But contiguous writes is the absolute (and unrealistic) best case in terms of MB transferred before failure for an HDD, because it minimizes the number of revolutions and seeks per megabyte written. For whatever it's worth, it used to be said that "enterprise grade" drives were designed to withstand constant seeking associated with accesses from multiple processes, instead of fewer seeks associated with sporadic, single-user access.
If seeking does wear a drive, then using an SSD for files that generates lots of seeks will not only greatly speed up the computer, but also extend the life of HDDs relegated to storing big files.
In regard to mixing SDDs and HDDs, there are some great caching programs that allow a single SSD to act as a front end to several HDDs. The driver looks at the traffic coming through, and if it is "mainly sequential writes", bypasses the SSD to write direct to the disk. For random stuff, across the x HDD drives, the SSD acts as a cache. The percentage of Sequential to Random is selectable.
Very recently I purchased my first SDD at about $0.48 per gigabyte (128gig for $59.00) I expect that next year I should be seeing $0.35 per/gig to where I expect by next year, we will have excellent terabyte SDDs for $50.00. Can someone confirm that in SSD size measurement, we are back to 1k=1024 and 1meg=1024x1000, etc.?
SpaceX and the American people thank you, Mr Putin.
In the same light, the financial embargo against Iran is helping Iran to do what it could not do in regular circumstances. It will have the bomb, and industry to not require European, American or other foreign products.
I like compatability, but I've had it with x86. Let ARM hog the limelight for a while, no reason it shouldn't have its fifteen minutes. And let x86 die, it's way past its BBE date and has outstayed its welcome by several generations.
And what architecture would you put into place? RISC? A competitor's chipset? This is not a challenge to you, but an RFI?
I used to program ibm360. There was no little endien arrangment for integers as is the norm in x86. Changing to big endien architecture will make for an interesting change, if it comes about, and with potential performance gains.
With conservative government wanting that pipline to the USA, the planes were meant to sway the deal. Just think, the original bill was for under 10 billion for the planes. Now it is closer to 35.
Harper likes to kiss ass with Obama. Canada does not need those planes. We need vehicles to protect our North and to keep Russia out from claiming our lands. (our ice).
rE SMOKING IS A RIGHT. In a single payer system, the medical costs of curing smoker related diseases is way out of proportion to the world of non-smokers. I wouñd like to see a law that stipulates "if you have smoked in the last 5 years, you are denied medical coverage for consequential illnesses. Got cancer because of smoking? Got money for treatment? No! Too bad. You as a smoker abused the system. Don't come begging.
And not just a little. FAR safer. Violent crime is less than half what it was 20 years ago. And even less compared to 30 years ago.
The only "increasing" violence is news-media propaganda. Because chicks hatching on the farm does not sell news.
In fact, some recent studies have concluded that it was news media coverage, and not guns, which led to copy-cat "mass" shootings on college and other school campuses. (But even so, and even though they are splashed all over the news, THOSE are way down, too, compared to 2-3 decades ago.)
American does not have "increasing" internal violence. It has decreasing violence.
Statistics do not prove cause-and-effect. But a negative correlation can DISprove cause-and-effect.
We have more guns. (Per person!) According to our own government's statistics. Yet we have less violent crime. This is a direct, indisputable DISproof of the idea that "more guns equals more crime".
[Sources: U.S. DOJ, and for more recent years: U.S. Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics]
Most probably the reason violent crime is way down is that fewer people carry cash, and rely on credit and debit cards. Ergo, the stores have much less cash in hand then they had in the past.
This is just an anecdote, not science. But that was the only time I had a general at age 5. That procedure was very common in those days. I never felt as good a muscular coordination aftwards as before. I am used to it after all these decades.
I misread the headline. I thought that it was infantry, as opposed to infancy. I betcha both are true.
If the US really was concerned about Snowden giving US secrets to Russia, why not reinstate his passport so he can leave? They're the reason he's stranded in Russia, not because Snowden wanted to go there.
Can this happen? Russia allows Snowdon as a landed immigrant. After the probationary period, he receives citizenship and a new passport. He will then be able legally to change his name. And by that time, he may also be married and living a happy married life.
Is there any evidence at all that he had contact with Russia prior to ending up there? As far as I know, there isn't.
Yeah. I'll admit my memory of the topic isn't perfect, but I thought it was the folks at wikileaks that that were trying to help him and suggested Russia was the safest stopover point.
You are correct it was Wikileaks that bought him his plane tickets out of Hong Kong when China was looking like they were about to give him up to the US. Russia was supposed to just be a stop where he was supposed to get on a plane bound for Cuba then Ecuador. But the US state department revoked his passport preventing him from leaving the airport in Russia after sitting in the international lobby for weeks unable to leave, Russia gave him a one year grant of asylum. This is just a bunch of political propaganda to discredit Snowden.
Also remember the US forced a landing of the jet carrying the President of Bolivia because we thought that Snowden might be on board.
The only reason Snowden is in Russia is Because the US government has trapped him there.
You guys should realize that live in Russia is not at all bad. Particularly for an educated person. My son worked 10yrs in USA, moved to Latvia (marriage), and after learning Russian, applied to several international companies there. Job prospects were great. He accepted an offer for Moscow, but his wife refused to relocate there, and that kaboshed that opportunity. Salaries, when you factor in Free quality medicare, is comparable to that earned by an MBA with 15 years management experience.
Good food, one month vacations, great vacation areas. Negative -- cost of housing, if you want an independent house, like a cottage or bungalow.
Exactly. You see that more often that hints are being given about circumstances that would have lead to a different outcome. Even in copyright trolling cases. Just the phrase "(hint, hint!)" is missing. So for instance it wouldn't be "Denied because it is unclear if the subscriber is the perpetrator" it becomes instead "Denied because no secondary evidence was presented where -for instance being the only adult male in the household- it could be presumed that the subscriber is the only one likely to have been the perpetrator, which would be enough evidence to grant the subpoena". As I said, only the "(hint, hint)" is missing.
If the police orders you to "stop filming" even IF YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO DO SO, you are still not following their orders. This ALSO applies to flight attendants. It doesn't matter ONE LITTLE BIT if the order was proper, you ARE guilty of not following it.
The CURRENT "proper way" of doing this is to follow their orders and then file a complaint at the station about the infringement on your rights. And yes, you won't have your videotaped evidence. And yes, police will likely retaliate. And no, the officer won't be immediately fired with cause. You lose.
Do you think there can be a counter suit for "invasion of privacy"?. You just can't film someone without their approval, or can you?
No, the death sentence is reserved for politicians and prime ministers who go to war on false pretenses just to get re-elected, resulting in loss of life or threat to the country's national security. From the article: "The UK government will seek to ensure sentences for attacks on society fully reflect the damage they cause".
Iran issued and implemented the death penalty for just this reason. The individual was hanged. At first I thought it was excessive, but now I realize it is almost like destroying an economy of a country.
Let's face it though. He is guilty. He admits what he's done. We can argue about what the law should be, but not what the law is. It's illegal to take classified documents like Snowden did, and start giving them away to everybody like Snowden did. His reasons for doing what he did are irrelevant as it pertains to his legal liability. The fact that he or even the public sees himself as a whistle blower over illegal actions by the government are irrelevant as they pertain to his legal liability.
Of course, we do have jury nullification in the common law system. A jury could very well say, okay, well he did the crime, the evidence is overwhelming, but we're not going to say he's guilty because we don't agree with the law. That's quite possible. Sure, the prosecutor and judge will try to tell the jury that's not allowed, but it is, and it can happen. The jury system exists specifically so the people can check the government's power.
This is all a separate matter from trial fairness, of course. If I was Snowden, I might not be so inclined to trust a US federal court with my fate. The judge might disallow evidence or testimony that would give Snowden and his lawyers a chance to argue however subtlety for jury nullification. The judge might not sustain valid objections from the defense. The judge could give a horribly unfair instruction. All kinds of things could happen. Considering the overwhelming political pressures that are sure to be placed on any kind of trial, Snowden might very well find himself screwed. He might also think it was all worth it anyway.
Then of course we have the appeals system and of course the presidential pardon. Even if Snowden doesn't get a jury to nullify, that's hardly the end of it. He might get his case to the Supreme Court and have a fairer chance there. He might also have a groundswell of popular support that results in a pardon or at least a commutation of his sentence.
Personally, I would like to see Snowden prosecuted for the crimes he's accused of and given a trial by his peers. I would very much like to see him get a fair trial, with all the evidence and arguments heard. The outcome of such a trial would be of great interest to me, as well as whatever happens afterwards. We would all learn something from it. It might suck for Snowden, but he thinks he's doing all of this to teach the American people about their government. The way his trial is conducted would certainly teach us all about our government.
Did the documents become classified after they were taken? Nowhere did I read that they were classified at the time he made copies.
They had the same problem prior to the year 2000, so why wasn't this lesson already learned?
Why is this a problem. My wristwatch is an embedded system that drives the display and hands. What about vending machine software or even home washer/dryer products. So they are not maintainable, unless we upgrade.
Isn't that part of the "disposable society", where we get bored of some products and upgrade as a replacement for food or sex satisfaction?
For reasons known only to them, they wanted phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops to all use the same interface. Since a start menu doesn't work well on a phone, they opted to remove it.
Would you not think that with a single interface, that a) The support team size can be optimized (smaller is better), and b) reliability can be improved, as any bug found would be common to all products, leading to faster roll out of patches, and c) Only one architecture to protect from hackers.
Reminds me of Henry Ford and the early startup times. All the car colors he initially manufactured were standard black. No other color was available. Ergo All you will have from MS is one interface, no others available.
It's simple; you just need to change the motions of the heavenly bodies so that Earth orbits the sun exactly 13 times per year, the Earth rotates exactly 28 times per month, and the Moon orbits the Earth exactly once per month. If you can arrange that, I'll gladly switch to your new calendar.
Are you describing the Jewish and Chinese calendars?
Looks like some special interests are trying to strike another blow against people actually owning the movies that they buy. Lets list some other benefits: You don't get to watch the disc again, or lend it to a friend. And if you do watch it again on-line, you can completely ignore any costs involved (because that's what the research did). You're not distracted by the extra content included on DVDs. The lower quality streaming video is perfectly fine for you. You're completely freed from the "right of first sale' and will never have to concern yourself with selling or trading old DVDs that you have. And those nice people at your ISP who have started capping your service and who will charge outrageous overages if you happen to exceed your monthly quota will gladly forgive your overage if you explain how you were downloading or streaming for the sake of the planet (wouldn't you, AT&T?)
Think of the job loss that would occur. Stores that sell DVDs from artists. Artists also create and sell their own copies would be at a disadvantage. And DVDs are used to store more than music or video information. For disposable information, I do not use a DVD. For archiving, I most certainly do.
As a Quebec'er, the provincial government pays for the vaccines, and they do not want to pay double. Ergo, our and our children and our grandchildren's list of immunizations is on record, available for consultation by the patient. NB, by the patient or his medical doctor.
Here is my conjecture on how to get rich at the expense of the corporation.
I am a senior executive in a company with a lot of cash. That cash is part of the assets of the corporation. I would like to get my hands on that cash, at least as much of it as I can. What can I do. Of course, I would share any gains with some of the other directors. I could not ask the directors to plain give me a huge chunk of it.
Well, I find a company to take over, I purchase a large equity portion of that business, and make a deal with the existing shareholders re a takeover bid.
I then bid for that company, offering top dollar. I put pressure for the deal to proceed. The deal goes through, and my corporation has now exchanged cash assets for assets of the company I purchased, a company that may only be worth 50% or less of the actual purchase price.
As shareholder in the company that is purchased, that receives the cash for the purchase, we arrange that it gets distributed to the shareholders as an extraordinary divident, or as a share buy out. I sell my shares, (distribution of the purchase payment), I put that money in my pocket, and my employer, has, through this manipulation, been emptied of cash, and has received $cash/2 or $cash/3 in value. I of course, make $cash/6 or even $cash/3 via the ownership of the company being taken over.
Such a sweet deal, don't you think? And it is legal, or is it?
Suppose he gets the full punishment. It will serve as his deterrent, but it will also serve as a deterrent to others who could be (mark that should be) helpful to the authorities.
A good question to ask is "Who is the government?". The posting wrote "the government", without explaining if it was the local cop or the DA:
Computers are essentially living encyclopaedias. But it teaches seach, click, cut and paste. In this way, a child picks up a lot of knowledge about his/her assignment. But the kid has lost the ability to concentrate for more than a few seconds. His brain has become wired to 30 seconds of knowledge absorption. Can he read a novel ? No, unless it is a very short story. A 2 hour novel would be a torture for a child. His grandparents generation would find a 4 hour novel as torture. So, we substitute one way of gaining knowledge to a short very superficial way to learn where to visit sites for cut-and-paste assignments.
My grandkids did a complete assignment on a cockroach by googling, cutting images, pasting and putting down a few words. There was no gain in vocabulary that will persist. He could not remember what the belly of the roach was called, though it was important for his presentation (grade 4-5)
An unfired gun is the best defensive weapon that exists. The threat of death is the defensive deterrent. Actually firing is the last resort.
If a gang of 10 people are advancing on somebody and the target pulls a gun, all 10 people stop advancing or run away. If you have a taser or stun gun, you're a non-lethal threat to one of them...and you get one shot. Pepper spray is largely in the same boat (plus you have to account for wind). In both scenarios, you have to wonder if the battery has run out or the spray has expired depending on how long you've carried it.
Bullets last pretty much forever. The device is mechanical and has no dependence on a battery. As a defensive weapon it provides the greatest threat to an attacker and the highest degree of reliability to the carrier for those reasons. The second you start shooting it becomes every man for himself.
Up until you shoot, simply brandishing the weapon is an active deterrent without any need to fire. Brandishing a gun is actually considered assault for that reason. People often forget that when talking about concealed carry. It's as if people imagine that the idea is to tote it around so you can relish the opportunity to shoot somebody. I know many people who are not willing to pull the trigger that will carry an unloaded gun just so that they can pull it out in an emergency to diffuse the situation if they need to.
Additionally, when somebody takes a gun to commit a crime or kill somebody, they have every intention of pulling the trigger and are guaranteed to be armed. When somebody is attacked there is a much lower chance of those people being armed and/or able to retaliate so of course those statistics will be skewed.
Its too bad that you live in a country that kills. There is no G7 country in the world that has as many gun deaths as the USA. Now I presume that you want to arm your kids so that they can feel safe on the way to kindergarten.
I guess you never lived in a country that did not have guns or the death penalty, and which has an even lower crime rate than the USA (crimes per capita). Try any country in Europe, England, Canada, and Russia, and others, for a more safety lifestyle than is possible from a Gun country.
In 2006, we had a secure phone system that used aes encryption. The process worked by calling a specific number, and via SSH, getting a session AES key. That key encrypted the info before it left the phone, and decripted the info after arriving in the phone. We had it for voice and data. AES encryption and decryption was chosen so that the one AES key would serve for both.
It required a key server functionality between partners who prearranged calls. Ideal for embassies, and for other secure communications.
Slashdot Mirror
But contiguous writes is the absolute (and unrealistic) best case in terms of MB transferred before failure for an HDD, because it minimizes the number of revolutions and seeks per megabyte written. For whatever it's worth, it used to be said that "enterprise grade" drives were designed to withstand constant seeking associated with accesses from multiple processes, instead of fewer seeks associated with sporadic, single-user access.
If seeking does wear a drive, then using an SSD for files that generates lots of seeks will not only greatly speed up the computer, but also extend the life of HDDs relegated to storing big files.
In regard to mixing SDDs and HDDs, there are some great caching programs that allow a single SSD to act as a front end to several HDDs. The driver looks at the traffic coming through, and if it is "mainly sequential writes", bypasses the SSD to write direct to the disk. For random stuff, across the x HDD drives, the SSD acts as a cache. The percentage of Sequential to Random is selectable.
Very recently I purchased my first SDD at about $0.48 per gigabyte (128gig for $59.00) I expect that next year I should be seeing $0.35 per/gig to where I expect by next year, we will have excellent terabyte SDDs for $50.00. Can someone confirm that in SSD size measurement, we are back to 1k=1024 and 1meg=1024x1000, etc.?
SpaceX and the American people thank you, Mr Putin.
In the same light, the financial embargo against Iran is helping Iran to do what it could not do in regular circumstances. It will have the bomb, and industry to not require European, American or other foreign products.
Embargos force governments to "roll their own".
I like compatability, but I've had it with x86. Let ARM hog the limelight for a while, no reason it shouldn't have its fifteen minutes. And let x86 die, it's way past its BBE date and has outstayed its welcome by several generations.
And what architecture would you put into place? RISC? A competitor's chipset? This is not a challenge to you, but an RFI?
I used to program ibm360. There was no little endien arrangment for integers as is the norm in x86. Changing to big endien architecture will make for an interesting change, if it comes about, and with potential performance gains.
With conservative government wanting that pipline to the USA, the planes were meant to sway the deal. Just think, the original bill was for under 10 billion for the planes. Now it is closer to 35.
Harper likes to kiss ass with Obama. Canada does not need those planes. We need vehicles to protect our North and to keep Russia out from claiming our lands. (our ice).
rE SMOKING IS A RIGHT. In a single payer system, the medical costs of curing smoker related diseases is way out of proportion to the world of non-smokers. I wouñd like to see a law that stipulates "if you have smoked in the last 5 years, you are denied medical coverage for consequential illnesses. Got cancer because of smoking? Got money for treatment? No! Too bad. You as a smoker abused the system. Don't come begging.
This is the most relevant point:
the US is safer now than ever before.
And not just a little. FAR safer. Violent crime is less than half what it was 20 years ago. And even less compared to 30 years ago.
The only "increasing" violence is news-media propaganda. Because chicks hatching on the farm does not sell news.
In fact, some recent studies have concluded that it was news media coverage, and not guns, which led to copy-cat "mass" shootings on college and other school campuses. (But even so, and even though they are splashed all over the news, THOSE are way down, too, compared to 2-3 decades ago.)
American does not have "increasing" internal violence. It has decreasing violence.
And during the same period, it is interesting to not, per-capita gun ownership in the U.S. has gone steadily up. And also during that same period, concealed-carry laws have become much more common.
Statistics do not prove cause-and-effect. But a negative correlation can DISprove cause-and-effect.
We have more guns. (Per person!) According to our own government's statistics. Yet we have less violent crime. This is a direct, indisputable DISproof of the idea that "more guns equals more crime".
[Sources: U.S. DOJ, and for more recent years: U.S. Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics]
Most probably the reason violent crime is way down is that fewer people carry cash, and rely on credit and debit cards.
Ergo, the stores have much less cash in hand then they had in the past.
This is just an anecdote, not science. But that was the only time I had a general at age 5. That procedure was very common in those days. I never felt as good a muscular coordination aftwards as before. I am used to it after all these decades.
I misread the headline. I thought that it was infantry, as opposed to infancy. I betcha both are true.
This is why I find this discussion so absurd.
If the US really was concerned about Snowden giving US secrets to Russia, why not reinstate his passport so he can leave? They're the reason he's stranded in Russia, not because Snowden wanted to go there.
Can this happen? Russia allows Snowdon as a landed immigrant. After the probationary period, he receives citizenship and a new passport. He will then be able legally to change his name. And by that time, he may also be married and living a happy married life.
Is there any evidence at all that he had contact with Russia prior to ending up there? As far as I know, there isn't.
Yeah. I'll admit my memory of the topic isn't perfect, but I thought it was the folks at wikileaks that that were trying to help him and suggested Russia was the safest stopover point.
You are correct it was Wikileaks that bought him his plane tickets out of Hong Kong when China was looking like they were about to give him up to the US. Russia was supposed to just be a stop where he was supposed to get on a plane bound for Cuba then Ecuador. But the US state department revoked his passport preventing him from leaving the airport in Russia after sitting in the international lobby for weeks unable to leave, Russia gave him a one year grant of asylum. This is just a bunch of political propaganda to discredit Snowden.
Also remember the US forced a landing of the jet carrying the President of Bolivia because we thought that Snowden might be on board.
The only reason Snowden is in Russia is Because the US government has trapped him there.
You guys should realize that live in Russia is not at all bad. Particularly for an educated person. My son worked 10yrs in USA, moved to Latvia (marriage), and after learning Russian, applied to several international companies there. Job prospects were great. He accepted an offer for Moscow, but his wife refused to relocate there, and that kaboshed that opportunity. Salaries, when you factor in Free quality medicare, is comparable to that earned by an MBA with 15 years management experience.
Good food, one month vacations, great vacation areas. Negative -- cost of housing, if you want an independent house, like a cottage or bungalow.
Exactly. You see that more often that hints are being given about circumstances that would have lead to a different outcome. Even in copyright trolling cases. Just the phrase "(hint, hint!)" is missing. So for instance it wouldn't be "Denied because it is unclear if the subscriber is the perpetrator" it becomes instead "Denied because no secondary evidence was presented where -for instance being the only adult male in the household- it could be presumed that the subscriber is the only one likely to have been the perpetrator, which would be enough evidence to grant the subpoena". As I said, only the "(hint, hint)" is missing.
If the police orders you to "stop filming" even IF YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO DO SO, you are still not following their orders. This ALSO applies to flight attendants. It doesn't matter ONE LITTLE BIT if the order was proper, you ARE guilty of not following it.
The CURRENT "proper way" of doing this is to follow their orders and then file a complaint at the station about the infringement on your rights. And yes, you won't have your videotaped evidence. And yes, police will likely retaliate. And no, the officer won't be immediately fired with cause. You lose.
Do you think there can be a counter suit for "invasion of privacy"?. You just can't film someone without their approval, or can you?
No, the death sentence is reserved for politicians and prime ministers who go to war on false pretenses just to get re-elected, resulting in loss of life or threat to the country's national security. From the article: "The UK government will seek to ensure sentences for attacks on society fully reflect the damage they cause".
Iran issued and implemented the death penalty for just this reason. The individual was hanged. At first I thought it was excessive, but now I realize it is almost like destroying an economy of a country.
Iran was first to execute a hacker.
Let's face it though. He is guilty. He admits what he's done. We can argue about what the law should be, but not what the law is. It's illegal to take classified documents like Snowden did, and start giving them away to everybody like Snowden did. His reasons for doing what he did are irrelevant as it pertains to his legal liability. The fact that he or even the public sees himself as a whistle blower over illegal actions by the government are irrelevant as they pertain to his legal liability.
Of course, we do have jury nullification in the common law system. A jury could very well say, okay, well he did the crime, the evidence is overwhelming, but we're not going to say he's guilty because we don't agree with the law. That's quite possible. Sure, the prosecutor and judge will try to tell the jury that's not allowed, but it is, and it can happen. The jury system exists specifically so the people can check the government's power.
This is all a separate matter from trial fairness, of course. If I was Snowden, I might not be so inclined to trust a US federal court with my fate. The judge might disallow evidence or testimony that would give Snowden and his lawyers a chance to argue however subtlety for jury nullification. The judge might not sustain valid objections from the defense. The judge could give a horribly unfair instruction. All kinds of things could happen. Considering the overwhelming political pressures that are sure to be placed on any kind of trial, Snowden might very well find himself screwed. He might also think it was all worth it anyway.
Then of course we have the appeals system and of course the presidential pardon. Even if Snowden doesn't get a jury to nullify, that's hardly the end of it. He might get his case to the Supreme Court and have a fairer chance there. He might also have a groundswell of popular support that results in a pardon or at least a commutation of his sentence.
Personally, I would like to see Snowden prosecuted for the crimes he's accused of and given a trial by his peers. I would very much like to see him get a fair trial, with all the evidence and arguments heard. The outcome of such a trial would be of great interest to me, as well as whatever happens afterwards. We would all learn something from it. It might suck for Snowden, but he thinks he's doing all of this to teach the American people about their government. The way his trial is conducted would certainly teach us all about our government.
Did the documents become classified after they were taken? Nowhere did I read that they were classified at the time he made copies.
You should never trust any drive and always backup your data.
Can you trust the backup drive?
They had the same problem prior to the year 2000, so why wasn't this lesson already learned?
Why is this a problem. My wristwatch is an embedded system that drives the display and hands. What about vending machine software or even home washer/dryer products. So they are not maintainable, unless we upgrade.
Isn't that part of the "disposable society", where we get bored of some products and upgrade as a replacement for food or sex satisfaction?
It is coincidence. Our team idiot is the company owner.
Mine was the boss's son. He was more interested in Playboy mags than the project.
For reasons known only to them, they wanted phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops to all use the same interface. Since a start menu doesn't work well on a phone, they opted to remove it.
Would you not think that with a single interface, that a) The support team size can be optimized (smaller is better), and b) reliability can be improved, as any bug found would be common to all products, leading to faster roll out of patches, and c) Only one architecture to protect from hackers.
Reminds me of Henry Ford and the early startup times. All the car colors he initially manufactured were standard black. No other color was available. Ergo All you will have from MS is one interface, no others available.
It's simple; you just need to change the motions of the heavenly bodies so that Earth orbits the sun exactly 13 times per year, the Earth rotates exactly 28 times per month, and the Moon orbits the Earth exactly once per month. If you can arrange that, I'll gladly switch to your new calendar.
Are you describing the Jewish and Chinese calendars?
Looks like some special interests are trying to strike another blow against people actually owning the movies that they buy. Lets list some other benefits: You don't get to watch the disc again, or lend it to a friend. And if you do watch it again on-line, you can completely ignore any costs involved (because that's what the research did). You're not distracted by the extra content included on DVDs. The lower quality streaming video is perfectly fine for you. You're completely freed from the "right of first sale' and will never have to concern yourself with selling or trading old DVDs that you have. And those nice people at your ISP who have started capping your service and who will charge outrageous overages if you happen to exceed your monthly quota will gladly forgive your overage if you explain how you were downloading or streaming for the sake of the planet (wouldn't you, AT&T?)
Think of the job loss that would occur. Stores that sell DVDs from artists. Artists also create and sell their own copies would be at a disadvantage. And DVDs are used to store more than music or video information.
For disposable information, I do not use a DVD. For archiving, I most certainly do.
As a Quebec'er, the provincial government pays for the vaccines, and they do not want to pay double. Ergo, our and our children and our grandchildren's list of immunizations is on record, available for consultation by the patient. NB, by the patient or his medical doctor.
Here is my conjecture on how to get rich at the expense of the corporation.
I am a senior executive in a company with a lot of cash. That cash is part of the assets of the corporation. I would like to get my hands on that cash, at least as much of it as I can. What can I do. Of course, I would share any gains with some of the other directors. I could not ask the directors to plain give me a huge chunk of it.
Well, I find a company to take over, I purchase a large equity portion of that business, and make a deal with the existing shareholders re a takeover bid.
I then bid for that company, offering top dollar. I put pressure for the deal to proceed. The deal goes through, and my corporation has now exchanged cash assets for assets of the company I purchased, a company that may only be worth 50% or less of the actual purchase price.
As shareholder in the company that is purchased, that receives the cash for the purchase, we arrange that it gets distributed to the shareholders as an extraordinary divident, or as a share buy out. I sell my shares, (distribution of the purchase payment), I put that money in my pocket, and my employer, has, through this manipulation, been emptied of cash, and has received $cash/2 or $cash/3 in value. I of course, make $cash/6 or even $cash/3 via the ownership of the company being taken over.
Such a sweet deal, don't you think? And it is legal, or is it?
Suppose he gets the full punishment. It will serve as his deterrent, but it will also serve as a deterrent to others who could be (mark that should be) helpful to the authorities.
A good question to ask is "Who is the government?". The posting wrote "the government", without explaining if it was the local cop or the DA:
Computers are essentially living encyclopaedias. But it teaches seach, click, cut and paste. In this way, a child picks up a lot of knowledge about his/her assignment. But the kid has lost the ability to concentrate for more than a few seconds. His brain has become wired to 30 seconds of knowledge absorption.
Can he read a novel ? No, unless it is a very short story. A 2 hour novel would be a torture for a child. His grandparents generation would find a 4 hour novel as torture. So, we substitute one way of gaining knowledge to a short very superficial way to learn where to visit sites for cut-and-paste assignments.
My grandkids did a complete assignment on a cockroach by googling, cutting images, pasting and putting down a few words. There was no gain in vocabulary that will persist. He could not remember what the belly of the roach was called, though it was important for his presentation (grade 4-5)
An unfired gun is the best defensive weapon that exists. The threat of death is the defensive deterrent. Actually firing is the last resort.
If a gang of 10 people are advancing on somebody and the target pulls a gun, all 10 people stop advancing or run away. If you have a taser or stun gun, you're a non-lethal threat to one of them...and you get one shot. Pepper spray is largely in the same boat (plus you have to account for wind). In both scenarios, you have to wonder if the battery has run out or the spray has expired depending on how long you've carried it.
Bullets last pretty much forever. The device is mechanical and has no dependence on a battery. As a defensive weapon it provides the greatest threat to an attacker and the highest degree of reliability to the carrier for those reasons. The second you start shooting it becomes every man for himself.
Up until you shoot, simply brandishing the weapon is an active deterrent without any need to fire. Brandishing a gun is actually considered assault for that reason. People often forget that when talking about concealed carry. It's as if people imagine that the idea is to tote it around so you can relish the opportunity to shoot somebody. I know many people who are not willing to pull the trigger that will carry an unloaded gun just so that they can pull it out in an emergency to diffuse the situation if they need to.
Additionally, when somebody takes a gun to commit a crime or kill somebody, they have every intention of pulling the trigger and are guaranteed to be armed. When somebody is attacked there is a much lower chance of those people being armed and/or able to retaliate so of course those statistics will be skewed.
Its too bad that you live in a country that kills. There is no G7 country in the world that has as many gun deaths as the USA. Now I presume that you want to arm your kids so that they can feel safe on the way to kindergarten.
I guess you never lived in a country that did not have guns or the death penalty, and which has an even lower crime rate than the USA (crimes per capita). Try any country in Europe, England, Canada, and Russia, and others, for a more safety lifestyle than is possible from a Gun country.
This is like dinging RedHat for not supporting Ubuntu or SuSE. More specifically, for not supporting Apache on each of these distros.
You forgot Oracle taking RED Hat's linux software, rebranding it and selling it as their own.
In 2006, we had a secure phone system that used aes encryption. The process worked by calling a specific number, and via SSH, getting a session AES key. That key encrypted the info before it left the phone, and decripted the info after arriving in the phone. We had it for voice and data.
AES encryption and decryption was chosen so that the one AES key would serve for both.
It required a key server functionality between partners who prearranged calls. Ideal for embassies, and for other secure communications.