until they reach public switched telephone network. Note that in a conference call where one participant is a PSTN (regular telephone or mobile phone) number/phone number, the padlock icon will not appear indicating that the call is not encrypted.
It makes sense, at least to me, that the RIAA's all-stakes vendetta against file sharers is taking things too far. While I do think that artists should have the ability to make a living off of their music, it does not at all justify the sheer amount of all out attack that the RIAA has been taking agaisnt File-sharers.
The RIAA's tactis have not done nearly as much I think to stop illegal file-sharing as LEGAL music downloads like Apple's iTunes and others have been doing. The scare tactics employeed by the RIAA only scares off some of the less-diehard file swappers, and does not deter the majority of the sharers out there. While it may seem like the number of file sharers has decreased, the majority of those that have stopped have probably moved to legal forms of getting music downloads. If the RIAA, instead of spending millions on lawyers fees to sue, spend that money on promoting legal music downloading, I have a feeling the impact would be greater
Slashdot Mirror
My lego mindstorms vehicle can beat this car any day! Except maybe on sand dunes, but oh wel.
Hmm... Seems this guy likes to get EXCITED at these confrences, maybe he just got a little bit over excited this time.
If they could somehow program it for those of us who , (guilty) surf the web for hours on end, sitting in front of the computer... Until then, I will continue to wander the net...
Assuming these military industrial complex string pullers get their way, we will probably find ourselves in another version of the Starwars type programs Ronald Reagan tried to push during the 80's. It will for sure cost tens/hundreds of billions of dollars, makes go deeper in debt, and will bring nothing but space war stalemate.
It has a nice small form factor, as well as ethernet, USB, and video output in various formats, and a PCMCIA slot for removable media." Sounds like it would be an excellent, albeit pricy makeshift firewall!
Personally, I type in random asdjkenjwjksjknewj. But I am talking about Mr. Joe average user who simply logs onto www.nytimes.com. He may not think twice about submitting his real information to NYtimes.com, thinking that since they are a well respected newspaper that they would not send you promotion stuff.
As expected. Seems the NYT is going more and more subscription oriented. I must really ask...What is the benifit on their side for the public to register to read articles online? Just to be able to sell their emails?
You chose the wrong crowd for this article.
[Shudders]
If Redhat bought out Microsoft...THAT would be something.
How DARE Microsoft think they can take down Red Hat?!?
Would be racks and racks of laptops! No need to by expensive low-power servers, just pump money into high-end laptops that already run low on power. And the best thing is, I don't have to pay for APC's, as they all come with batteries!
While it may be an obvious way to get the schools attention on the matter, it is, as the article said, a good way to get yourself expelled, etc. Maybe if they took the issue with the IT staff, and showed them one-on-one how it could be done, they would not be in any harms way.
Play the CD in a DRM player, and record from the speakers....
We are just going to place this little...device in you and everything will be all right. Just take a deep breath, relax, and don't worry about what we're doing....
Wait til Bill finds out about this!! He is going to be furious!
The Diebold voting machine. Is there any evidence that these machines went haywire on Tuesday? Nationally, there were more than 1,100 reports of electronic voting machine malfunctions. A few examples:
In Broward County, Florida, election workers were shocked to discover that their shiny new machines were counting backwards. "Tallies should go up as more votes are counted," according to this report. "That's simple math. But in some races, the numbers had gone down. Officials found the software used in Broward can handle only 32,000 votes per precinct. After that, the system starts counting backward."
In Franklin County, Ohio, electronic voting machines gave Bush 3,893 extra votes in one precinct alone. "Franklin County's unofficial results gave Bush 4,258 votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry's 260 votes in Precinct 1B," according to this report. "Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, said Bush received 365 votes there. The other 13 voters who cast ballots either voted for other candidates or did not vote for president."
In Craven County, North Carolina, a software error on the electronic voting machines awarded Bush 11,283 extra votes. "The Elections Systems and Software equipment," according to this report, "had downloaded voting information from nine of the county's 26 precincts and as the absentee ballots were added, the precinct totals were added a second time. An override, like those occurring when one attempts to save a computer file that already exists, is supposed to prevent double counting, but did not function correctly."
In Carteret County, North Carolina, "More than 4,500 votes may be lost in one North Carolina county because officials believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. Local officials said UniLect Corp., the maker of the county's electronic voting system, told them that each storage unit could handle 10,500 votes, but the limit was actually 3,005 votes. Officials said 3,005 early votes were stored, but 4,530 were lost."
In LaPorte County, Indiana, a Democratic stronghold, the electronic voting machines decided that each precinct only had 300 voters. "At about 7 p.m. Tuesday," according to this report, "it was noticed that the first two or three printouts from individual precinct reports all listed an identical number of voters. Each precinct was listed as having 300 registered voters. That means the total number of voters for the county would be 22,200, although there are actually more than 79,000 registered voters."
In Sarpy County, Nebraska, the electronic touch screen machines got generous. "As many as 10,000 extra votes," according to this report, "have been tallied and candidates are still waiting for corrected totals. Johnny Boykin lost his bid to be on the Papillion City Council. The difference between victory and defeat in the race was 127 votes. Boykin says, 'When I went in to work the next day and saw that 3,342 people had shown up to vote in our ward, I thought something's not right.' He's right. There are not even 3,000 people registered to vote in his ward. For some reason, some votes were counted twice." Stories like this have been popping up in many of the states that put these touch-screen voting machines to use. Beyond these reports are the folks who attempted to vote for one candidate and saw the machine give their vote to the other candidate. Sometimes, the flawed machines were taken off-line, and sometimes they were not. As for the reports above, the mistakes described were caught and corrected. How many mistakes made by these machines were not caught, were not corrected, and have now become part of the record?
It be best to buy the satellite internet reciever, hardware,etc. in the USA (or other free country), and then ship it into the country in question. You could then set up the reciever almost anywhere (including middle of the desert, rooftops,etc.), and still be able to get to the internet. Best of all, the company that owns the satellite is the one that is providing the internet, and therefore would probably not filter it. Also, it is almost impossible for the oppressive govnerment to know that you are using satellite internet, as long as you keep your interent presence anonymous (and you keep your physical location a guarded secret).
An excellent website that shows satellite internet coverage around the world is: http://www.satsig.net/ivsat.htm.
Seriously, I would really love to see Tux scream on this thing!
This is the same guy who calculated the 1 Quadrillionth hexadigit of Pi (no, not digit. It is in base 16). His project was called PiHex. According to his currently short but illustrious trackrecord, along with this current announcement, he is destined for being a big-name IT security guru.
Calls between Skype software users (PC-to-PC calls) are secure and encrypted. Calls to standard telephone or mobile numbers are encrypted until they reach public switched telephone network. Note that in a conference call where one participant is a PSTN (regular telephone or mobile phone) number/phone number, the padlock icon will not appear indicating that the call is not encrypted.
from the frog-boiling dept. You got that right! This is making me hopping mad!
Tux at my fingertips!
The Long John Silver Restaurant chain will be willing to offer free shrimp for a second time if this finds any fresh water. Of a man's appetite can dream.
It makes sense, at least to me, that the RIAA's all-stakes vendetta against file sharers is taking things too far. While I do think that artists should have the ability to make a living off of their music, it does not at all justify the sheer amount of all out attack that the RIAA has been taking agaisnt File-sharers.
The RIAA's tactis have not done nearly as much I think to stop illegal file-sharing as LEGAL music downloads like Apple's iTunes and others have been doing. The scare tactics employeed by the RIAA only scares off some of the less-diehard file swappers, and does not deter the majority of the sharers out there. While it may seem like the number of file sharers has decreased, the majority of those that have stopped have probably moved to legal forms of getting music downloads. If the RIAA, instead of spending millions on lawyers fees to sue, spend that money on promoting legal music downloading, I have a feeling the impact would be greater