If I remember correctly Google said they would keep the data until the Canadian authorities had stated they had finished examining it to determine what laws were breached. Once the evidence had been evaluated and they get authorization, they will delete it. Basically they are saying they won't delete evidence of a possible wrong doing until the appropriate authorities say it is OK. This means that they have to hold on to the data collected in each country until they get permission from that country's authorities. Sounds like and administrative nightmare.
Its also a perfect example of how the laws don't reflect how the technology was designed to work. WAPs are designed to handle two situations:
I want to share with everybody, a.k.a "Open WAP"; and
I want to share with only a select few, a.k.a. "Encrypted or closed WAP".
From the technology design point of view if you run across an open WAP then you "know" they want to share. If its closed then you know they don't. I agree that it gets very grey when you knowingly start to collect user ids and passwords. If its an automated download of everything that is available, sort of like a wget, then you can argue the stuff should have been secured.
The laws try to protect the group of people who are too lazy to learn how and why you should secure a WAP as well as your data. The problem is how to differentiate between those open WAPs that people want to share from those where people don't.
All public key encryption systems practically require both parties to have both public and private keys. Its true that you could send a "secret" message by using a public key and only someone with the matching private key could decrypt it. The problem is that in that scenario the receiver can't authenticate who the sender is. The way around this is to first encrypt the message with the sender's private key and then with the receiver's private key. Only someone with the receiver's private key can decrypt the outer "envelope" of the message and get the message still encrypted with the sender's private key. They then use the sender's public key to get the clear text. The receiver therefore "knows" that only the sender could have sent the message. Its generally used as part of a digital signature for the message.
Since public encryption/decryption is computationally intensive most systems use a private key system to encrypt the message and a public key system to encrypt the one time use private key.
Lookup symmetric and asymmetric cryptographic systems for more info.
You can't stop evolution, you can only have some ( albeit small) effect on the conditions that the population is adapting to. The more "dumb proof" you make products the more the environment favours "dumbness". In effect the "dumb" population has a competitive advantage and we therefore are selecting for dumbness.
Reminds me of an idea I heard of several years ago. During the middle ages, the first son was the designated heir, the brightest of the left-over sons and daughters were sent to join various religious organizations that practised celibacy. In effect the church was dumbing down the population while selecting its own members from the brightest of what was left.
Reminds me of a company I worked for. They had a data centre divided into 5 zones, each zone had a UPS. Each zone was connected to the neighbouring zone with a transfer switch and each UPS could handle 2 zones until the diesel generators kicked in. Each year for 5 years management decided that the cost of the downtime to do annual maintenance was too high so it wasn't done. Outside power finally goes away and 4 of the five zones stay up. The investigation determined that the battery ( natch the power is out) powered transfer switches on both neighbouring zones failed because the battery failed. Turns out putting in new batteries was part of the annual maintenance check list and they had a shelf life of 4+ years.
How about the company with the diesel generator that has 5 hours of fuel. They test it for 1 hour every year. On year 5 the power goes out and the generator runs for one hour before running out of fuel. Seems the test procedure didn't include refuelling the generator.
The point is that even with what you think is the best of planning and testing some time stuff happens.
There are tens of millions of lines of code in a variety languages that help run the world that were written and are maintained by hard working programmers who have never used C. There is also a lot of code that is written in C. It depends on where and what you are talking about.
The reality of the situation is that in industry there are a large number of camps. Some have huge repositories of code that is probably older than the OP that is mission critical and is still chugging along very well thank you very much. There are other places where the latest and greatest objected oriented, web based language invented at a University is the vogue. You have everything in between.
Saying one particular language is that basis of computing displays a very limited knowledge of the wide breadth and depth of computing both in industry and academia.
Now back to the original topic. What language(s) to use to teach beginning computing.
There are two basic methods. One is to teach the nitty gritty machine level first and then move up to higher and higher levels of abstraction. I.E. Bits, Nibbles, Bytes et al. The second is to start at a higher level of abstraction, teach the higher level concepts, such as iterative loops, without getting bogged down with the minutiae of what's under the hood. With the second method you can get more specific if you need to.
I would argue that most people will get bored with method 1 and have no real need for it. Method two does require selecting the level of abstraction you want to start at, you tailor the selection to the group you are trying to teach. People who argue C are simply picking a lower level of abstraction than people who argue for Java, either can be "right" or "wrong" depending on the people in the class and the objectives of the class.
I also think that a good grounding in computational theory and the study of algorithms is a good idea. If you know why a bubble sort on a 1 million entry list is a bad idea then it doesn't really matter what language you decide to not implement it in:-)
If it has a rocket engine then isn't it a rocket. If so the "land" speed record has a maximum velocity of whatever escape velocity is while still "touching" the ground.
Lets see, I can help these guys develop a new use for my line of wonky mobo's, get favourable mention all over the world on places like slashdot and reap the benefit of every geek with excess cash and a yen for a super computer or I can stand back and maybe they find someone else who has a "better" board or they develop their own.
Sounds like just the thing for vampires.
I've always wondered what the "holy hand grenade" would do to the walking dead, seems to have the correct ( blessed) components and should do the appropriate amount of violence ( blow up with shrapnel).
Every year I see hundreds of calenders that stop after anywhere from 12 to 18 months and no one gets upset. Why does anyone get upset just because the Mayan calender ends at a certain date? It was probably one of two things
1. Hey George, is that the biggest rock you have in the yard, I'll only be able to carve up to 2012? Yah that's it I won't get another shipment for another 6 months, but hey I've got a good deal on these pocket rocks, I'll throw in a dozen for only....; or
2. You want how much for over weight shipping!!! That's crazy, I'm going to get a smaller rock, so what if it only goes out to 2012, we can carve a new one a couple of centuries before this one runs out.
I would guess that some sort of file is created, how else do they keep track of and coordinate the progress and work done to satisfy the request? Said file would have to be associated with the original requester since they have to know who to send the results to. - duh
Years ago one of my co-workers was asked by management to do a global password change on the systems (s)he supported. It was to be done late Friday afternoon for the "usual" reasons. The systems were such that you couldn't just expire them so they were individually reset to new ones. (S)He did this and then put post-its on everyone's monitor to let them know what their new password was when they came in on Monday. Shortly thereafter there was a new global password change.
Depends on what you mean by Zero G. If you mean there is no ( or very little) gravity at your location then you are out of luck with all of this nonsense. If you mean free fall, I.E. you are accelerating at the same value as the local gravity field then the first part of sky diving before you reach terminal velocity would be pretty close as would a diving air plane, being in orbit and some roller coasters.
I wonder what would happen if you implemented the software so that whether it obeyed the various DRM related flags was a matter of either execution flags or a settings file. You would be distributing software and settings that obey the "rules", if those pesky users want to change the settings to do something else then that's their problem.
A fireproof lock box is designed to save paper from fire. It is air tight and lined with a material that absorbs oxygen when heated. That's why you are supposed to cool them down before opening ( hot paper + fresh air = burnt paper). They won't protect plastic, magnetic or electronic media.
Can we not call it timeshift. Sounds way cooler than it really is.
I don't remember anyone saying "I'll use my VCR to timeshift all my viewing to a more convenient time".
I do.
The original usage was for using a VCR to record a show that you watched later. Cable companies started misusing it to mean showing the same stuff at different times so they could claim you were getting more stuff than you actually were. Basically they were marketing to the 12:00 flashers.
I always kept off site copies of my performance reviews. Asking for a copy of your HR file is also a good idea.
From the sounds of your problem description the negative statements are from an isolated individual so penalizing the whole organization is not professional. Most of the "leave immediately" advice is unprofessional, it may be legal but thats not the point.
Once you have done paragraph one and assuming paragraph two is correct, discuss the situation with the person, preferably with someone you trust and/or an HR rep present and explain how you interpreted what they said. Ask if you have misunderstood, take notes and or record the meeting. Once that is cleared up and assuming they still want you around, continue to do the best job you can and make sure you leave the company on as good terms as you can.
If you really want to slap the turkey then have their manager present as well. The sheer fact that the person said something that could be easily construed as blackmail is very serious and can only be dealt with when the people responsible for the person are involved. If I had a manger make such threats I would want to know immediately so that proper training and incentive could be provided to make sure they never do it again.
Its not the CRTC that came up with this admittedly stupid idea, its Canadian "content" ( I.E ACTRA) producers that have come up with this.
Essentially they want more money given them for stuff that nobody is willing to pay them for in the first place. The idea is to somehow get money to produce so called Canadian content and throw it on a server in the hope that someone will actually request it.
One idea for getting the money is to get the ISPs to give money, which of course means all their customers are paying to produce something that only some will actually look at... maybe... sometimes. The ISPs are fighting this one, since they aren't broadcasters. There are other ideas as well.
But wait there's more, ISPs want to do traffic shaping to the benefit of content providers who have paid the ISPs for this benefit, much like radio and TV companies give benefits to advertisers. That means that in the case where the ISPs get to charge someone and keep the money they are broadcasters, when they have to give the collected money to someone else then they aren't.
Don't you love it when lawyers get involved with what should be a technical problem?
I don't understand the logic since there are no "broadcasters" on the internet, there are servers and clients. If people want to see the content then people will use their clients to request it from the servers. As far as I am concerned I am paying for a certain amount of bandwidth every month, what I do with it is my business and I don't want to subsidize something I'm not consuming.
So quicken gets security related data back while doing something and doesn't "gracefully" ignore it. Instead it lets the user know that something is wrong and refuses to allow anything happen. Isn't this what its supposed to do?
"Gracefully" ignoring this type of thing while potentially convenient strikes me as somewhat like ignoring buffer overruns. We all know how convenient that security related decision has been.
Actually the bandwidth of a DVD is excellent, its the latency that is a problem. Picture a postal truck full of DVDs, lots of bits but the round trip time is bit high.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs there was an attempt to recreate the extinct species of cow called an Auroch. The idea was to identify currently existing cattle that had partial Auroch ancestry and breed them, selecting for Auroch characteristics. Essentially you were building a gene pool that contained all the necessary genes mixed in with others, running everything through a filter and trying to just get the ones you wanted. They were partially successful
Slashdot Mirror
If I remember correctly Google said they would keep the data until the Canadian authorities had stated they had finished examining it to determine what laws were breached. Once the evidence had been evaluated and they get authorization, they will delete it. Basically they are saying they won't delete evidence of a possible wrong doing until the appropriate authorities say it is OK. This means that they have to hold on to the data collected in each country until they get permission from that country's authorities. Sounds like and administrative nightmare.
Its also a perfect example of how the laws don't reflect how the technology was designed to work. WAPs are designed to handle two situations:
From the technology design point of view if you run across an open WAP then you "know" they want to share. If its closed then you know they don't. I agree that it gets very grey when you knowingly start to collect user ids and passwords. If its an automated download of everything that is available, sort of like a wget, then you can argue the stuff should have been secured.
The laws try to protect the group of people who are too lazy to learn how and why you should secure a WAP as well as your data. The problem is how to differentiate between those open WAPs that people want to share from those where people don't.
All public key encryption systems practically require both parties to have both public and private keys. Its true that you could send a "secret" message by using a public key and only someone with the matching private key could decrypt it. The problem is that in that scenario the receiver can't authenticate who the sender is. The way around this is to first encrypt the message with the sender's private key and then with the receiver's private key. Only someone with the receiver's private key can decrypt the outer "envelope" of the message and get the message still encrypted with the sender's private key. They then use the sender's public key to get the clear text. The receiver therefore "knows" that only the sender could have sent the message. Its generally used as part of a digital signature for the message.
Since public encryption/decryption is computationally intensive most systems use a private key system to encrypt the message and a public key system to encrypt the one time use private key.
Lookup symmetric and asymmetric cryptographic systems for more info.
You can't stop evolution, you can only have some ( albeit small) effect on the conditions that the population is adapting to. The more "dumb proof" you make products the more the environment favours "dumbness". In effect the "dumb" population has a competitive advantage and we therefore are selecting for dumbness.
Reminds me of an idea I heard of several years ago. During the middle ages, the first son was the designated heir, the brightest of the left-over sons and daughters were sent to join various religious organizations that practised celibacy. In effect the church was dumbing down the population while selecting its own members from the brightest of what was left.
Reminds me of a company I worked for. They had a data centre divided into 5 zones, each zone had a UPS. Each zone was connected to the neighbouring zone with a transfer switch and each UPS could handle 2 zones until the diesel generators kicked in. Each year for 5 years management decided that the cost of the downtime to do annual maintenance was too high so it wasn't done. Outside power finally goes away and 4 of the five zones stay up. The investigation determined that the battery ( natch the power is out) powered transfer switches on both neighbouring zones failed because the battery failed. Turns out putting in new batteries was part of the annual maintenance check list and they had a shelf life of 4+ years.
How about the company with the diesel generator that has 5 hours of fuel. They test it for 1 hour every year. On year 5 the power goes out and the generator runs for one hour before running out of fuel. Seems the test procedure didn't include refuelling the generator.
The point is that even with what you think is the best of planning and testing some time stuff happens.
I'll deny it it just to show it can be done.
There are tens of millions of lines of code in a variety languages that help run the world that were written and are maintained by hard working programmers who have never used C. There is also a lot of code that is written in C. It depends on where and what you are talking about.
The reality of the situation is that in industry there are a large number of camps. Some have huge repositories of code that is probably older than the OP that is mission critical and is still chugging along very well thank you very much. There are other places where the latest and greatest objected oriented, web based language invented at a University is the vogue. You have everything in between.
Saying one particular language is that basis of computing displays a very limited knowledge of the wide breadth and depth of computing both in industry and academia.
Now back to the original topic. What language(s) to use to teach beginning computing.
There are two basic methods. One is to teach the nitty gritty machine level first and then move up to higher and higher levels of abstraction. I.E. Bits, Nibbles, Bytes et al. The second is to start at a higher level of abstraction, teach the higher level concepts, such as iterative loops, without getting bogged down with the minutiae of what's under the hood. With the second method you can get more specific if you need to.
I would argue that most people will get bored with method 1 and have no real need for it. Method two does require selecting the level of abstraction you want to start at, you tailor the selection to the group you are trying to teach. People who argue C are simply picking a lower level of abstraction than people who argue for Java, either can be "right" or "wrong" depending on the people in the class and the objectives of the class.
I also think that a good grounding in computational theory and the study of algorithms is a good idea. If you know why a bubble sort on a 1 million entry list is a bad idea then it doesn't really matter what language you decide to not implement it in :-)
If it has a rocket engine then isn't it a rocket. If so the "land" speed record has a maximum velocity of whatever escape velocity is while still "touching" the ground.
Mobo Manufacturer
Lets see, I can help these guys develop a new use for my line of wonky mobo's, get favourable mention all over the world on places like slashdot and reap the benefit of every geek with excess cash and a yen for a super computer or I can stand back and maybe they find someone else who has a "better" board or they develop their own.
Hmm lets think on this one
Sounds like just the thing for vampires. I've always wondered what the "holy hand grenade" would do to the walking dead, seems to have the correct ( blessed) components and should do the appropriate amount of violence ( blow up with shrapnel).
I would guess that some sort of file is created, how else do they keep track of and coordinate the progress and work done to satisfy the request? Said file would have to be associated with the original requester since they have to know who to send the results to. - duh
Years ago one of my co-workers was asked by management to do a global password change on the systems (s)he supported. It was to be done late Friday afternoon for the "usual" reasons. The systems were such that you couldn't just expire them so they were individually reset to new ones. (S)He did this and then put post-its on everyone's monitor to let them know what their new password was when they came in on Monday. Shortly thereafter there was a new global password change.
Depends on what you mean by Zero G. If you mean there is no ( or very little) gravity at your location then you are out of luck with all of this nonsense. If you mean free fall, I.E. you are accelerating at the same value as the local gravity field then the first part of sky diving before you reach terminal velocity would be pretty close as would a diving air plane, being in orbit and some roller coasters.
I wonder what would happen if you implemented the software so that whether it obeyed the various DRM related flags was a matter of either execution flags or a settings file. You would be distributing software and settings that obey the "rules", if those pesky users want to change the settings to do something else then that's their problem.
A fireproof lock box is designed to save paper from fire. It is air tight and lined with a material that absorbs oxygen when heated. That's why you are supposed to cool them down before opening ( hot paper + fresh air = burnt paper). They won't protect plastic, magnetic or electronic media.
Great now robo cop HAS to stop for donuts every so often.
Obviously this was the first know case of aBIHALO drop - Bat Initiated High Altitude Low Opening
Can we not call it timeshift. Sounds way cooler than it really is.
I don't remember anyone saying "I'll use my VCR to timeshift all my viewing to a more convenient time".
I do. The original usage was for using a VCR to record a show that you watched later. Cable companies started misusing it to mean showing the same stuff at different times so they could claim you were getting more stuff than you actually were. Basically they were marketing to the 12:00 flashers.
" What I'd like to know is, whose job is it to put the magnets on?"
Whoever they are they aren't paid enough.
I always kept off site copies of my performance reviews. Asking for a copy of your HR file is also a good idea.
From the sounds of your problem description the negative statements are from an isolated individual so penalizing the whole organization is not professional. Most of the "leave immediately" advice is unprofessional, it may be legal but thats not the point.
Once you have done paragraph one and assuming paragraph two is correct, discuss the situation with the person, preferably with someone you trust and/or an HR rep present and explain how you interpreted what they said. Ask if you have misunderstood, take notes and or record the meeting. Once that is cleared up and assuming they still want you around, continue to do the best job you can and make sure you leave the company on as good terms as you can.
If you really want to slap the turkey then have their manager present as well. The sheer fact that the person said something that could be easily construed as blackmail is very serious and can only be dealt with when the people responsible for the person are involved. If I had a manger make such threats I would want to know immediately so that proper training and incentive could be provided to make sure they never do it again.
If you feel you need legal advice, see a lawyer.
Its not the CRTC that came up with this admittedly stupid idea, its Canadian "content" ( I.E ACTRA) producers that have come up with this.
Essentially they want more money given them for stuff that nobody is willing to pay them for in the first place. The idea is to somehow get money to produce so called Canadian content and throw it on a server in the hope that someone will actually request it.
One idea for getting the money is to get the ISPs to give money, which of course means all their customers are paying to produce something that only some will actually look at ... maybe ... sometimes. The ISPs are fighting this one, since they aren't broadcasters. There are other ideas as well.
But wait there's more, ISPs want to do traffic shaping to the benefit of content providers who have paid the ISPs for this benefit, much like radio and TV companies give benefits to advertisers. That means that in the case where the ISPs get to charge someone and keep the money they are broadcasters, when they have to give the collected money to someone else then they aren't.
Don't you love it when lawyers get involved with what should be a technical problem?
I don't understand the logic since there are no "broadcasters" on the internet, there are servers and clients. If people want to see the content then people will use their clients to request it from the servers. As far as I am concerned I am paying for a certain amount of bandwidth every month, what I do with it is my business and I don't want to subsidize something I'm not consuming.
If I were an investor I'd be satisfied with knowing it was > 10%, how much bigger is gravy.
So quicken gets security related data back while doing something and doesn't "gracefully" ignore it. Instead it lets the user know that something is wrong and refuses to allow anything happen. Isn't this what its supposed to do?
"Gracefully" ignoring this type of thing while potentially convenient strikes me as somewhat like ignoring buffer overruns. We all know how convenient that security related decision has been.
Actually the bandwidth of a DVD is excellent, its the latency that is a problem. Picture a postal truck full of DVDs, lots of bits but the round trip time is bit high.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs there was an attempt to recreate the extinct species of cow called an Auroch. The idea was to identify currently existing cattle that had partial Auroch ancestry and breed them, selecting for Auroch characteristics. Essentially you were building a gene pool that contained all the necessary genes mixed in with others, running everything through a filter and trying to just get the ones you wanted. They were partially successful