The restrictions? An eligible participant must be a junior faculty member at a US higher education institution. Participants should be no more than seven years beyond receiving a doctoral degree, pretenure junior faculty, with demonstrated exceptional potential for worldclass contributions to the field of computer science.
So, it seems like they only want faculty with the most tenuous positions at their institutions to do projects that will likely be viewed with suspicion by their more senior peers. After completing their project terms, they'll likely be anathema to the other faculty in their departments, and since they don't have tenure and likely won't be able to get it, will be ripe for the poaching. But they pay and benefits are probably a lot better than the universities can muster these days.
Isn't he a South African living in Canada who makes a product that ships with uber-strong crypto out of the box (like, even encoding the password file in Blowfish by default) and doesn't host any servers in the US to avoid crypto export regulations? As awesome as he would be at somehing like NSA's IAD, he seems to be kind of the opposite of what they're looking for.
Nuclear weapons "evidence" was clearly B.S., however he is known to have chemical and biological weapons. He stated not to have nuclear weapons, but beat around the bush on the chem and bio weapons, and played a pseudo-shell game with inspectors, largely to keep up appearances with his neighbors. I am by no means a supporter of the Iraq war. I've lost enough friends to it not to have any romantic notions that we went in for the "right reasons" when the war was sold to us. However, it's not as if Saddam was a nice guy who was open about his intentions and gave full, un-fettered access to inspectors and/or journalists to prove he didn't have any weapons or weapons programs.
At one point in time, Iraq DID have WMDs. We know this for a fact, because they were bought from the US. They were used against Iran, and this is well documented. Saddam also had a vested interest in projecting the illusion he had WMDs currently, to ensure his status as a regional player. Iran may very well have decided to seek some revenge, if they knew Iraq was basically defenseless. That explains his brazen attitude and actions leading up to the invasion (Saddam's, not Bush's... I'm still trying to figure that one out). It's really not quite as clear-cut as either side of the domestic political debate would like us to believe.
It's pretty easy to look at the public details of these ops from today's vantage point and go "that's stupid," but remember when these ops were first started the world was different. Dramatically different in the case of the spies which had been here 10 or 20 years, although not so much in this case. It's only been a year. But a year ago, the FSB didn't have a contract with Microsoft for the source code, and so access to that was worth a little more.
When some of the 10 spies that were deported recently were originally placed here, we didn't live with the constant flood of information that we do today. It wasn't as easy as going to washingtonpost.com or reading someone's blog to find out what was going on in the debate on certain issues. You had to wait, for news broadcasts or to get hold of a copy of a paper. Having someone get to know an individual who was an insider and to innocently ask some questions every now and then could actually pay dividends. And once an agency has already invested time and money training operatives, creating their legends and getting them into place, they're not going to just pull them out. They might be useful for something else later. This is type of work is like a marathon, not a sprint.
No, it seems more like "If you don't appoint 1 person to sit at a table, we'll dump responsibility for the whole thing on your lap... where you still won't have anyone pay attention to it, so we may as well all just cut to the chase and declare OpenSolaris dead."
There is evidence to suggest that George Welch, a Norther American Aviation test pilot, broke the sound barrier testing the F-86 about 2 weeks before Yaeger in the X-1.
It might be because they're free that there is competition to innovate. It doesn't take anything for someone to switch to a different browser, so getting them to stick with one is a bit trickier. No one is going to go into purchase rationalization mode over a free download like they might over a car that turns out not to be as cool as they hoped. From the perspective of a Microsoft or a Google, once you can lock in the loyalty of the end users, then its easier to steer them towards your other products, including for-pay products. Hell, even Netscape was giving away Navigator hoping people would pick up their server offerings to go along with it. Mozilla, on the other hand, needs to keep people in the open, standards-based ecosystem because that forces all the vendors towards the center and creates are more cross-compatible environment.
For retired race horses, being put out to stud is considered a great honor. Of course, the prospects probably aren't so good for 60-year-old engineers. Tough break, I guess.
if i want to view things in 3D, why can't I just go do stuff in actual reality? I haven't ever really had trouble seeing 3D, as long as it was done well (stuff at Disney as opposed to crap on super bowl commercials i had to use cheapo glasses from a cereal box to see), I just don't really see what the big deal is. Then again, I barely watch "normal" TV, so that probably has a lot to do with it.
So, basically either they have some poor engineers in key positions, or a non-trivial number of their customers are morons (bad for marketing purposes). It's kind of hard to say which will do more damage to their image.
I've known many Spanish women but I never put any effort into sleeping with them. The Eastern European girls were always catching my eye instead. Btw, your homepage link is throwing 500 errors. You might want to look into that.
There is a difference between wanting to leave some children behind and wanting to just call a spade a spade. Some kids don't care. Some kids aren't able to "get it." Not everyone is created equal. Perhaps morally equal, but not mathematically equivalent. I dunno, frankly I'd just as soon stay out of it. My mother's a high school teacher (undergrad from an ivy in Romance languages with a concentration in French and Italian; masters in Spanish; teaches Spanish 4 and 5, with the AP classes) so most of what I get about the actual implementation of the law comes from her. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, when she was in school she had become fluent in Italian before 5th grade and these days they don't even teach foreign languages in most elementary schools, if any. But we're not trying to train future generations of CIA covert agents and diplomats to thwart the Soviets. We're not trying to push people into science and engineering or encouraging them with a kick-ass maned space program like they did back then, either. Maybe its because we don't have a big, tough enemy to make us stronger anymore, and that means we're going to grow soft. China could have fit the bill, but Nixon did sort of fuck us on that. Now we're too dependent on them for trade to go to war, or compete in space.
I just think resources should be distributed in such a way as that the students who are going to make better use of them get first dibs. AP and Honors classes should get first crack and shouldn't have to have their time wasted by putting remedial kids in their classes to suck up the teacher's time and attention.
Most of the rest of the world can already say "been there, done that." We haven't fought foreign troops on US soil since 1815, except a brief issue in the Aleutian Islands during WWII. Most of Europe was taken over by the Nazis and/or their allies (for the sake of argument, we'll include Franco even though this isn't strictly true... he did tolerate and leverage Primo de Rivera well after he was killed by Republicans), or the Soviet Union. Soviet Communism controlled the Eastern Bloc and Central Asia, while Maoists took over China, and Communists took many other South Asian countries, such as Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. Let's also not forget North Korea.
Then, there's all the tin-bot banana republics that popped up in Latin America, leftist rebels fighting CIA-backed reactionaries for the better part of the 20th century.
Africa was under Colonial rule until the 50s or 60s in most places, and UDI in Rhodesia and South Africa didn't exactly work out. Most of the so-called "leaders" that popped up in the post-colonial era were/are worse than the European powers they replaced (Mugabe and Amin, I'm looking in your directions).
All the while, here in the WASP-y, western world (USA, UK, Canada, Australia, NZ) it's seemed "business as usual" while we say "man, at least we're not like . We're totally free!", and then we vote for wire taps, closed-circuit cameras on the street corners, gun control (even in Iraq, house holds are allowed a "real" AK-47 (not these fake-ass WASR-10s or MAK-90s we get here) with a full 30rd magazine without being hassled by coalition troops). Most Americans could not possibly imagine the hardships suffered by people in the majority of the world while they wish for more "safety" in their mini-vans and suburbs. I love my country, but seriously -- people need to get out more and learn to appreciate what's actually important. Maybe then we can stop having to say "well, it looks like people in country understand." Of course they do, the value of freedom hasn't been diluted for them yet.
No, I don't work for Comcast. My work would be much less popular with the Slashdot community, but I can't really discuss it anyway. But, just to play devil's advocate, if, say, port 80 traffic were completely unfettered in a bi-directional manner and incomming connections were allowed without a previously established outgoing connection, chances are quite high that would be abused by malware authors for command-and-control and botnet node intercommunication. I don't think that's much of a stretch at all, and its not as if the typical end user is going to know or care to secure their node.
From the Nixon administration through the first half of Bush 41's term, Chile had Augusto Pinochet, a military dictator. They might tend to look at freedom with slightly less jaded eyes than Americans who have had it "too good for too long." Small things like that can tend to have major effects on perspective. Just saying.
Isn't stock an asset? Or do we only count depreciable items? It really don't make any sense to get an injunction against the transfer of office supplies, however stock indicates control of the company. If a majority of stock were transferred out of Zuckerberg's control, and the court ruled that this dude is only entitled to 84% of Zuckerberg's shares, not 84% of the whole company, but Zberg transferred most of his shares to someone else like an under-the-table escrow, then the claim becomes worth a lot less. At the end of the day, this is going to boil down to a battle over shares, not over stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like the stolen data was being sent to a hacked BlueHost account. Figures.
The restrictions? An eligible participant must be a junior faculty member at a US higher education institution. Participants should be no more than seven years beyond receiving a doctoral degree, pretenure junior faculty, with demonstrated exceptional potential for worldclass contributions to the field of computer science.
So, it seems like they only want faculty with the most tenuous positions at their institutions to do projects that will likely be viewed with suspicion by their more senior peers. After completing their project terms, they'll likely be anathema to the other faculty in their departments, and since they don't have tenure and likely won't be able to get it, will be ripe for the poaching. But they pay and benefits are probably a lot better than the universities can muster these days.
Isn't he a South African living in Canada who makes a product that ships with uber-strong crypto out of the box (like, even encoding the password file in Blowfish by default) and doesn't host any servers in the US to avoid crypto export regulations? As awesome as he would be at somehing like NSA's IAD, he seems to be kind of the opposite of what they're looking for.
Nuclear weapons "evidence" was clearly B.S., however he is known to have chemical and biological weapons. He stated not to have nuclear weapons, but beat around the bush on the chem and bio weapons, and played a pseudo-shell game with inspectors, largely to keep up appearances with his neighbors. I am by no means a supporter of the Iraq war. I've lost enough friends to it not to have any romantic notions that we went in for the "right reasons" when the war was sold to us. However, it's not as if Saddam was a nice guy who was open about his intentions and gave full, un-fettered access to inspectors and/or journalists to prove he didn't have any weapons or weapons programs.
At one point in time, Iraq DID have WMDs. We know this for a fact, because they were bought from the US. They were used against Iran, and this is well documented. Saddam also had a vested interest in projecting the illusion he had WMDs currently, to ensure his status as a regional player. Iran may very well have decided to seek some revenge, if they knew Iraq was basically defenseless. That explains his brazen attitude and actions leading up to the invasion (Saddam's, not Bush's... I'm still trying to figure that one out). It's really not quite as clear-cut as either side of the domestic political debate would like us to believe.
It's pretty easy to look at the public details of these ops from today's vantage point and go "that's stupid," but remember when these ops were first started the world was different. Dramatically different in the case of the spies which had been here 10 or 20 years, although not so much in this case. It's only been a year. But a year ago, the FSB didn't have a contract with Microsoft for the source code, and so access to that was worth a little more.
When some of the 10 spies that were deported recently were originally placed here, we didn't live with the constant flood of information that we do today. It wasn't as easy as going to washingtonpost.com or reading someone's blog to find out what was going on in the debate on certain issues. You had to wait, for news broadcasts or to get hold of a copy of a paper. Having someone get to know an individual who was an insider and to innocently ask some questions every now and then could actually pay dividends. And once an agency has already invested time and money training operatives, creating their legends and getting them into place, they're not going to just pull them out. They might be useful for something else later. This is type of work is like a marathon, not a sprint.
No, it seems more like "If you don't appoint 1 person to sit at a table, we'll dump responsibility for the whole thing on your lap... where you still won't have anyone pay attention to it, so we may as well all just cut to the chase and declare OpenSolaris dead."
There is evidence to suggest that George Welch, a Norther American Aviation test pilot, broke the sound barrier testing the F-86 about 2 weeks before Yaeger in the X-1.
It might be because they're free that there is competition to innovate. It doesn't take anything for someone to switch to a different browser, so getting them to stick with one is a bit trickier. No one is going to go into purchase rationalization mode over a free download like they might over a car that turns out not to be as cool as they hoped. From the perspective of a Microsoft or a Google, once you can lock in the loyalty of the end users, then its easier to steer them towards your other products, including for-pay products. Hell, even Netscape was giving away Navigator hoping people would pick up their server offerings to go along with it. Mozilla, on the other hand, needs to keep people in the open, standards-based ecosystem because that forces all the vendors towards the center and creates are more cross-compatible environment.
Because the Taliban might start training their monkeys to interpret Javascript, too.
I heard they have zombies in Haiti and sometimes in New Orleans. However, your mileage my vary.
I think you're supposed to say Glenn Beck and not Bill O'Reilly these days.
For retired race horses, being put out to stud is considered a great honor. Of course, the prospects probably aren't so good for 60-year-old engineers. Tough break, I guess.
if i want to view things in 3D, why can't I just go do stuff in actual reality? I haven't ever really had trouble seeing 3D, as long as it was done well (stuff at Disney as opposed to crap on super bowl commercials i had to use cheapo glasses from a cereal box to see), I just don't really see what the big deal is. Then again, I barely watch "normal" TV, so that probably has a lot to do with it.
So, basically either they have some poor engineers in key positions, or a non-trivial number of their customers are morons (bad for marketing purposes). It's kind of hard to say which will do more damage to their image.
I've known many Spanish women but I never put any effort into sleeping with them. The Eastern European girls were always catching my eye instead. Btw, your homepage link is throwing 500 errors. You might want to look into that.
There is a difference between wanting to leave some children behind and wanting to just call a spade a spade. Some kids don't care. Some kids aren't able to "get it." Not everyone is created equal. Perhaps morally equal, but not mathematically equivalent. I dunno, frankly I'd just as soon stay out of it. My mother's a high school teacher (undergrad from an ivy in Romance languages with a concentration in French and Italian; masters in Spanish; teaches Spanish 4 and 5, with the AP classes) so most of what I get about the actual implementation of the law comes from her. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, when she was in school she had become fluent in Italian before 5th grade and these days they don't even teach foreign languages in most elementary schools, if any. But we're not trying to train future generations of CIA covert agents and diplomats to thwart the Soviets. We're not trying to push people into science and engineering or encouraging them with a kick-ass maned space program like they did back then, either. Maybe its because we don't have a big, tough enemy to make us stronger anymore, and that means we're going to grow soft. China could have fit the bill, but Nixon did sort of fuck us on that. Now we're too dependent on them for trade to go to war, or compete in space.
I just think resources should be distributed in such a way as that the students who are going to make better use of them get first dibs. AP and Honors classes should get first crack and shouldn't have to have their time wasted by putting remedial kids in their classes to suck up the teacher's time and attention.
Most of the rest of the world can already say "been there, done that." We haven't fought foreign troops on US soil since 1815, except a brief issue in the Aleutian Islands during WWII. Most of Europe was taken over by the Nazis and/or their allies (for the sake of argument, we'll include Franco even though this isn't strictly true... he did tolerate and leverage Primo de Rivera well after he was killed by Republicans), or the Soviet Union. Soviet Communism controlled the Eastern Bloc and Central Asia, while Maoists took over China, and Communists took many other South Asian countries, such as Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. Let's also not forget North Korea.
Then, there's all the tin-bot banana republics that popped up in Latin America, leftist rebels fighting CIA-backed reactionaries for the better part of the 20th century.
Africa was under Colonial rule until the 50s or 60s in most places, and UDI in Rhodesia and South Africa didn't exactly work out. Most of the so-called "leaders" that popped up in the post-colonial era were/are worse than the European powers they replaced (Mugabe and Amin, I'm looking in your directions).
All the while, here in the WASP-y, western world (USA, UK, Canada, Australia, NZ) it's seemed "business as usual" while we say "man, at least we're not like . We're totally free!", and then we vote for wire taps, closed-circuit cameras on the street corners, gun control (even in Iraq, house holds are allowed a "real" AK-47 (not these fake-ass WASR-10s or MAK-90s we get here) with a full 30rd magazine without being hassled by coalition troops). Most Americans could not possibly imagine the hardships suffered by people in the majority of the world while they wish for more "safety" in their mini-vans and suburbs. I love my country, but seriously -- people need to get out more and learn to appreciate what's actually important. Maybe then we can stop having to say "well, it looks like people in country understand." Of course they do, the value of freedom hasn't been diluted for them yet.
No, I don't work for Comcast. My work would be much less popular with the Slashdot community, but I can't really discuss it anyway. But, just to play devil's advocate, if, say, port 80 traffic were completely unfettered in a bi-directional manner and incomming connections were allowed without a previously established outgoing connection, chances are quite high that would be abused by malware authors for command-and-control and botnet node intercommunication. I don't think that's much of a stretch at all, and its not as if the typical end user is going to know or care to secure their node.
From the Nixon administration through the first half of Bush 41's term, Chile had Augusto Pinochet, a military dictator. They might tend to look at freedom with slightly less jaded eyes than Americans who have had it "too good for too long." Small things like that can tend to have major effects on perspective. Just saying.
egress filtering is a perfectly legitimate tool for both security and QoS reasons. If anything, most ISPs aren't doing enough of it.
Isn't stock an asset? Or do we only count depreciable items? It really don't make any sense to get an injunction against the transfer of office supplies, however stock indicates control of the company. If a majority of stock were transferred out of Zuckerberg's control, and the court ruled that this dude is only entitled to 84% of Zuckerberg's shares, not 84% of the whole company, but Zberg transferred most of his shares to someone else like an under-the-table escrow, then the claim becomes worth a lot less. At the end of the day, this is going to boil down to a battle over shares, not over stuff.
I think they call them "channel ops" or "moderators" depending on the context.
Is it that obvious? I mean, I try to be a good person, but I didn't know how well it came across. Thanks for believing I'm not a lawyer.