Most high schools simply want cookie cutter kids. Teach them all the same stuff (with little variation allowed), the same way, and push them out on the other end. There is rarely any accommodation for differences in learning style, or for a young person's unique talents, aptitudes, or approaches. That's what made me hate high school, and I hear the same from young people today, too.
I have received praise in every job I've held for my communications skills--verbal and written. When finally in college, my writings were nominated numerous times for recognition and publication. In high school, however, my grades were mediocre. I lost points for not having all of the requisite drafts for term papers, even though I could sit down without a formal outline and write a first draft that was better than the final papers of most of my peers. I failed junior year English composition, because I did not complete a paper on what I wanted to be when I grew up (I would still have a tough time with that one today, almost 20 years later!--I still don't know what I want to be). That missing English credit (and some other poor marks where I was penalized more for thw "how" of my work rather than the work itself) kept me from receiving a high shcool diploma, prevented me from going to college full time for many years, and directed me on a very unpleasant path for a number of years.
Math teachers automatically penalize students who solve problems in nontraditional ways (or without showing all of that long multiplication or division)--a real problem for intuitives who could derive the answer by looking at the problem. I'm one of those (but probably not as gifted as many other/.ers). In time, however, I learned the value of showing my work (to help others in the process, or to allow others to proof my work), but to force young people into tedium for tasks that are second nature to them makes them despise school. The only reason why I did not drop out is because I thought my parents would kill me (only a slight exaggeration here).
Later, when I returned to college as a nontraditional student, I was given much more latitude in how I approached my work, I was able to select courses that better fit my interests, and my grades were top-notch. Unless high schools are willing to break the cycle of disfunction that treats students like cogs on a wheel (after all, aren't modern high schools simply extensions of the industrial revolution?), more and more students will become disenfranchised and will risk dropping out.
I do believe the burden should not be upon those who wish to disprove the existance of God.
I would argue, however, that there is enough evidence in the physical world to point to his existance. IMO, the absolute complexity of life itself, and the fact that current forms would have needed to go through innumerable evolutionary changes in concert with other forms (where symbiotic relationships exist), is enough to make me ask "who made this?" You may not agree, but that is where I stand. From my vantage point, the atheist is one who walks into an art museum and surmises that the art eveloled on its own, since the atheist cannot see the artist [a confirmation of existance]. While it would be easy to introduce the atheist to a living artist, introducing an atheist to the artist who crafted an ancient work would not be possible. Yet reason would tell the atheist that there had been an artist, for the complexity of the work demands it and the athiest would be hard pressed to find a natural cause for(if considering a painting) the extraction of pigments, their application to a canvas (which, itself, was woven), its placement on a frame, etc. The same is true of any object created by man--its very existance proves there was a creator, builder, or artisan. Now, which is more complex--the Empire State Building or the fragile balance of life on this Earth (or in our solar system, our galaxy, or this universe)? That is the evidence that convinces me that there is a Creator.
One correction--only the King James Version was translated from Aramaic through Greek and Latin to English, and it is largely regarded by biblical scholars to be the least accurate translation avaialble today. Most modern translations were completed using extant copies of manuscripts in the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and, yes, Greek for some of the epistles), many of which date in the first centrury.
What happened to the days when software vendors released new versions when their user base told them (through numerous feature requests) that it was time? Now, we have the cart before the horse. Microsoft (and others) went from implementing business requirements in their software, to telling users what their requirements should be. It's a darn shame...
Like so many other entities in so many other things, the RIAA is responding to the actions of a small minority and hypothesizing that they are representative of the majority. Thus, they learn about a small number of file sharers who are copying and distributing hundreds of albums daily, and they immediately see the end of their supply chain. That would be like looking at serial killers, like Andrea Yates, and hypothesizing that all people with similar family sizes, neighborhoods, or even pets will do the same things. Moronic? Yes, but unfortunately they have a powerful lobby and they have the law on their side for the moment.
In my house (and I'm not a gadget freak), we got rid of VHS years ago, just to save space. As far as I'm concerned, they've already gone the way of the 8-track. Sure, like others have commented, they were easier for kids to play, but I got tired of my kids ruining the tapes (and the players), so I'm glad to have that additional complexity that comes with DVD. If the toddler can't open the DVD case--fantastic!
The only VHS tape still in the house is my wedding video, and that's just because we don't have a working player to push the content to our PC.
Lack of parental support? If schools were truly local, perhaps more parents would be involved. I've been in too many communities (especially smaller ones), where multiple districts are rolled up into one. Classrooms are overflowing, but whereas there may have been three fourth grade classrooms before a merger, now there may only be two. Then, consider that many of such mergers mean kids are travelling miles by bus to get to school, and you realize that you've automatically reduced the number of parents who may be able ot help (parents who may have helped in their hometown school may not have the ability--time or transport--to get to the other town where their kids are now in school), or may have to split their parental involvement time between two or more schools (I'm in this situation now, where the district has elementary students in Town A, and middle school kids in Town B). This is especially true when each school has its own parent-teacher association, sports boosters, committeess for site-based improvement and the like, all with their own meetings on different days of the week.
I do see problems with the standardized tests, in that teachers are more and more teaching to the test, but that's not the only issue. States also push their own agendas, and the teachers need to fit in all sorts of special topics and assemblies that take away from student class time. Someone should tally up how many hours of actual instruction go on--I think we all would be surprised.
That said, we need to make sure teachers are not villified in all this. Much of this is crammed down their throats, and they are supposed to deal with all of this generations social problems with their hands largely tied. It goes far beyond test scores and parental involvement. I would argue that actual parenting during the early years (not just being your child's best buddy or play pal) is what is really needed. Even just involving kids in daily routines around the house and everyday life can have a huge impact on school readiness. Setting a table nightly teaches patterns (one plate, cup, fork, etc. for each member of the family). Letting your kids handle change at a store, or letting them present money to a clerk helps teach number sense and common denominations. Reading to a kid can be one of the most significant infuences on their early reading ability. No, not everything needs to be Doctor Suess!--read them your trade rags, or even the TV Guide! They'll start associating sounds with the shapes and symbols more quickly.
Technically (IANAL), yes, I believe they would be in violation unless they secured license through the purchase of their fake book or some other source.
That said, unless the RIAA and its ilk have a documented history of pursuing cover bands for copyright violations, one might be able to argue that they abandoned their right to pursue such violations (why care after all these years). I don't think such an argument would fly in today's legal environs, however.
I think such an argument is stupid, as such local or cover bands often introduce their audiences to tunes they otherwise might not hear (especially if they are playing across genres, or playing a tune in a different style), but that's also my argument in the file sharing arena: let people share music and you will actually increase consumer interest and sales through formal channels*.
*Going off on a tangent here, but I think the easiest way to avoid most of the RIAA's concerns is to allow them to prohibit perfect digital copies that match the original source, but to allow file sharing of copies burned at lower sampling rates (e.g. radio quality). Will that stop everyone from making perfect digital copies? No, but it would provide a legal music file sharing option while allowing the record companies to argue that listeners can get the better product (the perfect digital copy) by making a purchase. Such a system would work to protect the interests of both sides of the argument--reasonable sharing and non-erosion of (perfect) digital media sales.
Of course, I don't think the RIAA will buy this argument because they likely already know that most people cannot hear the difference between radio quality and lossless copy.
IANAL, but the key seems to be whether or not the musician playing the cover tune is charging/making any money from the performance, or whether the party of the second part (the wedding band) is actually diverting income from the party of the first part (the original artist). I don't fully agree with the concept (especially as a guitarist and once and again band member for the last 24 years), but it is how the law appears to be structured at present. Griping won't change the law, but channelling that energy into lobbying activities (individuals can lobby just by repetitive letter writing).
I believe that musicians deserve the right to earn funds derived from their creativity, but also to protect themselves from someone else making a buck on their backs. It would suck to be part of a band that wrote/composed a cool song, only to have someone else (regardless of whether they play it better or worse) take the song and perform it for their own profit while I got nothing. That said, if I were part of a cover band, I would want to be able to negotiate those performance rights quickly and at a reasonable price. So, as it stands, the system is broken (or at least difficult to navigate).
I saw the news piece in a headline on CNN.com. It read "Vista is done." I was sorely disappointed when I read that "done" meant finished rather than "done for," "kaput," or "ain't gonna happen."
The difference here is that this guy plays the tunes in his business establishment. One could reasonably argue that he does derive financial benefit from having music as a perk for his patrong.
Unless the guitar-playing kids are imposing a cover charge when playing for Aunt Sally, I think they are free from worry...
While Microsoft announced that it would not assert its patents against individual open source developers, the company's general counsel, Brad Smith qualified that offer. "These are individuals who are creating code, contributing code, they're not being paid for that code. They're not creating it as part of their job," he said.
So, if they only will go after developers who are being employed to code Linux ("as part of their job"), then we need to see companies drop their supported Linux coders off the payroll, and start awarding grants to coders who choose to pursue their own coding projects for Linux. Under that model, the coders could still survive financially, but it would isolate them from the surmised "corporate influence" that M$ must use as a presumption for it's selective IP policy.
Even better would be the establishment of a non-profit foundation (call it something like the Linux/OpenSource Innovative Freedom Experiment, or LIFE) that would accept donations from all corporate and individual donors who wish to support Linux/OpenSouce community. They would have oversight over the funds and the distribution of the grants.
Other recent studies (I don't remember the exact sources, I learned of this via PBS) suggest that the effect of warming is far greater than expected and that it would be out of control except for another mitigating factor--the decrease in solar energy attributed to increased cloud cover.
As it turns out, the particulate emissions that remain airborne allow additional clouds to form. These clouds, in turn, lessen the impact of solar warming. They were able to test this hypothesis in the day after 9-11-01, when aircraft were grounded. The level of cloud cover was greatly reduced (it has only recently been determined that cloudy contrails eventually spread out and allow substantially more high altitude cloud formation).
This is an interesting idea, but I doubt we'll be able to get any governments or space agencies to build enough EM launchers (or the requisite mini-ships) to make this a viable alternative. If it's going to take 10 years to build the cloud, it will be too late by the time the talking heads decide they need to do something.
First off, I don't think the same non-binding argument would fly in US courts. Second (and hopefully tongue-in-cheek), is that Austrailian businesses will now need to include such sign-offs at the end of a training course, which will include an assessment, so they can prove that the employees were exposed to the content of the code of conduct.
Were the non-binding nature of an "automatic" or "mechanical" signature process be appplied to US Law, there are a whole slew of disclosures (especially in real estate and finance) that would basically be deemed invalid. What would one do then? How do you protect yourself from idiots who look at a page, comprehend nothing, and sign away. The user/consumer/customer/employee must bear a reasonable level of responsibility for understanding tems, conditions, policies or any other information that they are "required" to receive.
There is definately validity to some of the points made by the author, especially regarding the way individual events or artifacts may be defined differently across cultures, but there is one gaping hole in the argument. Unless someone is archiving every Wiki entry, every day ad infinitum, the present view for the anthropologist to consider is only the present view. Since the content can (and does) change frequently, the anthropologist would need to be able to view the entry as it existed at an earlier point in time to be sure s/he is viewing culturally relevant views for the era being studied.
I'm sure some entries would not change significantly, but imagine for a moment that Wikis were available starting in early America. Would you expect the entries for "slave," "slavery," or "slave owner" to read the same then as it would read during the Civil War (a period during which Union and Confederate netizens would constantly be revising the entries) or even as they would read today?
I will also reaffirm other comments that have been made regarding the maintenance of electronic recods as compared to paper, stone, or other earlier means of recording. While the ability to migrate data should become easier over time, and whereas online storage may eventually eliminate the need for individual backups to physical media, the rate of loss between platforms/media types is still dreadfully high (for most users, not those of you prone to migrate everything to multiple locations every time a new option is available).
Overall, a good, quick read, and I appreciate the author's optimism about the value of the Wiki. I just hope to live long enough to see whether or not this view pans out.
It's the level of user trust. I travel to Chicago frequently, and every time I've been there recently I've seen ad-hoc networks bearing the names of some of the common hotel access points in the Loop. How many uneducated digiots actually connect to those thinking they've found the hotel's hotspot (especailly in hotels that don't offer Wi-Fi!).
Perhaps once people realize that they will get nailed for posting others' content without permission/license YouTube may actually be a place where people expect to find original content from anyone who cares to produce it.
I think the point here was to make a podcasting appliance for non-techs. Anyone can walk up, insert the appropriate token, and record. Nothing further to do since it uploads the podcast when the key is removed. An interesting concept. Of course, first to market (in this niche) does not necessarily guarantee success. My guess is that the next team to do this--with a lower cost for the hardware and an integrated online hosting forum--will be the winner in this sector (if it ever takes off as an "everybody is doing it" technology--I think not everyone will choose to podcast--some will always prefer to listen rather than to opine).
One area where this could be pretty cool is if they became mandatory for public meetings (town councils, school boards, Congress, etc.). Then discussions and minutes would automatically be available online, and perhaps we could use the recordings to hold them to their word once in a while.
Wouldn't it be fitting if TM discovers, after its review of those 6TB of data, that the majority of bots are operating from within their own network, and from within those of their peers in the security industry. It would be a fitting irony.
No way. They would never buy a $600 hammer today. You would need to adjust for inflation first--since the '80s--so they won't buy your hammer until it cost WAAAYYYYY MORE!
I would never say ATMs are secure. The only ones I would trust are the ones attached directly to bank buildings. Many of the smaller, independent ones use dial-up connections (have you heard the modem tones?), and an associate of mine knew of some small operators who were tired of paying per call connection charges and simply hooked them up to dedicated DSL connections. In many smaller convenience stores I've visited, I could see the network connection or phone jack. It would not take much to tap those connections...
They can be programmed to handle other denominations, just like pop machines can be programmed to take other amounts. I've seen a few machines that offer multiples of $10, but they are not common. The $20 increment allows more cash to be available in the machine while using the same volume of bills.
Slashdot Mirror
Most high schools simply want cookie cutter kids. Teach them all the same stuff (with little variation allowed), the same way, and push them out on the other end. There is rarely any accommodation for differences in learning style, or for a young person's unique talents, aptitudes, or approaches. That's what made me hate high school, and I hear the same from young people today, too.
/.ers). In time, however, I learned the value of showing my work (to help others in the process, or to allow others to proof my work), but to force young people into tedium for tasks that are second nature to them makes them despise school. The only reason why I did not drop out is because I thought my parents would kill me (only a slight exaggeration here).
I have received praise in every job I've held for my communications skills--verbal and written. When finally in college, my writings were nominated numerous times for recognition and publication. In high school, however, my grades were mediocre. I lost points for not having all of the requisite drafts for term papers, even though I could sit down without a formal outline and write a first draft that was better than the final papers of most of my peers. I failed junior year English composition, because I did not complete a paper on what I wanted to be when I grew up (I would still have a tough time with that one today, almost 20 years later!--I still don't know what I want to be). That missing English credit (and some other poor marks where I was penalized more for thw "how" of my work rather than the work itself) kept me from receiving a high shcool diploma, prevented me from going to college full time for many years, and directed me on a very unpleasant path for a number of years.
Math teachers automatically penalize students who solve problems in nontraditional ways (or without showing all of that long multiplication or division)--a real problem for intuitives who could derive the answer by looking at the problem. I'm one of those (but probably not as gifted as many other
Later, when I returned to college as a nontraditional student, I was given much more latitude in how I approached my work, I was able to select courses that better fit my interests, and my grades were top-notch. Unless high schools are willing to break the cycle of disfunction that treats students like cogs on a wheel (after all, aren't modern high schools simply extensions of the industrial revolution?), more and more students will become disenfranchised and will risk dropping out.
I do believe the burden should not be upon those who wish to disprove the existance of God.
I would argue, however, that there is enough evidence in the physical world to point to his existance. IMO, the absolute complexity of life itself, and the fact that current forms would have needed to go through innumerable evolutionary changes in concert with other forms (where symbiotic relationships exist), is enough to make me ask "who made this?" You may not agree, but that is where I stand. From my vantage point, the atheist is one who walks into an art museum and surmises that the art eveloled on its own, since the atheist cannot see the artist [a confirmation of existance]. While it would be easy to introduce the atheist to a living artist, introducing an atheist to the artist who crafted an ancient work would not be possible. Yet reason would tell the atheist that there had been an artist, for the complexity of the work demands it and the athiest would be hard pressed to find a natural cause for(if considering a painting) the extraction of pigments, their application to a canvas (which, itself, was woven), its placement on a frame, etc. The same is true of any object created by man--its very existance proves there was a creator, builder, or artisan. Now, which is more complex--the Empire State Building or the fragile balance of life on this Earth (or in our solar system, our galaxy, or this universe)? That is the evidence that convinces me that there is a Creator.
One correction--only the King James Version was translated from Aramaic through Greek and Latin to English, and it is largely regarded by biblical scholars to be the least accurate translation avaialble today. Most modern translations were completed using extant copies of manuscripts in the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and, yes, Greek for some of the epistles), many of which date in the first centrury.
What happened to the days when software vendors released new versions when their user base told them (through numerous feature requests) that it was time? Now, we have the cart before the horse. Microsoft (and others) went from implementing business requirements in their software, to telling users what their requirements should be. It's a darn shame...
Like so many other entities in so many other things, the RIAA is responding to the actions of a small minority and hypothesizing that they are representative of the majority. Thus, they learn about a small number of file sharers who are copying and distributing hundreds of albums daily, and they immediately see the end of their supply chain. That would be like looking at serial killers, like Andrea Yates, and hypothesizing that all people with similar family sizes, neighborhoods, or even pets will do the same things. Moronic? Yes, but unfortunately they have a powerful lobby and they have the law on their side for the moment.
In my house (and I'm not a gadget freak), we got rid of VHS years ago, just to save space. As far as I'm concerned, they've already gone the way of the 8-track. Sure, like others have commented, they were easier for kids to play, but I got tired of my kids ruining the tapes (and the players), so I'm glad to have that additional complexity that comes with DVD. If the toddler can't open the DVD case--fantastic!
The only VHS tape still in the house is my wedding video, and that's just because we don't have a working player to push the content to our PC.
Lack of parental support? If schools were truly local, perhaps more parents would be involved. I've been in too many communities (especially smaller ones), where multiple districts are rolled up into one. Classrooms are overflowing, but whereas there may have been three fourth grade classrooms before a merger, now there may only be two. Then, consider that many of such mergers mean kids are travelling miles by bus to get to school, and you realize that you've automatically reduced the number of parents who may be able ot help (parents who may have helped in their hometown school may not have the ability--time or transport--to get to the other town where their kids are now in school), or may have to split their parental involvement time between two or more schools (I'm in this situation now, where the district has elementary students in Town A, and middle school kids in Town B). This is especially true when each school has its own parent-teacher association, sports boosters, committeess for site-based improvement and the like, all with their own meetings on different days of the week.
I do see problems with the standardized tests, in that teachers are more and more teaching to the test, but that's not the only issue. States also push their own agendas, and the teachers need to fit in all sorts of special topics and assemblies that take away from student class time. Someone should tally up how many hours of actual instruction go on--I think we all would be surprised.
That said, we need to make sure teachers are not villified in all this. Much of this is crammed down their throats, and they are supposed to deal with all of this generations social problems with their hands largely tied. It goes far beyond test scores and parental involvement. I would argue that actual parenting during the early years (not just being your child's best buddy or play pal) is what is really needed. Even just involving kids in daily routines around the house and everyday life can have a huge impact on school readiness. Setting a table nightly teaches patterns (one plate, cup, fork, etc. for each member of the family). Letting your kids handle change at a store, or letting them present money to a clerk helps teach number sense and common denominations. Reading to a kid can be one of the most significant infuences on their early reading ability. No, not everything needs to be Doctor Suess!--read them your trade rags, or even the TV Guide! They'll start associating sounds with the shapes and symbols more quickly.
OK. OK. I'll step off my soapbox now....
Technically (IANAL), yes, I believe they would be in violation unless they secured license through the purchase of their fake book or some other source.
That said, unless the RIAA and its ilk have a documented history of pursuing cover bands for copyright violations, one might be able to argue that they abandoned their right to pursue such violations (why care after all these years). I don't think such an argument would fly in today's legal environs, however.
I think such an argument is stupid, as such local or cover bands often introduce their audiences to tunes they otherwise might not hear (especially if they are playing across genres, or playing a tune in a different style), but that's also my argument in the file sharing arena: let people share music and you will actually increase consumer interest and sales through formal channels*.
*Going off on a tangent here, but I think the easiest way to avoid most of the RIAA's concerns is to allow them to prohibit perfect digital copies that match the original source, but to allow file sharing of copies burned at lower sampling rates (e.g. radio quality). Will that stop everyone from making perfect digital copies? No, but it would provide a legal music file sharing option while allowing the record companies to argue that listeners can get the better product (the perfect digital copy) by making a purchase. Such a system would work to protect the interests of both sides of the argument--reasonable sharing and non-erosion of (perfect) digital media sales.
Of course, I don't think the RIAA will buy this argument because they likely already know that most people cannot hear the difference between radio quality and lossless copy.
IANAL, but the key seems to be whether or not the musician playing the cover tune is charging/making any money from the performance, or whether the party of the second part (the wedding band) is actually diverting income from the party of the first part (the original artist). I don't fully agree with the concept (especially as a guitarist and once and again band member for the last 24 years), but it is how the law appears to be structured at present. Griping won't change the law, but channelling that energy into lobbying activities (individuals can lobby just by repetitive letter writing).
I believe that musicians deserve the right to earn funds derived from their creativity, but also to protect themselves from someone else making a buck on their backs. It would suck to be part of a band that wrote/composed a cool song, only to have someone else (regardless of whether they play it better or worse) take the song and perform it for their own profit while I got nothing. That said, if I were part of a cover band, I would want to be able to negotiate those performance rights quickly and at a reasonable price. So, as it stands, the system is broken (or at least difficult to navigate).
Now if we could only get politicians to be this forthright and transparent!
Anonymous Coward for president!
I saw the news piece in a headline on CNN.com. It read "Vista is done." I was sorely disappointed when I read that "done" meant finished rather than "done for," "kaput," or "ain't gonna happen."
Well, it was a pleasant dream while it lasted...
The difference here is that this guy plays the tunes in his business establishment. One could reasonably argue that he does derive financial benefit from having music as a perk for his patrong.
...for now.
Unless the guitar-playing kids are imposing a cover charge when playing for Aunt Sally, I think they are free from worry...
Even better would be the establishment of a non-profit foundation (call it something like the Linux/OpenSource Innovative Freedom Experiment, or LIFE) that would accept donations from all corporate and individual donors who wish to support Linux/OpenSouce community. They would have oversight over the funds and the distribution of the grants.
Other recent studies (I don't remember the exact sources, I learned of this via PBS) suggest that the effect of warming is far greater than expected and that it would be out of control except for another mitigating factor--the decrease in solar energy attributed to increased cloud cover.
As it turns out, the particulate emissions that remain airborne allow additional clouds to form. These clouds, in turn, lessen the impact of solar warming. They were able to test this hypothesis in the day after 9-11-01, when aircraft were grounded. The level of cloud cover was greatly reduced (it has only recently been determined that cloudy contrails eventually spread out and allow substantially more high altitude cloud formation).
This is an interesting idea, but I doubt we'll be able to get any governments or space agencies to build enough EM launchers (or the requisite mini-ships) to make this a viable alternative. If it's going to take 10 years to build the cloud, it will be too late by the time the talking heads decide they need to do something.
First off, I don't think the same non-binding argument would fly in US courts. Second (and hopefully tongue-in-cheek), is that Austrailian businesses will now need to include such sign-offs at the end of a training course, which will include an assessment, so they can prove that the employees were exposed to the content of the code of conduct.
Were the non-binding nature of an "automatic" or "mechanical" signature process be appplied to US Law, there are a whole slew of disclosures (especially in real estate and finance) that would basically be deemed invalid. What would one do then? How do you protect yourself from idiots who look at a page, comprehend nothing, and sign away. The user/consumer/customer/employee must bear a reasonable level of responsibility for understanding tems, conditions, policies or any other information that they are "required" to receive.
There is definately validity to some of the points made by the author, especially regarding the way individual events or artifacts may be defined differently across cultures, but there is one gaping hole in the argument. Unless someone is archiving every Wiki entry, every day ad infinitum, the present view for the anthropologist to consider is only the present view. Since the content can (and does) change frequently, the anthropologist would need to be able to view the entry as it existed at an earlier point in time to be sure s/he is viewing culturally relevant views for the era being studied.
I'm sure some entries would not change significantly, but imagine for a moment that Wikis were available starting in early America. Would you expect the entries for "slave," "slavery," or "slave owner" to read the same then as it would read during the Civil War (a period during which Union and Confederate netizens would constantly be revising the entries) or even as they would read today?
I will also reaffirm other comments that have been made regarding the maintenance of electronic recods as compared to paper, stone, or other earlier means of recording. While the ability to migrate data should become easier over time, and whereas online storage may eventually eliminate the need for individual backups to physical media, the rate of loss between platforms/media types is still dreadfully high (for most users, not those of you prone to migrate everything to multiple locations every time a new option is available).
Overall, a good, quick read, and I appreciate the author's optimism about the value of the Wiki. I just hope to live long enough to see whether or not this view pans out.
It's the level of user trust. I travel to Chicago frequently, and every time I've been there recently I've seen ad-hoc networks bearing the names of some of the common hotel access points in the Loop. How many uneducated digiots actually connect to those thinking they've found the hotel's hotspot (especailly in hotels that don't offer Wi-Fi!).
Perhaps once people realize that they will get nailed for posting others' content without permission/license YouTube may actually be a place where people expect to find original content from anyone who cares to produce it.
I think the point here was to make a podcasting appliance for non-techs. Anyone can walk up, insert the appropriate token, and record. Nothing further to do since it uploads the podcast when the key is removed. An interesting concept. Of course, first to market (in this niche) does not necessarily guarantee success. My guess is that the next team to do this--with a lower cost for the hardware and an integrated online hosting forum--will be the winner in this sector (if it ever takes off as an "everybody is doing it" technology--I think not everyone will choose to podcast--some will always prefer to listen rather than to opine).
One area where this could be pretty cool is if they became mandatory for public meetings (town councils, school boards, Congress, etc.). Then discussions and minutes would automatically be available online, and perhaps we could use the recordings to hold them to their word once in a while.
Wouldn't it be fitting if TM discovers, after its review of those 6TB of data, that the majority of bots are operating from within their own network, and from within those of their peers in the security industry. It would be a fitting irony.
No way. They would never buy a $600 hammer today. You would need to adjust for inflation first--since the '80s--so they won't buy your hammer until it cost WAAAYYYYY MORE!
Wait a minute...my doctor's name isn't Hubble...
I am NOT addicted to the Internet...
...but I may be addicted to /.
I would never say ATMs are secure. The only ones I would trust are the ones attached directly to bank buildings. Many of the smaller, independent ones use dial-up connections (have you heard the modem tones?), and an associate of mine knew of some small operators who were tired of paying per call connection charges and simply hooked them up to dedicated DSL connections. In many smaller convenience stores I've visited, I could see the network connection or phone jack. It would not take much to tap those connections...
They can be programmed to handle other denominations, just like pop machines can be programmed to take other amounts. I've seen a few machines that offer multiples of $10, but they are not common. The $20 increment allows more cash to be available in the machine while using the same volume of bills.