I've also done 2 years of physics, at 2 different high schools, and those were well taught classes that had time to cover their material. They didn't go over homework at the start of class. In fact, one of my teachers didn't actually grade the homework, just strongly advised doing it. There was an extremely strong relationship between doing the homework and passing, and everyone figured that out very quickly. Even though the homework wasn't graded, everyone who cared about the class still completed it.
Apparently at some colleges this is the preferred way of handling homework. At mine though, I did not have a single class where the homework was optional. One class had one mandatory problem (that was invariably rather easy) and the rest of the problems assigned were suggested problems to attempt.
There were apparently two main reasons for graded homework. The first being that it provided feedback to the professor as to what was and what was not being understood, so the professor could adjust accordingly.
The second being a university wide rule that no courses were permitted where the final grade was determined solely by exam scores. Thus the professors needed wither graded homework, Papers, projects, or similar. Outside of liberal-arts style classes, this was nearly invariably implemented at least in part by homework, although projects were also somewhat common.
I fully agree that separating out students is the right thing to do.
There are however two problems with this. One is politico-cultural, which is that the American public will not by-and-large accept this idea.
The second issue is that most implementations of such a system in other countries tend to decide which level or path you take based on a single test, or the grades of a single year. That puts tremendous pressure on a student still in middle school, and one bad day can ruin their chances at their desired career. That typeof pressure actually helps some students, but really hurts others.
A better system would allow for the top students in the first grade level or two post-separation the option to transfer up. Similarly students who fail, or who just barely pass would be given the option of transferring down. (There are many students who would gladly choose easier courses if given the option).
Many public high schools use Honors or AP variants of their courses to simulate such a system, but they only offer some courses with such variants, and thus you still get stuck in some courses designed such that the class can be passed even by students who will later flunk out of a trade school. Such courses by design will never be particularly challenging to students who attend competitive Universities.
True. The key here is to have net positive reserves, and a budget with a small surplus (the small surplus being needed to counteract the expected future interest of any current debts, since that is not accounted for ahead of time). If the amount of money you have in the bank is greater than the amount of debt you have, then you are in fine shape. Debt is only a problem if you are unable to pay it off.
Even if everyone acted rationally, you would then have the instability which is generated because all of these rational people would then change their behavior based on... the model. It's unclear, and in my eyes rather unlikely, that a "fixed point" exists where all of these rational people start behaving identically and predictably.
Hell, even if it were the case that there were a point when people acted in a totally predictable fashion, despite or because of the existence of the model, there is still another issue. Any sufficiently high quality economic model will be modeling a chaotic system. By definition chaotic systems are extremely sensitive to initial conditions. Even if your model has the parameters perfect, if you are even slightly off in your initial conditions the output can differ enormously. This is actually made worse by the fact the the chaotic portion of the model often has minimal impact on the output most of the time, but other times it becomes a dominant factor.
For example, chaos becomes a dominant factor during a catastrophic market collapse, since the exact order of events (what company's go out of business in what order, whose stock prices drop the most before regulators freeze trading, etc) is extremely sensitive to initial conditions, and the order of events determine whether certain events occur at all. If the order of events allows one of the big players in said market barely managing to remain in the game vs them going out of business can make an enormous difference in how quickly said market can recover.
Amazon Streaming is also officially supported on all Google TV devices. (That sounds more impressive than it really is since there are only 3 such devices yet).
The amendment clearly states "Cruel and Unusual punishment". The sex offenders registry system has long be ruled to not qualify as punishment (which is obviously bullshit). Such new measures would likely get the same treatment.
AmigaOS is still somewhat of a toy operating system though, considering that at is core is Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes)
Oy! AmigaOS is completely unrelated to MS-DOS/PC-DOS/etc. The only thing they have in common is that they were both used in the 80's and 90's.
It is completely unrelated to x86 DOS systems, but it does consist of AmigaDOS with Workbench (the GUI) running on top of it. AmigaDos uses similar syntax to x86 DOSes (despite not sharing code, and having incompatible kernel calls.) Thus I worded it "Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes)".
albeit one that supports preemptive multitasking, but only cooperative memory protection.
"cooperative memory protection"? You mean "no memory protection".
Ah but there is some form of limited memory protection. The Wikipedia calls it "co-operative memory protection" or "co-operational memory protection". Only part of other processes memory space in mapped into the memory space of other processes, permitting the existing message passing IPC convention while limiting the damage a runaway process can do to other processes. I'm not really clear on the exact details.
I'm honestly not exactly sure. It is listed on both the Amiga and AmigaOS 4 pages as "co-operational memory protection" and "co-operative memory protection" respectively.
The best I can guess is that perhaps the OS removes the write bits from the pages that do not belong to the current process, thus preventing them from inadvertently scribbling over other processes memory. That is completely a guess though, since I have no clue what is really meant.
It run AmigaOS 4.x, so that makes it special. AmigaOS is still somewhat of a toy operating system though, considering that at is core is Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes), albeit one that supports preemptive multitasking, but only cooperative memory protection. It has a GUI system named Workbench, which has a visual flavor most reminiscent of Mac OS Classic.
You forgot one case, which is when the production prevents or places significant limits on the use of the area by other people. If doing filming that will effectively block a road (even if it is just people standing in the street) then a permit should be required. Similarly if no construction occurred, but the production consisted of a large number of people, making a section of the park too crowed for other people.
This production has minimal impact on others using the park, so it case also would not apply.
The trouble is that Navigation systems have two very distinct narration types. One is a set of prerecorded sentences and words. Those are relatively inexpensive to make, and most celebrity navigation systems use this. For example all NavTones voices use this style.
The other is true Text-to-speech. This system is a lot harder since it requires adjusting the incredible number of parameters to get a voice that sounds a close as possible. For things like celebrities it would also work best if any canned text were tweaked to match their style of speaking, but that is not hard, and in fact most multi-lingual systems like navigation will have the phases be included with the voice anyway, since the phases will differ by language.
I have to believe that the cost of setting up new TTS voices must be really high, since Garmin offers relatively few of them. After all, if it only cost them $1000 for a voice, they would be idiotic not to have around 100 of them for English, and similar quantities for other popular languages, since that would be a substantial selling feature.
There are a few possible reasons. One is that I'm pretty darn sure the TTS occurs locally, which means they are limited to the processor on the phone. Even then, the voice is more artificial than the phone is capable of, so I doubt this was a major factor.
Possibility two is that while the TTS is definitely the one part of Siri that can be replaced without any impact on the rest, they may have stuck with whatever TTS engine was in use by SRI when they were developing SIRI just to get it out the door as quickly as possible.
That they deliberately wanted an artificial sounding voice is definitely also a possibility.
Many of these are software stacks that handle the decryption, but then pass the plaintext on to custom code to use. That custom code will almost invariably leak information, and there is nothing the stack manufacture can do to stop it.
It is not feasible to require the custom code return only success or failure, and to always take constant time for all messages of a specified size. If the time was non-constant then that would almost certainly leak the necessary information. If the response for invalid encoding were allowed to differ from the response for successful decoding but invalid message that would also leak the necessary information.
If the standard had said AES-EAX or AES-OCB as the required cypher, then if the stack is well implemented the only information that might be leaked to an attacker is that the modified message was rejected for being modified (which is information the attacker already knew and which leaks no information about the original message itself).
Considering that we are talking about primary school students, I'm not sure the concept of a textbook is particularly applicable.
Even when talking about post-primary education though, textbooks have a limited set of problems, while a computer program can have a set of parametrized problems supporting step by step solutions. thus if you are having difficulty figuring an answer out, you can request the steps and solution, and do not lose out on being able to try a similar problem now that this original one has been spoiled. Obviously that mostly applies to math, science, and engineering courses, since computers cannot easily generate say reasonable reading comprehension questions.
The French code of criminal procedure does not distinguish between on-duty and off duty judicial police officers. Indeed the only thing even remotely close is Article 59, which (under normal circumstances) limits searches and house visits to between 6 am and 9 pm.
It is possible that the non-codified laws or regulations limit them, but they appear to have all their rights and protections all the time.
Gold's price is based in significant part on its intrinsic value, while paper currency's intrinsic value is too small to be a significant part, but that is the sole difference
The current price of gold exceeds the intrinsic value of gold. If fewer people were investing in gold, and sitting on it, (which ties up our supply) then gold would cost less per ounce. Guess what? That is exactly what people complain about with fiat currencies. The paper money is printed on also has intrinsic value (a small fraction of a cent, but still more than zero), but the face value (price) for a one dollar bill greatly exceeds the intrinsic value of the paper. .
The simple fact is that this occurs with any possible currency. If tomorrow we went with oil as a currency, the price per barrel would increase (well it might first decrease due to lower barriers of trade, but it would eventually increase) despite no increase in the intrinsic value of oil. This happens for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is hoarding, effectively which makes the resource in question scarcer, which in turn increases the price.
Of course, oil is very unpalatable as a currency, as nobody likes to literally burn their money, but the point still stands.
Not to mention that there are several psychiatric (psychological and/or neurological) disorders found in adults that are caused in part by a failure to completely distinguish real and imagined events.Assuming that young children fully understand the difference seems unwarranted.
Now even young children can distinguish some events as definitely imagined, but not all such events will be distinguished, and by default, events not believed to be imagined are assumed to be real.
If there is one thing Apple has shown it is that more options is not better. The iPod has always been regarded as among the best dedicated portable media players, and it has an extremely small number of users configurable options, and fewer features too[1]. All the other MP3 players had more options and more features like FM radios, more formats, etc.
Or consider Windows Mobile vs iPhone. Windows Mobile 6 had far more options hands down. I mean it literally had a scaled down version of the Windows Registry. Once again Apple comes in with a Streamlined system that sacrifices options and features in exchange for a vastly improved UI, and once again they revolutionized an industry.
The best software designers try very hard to limit the number of options. As a general rule, it is actually better to have several competing apps each with zero options, but which just work, than to have one app that can be configured to look/act like all the rest, but does not work as well.
[1] Ignoring the iPod Touch, since that is not an iPod at all, but an iPhone without the cellular modem.
You realize that you need to drag a tab pretty far to pull it off. Pulling downwards in Chrome, you have to get past the middle of the address bar before the tab pops off. In Firefox, I have to reach the bottom of the address bar before the tab comes off. Somebody who can accidentally move the mouse that far should probably try slowing down the cursor speed. That is by far the easiest way to increase mouse precision.
I doubt the fmigration away from firefox is based mostly on performance, but based upon other things, like the insanely frequent updates, which are very visible and annoying. (Slow startup times as the updates get installed, and losing add-on compatibility). In contrast Chrome updates almost as often, but I rarely ever notice, except when visible changes are made to the new tab screen.
I personally use both browsers almost equally, and it is actually rare when they are not both running at the same time. I fully expect that over time I'll end up using Firefox less and less, and I would definitely recommend Chrome over Firefox to IE refugees.
I should also note that the database is currently being maintained by Robert Elz, in the absence of a formally appointed TZ Coordinator. IANA has effectively accepted him as interim TZ Coordinator[1] by they way of adopting the release he made on October 10 as the initial IANA published tzdata file.
[1] Until a formal TZ Coordinator is chosen by mailing list consensus and confirmed by the IESG, as per the as yet unpublished RFC.
ICANN is not taking over maintenance of the timezone database. The plan has been for a long time to maintain it under the IANA.
While technically the IANA is part of ICANN, they are still quite distinct. I have nothing but respect for the IANA, while I have nothing but disdain for ICANN (the policy organization). The difference? ICANN's board is not able to meddle with IANA, or the IAB (Internet Architecture Board) would designate a new IANA. Without the IANA, ICANN could only set, but not enforce policy, and the US Government would terminate the contract with ICANN. The result would be the death of ICANN.
The timezone database will continue to be maintained by an IETF designated expert, not by an ICANN policy committee. The internet draft (draft-lear-iana-timezone-database-04) has been approved for publication as an RFC, and the IANA has now implemented its side as per the standard RFC publication process. The IANA time-zone page remains unofficial until the RFC is published, but its already a done deal.
Where the hell does Spamhaus get the authority to dictate routing policy?
If Spamhaus feels that Cyberbunker is harboring spammers, and is being uncooperative, I can see Spamhaus adding all of Cyberbunker's blocks to the blacklist.
I can even see Spamhaus contacting A2B and asking A2B to tell Spamhaus what addresses from A2B's blocks have been assigned to Cyberbunker, such that Spamhaus can block Cyberbunker without blocking the rest of A2B.
But SpamHaus instead demands that A2B stop routing all traffic from Cyberbunker. That goes beyond preventing spam, and is plain abuse of Spamhaus's influence.
No ssh authentication information is stored in cookies. Only the username used to authenticate to GateOne itself lives in the cookie, and it is a signed unforgeable cookie.
Slashdot Mirror
I've also done 2 years of physics, at 2 different high schools, and those were well taught classes that had time to cover their material. They didn't go over homework at the start of class. In fact, one of my teachers didn't actually grade the homework, just strongly advised doing it. There was an extremely strong relationship between doing the homework and passing, and everyone figured that out very quickly. Even though the homework wasn't graded, everyone who cared about the class still completed it.
Apparently at some colleges this is the preferred way of handling homework. At mine though, I did not have a single class where the homework was optional. One class had one mandatory problem (that was invariably rather easy) and the rest of the problems assigned were suggested problems to attempt.
There were apparently two main reasons for graded homework. The first being that it provided feedback to the professor as to what was and what was not being understood, so the professor could adjust accordingly.
The second being a university wide rule that no courses were permitted where the final grade was determined solely by exam scores. Thus the professors needed wither graded homework, Papers, projects, or similar. Outside of liberal-arts style classes, this was nearly invariably implemented at least in part by homework, although projects were also somewhat common.
I fully agree that separating out students is the right thing to do.
There are however two problems with this. One is politico-cultural, which is that the American public will not by-and-large accept this idea.
The second issue is that most implementations of such a system in other countries tend to decide which level or path you take based on a single test, or the grades of a single year. That puts tremendous pressure on a student still in middle school, and one bad day can ruin their chances at their desired career. That typeof pressure actually helps some students, but really hurts others.
A better system would allow for the top students in the first grade level or two post-separation the option to transfer up. Similarly students who fail, or who just barely pass would be given the option of transferring down. (There are many students who would gladly choose easier courses if given the option).
Many public high schools use Honors or AP variants of their courses to simulate such a system, but they only offer some courses with such variants, and thus you still get stuck in some courses designed such that the class can be passed even by students who will later flunk out of a trade school. Such courses by design will never be particularly challenging to students who attend competitive Universities.
True. The key here is to have net positive reserves, and a budget with a small surplus (the small surplus being needed to counteract the expected future interest of any current debts, since that is not accounted for ahead of time). If the amount of money you have in the bank is greater than the amount of debt you have, then you are in fine shape. Debt is only a problem if you are unable to pay it off.
Even if everyone acted rationally, you would then have the instability which is generated because all of these rational people would then change their behavior based on ... the model. It's unclear, and in my eyes rather unlikely, that a "fixed point" exists where all of these rational people start behaving identically and predictably.
Hell, even if it were the case that there were a point when people acted in a totally predictable fashion, despite or because of the existence of the model, there is still another issue. Any sufficiently high quality economic model will be modeling a chaotic system. By definition chaotic systems are extremely sensitive to initial conditions. Even if your model has the parameters perfect, if you are even slightly off in your initial conditions the output can differ enormously. This is actually made worse by the fact the the chaotic portion of the model often has minimal impact on the output most of the time, but other times it becomes a dominant factor.
For example, chaos becomes a dominant factor during a catastrophic market collapse, since the exact order of events (what company's go out of business in what order, whose stock prices drop the most before regulators freeze trading, etc) is extremely sensitive to initial conditions, and the order of events determine whether certain events occur at all. If the order of events allows one of the big players in said market barely managing to remain in the game vs them going out of business can make an enormous difference in how quickly said market can recover.
Amazon Streaming is also officially supported on all Google TV devices. (That sounds more impressive than it really is since there are only 3 such devices yet).
The amendment clearly states "Cruel and Unusual punishment". The sex offenders registry system has long be ruled to not qualify as punishment (which is obviously bullshit). Such new measures would likely get the same treatment.
AmigaOS is still somewhat of a toy operating system though, considering that at is core is Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes)
Oy! AmigaOS is completely unrelated to MS-DOS/PC-DOS/etc. The only thing they have in common is that they were both used in the 80's and 90's.
It is completely unrelated to x86 DOS systems, but it does consist of AmigaDOS with Workbench (the GUI) running on top of it. AmigaDos uses similar syntax to x86 DOSes (despite not sharing code, and having incompatible kernel calls.) Thus I worded it "Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes)".
albeit one that supports preemptive multitasking, but only cooperative memory protection.
"cooperative memory protection"? You mean "no memory protection".
Ah but there is some form of limited memory protection. The Wikipedia calls it "co-operative memory protection" or "co-operational memory protection". Only part of other processes memory space in mapped into the memory space of other processes, permitting the existing message passing IPC convention while limiting the damage a runaway process can do to other processes. I'm not really clear on the exact details.
I'm honestly not exactly sure. It is listed on both the Amiga and AmigaOS 4 pages as "co-operational memory protection" and "co-operative memory protection" respectively.
The best I can guess is that perhaps the OS removes the write bits from the pages that do not belong to the current process, thus preventing them from inadvertently scribbling over other processes memory. That is completely a guess though, since I have no clue what is really meant.
It run AmigaOS 4.x, so that makes it special. AmigaOS is still somewhat of a toy operating system though, considering that at is core is Disk Operating System (not unlike the various x86 DOSes), albeit one that supports preemptive multitasking, but only cooperative memory protection. It has a GUI system named Workbench, which has a visual flavor most reminiscent of Mac OS Classic.
You forgot one case, which is when the production prevents or places significant limits on the use of the area by other people. If doing filming that will effectively block a road (even if it is just people standing in the street) then a permit should be required. Similarly if no construction occurred, but the production consisted of a large number of people, making a section of the park too crowed for other people.
This production has minimal impact on others using the park, so it case also would not apply.
The trouble is that Navigation systems have two very distinct narration types. One is a set of prerecorded sentences and words. Those are relatively inexpensive to make, and most celebrity navigation systems use this. For example all NavTones voices use this style.
The other is true Text-to-speech. This system is a lot harder since it requires adjusting the incredible number of parameters to get a voice that sounds a close as possible. For things like celebrities it would also work best if any canned text were tweaked to match their style of speaking, but that is not hard, and in fact most multi-lingual systems like navigation will have the phases be included with the voice anyway, since the phases will differ by language.
I have to believe that the cost of setting up new TTS voices must be really high, since Garmin offers relatively few of them. After all, if it only cost them $1000 for a voice, they would be idiotic not to have around 100 of them for English, and similar quantities for other popular languages, since that would be a substantial selling feature.
There are a few possible reasons. One is that I'm pretty darn sure the TTS occurs locally, which means they are limited to the processor on the phone. Even then, the voice is more artificial than the phone is capable of, so I doubt this was a major factor.
Possibility two is that while the TTS is definitely the one part of Siri that can be replaced without any impact on the rest, they may have stuck with whatever TTS engine was in use by SRI when they were developing SIRI just to get it out the door as quickly as possible.
That they deliberately wanted an artificial sounding voice is definitely also a possibility.
Many of these are software stacks that handle the decryption, but then pass the plaintext on to custom code to use. That custom code will almost invariably leak information, and there is nothing the stack manufacture can do to stop it.
It is not feasible to require the custom code return only success or failure, and to always take constant time for all messages of a specified size. If the time was non-constant then that would almost certainly leak the necessary information. If the response for invalid encoding were allowed to differ from the response for successful decoding but invalid message that would also leak the necessary information.
If the standard had said AES-EAX or AES-OCB as the required cypher, then if the stack is well implemented the only information that might be leaked to an attacker is that the modified message was rejected for being modified (which is information the attacker already knew and which leaks no information about the original message itself).
Considering that we are talking about primary school students, I'm not sure the concept of a textbook is particularly applicable.
Even when talking about post-primary education though, textbooks have a limited set of problems, while a computer program can have a set of parametrized problems supporting step by step solutions. thus if you are having difficulty figuring an answer out, you can request the steps and solution, and do not lose out on being able to try a similar problem now that this original one has been spoiled. Obviously that mostly applies to math, science, and engineering courses, since computers cannot easily generate say reasonable reading comprehension questions.
The quote came from the second link. He could not speak openly about that until Dan Morrill announced that the AOSP back up and running.
Dan made that announcement later in the day, at which point JBQ made the G+ comment that you linked to.
The French code of criminal procedure does not distinguish between on-duty and off duty judicial police officers. Indeed the only thing even remotely close is Article 59, which (under normal circumstances) limits searches and house visits to between 6 am and 9 pm.
It is possible that the non-codified laws or regulations limit them, but they appear to have all their rights and protections all the time.
Gold's price is based in significant part on its intrinsic value, while paper currency's intrinsic value is too small to be a significant part, but that is the sole difference
The current price of gold exceeds the intrinsic value of gold. If fewer people were investing in gold, and sitting on it, (which ties up our supply) then gold would cost less per ounce. Guess what? That is exactly what people complain about with fiat currencies. The paper money is printed on also has intrinsic value (a small fraction of a cent, but still more than zero), but the face value (price) for a one dollar bill greatly exceeds the intrinsic value of the paper.
.
The simple fact is that this occurs with any possible currency. If tomorrow we went with oil as a currency, the price per barrel would increase (well it might first decrease due to lower barriers of trade, but it would eventually increase) despite no increase in the intrinsic value of oil. This happens for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is hoarding, effectively which makes the resource in question scarcer, which in turn increases the price.
Of course, oil is very unpalatable as a currency, as nobody likes to literally burn their money, but the point still stands.
Not to mention that there are several psychiatric (psychological and/or neurological) disorders found in adults that are caused in part by a failure to completely distinguish real and imagined events.Assuming that young children fully understand the difference seems unwarranted.
Now even young children can distinguish some events as definitely imagined, but not all such events will be distinguished, and by default, events not believed to be imagined are assumed to be real.
If there is one thing Apple has shown it is that more options is not better. The iPod has always been regarded as among the best dedicated portable media players, and it has an extremely small number of users configurable options, and fewer features too[1]. All the other MP3 players had more options and more features like FM radios, more formats, etc.
Or consider Windows Mobile vs iPhone. Windows Mobile 6 had far more options hands down. I mean it literally had a scaled down version of the Windows Registry. Once again Apple comes in with a Streamlined system that sacrifices options and features in exchange for a vastly improved UI, and once again they revolutionized an industry.
The best software designers try very hard to limit the number of options. As a general rule, it is actually better to have several competing apps each with zero options, but which just work, than to have one app that can be configured to look/act like all the rest, but does not work as well.
[1] Ignoring the iPod Touch, since that is not an iPod at all, but an iPhone without the cellular modem.
You realize that you need to drag a tab pretty far to pull it off. Pulling downwards in Chrome, you have to get past the middle of the address bar before the tab pops off. In Firefox, I have to reach the bottom of the address bar before the tab comes off. Somebody who can accidentally move the mouse that far should probably try slowing down the cursor speed. That is by far the easiest way to increase mouse precision.
I doubt the fmigration away from firefox is based mostly on performance, but based upon other things, like the insanely frequent updates, which are very visible and annoying. (Slow startup times as the updates get installed, and losing add-on compatibility). In contrast Chrome updates almost as often, but I rarely ever notice, except when visible changes are made to the new tab screen.
I personally use both browsers almost equally, and it is actually rare when they are not both running at the same time. I fully expect that over time I'll end up using Firefox less and less, and I would definitely recommend Chrome over Firefox to IE refugees.
I should also note that the database is currently being maintained by Robert Elz, in the absence of a formally appointed TZ Coordinator. IANA has effectively accepted him as interim TZ Coordinator[1] by they way of adopting the release he made on October 10 as the initial IANA published tzdata file.
[1] Until a formal TZ Coordinator is chosen by mailing list consensus and confirmed by the IESG, as per the as yet unpublished RFC.
ICANN is not taking over maintenance of the timezone database. The plan has been for a long time to maintain it under the IANA.
While technically the IANA is part of ICANN, they are still quite distinct. I have nothing but respect for the IANA, while I have nothing but disdain for ICANN (the policy organization). The difference? ICANN's board is not able to meddle with IANA, or the IAB (Internet Architecture Board) would designate a new IANA. Without the IANA, ICANN could only set, but not enforce policy, and the US Government would terminate the contract with ICANN. The result would be the death of ICANN.
The timezone database will continue to be maintained by an IETF designated expert, not by an ICANN policy committee. The internet draft (draft-lear-iana-timezone-database-04) has been approved for publication as an RFC, and the IANA has now implemented its side as per the standard RFC publication process. The IANA time-zone page remains unofficial until the RFC is published, but its already a done deal.
Where the hell does Spamhaus get the authority to dictate routing policy?
If Spamhaus feels that Cyberbunker is harboring spammers, and is being uncooperative, I can see Spamhaus adding all of Cyberbunker's blocks to the blacklist.
I can even see Spamhaus contacting A2B and asking A2B to tell Spamhaus what addresses from A2B's blocks have been assigned to Cyberbunker, such that Spamhaus can block Cyberbunker without blocking the rest of A2B.
But SpamHaus instead demands that A2B stop routing all traffic from Cyberbunker. That goes beyond preventing spam, and is plain abuse of Spamhaus's influence.
No ssh authentication information is stored in cookies. Only the username used to authenticate to GateOne itself lives in the cookie, and it is a signed unforgeable cookie.