They have had those for years. MIT's biggest problem seems to be that they try to make everything overly complex. My first year at this competition (I was on Amador Valley's Team) they custom built new thrusters at 2k each and they were having all sorts of problems with them. I think it ended up basically costing them the competition although I wasn't on their team so I wouldn't know.
unfortunately we only beat em in static judging. In total points we ended up loosing. I was actually the vice president of the club my senior year (2003-2004) and i know then our operating budge was about 4k. In three years we spent about 15-20k on barracuda (our vehicle) although most of that was the first year.
Unfortunately it's not the same one. I was on the only High School team in this competition and while we would have liked to beat MIT the best we could ever do was get second place (with MIT in first of course).
I work at the IT department of my college and we spent close to 40% of our time removing spyware. A usual computer for us has between 300-600 infections/files. The max we have ever gotten on a computer is somewhere around 3k infections/files. The bad part is that increasingly were running into stuff that neither addaware, spybot, nor ms can remove. I think ive spent at least 4 hours removing spyware from a user's machine. Its getting to the point were seriously considering just reformatting any machine that a user brings in for spyware related problems because were not able to help the users with more serious problems.
I work at the IT department at my school and we've actually had people come in and tell us not to remove the add ware on their machine. One person even said that they liked it. It's an engineering school to top it all off.
Have you ever thought that it might be due to overuse? Servers do get overloaded after all. You obviously have no clue how difficult system management is so you shouldn't be talking.
Some of the most innovative software is written by groups that don't seek patents whereas some of the most boring, dull and overall bad software is written by groups who do seek patents. Didn't you read the post about Microsoft's code being dull, stupid, and unoriginal?
By definition software patents give you more freedom because they promote the growth of open source software rather then having one gigantic company that makes all the software because they have all the patents. Also since this promotes better software its helping to fight terrorism. If windows was the only OS terrorist would be having a field day.
Just imagine if guns were free.
How does free software even come close to relating to guns and terrorism. That's like saying that people who speak out against the government are terrorists because they are exercising their right to free speech.
Still. If the owner of the wifi had wanted others to use it why did he get the guy arrested...unless hes just a jerk.
basic assumption is - or should be - that it is exactly what it was intended
I see your point but that's still a dangerous assumption. Its like saying that if your neighbor left his door open and left the house you would feel free to go in and use his computer. I doubt your neighbor would be too happy about that.
If my neighbour leaves their front porch light on, and I use those light emissions (from the side walk or street) to read a piece a paper at night, am I stealing the light? They are allowing the light rays to go all over the place.
The thing is that you don't have a choice in the matter. When your using someone's wifi you have to physically log on to their network. Apart from blinding yourself there is not much you can do to keep from using your neighbors lights.
Still if the electricity went out and your neighbors were on vacation would you go and rob their house just because their security system was down? If you would i really dont want to live next to you...
and i supose if you go and drink water from a public fountatin
A public fountain is paid for by tax money so it is in an entirely different domain then a private internet connection that is paid for by an individual. How would you like someone tapping into your water supply, electrical lines? Since you are not paying for the service you do not have the right to access it.
Also what if the wifi is a public wifi by choice for the people to
Public wifi by definition is when the owner consents to having people use his/her wifi so I doubt that the government could do anything to restrict it (although I could be wrong). In this case the user obviously did not want people using his wifi.
Slashdot Mirror
use dispatch-conf then.
They have had those for years. MIT's biggest problem seems to be that they try to make everything overly complex. My first year at this competition (I was on Amador Valley's Team) they custom built new thrusters at 2k each and they were having all sorts of problems with them. I think it ended up basically costing them the competition although I wasn't on their team so I wouldn't know.
unfortunately we only beat em in static judging. In total points we ended up loosing. I was actually the vice president of the club my senior year (2003-2004) and i know then our operating budge was about 4k. In three years we spent about 15-20k on barracuda (our vehicle) although most of that was the first year.
Unfortunately it's not the same one. I was on the only High School team in this competition and while we would have liked to beat MIT the best we could ever do was get second place (with MIT in first of course).
I work at the IT department of my college and we spent close to 40% of our time removing spyware. A usual computer for us has between 300-600 infections/files. The max we have ever gotten on a computer is somewhere around 3k infections/files. The bad part is that increasingly were running into stuff that neither addaware, spybot, nor ms can remove. I think ive spent at least 4 hours removing spyware from a user's machine. Its getting to the point were seriously considering just reformatting any machine that a user brings in for spyware related problems because were not able to help the users with more serious problems.
I work at the IT department at my school and we've actually had people come in and tell us not to remove the add ware on their machine. One person even said that they liked it. It's an engineering school to top it all off.
Have you ever thought that it might be due to overuse? Servers do get overloaded after all. You obviously have no clue how difficult system management is so you shouldn't be talking.
how does this have any relevance at all?
Some of the most innovative software is written by groups that don't seek patents whereas some of the most boring, dull and overall bad software is written by groups who do seek patents. Didn't you read the post about Microsoft's code being dull, stupid, and unoriginal?
It was a typo. There should be a no in there somewhere.
By definition software patents give you more freedom because they promote the growth of open source software rather then having one gigantic company that makes all the software because they have all the patents. Also since this promotes better software its helping to fight terrorism. If windows was the only OS terrorist would be having a field day.
Just imagine if guns were free.
How does free software even come close to relating to guns and terrorism. That's like saying that people who speak out against the government are terrorists because they are exercising their right to free speech.
Still. If the owner of the wifi had wanted others to use it why did he get the guy arrested...unless hes just a jerk.
basic assumption is - or should be - that it is exactly what it was intended
I see your point but that's still a dangerous assumption. Its like saying that if your neighbor left his door open and left the house you would feel free to go in and use his computer. I doubt your neighbor would be too happy about that.
If my neighbour leaves their front porch light on, and I use those light emissions (from the side walk or street) to read a piece a paper at night, am I stealing the light? They are allowing the light rays to go all over the place.
The thing is that you don't have a choice in the matter. When your using someone's wifi you have to physically log on to their network. Apart from blinding yourself there is not much you can do to keep from using your neighbors lights.
Still if the electricity went out and your neighbors were on vacation would you go and rob their house just because their security system was down? If you would i really dont want to live next to you...
and i supose if you go and drink water from a public fountatin
A public fountain is paid for by tax money so it is in an entirely different domain then a private internet connection that is paid for by an individual. How would you like someone tapping into your water supply, electrical lines? Since you are not paying for the service you do not have the right to access it.
Also what if the wifi is a public wifi by choice for the people to
Public wifi by definition is when the owner consents to having people use his/her wifi so I doubt that the government could do anything to restrict it (although I could be wrong). In this case the user obviously did not want people using his wifi.