Problem is, banks can't just say "you're too stupid to not fuck up, here do this and it'll be less likely". But they can hint at it.
Banks aren't the ones with the security problems here. People with cracked PCs are handing over the key, and surprised when the lock is open. I think a bank could get away with it, but with some good marketing. I'm not a marketer (thank God) but something along the lines of "do you know your computer is safe? Use this disk instead, we know it's safe". But less insulting.
We take these sorts of catastrophic failures more seriously. If my data is on my computer, I know that I'm responsible for my own damn data - if I don't back it up, it's my own fault. But more importantly, when I lose everything, you don't care. If I'm holding millions of peoples' data, you suddenly care a lot more - especially if you're one of the people.
My point is, with all that data they damn well better be backing up properly, because it's out of my control. If I don't back up properly, I had the option and (hopefully) know the trade-offs.
Typical News Corp. Look at the recent Faux News bits about the tea parties - "OMG ITS SUCH A NATIONWIDE GRASSROOTS PROTEST!"
The entirety of his business model, it seems, is to come up with something and go on about how big a deal it is, until it actually becomes a semi-big deal.
George Smith is an alum of my school. Kind of a big deal here. They did good work, they almost single-handedly created an industry.
Think about it. Without the invention of the CCD, we'd take pictures and have them developed. Now we can take thousands upon thousands of pictures on a single 'roll' and print them a few seconds after they're taken. I think it's safe to say that the CCD revolutionized photography, at least for amateurs.
I've been thinking about Google Frame. Honestly, I think it's too good a stopgap. Let me explain:
People have Internet Explorer. It sucks. Or people have Chrome/Firefox/Opera/Safari/... and they all work the same (almost).
People who have IE are mostly unable or unwilling to install, well, anything else.
Chrome is good in that installing a browser plugin is easier (and more familiar) for most people than installing a browser. They do it all the time - Flash, Java, SuperPornSearch - even if they shouldn't.
So Chrome Frame is nice, in that regard, in that I as a web developer can have IE say "install this to view this page", or otherwise throw up a "You must have at least Flash 7 to view this content"-type page. Those errors seem to be effective, for the most part.
But it's bad in the sense that if everybody requires Chrome Frame, and everybody has it, that's dandy. But it's still running IE.
In short, it's a stopgap. But it's a very good stopgap. Potentially so good that people won't switch to a real browser. And that's bad.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your points, but I love the line about anybody being able to go into an ER and get treatment. It turns out that's a pretty significant percentage of ER visits. I'm an EMT in a very wealthy town (though we often go into much poorer neighboring towns) and about 10-20% of the people I pick up are uninsured.
Who pays? Well the answer is everybody with insurance has higher costs, which means that insurance companies have higher costs, which means that they charge more, which means that people are excluded - some of which will need to go to the ER.
Unless you would say that somebody having a heart attack, and standing in an ER, shouldn't get treatment because there's no money there - in which case I'd say you were a jackass - it's obvious that if everybody was insured, then there wouldn't be any offsetting of costs onto the insured, so prices should fall for everyone.
And ERs will stabilize and release. That guy with the heart-attack gets all the treatment he needs, then they kick him out without any follow-up or rehab, so he inevitably comes back with another one. Pregnant mothers who can't get to prenatal health care end up being significantly more expensive to deliver - in our same ER.
Taking primary health care out of the ER would do an outrageous amount to defray costs to everybody currently with insurance, and unless you can convince doctors, nurses, techs, and administrators to do the work for free, the only way that preventative care can happen is by insuring everyone.
I think it's willful ignorance on the part of the right. This ER business seems too obvious to be a simple overlooking.
I'm an EMT. I've seen that exact thing happen, to a 9 year old kid in a YMCA. It should have been found beforehand, but wasn't. Once his heart stopped, it couldn't be restarted (and this kid had just about the best shot possible).
Heart monitors aren't the right answer. It's fucking complicated to interpret an EKG, computers can do a rudimentary piece of that - but the point of physical activity is that muscles are firing, so heart monitoring is absolutely useless.
They didn't attempt to violate the GPL, get caught, and then take a crap on the floor either.
Had Microsoft gone and said "We have these drivers for you, benefiting us, that we want in the kernel. We've made a good-faith effort to do everything right, stylistically and otherwise, what do we do next?" everybody would be applauding them (as it is, people are still applauding them).
What they did instead was try to sneak them out like a thief in the night, then get caught and need to hand the code over or risk a lawsuit. So they had half-assed it to begin with, and now weren't answering questions. They've been working in bad faith.
They want to have their cake and eat it too. It's not a physical CD, that's why I can't import it and send it around - I don't 'own' the music. But apparently I don't have a license either... a license is independent of the media, so by purchasing a license for something on LP, I retain the license for a newer recording (8-track? tape? CD? you can make the argument that remasters are different).
So I've given up the idea (a while ago, actually) that these people are just fucking douchebags and nobody should care what they think. I sure as hell don't. They'd be a lot more successful - in the long run, at least - if they weren't so batshit. Nobody cares what they think any more; sure the politicians do but nobody else does. They have no moral legitimacy and everyone knows it.
No, you can right-click with the trackpad in Bootcamp. However, it seems more like an approximation - for example, it doesn't work in Half-Life 2. But it works in the desktop, at least, and many other programs (browsers, etc).
What bothers me is the scroll. On OSX it's really smooth, but on windows it's not so much; windows likes the wheel-click model I guess. Changing the requisite value to 1 instead of the default of 3 seems to do the trick.
Now that's being a little harsh. I think it has more to do with the fact that if I install a Postfix server for 500 people, I can set it up and ensure that it will be bulletproof. It also means that I can get right in the guts - perhaps somebody can't log in, well does the server see their attempt or not? I'm the one in control of updates, so it doesn't just change on me. And if it breaks catastrophically, I know how to deal with it - restore from backups and the like.
That's' why I wouldn't choose a hosted system without a very good reason. It's not that they're not as good, it's that they necessarily can't fit my needs like a glove because they're a mitten.
And I don't think anybody is seriously criticizing the research (without reason). It's usually in reaction to the summary which, shall we say, doesn't always reflect the research. Although some nerds have intimate knowledge of the subject, and most others have the critical thinking to say 'wait, but spinning in all directions isn't zero-g'.
I think you're being a little unfair. I would caution you against thinking that you understand all of us nerds and are yourself 'hypercompetent'.
There's something to be said for physical destruction. For example, thermite:
Consistent: Yes. Just cover the drive and let it go. There shouldn't be anything solid left. Known: Obviously impossible to recover. Guaranteed: I can absolutely guarantee that a pile of molten slag will not be recoverable. Do you disagree?
Or sanding off the magnetic layer:
Consistent: Yes, just make sure it looks the same. You can see the layer. Known: There's no magnetism left on the platter... Guaranteed: The data is dust. Bye-bye!
Both of those are somewhat faster than a DBAN, especially on today's sizes.
HTML is a markup language. It tells the browser "this is a paragraph" or "this is important".
Telling the browser that the top section of a website (Slashdot's tab bar) or the bottom (the search bar, quote, copyright, and links at the bottom) is exactly the sort of thing the browser should know. Screen readers would, in particular, benefit from this; most people don't need to hear the header or footer on every page.
Unnecessary? Sure - websites do fine without it. But telling the browser more about the page is a Good Thing.
Possibly shorter drive life. If each cell can be rewritten 100,000 times (don't remember exactly) then - for exactly the same reason you're doing this in the first place (rewriting an entire cell on every write) you'll be wearing out the cell.
Probably a net gain, though. This and wear-leveling algorithms probably will make drives last longer.
Don't be quite so cynical. Usually I'd agree with you - but SSD (not flash) is so new that improvements can be made for free by just changing some techniques.
Slashdot Mirror
Problem is, banks can't just say "you're too stupid to not fuck up, here do this and it'll be less likely". But they can hint at it.
Banks aren't the ones with the security problems here. People with cracked PCs are handing over the key, and surprised when the lock is open. I think a bank could get away with it, but with some good marketing. I'm not a marketer (thank God) but something along the lines of "do you know your computer is safe? Use this disk instead, we know it's safe". But less insulting.
If either TEMPEST or hardware keystroke loggers are in play, I'd wager you have bigger problems than someone transferring your money around.
We take these sorts of catastrophic failures more seriously. If my data is on my computer, I know that I'm responsible for my own damn data - if I don't back it up, it's my own fault. But more importantly, when I lose everything, you don't care. If I'm holding millions of peoples' data, you suddenly care a lot more - especially if you're one of the people.
My point is, with all that data they damn well better be backing up properly, because it's out of my control. If I don't back up properly, I had the option and (hopefully) know the trade-offs.
Typical News Corp. Look at the recent Faux News bits about the tea parties - "OMG ITS SUCH A NATIONWIDE GRASSROOTS PROTEST!"
The entirety of his business model, it seems, is to come up with something and go on about how big a deal it is, until it actually becomes a semi-big deal.
George Smith is an alum of my school. Kind of a big deal here. They did good work, they almost single-handedly created an industry.
Think about it. Without the invention of the CCD, we'd take pictures and have them developed. Now we can take thousands upon thousands of pictures on a single 'roll' and print them a few seconds after they're taken. I think it's safe to say that the CCD revolutionized photography, at least for amateurs.
You're a jackass. You always have something to learn from everyone.
You joke, but this is possible through adoption. You can raise a child without having one...
(Unless of course that's what you meant)
Each school controls their MSDNAA offerings. I just checked mine - Win7 is prominently displayed as the second choice.
I've been thinking about Google Frame. Honestly, I think it's too good a stopgap. Let me explain:
People have Internet Explorer. It sucks. Or people have Chrome/Firefox/Opera/Safari/... and they all work the same (almost).
People who have IE are mostly unable or unwilling to install, well, anything else.
Chrome is good in that installing a browser plugin is easier (and more familiar) for most people than installing a browser. They do it all the time - Flash, Java, SuperPornSearch - even if they shouldn't.
So Chrome Frame is nice, in that regard, in that I as a web developer can have IE say "install this to view this page", or otherwise throw up a "You must have at least Flash 7 to view this content"-type page. Those errors seem to be effective, for the most part.
But it's bad in the sense that if everybody requires Chrome Frame, and everybody has it, that's dandy. But it's still running IE.
In short, it's a stopgap. But it's a very good stopgap. Potentially so good that people won't switch to a real browser. And that's bad.
You are aware that TF2 was written for PC, right? XBox was almost an afterthought.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your points, but I love the line about anybody being able to go into an ER and get treatment. It turns out that's a pretty significant percentage of ER visits. I'm an EMT in a very wealthy town (though we often go into much poorer neighboring towns) and about 10-20% of the people I pick up are uninsured.
Who pays? Well the answer is everybody with insurance has higher costs, which means that insurance companies have higher costs, which means that they charge more, which means that people are excluded - some of which will need to go to the ER.
Unless you would say that somebody having a heart attack, and standing in an ER, shouldn't get treatment because there's no money there - in which case I'd say you were a jackass - it's obvious that if everybody was insured, then there wouldn't be any offsetting of costs onto the insured, so prices should fall for everyone.
And ERs will stabilize and release. That guy with the heart-attack gets all the treatment he needs, then they kick him out without any follow-up or rehab, so he inevitably comes back with another one. Pregnant mothers who can't get to prenatal health care end up being significantly more expensive to deliver - in our same ER.
Taking primary health care out of the ER would do an outrageous amount to defray costs to everybody currently with insurance, and unless you can convince doctors, nurses, techs, and administrators to do the work for free, the only way that preventative care can happen is by insuring everyone.
I think it's willful ignorance on the part of the right. This ER business seems too obvious to be a simple overlooking.
A watch like this, combined with some kind of alarm could help us keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18.
Then what? No, seriously. It seems like a watch like this would only delay teaching things like don't run off. What happens when he turns 18?
I really don't mean to offend, but seriously - wouldn't this hurt you and him in the long run?
I'm an EMT. I've seen that exact thing happen, to a 9 year old kid in a YMCA. It should have been found beforehand, but wasn't. Once his heart stopped, it couldn't be restarted (and this kid had just about the best shot possible).
Heart monitors aren't the right answer. It's fucking complicated to interpret an EKG, computers can do a rudimentary piece of that - but the point of physical activity is that muscles are firing, so heart monitoring is absolutely useless.
That's a complete non-sequiter.
(sung) The use of words to express something other than their literal intention. Now that - is - irony
They didn't attempt to violate the GPL, get caught, and then take a crap on the floor either.
Had Microsoft gone and said "We have these drivers for you, benefiting us, that we want in the kernel. We've made a good-faith effort to do everything right, stylistically and otherwise, what do we do next?" everybody would be applauding them (as it is, people are still applauding them).
What they did instead was try to sneak them out like a thief in the night, then get caught and need to hand the code over or risk a lawsuit. So they had half-assed it to begin with, and now weren't answering questions. They've been working in bad faith.
That's the difference.
You need to mount it async; I don't know if there's an alternate driver for it (or just a mount option) but it speeds up transfers by about 30x
It's Leela. You Fail. Hand in you geek card on the way out.
Jeez, all these high-UID types...
To be fair, guns aren't used for much other than murder. That's kind of what they've been honed to do for hundreds of years...
I don't think guns need to be banned, but nobody seriously carries a gun around to shoot cans with.
They want to have their cake and eat it too. It's not a physical CD, that's why I can't import it and send it around - I don't 'own' the music. But apparently I don't have a license either... a license is independent of the media, so by purchasing a license for something on LP, I retain the license for a newer recording (8-track? tape? CD? you can make the argument that remasters are different).
So I've given up the idea (a while ago, actually) that these people are just fucking douchebags and nobody should care what they think. I sure as hell don't. They'd be a lot more successful - in the long run, at least - if they weren't so batshit. Nobody cares what they think any more; sure the politicians do but nobody else does. They have no moral legitimacy and everyone knows it.
In mouse properties, try changing the 'scroll x lines' from 3 to 1. Works a lot better.
No, you can right-click with the trackpad in Bootcamp. However, it seems more like an approximation - for example, it doesn't work in Half-Life 2. But it works in the desktop, at least, and many other programs (browsers, etc).
What bothers me is the scroll. On OSX it's really smooth, but on windows it's not so much; windows likes the wheel-click model I guess. Changing the requisite value to 1 instead of the default of 3 seems to do the trick.
Now that's being a little harsh. I think it has more to do with the fact that if I install a Postfix server for 500 people, I can set it up and ensure that it will be bulletproof. It also means that I can get right in the guts - perhaps somebody can't log in, well does the server see their attempt or not? I'm the one in control of updates, so it doesn't just change on me. And if it breaks catastrophically, I know how to deal with it - restore from backups and the like.
That's' why I wouldn't choose a hosted system without a very good reason. It's not that they're not as good, it's that they necessarily can't fit my needs like a glove because they're a mitten.
And I don't think anybody is seriously criticizing the research (without reason). It's usually in reaction to the summary which, shall we say, doesn't always reflect the research. Although some nerds have intimate knowledge of the subject, and most others have the critical thinking to say 'wait, but spinning in all directions isn't zero-g'.
I think you're being a little unfair. I would caution you against thinking that you understand all of us nerds and are yourself 'hypercompetent'.
There's something to be said for physical destruction. For example, thermite:
Consistent: Yes. Just cover the drive and let it go. There shouldn't be anything solid left.
Known: Obviously impossible to recover.
Guaranteed: I can absolutely guarantee that a pile of molten slag will not be recoverable. Do you disagree?
Or sanding off the magnetic layer:
Consistent: Yes, just make sure it looks the same. You can see the layer.
Known: There's no magnetism left on the platter...
Guaranteed: The data is dust. Bye-bye!
Both of those are somewhat faster than a DBAN, especially on today's sizes.
HTML is a markup language. It tells the browser "this is a paragraph" or "this is important".
Telling the browser that the top section of a website (Slashdot's tab bar) or the bottom (the search bar, quote, copyright, and links at the bottom) is exactly the sort of thing the browser should know. Screen readers would, in particular, benefit from this; most people don't need to hear the header or footer on every page.
Unnecessary? Sure - websites do fine without it. But telling the browser more about the page is a Good Thing.
Possibly shorter drive life. If each cell can be rewritten 100,000 times (don't remember exactly) then - for exactly the same reason you're doing this in the first place (rewriting an entire cell on every write) you'll be wearing out the cell.
Probably a net gain, though. This and wear-leveling algorithms probably will make drives last longer.
Don't be quite so cynical. Usually I'd agree with you - but SSD (not flash) is so new that improvements can be made for free by just changing some techniques.