There *can't* be any difference between 128k AAC and uncompressed CD audio. CD audio is what 128K AAC becomes after it's uncompressed, but before it's sent to your machine's speakers.
However, re-compressing that already uncompressed 128K AAC will cause degradation (so your second point is correct).
Not true - it's not subject to the same man-in-the-middle-attacks. The first time you log in from a computer, it asks for your user name, password and personal details. At that point, a cookie is stored in your browser. For subsequent logins, the site will only ask for your password and display your picture.
If you visit a phishing site, there's no way for the site to know what your picture is. To retrieve your picture, the phisher will have to ask you for your username, password and personal details. At this point the login sequence is different enough that it should alert the user that something is up.
BofA login:
1) Site displays the first 4 letters of my user id
2) Click login
3) Site displays picture and asks for password
4) Access granted
Phisher:
1) Site does not display first 4 chars of login
2) Has to ask for:
a) username
b) password
c) two dropdowns with all the possible questions that BofA asks and a text fields for your answers
3) User enters all details in
4) Access is granted (to phisher)
Those two flows are different enough, that phishing should be reduced.
This won't work. The picture is only displayed if your browser contains the correct cookies. The first time you visit BofA, the site asks for your user name, password, and some other personal details. Subsequent visits first ask for your user id and then your password. If you visited a phisher, the site couldn't send the correct cookies to BofA, so it would have to ask you for the personal details before retrieving your picture. At that point, a user should know something is up and discontinue logging in.
I'm not sure what you mean by unit testing since the article doesn't go into that and it talks about 15% of errors making it out of development into production, but you got the gist right.
If you add in the number of new foreign immigrants over the past decade, California has had a net inflow or at least its population has stayed consistent. Furthermore, the results of the latest census gave California more representation in the House, which means that the state has larger percentage of the U.S's population than it had in 1990. Finally, if you look at the paper, it shows that the people leaving California are among the least educated, and those moving in are among the most. As a Californian, I say good riddance.
From the study:
Estimates of the net outflow vary substantially (see the text box, "Measuring Domestic Migration" on page 4). Despite the outflow of domestic migrants, California's population continued to grow during the 1990s through international immigration and natural increase. Although growth rates were substantially lower than in the 1980s, between 1990 and 1999 the state's population increased by 3.3 million people according to the Census Bureau and by 4.2 million people according to the California Department of Finance. According to the Census Bureau, the net inflow of 2.2 million international immigrants was offset by the net outflow of 2.2 million domestic migrants. Estimates by the California Department of Finance imply a much lower net outflow of about 1.2 million domestic migrants.
It's impossible to burn your own dual layered disks since such disks are, in essence, two thin single layered disk glued together. They can only be created at the factory.
There's no way a burner could "burn" the second layer of a disk without disturbing the top layer.
While switching over to a safer language would solve the exploit problem, it wouldn't solve the any of DOS problems. If a program had an exploitable overflow, it would be easy for a nefarious hacker to repeatedly bring it down (albeit safely) by exploiting it. Thus, the severity of any bugs would be lessoned, but if one wanted to keep their server stable and performing at a high level, an equal amount of maintenance and security patches will have to be installed.
This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future. - Adolph Hitler 1935
This quotation, often seen without any date or citation at all, suffers from several credibility problems, the most significant of which is that the date given (*in alternate versions, the words "This year..." are replaced by "1935...") has no correlation with any legislative effort by the Nazis for gun registration, nor would there have been a need for the Nazis to pass such a law, since gun registration laws passed by the Weimar government (in part to address street violence between Nazis and Communists!) were already in effect.
I wonder if a reactionary right-wing puke like yourself will allow the truth to get in the way of your use of this bogus pro-gun quote. I doubt it. With your type, the ends always justify the means.
Fallacy one: There is a boundary between the molecular world and other levels of biological organization.
Fallacy two: The current utility of a given feature (molecular or otherwise) explains "why" the feature originally evolved.
Fallacy three: Unless we can identify advantages for each imaginary gradual step leading to a contemporary bit of biochemistry, we cannot invoke a Darwinian explanation.
Fallacy four: Molecular evolution: "a lot of sequences, some math, and no answers."
Fallacy five: There is a conspiracy of silence among scientists concerning the failure of Darwinian explanation.
Fallacy six: The evolution of complexity is unaddressed and unexplained.
Behe's empty box "Behe's colossal mistake is that, in rejecting these possibilities, he concludes that no Darwinian solution remains. But one does. It is this: An irreducibly complex system can be built gradually by adding parts that, while initially just advantageous, become-because of later changes-essential. The logic is very simple. Some part (A) initially does some job (and not very well, perhaps). Another part (B) later gets added because it helps A. This new part isn't essential, it merely improves things. But later on, A (or something else) may change in such a way that B now becomes indispensable. This process continues as further parts get folded into the system. And at the end of the day, many parts may all be required."
"The point is there's no guarantee that improvements will remain mere improvements. Indeed because later changes build on previous ones, there's every reason to think that earlier refinements might become necessary. The transformation of air bladders into lungs that allowed animals to breathe atmospheric oxygen was initially just advantageous: such beasts could explore open niches-like dry land-that were unavailable to their lung-less peers. But as evolution built on this adaptation (modifying limbs for walking, for instance), we grew thoroughly terrestrial and lungs, consequently, are no longer luxuries-they are essential. The punch-line is, I think, obvious: although this process is thoroughly Darwinian, we are often left with a system that is irreducibly complex. I'm afraid there's no room for compromise here: Behe's key claim that all the components of an irreducibly complex system 'have to be there from the beginning' is dead wrong."
[b]The Fallacy of Conclusion by Analogy[/b]
When it comes to explaining science to the public, analogies and metaphors are essential tools of the trade. We all can better understand something new and unusual, when it is compared to something we already know: a cell is like a factory, the eye is like a camera, an atom is like a billiard ball, a biochemical system is like a mouse trap. An A is like a B, means A shares some conceptual properties with B. It does not mean A has all the properties of B. It does not follow that what is true for B is therefore true for A. Analogies can be used to explain science, but analogies cannot be used to draw conclusions or falsify scientific theories. Yet Behe commits this fallacy throughout his book.
For example:
[ol][li]A mousetrap is "irreducibly complex" - it requires all of its parts to work properly.
[li]A mousetrap is a product of design.
[li]The bacterial flagellum is "irreducibly complex" - it requires all of its parts to work properly.
[li]Therefore the flagellum is like a mouse trap.
[li]Therefore the flagellum is a product of design.
On page 179 of Darwin's Black Box Michael Behe claims:
"There has never been a meeting, or a book, or a paper on details of the evolution of complex biochemical systems."
He closes the chapter with this ludicrous statement:
"In effect, the theory of Darwinian molecular evolution has not published, and so it should perish"
(Did someone say publish or perish?: The Elusive Scientific Basis of Intelligent Design Theory)
To be honest, I suspect that the extent of detail Behe is demanding would require a combination cutting-edge biochemistry lab and a time machine. How else can science fully recover, for example, every single step in the evolution of the bacterial flagellum that took place billions of years ago?
Review of Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box (1998) For those who have not already encountered this book or one of its numerous reviews, let me simply say that the author sets out to argue that the organic world is so complex, particularly at the level of molecular biology and biochemistry, that Darwinian evolution cannot possibly have led to it. As evolution cannot produce irreducibly complex systems (the blood-clotting process, for instance, the biochemist's analogue of the eye), they must be the outcome of the activities of an Intelligent Designer. In other words, the book is a tiresome reworking at the molecular level of the timeworn "design" argument.
So much has already been written by reviewers of this book that it seems unnecessary to add anything more (go to ahref=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/publish.htmlhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/publish. html>). Specialists far more competent than me have analyzed the numerous and gross deficiencies in Dr. Behe's flatulent arguments in considerable technical detail (see especially ahref=http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/dave/Behe.htmlhttp://w ww.cbs.dtu.dk/dave/Behe.html>), so there would be an emptiness in my remarks if I were to try to emulate them. If I am to add anything to the discussion, I am forced to choose to look at the book from a different perspective. The perspective I shall adopt is that of misrepresentation, for that quality pervades this book at every level.
Their "Pause Live TV" mantra is both hackneyed and absolutely ineffectual. I can think of a million campaigns that would be currently better then what they're using. Sales would skyrocket if they used something like your idea. Ten years from now, the TiVo campaign will be used in Marketing 101 classes as what not to do. I've never heard of any situation where a company's product is almost universally praised and its ad campaign universally criticized.
We'd have to dedicate one to the Tivo, in order to be able to watch one show while recording another, which would be our major use.
You can watch one show and record another; they just both can't be live (with TiVo, you're almost never watching live TV). While the TiVo is obediently recording all the show you enjoy watching, you an sit down anytime and pick from its library of prerecorded programs. So, even if its currently recording one of your programs you can still watch T.V. The only time this setup fails is if you want to record two live programs at once.
To remedy this, you could always switch to DirectTV. There's a special running right now where you get free installation, a dish, and a 30 hour TiVo with two tuners (which allows you to record two programs while watching a third) all for $49.95. And if you want to be able to watch programs in two different rooms, you can buy a second box for $100.00 and set it up to record the same shows as the one in your living room. This is a pretty good deal considering DirecTV costs about the same as digital cable, and your getting all this equipment for less then half the price of a standalone TiVo.
I know that's not what you wanted to hear:), but I've done extensive research and never heard anyone mention this. However, if you really want to be sure, ask your question at the premier TiVo forum:
TiVo Community Forum> DIRECTV Receiver with TiVo
That commercial is soo much better then the crap they show in the states. Down here, their ads consist of a guy watching a football game, and when his team is about to kick a field goal, he pauses the game, drives to church and prays and then comes back to watch the result of the play. Yeah, that will convince me to buy one of those. After watching that commercial, anyone not intimately familiar with Tivo is asking themselves, "who the hell would want to do that?"
Also, I've never once seen the now playing screen advertised on an American commercial. They only seem to be concerned with brand awareness, not with actually using their commercials to convince people to buy their products. Everyone from their marketing department should be fired.
Oops, this is actually one of the copyright protection schemes of the X-Box, not the Playstation 2. Still, the PS 2 has other copyright protection schemes built into its hardware that accomplish the same thing, namely no booting of burned games. To get around these restrictions, you'll have to buy a mod chip. Futzing around with Apple's burner most likely will not accomplish much.
Slashdot Mirror
There *can't* be any difference between 128k AAC and uncompressed CD audio. CD audio is what 128K AAC becomes after it's uncompressed, but before it's sent to your machine's speakers.
However, re-compressing that already uncompressed 128K AAC will cause degradation (so your second point is correct).
Not true - it's not subject to the same man-in-the-middle-attacks. The first time you log in from a computer, it asks for your user name, password and personal details. At that point, a cookie is stored in your browser. For subsequent logins, the site will only ask for your password and display your picture.
If you visit a phishing site, there's no way for the site to know what your picture is. To retrieve your picture, the phisher will have to ask you for your username, password and personal details. At this point the login sequence is different enough that it should alert the user that something is up.
BofA login:
1) Site displays the first 4 letters of my user id
2) Click login
3) Site displays picture and asks for password
4) Access granted
Phisher:
1) Site does not display first 4 chars of login
2) Has to ask for:
a) username
b) password
c) two dropdowns with all the possible questions that BofA asks and a text fields for your answers
3) User enters all details in
4) Access is granted (to phisher)
Those two flows are different enough, that phishing should be reduced.
This won't work. The picture is only displayed if your browser contains the correct cookies. The first time you visit BofA, the site asks for your user name, password, and some other personal details. Subsequent visits first ask for your user id and then your password. If you visited a phisher, the site couldn't send the correct cookies to BofA, so it would have to ask you for the personal details before retrieving your picture. At that point, a user should know something is up and discontinue logging in.
Here's the article They Write the Right Stuff.
I'm not sure what you mean by unit testing since the article doesn't go into that and it talks about 15% of errors making it out of development into production, but you got the gist right.
Maybe the sign was the problem?
People Don't Read
Or let google do the math (and get the right answer): 1 terabyte / 1.544 megabits /s= 62.8823642 days
I have 56,442 messages in my Junk folder, so there can't be a 16-bit message limit...
You're off by a factor of ten. Let google do the math: 1 petabyte / 100 megabits / second in days = 994.205393 days
If you add in the number of new foreign immigrants over the past decade, California has had a net inflow or at least its population has stayed consistent. Furthermore, the results of the latest census gave California more representation in the House, which means that the state has larger percentage of the U.S's population than it had in 1990. Finally, if you look at the paper, it shows that the people leaving California are among the least educated, and those moving in are among the most. As a Californian, I say good riddance.
From the study:
Estimates of the net outflow vary substantially (see the text box, "Measuring Domestic Migration" on page 4). Despite the outflow of domestic migrants, California's population continued to grow during the 1990s through international immigration and natural increase. Although growth rates were substantially lower than in the 1980s, between 1990 and 1999 the state's population increased by 3.3 million people according to the Census Bureau and by 4.2 million people according to the California Department of Finance. According to the Census Bureau, the net inflow of 2.2 million international immigrants was offset by the net outflow of 2.2 million domestic migrants. Estimates by the California Department of Finance imply a much lower net outflow of about 1.2 million domestic migrants.
It's impossible to burn your own dual layered disks since such disks are, in essence, two thin single layered disk glued together. They can only be created at the factory.
There's no way a burner could "burn" the second layer of a disk without disturbing the top layer.
Of course you can copy DVD's you've authored yourself. The only thing you can't already do is copy DVD's that are CSS scrambeled. Sheesh.
Great post. At the very least, it's a nice balance to the statistics posted by the parent.
Do I win a prize :)?
While switching over to a safer language would solve the exploit problem, it wouldn't solve the any of DOS problems. If a program had an exploitable overflow, it would be easy for a nefarious hacker to repeatedly bring it down (albeit safely) by exploiting it. Thus, the severity of any bugs would be lessoned, but if one wanted to keep their server stable and performing at a high level, an equal amount of maintenance and security patches will have to be installed.
I couldn't find any reference to this during a quick goolge and MRC.com search.
This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future. - Adolph Hitler 1935
This quotation, often seen without any date or citation at all, suffers from several credibility problems, the most significant of which is that the date given (*in alternate versions, the words "This year..." are replaced by "1935...") has no correlation with any legislative effort by the Nazis for gun registration, nor would there have been a need for the Nazis to pass such a law, since gun registration laws passed by the Weimar government (in part to address street violence between Nazis and Communists!) were already in effect.
More: hitler gun control
I wonder if a reactionary right-wing puke like yourself will allow the truth to get in the way of your use of this bogus pro-gun quote. I doubt it. With your type, the ends always justify the means.
I terribly messed up the formatting, and hit submit instead of preview. Oh well, you get the idea.
Darwin's Black Box Review
h .htmlhttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/publish. html>). Specialists far more competent than me have analyzed the numerous and gross deficiencies in Dr. Behe's flatulent arguments in considerable technical detail (see especially ahref=http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/dave/Behe.htmlhttp://w ww.cbs.dtu.dk/dave/Behe.html>), so there would be an emptiness in my remarks if I were to try to emulate them. If I am to add anything to the discussion, I am forced to choose to look at the book from a different perspective. The perspective I shall adopt is that of misrepresentation, for that quality pervades this book at every level.
The book basis its premace on six fallacies:
Fallacy one: There is a boundary between the molecular world and other levels of biological organization.
Fallacy two: The current utility of a given feature (molecular or otherwise) explains "why" the feature originally evolved.
Fallacy three: Unless we can identify advantages for each imaginary gradual step leading to a contemporary bit of biochemistry, we cannot invoke a Darwinian explanation.
Fallacy four: Molecular evolution: "a lot of sequences, some math, and no answers."
Fallacy five: There is a conspiracy of silence among scientists concerning the failure of Darwinian explanation.
Fallacy six: The evolution of complexity is unaddressed and unexplained.
More: Darwin's Black Box Review
Behe's empty box
"Behe's colossal mistake is that, in rejecting these possibilities, he concludes that no Darwinian solution remains. But one does. It is this: An irreducibly complex system can be built gradually by adding parts that, while initially just advantageous, become-because of later changes-essential. The logic is very simple. Some part (A) initially does some job (and not very well, perhaps). Another part (B) later gets added because it helps A. This new part isn't essential, it merely improves things. But later on, A (or something else) may change in such a way that B now becomes indispensable. This process continues as further parts get folded into the system. And at the end of the day, many parts may all be required."
"The point is there's no guarantee that improvements will remain mere improvements. Indeed because later changes build on previous ones, there's every reason to think that earlier refinements might become necessary. The transformation of air bladders into lungs that allowed animals to breathe atmospheric oxygen was initially just advantageous: such beasts could explore open niches-like dry land-that were unavailable to their lung-less peers. But as evolution built on this adaptation (modifying limbs for walking, for instance), we grew thoroughly terrestrial and lungs, consequently, are no longer luxuries-they are essential. The punch-line is, I think, obvious: although this process is thoroughly Darwinian, we are often left with a system that is irreducibly complex. I'm afraid there's no room for compromise here: Behe's key claim that all the components of an irreducibly complex system 'have to be there from the beginning' is dead wrong."
[b]The Fallacy of Conclusion by Analogy[/b]
When it comes to explaining science to the public, analogies and metaphors are essential tools of the trade. We all can better understand something new and unusual, when it is compared to something we already know: a cell is like a factory, the eye is like a camera, an atom is like a billiard ball, a biochemical system is like a mouse trap. An A is like a B, means A shares some conceptual properties with B. It does not mean A has all the properties of B. It does not follow that what is true for B is therefore true for A. Analogies can be used to explain science, but analogies cannot be used to draw conclusions or falsify scientific theories. Yet Behe commits this fallacy throughout his book.
For example:
[ol][li]A mousetrap is "irreducibly complex" - it requires all of its parts to work properly.
[li]A mousetrap is a product of design.
[li]The bacterial flagellum is "irreducibly complex" - it requires all of its parts to work properly.
[li]Therefore the flagellum is like a mouse trap.
[li]Therefore the flagellum is a product of design.
More: Features: Behe's empty box
Publish or Perish
On page 179 of Darwin's Black Box Michael Behe claims:
"There has never been a meeting, or a book, or a paper on details of the evolution of complex biochemical systems."
He closes the chapter with this ludicrous statement:
"In effect, the theory of Darwinian molecular evolution has not published, and so it should perish"
(Did someone say publish or perish?: The Elusive Scientific Basis of Intelligent Design Theory)
To be honest, I suspect that the extent of detail Behe is demanding would require a combination cutting-edge biochemistry lab and a time machine. How else can science fully recover, for example, every single step in the evolution of the bacterial flagellum that took place billions of years ago?
More: Publish or Perish
Review of Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box (1998)
For those who have not already encountered this book or one of its numerous reviews, let me simply say that the author sets out to argue that the organic world is so complex, particularly at the level of molecular biology and biochemistry, that Darwinian evolution cannot possibly have led to it. As evolution cannot produce irreducibly complex systems (the blood-clotting process, for instance, the biochemist's analogue of the eye), they must be the outcome of the activities of an Intelligent Designer. In other words, the book is a tiresome reworking at the molecular level of the timeworn "design" argument.
So much has already been written by reviewers of this book that it seems unnecessary to add anything more (go to ahref=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/publis
More: Review of Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box (1998)
Great :)! What I meant was that you 100% certainty, not 99%. Anyway, good luck!
Their "Pause Live TV" mantra is both hackneyed and absolutely ineffectual. I can think of a million campaigns that would be currently better then what they're using. Sales would skyrocket if they used something like your idea. Ten years from now, the TiVo campaign will be used in Marketing 101 classes as what not to do. I've never heard of any situation where a company's product is almost universally praised and its ad campaign universally criticized.
We'd have to dedicate one to the Tivo, in order to be able to watch one show while recording another, which would be our major use.
You can watch one show and record another; they just both can't be live (with TiVo, you're almost never watching live TV). While the TiVo is obediently recording all the show you enjoy watching, you an sit down anytime and pick from its library of prerecorded programs. So, even if its currently recording one of your programs you can still watch T.V. The only time this setup fails is if you want to record two live programs at once.
To remedy this, you could always switch to DirectTV. There's a special running right now where you get free installation, a dish, and a 30 hour TiVo with two tuners (which allows you to record two programs while watching a third) all for $49.95. And if you want to be able to watch programs in two different rooms, you can buy a second box for $100.00 and set it up to record the same shows as the one in your living room. This is a pretty good deal considering DirecTV costs about the same as digital cable, and your getting all this equipment for less then half the price of a standalone TiVo.
I know that's not what you wanted to hear :), but I've done extensive research and never heard anyone mention this. However, if you really want to be sure, ask your question at the premier TiVo forum:
TiVo Community Forum> DIRECTV Receiver with TiVo
That commercial is soo much better then the crap they show in the states. Down here, their ads consist of a guy watching a football game, and when his team is about to kick a field goal, he pauses the game, drives to church and prays and then comes back to watch the result of the play. Yeah, that will convince me to buy one of those. After watching that commercial, anyone not intimately familiar with Tivo is asking themselves, "who the hell would want to do that?"
Also, I've never once seen the now playing screen advertised on an American commercial. They only seem to be concerned with brand awareness, not with actually using their commercials to convince people to buy their products. Everyone from their marketing department should be fired.
Posts like these are why I still read slashdot.
Oops, this is actually one of the copyright protection schemes of the X-Box, not the Playstation 2. Still, the PS 2 has other copyright protection schemes built into its hardware that accomplish the same thing, namely no booting of burned games. To get around these restrictions, you'll have to buy a mod chip. Futzing around with Apple's burner most likely will not accomplish much.