So why does the Kansas City Office of Environmental Quality need a pickup truck? Or is this another technology that requires a larger vehicle to demonstrate any feasibility?
It would depend on what energy source you are using to heat your home. If you have electric heat, then it's essentially one in the same. The only difference would be how efficiently your incandescents can diffuse heat into the room versus the electric heater (keep in mind that most light bulbs are near the ceiling).
If you use gas for heat(and don't have some really exorbinant cost on gas), then you're better off letting your gas furnace do more of the heating, instead. Electic heat tends to be nearly twice as expensive as natural gas...at least in the United States.
So at what point do the actor's/actress' talents become obsolete? Could the break point be when it's less expensive to pay someone to clean up bad acting versus shelling out uber-bucks for a good actor? Maybe Pixar (et al) are the pioneers on what is to come, in which everything is essentially generated virtually.
The bright side that I can see is that perhaps not having to put up with so many dumb, uneducated actors as public role models and political activists.
While I agree with your argument about standards, where in heck did you come up with your conversion factors? The standard in America has these conversions:
Well, maybe they thought it would be a great way to distribute and instill their propaganda in the impressionable minds of that country's youth. Of course, there will always be a few outliers exhibiting independent thought. They must be quelled and dealt with "appropriately".
I want to know what the Sipples' were doing with the evidence of people speeding. Moreso, what was their course of action after videotaping a speeder? There was a follow-up article about the officer involved dropping charges, though mentioning that he was being repeatedly emailed by the Sipples.
I think what might be getting missed here is that it wasn't so much the action of videotaping speeders, but what perhaps was being done afterwards. Here's my speculation: They were getting license plates looked up after reviewing the tape of speeding vehicles, then calling/emailing the offender and harassing them. If this were the case, then such charges might have some sort of grounds.
Why did they not just turn the tapes over to authorities? Because the cops can't write tickets based off of it. None of the equipment was certified calibrated, etc., etc., basically, the taped evidence would not stand up in a court of law. At best, the tapes would encourage law enforcement to take some action, after delivering some evidence that a problem may exist. But in most cases, there's not enough manpower/money/equipment to setup a targeted enforcement area (the typical excuse given). So where does this leave these people? You got it, vigilantism. They start to take matters into their own hands. Harassment and intimidation are the first step of the process.
From what I can tell, there's a lot of crucial information that is not being told in this article that might reveal a much different picture. Was the officer in a police car or his private vehicle? How did they alert authorities? Did they contact this police officer directly and imply (threaten?) that they caught him speeding? Yes, this may just be a case of Officer Hardass getting upset and retaliating against someone pointing out his malfeasances, but it might also be a case of some citizens getting a little overzealous in their pursuit to resolve a problem.
Sounds to me like a convenient way to gag someone that a government doesn't want to be heard. "Are they making derrogatory comments about the leadership? Well then, just turn their computer off."
I suppose, it probably will only be a matter of time before some individual will figure out (in their mind) that this is a good way to extort money from someone else. "Send me $nn or I will disable your computer(s)." Then again, if they're using a $100 laptop given to them, what money would there be to extort?
Well, I suppose one really bored geologist might have played back the seismograph tape aurally at (very) fast speed. Reference: "The Hunt for Red October"
They can be configured that way, but usually by default, they are not. I know that Linksys has the option, but Wireless management of the router is not disabled by default.
Beside that, the title was a bit misleading with the term "drive-by". This exploit has nothing at all to do with a wireless LAN.
Basically:
You get a person to browse to a web page with the malicious code
The web browser downloads the malicious JavaScript and executes it.
The JavaScript connects to the router from the user's computer and changes the settings.
The router's DNS now point to the attacker's DNS.
Attacker can now point the user's browser in whatever direction he chooses.
You don't know shit about what happened, and neither do the rest of us. And I would speculate that Fox, at this point in time, doesn't either, thus why they are getting supoenas.
Yes, you are correct that these shows sometimes get spread all over hell before getting aired, as you pointed out there are numerous vectors for a leak. But rather than wasting a page listing them all, I provided one possibility that had, at the very least, guaranteed plausibility.
And no, I wasn't insinuating that someone walked out the door with something physical in their possesion either. (Warning: more speculation) For all we know, someone could have FTP'd the show to a third-party storage site before putting it on YouTube. The key point is that theft is not always the physical removal of something. Property isn't always a physical entity. What if I steal (copy) your idea? Isn't intellectual property subject to theft? People sue each other silly over things like that every day, sometimes before a patent is even established.
This someone was posting shows before they aired. It would be akin to publishing a company's trade secrets before they went public with them And if they could get it equated to a trade secret, that would be a nice thing to nail them for.
How about lost revenue due to reduced ad revenue, resulting from reduced viewership? If people know ahead of time what is going to happen in the next cliffhanger, they would be less apt to make arrangements to watch it. Draw a parallel to all the reality TV series for a moment. How interesting does the show series become when you know who is going to win in the last episode? Why do you think they sign the participants to "hush agreements" with stiff penalties? If people lose interest in a show, it becomes harder to demand higher ad revenue for placement during the show airtimes since the ratings would show that less people would be watching. (higher ratings = higher price commanded for ad airtime)
IANAL (obviously) but what laws are being broken here besides copyright infringement?
How about simple theft? The shows in question weren't broadcast or otherwise distributed to the general public in some fashion by Fox. If these shows were posted to YouTube after they aired, then copyright infringement would be pretty much all that Fox would have as legal ammunition. However, someone illegally removed (stole) these shows from one of the production facilities. What if I were to grab a copy of my company's quarterly results before they were published/publically released and spread them all over the internet? Obviously, there would be hell to pay. However, if I did the same thing after the company published its results, there really wouldn't be any harm that would come from it.
Seems to me that the issue at hand is more of a precursor to all the RIAA/MPAA/copyright gobbledygook. This someone was posting shows before they aired. It would be akin to publishing a company's trade secrets before they went public with them (i.e. leaking insider information that would influence the company's stock price).
Yes, the copyright stuff applies in whatever sense that it does, but if I were Fox, that would be taking a back seat to getting someone that was leaking "my" shows before they aired. Of course, once that someone were caught, "I" wouldn't be afraid to add copyright infringement to the list of charges.
I guess then he would learn his lesson to upload it from a free wi-fi hotspot or an unsecured one in his neighborhood next time. But then again, perhaps he already did this?
It looks to me like they've essentially created what could be compared to a nano-abacus. I wonder how immune this system would be to physical movement (i.e. jarring). In a similar vein, I would imagine that it would be just as static sensitive as most other memory devices even though.
Did I miss something, though? How is the position of the telescoping tube read? Applying a current to it would change the position, would it not?
I guess if I were a librarian, I would setup one section of my computers for the usual full internet access, and another section that have slightly limited access (i.e. IM, social-networking blocked). This way, my patrons would have computers that would provide them with the full access they want, while at the same time, other patrons that need to do legitimate research would have the limited access computers that aren't being hogged by the supposed 15 year-old whining about their love life.
As an added bonus, I would consider having the filter mechanism give the user an opportunity to temporarily bookmark a blocked URL in a private user bookmark file on the local network. This way, if they happen to google something that is blocked, they could bookmark it in their personal list, then later pull it up on one of the unblocked computers when they became available. I would expect that this option would be used fairly rarely, as useful research information is rarely found on MySpace, Facebook, etc.
I'd even consider setting up a third tier that would be limited to known reference sites (i.e. Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia, Dictionaries, Phone listings, etc.). Again, with the private local network bookmark option.
I guess the premise of what I'm proposing isn't so much as to "protect the children" but rather to distribute computer usage more equitably amongst the users and to encourage their use for more academic and intellectual enlightenment pursuits.
So now instead of arguing back and forth with others in one (of many available) forums out there, you can just go in and change the commentary of your antagonist.
This seems to me just to be another collaborative site launch into an already saturated market. The only novelty is that you can go and mess with someone else's opinion or contribution.
Yes, but it's still better than releasing carbon that is already sequestered in fossil fuels. Granted that burning biodiesel produced from plants would release the carbon captured, but it is carbon neutral in that no new quantities of carbon are released in the whole cycle. Not the case when burning petroleum oil or coal in which the carbon has been capped underground for thousands of years.
The national department of transportation puts a uniform code of federal regs as they relate to traffic standards (federal goverment) making reciprocity fairly easy. Each state has their own conceal/carry regs (state goverment) and several don't allow any. Driving is legal and largely the same in all 50 states. Carrying a handgun is not and the specifics vary state to state.
I can see the bumper stickers on the biodiesel cars now: "Save the planet: Get high!"
Seriously, you are correct that hemp is more useful and more efficient for use in biofuels than most of the stuff we're using now. And yes, they can grow varieties that are low in THC.
The pharmaceutical companies would love this idea. Then they could start making Lipitor, Crestor, and Zocor for cars!
P1: "Dude, what happened to your car?"
P2: "Man, it had a heart attack on the freeway the other day!"
P1: "See, I told you that you needed to get that jalopy on some cholesterol meds."
P2: "Yeah, the fuel line angioplasty is gonna' cost me a fortune!"
Trees....lots of trees.
Solar powered. Self-sustaining, self-propagating...pretty much self-everything.
It's pretty obvious to do any carbon dioxide scrubbing on a large scale, it's going to require a process that requires as little artificially-induced energy input as possible.
How about large saltwater algae beds in arid regions adjacent to the ocean? Harvest the algae, press out the plant oil, and make biodiesel. Algae is probably the most efficient crop for something like this.
Slashdot Mirror
So why does the Kansas City Office of Environmental Quality need a pickup truck? Or is this another technology that requires a larger vehicle to demonstrate any feasibility?
There are several in my area...but I live in a Midwest state that produces corn.
It would depend on what energy source you are using to heat your home. If you have electric heat, then it's essentially one in the same. The only difference would be how efficiently your incandescents can diffuse heat into the room versus the electric heater (keep in mind that most light bulbs are near the ceiling).
If you use gas for heat(and don't have some really exorbinant cost on gas), then you're better off letting your gas furnace do more of the heating, instead. Electic heat tends to be nearly twice as expensive as natural gas...at least in the United States.So at what point do the actor's/actress' talents become obsolete? Could the break point be when it's less expensive to pay someone to clean up bad acting versus shelling out uber-bucks for a good actor? Maybe Pixar (et al) are the pioneers on what is to come, in which everything is essentially generated virtually.
The bright side that I can see is that perhaps not having to put up with so many dumb, uneducated actors as public role models and political activists.
While I agree with your argument about standards, where in heck did you come up with your conversion factors? The standard in America has these conversions:
1 statute mile = 5280 feet = 320 rods, one nautical mile is 6076 feet (rounded)
1 ton = 2000 lbs = 32,000 ounces
1 gallon = 128 fluid ounces = 4 quarts = 16 cups = 768 teaspoons
Thankfully, you got the calendar year essentially right.
Well, maybe they thought it would be a great way to distribute and instill their propaganda in the impressionable minds of that country's youth. Of course, there will always be a few outliers exhibiting independent thought. They must be quelled and dealt with "appropriately".
Now they can lose money together...
I want to know what the Sipples' were doing with the evidence of people speeding. Moreso, what was their course of action after videotaping a speeder? There was a follow-up article about the officer involved dropping charges, though mentioning that he was being repeatedly emailed by the Sipples.
I think what might be getting missed here is that it wasn't so much the action of videotaping speeders, but what perhaps was being done afterwards. Here's my speculation: They were getting license plates looked up after reviewing the tape of speeding vehicles, then calling/emailing the offender and harassing them. If this were the case, then such charges might have some sort of grounds.
Why did they not just turn the tapes over to authorities? Because the cops can't write tickets based off of it. None of the equipment was certified calibrated, etc., etc., basically, the taped evidence would not stand up in a court of law. At best, the tapes would encourage law enforcement to take some action, after delivering some evidence that a problem may exist. But in most cases, there's not enough manpower/money/equipment to setup a targeted enforcement area (the typical excuse given). So where does this leave these people? You got it, vigilantism. They start to take matters into their own hands. Harassment and intimidation are the first step of the process.
From what I can tell, there's a lot of crucial information that is not being told in this article that might reveal a much different picture. Was the officer in a police car or his private vehicle? How did they alert authorities? Did they contact this police officer directly and imply (threaten?) that they caught him speeding? Yes, this may just be a case of Officer Hardass getting upset and retaliating against someone pointing out his malfeasances, but it might also be a case of some citizens getting a little overzealous in their pursuit to resolve a problem.
Sounds to me like a convenient way to gag someone that a government doesn't want to be heard. "Are they making derrogatory comments about the leadership? Well then, just turn their computer off."
I suppose, it probably will only be a matter of time before some individual will figure out (in their mind) that this is a good way to extort money from someone else. "Send me $nn or I will disable your computer(s)." Then again, if they're using a $100 laptop given to them, what money would there be to extort?
Well, I suppose one really bored geologist might have played back the seismograph tape aurally at (very) fast speed.
Reference: "The Hunt for Red October"
They can be configured that way, but usually by default, they are not. I know that Linksys has the option, but Wireless management of the router is not disabled by default.
Beside that, the title was a bit misleading with the term "drive-by". This exploit has nothing at all to do with a wireless LAN.
Basically:
Yes, you are correct that these shows sometimes get spread all over hell before getting aired, as you pointed out there are numerous vectors for a leak. But rather than wasting a page listing them all, I provided one possibility that had, at the very least, guaranteed plausibility.
And no, I wasn't insinuating that someone walked out the door with something physical in their possesion either. (Warning: more speculation) For all we know, someone could have FTP'd the show to a third-party storage site before putting it on YouTube. The key point is that theft is not always the physical removal of something. Property isn't always a physical entity. What if I steal (copy) your idea? Isn't intellectual property subject to theft? People sue each other silly over things like that every day, sometimes before a patent is even established.
How about lost revenue due to reduced ad revenue, resulting from reduced viewership? If people know ahead of time what is going to happen in the next cliffhanger, they would be less apt to make arrangements to watch it. Draw a parallel to all the reality TV series for a moment. How interesting does the show series become when you know who is going to win in the last episode? Why do you think they sign the participants to "hush agreements" with stiff penalties? If people lose interest in a show, it becomes harder to demand higher ad revenue for placement during the show airtimes since the ratings would show that less people would be watching. (higher ratings = higher price commanded for ad airtime)
IANAL (obviously) but what laws are being broken here besides copyright infringement?How about simple theft? The shows in question weren't broadcast or otherwise distributed to the general public in some fashion by Fox. If these shows were posted to YouTube after they aired, then copyright infringement would be pretty much all that Fox would have as legal ammunition. However, someone illegally removed (stole) these shows from one of the production facilities. What if I were to grab a copy of my company's quarterly results before they were published/publically released and spread them all over the internet? Obviously, there would be hell to pay. However, if I did the same thing after the company published its results, there really wouldn't be any harm that would come from it.
Seems to me that the issue at hand is more of a precursor to all the RIAA/MPAA/copyright gobbledygook. This someone was posting shows before they aired. It would be akin to publishing a company's trade secrets before they went public with them (i.e. leaking insider information that would influence the company's stock price).
Yes, the copyright stuff applies in whatever sense that it does, but if I were Fox, that would be taking a back seat to getting someone that was leaking "my" shows before they aired. Of course, once that someone were caught, "I" wouldn't be afraid to add copyright infringement to the list of charges.
I guess then he would learn his lesson to upload it from a free wi-fi hotspot or an unsecured one in his neighborhood next time. But then again, perhaps he already did this?
It looks to me like they've essentially created what could be compared to a nano-abacus. I wonder how immune this system would be to physical movement (i.e. jarring). In a similar vein, I would imagine that it would be just as static sensitive as most other memory devices even though.
Did I miss something, though? How is the position of the telescoping tube read? Applying a current to it would change the position, would it not?
I guess if I were a librarian, I would setup one section of my computers for the usual full internet access, and another section that have slightly limited access (i.e. IM, social-networking blocked). This way, my patrons would have computers that would provide them with the full access they want, while at the same time, other patrons that need to do legitimate research would have the limited access computers that aren't being hogged by the supposed 15 year-old whining about their love life.
As an added bonus, I would consider having the filter mechanism give the user an opportunity to temporarily bookmark a blocked URL in a private user bookmark file on the local network. This way, if they happen to google something that is blocked, they could bookmark it in their personal list, then later pull it up on one of the unblocked computers when they became available. I would expect that this option would be used fairly rarely, as useful research information is rarely found on MySpace, Facebook, etc.
I'd even consider setting up a third tier that would be limited to known reference sites (i.e. Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia, Dictionaries, Phone listings, etc.). Again, with the private local network bookmark option.
I guess the premise of what I'm proposing isn't so much as to "protect the children" but rather to distribute computer usage more equitably amongst the users and to encourage their use for more academic and intellectual enlightenment pursuits.
So now instead of arguing back and forth with others in one (of many available) forums out there, you can just go in and change the commentary of your antagonist.
This seems to me just to be another collaborative site launch into an already saturated market. The only novelty is that you can go and mess with someone else's opinion or contribution.
Now if they can only make it bend the RF signal over that damned hill in front of the cell tower...
Yes, but it's still better than releasing carbon that is already sequestered in fossil fuels. Granted that burning biodiesel produced from plants would release the carbon captured, but it is carbon neutral in that no new quantities of carbon are released in the whole cycle. Not the case when burning petroleum oil or coal in which the carbon has been capped underground for thousands of years.
The national department of transportation puts a uniform code of federal regs as they relate to traffic standards (federal goverment) making reciprocity fairly easy. Each state has their own conceal/carry regs (state goverment) and several don't allow any. Driving is legal and largely the same in all 50 states. Carrying a handgun is not and the specifics vary state to state.
Seriously, you are correct that hemp is more useful and more efficient for use in biofuels than most of the stuff we're using now. And yes, they can grow varieties that are low in THC.
But green just isn't my color...
The pharmaceutical companies would love this idea. Then they could start making Lipitor, Crestor, and Zocor for cars!
P1: "Dude, what happened to your car?"
P2: "Man, it had a heart attack on the freeway the other day!"
P1: "See, I told you that you needed to get that jalopy on some cholesterol meds."
P2: "Yeah, the fuel line angioplasty is gonna' cost me a fortune!"
Trees....lots of trees.
Solar powered. Self-sustaining, self-propagating...pretty much self-everything.
It's pretty obvious to do any carbon dioxide scrubbing on a large scale, it's going to require a process that requires as little artificially-induced energy input as possible.
How about large saltwater algae beds in arid regions adjacent to the ocean? Harvest the algae, press out the plant oil, and make biodiesel. Algae is probably the most efficient crop for something like this.