So where are all the 10 year old nephews who can go under the hood, break things, but do it in such a way that the car can still drive around and duplicate the problem in every car it passes? Now THAT would have me impressed.
I very much doubt this was anything other than accidental. Cookies aren't exactly something that can be hidden, so an agency using cookies knows those cookies will be noticed. An agency would not intentionally use cookies when they know with a certainty that use will be uncovered. They aren't stupid enough to just cross their fingers and hope no one notices.
I don't think something like this would be designed for combat situations. I'd imagine its use involving more relocation of supplies, perhaps as part of a squad with several people not wearing these devices able to move and fight if the need arises. This could offer good potential to move large supply loads from point 'A' to point 'B' in situations where terrain restricts vehicles and hostile forces might make a helicopter trip a bit too risky.
Actually this is quite helpful, it shows all the good that can be done without the use of embryonic stem cells. Despite the whining from ESC researchers that only embryonic stem cells will do the magic, we've already heard several cases where non-embryonic stem cells have been used to work magic. Here we have another one. Why the continued push for ESC research? Here is a case where we don't have to destroy life in order to save life.
The steps are a radical change for Nielsen, reflecting an overall paradigm shift that's shaking up the television world. The audience is taking control. And TV companies are scrambling to catch up."
This isn't a paradigm shift, it's expansion of technology. Media entertainment is still media entertainment and people still watch it to be entertained. The ways people can access that media have expanded, but there has been no overall shift as a result.
Also, audiences aren't taking control. These extensions of media access are tickling media providers to death. Even Tivo, while cutting out advertising, reflects the audience demand for More! More! The problems Tivo presents to a media provider are only temporary. Media providers are recognizing the audience's unquenchable thirst for more! more! more! and they are finding ways to make even more money off of that thirst. It isn't victory of the audience, it's victory of the provider.
Re:From TFA (and other materials on the subject)
on
HAARP Amping It Up
·
· Score: 2
so HAARP will be the first nuke target?
*HAARP general gets a funny look on his face* "Mr. President, maybe we should have given those interceptor missiles a bit more funding after all."
Ahh! But don't forget! The Raleian's will help you live the full life of your clock. If their rates are a bit too expensive for you, you might find Aubrey de Grey to be a cheaper option.
Something like 12 years ago I did my first linux installation - Slackware from a stack of floppy disks. Since Slackware I've moved to Redhat, then Mandrake, and now Gentoo. Quite a lot has changed in the Linux world over the last 12 years. In Linux terms, 2 years is quite old.
For me there is a sportsmanship issue here that even goes beyond the absurdity of hunting from a computer.
When a hunter shoots an animal and the animal runs off the obligation is on the hunter to track the animal rather than have it suffer a slow death. Every hunter I know follows this, even when it costs them a good deal of time to do so. I'm sure there are those who don't, but there's exceptions to everything.
Will the guy running the site be sitting there during a person's paid session so that if an animal is simply wounded he will track it down? Perhaps, but I'm not thinking so.
The problem with that is, when the asteroid hits, say good-bye to the infrastructure that would make a space program possible. We would survive, but just how much would be left? I'd guess it would be some time before interplanetary colonization would be possible.
And what's the complaint as far as present progress goes? Progress is slow going, but there is still progress taking place. We will establish bases off our planet eventually, it just takes time.
The constitution does not guarantee a person the right to internet access. When an organization, public or private, provides public access to the internet, it is provided as a service. We have no rights as to exactly how that service must be provided, it is at the whim of the provider. If we don't like how they provide it, we can petition for change or vote differently in the next election to get in guys who will set things up the way we want it.
But to call it a constitutional violation when public internet is filtered? That is ridiculous.
I've been curious why Microsoft has continued to resist industry web standards. Asking seriously, what do they have to gain from this? It would seem they would want to be able to tell their customers that their browser is compliant with industry standards. Granted, they like doing their own thing and pushing their own standards, but have they really pushed anything new along the lines of css type capability?
The only thing I might suspect is that somewhere in Microsoft development they are working on something rather radically new that departs from traditional web methodology, so they don't consider it necessary to keep up with web standards since their new product won't have anything to do with traditional web standards.
While this is possible, I consider it unlikely. So what else? What does Microsoft have to gain by not updating to css2 and other standards?
Interesting idea, but I don't see this ever working, at least not with the current structure of the net. Unless the user had to provide the information to the website, there would be no real way of knowing who to bill. Current phone systems make it pretty simple for a number to know where to send the bill and who is being billed. The internet provides no such ease, as user data is generally not available. About the most a website can hope for is the user's IP address and even that can't be validated with any degree of reliability.
As well, this wouldn't do anything for those users who access sites from a coffee shop, airport terminal, college dorm room, the workplace, etc. Generally if a person calls a phone service that charges their account, they do it from home. Such services are not accessible from other phone. Blocking computer users not tied to some sort of paid ISP would be suicide to a company since that is a lot of users.
Thinking of something myself, I'm not sure why iTunes' method wouldn't work. Music purchased through iTunes is not immediately charged to your account. My observation has been that about once a day they charge your account for all music purchased that day, rather than doing several smaller charges. Sites doing this would still require you sign up and provide billing information, but rather than doing a credit on every download they credit the account once a week or something like that.
Slashdot Mirror
You sound like an expert. Someone in the car security industry should hire you.
So where are all the 10 year old nephews who can go under the hood, break things, but do it in such a way that the car can still drive around and duplicate the problem in every car it passes? Now THAT would have me impressed.
I very much doubt this was anything other than accidental. Cookies aren't exactly something that can be hidden, so an agency using cookies knows those cookies will be noticed. An agency would not intentionally use cookies when they know with a certainty that use will be uncovered. They aren't stupid enough to just cross their fingers and hope no one notices.
I don't think something like this would be designed for combat situations. I'd imagine its use involving more relocation of supplies, perhaps as part of a squad with several people not wearing these devices able to move and fight if the need arises. This could offer good potential to move large supply loads from point 'A' to point 'B' in situations where terrain restricts vehicles and hostile forces might make a helicopter trip a bit too risky.
Actually this is quite helpful, it shows all the good that can be done without the use of embryonic stem cells. Despite the whining from ESC researchers that only embryonic stem cells will do the magic, we've already heard several cases where non-embryonic stem cells have been used to work magic. Here we have another one. Why the continued push for ESC research? Here is a case where we don't have to destroy life in order to save life.
Any recommendations where one can still live free and unobserved in a non-nanny state?
Well, I do know this island in the pacific... Nevermind, satellites still fly overhead.
...I use KDE... And do most of my work from the shell. I feel so lost in a void of defying the stereotype.
They made this already.
I guess we know who *doesn't* have the gene. :)
The steps are a radical change for Nielsen, reflecting an overall paradigm shift that's shaking up the television world. The audience is taking control. And TV companies are scrambling to catch up."
This isn't a paradigm shift, it's expansion of technology. Media entertainment is still media entertainment and people still watch it to be entertained. The ways people can access that media have expanded, but there has been no overall shift as a result.
Also, audiences aren't taking control. These extensions of media access are tickling media providers to death. Even Tivo, while cutting out advertising, reflects the audience demand for More! More! The problems Tivo presents to a media provider are only temporary. Media providers are recognizing the audience's unquenchable thirst for more! more! more! and they are finding ways to make even more money off of that thirst. It isn't victory of the audience, it's victory of the provider.
*whew* after all that, I don't think I'll ever again find anything funny!
*sniff sniff* You smell like an attention whore, you dadburn self-involved twit!
how do you fill a shotgun with a water hose?
*hugs gentoo*
so HAARP will be the first nuke target? *HAARP general gets a funny look on his face* "Mr. President, maybe we should have given those interceptor missiles a bit more funding after all."
but 'grammer' isn't spelling. Grammar, on the other hand, is spelled correctly. :) Hmm, this reminds me of something.
http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=051102
Ahh! But don't forget! The Raleian's will help you live the full life of your clock. If their rates are a bit too expensive for you, you might find Aubrey de Grey to be a cheaper option.
Something like 12 years ago I did my first linux installation - Slackware from a stack of floppy disks. Since Slackware I've moved to Redhat, then Mandrake, and now Gentoo. Quite a lot has changed in the Linux world over the last 12 years. In Linux terms, 2 years is quite old.
For me there is a sportsmanship issue here that even goes beyond the absurdity of hunting from a computer. When a hunter shoots an animal and the animal runs off the obligation is on the hunter to track the animal rather than have it suffer a slow death. Every hunter I know follows this, even when it costs them a good deal of time to do so. I'm sure there are those who don't, but there's exceptions to everything. Will the guy running the site be sitting there during a person's paid session so that if an animal is simply wounded he will track it down? Perhaps, but I'm not thinking so.
Off topic? Sounds right on to me.
The problem with that is, when the asteroid hits, say good-bye to the infrastructure that would make a space program possible. We would survive, but just how much would be left? I'd guess it would be some time before interplanetary colonization would be possible. And what's the complaint as far as present progress goes? Progress is slow going, but there is still progress taking place. We will establish bases off our planet eventually, it just takes time.
The constitution does not guarantee a person the right to internet access. When an organization, public or private, provides public access to the internet, it is provided as a service. We have no rights as to exactly how that service must be provided, it is at the whim of the provider. If we don't like how they provide it, we can petition for change or vote differently in the next election to get in guys who will set things up the way we want it. But to call it a constitutional violation when public internet is filtered? That is ridiculous.
Can't right click. Wait, that's Macs.
I've been curious why Microsoft has continued to resist industry web standards. Asking seriously, what do they have to gain from this? It would seem they would want to be able to tell their customers that their browser is compliant with industry standards. Granted, they like doing their own thing and pushing their own standards, but have they really pushed anything new along the lines of css type capability?
The only thing I might suspect is that somewhere in Microsoft development they are working on something rather radically new that departs from traditional web methodology, so they don't consider it necessary to keep up with web standards since their new product won't have anything to do with traditional web standards.
While this is possible, I consider it unlikely. So what else? What does Microsoft have to gain by not updating to css2 and other standards?
Interesting idea, but I don't see this ever working, at least not with the current structure of the net. Unless the user had to provide the information to the website, there would be no real way of knowing who to bill. Current phone systems make it pretty simple for a number to know where to send the bill and who is being billed. The internet provides no such ease, as user data is generally not available. About the most a website can hope for is the user's IP address and even that can't be validated with any degree of reliability. As well, this wouldn't do anything for those users who access sites from a coffee shop, airport terminal, college dorm room, the workplace, etc. Generally if a person calls a phone service that charges their account, they do it from home. Such services are not accessible from other phone. Blocking computer users not tied to some sort of paid ISP would be suicide to a company since that is a lot of users. Thinking of something myself, I'm not sure why iTunes' method wouldn't work. Music purchased through iTunes is not immediately charged to your account. My observation has been that about once a day they charge your account for all music purchased that day, rather than doing several smaller charges. Sites doing this would still require you sign up and provide billing information, but rather than doing a credit on every download they credit the account once a week or something like that.