Since then, yes, even minor wounds are routinely X-rayed ; not to find missing fragments (which would have happened anyway, if the clinician suspected fragmentation), but to document that the wound is clear to keep the lawyers happy.
I remeber I smashed a windows and opened a massive flap on my finger, the hospital flushed it out, x-rayed it, closed it up etc. For a long time afterwards there was pain there when presure was put on it and things felt a bit hard on the skin surface but I didn't think much of either.
Anyway some time down the line while picking at it (yeah I probablly shouldn't do that but it's a habbit i've always had) I felt something way too hard to be skin, as I continued picking at it I revealed a small peice of glass which I levered out with a knife. Soon afterwards there was no more pressure from putting pain on it.
Notice the strings attatched to that option. In particular the fact it only applies to offers made in accordance with section 2B and that it only applies to noncommercial distribution. IANAL buy I don't think providing a link back to the developers site would satisfy 2B, it may satisfy 2C depending on the exact defintion of same place.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
-------- end quote from GPLv2
Seems pretty clear to me that if you aren't distributing the source at the same time the binaries you have to provide the offer to supply a copy (for 4b or 4c) or the access to copy (for the exception given in unnumbered paragraph at the end) upfront, not only when asked. It is not clear on what counts as the "same place".
GPLv3 is similar except it provides clarification on what exactly counts as the same place and is explicit that the access to copy the source code must be at no extra charge.
Even if the sysadmins do realise that if the manager is high enough up the pecking order there may not be much the sysadmin can do except either allow access or get fired. The will to run a highly locked down environment has to come from the top.
Desktop computers particually windows ones are generally complex, not particually secure and relatively cheap. So having the same one do highly exposed tasks (browsing the web) and highly important tasks is not a brilliant idea.
Yes vlans, encrypted tunnels etc aren't airgap but IMO they are a heck of a lot lower risk than running your sensitive stuff and your exposed stuff on the same desktop.
because that isn't what marketing think people want (of course what marketing think people want and what people actually want aren't nessacerally the same thing). Judging from the adverts I see on TV marketing seem to think that people want large screens, powerful processors and low prices.
Another big problem is that in electronics in general cost is highly related to volume. So if you want something even a little out of the ordinary you have to pay more. For example I wanted a 10 inch machine with 768 vertical pixels, I got one but at DOUBLE the price of machines with the same CPU, ram and size but a lower screen resoloution. Similarly I got a 13 inch laptop recently for a project at uni but I could have got the same specs for about £100 less in a 15 inch. This in turn means that value-concious customers will most likely buy what marketing has decided is "ordinary" and the cycle continues.
As for the act, The Daily Show showed 2 clips, one from his CNN show and one from his FOX NEWS show, they were separated by about 18 months. On CNN he was saying the USA had the worst health care system in the world, but 18 months later he is on FOX NEWS saying its the best health care system in the world.
My understanding is it all depends on your definition of best and worst and whose perspective you are looking it from. It's quite possible for a system to be the best by one metric and the worst by another at the same time.
My understanding is if you have lots of money or a very good insurance plan then the US system is brilliant. Many rich people from elsewhere travel to the US to get treatment. On the other hand afaict the US has a system where afaict the poor aren't treated until they are in dire need and when their conditions get bad enough that they are finally treated indvidual hospitals have to pick up the bill rather than the taxpayer.
AMD spun off their manufacturing facilities to stave off bankruptcy.
Personally if this is true I would think it is a strategic purchase. Even if dell has to subsidise AMD that may be a better option than letting intel drive them to bankrupcy and take a monopoly.
1: what is their release frequency and security update policy like? fast releases with little overlap mean a lot of time spent upgrading systems. Slow releases mean you run into problems with application software depending on stuff that is newer than your distro supplies. 2: what is their QA like? too long and some people complain it's old before it's even released. Too short and you get a buggy release that breaks in a lot of configurations. 3: what is their package management like (both the software but also the archives it backs on to)? how easy is it to install stuff, remove stuff, upgrade to the next release etc. Do you often have to resort to unofficial package archives or building from source (see also point 1) 4: do they set up sane defaults when you install stuff or do they expect you to work everything out from scratch 5: do they provide tools to help you with configuration and if so do they stomp over existing manual configuration or try and work with it as nicely as possible?
The root problem is commerical software vendors sell their software on new features.
That is fine for a field with little exposure to security threats but for basic infrastructure it leads to features that seemed like a good idea at the time but cause big problems down the road. For example putting scripting in pdf opened up massive cans of worms. Besides the plain and simple exploits it opened the possibility for fraud through the authoring of PDFs that displayed different content on different systems.
Well the main infection vectors are different for servers than for desktops. On windows desktops it's a combination of autorun and stupid users, you can disable autorun try to lock things down so they can't get hit but often some admin in a hurry to make things work will leave something open (or there simply isn't a defined admin at all and everyone runs with admin rights and sorts the software out themelves. On linux servers the main infection vector seems to be buggy webapps.
Never run a windows server but as I understand it ISS used to be a nightmare of security holes. Plus windows servers due to their huge commonality with windows desktops can suffer from desktop malware as well if the admin isn't on the ball.
Linux desktops aren't all that brilliant security wise, yeah it's easier to run as an unprivilaged user than on windows and there isn't the autorun issue. But on most distros normal users can still download and run malware and if that normal user ever makes use of say the "root terminal" menu entry or su/sudo it's pretty easy for malware to quietly subvert that to gain root (just alter the users menus and executable path). It's just they are too small a market for anyone to bother.
Unfortunately while they say this was "valued at over $10000" they don't say exactly what was included. So we don't know if it's expensive because it's a ripoff or expensive because it's loaded down with the most expensive CPUs, HDDs, raid controllers etc that money can buy.
HPs site doesn't seem to want to let me configure that model of server (it lists a number of standard models but none of them include any drives) but when i've looked at dell the base prices are ok but the extras are a massive ripoff. £300 for a 1TB 7200 RPM sata hard drive?!
One of the key things that makes this work is that on the nes the game controls polling of the controller and the controller polling process involves controlling a shift register in in the controller. Afaict his board locks to one of the signals that controls the shift register and uses it to stay in sync with the game. This allows it to play through an entire game with frame accurate timing. Something that would be MUCH harder to do by mechanically actuating a real controller even if you took a sync source from the console.
And doing it without a sync source would be basically impossible.
was not an easy task because of the way lag is handled
Lag probablly isn't a particaully good term for the issue. AIUI the issue is that there is not a 1:1 mapping between controller input cycles and frames out output. Since his device is locked to controller input signals rather than dispaly frames he needs to strip out the frames that don't have a corresponding input cycles.
MS actually tried in the past to release a codec as royalty free. Unfortunately they didn't do their homework well enough and mpeg-la managed to find patents that it violated. mpeg-la are are clearly trying to do the same to vp8, only time will tell whether they will be successful.
It doesn't seem MS are trying to fight VP8. They have said that while they won't ship it by default IE will play it through the video tag if the user installed a coded. Flash runs on linux anyway so there is a legit (though poorly performing) option for playing h.264 videos there.
Plus, it's just begging the question -- how would I set up the DHCP server without a console?
Equally how would you set up a serial console server box without a console?
Whether using serial or kvm over IP or whatever you are going to have to setup the initial bits of gear using either a laptop or a locally connected keyboard, monitor and possibly mouse.
I'm not sure there is a way for inflation and deflation to happen in a fixed currency system. That's way over my area of expertise.
A currency with a fixed money supply but an increasing number of users will tend to go up in value relative to other currencies and commodities (that is it will have deflation). Likewise if a large ammount of money gets hoarded. On the other hand there will be inflation if a large number of users decide to transfer out and/or hoarders decide to start spending their bitcoins.
Also afaict bitcoins are effectively destroyed if their associated private key is lost. So (once the new generations stop) the actual circulating bitcoins is likely to go down over time (which means a general deflationary trend if everything else stays equal).
1: standardise a list of comodity categories that can have sales tax applied. This means that retailers only need to categorise each item once. Federal courts should be given jurisdiction on disputed classifications to reduce inconsistencies. 2: give each sales tax jurisdiction a code number that residents enter when buying online 3: create an official, publically available and machine readable list of sales tax jurisdictions, their rates for each commodity category and details of where to send the reports and money to (maybe even have a central collection agency or at least a maximum of one collection agency per state).
The overhead on retailers would be relatively low with this system, they would just have to figure out what categories their products were in and feed the official list into whatever processing software they used.
1: nothing comes of it, either noone has a patent that they can reasonablly claim is essential for VP8 or those that do either want VP8 to stay open or want to continue holding their cards close to their chest. 2: Google looks at the patents and claims they don't actually apply to VP8 at which point a standoff ensues until a court rules on the issue. 3: Google looks at the patents, decides they do indeed cover VP8 and designs VP9 specifically to avoid them.
Imo 2 years is about right for server distros of linux, slow enough to keep the pain of upgrading down.
And if you really need newer versions of specific software there is always backports (which is now an official service).
Then of course, you have the fact that Debian based distros control over 40% of the webserver market [w3techs.com], [+ RH based ~92%]. I guess that's not important either.
That is 40% of LINUX webservers not 40% of all webservers.
I don't use ubuntu myself but the main downside seems to be that it's shorter release cycles and the fact they prioritise releasing on time over getting rid of bugs leads to a lower quality product. Even the LTS releases come out of the 6 month release cycle they are just supported for longer.
The main upside of ubuntu lts seems to be the longer support lifecycle. With debian if you want to keep getting security updates you have to do a potentially disruptive upgrade approximately once every 2 years and you have a window of about 1 year to do it in. With ubuntu LTS you have a three year window and can even skip a release if you want.
I wouldn't generally run a non-lts release of ubuntu on a server unless you have a good reason to (e.g. your hardware is new enough that neither current debian stable or current ubuntu LTS gets on with it) it just means you have to do potentially disruptive upgrades even more often.
Afaict an issuer could generate a new public/private key pair for each card and print the private key under a scratch-off panel on the card. Then they would add the cards public key to the coin and sign with their private key. To convert back to electronic form you would scratch off the card, add your own public key to the coin and sign with the private key on the card.
Of course those accepting the cards would have to trust both that 1: the issuer was trustworthy and 2: there was no way to read the key off the card without leaving evidence they had done so.
Another possibility would be to have smartcards which had a private key inside that could not be read out by the user. Anyone with access to the card could transfer bitcoin on and off it and the card could keep track of what bitcoin it owned so it's value could be assessed in a non-networked scenario. Again it would be nessacery to trust that the card vendor wasn't going to keep the keys and run off with the money and that the cards were actually secure against extraction of the private key or manipulating the list of bitcoins they belive they own..
Slashdot Mirror
Since then, yes, even minor wounds are routinely X-rayed ; not to find missing fragments (which would have happened anyway, if the clinician suspected fragmentation), but to document that the wound is clear to keep the lawyers happy.
I remeber I smashed a windows and opened a massive flap on my finger, the hospital flushed it out, x-rayed it, closed it up etc. For a long time afterwards there was pain there when presure was put on it and things felt a bit hard on the skin surface but I didn't think much of either.
Anyway some time down the line while picking at it (yeah I probablly shouldn't do that but it's a habbit i've always had) I felt something way too hard to be skin, as I continued picking at it I revealed a small peice of glass which I levered out with a knife. Soon afterwards there was no more pressure from putting pain on it.
"it may satisfy 2C depending on the exact defintion of same place"
That should have said it may satisfy the unnumbered paragraph at the end.
There is saying "markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent". IIRC shorting is one of the riskiest strategies in this regard.
Notice the strings attatched to that option. In particular the fact it only applies to offers made in accordance with section 2B and that it only applies to noncommercial distribution. IANAL buy I don't think providing a link back to the developers site would satisfy 2B, it may satisfy 2C depending on the exact defintion of same place.
---- begin quote From GPLv2
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
-------- end quote from GPLv2
Seems pretty clear to me that if you aren't distributing the source at the same time the binaries you have to provide the offer to supply a copy (for 4b or 4c) or the access to copy (for the exception given in unnumbered paragraph at the end) upfront, not only when asked. It is not clear on what counts as the "same place".
GPLv3 is similar except it provides clarification on what exactly counts as the same place and is explicit that the access to copy the source code must be at no extra charge.
Even if the sysadmins do realise that if the manager is high enough up the pecking order there may not be much the sysadmin can do except either allow access or get fired. The will to run a highly locked down environment has to come from the top.
IMO it all comes down to risk management..
Desktop computers particually windows ones are generally complex, not particually secure and relatively cheap. So having the same one do highly exposed tasks (browsing the web) and highly important tasks is not a brilliant idea.
Yes vlans, encrypted tunnels etc aren't airgap but IMO they are a heck of a lot lower risk than running your sensitive stuff and your exposed stuff on the same desktop.
because that isn't what marketing think people want (of course what marketing think people want and what people actually want aren't nessacerally the same thing). Judging from the adverts I see on TV marketing seem to think that people want large screens, powerful processors and low prices.
Another big problem is that in electronics in general cost is highly related to volume. So if you want something even a little out of the ordinary you have to pay more. For example I wanted a 10 inch machine with 768 vertical pixels, I got one but at DOUBLE the price of machines with the same CPU, ram and size but a lower screen resoloution. Similarly I got a 13 inch laptop recently for a project at uni but I could have got the same specs for about £100 less in a 15 inch. This in turn means that value-concious customers will most likely buy what marketing has decided is "ordinary" and the cycle continues.
Afaict on mobile phone networks TDMA and/or CDMA are used to seperate different users while FDMA is used to seperate uplink from downlink.
As for the act, The Daily Show showed 2 clips, one from his CNN show and one from his FOX NEWS show, they were separated by about 18 months. On CNN he was saying the USA had the worst health care system in the world, but 18 months later he is on FOX NEWS saying its the best health care system in the world.
My understanding is it all depends on your definition of best and worst and whose perspective you are looking it from. It's quite possible for a system to be the best by one metric and the worst by another at the same time.
My understanding is if you have lots of money or a very good insurance plan then the US system is brilliant. Many rich people from elsewhere travel to the US to get treatment. On the other hand afaict the US has a system where afaict the poor aren't treated until they are in dire need and when their conditions get bad enough that they are finally treated indvidual hospitals have to pick up the bill rather than the taxpayer.
AMD spun off their manufacturing facilities to stave off bankruptcy.
Personally if this is true I would think it is a strategic purchase. Even if dell has to subsidise AMD that may be a better option than letting intel drive them to bankrupcy and take a monopoly.
IMO the big things with a linux distro are
1: what is their release frequency and security update policy like? fast releases with little overlap mean a lot of time spent upgrading systems. Slow releases mean you run into problems with application software depending on stuff that is newer than your distro supplies.
2: what is their QA like? too long and some people complain it's old before it's even released. Too short and you get a buggy release that breaks in a lot of configurations.
3: what is their package management like (both the software but also the archives it backs on to)? how easy is it to install stuff, remove stuff, upgrade to the next release etc. Do you often have to resort to unofficial package archives or building from source (see also point 1)
4: do they set up sane defaults when you install stuff or do they expect you to work everything out from scratch
5: do they provide tools to help you with configuration and if so do they stomp over existing manual configuration or try and work with it as nicely as possible?
The root problem is commerical software vendors sell their software on new features.
That is fine for a field with little exposure to security threats but for basic infrastructure it leads to features that seemed like a good idea at the time but cause big problems down the road. For example putting scripting in pdf opened up massive cans of worms. Besides the plain and simple exploits it opened the possibility for fraud through the authoring of PDFs that displayed different content on different systems.
Well the main infection vectors are different for servers than for desktops. On windows desktops it's a combination of autorun and stupid users, you can disable autorun try to lock things down so they can't get hit but often some admin in a hurry to make things work will leave something open (or there simply isn't a defined admin at all and everyone runs with admin rights and sorts the software out themelves. On linux servers the main infection vector seems to be buggy webapps.
Never run a windows server but as I understand it ISS used to be a nightmare of security holes. Plus windows servers due to their huge commonality with windows desktops can suffer from desktop malware as well if the admin isn't on the ball.
Linux desktops aren't all that brilliant security wise, yeah it's easier to run as an unprivilaged user than on windows and there isn't the autorun issue. But on most distros normal users can still download and run malware and if that normal user ever makes use of say the "root terminal" menu entry or su/sudo it's pretty easy for malware to quietly subvert that to gain root (just alter the users menus and executable path). It's just they are too small a market for anyone to bother.
Unfortunately while they say this was "valued at over $10000" they don't say exactly what was included. So we don't know if it's expensive because it's a ripoff or expensive because it's loaded down with the most expensive CPUs, HDDs, raid controllers etc that money can buy.
HPs site doesn't seem to want to let me configure that model of server (it lists a number of standard models but none of them include any drives) but when i've looked at dell the base prices are ok but the extras are a massive ripoff. £300 for a 1TB 7200 RPM sata hard drive?!
but some of it involves doing crazy things like pressing up *and* down on the controller at the same time.
Is that even possible on the original physical controllers?
One of the key things that makes this work is that on the nes the game controls polling of the controller and the controller polling process involves controlling a shift register in in the controller. Afaict his board locks to one of the signals that controls the shift register and uses it to stay in sync with the game. This allows it to play through an entire game with frame accurate timing. Something that would be MUCH harder to do by mechanically actuating a real controller even if you took a sync source from the console.
And doing it without a sync source would be basically impossible.
was not an easy task because of the way lag is handled
Lag probablly isn't a particaully good term for the issue. AIUI the issue is that there is not a 1:1 mapping between controller input cycles and frames out output. Since his device is locked to controller input signals rather than dispaly frames he needs to strip out the frames that don't have a corresponding input cycles.
MS actually tried in the past to release a codec as royalty free. Unfortunately they didn't do their homework well enough and mpeg-la managed to find patents that it violated. mpeg-la are are clearly trying to do the same to vp8, only time will tell whether they will be successful.
It doesn't seem MS are trying to fight VP8. They have said that while they won't ship it by default IE will play it through the video tag if the user installed a coded. Flash runs on linux anyway so there is a legit (though poorly performing) option for playing h.264 videos there.
Plus, it's just begging the question -- how would I set up the DHCP server without a console?
Equally how would you set up a serial console server box without a console?
Whether using serial or kvm over IP or whatever you are going to have to setup the initial bits of gear using either a laptop or a locally connected keyboard, monitor and possibly mouse.
I'm not sure there is a way for inflation and deflation to happen in a fixed currency system. That's way over my area of expertise.
A currency with a fixed money supply but an increasing number of users will tend to go up in value relative to other currencies and commodities (that is it will have deflation). Likewise if a large ammount of money gets hoarded. On the other hand there will be inflation if a large number of users decide to transfer out and/or hoarders decide to start spending their bitcoins.
Also afaict bitcoins are effectively destroyed if their associated private key is lost. So (once the new generations stop) the actual circulating bitcoins is likely to go down over time (which means a general deflationary trend if everything else stays equal).
One option would be to do the following
1: standardise a list of comodity categories that can have sales tax applied. This means that retailers only need to categorise each item once. Federal courts should be given jurisdiction on disputed classifications to reduce inconsistencies.
2: give each sales tax jurisdiction a code number that residents enter when buying online
3: create an official, publically available and machine readable list of sales tax jurisdictions, their rates for each commodity category and details of where to send the reports and money to (maybe even have a central collection agency or at least a maximum of one collection agency per state).
The overhead on retailers would be relatively low with this system, they would just have to figure out what categories their products were in and feed the official list into whatever processing software they used.
There are a few possible outcomes of this
1: nothing comes of it, either noone has a patent that they can reasonablly claim is essential for VP8 or those that do either want VP8 to stay open or want to continue holding their cards close to their chest.
2: Google looks at the patents and claims they don't actually apply to VP8 at which point a standoff ensues until a court rules on the issue.
3: Google looks at the patents, decides they do indeed cover VP8 and designs VP9 specifically to avoid them.
If it wasn't for Debian's crazy release schedule
Imo 2 years is about right for server distros of linux, slow enough to keep the pain of upgrading down.
And if you really need newer versions of specific software there is always backports (which is now an official service).
Then of course, you have the fact that Debian based distros control over 40% of the webserver market [w3techs.com], [+ RH based ~92%]. I guess that's not important either.
That is 40% of LINUX webservers not 40% of all webservers.
I don't use ubuntu myself but the main downside seems to be that it's shorter release cycles and the fact they prioritise releasing on time over getting rid of bugs leads to a lower quality product. Even the LTS releases come out of the 6 month release cycle they are just supported for longer.
The main upside of ubuntu lts seems to be the longer support lifecycle. With debian if you want to keep getting security updates you have to do a potentially disruptive upgrade approximately once every 2 years and you have a window of about 1 year to do it in. With ubuntu LTS you have a three year window and can even skip a release if you want.
I wouldn't generally run a non-lts release of ubuntu on a server unless you have a good reason to (e.g. your hardware is new enough that neither current debian stable or current ubuntu LTS gets on with it) it just means you have to do potentially disruptive upgrades even more often.
Afaict an issuer could generate a new public/private key pair for each card and print the private key under a scratch-off panel on the card. Then they would add the cards public key to the coin and sign with their private key. To convert back to electronic form you would scratch off the card, add your own public key to the coin and sign with the private key on the card.
Of course those accepting the cards would have to trust both that 1: the issuer was trustworthy and 2: there was no way to read the key off the card without leaving evidence they had done so.
Another possibility would be to have smartcards which had a private key inside that could not be read out by the user. Anyone with access to the card could transfer bitcoin on and off it and the card could keep track of what bitcoin it owned so it's value could be assessed in a non-networked scenario. Again it would be nessacery to trust that the card vendor wasn't going to keep the keys and run off with the money and that the cards were actually secure against extraction of the private key or manipulating the list of bitcoins they belive they own..