Depending upon what you're willing to lose over this, this is exactly the sort of thing that Wikileaks is for. Unfortunately, it's a pretty good bet that you'd end up blacklisted from the industry for doing it, as I suspect that they've got much better measures in place to figure out who leaked the code.
It's probably not that inconvenient, USB DVD drives and external hard drives aren't exactly that hard to come by for the purposes of installing things.
The GP poster is right. It's one thing to not use the word nigger to refer to a person, and quite another when used in a discussion where it's relevant. It's difficult to have a meaningful discussion of race when people are censoring things out. Nobody in those sorts of discussions is genuinely completely without fault, those that censor themselves just hamper the possibility of making progress.
To some extent in depends on the particular person. Mark Twain was noted for considering the Southerners for being less civilized than Africans. And his use of the word nigger in its place in the books was necessary for the purposes of portraying the story accurately. It would be a bit like writing a story with a Klan member as a character without the use of any racial epithets or nasty things to say about Jewish people.
It's not so much that it really depends on the author so much as how and why the author is using the language. Some cases of censorship are more egregious than others are.
As they hint at in that rebuttal - As a mathematician and someone of a scientific mind, I would just like to see *ONE* good test that conclusively shuts people up. Trouble is, no good test will report a false result and thus you'll never get the psychic / UFO / religion factions to even participate, let alone agree on the method of testing because they would have to accept its findings.
This is rich, a mathematician lecturing the rest of us on science and getting it wrong. Psychics, UFOs and religion haven't been disproven, the lack of evidence in support is not the same thing as having enough evidence to conclusively prove that they don't exist. Sure the likelihood of those hypotheses being correct is somewhere between quite unlikely and completely impossible, but given the amount we don't know about the universe it's way too soon to suggest that those ideas aren't valid on some level to some extent in some way, even if just as a proxy for something that is real and observable.
The problem is that weak studies like this which completely ignore what is a few reasonable statistical tests without sound reason is just going to undermine the research that might come up with something.
Given that statisticians make in order to use their formulae, I don't think that they or anybody using those methods should be getting too sanctimonious about it. There are definitely situations where it breaks down, and considering the lack of justification for some of those assumptions, it's going to have issues at time.
Also, observer state problems really make it hard to prove/disprove a lot of those sorts of ideas, if you're not really careful in how you construct the experiment you can totally blow any chance of coming to a reasonable conclusion.
I'd go for ignorance. The write up I saw was pretty dubious and at that point nobody had been able to replicate the findings. Additionally, the effect they were claiming was so weak that it would happen by random chance frequently, and I don't recall seeing any indication of the confidence interval or that jazz.
Right, but there was also a problem where nobody else has been able to replicate the findings. And the difference itself in the hit rate didn't vary substantively from the margin for error. Meaning that the result was weak enough that it was easily just a random occurrence.
It's not a surprise and it's really necessary. The contract itself is chump change for both MS and Google, but what's really at stake is whether or not the federal government needs to offer Google a chance to compete on contracts. As well as a chance to further its strides into the enterprise market for office software.
There is some argument over whether or not Google can provide what the agency needs in terms of security, but I don't think that the agency will be allowed to dismiss Google outright without giving them at least a chance to submit a bid and proposal.
Had, Google been allowed to bid and been turned down, it's unlikely that they would be filing suit.
No it doesn't. It means that they were able to successfully argue to the judge that the injunction was necessary. It may be dismissed before a court case takes case, but the injunction was granted so that there would be something to sue over later on.
The irony there is that individuals like Sen. Coburn go apeshit over the wasting of a few million dollars on a multibillion dollar budget item even as getting equally worked up when suggested that he should take it out of defense or raise taxes on the rich.
Pretty much anything in the US budget for less than about $15b isn't worth worrying about unless it's really easily pruned. And certainly anything under $1b isn't. We're going bankrupt on the huge expenditures for no gain, such as the DoD ridiculously huge budget and the various tax breaks to people that already have mansions.
So, shall I add it to the list of reasons not to upgrade my Nexus One to the Nexus S? Seems to me that all this wireless payment stuff isn't entirely baked.
That's not entirely the CFO's fault, a lot of that has to do with the US tax code. If the capital gains rate for investors didn't start to kick in until 2 years down the road and took another year to fully kick in, you'd see longer holding periods. Also, if the short term tax rate was higher for individuals holding for less than a month.
As it is there's very little reason for corporate executives to think down the road by more than a couple quarters, as chances are the people who own shares now won't still own any much beyond that.
I know you're joking, but these days we have more trouble with the opposite problem. White folks moving into those neighborhoods and displacing the minority groups to the suburbs by pricing them out of the market.
Most Amtrak trains, at least in the western US have double storied sleeper cars. I'm not sure about the east coast, they might not due to height restrictions in the tunnels.
That depends how you choose to implement it. Streaming is likely to be one of the least efficient ways of doing that. It's more likely that rather than streaming the desktop, all you'd be streaming would be the commands, mouse events and the results. Allowing the local client to do the actual rendering. Which for things other than games and such would be a lot faster.
Depending upon the implementation, that's not necessarily such a bad thing. One of the problems with OSes is that once you've paid for it, that's the revenue they've got for patching it and providing the next upgrade. Whereas with a subscription model they could provide continuous upgrades for the same price.
And probably even allow XP users to keep using it indefinitely, or until the number of users gets to be small enough that it's not possible to continue support.
Of course there is the downside of not being able to use the OS after the subscription expires, but it's not really worthwhile to dismiss out of hand. It's also something that would work well alongside the more traditional model.
They are profitable now, that's one of the reasons why Sony started to remove chips from the PS3 pretty much from the start, to get the cost down under what they were selling it for.
But, really, if people buy them and want to use them for Linux then Sony shouldn't be allowed to do anything about it. If I buy a console then I own it, and should be able to do whatever I like with it. Provided it doesn't screw up anybody else's experience. And even then with the minimum restraint necessary to solve the problem.
I think it's a pretty good bet that the DoD already has the key necessary to do whatever they like with it. Whether Sony caved in secret or they just had the NSA crack it is sort of a moot point.
You've probably got a third option, Satellite, and it's probably more useful than powerline will be.
The bigger issue is that we don't have the ISP as a public utility and we don't have the ISP as a free market either. Around here Qwest charges roughly $50 a month for 5mpbs but in some markets they supposedly offer 40mbps for $55 a month. Which doesn't make sense from a technical standpoint as I'm within a few short miles of a major Internet Exchange Point.
At this point, the connection speeds available haven't changed in over a decade and despite vague promises by Qwest to do something about it, they only bother to make those promises when the city starts talking about creating its own fiber network. Personally, I think we should take away their right of way and contract it out to somebody that actually cares to offer the service we deserve.
It's not a good practice, and it's definitely not something that the building codes of the present and future are going to allow. It's similar to gas meters. Around here they were placed inside for whatever reason, that only changed a couple years ago when the utility went through and replaced their mains and lines with high pressure ones. At that time they came in and put in their new meter outside.
One of the big problems is that without the government subsidizing it, they typically have to wait for the equipment to amortize before they replace it.
That all depends, here our electricity is provided by a public utility. But if you're in a part of the country where it was deregulated and/or the utility is private, then you could see all sorts of problems like that.
Unless there's been radical changes to it in recent years the answer is definitely not. One of the problems with it is that it doesn't handle going through transformers very well, if at all. And if you figure out how to get it to go through the transformers then you've got a serious security problem on your hands.
All in all, I wouldn't expect this to take off any time soon.
Slashdot Mirror
Depending upon what you're willing to lose over this, this is exactly the sort of thing that Wikileaks is for. Unfortunately, it's a pretty good bet that you'd end up blacklisted from the industry for doing it, as I suspect that they've got much better measures in place to figure out who leaked the code.
It's probably not that inconvenient, USB DVD drives and external hard drives aren't exactly that hard to come by for the purposes of installing things.
The GP poster is right. It's one thing to not use the word nigger to refer to a person, and quite another when used in a discussion where it's relevant. It's difficult to have a meaningful discussion of race when people are censoring things out. Nobody in those sorts of discussions is genuinely completely without fault, those that censor themselves just hamper the possibility of making progress.
To some extent in depends on the particular person. Mark Twain was noted for considering the Southerners for being less civilized than Africans. And his use of the word nigger in its place in the books was necessary for the purposes of portraying the story accurately. It would be a bit like writing a story with a Klan member as a character without the use of any racial epithets or nasty things to say about Jewish people.
It's not so much that it really depends on the author so much as how and why the author is using the language. Some cases of censorship are more egregious than others are.
As they hint at in that rebuttal - As a mathematician and someone of a scientific mind, I would just like to see *ONE* good test that conclusively shuts people up. Trouble is, no good test will report a false result and thus you'll never get the psychic / UFO / religion factions to even participate, let alone agree on the method of testing because they would have to accept its findings.
This is rich, a mathematician lecturing the rest of us on science and getting it wrong. Psychics, UFOs and religion haven't been disproven, the lack of evidence in support is not the same thing as having enough evidence to conclusively prove that they don't exist. Sure the likelihood of those hypotheses being correct is somewhere between quite unlikely and completely impossible, but given the amount we don't know about the universe it's way too soon to suggest that those ideas aren't valid on some level to some extent in some way, even if just as a proxy for something that is real and observable.
The problem is that weak studies like this which completely ignore what is a few reasonable statistical tests without sound reason is just going to undermine the research that might come up with something.
Given that statisticians make in order to use their formulae, I don't think that they or anybody using those methods should be getting too sanctimonious about it. There are definitely situations where it breaks down, and considering the lack of justification for some of those assumptions, it's going to have issues at time.
Also, observer state problems really make it hard to prove/disprove a lot of those sorts of ideas, if you're not really careful in how you construct the experiment you can totally blow any chance of coming to a reasonable conclusion.
I'd go for ignorance. The write up I saw was pretty dubious and at that point nobody had been able to replicate the findings. Additionally, the effect they were claiming was so weak that it would happen by random chance frequently, and I don't recall seeing any indication of the confidence interval or that jazz.
Right, but there was also a problem where nobody else has been able to replicate the findings. And the difference itself in the hit rate didn't vary substantively from the margin for error. Meaning that the result was weak enough that it was easily just a random occurrence.
It's not a surprise and it's really necessary. The contract itself is chump change for both MS and Google, but what's really at stake is whether or not the federal government needs to offer Google a chance to compete on contracts. As well as a chance to further its strides into the enterprise market for office software.
There is some argument over whether or not Google can provide what the agency needs in terms of security, but I don't think that the agency will be allowed to dismiss Google outright without giving them at least a chance to submit a bid and proposal.
Had, Google been allowed to bid and been turned down, it's unlikely that they would be filing suit.
No it doesn't. It means that they were able to successfully argue to the judge that the injunction was necessary. It may be dismissed before a court case takes case, but the injunction was granted so that there would be something to sue over later on.
The irony there is that individuals like Sen. Coburn go apeshit over the wasting of a few million dollars on a multibillion dollar budget item even as getting equally worked up when suggested that he should take it out of defense or raise taxes on the rich.
Pretty much anything in the US budget for less than about $15b isn't worth worrying about unless it's really easily pruned. And certainly anything under $1b isn't. We're going bankrupt on the huge expenditures for no gain, such as the DoD ridiculously huge budget and the various tax breaks to people that already have mansions.
So, shall I add it to the list of reasons not to upgrade my Nexus One to the Nexus S? Seems to me that all this wireless payment stuff isn't entirely baked.
Yawn, let me know when they're carving up the Bud Bowl.
NFC isn't RFID. It's RFID plus a simple extension to allow it to both read and be read. Which isn't RFID, it's several steps more scary that RFID.
You're point about the name change is apt though.
It's not until they loser your records like TD Ameritrade did mine, or are unable to find a file vital for handling an account.
That's not entirely the CFO's fault, a lot of that has to do with the US tax code. If the capital gains rate for investors didn't start to kick in until 2 years down the road and took another year to fully kick in, you'd see longer holding periods. Also, if the short term tax rate was higher for individuals holding for less than a month.
As it is there's very little reason for corporate executives to think down the road by more than a couple quarters, as chances are the people who own shares now won't still own any much beyond that.
I know you're joking, but these days we have more trouble with the opposite problem. White folks moving into those neighborhoods and displacing the minority groups to the suburbs by pricing them out of the market.
Most Amtrak trains, at least in the western US have double storied sleeper cars. I'm not sure about the east coast, they might not due to height restrictions in the tunnels.
That depends how you choose to implement it. Streaming is likely to be one of the least efficient ways of doing that. It's more likely that rather than streaming the desktop, all you'd be streaming would be the commands, mouse events and the results. Allowing the local client to do the actual rendering. Which for things other than games and such would be a lot faster.
Depending upon the implementation, that's not necessarily such a bad thing. One of the problems with OSes is that once you've paid for it, that's the revenue they've got for patching it and providing the next upgrade. Whereas with a subscription model they could provide continuous upgrades for the same price.
And probably even allow XP users to keep using it indefinitely, or until the number of users gets to be small enough that it's not possible to continue support.
Of course there is the downside of not being able to use the OS after the subscription expires, but it's not really worthwhile to dismiss out of hand. It's also something that would work well alongside the more traditional model.
They are profitable now, that's one of the reasons why Sony started to remove chips from the PS3 pretty much from the start, to get the cost down under what they were selling it for.
But, really, if people buy them and want to use them for Linux then Sony shouldn't be allowed to do anything about it. If I buy a console then I own it, and should be able to do whatever I like with it. Provided it doesn't screw up anybody else's experience. And even then with the minimum restraint necessary to solve the problem.
I think it's a pretty good bet that the DoD already has the key necessary to do whatever they like with it. Whether Sony caved in secret or they just had the NSA crack it is sort of a moot point.
You've probably got a third option, Satellite, and it's probably more useful than powerline will be.
The bigger issue is that we don't have the ISP as a public utility and we don't have the ISP as a free market either. Around here Qwest charges roughly $50 a month for 5mpbs but in some markets they supposedly offer 40mbps for $55 a month. Which doesn't make sense from a technical standpoint as I'm within a few short miles of a major Internet Exchange Point.
At this point, the connection speeds available haven't changed in over a decade and despite vague promises by Qwest to do something about it, they only bother to make those promises when the city starts talking about creating its own fiber network. Personally, I think we should take away their right of way and contract it out to somebody that actually cares to offer the service we deserve.
It's not a good practice, and it's definitely not something that the building codes of the present and future are going to allow. It's similar to gas meters. Around here they were placed inside for whatever reason, that only changed a couple years ago when the utility went through and replaced their mains and lines with high pressure ones. At that time they came in and put in their new meter outside.
One of the big problems is that without the government subsidizing it, they typically have to wait for the equipment to amortize before they replace it.
That all depends, here our electricity is provided by a public utility. But if you're in a part of the country where it was deregulated and/or the utility is private, then you could see all sorts of problems like that.
Unless there's been radical changes to it in recent years the answer is definitely not. One of the problems with it is that it doesn't handle going through transformers very well, if at all. And if you figure out how to get it to go through the transformers then you've got a serious security problem on your hands.
All in all, I wouldn't expect this to take off any time soon.