The Metro UI is great for tablets. It's the stuff that you can't do in Metro, or has no Metro equivalent, that sucks major ones. On a tablet.
On the other hand, the traditional desktop UI is great for desktops. It's the stuff that you can't do in the traditional UI, or has no traditional equivalent, that sucks major ones. On a desktop.
I think you'll find a lot of Christians identify closer with that than with any strict or literal interpretation of the Christian creation mythology. This is especially true of scientists who are also religious, having to reconcile their profession with the dogma that comes with their beliefs.
Because it creates goodwill, and an excuse not to be subversive. People like excuses to maintain the status quo. Paying for a service rendered, even if pennies on the dollar, qualifies.
Not exit nodes, bridge nodes. And specifically the ones you're more likely to connect to. If they're able to monitor the other end (and they can), they can link you to the destination of your TOR packetse, and whatever information your destination logs about you. If they didn't have this, they'd only be able to figure out that you're sending TOR packets, which in and of itself is not criminal (yet).
However, I think it's also possible to trace TOR packet origins (and destinations if it's a hidden service) via perfect knowledge of the entire internet. I don't know if they have that yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did, or will soon.
Remember, it's not the exit nodes that are important, but the bridge nodes. Exit nodes are merely the "fall guy" as it were, and should be assumed to already be compromised. Bridge nodes are what keeps your identity safe.
I think this is reasonable in the context of communications monitoring. TOR exit nodes are often not in the U.S., and it's reasonable to expect that traffic coming out of a TOR exit node may not originate from the U.S. I don't support this massive data collection in general, but I don't see why TOR traffic wouldn't be expected to raise red flags.
That having been said, I'm not sure where the fire is. Unless you're stupid enough to log into your own accounts (which contain identifying information) via TOR, they can collect all they want, but they'll never tie it back to you.
Now, could they theoretically track your traffic back to its origin if they have a complete picture of the network? It's possible, but they can only do a positive ID when there's not much TOR traffic, especially near your physical location, to begin with. That's where security by obscurity comes into play.
I'm not so sure about that. Sony's reputation still precedes them. I think people are looking for a 3rd option this next generation (or 4th if you include the Wii U a part of this next generation). I don't think it's going to be either Sony or Microsoft.
It's their service and they're giving it away for free
Except, they're taking this exact same mentality to the enterprise world too. Only, the enterprise market pays for the services; it's not free. And in the enterprise, there's one and only one thing that matters: stability.
This mentality does not fly for enterprises. Making significant changes every few months, terminating all support for deprecated services under 2 years (by support, I mean the actual service itself), releasing their "beta" products to a production environment and hoping nobody'd notice the bugs.
Just remember that IBM is still supporting their mainframes from the 1970's (albeit for a price). Note that Microsoft Office 2012 will run VBA code from Office 97. That's enterprise support. Support for XP will last 13(!) years, and enterprises will still use it for another 10. Enterprises manage change in 10-20 year timeframes, not the.5-2 that Google likes and insists everyone else follow.
Google's the antithesis of what enterprises want and need. If they didn't practically have a monopoly in certain areas, if they weren't the most reliable vendor by far for certain services, nobody'd touch them with a 10ft pole.
Forget the war of Independence. Look at Manifest Destiny. Look at slavery. To think that the U.S. has ever been better than that is to ignore U.S. history altogether. It's been 250 years worth of power grabbing at all costs. The "land of opportunity" did not refer to wealth.
Thankfully, it's all coming to an end real soon. Or maybe not so thankfully. The beauty of the system of government laid out by the Consititution is that it enables and dictates a regime change once every 4-8 years under peaceful, orderly circumstances. When that comes to an end, the only regime change that'll happen will neither be peaceful nor orderly.
With no post-mortem copyright, Christopher Tolkien might not have allowed The Silmarillion to see publication.
I'm not sure that'd be the case. Remember that derivative works have their own copyright, in addition to having to comply with the copyright of the work from which they're derived.
Christopher Tolkien is currently considered the editor, and as such, made his changes to the work prior to publication. Unless anyone could get their hands on J.R.R.'s original manualscript and notes, the published Silmarillion would've had its copyright fallen under him. The only thing that would've been in public domain would've been J.R.R. Tolkien's original works, which his estate could've locked away, buried, or even burned up, and no other version of the Silmarillion would exist.
Now, you can argue that the original notes couldn't be donated to a museum or some such for posterity, and society would be culturally lesser in 100 years (or whenever copyright's going to run out) for it. However, there are already existing methods irrespective of copyright to handle such matters. For example, the donation of the original notes could come with an NDA or some other agreement that they not be released for a certain period of time. This is because while the contents of the notes may be copyrighted (or in the public domain), the physical medium itself is still someone's property.
In fact, since there's probably only one copy of J.R.R. Tolkien's notes, that being the original in possession by the estate, this still hasn't changed in the slightest.
So this case is effectively a non-issue with respect to post-mortem copyrights. And really, there are no good arguments for post-mortem copyrights, except monetary ones. In fact, post-mortem copyrights can be argued to be detrimental to the progress of the arts, because with daddy's (or mommy's) estate providing them all the cash they want and need, now the kids who could've been producing their own works, would be less likely to do so.
Who else has money that Kodak will go under first before they exhaust their stockpile?
Granted, they're only in bankruptcy protection, but unless they can kill CCD/CMOS imaging with a new device of their invention, they've got little chance of coming out.
On the bright side, Intel's been distracted by ARM - they threw away a year's lead on performance to chase idle power draw, which should give AMD a bit of time to catch up on performance on the desktop.
In the short term, this appears to be a good thing. In the long term, this is very bad for AMD.
The world is moving to low-powered portables. The future of consumer computing will not be on the desk or lap, but in the hand. Workstations will still use desktop chips, but Intel pretty much has that market cornered.
The low-powered, RISC space is where AMD needs to go. It doesn't necessarily have to be ARM. Instead, there's a market for low-powered x86, which is where Intel is going with Haswell. AMD needs to get ahead of the game and create something that is capable of power sipping (which obviously won't be x86), but is also capable of running legacy x86 code at reasonable speeds.
Basically, they need to create a migration path away from x86, which will never be as efficient as ARM and thus has no chance in the portable space. Yes, Intel tried that with Itanic, but they were aiming in the wrong direction (servers).
Slashdot Mirror
The Metro UI is great for tablets. It's the stuff that you can't do in Metro, or has no Metro equivalent, that sucks major ones. On a tablet.
On the other hand, the traditional desktop UI is great for desktops. It's the stuff that you can't do in the traditional UI, or has no traditional equivalent, that sucks major ones. On a desktop.
See the problem here?
You'll find that they are one and the same issue. And security and privacy are about individual rights and freedoms.
I don't get why people think that tremendous wealth is a key to power.
Because people need to eat. Do I need to go further?
Feudalism. Fascism.
Funny, I read the second one as Federalism.
I think you'll find a lot of Christians identify closer with that than with any strict or literal interpretation of the Christian creation mythology. This is especially true of scientists who are also religious, having to reconcile their profession with the dogma that comes with their beliefs.
Trademarks are expensive, both up front, and to maintain.
Because it creates goodwill, and an excuse not to be subversive. People like excuses to maintain the status quo. Paying for a service rendered, even if pennies on the dollar, qualifies.
It's an old mobster trick.
If they're going to bring the battering ram to your door, you might as well open it and let them in. It'll save you the door at least.
Again, only in name. When push comes to shove, the Scandinavians cave.
They're saying on iOS you have to make that transition in three months, not two years.
FTFY.
To look at it another way, if you don't transition when Apple does, you're hosed.
Not exit nodes, bridge nodes. And specifically the ones you're more likely to connect to. If they're able to monitor the other end (and they can), they can link you to the destination of your TOR packetse, and whatever information your destination logs about you. If they didn't have this, they'd only be able to figure out that you're sending TOR packets, which in and of itself is not criminal (yet).
However, I think it's also possible to trace TOR packet origins (and destinations if it's a hidden service) via perfect knowledge of the entire internet. I don't know if they have that yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did, or will soon.
Remember, it's not the exit nodes that are important, but the bridge nodes. Exit nodes are merely the "fall guy" as it were, and should be assumed to already be compromised. Bridge nodes are what keeps your identity safe.
I think this is reasonable in the context of communications monitoring. TOR exit nodes are often not in the U.S., and it's reasonable to expect that traffic coming out of a TOR exit node may not originate from the U.S. I don't support this massive data collection in general, but I don't see why TOR traffic wouldn't be expected to raise red flags.
That having been said, I'm not sure where the fire is. Unless you're stupid enough to log into your own accounts (which contain identifying information) via TOR, they can collect all they want, but they'll never tie it back to you.
Now, could they theoretically track your traffic back to its origin if they have a complete picture of the network? It's possible, but they can only do a positive ID when there's not much TOR traffic, especially near your physical location, to begin with. That's where security by obscurity comes into play.
most people have already decided on the PS4
I'm not so sure about that. Sony's reputation still precedes them. I think people are looking for a 3rd option this next generation (or 4th if you include the Wii U a part of this next generation). I don't think it's going to be either Sony or Microsoft.
Makes me wonder if the whole thread was shills arguing with shills, or the one shill arguing with himself to generate discussion.
It's their service and they're giving it away for free
Except, they're taking this exact same mentality to the enterprise world too. Only, the enterprise market pays for the services; it's not free. And in the enterprise, there's one and only one thing that matters: stability.
This mentality does not fly for enterprises. Making significant changes every few months, terminating all support for deprecated services under 2 years (by support, I mean the actual service itself), releasing their "beta" products to a production environment and hoping nobody'd notice the bugs.
Just remember that IBM is still supporting their mainframes from the 1970's (albeit for a price). Note that Microsoft Office 2012 will run VBA code from Office 97. That's enterprise support. Support for XP will last 13(!) years, and enterprises will still use it for another 10. Enterprises manage change in 10-20 year timeframes, not the .5-2 that Google likes and insists everyone else follow.
Google's the antithesis of what enterprises want and need. If they didn't practically have a monopoly in certain areas, if they weren't the most reliable vendor by far for certain services, nobody'd touch them with a 10ft pole.
Just a nitpick, but there are other survivors of Krypton out there, mainly the ones who weren't on the planet at the time of its destruction.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
The most you can ever achieve from your own productivity is to be moderately comfortable.
Unless you were J.K. Rowling.
Hey, you have to give them credit for getting the tubes part right. They even knew where to shove it.
Forget the war of Independence. Look at Manifest Destiny. Look at slavery. To think that the U.S. has ever been better than that is to ignore U.S. history altogether. It's been 250 years worth of power grabbing at all costs. The "land of opportunity" did not refer to wealth.
Thankfully, it's all coming to an end real soon. Or maybe not so thankfully. The beauty of the system of government laid out by the Consititution is that it enables and dictates a regime change once every 4-8 years under peaceful, orderly circumstances. When that comes to an end, the only regime change that'll happen will neither be peaceful nor orderly.
With no post-mortem copyright, Christopher Tolkien might not have allowed The Silmarillion to see publication.
I'm not sure that'd be the case. Remember that derivative works have their own copyright, in addition to having to comply with the copyright of the work from which they're derived.
Christopher Tolkien is currently considered the editor, and as such, made his changes to the work prior to publication. Unless anyone could get their hands on J.R.R.'s original manualscript and notes, the published Silmarillion would've had its copyright fallen under him. The only thing that would've been in public domain would've been J.R.R. Tolkien's original works, which his estate could've locked away, buried, or even burned up, and no other version of the Silmarillion would exist.
Now, you can argue that the original notes couldn't be donated to a museum or some such for posterity, and society would be culturally lesser in 100 years (or whenever copyright's going to run out) for it. However, there are already existing methods irrespective of copyright to handle such matters. For example, the donation of the original notes could come with an NDA or some other agreement that they not be released for a certain period of time. This is because while the contents of the notes may be copyrighted (or in the public domain), the physical medium itself is still someone's property.
In fact, since there's probably only one copy of J.R.R. Tolkien's notes, that being the original in possession by the estate, this still hasn't changed in the slightest.
So this case is effectively a non-issue with respect to post-mortem copyrights. And really, there are no good arguments for post-mortem copyrights, except monetary ones. In fact, post-mortem copyrights can be argued to be detrimental to the progress of the arts, because with daddy's (or mommy's) estate providing them all the cash they want and need, now the kids who could've been producing their own works, would be less likely to do so.
They had trouble seeing it.
Who else has money that Kodak will go under first before they exhaust their stockpile?
Granted, they're only in bankruptcy protection, but unless they can kill CCD/CMOS imaging with a new device of their invention, they've got little chance of coming out.
Based on the photographs from CERN, the big model is actually fairly close to minifigure scale.
On the bright side, Intel's been distracted by ARM - they threw away a year's lead on performance to chase idle power draw, which should give AMD a bit of time to catch up on performance on the desktop.
In the short term, this appears to be a good thing. In the long term, this is very bad for AMD.
The world is moving to low-powered portables. The future of consumer computing will not be on the desk or lap, but in the hand. Workstations will still use desktop chips, but Intel pretty much has that market cornered.
The low-powered, RISC space is where AMD needs to go. It doesn't necessarily have to be ARM. Instead, there's a market for low-powered x86, which is where Intel is going with Haswell. AMD needs to get ahead of the game and create something that is capable of power sipping (which obviously won't be x86), but is also capable of running legacy x86 code at reasonable speeds.
Basically, they need to create a migration path away from x86, which will never be as efficient as ARM and thus has no chance in the portable space. Yes, Intel tried that with Itanic, but they were aiming in the wrong direction (servers).