I'm reasonably confident that you would have a hard time winning any lawsuit against Professor X (Professor Charles Francis Xavier) given his psychic abilities to influence others.
Ethernet using cat5 cabling was specifically designed such that the cheapest hubs would just be RJ45 jacks wired together passively. So one could make a "hub cable" in theory.
Interestingly another instructable linked to the one he showed, was about how to use 1 cat5 cable to every jack in the house to support both phone and Ethernet data.
This person was apparently unaware of the fact that a phone cords 6P4C or 6P2C cable will happily fit into the wider 8P jack. (That is to say that phone cable will plug into Ethernet jacks by design).
Further the Ethernet wiring standard deliberately has pins 3-6 (which correspond to pins 2-5 in a phone style jack, which are the 4 that are normally connected in a phone jack) connected identically to standard phone cord. Further Pins 4 and 5 are deliberately unused in 100Mbs Ethernet, which is the one pair necessary for a single phone line.
Thus if you have a house wired for Ethernet but not phone, adding support for phones to all the jacks is as simple as using Ethernet switches that connect pin 4 of all jacks together and pin 5 of all jacks together, and then plug a pone line into one of the jacks in the switch. (I would actually be surprised if there were not Ethernet switches specially designed for that).
Even if we have a chip capable of simulating the same number of neurons and synapses as the human brain, that will not magically form an artificial life-form. I know little about simulated neural networks, but I do know that they are only a very rough approximation of the workings of the human brain. We still don't understand all the intricacies of the neural and chemical interactions that occur to a sufficient level to properly simulate all of them.
I merely mentioned that while a double blind test, it was not quite the double blind test he made it sound like. The test of the relation between being stoned and driving well was only single blind. That is still reasonable, and at a larger scale would potentially be acceptable for a paper.
Although double blind is preferred, the only way to do that here is to tape the person/people in question driving while both stoned and not stoned, without them realizing they are being taped, much less the purpose of the underlying study. (If they realize they are being taped they will drive more cautiously in both cases, and since we don't know if the amount of additional caution would be the same for both the stoned and not stoned).
DWI means "Driving While Intoxicated" in at least some of the states that use that term rather than DUI. That said, any driving while significantly impaired is at absolutely minimum a violation of the prohibitions against reckless endangerment. The simple fact of the matter is that there are quite a few catch-all laws out there that can be used when for some reason the primary laws about the activity in question fail to apply.
Take for example Sexual Assault. That is broadly defined in many places, so in the event that due to a technicality an act of forced sex did not qualify as rape, it will still qualify as sexual assault. Granted that is a fairly extreme example, but it is still a valid one, and one that few people take issue with. More mundane catch-alls include obstruction of justice, misprision of felony, and of course the biggest catch-all: disorderly conduct.
To be a double blind study, you must not have known which files contained which clip. (You could potentially recognize which ones you were stoned in by sight.) So only your friend knew, but gave no indication to you. Then you had people watch the clips, with you not present. Even then this was only a double blind study of people being able to identify one of the videos as involving a more coordinated driver.
But at the time that you were driving, you new you were going to be doing this, no? What was to prevent you from subconsciously choosing to be even more careful during the stoned part then you would have been if normally driving stoned?
I'm not disputing your findings though, as all studies of this topic that I have heard of were either inconclusive, or agrees that stoned drivers are generally safer drivers. But I'm not sure it is fully reasonable to call this a double blind study.
It could even be a normal windows app that has the IE rendering engine embedded, so it functionally acts like a miniature I.E. w/o an address bar. Once the user has chosen a browser, the program could be deleted, or just left there, with the internet browser shortcuts changed.
The reason this is not being done? The Windows 7 CD's are being pressed right now. It is too late to add a program, not to mention test these changes. Instead there will be an update distributed through Windows update shortly after the release. The update will merely add a registry entry to make the browser load the ballot page the next time the browser is loaded. (Using the one time homepage replacement feature of I.E.). This would inherently make no difference if I.E. was not installed.
Keyboards with built-in hubs have been around nearly as long as as USB keyboards. The idea would be that you plug your mouse, and perhaps your joystick into the keyboard, using only one USB port on the computer for all your major input devices. These days, a hub built into the keyboard is often the most convenient USB port for flash drives.
Similarly, it was thought that your monitor might be a USB device (Not fully USB, still using a VGA or DVI cable for the video image, but perhaps passing monitor configuration data (brightness, contrast, ect) as well as power management data.) The monitor would also be a USB hub, into which your speakers and microphone were connected.
Thus all your essential components took up only 2 of your computer's USB ports, leaving the rest for other devices (such as printers or scanners, or mp3 players, or whatnot).
Yes. The browser is a fault for treating an ASN.1 string as a null terminated string. The CA is at fault for issuing a certificate for a domain that does not exist, and in fact is not even legal under the domain name system.
(Yes the second level domain does exist, but the company would not sell me a cert for some non-existant second level domain merely because the.com TLD exists.)
Fair enough. The point of my post though is that a baseband can be configured to act just like a modem, and in fact frequently are. Indeed bringing down the cell network with an AT&T Laptop Connect Card would probably be easier than doing it with the iPhone.
The big problem is that there where multiple issues, at least one of which was a userspace bug. Cox originally questioned the Emacs code on one half of the bug, although he seems to have since taken that back. At first Cox seemed insistent on solving the issue one way which appeared to work but was not technically sound. But now he and Linus appear to agree on the basic solution, although a few issues sound like they still need to be hashed out.
Sure, but it rains often enough up there that I would not be willing to blame the shuttle. More likely the times that conditions are best in Florida for a shuttle launch tend to come the day before it rains in New York.
But I'm sure you posted your anecdote more to be humorous than to seriously suggest a causal link.
Re:First cryptographic fiction?
on
Tetraktys
·
· Score: 1
Really, Cryptonomicon is heavilly based on fact. Very few of the deviations from the real world in said book were not highly deliberate (since all fiction requires deviation from the real world or they would not be fiction).
But it is rather how many novels make little or no attempt to follow the facts. But even worse is TV. Look at CSI. That is awful. Similarly 24 is pretty bad in terms of technology realism. One of the few shows I've seen that really tries is Burn Notice. They clearly have a staff of experts who assist in making the portrayal of technology, weapons, and explosives accurate. No GPS trackers that magically transmit the location to a computer. No hackers who magically break into things. Generally speaking none of the mistakes present in absolutely every episode of CSI, 24, or most other technology heavy fictional television programs.
If other shows tried as hard, many of these other programs would be significantly improved.
Very true. People don't seem to understand that Smartphones are very different from the average nokia brick. To a smartphone the baseband is little more than a modem.
It exposes a couple of interfaces. One is the voice interface, one is that high-speed data interface (this might be the same as the voice interface), and last but not least we have a serial port interface that is used to control the modem, including a AT-style command set.
You can add such a modem to any laptop too. They sell them, and call them things like "The AT&T Laptop Connect Card".
Anything that can be done with the iPhone can be done with one of those cards.
If I recall the book correctly, it was a weapon that was supposed to be thermonuclear, but it was broken due to the bad guy's killing off the scientist a few seconds too soon (resulting in impure tritium being used). However, the reflection of the blast off the snow made the actual yield appear larger to the satellites.
49. Concatenating and UUDecoding binaries from Usenet.
Is this referring to the fact that more Usenet clients have migrated from uuencode to yEnc?
It is more likely referring to the fact that binary Usenet is all but dead. Many ISPs no longer provide any Usenet access at all. Further all of the free public Usenet servers do not carry to binary groups. Paying for a subscription to a Usenet server is not worth it. All of the same stuff is available on torrents, or if one insists on passive downloading, one of the many rapidshare style sites.
Yes. That is exactly what my university does for the wired network. For the wireless network PEAP is used to authenticate users (although the other page must also be filled out, because each machine is given a domain name (subdomain of a subdomain of the University domain name).
In fact I do not believe there is any limit to the number of devices per user either.
At my University we have that completely backwards. There is Wifi access everywhere, that gives you access to both the internal domain and the general internet. There is minimal blocking, notably the only outbound block is the default IRC port, although inbound ports for well known services (HTTP, FTP, etc) are generally blocked . No content filters in place at all. There are two VPN's available for remote access to compus resources. The Cisco VPN is restricted to faculty use, but the Microsoft VPN servers are availble for students (although probably also used by staff.
There are no mandatory programs to install to access the network, although they trick most students into downloading a security suite. The system makes no effort to ensure said suite is installed. If your computer becomes a threat to the network they reserve the right to cut off your access.
All the Windows and Mac computers have Firefox installed for those who prefer it. Many computers have other useful software installed, although the the software available varies by lab. The best computers are those in the Engineering building, which are administered by the Engineering department instead of IT. That includes the Linux machines.
Granted that not everything is ideal. The Linux machines all run RHEL 4, (so the word processor is the relatively awful OO.org 1.x instead of 2.x or 3.x, and they intend to skip over RHEL 5 entirely. OIT has many parts that are barely competent. The biggest thing though is that there is absolutely no access for the general public. There are provisions for guest Wifi access (providing access only to the Internet, not the local domain) but it requires special guest credentials that are available only to special guests of the University.
Be careful. CC-BY may be what you describe, but CC-BY-NC-ND is very much in line with copyright. It permits only verbatim copies of the work be mode for non-commercial purposes. That is more than many rights holders permit, but far less than putting the work in the public domain.
As of Internet Explorer 8 (and I believe also I.E. 7) both Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer support ftp. The Windows Explorer support is better (same interface as back with I.E. 6), but for just downloading the Internet Explorer interface is just barely sufficient.
I did not say the compiler would have perfect support for it. 'gcc --std=c99' includes everything that realistically gets used. The fact of the matter is that there does not exist a single fully compliant C++ compiler either. Comeau C++ with the Dinkumware library comes really close, but it still has issues.
It can only be remotely exploited in that case. However, it can be exploited locally if you load any page that that has a tag of the form <img src="http://192.168.1.1/cgi-bin/;reboot"> replacing 192.168.1.1 with your router's actual IP, and the reboot command with whatever command is desired. So you visit any webpage in any browser and you don't have the browser set to not load images from another domain, and you can be exploited.
No! Don't do that! The laser would be applying a pressure in the wrong direction. If you must, reflect it on a mirror on earth so the light can bounce back up to the craft. (In all actuality, the force from the light pressure is probably insignificant.)
C++0x is just an evolution of C++. It does not add anything that is not already possible, but it does attempt to improve certain usecases. Adding threading support to the language core allows the standard library to be used with threading, and makes it easier to write thread-safe code. (As it is, you need to look up for each and every compiler/standard library pair you use which if any standard library functions are threadsafe.)
The hash-based containers have been fairly standard since the beginning, although there were slight incompatible differences between the implementations, which meant that portibility suffered if you used them. Now adopted by the Standard Library, you can use them in any C++ implementation that support C++0x (Which will be most of them. Even Microsoft plans to strive for a fully complaint implementation, minus a small number of legacy deviations (although they will always remain fairly far from perfect compliance)).
Much of the standardization effort is in bringing chunks of BOOST into the standard library, such that you can just use them without installing all of BOOST (which is pretty extensive). They are adding a few nice convenience features, such as lambdas (really useful with STL algorithms), and a few other features.
Just like any decent C compiler supports C99, all good C++ compilers will support C++0x. It is highly backwards compatible, although a few minor breakages will be present, especially if you use one of the few new keywords as an identifier.
Slashdot Mirror
She also eats dogs?!?!
I'm reasonably confident that you would have a hard time winning any lawsuit against Professor X (Professor Charles Francis Xavier) given his psychic abilities to influence others.
Ethernet using cat5 cabling was specifically designed such that the cheapest hubs would just be RJ45 jacks wired together passively. So one could make a "hub cable" in theory.
Interestingly another instructable linked to the one he showed, was about how to use 1 cat5 cable to every jack in the house to support both phone and Ethernet data.
This person was apparently unaware of the fact that a phone cords 6P4C or 6P2C cable will happily fit into the wider 8P jack. (That is to say that phone cable will plug into Ethernet jacks by design).
Further the Ethernet wiring standard deliberately has pins 3-6 (which correspond to pins 2-5 in a phone style jack, which are the 4 that are normally connected in a phone jack) connected identically to standard phone cord. Further Pins 4 and 5 are deliberately unused in 100Mbs Ethernet, which is the one pair necessary for a single phone line.
Thus if you have a house wired for Ethernet but not phone, adding support for phones to all the jacks is as simple as using Ethernet switches that connect pin 4 of all jacks together and pin 5 of all jacks together, and then plug a pone line into one of the jacks in the switch. (I would actually be surprised if there were not Ethernet switches specially designed for that).
Even if we have a chip capable of simulating the same number of neurons and synapses as the human brain, that will not magically form an artificial life-form. I know little about simulated neural networks, but I do know that they are only a very rough approximation of the workings of the human brain. We still don't understand all the intricacies of the neural and chemical interactions that occur to a sufficient level to properly simulate all of them.
I dispute none of that.
I merely mentioned that while a double blind test, it was not quite the double blind test he made it sound like. The test of the relation between being stoned and driving well was only single blind. That is still reasonable, and at a larger scale would potentially be acceptable for a paper.
Although double blind is preferred, the only way to do that here is to tape the person/people in question driving while both stoned and not stoned, without them realizing they are being taped, much less the purpose of the underlying study. (If they realize they are being taped they will drive more cautiously in both cases, and since we don't know if the amount of additional caution would be the same for both the stoned and not stoned).
DWI means "Driving While Intoxicated" in at least some of the states that use that term rather than DUI. That said, any driving while significantly impaired is at absolutely minimum a violation of the prohibitions against reckless endangerment. The simple fact of the matter is that there are quite a few catch-all laws out there that can be used when for some reason the primary laws about the activity in question fail to apply.
Take for example Sexual Assault. That is broadly defined in many places, so in the event that due to a technicality an act of forced sex did not qualify as rape, it will still qualify as sexual assault. Granted that is a fairly extreme example, but it is still a valid one, and one that few people take issue with. More mundane catch-alls include obstruction of justice, misprision of felony, and of course the biggest catch-all: disorderly conduct.
To be a double blind study, you must not have known which files contained which clip. (You could potentially recognize which ones you were stoned in by sight.) So only your friend knew, but gave no indication to you. Then you had people watch the clips, with you not present. Even then this was only a double blind study of people being able to identify one of the videos as involving a more coordinated driver.
But at the time that you were driving, you new you were going to be doing this, no? What was to prevent you from subconsciously choosing to be even more careful during the stoned part then you would have been if normally driving stoned?
I'm not disputing your findings though, as all studies of this topic that I have heard of were either inconclusive, or agrees that stoned drivers are generally safer drivers. But I'm not sure it is fully reasonable to call this a double blind study.
It could even be a normal windows app that has the IE rendering engine embedded, so it functionally acts like a miniature I.E. w/o an address bar. Once the user has chosen a browser, the program could be deleted, or just left there, with the internet browser shortcuts changed.
The reason this is not being done? The Windows 7 CD's are being pressed right now. It is too late to add a program, not to mention test these changes. Instead there will be an update distributed through Windows update shortly after the release. The update will merely add a registry entry to make the browser load the ballot page the next time the browser is loaded. (Using the one time homepage replacement feature of I.E.). This would inherently make no difference if I.E. was not installed.
Keyboards with built-in hubs have been around nearly as long as as USB keyboards. The idea would be that you plug your mouse, and perhaps your joystick into the keyboard, using only one USB port on the computer for all your major input devices. These days, a hub built into the keyboard is often the most convenient USB port for flash drives.
Similarly, it was thought that your monitor might be a USB device (Not fully USB, still using a VGA or DVI cable for the video image, but perhaps passing monitor configuration data (brightness, contrast, ect) as well as power management data.) The monitor would also be a USB hub, into which your speakers and microphone were connected.
Thus all your essential components took up only 2 of your computer's USB ports, leaving the rest for other devices (such as printers or scanners, or mp3 players, or whatnot).
Yes. The browser is a fault for treating an ASN.1 string as a null terminated string.
The CA is at fault for issuing a certificate for a domain that does not exist, and in fact is not even legal under the domain name system.
(Yes the second level domain does exist, but the company would not sell me a cert for some non-existant second level domain merely because the .com TLD exists.)
Fair enough. The point of my post though is that a baseband can be configured to act just like a modem, and in fact frequently are. Indeed bringing down the cell network with an AT&T Laptop Connect Card would probably be easier than doing it with the iPhone.
The whole thing is publicly available. See This Google Groups thread
The big problem is that there where multiple issues, at least one of which was a userspace bug. Cox originally questioned the Emacs code on one half of the bug, although he seems to have since taken that back. At first Cox seemed insistent on solving the issue one way which appeared to work but was not technically sound. But now he and Linus appear to agree on the basic solution, although a few issues sound like they still need to be hashed out.
Overall a classic miscommunication flare-up.
Sure, but it rains often enough up there that I would not be willing to blame the shuttle. More likely the times that conditions are best in Florida for a shuttle launch tend to come the day before it rains in New York.
But I'm sure you posted your anecdote more to be humorous than to seriously suggest a causal link.
Really, Cryptonomicon is heavilly based on fact. Very few of the deviations from the real world in said book were not highly deliberate (since all fiction requires deviation from the real world or they would not be fiction).
But it is rather how many novels make little or no attempt to follow the facts. But even worse is TV. Look at CSI. That is awful. Similarly 24 is pretty bad in terms of technology realism. One of the few shows I've seen that really tries is Burn Notice. They clearly have a staff of experts who assist in making the portrayal of technology, weapons, and explosives accurate. No GPS trackers that magically transmit the location to a computer. No hackers who magically break into things. Generally speaking none of the mistakes present in absolutely every episode of CSI, 24, or most other technology heavy fictional television programs.
If other shows tried as hard, many of these other programs would be significantly improved.
Very true. People don't seem to understand that Smartphones are very different from the average nokia brick. To a smartphone the baseband is little more than a modem.
It exposes a couple of interfaces. One is the voice interface, one is that high-speed data interface (this might be the same as the voice interface), and last but not least we have a serial port interface that is used to control the modem, including a AT-style command set.
You can add such a modem to any laptop too. They sell them, and call them things like "The AT&T Laptop Connect Card".
Anything that can be done with the iPhone can be done with one of those cards.
If I recall the book correctly, it was a weapon that was supposed to be thermonuclear, but it was broken due to the bad guy's killing off the scientist a few seconds too soon (resulting in impure tritium being used). However, the reflection of the blast off the snow made the actual yield appear larger to the satellites.
49. Concatenating and UUDecoding binaries from Usenet.
Is this referring to the fact that more Usenet clients have migrated from uuencode to yEnc?
It is more likely referring to the fact that binary Usenet is all but dead. Many ISPs no longer provide any Usenet access at all. Further all of the free public Usenet servers do not carry to binary groups. Paying for a subscription to a Usenet server is not worth it. All of the same stuff is available on torrents, or if one insists on passive downloading, one of the many rapidshare style sites.
Yes. That is exactly what my university does for the wired network. For the wireless network PEAP is used to authenticate users (although the other page must also be filled out, because each machine is given a domain name (subdomain of a subdomain of the University domain name).
In fact I do not believe there is any limit to the number of devices per user either.
At my University we have that completely backwards. There is Wifi access everywhere, that gives you access to both the internal domain and the general internet. There is minimal blocking, notably the only outbound block is the default IRC port, although inbound ports for well known services (HTTP, FTP, etc) are generally blocked . No content filters in place at all. There are two VPN's available for remote access to compus resources. The Cisco VPN is restricted to faculty use, but the Microsoft VPN servers are availble for students (although probably also used by staff.
There are no mandatory programs to install to access the network, although they trick most students into downloading a security suite. The system makes no effort to ensure said suite is installed. If your computer becomes a threat to the network they reserve the right to cut off your access.
All the Windows and Mac computers have Firefox installed for those who prefer it. Many computers have other useful software installed, although the the software available varies by lab. The best computers are those in the Engineering building, which are administered by the Engineering department instead of IT. That includes the Linux machines.
Granted that not everything is ideal. The Linux machines all run RHEL 4, (so the word processor is the relatively awful OO.org 1.x instead of 2.x or 3.x, and they intend to skip over RHEL 5 entirely. OIT has many parts that are barely competent. The biggest thing though is that there is absolutely no access for the general public. There are provisions for guest Wifi access (providing access only to the Internet, not the local domain) but it requires special guest credentials that are available only to special guests of the University.
Be careful. CC-BY may be what you describe, but CC-BY-NC-ND is very much in line with copyright. It permits only verbatim copies of the work be mode for non-commercial purposes. That is more than many rights holders permit, but far less than putting the work in the public domain.
As of Internet Explorer 8 (and I believe also I.E. 7) both Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer support ftp. The Windows Explorer support is better (same interface as back with I.E. 6), but for just downloading the Internet Explorer interface is just barely sufficient.
I did not say the compiler would have perfect support for it. 'gcc --std=c99' includes everything that realistically gets used. The fact of the matter is that there does not exist a single fully compliant C++ compiler either. Comeau C++ with the Dinkumware library comes really close, but it still has issues.
It can only be remotely exploited in that case. However, it can be exploited locally if you load any page that that has a tag of the form <img src="http://192.168.1.1/cgi-bin/;reboot"> replacing 192.168.1.1 with your router's actual IP, and the reboot command with whatever command is desired. So you visit any webpage in any browser and you don't have the browser set to not load images from another domain, and you can be exploited.
No! Don't do that! The laser would be applying a pressure in the wrong direction. If you must, reflect it on a mirror on earth so the light can bounce back up to the craft. (In all actuality, the force from the light pressure is probably insignificant.)
C++0x is just an evolution of C++. It does not add anything that is not already possible, but it does attempt to improve certain usecases. Adding threading support to the language core allows the standard library to be used with threading, and makes it easier to write thread-safe code. (As it is, you need to look up for each and every compiler/standard library pair you use which if any standard library functions are threadsafe.)
The hash-based containers have been fairly standard since the beginning, although there were slight incompatible differences between the implementations, which meant that portibility suffered if you used them. Now adopted by the Standard Library, you can use them in any C++ implementation that support C++0x (Which will be most of them. Even Microsoft plans to strive for a fully complaint implementation, minus a small number of legacy deviations (although they will always remain fairly far from perfect compliance)).
Much of the standardization effort is in bringing chunks of BOOST into the standard library, such that you can just use them without installing all of BOOST (which is pretty extensive). They are adding a few nice convenience features, such as lambdas (really useful with STL algorithms), and a few other features.
Just like any decent C compiler supports C99, all good C++ compilers will support C++0x. It is highly backwards compatible, although a few minor breakages will be present, especially if you use one of the few new keywords as an identifier.