At least according to wikipedia they were planning to launch in that configuration
The high-pressure oxygen atmosphere was consistent with that used in the Mercury and Gemini programs. The pressure before launch was deliberately greater than ambient in order to drive out the nitrogen-containing air and replace it with pure oxygen. After liftoff, the pressure would have been reduced to the in-flight level of 5 pounds per square inch (34 kPa), providing sufficient oxygen for the astronauts to breathe while reducing the fire risk.
After the fire the plans were changed to launch with an oxygen nitrogen mix (though still a VERY oxygen rich one) in the cabin and then replace the atmosphere in space.
Your Hogwarts Express journey is going to take upwards of 10 days and will cross a minimum of 8 national borders. (US-Canada, Canada-US, US-Russia, Russia-Belarus, Belarus-Poland, Poland-Germany, Germany-France, France-UK).
It's not as bad as it first seems.
Afaict you can go from russia to the schengen area without crossing any other countries in between by going through lavia and lithuania rather than belarus. Afaict canada, the schengen area and the UK all allow US passport holders in without requiring a VISA. Similally british passport holders can travel without a visa in the schengen area canada and the US.
So afaict the only issue for US and UK travellers would be the time required to get a russian (and maybe belarusian if you go that route but afaict they hand out transit VISAs at the border) VISA.
While the 4 layer model may make sense from the upper layers POV, I do prefer separating the Link layers, and not mixing the media used w/ the switching layers.
I think the key with TCP/IP is that you have two layers that are actually part of TCP/IP. Above those layers you have an application and below them you have a "link" . The application and the link may themselves be divided into multiple layers but that is outside the scope of TCP/IP. You may even have some layers occouring more than once in the stack.
Something to consider is that in areas that regularly get earthquakes of a given level buildings are built to tolerate them. Whereas if a quake is stronger than anything that has previously been known to hit an area buidlings will not have been designed to tolerate it.
Yeaaah... that shouldn't matter actually. The web programmer that transmits credit card data unencrypted should be shot on sight in today's security concerned society. So no matter if the wireless is unsecured, buying shit should still be safe.
Most ecommerce websites work on the following system
1: the user visits an unencrypted website 2: the user adds products to their cart 3: the user is transferred to a SSL site which may or may not be operated by the same company as the main website to submit payment.
The question then becomes will people notice if the SSL site they are redirected to has a slightly different name from what they were expecting? I'm betting in most cases the answer is no.
If you want to block an individual website without blocking everything else on the IP you have three main options
1: Make your DNS server act as authoritative for that websites hostname. 2: Redirect all web requests for that IP to a proxy which can then decide whether to forward them or not. 3: Perform deep packet inspection and drop packets that look like a request for the banned website.
The first of these is relatively easy to implement but is also very leaky (the clients can just use another DNS server). The other two have nontrivial costs both in time and money to implement.
Blocking everything on an IP OTOH is trivial, you just add a rule to your firewall or a static route to your router that sends the packets to nowhere.
So if you are an ISP and a court orders you to block a site what do you do? deploy soloution 1 and hope the court doesn't blame you for the leakiness? build out infrastructure for options 2 and 3 and hope you can do it in time to comply with the courts demans? or just block the IP on which the domain is hosted?
This in no way helps oppressive governments. It is about a client-side cookie
The important thing is the database of "bad images" exists and requests for an image can be checked against the DB relatively easilly (otherwise the blocking feature wouldn't work). All other details of how the blocking system works for opt-in users are irrelevent to those who plan to use it as a datasource for censorship.
If an evil government tried to filter images, they'd have to prevent pictures from actually being sent over the internet.
Once the "evil government" has the ability to check an image against the list of "bad images" it is easy for them to build a proxy that blocks any image on the "bad images" list and redirect all wikipedia traffic through said proxy. As for secure.wikimedia.org IIRC image requests currently aren't routed through https and even if they were the "evil government" they can either block them outright, proxy it though a server without a valid cert (which will produce warnings for the users) or bully a CA to giving them a cert for MITM purposes. In a coropate or education setting the secure server could be dealt with by deploying a custom root cert to clients.
On the other hand, if UK prices are massively higher than other places, people will just import and pay no VAT at all (or pay it to a foreign country instead).
If you buy from a small retailer elsewhere in the EU then you will indeed pay that countries VAT. I don't think many people do that on a significant scale though. IIRC larger retailers in the EU are required to charge VAT based on the customers country. Plus many smaller foreign sites aren't in english so even though you can technically buy from them it requires knowlage of that countries language. Many smaller sites also tend to have steep charges for out of country delivery.
If you buy from outside the EU (or from the channel islands which while inside the EU for most purposes but outside the EU for VAT purposes) then unless the value is very low (below £18 IIRC), you get lucky or the supplier lies on the customs form you will be charged VAT. Further in many cases you will be charged a fee of £10 or so for collecting said VAT.
It's not a glamorous way to acquire extra money but you're guaranteed to "earn" (save) that amount of interest.
There are caveats though, for example if you lose your job you are likely to suddenly find it very hard to borrow money. So it may be safer to have a larger mortgate and some savings than a smaller mortage and no savings.
Avago (or was that the old HP optoelectronics business?)
Avago was spun off from Agilent who in turn were spun off from HP.
It's not uncommon to see a part listed on the supplier as being from avago with a datasheet that is titled agilent and a H at the start of the part number (which I presume originally stood for HP)
1: allows both RAII and close to bare metal coding to coexist as appropriate for each peice of the code in question without having to resort to the mess of mixing languages 2: Has a high quality FOSS implementation 3: Is widely ported
Managing memory is manual labor, that's why the memory should be handled by the computer and not humans.
So why does java unlike virtually every programming langauge i've dealt with impose an arbitary memory limit on programs by default?
I believe the reason is that the GC can't be trusted to clean up memory in a timely manner unless it's forced into an out of memory situation. So they put an arbitary memory limit on there to make sure the vm doesn't drive the machine into swap death before the GC bothers to clean up.
I don't think GC is a fundamentally bad idea but I DO think doing it properly requires hooks in the OS so applications can be informed of memory pressure not just within their own application but between applications.
If you know the maximum size of everything up front then as you say you can allocate all your memory upfront and mostly forget about managing it. Of course this only works for certain types of application.
On the other hand in C if you don't know the sizes of stuff upfront then you will need to allocate memory for them as you go along and manually keep track of that memory so you can free it at the appropriate time. C++ gives you tools to automatically keep track of that memory and free it when appropriate. Java sidesteps the problem of needing to keep track of memory allocations by using GC (of course GC opens a huge can of worms of it's own)
The difference is that the PC environment has over a long time filtered down to a few typical devices for each type. Your network hardware is probably Realtek, or maybe Intel or an embedded AMD chip. You graphics card is NVidia, AMD or Intel. Your mouse does not matter, because it always talk USB HID etc.
And perhaps most importantly your main system bus is either PCI or something that looks like PCI to software and by accessing the configuration space of that bus you can read the device IDs of everything on it whereas with ARM the software is expected to know the complete hardware setup in advance.
Despite the fact that both industries have a continual boost in special effects/graphics
Yes movies techologies have improved but game tech advances FAR quicker than movie tech (go play a current game and a current movie, then do the same for a game and movie from 1990)and it's no wonder that games date quickly I suspect that given time the game industry will stablise at a state where visual quality is only slowly improving and a 10 year old title still looks comparable to a current title. When that will happen I don't know but I would expect it to be soon.
Also film was ALWAYS far higher quality than any techology available to the home customer. So they have had plenty of quality "in-reserve" (that is quality that customers could previously only see at the cinema not own) to release new higher quality versions. Whereas with games there is little to no quality "in reseve". Unless someone does a remake the quality in the original game is pretty much all you are going to get if you re-buy it.
Some games are like that. Some games were supposed to be like that but thanks to implementation bugs either crash or reach a screen that is impossible to pass. Most modern games (and some older games) have a story which you play through. Eventually you reach a point where you finish that story (and usually the credits roll). There may be side things to do after you finish the story (side missions, playing through on a harder difficulty etc) but eventually you complete all of those (or at least all of those you can figure out how to complete and haven't accidently locked out through design glitches) too.
At least per the GPL definition of source ASM may or may not be source just as C may or may not be source. What matters is not what language it is in but whether or not it is the "preffered form of the work for making modifications".
Well you could run a hacked version of the trojan that reported any blocks found to you. You could then trace what bitcoin addresses those coins flowed to.
Of course you'd still have all the normal problems of tracking a bitcoin transaction from there. How difficult that would be would depend on how paraniod the hacker was and whether you could get the cooperation of the major exchanges.
Can someone tell me why Bernie Madoff, former Enron executives, and all current Goldman Sachs management are all alive while piddly murderers, some not even serial, are executed?
I think there are a couple of reasons.
Firstly even though it's damage to society may well be lower murder is viewed as a worse crime than mass financial fraud.
Secondly the US is a structure of multiple governements some of which are big on the death penalty (according to wikpedia texas accounts for over a third of US executions since 1976) , some of which rarely use it and some of which never use it. Afaict murder is usually handled on a state level which means it's the state government/legal system that decides whether to apply the death penalty. The federal government (which usually ends up dealing with large scale financial crime since it nearly always has an interstate component) seems to fall into the "rarely uses it" category.
How practical that is will of course depend on how well designed the locking system is. If it's done properly with digitally signed unlock messages tied to the processors serial numbers it could be made extremely difficult to bypass.
Train your people better (which means that you WTFM(*) yourself, because you seem to understand the issue). Or replace the equipment with something else. Or live with the costs.
Deciding it's cheaper to live with a suboptimal situation (e.g. one where accidently mixing up the serial and ethernet lines can fry stuff) than to fix it doesn't preclude hating those who got you into the situation in the first place.
Though IMO the real issue is with the ethernet gear rather than the serial gear. They decided to use the same connectors as phone systems yet afaict they didn't require ethernet equipment to survive connection to a phone line.
Absolute basics will save those with no maps or GPS. Walk downhill until you get to a stream. You now have water. Follow that downstream until you hit a road.
Afaict that will work in most places but it's not foolproof. You could end up at an impassable cliff, in a dry depression, at the enterance to a cave lost in fog etc.
Yeah, knowing how to use gps and all that might be great when you're in a city, but if you're going to be roughing it you should carry the most simple of technologies (compasses, maps, etc) instead of things that use damned batteries or rely on signals to external technologies to function.
You should also attempt to maximise your chances of survival when the shit hits the fan. IMO that means both carrying appropriate communication technology and carrying enough of lifes essentials to get you through a walk back to civilisation.
these days periodic fire tests (i.e. falsely raising the alarm...) are generally considered a good thing and presumably not dangerous but to be fair I suppose that's partly because it's probably illegal to let public places get as crowded without adequate means of escape as may have been allowed back then.
Also fire drills and false alarms are pretty routine so everyone just files out quietly and doesn't panic.
Though i'd expect shouting fire to have a rather more panic inducing effect than a mere fire alarm.
Slashdot Mirror
At least according to wikipedia they were planning to launch in that configuration
The high-pressure oxygen atmosphere was consistent with that used in the Mercury and Gemini programs. The pressure before launch was deliberately greater than ambient in order to drive out the nitrogen-containing air and replace it with pure oxygen. After liftoff, the pressure would have been reduced to the in-flight level of 5 pounds per square inch (34 kPa), providing sufficient oxygen for the astronauts to breathe while reducing the fire risk.
After the fire the plans were changed to launch with an oxygen nitrogen mix (though still a VERY oxygen rich one) in the cabin and then replace the atmosphere in space.
Your Hogwarts Express journey is going to take upwards of 10 days and will cross a minimum of 8 national borders. (US-Canada, Canada-US, US-Russia, Russia-Belarus, Belarus-Poland, Poland-Germany, Germany-France, France-UK).
It's not as bad as it first seems.
Afaict you can go from russia to the schengen area without crossing any other countries in between by going through lavia and lithuania rather than belarus.
Afaict canada, the schengen area and the UK all allow US passport holders in without requiring a VISA. Similally british passport holders can travel without a visa in the schengen area canada and the US.
So afaict the only issue for US and UK travellers would be the time required to get a russian (and maybe belarusian if you go that route but afaict they hand out transit VISAs at the border) VISA.
While the 4 layer model may make sense from the upper layers POV, I do prefer separating the Link layers, and not mixing the media used w/ the switching layers.
I think the key with TCP/IP is that you have two layers that are actually part of TCP/IP. Above those layers you have an application and below them you have a "link" . The application and the link may themselves be divided into multiple layers but that is outside the scope of TCP/IP. You may even have some layers occouring more than once in the stack.
Something to consider is that in areas that regularly get earthquakes of a given level buildings are built to tolerate them. Whereas if a quake is stronger than anything that has previously been known to hit an area buidlings will not have been designed to tolerate it.
Yeaaah... that shouldn't matter actually. The web programmer that transmits credit card data unencrypted should be shot on sight in today's security concerned society. So no matter if the wireless is unsecured, buying shit should still be safe.
Most ecommerce websites work on the following system
1: the user visits an unencrypted website
2: the user adds products to their cart
3: the user is transferred to a SSL site which may or may not be operated by the same company as the main website to submit payment.
The question then becomes will people notice if the SSL site they are redirected to has a slightly different name from what they were expecting? I'm betting in most cases the answer is no.
If you want to block an individual website without blocking everything else on the IP you have three main options
1: Make your DNS server act as authoritative for that websites hostname.
2: Redirect all web requests for that IP to a proxy which can then decide whether to forward them or not.
3: Perform deep packet inspection and drop packets that look like a request for the banned website.
The first of these is relatively easy to implement but is also very leaky (the clients can just use another DNS server). The other two have nontrivial costs both in time and money to implement.
Blocking everything on an IP OTOH is trivial, you just add a rule to your firewall or a static route to your router that sends the packets to nowhere.
So if you are an ISP and a court orders you to block a site what do you do? deploy soloution 1 and hope the court doesn't blame you for the leakiness? build out infrastructure for options 2 and 3 and hope you can do it in time to comply with the courts demans? or just block the IP on which the domain is hosted?
This in no way helps oppressive governments. It is about a client-side cookie
The important thing is the database of "bad images" exists and requests for an image can be checked against the DB relatively easilly (otherwise the blocking feature wouldn't work). All other details of how the blocking system works for opt-in users are irrelevent to those who plan to use it as a datasource for censorship.
If an evil government tried to filter images, they'd have to prevent pictures from actually being sent over the internet.
Once the "evil government" has the ability to check an image against the list of "bad images" it is easy for them to build a proxy that blocks any image on the "bad images" list and redirect all wikipedia traffic through said proxy. As for secure.wikimedia.org IIRC image requests currently aren't routed through https and even if they were the "evil government" they can either block them outright, proxy it though a server without a valid cert (which will produce warnings for the users) or bully a CA to giving them a cert for MITM purposes. In a coropate or education setting the secure server could be dealt with by deploying a custom root cert to clients.
On the other hand, if UK prices are massively higher than other places, people will just import and pay no VAT at all (or pay it to a foreign country instead).
If you buy from a small retailer elsewhere in the EU then you will indeed pay that countries VAT. I don't think many people do that on a significant scale though. IIRC larger retailers in the EU are required to charge VAT based on the customers country. Plus many smaller foreign sites aren't in english so even though you can technically buy from them it requires knowlage of that countries language. Many smaller sites also tend to have steep charges for out of country delivery.
If you buy from outside the EU (or from the channel islands which while inside the EU for most purposes but outside the EU for VAT purposes) then unless the value is very low (below £18 IIRC), you get lucky or the supplier lies on the customs form you will be charged VAT. Further in many cases you will be charged a fee of £10 or so for collecting said VAT.
It's not a glamorous way to acquire extra money but you're guaranteed to "earn" (save) that amount of interest.
There are caveats though, for example if you lose your job you are likely to suddenly find it very hard to borrow money. So it may be safer to have a larger mortgate and some savings than a smaller mortage and no savings.
Avago (or was that the old HP optoelectronics business?)
Avago was spun off from Agilent who in turn were spun off from HP.
It's not uncommon to see a part listed on the supplier as being from avago with a datasheet that is titled agilent and a H at the start of the part number (which I presume originally stood for HP)
Well it's certainly not for lack of options
Ok name a language that
1: allows both RAII and close to bare metal coding to coexist as appropriate for each peice of the code in question without having to resort to the mess of mixing languages
2: Has a high quality FOSS implementation
3: Is widely ported
Managing memory is manual labor, that's why the memory should be handled by the computer and not humans.
So why does java unlike virtually every programming langauge i've dealt with impose an arbitary memory limit on programs by default?
I believe the reason is that the GC can't be trusted to clean up memory in a timely manner unless it's forced into an out of memory situation. So they put an arbitary memory limit on there to make sure the vm doesn't drive the machine into swap death before the GC bothers to clean up.
I don't think GC is a fundamentally bad idea but I DO think doing it properly requires hooks in the OS so applications can be informed of memory pressure not just within their own application but between applications.
A lot depends on what the code is trying to do.
If you know the maximum size of everything up front then as you say you can allocate all your memory upfront and mostly forget about managing it. Of course this only works for certain types of application.
On the other hand in C if you don't know the sizes of stuff upfront then you will need to allocate memory for them as you go along and manually keep track of that memory so you can free it at the appropriate time. C++ gives you tools to automatically keep track of that memory and free it when appropriate. Java sidesteps the problem of needing to keep track of memory allocations by using GC (of course GC opens a huge can of worms of it's own)
Not anymore [oracle.com]. It does require you to get the resource in a special block
mmm, better than it used to be though IMO still not as good as C++
Also their example doesn't make it clear whether only the bufferedreader will be autoclosed or whether the filereader will be as well.
The difference is that the PC environment has over a long time filtered down to a few typical devices for each type. Your network hardware is probably Realtek, or maybe Intel or an embedded AMD chip. You graphics card is NVidia, AMD or Intel. Your mouse does not matter, because it always talk USB HID etc.
And perhaps most importantly your main system bus is either PCI or something that looks like PCI to software and by accessing the configuration space of that bus you can read the device IDs of everything on it whereas with ARM the software is expected to know the complete hardware setup in advance.
Despite the fact that both industries have a continual boost in special effects/graphics
Yes movies techologies have improved but game tech advances FAR quicker than movie tech (go play a current game and a current movie, then do the same for a game and movie from 1990)and it's no wonder that games date quickly I suspect that given time the game industry will stablise at a state where visual quality is only slowly improving and a 10 year old title still looks comparable to a current title. When that will happen I don't know but I would expect it to be soon.
Also film was ALWAYS far higher quality than any techology available to the home customer. So they have had plenty of quality "in-reserve" (that is quality that customers could previously only see at the cinema not own) to release new higher quality versions. Whereas with games there is little to no quality "in reseve". Unless someone does a remake the quality in the original game is pretty much all you are going to get if you re-buy it.
Some games are like that.
Some games were supposed to be like that but thanks to implementation bugs either crash or reach a screen that is impossible to pass.
Most modern games (and some older games) have a story which you play through. Eventually you reach a point where you finish that story (and usually the credits roll). There may be side things to do after you finish the story (side missions, playing through on a harder difficulty etc) but eventually you complete all of those (or at least all of those you can figure out how to complete and haven't accidently locked out through design glitches) too.
At least per the GPL definition of source ASM may or may not be source just as C may or may not be source. What matters is not what language it is in but whether or not it is the "preffered form of the work for making modifications".
Well you could run a hacked version of the trojan that reported any blocks found to you. You could then trace what bitcoin addresses those coins flowed to.
Of course you'd still have all the normal problems of tracking a bitcoin transaction from there. How difficult that would be would depend on how paraniod the hacker was and whether you could get the cooperation of the major exchanges.
Can someone tell me why Bernie Madoff, former Enron executives, and all current Goldman Sachs management are all alive while piddly murderers, some not even serial, are executed?
I think there are a couple of reasons.
Firstly even though it's damage to society may well be lower murder is viewed as a worse crime than mass financial fraud.
Secondly the US is a structure of multiple governements some of which are big on the death penalty (according to wikpedia texas accounts for over a third of US executions since 1976) , some of which rarely use it and some of which never use it. Afaict murder is usually handled on a state level which means it's the state government/legal system that decides whether to apply the death penalty. The federal government (which usually ends up dealing with large scale financial crime since it nearly always has an interstate component) seems to fall into the "rarely uses it" category.
How practical that is will of course depend on how well designed the locking system is. If it's done properly with digitally signed unlock messages tied to the processors serial numbers it could be made extremely difficult to bypass.
Train your people better (which means that you WTFM(*) yourself, because you seem to understand the issue). Or replace the equipment with something else. Or live with the costs.
Deciding it's cheaper to live with a suboptimal situation (e.g. one where accidently mixing up the serial and ethernet lines can fry stuff) than to fix it doesn't preclude hating those who got you into the situation in the first place.
Though IMO the real issue is with the ethernet gear rather than the serial gear. They decided to use the same connectors as phone systems yet afaict they didn't require ethernet equipment to survive connection to a phone line.
Absolute basics will save those with no maps or GPS. Walk downhill until you get to a stream. You now have water. Follow that downstream until you hit a road.
Afaict that will work in most places but it's not foolproof. You could end up at an impassable cliff, in a dry depression, at the enterance to a cave lost in fog etc.
Yeah, knowing how to use gps and all that might be great when you're in a city, but if you're going to be roughing it you should carry the most simple of technologies (compasses, maps, etc) instead of things that use damned batteries or rely on signals to external technologies to function.
You should also attempt to maximise your chances of survival when the shit hits the fan. IMO that means both carrying appropriate communication technology and carrying enough of lifes essentials to get you through a walk back to civilisation.
these days periodic fire tests (i.e. falsely raising the alarm...) are generally considered a good thing and presumably not dangerous but to be fair I suppose that's partly because it's probably illegal to let public places get as crowded without adequate means of escape as may have been allowed back then.
Also fire drills and false alarms are pretty routine so everyone just files out quietly and doesn't panic.
Though i'd expect shouting fire to have a rather more panic inducing effect than a mere fire alarm.