"Who else but the selfish can bring themselves to thrust children into this world of ours?"
Well, ignoring the obvious (your parents' decision, for starters), Your attitude is the one that is lacking both a reasonable foundation and any consistency.
If this world is so terrible, why didn't you check out? Or at the very least minimize your interaction and pain? Slashdot is not a minimizing of any of that, my friend.
Self-serving statements like this sound all witty and wise, but are pure snark, and intended to either leave us with that sense of guilt for having been part of something so painful to you (and by extension others). But you just make this up to answer some desire you have for attention or respect. One without the other, you get. Nice.
Life. If it isnt good enough for you, you have to fix that. Whatever the cause, it's your problem.
And we have children for all of the reasons you describe. All of them. Some parents want their children to share the world they love. Is that selfish?
Wait to see which of thse are rooted, and how the flashing is done. I expect many will be pretty well locked-down.
Of course, if by hackability you mean applications, well, you're good to go. But I'm waiting for Honeycomb (3.0), better CPUs and GPUs (dual core Tegra for instance) and capacitive screens. Won't be cheap.
I haven't heard the gunman identifed yet, and the Pima County sheriff is not yet speculating on motive. to try and ascribe this to any political motive is premature and without evidence.
Children, you are. Or just fanning the fire. Pointless either way. Here in Arizona this seems to be the only thing to talk about today. Even the usual talk show hosts have come on on their weekend to run on about all this. Great. It's tragedy enough without piling on this crap.
You don't want the makers (especially the likes of D-Link) hiring on some temps to go in and patch code on 3 year old $40 routers. Even Cisco/Linksys will screw some up.
Well, it has to be fixed in every device. And it shouldn't be this way, some devices shouldn't be buffering nearly as much as they are. The bottom line here is that every device maker that thought it would be a good feature didn't evaluate the idea in light of every other maker doing the same thing. So we have buffers everywhere stopping up traffic and causing this problem.
And you may have updated your router the other day, but be assured that unless you are using something open-source AND you went in and configured it just so, you have not changed anything about this problem with your hardware. The makers are not yet into this.
Packet losses would be handled by adjusting to the conditions.
Look at the trace Gettys posted in the referenced article. Lots of dup packets. Get rid of those, and there's some bandwidth that can be *used*. And allowing TCP to adjust to prevailing conditions should result in less packet loss. It might seem to be less bandwidth also, but we may be in a vicious circle of increasing bandwidth to solve a problem that is NOT bandwidth. Packet loss by itself is a symptom, not a problem.
Actually, the solution to bufferbloat is to stop using large buffers. Let TCP manage the connection.
An analogy. If you want to drip irrigate your garden, you usually connect the water source, add in the necessary stuff, and eventually you put a drip emitter on the line that only lets 1GPH flow, or whatever. Now, if you put a 1GPH valve on the water connection, fine, you get the 1GPH at the emitter. Add emitters, cause you have more than one flower in your garden, and well your flowers are sharing the 1GPH. Not what you intended. Bufferbloat has all these devices trying to manage the flow, and they are all breaking at the least the initial management, your TCP stack. And breaking all the others as well.
Another, better analogy. If you've ever been going down a long street and hitting every red light, that's an intentional traffic management method (unless the lights really aren't sychronized, which happens). This allows intersecting traffic to flow also, and prevents accidents. Now imagine this on the Interstate, on a divided highway. There is no intersecting traffic, only on-and off-ramps. But some nimrod put up a light to buffer you all so that traffic would accumulate, than be released to maximize the flow. Wrong. It just creates artificial congestion. Bogus.
I'm obviously not very good at this, but I grok what Gettys is saying, in my reptilian-part of my brain.
- Under max load, your connection slows to much less than is possible.
- Restarting the transfer doesn't solve the problem.
- Testing with anything less than that max load doesn't reveal a problem. Indeed, testing just latency or bandwidth doesn't show a problem.
- In some cases, the connection 'lopes', I think, starting out at full speed and then getting throttled for NO GOOD REASON except that the buffers have defeated normal TCP bandwidth management.
- The cause can be anywhere along the system.
- Buffers sound good, but in practice are essentially defeating TCP throughput management features.
Why is this bad?
- As we hurdle headlong into a cloud-based environment, we will be sending more and larger transfers. This 'bufferbloat' will get worse, and we risk the hardware makers responding by including BIGGER buffers. Making the problem worse and worse.
- Other protocols such as VOIP, various video, etc. will be significantly impacted, and it will get worse no better unless the hardware makers understand this and both test and modify their designs as needed.
- With the large number of routers out there, this is a big $$$ investment overall. Adopting IPv6 may help by flushing out old routers, if the makers again understand and both test and modify their designs.
- And this seems to affect virtually every type of device, from home routers and smartphones/3-4G networks to 'big-iron' routers and switches. Collectively, this has become a serious problem.
So, in a nutshell, when you start up a download of your new favorite ISO, and the connection slows to a trickle, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'. When your video goes to hell halfway through the show, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'. When your Skype goes to hell regularly, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'.
I'm wondering how much this impacts my pet peeve, waiting for a page to load and seeing it is just the damned ads holding it up. And ads are getting bigger and heavier every day.
Gettys was dead-on when he mentioned that in the 'old days', a T-1 was pretty snappy. I had a T-1 at work for a long time, and it was great in the mid 90s. Even my 128k ISDN line was plenty enough for serious surfing, which back then wasn't quite as deanding as now, but even Flash sites were just fine. Now I have a 20MB cable connection and it just seems slow, even when I adjust for expectations.
Obviously, I blame this 'bufferbloat' for my inability to prevail in COD.
But this is the only good argument for perpetual copyright I've seen in a while.
If you can change 'objectionable' words at your whim and re-publish the work of an author as if it were the 'original', well, you can't know what the hell anyone ever wrote unless you kept a copy.
I'm not at all interested in reading Mark Twain censored. Next thing you know, they start in some really offensive authors, and we have nothing to rely on.
Sounds like something the high-school textbook publishers would do. Stupid. So much for literary integrity. Another publisher I can regard with a jaundiced eye.
My G1 runs CyanogenMod 6.1.0, and does SSH out of the box. You can find one for $50 in CL, root it and load any of several recovery images and ROMs that will let you configure WiFi without a SIM, and you got yourself an entirely usable SSH terminal. Other Android phones may do this also. If you can get a MyTouch (Magic), do that instead, the G1 has serious memory limitations and you really need the 2708 hack to make it stable.
Bonus points for having a minimal browser that can get you into forums and do serious research with nothing but WiFi.
More bonus points if you can make your 'real' phone a hotspot and then you can use the 'spare' SSH phone via that. I do this a lot. EDGE is plenty fast enough.
There is little good in this. I'm pleased beyond punch that another quack is exposed, and a falsehood exposed. But the damage is so massive, parents will refute this for a generation. Dierdre Imus will NOT give up, and Jenny McCarthy will continue to probe for the coverup and corporate malfeasance. Autism will continue to be overdiagnosed, and the DSM V will only add to the confusion. Many children will grow up so misdiagnosed that it should be considered a crime.
And yet, I cannot be happy that this lie was successful, and that we may now start the witch hunts for other fabrications, good science will be hampered by the additional hurdles of more and more research and checking, and ultimately we may lose faith in science a little bit more.
There is little good in this. Why do lies seem to live longer than the truth? I know, since I don't have an autistic child, I don't understand. And I only understand a little that urge to find a cause, identify the culprit, punish the guily. But my dear friend who does have an autistic daughter has long ago given this up, and now just works to ensure she will be cared for after he is gone. He believes this is all he can really do. And of course visit her and stay involved. I do not envy him, because he will leave this world and leave behind a child dependent on the care of others.
What? Microsoft just made the smartest decision in their corporate lifetime. Well, third-smartest, and critical to their survival.
x86 is not the only architecture out there. Itanium is a market failure, RISC is relegated to the memory of us modem-wielding veterans, is there another chip line out there I forgot? If so, irrelevant.
Windows on ARM means:
- Potential NT kernel on phones. Hey, the NT kernel isn't half bad. A single kernel everywhere eorks for Linux, just sayin'.
- Opportunity for new markets like tablets and set-top/integrated TV systems. No, an Atom-powered tablet isn't ery attractive. Power demand is the issue, and ARM seems to be the king of power demand.
- A huge developer base that may not have to learn Java or Cocoa or Objective-C after all to be rlevant in our mobile- social- oriented world.
I mean, Microsoft winning sounds evil, but we should know by now that competition is good. Apple may have to answer this, and the Linux/Android community hasn't changed their value proposition one iota. In fact, consider the appeal of buying a phone and THEN choosing the OS you want - 'WindowsARM', Android, 'OpenIOS'... Or perhaps a hypervisor and VMs running any of the three?
I like it. 2GHz dual-core DX10 phones with 2GB RAM and a uSD slot for another 128G, 4.5" AMOLED screens and 1080p HDMI out? All I need now is to find a table at the Starbucks with the Bluetooth keyboard and mouse, and the 21" display, and I'm rockin.
That wasn't an accident. Deutschewelle ran that as a test to validate their system to jam BBC Radio 1-3. Sadly, it failed. They ignored BBC Radio 4 for obvious reasons.
And we still have Serie A on the air, in some small part due to that failure, no doubt. Cannot someone devise a system? Please? Spark gap? Numbers? Darts? Please?
The occasional EW mishap is legendary, fleeting, and cautionary. Everything from NASA to AT&T has been hit by this. British telecom has a few stories to tell, as well as most of Europe. Darned pods go off at the drop of a wrench.
But this is definitely NOT something that's been around since the 60s. We think of EW traditionally as an anti-radar weapon, until we realized that jamming communicaitons from the radar to the launch control trailer was just as effective at neutralizing SAM threats. Still problems with various IR-guided shoulder- and vehicle-launched weapons, but there you go to infrared and that's a whole 'nother area of specialization.
So jamming comm means you risk jamming your own, since most militaries have observed treaties and kept to certain bands, except in wartime when they surely don't much care. This means you have to have frequency-agile systems that can be adapted to battle regimes where you don't much care what bands you're on. Since trying to communicate on frequencies that are already in use is difficult, you go to either less-used freqs, or hop around finding spots that are not in use, if only for a few seconds.
BLADE seems focused on essentially determining if transmissions are: 1)not friendly, 2)not benign, and 3)suspicious.
"Not friendly" is fairly easy to determine if you have enough theater information to know what your own forces are using. This will not always be the case, so this is as difficult a problem as any other.
"Not benign" will be a lot more interesting. It's probably just as important to know what is innocuous as it it so know what is "suspicious".
I'm a little surprised that BLADE isn't more obviously intertwined with battlefield comm intelligence. Not very useful to jam your own comm. But if we can communicate with Voyager 2, we can certainly burn through the clutter and keep comm going in a busy battlefield environment.
It's sometimes more useful to listen to your adversary than it is to prevent their communications. But BLADE might be destined to be an offensive weapon. Imagine how D-day might have gone if the Allies had been able to completely deny communications from France to Germany. Of how Vietnam might have gone if we had eliminated the North's ability to communicate electronically, at all. Something as simple as docking a cargo ship or dispatching trains could turn into a quagmire. Yes, you can jam landline telephones. No, it isn't pretty. The collateral damage includes civilian deaths from loss of emergency response and hospital communications. You can be sure that both Iraq campaigns used these tactics, at least selectively.
Almost makes we want to get back into the field. The idea of hiding an aircraft carrier is almost as interesting in being able to frustrate your enemy's communications so well that they end up screaming in plaintext. Ah, modern warfare. Some day we'll start a war campaign by convincing the enemy to order 3 million Pampers instead of 3 million pairs of boots. Then we'll tell them "Look! Ponies!"
Is it the Fourth or Fifth Amendment that this runs roughshod over?
Are we reaching the point where we need a TrueCrypt implementation on Android?
I do get the Police point of view here, it's just another 'thing'. But so is my mind. Can they compel me to tell them stuff? No, but they can rifle through my belongings, no matter. And it can't be long before we see domestic police forces assert the same privilege that ICE does in searching incoming deices in citizens' possession.
The only protection against this is to guard our rights in all areas. Police must be compelled to both return these bits of evidence if no prosecutorial action is taken, must also expunge all data from their own systems, and must not share this with other agencies that would not also do the same. Fat chance, but we have to force police departments and all other law enforcement agencies to respect our privacy if they are not going to charge us.
This will not hamper the War on Terrorism. It will require multi-agency operations to play reasonably fair. Of course, that is currently impossible, so my proposal is a failure already.
Ah, yes, the Obama Administration has been a breath of fresh air amid the stale repression of the states. California of all places. Don't they see the hypocrisy?
1. Um, connect your Android video-out-capable phone to your in-car video. If the hack is replacing yoru in-car satnav system, you did that with the Android phone without the video. Now, hooking up YouTube to your in-car video, that's a hack. And illegal in many states.
4. Playing classic games on your Andriod? That's an *app*, not a *hack*. The controller hack is nice tho.
7. Installing root-only apps? How about "Getting root on your android"? After that, well, the apps come.
8. Controlling your Media Centre? Um, My Palm III did that. And that was before I *had* a mnedia centre.
10. "Get the latest Android versions, fast" What? If you're referrring to getting custom ROMs from those intrepid developers out there, fast is relative. Getting Froyo on my G1 took waiting for Froyo to be released into SDK, then waiting for it to be ported to the G1 (which required waiting for the DangerSPL), then waiting for a stable candidate, then finally the 2708 hack to make it useable long-term. Now, this is admittedly faster than waiting for the OPTA release, cause neither TMO, HTC, or Google will ever release any Android 2.x for the G1, but that's sort of like saying it was a clever hack to play DNF at PennyArcade before anyone else, since for all purposes DNF is a DNF, but the demo is not a release. Well, maybe not quite like that, but calling an alternative ROM release 'fast' is relative.
Stupid list. Mostly apps, not hacks. Show me the RAM stack hack for the G1 and I'm nominating it for #1.
I have NO knowledge of this ever happening to me, nor do I ever recall getting an SMS from some random person...
3600 reports out of millions of devices. Assuming on'y perhaps one in a thousand bother to report this, then you do get a large enough sample to be concerned about unless some of those 3600 are repeats.
More interesting to me is the sad state of the POP/IMAP Email client. It's been substantially dysfunctional since birth. Only with the Android 1.6 release did it even actually delete the trash locally. On my G1, with 1.6, it still couldn't retrieve mail without retrieving all the previously read and deleted mails again. It fails to make a connection to a perfectly good server on a regular basis, stalls during retrieval, and a myriad of lesser issues. The trash issue was first reported by me in January 2009, and has been assigned, deleted, re-reported, claimed as fixed, reported again, re-assigned, prioritized to no action, and then a new Android release woud come out and all the previous reports were flushed. I stopped reporting it with 1.5.
But the POP email client isn't a priority. After all, you need a Gmail account, so just use Gmail, ok?
I won't belabor the sad state of the Bluetooth Voice Dialer. It's pathetically inacurrate for me, so much so I had to delete it, not to mention grabby about answering the headset button presses in my pocket, and plain failing to run when I wanted it to. Pus.
This is one of the problems with Open Source; support and development at the whim of those doing it, not the same sense of urgency for some of the more obscure problems, the priority being determined by the developers. Mostly this just whets our appetite for the 'final' result, but sometimes, like when you're buying a phone dependent on it, well, it's annoying.
I still see this SMS issue as miniscule, but I might be wrong. Some of the other problems introduced by various phone makers' unique UI enhancements are a lot more interesting.
And yes, I do root my phone. I'm running 2.2.1 via Cyanogenmod 6.1.0 with the 2708 hack. It's a lot more stable than without the hack, and my G1 jus doesn't have enough RAM. It's served me well. I can hardly wait for a cool dual-core Tegra-based replacement. Then I'll try the POP mail client again... Betcha it still sucks.
Space.com is really annoying, with these banner ads that have the smallest close buttons, and the damned Chrome popup that hides its close button. I'm not at all sure it's worth going to those links any more. At least for me.
"We can never agree, because your belief requires that you just believe, with no reason to not believe, even when presented with science and facts to the contrary."
No, my belief doesn't require me to believe when presented with contrary science and facts. When you have proof that God doesn't exist, please, direct me to it. I'm not using a clever rhetorical device, I'm pointing out the obvious, at least to me. If God wanted the Unvierse to look like this, with evolutionary evidence and all, He can certainly do it. At least if He is who He says He is.
You don't think I'm skeptical? You don't think I questioned all this for at least the 31 years of my adult life I lived as a non-believer? And before?
It's a clever rhetorical device to rely on faith to refute the other side of the argument, as in 'well, you just believe,and that's not good enough.
I'm almost at the point of saying 'How dare you claim I am not a rational, thinking person. How dare you call me a simpelton when you don't even seem to know my rational basis for my beliefs. How dare you declare my reason as fiction.' Unfortunately, I don't believe you can ever understand how someone can come to a faith in God rationally. But you should, because Science has grown out of roots that were anything BUT rational in hindsight. Ether? Philosopher's Stone? Bleeding as medicinal therapy? Trephanation? Science is replete with mistaken assumptions and entirely false theories. As Science evolves and develops better understandings of things, they do change. I changed when I came to beleive something else, and had evidence to support it. You don't really seem interested in my evidence, and I'm no longer interested in defending it.
You seem mostly to rely on the shortcomings of Christians as evidence of their false beliefs. It is our shortcomings that reinforce our faith, for some of us. That is proof that the fundamental premises of our faith are accurate. Don't ask me. Go look. It's there.
Birth control would be an interesting topic to find in the Bible. Most modern method would have been unthinkable back then.
But why do I jump to abortion? Because it is a commonly used method of birth control. Do you not know that? Just because it is post-conception doesn't make it something else.
I see this as a red herring also. Abortion is birth control. It differs from the 'morning after' pill in timing and mechanics, but it's birth control.
Most other forms of birth control we use today are actually conception control. Same effect, yes. Many Christians don't approve of this for various reasons. I'm not settled on this yet.
The Catholic church has recently expressed a distinct view on aritificial birth control, and actually on birth control in general. Sadly, the AIDS epidemic in Africa has compelled it to modify that stance. Sadly, I say, because AIDS in Africa is a tragedy of immeasuarable pain and suffering. The causes are clear, and more the pity.
"Atheism uses all the observation, cognition, and scientific skills required to come to rational conclusions, whereas religion doesn't."
I believe that observing our world and the Universe leaves me with the inescapable conclusion that all this was created, and by a Creator. That He is unseen is not surprising, as such a being may be too powerful to be in the physical presence of too closely. He can certainly have the ability to modify His presence as He wishes.
Science has yet to explain the creation of the Universe beyond variations of the 'big bang' theory. Any ideas on what was before that? Did Time merely start? Is it any more stupefying to consider an all-encompassing, eternal being that made all this than to consider the problems of what came 'before' this?
From there, we diverge. But to claim that all religions are irrational is to misunderstand them, I think. Some rely entirely on accepting things unseen. Others claim to draw their foundations from what they can explain, or were given to them. Christianity, for instance, can be founded first on Moses inspired leadership of Israel out of Egypt, and second on the ressurection of Jesus. Both events are documented, but primarily in the Bible. That there was a teacher in Israel in the early 30s AD is also corroborated by Josephus. To claim Jesus did not exist is convenient, but I believe incorrect.
We can go down this path for a long time and never agree.
Slashdot Mirror
"Who else but the selfish can bring themselves to thrust children into this world of ours?"
Well, ignoring the obvious (your parents' decision, for starters), Your attitude is the one that is lacking both a reasonable foundation and any consistency.
If this world is so terrible, why didn't you check out? Or at the very least minimize your interaction and pain? Slashdot is not a minimizing of any of that, my friend.
Self-serving statements like this sound all witty and wise, but are pure snark, and intended to either leave us with that sense of guilt for having been part of something so painful to you (and by extension others). But you just make this up to answer some desire you have for attention or respect. One without the other, you get. Nice.
Life. If it isnt good enough for you, you have to fix that. Whatever the cause, it's your problem.
And we have children for all of the reasons you describe. All of them. Some parents want their children to share the world they love. Is that selfish?
Yes, you do, even if that someONE is YOU.
For all you quivering sysadmins out there, and you lusers that question their authority and trustworthiness:
Do you trust your CIO to not shackle you to poor choices just for their kickbacks?
Do you trust the Board to not limit your opportunities by failing to act on corporate goals?
Do you trust your CEO to not collude with your accountants and cook the books?
Trust.
Wait to see which of thse are rooted, and how the flashing is done. I expect many will be pretty well locked-down.
Of course, if by hackability you mean applications, well, you're good to go. But I'm waiting for Honeycomb (3.0), better CPUs and GPUs (dual core Tegra for instance) and capacitive screens. Won't be cheap.
I haven't heard the gunman identifed yet, and the Pima County sheriff is not yet speculating on motive. to try and ascribe this to any political motive is premature and without evidence.
Children, you are. Or just fanning the fire. Pointless either way. Here in Arizona this seems to be the only thing to talk about today. Even the usual talk show hosts have come on on their weekend to run on about all this. Great. It's tragedy enough without piling on this crap.
You don't want the makers (especially the likes of D-Link) hiring on some temps to go in and patch code on 3 year old $40 routers. Even Cisco/Linksys will screw some up.
Well, it has to be fixed in every device. And it shouldn't be this way, some devices shouldn't be buffering nearly as much as they are. The bottom line here is that every device maker that thought it would be a good feature didn't evaluate the idea in light of every other maker doing the same thing. So we have buffers everywhere stopping up traffic and causing this problem.
And you may have updated your router the other day, but be assured that unless you are using something open-source AND you went in and configured it just so, you have not changed anything about this problem with your hardware. The makers are not yet into this.
No.
Packet losses would be handled by adjusting to the conditions.
Look at the trace Gettys posted in the referenced article. Lots of dup packets. Get rid of those, and there's some bandwidth that can be *used*. And allowing TCP to adjust to prevailing conditions should result in less packet loss. It might seem to be less bandwidth also, but we may be in a vicious circle of increasing bandwidth to solve a problem that is NOT bandwidth. Packet loss by itself is a symptom, not a problem.
Actually, the solution to bufferbloat is to stop using large buffers. Let TCP manage the connection.
An analogy. If you want to drip irrigate your garden, you usually connect the water source, add in the necessary stuff, and eventually you put a drip emitter on the line that only lets 1GPH flow, or whatever. Now, if you put a 1GPH valve on the water connection, fine, you get the 1GPH at the emitter. Add emitters, cause you have more than one flower in your garden, and well your flowers are sharing the 1GPH. Not what you intended. Bufferbloat has all these devices trying to manage the flow, and they are all breaking at the least the initial management, your TCP stack. And breaking all the others as well.
Another, better analogy. If you've ever been going down a long street and hitting every red light, that's an intentional traffic management method (unless the lights really aren't sychronized, which happens). This allows intersecting traffic to flow also, and prevents accidents. Now imagine this on the Interstate, on a divided highway. There is no intersecting traffic, only on-and off-ramps. But some nimrod put up a light to buffer you all so that traffic would accumulate, than be released to maximize the flow. Wrong. It just creates artificial congestion. Bogus.
I'm obviously not very good at this, but I grok what Gettys is saying, in my reptilian-part of my brain.
As I understand it, the problem is:
- Under max load, your connection slows to much less than is possible.
- Restarting the transfer doesn't solve the problem.
- Testing with anything less than that max load doesn't reveal a problem. Indeed, testing just latency or bandwidth doesn't show a problem.
- In some cases, the connection 'lopes', I think, starting out at full speed and then getting throttled for NO GOOD REASON except that the buffers have defeated normal TCP bandwidth management.
- The cause can be anywhere along the system.
- Buffers sound good, but in practice are essentially defeating TCP throughput management features.
Why is this bad?
- As we hurdle headlong into a cloud-based environment, we will be sending more and larger transfers. This 'bufferbloat' will get worse, and we risk the hardware makers responding by including BIGGER buffers. Making the problem worse and worse.
- Other protocols such as VOIP, various video, etc. will be significantly impacted, and it will get worse no better unless the hardware makers understand this and both test and modify their designs as needed.
- With the large number of routers out there, this is a big $$$ investment overall. Adopting IPv6 may help by flushing out old routers, if the makers again understand and both test and modify their designs.
- And this seems to affect virtually every type of device, from home routers and smartphones/3-4G networks to 'big-iron' routers and switches. Collectively, this has become a serious problem.
So, in a nutshell, when you start up a download of your new favorite ISO, and the connection slows to a trickle, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'. When your video goes to hell halfway through the show, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'. When your Skype goes to hell regularly, this might be caused just by 'bufferbloat'.
I'm wondering how much this impacts my pet peeve, waiting for a page to load and seeing it is just the damned ads holding it up. And ads are getting bigger and heavier every day.
Gettys was dead-on when he mentioned that in the 'old days', a T-1 was pretty snappy. I had a T-1 at work for a long time, and it was great in the mid 90s. Even my 128k ISDN line was plenty enough for serious surfing, which back then wasn't quite as deanding as now, but even Flash sites were just fine. Now I have a 20MB cable connection and it just seems slow, even when I adjust for expectations.
Obviously, I blame this 'bufferbloat' for my inability to prevail in COD.
Keep an eye out for blades...
But this is the only good argument for perpetual copyright I've seen in a while.
If you can change 'objectionable' words at your whim and re-publish the work of an author as if it were the 'original', well, you can't know what the hell anyone ever wrote unless you kept a copy.
I'm not at all interested in reading Mark Twain censored. Next thing you know, they start in some really offensive authors, and we have nothing to rely on.
Sounds like something the high-school textbook publishers would do. Stupid. So much for literary integrity. Another publisher I can regard with a jaundiced eye.
I used MidpPSSH on my BB 7105t back in 2006.
My G1 runs CyanogenMod 6.1.0, and does SSH out of the box. You can find one for $50 in CL, root it and load any of several recovery images and ROMs that will let you configure WiFi without a SIM, and you got yourself an entirely usable SSH terminal. Other Android phones may do this also. If you can get a MyTouch (Magic), do that instead, the G1 has serious memory limitations and you really need the 2708 hack to make it stable.
Bonus points for having a minimal browser that can get you into forums and do serious research with nothing but WiFi.
More bonus points if you can make your 'real' phone a hotspot and then you can use the 'spare' SSH phone via that. I do this a lot. EDGE is plenty fast enough.
There is little good in this. I'm pleased beyond punch that another quack is exposed, and a falsehood exposed. But the damage is so massive, parents will refute this for a generation. Dierdre Imus will NOT give up, and Jenny McCarthy will continue to probe for the coverup and corporate malfeasance. Autism will continue to be overdiagnosed, and the DSM V will only add to the confusion. Many children will grow up so misdiagnosed that it should be considered a crime.
And yet, I cannot be happy that this lie was successful, and that we may now start the witch hunts for other fabrications, good science will be hampered by the additional hurdles of more and more research and checking, and ultimately we may lose faith in science a little bit more.
There is little good in this. Why do lies seem to live longer than the truth? I know, since I don't have an autistic child, I don't understand. And I only understand a little that urge to find a cause, identify the culprit, punish the guily. But my dear friend who does have an autistic daughter has long ago given this up, and now just works to ensure she will be cared for after he is gone. He believes this is all he can really do. And of course visit her and stay involved. I do not envy him, because he will leave this world and leave behind a child dependent on the care of others.
What? Microsoft just made the smartest decision in their corporate lifetime. Well, third-smartest, and critical to their survival.
x86 is not the only architecture out there. Itanium is a market failure, RISC is relegated to the memory of us modem-wielding veterans, is there another chip line out there I forgot? If so, irrelevant.
Windows on ARM means:
- Potential NT kernel on phones. Hey, the NT kernel isn't half bad. A single kernel everywhere eorks for Linux, just sayin'.
- Opportunity for new markets like tablets and set-top/integrated TV systems. No, an Atom-powered tablet isn't ery attractive. Power demand is the issue, and ARM seems to be the king of power demand.
- A huge developer base that may not have to learn Java or Cocoa or Objective-C after all to be rlevant in our mobile- social- oriented world.
I mean, Microsoft winning sounds evil, but we should know by now that competition is good. Apple may have to answer this, and the Linux/Android community hasn't changed their value proposition one iota. In fact, consider the appeal of buying a phone and THEN choosing the OS you want - 'WindowsARM', Android, 'OpenIOS'... Or perhaps a hypervisor and VMs running any of the three?
I like it. 2GHz dual-core DX10 phones with 2GB RAM and a uSD slot for another 128G, 4.5" AMOLED screens and 1080p HDMI out? All I need now is to find a table at the Starbucks with the Bluetooth keyboard and mouse, and the 21" display, and I'm rockin.
I can dream, can't I?
That wasn't an accident. Deutschewelle ran that as a test to validate their system to jam BBC Radio 1-3. Sadly, it failed. They ignored BBC Radio 4 for obvious reasons.
And we still have Serie A on the air, in some small part due to that failure, no doubt. Cannot someone devise a system? Please? Spark gap? Numbers? Darts? Please?
Pfft. You can jam drive-throughs with a car battery and a bracelet.
Now shutting down the phone systems in East Anglia in 1974, that was purely an accident. The water main incident was an accident too.
And that means a nontrivial bandwidth requirement.
If these do come out, and and get popular, then the ISPs get to decide if they like the bandwidth usage...
Nice. I like being able to boot without a network, thanks.
The occasional EW mishap is legendary, fleeting, and cautionary. Everything from NASA to AT&T has been hit by this. British telecom has a few stories to tell, as well as most of Europe. Darned pods go off at the drop of a wrench.
But this is definitely NOT something that's been around since the 60s. We think of EW traditionally as an anti-radar weapon, until we realized that jamming communicaitons from the radar to the launch control trailer was just as effective at neutralizing SAM threats. Still problems with various IR-guided shoulder- and vehicle-launched weapons, but there you go to infrared and that's a whole 'nother area of specialization.
So jamming comm means you risk jamming your own, since most militaries have observed treaties and kept to certain bands, except in wartime when they surely don't much care. This means you have to have frequency-agile systems that can be adapted to battle regimes where you don't much care what bands you're on. Since trying to communicate on frequencies that are already in use is difficult, you go to either less-used freqs, or hop around finding spots that are not in use, if only for a few seconds.
BLADE seems focused on essentially determining if transmissions are: 1)not friendly, 2)not benign, and 3)suspicious.
"Not friendly" is fairly easy to determine if you have enough theater information to know what your own forces are using. This will not always be the case, so this is as difficult a problem as any other.
"Not benign" will be a lot more interesting. It's probably just as important to know what is innocuous as it it so know what is "suspicious".
I'm a little surprised that BLADE isn't more obviously intertwined with battlefield comm intelligence. Not very useful to jam your own comm. But if we can communicate with Voyager 2, we can certainly burn through the clutter and keep comm going in a busy battlefield environment.
It's sometimes more useful to listen to your adversary than it is to prevent their communications. But BLADE might be destined to be an offensive weapon. Imagine how D-day might have gone if the Allies had been able to completely deny communications from France to Germany. Of how Vietnam might have gone if we had eliminated the North's ability to communicate electronically, at all. Something as simple as docking a cargo ship or dispatching trains could turn into a quagmire. Yes, you can jam landline telephones. No, it isn't pretty. The collateral damage includes civilian deaths from loss of emergency response and hospital communications. You can be sure that both Iraq campaigns used these tactics, at least selectively.
Almost makes we want to get back into the field. The idea of hiding an aircraft carrier is almost as interesting in being able to frustrate your enemy's communications so well that they end up screaming in plaintext. Ah, modern warfare. Some day we'll start a war campaign by convincing the enemy to order 3 million Pampers instead of 3 million pairs of boots. Then we'll tell them "Look! Ponies!"
Is it the Fourth or Fifth Amendment that this runs roughshod over?
Are we reaching the point where we need a TrueCrypt implementation on Android?
I do get the Police point of view here, it's just another 'thing'. But so is my mind. Can they compel me to tell them stuff? No, but they can rifle through my belongings, no matter. And it can't be long before we see domestic police forces assert the same privilege that ICE does in searching incoming deices in citizens' possession.
The only protection against this is to guard our rights in all areas. Police must be compelled to both return these bits of evidence if no prosecutorial action is taken, must also expunge all data from their own systems, and must not share this with other agencies that would not also do the same. Fat chance, but we have to force police departments and all other law enforcement agencies to respect our privacy if they are not going to charge us.
This will not hamper the War on Terrorism. It will require multi-agency operations to play reasonably fair. Of course, that is currently impossible, so my proposal is a failure already.
Ah, yes, the Obama Administration has been a breath of fresh air amid the stale repression of the states. California of all places. Don't they see the hypocrisy?
Ok, in order:
1. Um, connect your Android video-out-capable phone to your in-car video. If the hack is replacing yoru in-car satnav system, you did that with the Android phone without the video. Now, hooking up YouTube to your in-car video, that's a hack. And illegal in many states.
4. Playing classic games on your Andriod? That's an *app*, not a *hack*. The controller hack is nice tho.
7. Installing root-only apps? How about "Getting root on your android"? After that, well, the apps come.
8. Controlling your Media Centre? Um, My Palm III did that. And that was before I *had* a mnedia centre.
10. "Get the latest Android versions, fast" What? If you're referrring to getting custom ROMs from those intrepid developers out there, fast is relative. Getting Froyo on my G1 took waiting for Froyo to be released into SDK, then waiting for it to be ported to the G1 (which required waiting for the DangerSPL), then waiting for a stable candidate, then finally the 2708 hack to make it useable long-term. Now, this is admittedly faster than waiting for the OPTA release, cause neither TMO, HTC, or Google will ever release any Android 2.x for the G1, but that's sort of like saying it was a clever hack to play DNF at PennyArcade before anyone else, since for all purposes DNF is a DNF, but the demo is not a release. Well, maybe not quite like that, but calling an alternative ROM release 'fast' is relative.
Stupid list. Mostly apps, not hacks. Show me the RAM stack hack for the G1 and I'm nominating it for #1.
I have NO knowledge of this ever happening to me, nor do I ever recall getting an SMS from some random person...
3600 reports out of millions of devices. Assuming on'y perhaps one in a thousand bother to report this, then you do get a large enough sample to be concerned about unless some of those 3600 are repeats.
More interesting to me is the sad state of the POP/IMAP Email client. It's been substantially dysfunctional since birth. Only with the Android 1.6 release did it even actually delete the trash locally. On my G1, with 1.6, it still couldn't retrieve mail without retrieving all the previously read and deleted mails again. It fails to make a connection to a perfectly good server on a regular basis, stalls during retrieval, and a myriad of lesser issues. The trash issue was first reported by me in January 2009, and has been assigned, deleted, re-reported, claimed as fixed, reported again, re-assigned, prioritized to no action, and then a new Android release woud come out and all the previous reports were flushed. I stopped reporting it with 1.5.
But the POP email client isn't a priority. After all, you need a Gmail account, so just use Gmail, ok?
I won't belabor the sad state of the Bluetooth Voice Dialer. It's pathetically inacurrate for me, so much so I had to delete it, not to mention grabby about answering the headset button presses in my pocket, and plain failing to run when I wanted it to. Pus.
This is one of the problems with Open Source; support and development at the whim of those doing it, not the same sense of urgency for some of the more obscure problems, the priority being determined by the developers. Mostly this just whets our appetite for the 'final' result, but sometimes, like when you're buying a phone dependent on it, well, it's annoying.
I still see this SMS issue as miniscule, but I might be wrong. Some of the other problems introduced by various phone makers' unique UI enhancements are a lot more interesting.
And yes, I do root my phone. I'm running 2.2.1 via Cyanogenmod 6.1.0 with the 2708 hack. It's a lot more stable than without the hack, and my G1 jus doesn't have enough RAM. It's served me well. I can hardly wait for a cool dual-core Tegra-based replacement. Then I'll try the POP mail client again... Betcha it still sucks.
Space.com is really annoying, with these banner ads that have the smallest close buttons, and the damned Chrome popup that hides its close button. I'm not at all sure it's worth going to those links any more. At least for me.
"We can never agree, because your belief requires that you just believe, with no reason to not believe, even when presented with science and facts to the contrary."
No, my belief doesn't require me to believe when presented with contrary science and facts. When you have proof that God doesn't exist, please, direct me to it. I'm not using a clever rhetorical device, I'm pointing out the obvious, at least to me. If God wanted the Unvierse to look like this, with evolutionary evidence and all, He can certainly do it. At least if He is who He says He is.
You don't think I'm skeptical? You don't think I questioned all this for at least the 31 years of my adult life I lived as a non-believer? And before?
It's a clever rhetorical device to rely on faith to refute the other side of the argument, as in 'well, you just believe,and that's not good enough.
I'm almost at the point of saying 'How dare you claim I am not a rational, thinking person. How dare you call me a simpelton when you don't even seem to know my rational basis for my beliefs. How dare you declare my reason as fiction.' Unfortunately, I don't believe you can ever understand how someone can come to a faith in God rationally. But you should, because Science has grown out of roots that were anything BUT rational in hindsight. Ether? Philosopher's Stone? Bleeding as medicinal therapy? Trephanation? Science is replete with mistaken assumptions and entirely false theories. As Science evolves and develops better understandings of things, they do change. I changed when I came to beleive something else, and had evidence to support it. You don't really seem interested in my evidence, and I'm no longer interested in defending it.
You seem mostly to rely on the shortcomings of Christians as evidence of their false beliefs. It is our shortcomings that reinforce our faith, for some of us. That is proof that the fundamental premises of our faith are accurate. Don't ask me. Go look. It's there.
Birth control would be an interesting topic to find in the Bible. Most modern method would have been unthinkable back then.
But why do I jump to abortion? Because it is a commonly used method of birth control. Do you not know that? Just because it is post-conception doesn't make it something else.
I see this as a red herring also. Abortion is birth control. It differs from the 'morning after' pill in timing and mechanics, but it's birth control.
Most other forms of birth control we use today are actually conception control. Same effect, yes. Many Christians don't approve of this for various reasons. I'm not settled on this yet.
The Catholic church has recently expressed a distinct view on aritificial birth control, and actually on birth control in general. Sadly, the AIDS epidemic in Africa has compelled it to modify that stance. Sadly, I say, because AIDS in Africa is a tragedy of immeasuarable pain and suffering. The causes are clear, and more the pity.
"Atheism uses all the observation, cognition, and scientific skills required to come to rational conclusions, whereas religion doesn't."
I believe that observing our world and the Universe leaves me with the inescapable conclusion that all this was created, and by a Creator. That He is unseen is not surprising, as such a being may be too powerful to be in the physical presence of too closely. He can certainly have the ability to modify His presence as He wishes.
Science has yet to explain the creation of the Universe beyond variations of the 'big bang' theory. Any ideas on what was before that? Did Time merely start? Is it any more stupefying to consider an all-encompassing, eternal being that made all this than to consider the problems of what came 'before' this?
From there, we diverge. But to claim that all religions are irrational is to misunderstand them, I think. Some rely entirely on accepting things unseen. Others claim to draw their foundations from what they can explain, or were given to them. Christianity, for instance, can be founded first on Moses inspired leadership of Israel out of Egypt, and second on the ressurection of Jesus. Both events are documented, but primarily in the Bible. That there was a teacher in Israel in the early 30s AD is also corroborated by Josephus. To claim Jesus did not exist is convenient, but I believe incorrect.
We can go down this path for a long time and never agree.