What a curious definition of "Troll" - speaking the facts. Note hat I didn't say GPL was bad - only that it carries its own set of restrictions that must be weighed in deciding when to use it; and when to accept GPL'd source.
I love PR articles like this one. This is the kind of piece that future researchers can than use as a reference - since it appeared in a reputable newspaper, it's "proof" that such services are "coming back". Ultimately the companies offering this service are made to appear more legitimate to potential investors and partners -- even though readig the article shows no actual evidence of a "comeback" for deep packet inspection beyond the fact that a couple of companies are trying to get it moving. cf "Suits are back!"
Yay to innovation! Reinventing the wheel a thousand times, will of course speed up progress manifolds..
You realize that there are consequences to choosing the GPL, just as for any other choice in software development? One of those consequences is that you automatically exclude large portions of people and corporations from using your code. That may be what you want - on the other hand you seem to find it offensive. If it's a problem, use a less restrictive license*.
*(Says the person who's developing and maintaining a GPLv2 project.)
I don't fly either, when I have a choice. This too has cost hte airline many thousands of dollars. Where there is one person doing this, there are two. And where there are two, it is not a stretch to say there are many.
Look at the year over year numbers - fewer people have been flying since 2006. The visible signs of the economic depression didn't start until 2007/2008 - so that's not the only reason for the reduced numbers. Do you really think the loss of millions of flliers annually has nothing to do with the ever-increasing ridiculousness of TSA requirements?
By all means, vote with your wallet, but please be aware that it won't mean anytthing.
You can continue to vote with your wallet by paying to have your privacy (and potentially your dignity) taken away - while those of us who vote in the other direction continue to quietly accumulate in cost to the airlines.
Nope. Only in the context of... "elecommunication services, namely, providing online chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users in the field of general interest and concerning social and entertainment subject matter".
I'd agree with the cat body language, but I've found that with dogs it can be just as much if not more so. My dogs are all trained to hand signals for the basic commands, and often take cues from posture alone Watching them interact with each other, it's much the same - sure there's some barking at play time, but you can see who's in charge by the way they interact non-verbally with each other.
No dog I've ever had in the family or known of has been able to open doors by using the handle, nor had a personality as strong as any of the cats we've had. Dogs can be social all they want, but they still act dumb, and I really don't think it's to fit in.
Yeah - dogs convince their owners to cut large holes in the door instead. I'd say that one's a wash...
I think* cats present a fine illusion of intelligence by ignoring you when they don't want to be engaged. People use this technique successfully all the time -- if you're aloof, there's an assumption of intelligence.
That said, cats can be trained too - though perhaps not with a vocabulary as large as dogs. It just takes more patience.
*Speaking as owner of 3 dogs, 2 cats, and a number of past pets of both species...
As long as an Android device is properly responding to onPause() and onResume() there is ZERO reason an Android app should be eating resources in the background.
"Resources" are not limited to just "UI resources" - they also include CPU, RAM, bandwidth, and interactions with integrated hardware. The very fact that an app continues running in the background means it consumes more resources than if it weren't. This is true on BB devices, and I assume Android and iOS as well.
Under 2.5? Try under 6-10 hours, especially at peak holiday travel time. On one occasion I drove to/from a site 10 hours away, and made it home before my colleagues who left via airplane at the same time. Further, if you DO elect to fly, what do you get? Waiting for TSA, waiting for late arrival/departure, hours of white noise, cramped and uncomfortable seating... and you PAY for this privilege?
No, it wouldn't. As long as we are put under duress to forfeit our 4th amendment rights, it's not acceptable. Please stop muddying the issue - the question you raise is one that undoubtedly has a technical solution. The one that I raise does not.
I am embarrassed by people. Not because they're outraged about the scanners. But because it's over a little virtual nudity.
Worry about the incredible cost in hardware and training. Worry about some idiot cranking up the power, or a hardware flaw doing it for them. Worry about the infinite spiral of ineffective hoops in the security theater. Worry about what you're going to have to supper.
But, good grief, stop with the omg-naked and think-of-the-children crap.
The nudity is a straw man. The real issue is the 4th amendment. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise - and if you have an opportunity to correct someone (especially media reports) then do so.
Here's the ridiculous thing. You're still allowed to carry on knitting needles. THey even go so far as to defend themselves against slanderous accusations that knitting needles are not allowed on.
For those of you not familiar, knitting needles are often up to seven (or more) inches long; they can be made of wood, plastic, or metal. A sturdy needle can also slide nicely into soft tissue without any major difficulties assuming the wielder is strong enough.
But hey, at least it's not like they let the REAL deadly things on board. Like factory-sealed bottles of soda, and similar threats.
My wife and I were talking about this yesterday. We would rather be one of the many thousands of people a screener sees "naked" instead of one of the people being publicly fondled.
That's pretty much how they're counting on you thinking. Naturally a public groping is less appealing than a quasi-anonymous screening. However, your tacit agreement that this type of search is necessary in the first place puts you at a disadvantage to start with for it means you've dismissed option 3 out-of-hand.
That also leads to suggestions like those in TFA -- not to eliminate the searches, but to make them "less invasive". Too many people seem to think that the major issue here is nudity. A subset of people claim to be concerned about the radiation, but I think many of them are doing this to avoid sounding too radical about the real issue: for me (and I think many others), the issue is "unreasonable search" -- and as long as we continue to consent to the searches, they're allowed to do them.
Of course, you're free to fall in line and know your place. As for me, I'll speak with my wallet and contacting my representatives. I've already stopped flying unless the drive was more than 12 hours -- after all, 12 hours is close to break-even when you factor in flight time and security. (One one recent occasion I drove 500 miles and made it home before my flying colleagues.) I can and will stretch that to 24 hours, even though it inconveniences the hell out of me.
I'm just glad that the media is picking up on this issue. I only hope their attention span lasts longer than it takes for some administrator to soothe them by saying the searches will be "less invasive" from now on.
The software is a little spastic with the lighting. Seriously, if my lighting were that twitchy back when I did stage lighting for various bands, I never would have gotten a second gig.
Also have him disable automatically opening PDFs in his browser. This is how a lot of PDF exploits can easily find a way into a system - because it opens in the browser, a hidden iframe can allow malicious content in. Update the browser settings to ALWAYS save them to disk.
I'd hazard an uneducated guess that your random cell phone is connecting to a cell tower, and is doing what the system was built to handle. A repeater, on the other hand, is broadcasting its own 3g signal. I honestly don't know how much that could interfere with legitimate service as I don't know how efficient the repeaters really are, but it seems clear that it's a far different use case.
Slashdot Mirror
Is our children learning?
At least one is not.
What a curious definition of "Troll" - speaking the facts. Note hat I didn't say GPL was bad - only that it carries its own set of restrictions that must be weighed in deciding when to use it; and when to accept GPL'd source.
I've spent more time than I should have struggling to explain that concept effectively here. Well said indeed.
So, what device are you using to post this? And how did you get it without paying for it? Or is this not entertainment?
I love PR articles like this one. This is the kind of piece that future researchers can than use as a reference - since it appeared in a reputable newspaper, it's "proof" that such services are "coming back". Ultimately the companies offering this service are made to appear more legitimate to potential investors and partners -- even though readig the article shows no actual evidence of a "comeback" for deep packet inspection beyond the fact that a couple of companies are trying to get it moving. cf "Suits are back!"
Yay to innovation! Reinventing the wheel a thousand times, will of course speed up progress manifolds..
You realize that there are consequences to choosing the GPL, just as for any other choice in software development? One of those consequences is that you automatically exclude large portions of people and corporations from using your code. That may be what you want - on the other hand you seem to find it offensive. If it's a problem, use a less restrictive license*.
*(Says the person who's developing and maintaining a GPLv2 project.)
Look at the year over year numbers - fewer people have been flying since 2006. The visible signs of the economic depression didn't start until 2007/2008 - so that's not the only reason for the reduced numbers. Do you really think the loss of millions of flliers annually has nothing to do with the ever-increasing ridiculousness of TSA requirements?
By all means, vote with your wallet, but please be aware that it won't mean anytthing.
You can continue to vote with your wallet by paying to have your privacy (and potentially your dignity) taken away - while those of us who vote in the other direction continue to quietly accumulate in cost to the airlines.
This is supremely retarded.
Well, yeah.
As TFS says, it was just a single teacher...
I'd agree with the cat body language, but I've found that with dogs it can be just as much if not more so. My dogs are all trained to hand signals for the basic commands, and often take cues from posture alone Watching them interact with each other, it's much the same - sure there's some barking at play time, but you can see who's in charge by the way they interact non-verbally with each other.
No dog I've ever had in the family or known of has been able to open doors by using the handle, nor had a personality as strong as any of the cats we've had. Dogs can be social all they want, but they still act dumb, and I really don't think it's to fit in.
Yeah - dogs convince their owners to cut large holes in the door instead. I'd say that one's a wash...
That said, cats can be trained too - though perhaps not with a vocabulary as large as dogs. It just takes more patience.
*Speaking as owner of 3 dogs, 2 cats, and a number of past pets of both species...
It better be 100% free and work with txting blocked and even if you have no sim.
Yeah! It'd better! Or else... erm, or else what?
As long as an Android device is properly responding to onPause() and onResume() there is ZERO reason an Android app should be eating resources in the background.
"Resources" are not limited to just "UI resources" - they also include CPU, RAM, bandwidth, and interactions with integrated hardware. The very fact that an app continues running in the background means it consumes more resources than if it weren't. This is true on BB devices, and I assume Android and iOS as well.
Fair enough. I thought it implied in the context of the comment, but you didn't say any such thing.
Under 2.5? Try under 6-10 hours, especially at peak holiday travel time. On one occasion I drove to/from a site 10 hours away, and made it home before my colleagues who left via airplane at the same time. Further, if you DO elect to fly, what do you get? Waiting for TSA, waiting for late arrival/departure, hours of white noise, cramped and uncomfortable seating... and you PAY for this privilege?
It would also be "less objectionable" if we were not exposed to significant dose of ionizing radiation.
http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf
No, it wouldn't. As long as we are put under duress to forfeit our 4th amendment rights, it's not acceptable. Please stop muddying the issue - the question you raise is one that undoubtedly has a technical solution. The one that I raise does not.
I am embarrassed by people. Not because they're outraged about the scanners. But because it's over a little virtual nudity.
Worry about the incredible cost in hardware and training. Worry about some idiot cranking up the power, or a hardware flaw doing it for them. Worry about the infinite spiral of ineffective hoops in the security theater. Worry about what you're going to have to supper.
But, good grief, stop with the omg-naked and think-of-the-children crap.
The nudity is a straw man. The real issue is the 4th amendment. Don't let anybody tell you otherwise - and if you have an opportunity to correct someone (especially media reports) then do so.
For those of you not familiar, knitting needles are often up to seven (or more) inches long; they can be made of wood, plastic, or metal. A sturdy needle can also slide nicely into soft tissue without any major difficulties assuming the wielder is strong enough.
But hey, at least it's not like they let the REAL deadly things on board. Like factory-sealed bottles of soda, and similar threats.
Oops - linked to the wrong section. THis is where I meant to link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Consent
My wife and I were talking about this yesterday. We would rather be one of the many thousands of people a screener sees "naked" instead of one of the people being publicly fondled.
That's pretty much how they're counting on you thinking. Naturally a public groping is less appealing than a quasi-anonymous screening. However, your tacit agreement that this type of search is necessary in the first place puts you at a disadvantage to start with for it means you've dismissed option 3 out-of-hand.
That also leads to suggestions like those in TFA -- not to eliminate the searches, but to make them "less invasive". Too many people seem to think that the major issue here is nudity. A subset of people claim to be concerned about the radiation, but I think many of them are doing this to avoid sounding too radical about the real issue: for me (and I think many others), the issue is "unreasonable search" -- and as long as we continue to consent to the searches, they're allowed to do them.
Of course, you're free to fall in line and know your place. As for me, I'll speak with my wallet and contacting my representatives. I've already stopped flying unless the drive was more than 12 hours -- after all, 12 hours is close to break-even when you factor in flight time and security. (One one recent occasion I drove 500 miles and made it home before my flying colleagues.) I can and will stretch that to 24 hours, even though it inconveniences the hell out of me.
I'm just glad that the media is picking up on this issue. I only hope their attention span lasts longer than it takes for some administrator to soothe them by saying the searches will be "less invasive" from now on.
Cool, thanks for the info
The software is a little spastic with the lighting. Seriously, if my lighting were that twitchy back when I did stage lighting for various bands, I never would have gotten a second gig.
Also have him disable automatically opening PDFs in his browser. This is how a lot of PDF exploits can easily find a way into a system - because it opens in the browser, a hidden iframe can allow malicious content in. Update the browser settings to ALWAYS save them to disk.
I'd hazard an uneducated guess that your random cell phone is connecting to a cell tower, and is doing what the system was built to handle. A repeater, on the other hand, is broadcasting its own 3g signal. I honestly don't know how much that could interfere with legitimate service as I don't know how efficient the repeaters really are, but it seems clear that it's a far different use case.