And you can look forward to an employment discrimination lawsuit for that.
Based on what exactly? That a potential employer doesn't feel that a job applicant would be a good fit for the position or the company? Good luck with that.
Out of curiosity, what is the line that separates a UAV from a R/C? I mean, there are some R/Cs out there that are on steroids â" and some really cheap UAV. Is it a subjective thing or is there a rule? (Is it like Horse vs. Pony. There are some hard rules, such as being under 14.2 hands and some subject rules
I don't believe there is a hard line between the two similar to the example you posted. My personal definition would be anything that operates outside of the limited boundaries that model airplane hobbyists are permitted would be a UAV. Similarly I would include an aircraft where the operator uses a POV from the aircraft for operation as a UAV.
That's what the two-year contract is for -- to amortize the cost of the $600 phone over 2 years while still giving them (Verizon, et al) service profits.
So why doesn't my mobile bill drop to half or less after the amortized phone is paid off?
It's like saying we're going to upgrade the dollar, and yet nobody moves to the "new dollar". The new dollar ends up valueless and everyone just stays on the old one.
The security was broken. Suddenly, an attacker had the ability to easily spend the exact same set of coins twice, violating one of the key security properties Bitcoin was meant to have.
How would an attacker do that and still have both chains validated?
If I have already completed a transaction, with cash in hand, that transaction must not be "most likely" legitimate. It must be legitimate from the very moment that I verify the currency that I received as legitimate. It must not pass verification, then "most likely" have to pass verification again.
I guess you've never deposited a check into a bank, only to have it come back on you for insufficient funds?
The camera in question was installed in a school zone. I'm going with yes.
There were four cameras installed. Two were active. One was in a school zone. The other was right at the edge of the village where the speed limit drops from 35mph to 25mph. Guess which one accounted for over an overwhelming majority of the tickets/revenue?
Some time ago I wrote a shareware program that does something no other software does. 100,000 people downloaded it. It got top ratings everywhere. About 60 people emailed me saying how much they like the software. Exactly ONE person paid the $5 "donation" for it. Web sites are like that - people will visit daily, they'll talk about how awesome the site is, but no way they'll fork over $1. They just don't.
None of which mean that even one of those 100,000 people continued to use it for more than a few days. I can download a program, give it top ratings, good reviews and even email you directly to commend your work and be sincere about it, but that doesn't imply that I'm going to continue to use it. Just because I take a car for a test drive, marvel at the features, praise the handling and give a "thumbs up" for fuel economy doesn't mean I'm going to buy it.
You should consider the possibility that rather than not paying for your software because they don't have to, users just aren't finding any long term value in it.
This looks like poor security from everyone involved.
This is perhaps arguable in the case of VirWox, the exchange used to move the money out of the account. According to the article, VirWox has offered two factor authentication since September of last year. The fact that BitInstant didn't use it allowed the attackers to succeed with the heist. I say arguable because two factor authentication should probably be mandatory for anything that involves monetary transactions.
A man in a hot air balloon realized he was lost. He reduced altitude and
spotted a woman below. He descended a bit more and shouted, "Excuse me,
can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I
don't know where I am."
The woman below replied, "You're in a hot air balloon hovering
approximately 30 feet above the ground. You're between 40 and 41 degrees
north latitude and between 59 and 60 degrees west longitude."
"You must be an engineer," said the balloonist. "I am," replied the woman,
"How did you know?"
"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is, technically
correct, but I've no idea what to make of your information, and the fact
is I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help at all. If anything,
you've delayed my trip."
The woman below responded, "You must be in Management." "I am," replied
the balloonist, "but how did you know?"
"Well," said the woman, "you don't know where you are or where you're
going. You have risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air.
You made a promise which you've no idea how to keep, and you expect people
beneath you to solve your problems. The fact is you are in exactly the same
position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my fault."
The answer would be to form a hash from your input key, then feed that back through itself for several million rounds. Only the final result would be used as the decryption key. This is the same sort of setup used by KeePass and other password managers.
If there are only 10 billion inputs then there are only 10 billion outputs (encryption keys) and a rainbow table turns the whole thing into a lookup.
A device specific salt would also be a help.
It would be a requirement to prevent rainbow tables but the list of usable keys is still limited to those 10 billion that could be generated using that salt value.
The sad side effect of endless war, warrantless wiretapping, blatant disregard of the Rule of Law, is that I'm left to wonder if any of this is true, instead of just a False Flag operation to justify the final destruction of privacy and the true Internet.
You have officially earned your tinfoil hat. Welcome to the club.
:lol: Right. Because when publishers eliminate the only legitimate source of price competition for their titles, they will become benevolent toward their customers and cut the price out of... good-naturedness? Rather than, you know, jacking up the rates for Halo XVIII through the roof, because they know that customers would sell a kidney to play Master Chef again?
No, but when people can't buy the new game, play it through, and resell it to recoup half the cost, they will be buying fewer games. Retailers will need to lower their price in order to reclaim their previous sales numbers.
Ok. So someone invented this thing called a virtual shopping cart. Another company "tweaked" the code slightly and had a shopping cart themselves. This sounds familiar. So which is right? You can tweak it? You can't Tweak it? How much Tweaking is a new design?
Neither is right because "inventing" X, where X is just some existing Y but on a computer should not be patentable.
Not sure if it was true or not, but I heard a story about a jewelry store that used to let tarantulas loose in the display cases when the store was closed.
Slashdot Mirror
And you can look forward to an employment discrimination lawsuit for that.
Based on what exactly? That a potential employer doesn't feel that a job applicant would be a good fit for the position or the company? Good luck with that.
Out of curiosity, what is the line that separates a UAV from a R/C? I mean, there are some R/Cs out there that are on steroids â" and some really cheap UAV. Is it a subjective thing or is there a rule? (Is it like Horse vs. Pony. There are some hard rules, such as being under 14.2 hands and some subject rules
I don't believe there is a hard line between the two similar to the example you posted. My personal definition would be anything that operates outside of the limited boundaries that model airplane hobbyists are permitted would be a UAV. Similarly I would include an aircraft where the operator uses a POV from the aircraft for operation as a UAV.
Well played sir.
That's what the two-year contract is for -- to amortize the cost of the $600 phone over 2 years while still giving them (Verizon, et al) service profits.
So why doesn't my mobile bill drop to half or less after the amortized phone is paid off?
It's like saying we're going to upgrade the dollar, and yet nobody moves to the "new dollar". The new dollar ends up valueless and everyone just stays on the old one.
Who else remembers "new Coke"?
The security was broken. Suddenly, an attacker had the ability to easily spend the exact same set of coins twice, violating one of the key security properties Bitcoin was meant to have.
How would an attacker do that and still have both chains validated?
If I have already completed a transaction, with cash in hand, that transaction must not be "most likely" legitimate. It must be legitimate from the very moment that I verify the currency that I received as legitimate. It must not pass verification, then "most likely" have to pass verification again.
I guess you've never deposited a check into a bank, only to have it come back on you for insufficient funds?
Your silly "men with guns" strawman is patently silly, and is the result of a serious lack of understanding about society at large.
Great, another silly patent troll.
The camera in question was installed in a school zone. I'm going with yes.
There were four cameras installed. Two were active. One was in a school zone. The other was right at the edge of the village where the speed limit drops from 35mph to 25mph. Guess which one accounted for over an overwhelming majority of the tickets/revenue?
Some time ago I wrote a shareware program that does something no other software does. 100,000 people downloaded it. It got top ratings everywhere. About 60 people emailed me saying how much they like the software. Exactly ONE person paid the $5 "donation" for it. Web sites are like that - people will visit daily, they'll talk about how awesome the site is, but no way they'll fork over $1. They just don't.
None of which mean that even one of those 100,000 people continued to use it for more than a few days. I can download a program, give it top ratings, good reviews and even email you directly to commend your work and be sincere about it, but that doesn't imply that I'm going to continue to use it. Just because I take a car for a test drive, marvel at the features, praise the handling and give a "thumbs up" for fuel economy doesn't mean I'm going to buy it.
You should consider the possibility that rather than not paying for your software because they don't have to, users just aren't finding any long term value in it.
This looks like poor security from everyone involved.
This is perhaps arguable in the case of VirWox, the exchange used to move the money out of the account. According to the article, VirWox has offered two factor authentication since September of last year. The fact that BitInstant didn't use it allowed the attackers to succeed with the heist. I say arguable because two factor authentication should probably be mandatory for anything that involves monetary transactions.
If you want something beneficial to the wearer instead, how about a targeting reticle?
Does that include the IP addresses of the 20 million visitors they will get over the next 48 hours for appearing on the Slashdot FP?
Sorry but a low end android phone could handle the load from a slashdotting these days.
Jitsi is GPL, and Apple's mandatory license terms are incompatible with GPL software.
Actually jitsi is LGPL.
Jitsi is Open Source / Free Software, and is available under the terms of the LGPL.
Higher quality recording:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
The woman below replied, "You're in a hot air balloon hovering approximately 30 feet above the ground. You're between 40 and 41 degrees north latitude and between 59 and 60 degrees west longitude."
"You must be an engineer," said the balloonist. "I am," replied the woman, "How did you know?"
"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is, technically correct, but I've no idea what to make of your information, and the fact is I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help at all. If anything, you've delayed my trip."
The woman below responded, "You must be in Management." "I am," replied the balloonist, "but how did you know?"
"Well," said the woman, "you don't know where you are or where you're going. You have risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise which you've no idea how to keep, and you expect people beneath you to solve your problems. The fact is you are in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my fault."
Trial & Error Works Often better than calculations.
Unless you're designing parachutes.
While not gyro stabilized, the MonoTracer is a pretty cool take on a similar enclosed two wheel design.
The answer would be to form a hash from your input key, then feed that back through itself for several million rounds. Only the final result would be used as the decryption key. This is the same sort of setup used by KeePass and other password managers.
If there are only 10 billion inputs then there are only 10 billion outputs (encryption keys) and a rainbow table turns the whole thing into a lookup.
A device specific salt would also be a help.
It would be a requirement to prevent rainbow tables but the list of usable keys is still limited to those 10 billion that could be generated using that salt value.
The sad side effect of endless war, warrantless wiretapping, blatant disregard of the Rule of Law, is that I'm left to wonder if any of this is true, instead of just a False Flag operation to justify the final destruction of privacy and the true Internet.
You have officially earned your tinfoil hat. Welcome to the club.
We need a whole new database paradigm!
Wait, don't you just draw a different arrow on the end of the line joining the two tables and the rest happens automatically?
Yea, because folks on the Intelligence committees shouldn't have clearances.
Folks who can't get clearances should not be on Intelligence committees. We keep putting the cart before the horse.
:lol: Right. Because when publishers eliminate the only legitimate source of price competition for their titles, they will become benevolent toward their customers and cut the price out of... good-naturedness? Rather than, you know, jacking up the rates for Halo XVIII through the roof, because they know that customers would sell a kidney to play Master Chef again?
No, but when people can't buy the new game, play it through, and resell it to recoup half the cost, they will be buying fewer games. Retailers will need to lower their price in order to reclaim their previous sales numbers.
Ok. So someone invented this thing called a virtual shopping cart. Another company "tweaked" the code slightly and had a shopping cart themselves. This sounds familiar. So which is right? You can tweak it? You can't Tweak it? How much Tweaking is a new design?
Neither is right because "inventing" X, where X is just some existing Y but on a computer should not be patentable.
Obvious solution - get a dog.
Not sure if it was true or not, but I heard a story about a jewelry store that used to let tarantulas loose in the display cases when the store was closed.