"In the US, the spirit of rugged individualism is held up an an ideal to aspire to. In the US, the government imposing mandates saying "You WILL use THIS system." is likely to result in a backlash. More so than in many other places."
Good grief! Go ahead. Invent your own "ruggedly individual" system of measurements and then try to communicate with the government in your own units or do regulated business in those units. That's gonna go really well. The government already mandates by law and de facto the use of certain units.
Quest Title: "Fruit Flies Hold the Key To Faster Computing"
Walkthrough:
Diplomatic route:
1. Go to the flies. 2. Talk them into cooperating with you. (You'll get a 75 Speech check at some point.) 3. The flies are going to agree to cooperate but they'll ask you to gather 10 issues of "Flies Monthly" in exchange for the key. (Follow this link for the locations of the issues.) 4. Once you get the magazines, go back to the flies. 5. Give them the issues. They'll give you a "Key to Faster Computing." 6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."
Non-diplomatic route:
1. Sneak on the flies. 2. Plant live grenade. 3. Walk away. 4. Boom. 5. Go back to the corpse of the flees and grab the "Key to Faster Computing." 6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."
Note: If Miss Puss is in your party, she'll eat the flies at first sight. You'll then have to wait for her to pass them and the key. Wait for about 24 hours. You'll eventually see her... hmm... do her business. Click on the business to open it, get the key. By the way, this business of hers is just a regular locker so you could use it as a convenient location to hoard stuff.
I am going to put my money where my mouth is. I've done it before.
Once upon a time I had nVidia and ATI hardware on my computers. I could compare how well each company provided support for Linux. In neither case was their support stellar but nVidia did more than ATI. So when came time to buy a new laptop, no machine with ATI hardware made it onto the short list. They were disqualified from the start.
In recent years, it seems that AMD is supporting Linux better than nVidia does. So it is likely that when I buy another machine, those with nVidia hardware will be disqualified from the start.
Also, I'm never buying Acer again... but that's another rant.
There have been a number of times lately I felt that to win the game I had to be able to read the game developer's mind. The fight with Loghain in Dragon Age was one such case. By the time I got there, my party was able to win most battles without difficulty. Sometimes there were battles which required more strategy but battles were not overwhelmingly difficult. With Loghain, I got my ass kicked in 2 seconds maybe 4 or 5 times before I wised up. Can you say difficulty spike? I decided that I was not going to put up with this shit. I went to the Internet and found that if you put Morrigan against him, it is a piece of cake. Then I moved on.
I had a similar experience with the last battle in Bioshock. Got there, got my ass kicked several times. Again, the previous battles were difficult but not overwhelmingly so. I read up on some strategies but still got my ass kicked. Then I read that if you have selected this and that ability it is a piece of cake. In this case, I said screw this, uninstalled the game and watched the final cut scene on Youtube.
I doubt that developers read this but just in case. This shit is precisely why I decided to NOT buy Bioshock 2. I've also decided that I'm not going to buy any more Dragon Age.
I remember when extreme programming (part of agile programming) was still new and being promoted. I have not kept abreast of developments but at that time there was only one project for which extreme programming had been systematically used: the C3 project at Chrysler. It turns out the project was a resounding failure. However, every time the extreme programming snake oil peddlers had something to say about it, they'd defend extreme programming by stating that the reason the project failed was not due to to the process but due to internal politics.
Yeah, and I have a process to get cold fusion from ingredients found in my kitchen. What? It did not work? That's because a ghost interfered.
I went and read the article and found that even to this day the defenders of agile methods pepper their statements with disclaimers:
Solid programming skills are necessary for agile development, Cunningham stressed. "There's a lot of people who get into this field who actually find programming tedious and don't want to do it," Cunningham says. "If you enjoy doing it and want to do it well, that helps a lot."
Well, duh... is this not the case for any method? This is just setting up the stage for again pointing fingers at anything except the method when projects using agile methods fail. The whole agile thinking starts from the axiom "agile methodologies are intrinsically successful". So any problem is seen to come from outside.
I can't talk about other fields but in the humanities, the pay for writing an encyclopedia article is really minimal. As for tenure, encyclopedia articles do not count because an encyclopedia article does not contribute to the advancement of the field. The problem with Wikipedia is not tenure or pay but the fact that uninformed idiots can ruin the contributions of someone who knows what he is talking about.
We can also add to your list rag doll physics in computer games. I'm sure many slashdotters can remember games where dead or unconscious enemies moved in unrealistic ways because the development team decided that they had to highlight the damn rag doll physics engine. "Wait! A dead enemy moves?" someone asks. Why, yes. In some games, hiding corpses would avoid raising suspicions. When a dead enemy being dragged to a hidden spot jerks like he's having an epileptic fit, that's just to highlight rag doll physics.
And also booby physics, in some games.
And how some designers decided to add a realistic touch in making all characters breathe. "Look at the level of detail in our game! Characters breathe! In real time! You can see it!" Except that in real life, the rising of the chest is nowhere as so noticeable as in the game so it ends up just looking like the characters are constantly trying to calm themselves with deep breathing.
Good points.
Besides, if the board does not fire him, would they not then be liable to be sued by the shareholders? Maybe there would not be much of a risk in the immediate future but if Hurd were to commit an illegal act again, then the shareholders could claim that the board already had evidence that the CEO could not be trusted to act legally. They could claim that by not firing Hurd the board committed a breach of duty.
Or is it that they are underfunded? I think this is a question which must be asked. It is easy to claim incompetence or laziness but without the funds to do the work there's only so much they can do. I don't know the answer to this question but I'd sure like to know.
We should limit broadband to prevent unauthorized distribution of copyrighted materials to the same extent that we should limit free speech to prevent people from uttering bullshit.
"Every child should have health insurance..." Okay, we all need to be healthy to live and children should not be penalized for their parent's ineptitude. Well, in fact if the parents are inept, the children are penalized in many ways already but let's try to make it easier.
"One laptop per child...." Computer literacy is an essential part of modern life. Rare is the job in which someone does not have to use a computer at one point or another. Computers are versatile so the child can use it to write stories, write software, explore mathematical concepts, search about history, learn Sanskrit, etc. etc. etc.
"One telescope per child." Say what? I think we are veering into "pet project" territory here. How about these?
"one terrarium per child" "one guitar per child" "one bicycle per child" "one cadaver per child" (promote medicine) "one mentally ill person per child" (promote psychiatry) "one [intentionally left blank] per child" (promote imagination)
Hmm... but maybe I should seize the opportunity and start my own pet project: "One Sanskrit grammar per child."
I'm not going to talk about the worth of iTunes rating or of foreign markets but I find most arguments based on DVR ratings unconvincing.
The reason we have ratings in the first place is that advertisers want to know how much people are watching a show so that if they sponsor that show they don't end up paying a lot of money for a show which no one watches. From the point of view of an advertiser, the only worth of a show is as an effective vehicle for their advertisement. The fact is that people watching a show on DVR usually don't watch the ads. A show on DVR is not an effective vehicle. The advertisers know this. So whatever ratings a show gets on DVR is certainly not going to count for much.
You've hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head. I'm an expert in a relatively obscure field and found that it was not worth my time to fight it out with those who consider themselves the Guardians of Wikipedia(tm). Let's see... I can contribute to Wikipedia and have to fight ad nauseam with a Guardian of Wikipedia(tm) to get my changes to stick. Then, whether my changes stick or not (most likely not), I get no credit for it. Or I can contribute to a scholarly journal, encyclopedia, etc. I might have to defend my contribution but the dialogue will be at a higher level than "tihs iz teh suks0rz, lol! reverting..." It is a dialogue which can really help improve the contribution (rather than a knee-jerk reaction to something which contradicts cherished misconceptions about a given subject). Finally, when the job is done, I do get credit for it.
So we have guys who were actually working at Area 51 and say there were no ETs or ET technology there.
Will this debunk any conspiracy theory?
No.
The axioms upon which the conspiracy theories are established will be protected. The theorists will interpret reality so as to protect their cherished axioms. The theorists will just say that these men are part of the cover up and that their declaration is in fact proof of ETs at Area 51.
The article is based on nothing but anecdotal evidence.
So it is not a population study.
I teach physics at a community college
I've taught object oriented programming at an engineering university when I was in engineering. I've more recently taught university-level courses in religion. (Graduated in Computer Engineering, started and then abandoned a M.Sc.A. in Computer Engineering, worked as a software engineer, went back to school for an M.A. in South Asia Studies and now finishing a Ph.D. in Religious Studies.)
My default hypothesis about any educational reform movement is that it will have absolutely no effect on anything.
It is a change in attitude which is needed, not a reform.
My default hypothesis is that the self-esteem movement has had absolutely no effect on students' self-esteem, or on their achievement, or on anything else.
Your default hypothesis does not correspond to what I can observe. Yes, I know this is still anecdotal, just like your own observations of your students are anecdotal.
The self-esteem movement teaches students that all opinions are equally valid. This might not be the intended effect but this is what actually happens. Critical thinking is flushed down the drain. This is plain as day when you teach in the humanities. Everybody expects that their opinion, as ill-informed as it is and as badly formulated as it is, is just as valid as their neighbors' and should be rewarded equally. Yay! Everybody gets an "A"!
Students tend to be pretty realistic. They look and compare themselves with other students. They know if they got an F on their physics exam and their lab partner didn't.
This is less of a problem in the sciences and scientifically-oriented domains like engineering. When I was teaching object oriented programming, first of all either the software they had to write was working or not. And then there were quantifiable differences between algorithms. It was fairly easy to convince students that their answers might not be as good as their neighbors'.
It is not so in religion. If I ask an essay question about how modern Buddhists have dealt with abortion, I don't want a personal statement. And yet, I get personal statements and then they are indignant when they don't get an A.
So the OP is talking about software engineering. Still, the question of "how much am I worth to this company" is not primarily a software engineering problem but a socio-economic one. People who can apply rigorous thinking in solving engineering problems are not necessarily rigorous when thinking about their own worth in the workplace. The differences in worth are often difficult to quantify. And this is where the plague of "all opinions are equally valid" creeps in. Since there is no scientific demonstration which can prove the relative worth of different employees, they can't see why someone else would get a better salary than they do.
What they did to replace it, is (IMHO) a very good compromise - VPN access with a system of "recognizing" the computer (Juniper proprietary -- I assume it is some sort of certificate) and enforced strong passwords. You have to answer a bunch of questions to register the computer, but then afterward it is simple username/password signon. Secure enough for banking online, and secure enough for our corporation / hospital.
I'm going to assume that if they require the use of passwords, they have designed a security system in which passwords must remain secret. If it is so, then how do they get users to keep their passwords secret?
Or if it is the case that the system does not rely on the secrecy of passwords for security, then why ask for passwords in the first place?
To put it another way. If after the initial registration only one password is needed by a legitimate user to enter the system and that password is put on a post-it note stuck to the laptop, then what level of security do you actually end up with? You're in the same scenario as what the GP post is talking about. The solution is not to add yet another layer of security which ultimately hinges on users keeping a secret when in fact they are unable or unwilling to do so.
There is no security solution I know of which does not depend on the users behaving in a secure fashion. This does not mean that all solutions are equally likely to help users behave properly. A company which requires their employees to require 10 passwords would do well to switch to a one password system because the inconvenience of managing 10 passwords encourages unsafe behavior.
At any rate, if a system is dependent on user behavior then there has to be a way to enforce proper behavior. I agree that draconian me1asures should be avoided but there has to be a way to verify that the users are behaving properly.
In the meantime, other patent examiners have repeatedly smacked down 1-Click --- the latest (non-final) rejection was issued on Feb. 10th with Sandra Bullock's help."
I truly don't know what that sentence is supposed to mean. Is "smack down" a legal term?
Defense: Your Honor, the defense would like to smack down the prosecution's evidence.
Prosecution: Objection, Your Honor. The defense has not demonstrated it possesses the balls to smack us down. We'd also like to put on the record that we've had intercourse with the defense's wife.
Judge: Objection sustained. It has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the court that the defense has no balls. We also note that the prosecution could not have had intercourse with the defense's wife, for lack of penis.
You want TrueCrypt to be part of your toolbox but you may not want to have TrueCrypt as your only tool. I use dm-crypt to encrypt my Linux partitions because relying on TrueCrypt would just be a nightmare configuration-wise.
As for speed... I don't know what you're worried about. AES-256-XTS (best-in-breed, the new standard, which TrueCrypt pioneered and uses) runs at over 150MB/sec in benchmark, and that's on one core. Your hard disk very probably doesn't run that fast.
Huh? TrueCrypt is software. Hence whatever benchmarks you will quote is dependent on what hardware it is run. So "one core" of which processor?
With Ubuntu 8.10, I use both TrueCrypt and dm-crypt and in both cases the delays were initially noticeable. My advice for whole-disk encryption is to maximize the RAM. I went from 2GB without encryption to 2GB with encryption. Responsiveness suffered noticeably. I upgraded to 4GB and it made a world of difference.
I live in Maryland, USA. My wife and I have recently written up our wills.
I do not have the papers with me now and but if I recall correctly, the list of accounts was not in the will itself. We wrote up another document which had that information. It seems however that it is pretty much standard operating procedure in the US that when someone writes up a will they also create that document. It is possible to create a will without any additional document listing assets but lawyers and will-writing software will typically suggest doing both at the same time. (And will also suggest quite a few other legal documents like power of attorney, advance directive, etc.)
Re:one of his less self-indulgent works, actually
on
Anathem
·
· Score: 1
Indeed, Snow Crash probably would have been more effective at half the length, and that's probably his most popular work. It's extremely self-indulgent, and if it weren't for the heavy tongue-in-cheek humor that runs through the whole thing, I doubt it ever would have made it.
Yep. I've been reading Snow Crash and found it an self-indulgent over-rated piece of "who cares?" A good deal of the OP's critique of Anathem reflect what I thought about Snow Crash.
Slashdot Mirror
"In the US, the spirit of rugged individualism is held up an an ideal to aspire to. In the US, the government imposing mandates saying "You WILL use THIS system." is likely to result in a backlash. More so than in many other places."
Good grief! Go ahead. Invent your own "ruggedly individual" system of measurements and then try to communicate with the government in your own units or do regulated business in those units. That's gonna go really well. The government already mandates by law and de facto the use of certain units.
Quest Title: "Fruit Flies Hold the Key To Faster Computing"
Walkthrough:
Diplomatic route:
1. Go to the flies.
2. Talk them into cooperating with you. (You'll get a 75 Speech check at some point.)
3. The flies are going to agree to cooperate but they'll ask you to gather 10 issues of "Flies Monthly" in exchange for the key. (Follow this link for the locations of the issues.)
4. Once you get the magazines, go back to the flies.
5. Give them the issues. They'll give you a "Key to Faster Computing."
6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."
Non-diplomatic route:
1. Sneak on the flies.
2. Plant live grenade.
3. Walk away.
4. Boom.
5. Go back to the corpse of the flees and grab the "Key to Faster Computing."
6. Open safe to get the "Faster Computing."
Note: If Miss Puss is in your party, she'll eat the flies at first sight. You'll then have to wait for her to pass them and the key. Wait for about 24 hours. You'll eventually see her... hmm... do her business. Click on the business to open it, get the key. By the way, this business of hers is just a regular locker so you could use it as a convenient location to hoard stuff.
Mom: "It's okay, Timmy. Our carpet is coprophage."
I am going to put my money where my mouth is. I've done it before.
Once upon a time I had nVidia and ATI hardware on my computers. I could compare how well each company provided support for Linux. In neither case was their support stellar but nVidia did more than ATI. So when came time to buy a new laptop, no machine with ATI hardware made it onto the short list. They were disqualified from the start.
In recent years, it seems that AMD is supporting Linux better than nVidia does. So it is likely that when I buy another machine, those with nVidia hardware will be disqualified from the start.
Also, I'm never buying Acer again... but that's another rant.
There have been a number of times lately I felt that to win the game I had to be able to read the game developer's mind. The fight with Loghain in Dragon Age was one such case. By the time I got there, my party was able to win most battles without difficulty. Sometimes there were battles which required more strategy but battles were not overwhelmingly difficult. With Loghain, I got my ass kicked in 2 seconds maybe 4 or 5 times before I wised up. Can you say difficulty spike? I decided that I was not going to put up with this shit. I went to the Internet and found that if you put Morrigan against him, it is a piece of cake. Then I moved on.
I had a similar experience with the last battle in Bioshock. Got there, got my ass kicked several times. Again, the previous battles were difficult but not overwhelmingly so. I read up on some strategies but still got my ass kicked. Then I read that if you have selected this and that ability it is a piece of cake. In this case, I said screw this, uninstalled the game and watched the final cut scene on Youtube.
I doubt that developers read this but just in case. This shit is precisely why I decided to NOT buy Bioshock 2. I've also decided that I'm not going to buy any more Dragon Age.
You are completely right.
I remember when extreme programming (part of agile programming) was still new and being promoted. I have not kept abreast of developments but at that time there was only one project for which extreme programming had been systematically used: the C3 project at Chrysler. It turns out the project was a resounding failure. However, every time the extreme programming snake oil peddlers had something to say about it, they'd defend extreme programming by stating that the reason the project failed was not due to to the process but due to internal politics.
Yeah, and I have a process to get cold fusion from ingredients found in my kitchen. What? It did not work? That's because a ghost interfered.
I went and read the article and found that even to this day the defenders of agile methods pepper their statements with disclaimers:
Well, duh... is this not the case for any method? This is just setting up the stage for again pointing fingers at anything except the method when projects using agile methods fail. The whole agile thinking starts from the axiom "agile methodologies are intrinsically successful". So any problem is seen to come from outside.
Well, if this becomes the norm, you've got a problem. Watch what you post or live the life of a hobo. Yay!
I can't talk about other fields but in the humanities, the pay for writing an encyclopedia article is really minimal. As for tenure, encyclopedia articles do not count because an encyclopedia article does not contribute to the advancement of the field. The problem with Wikipedia is not tenure or pay but the fact that uninformed idiots can ruin the contributions of someone who knows what he is talking about.
True, true!
We can also add to your list rag doll physics in computer games. I'm sure many slashdotters can remember games where dead or unconscious enemies moved in unrealistic ways because the development team decided that they had to highlight the damn rag doll physics engine. "Wait! A dead enemy moves?" someone asks. Why, yes. In some games, hiding corpses would avoid raising suspicions. When a dead enemy being dragged to a hidden spot jerks like he's having an epileptic fit, that's just to highlight rag doll physics.
And also booby physics, in some games.
And how some designers decided to add a realistic touch in making all characters breathe. "Look at the level of detail in our game! Characters breathe! In real time! You can see it!" Except that in real life, the rising of the chest is nowhere as so noticeable as in the game so it ends up just looking like the characters are constantly trying to calm themselves with deep breathing.
Good points. Besides, if the board does not fire him, would they not then be liable to be sued by the shareholders? Maybe there would not be much of a risk in the immediate future but if Hurd were to commit an illegal act again, then the shareholders could claim that the board already had evidence that the CEO could not be trusted to act legally. They could claim that by not firing Hurd the board committed a breach of duty.
Open Office Basic is also a shitty language to work with, and the Open Office API is inconsistent.
Or is it that they are underfunded? I think this is a question which must be asked. It is easy to claim incompetence or laziness but without the funds to do the work there's only so much they can do. I don't know the answer to this question but I'd sure like to know.
Thank you for taking time to post your analysis. I found it insightful (but alas I have no mod points).
We should limit broadband to prevent unauthorized distribution of copyrighted materials to the same extent that we should limit free speech to prevent people from uttering bullshit.
Yes, AFACT, I'm looking at you.
"Every child should have health insurance..." Okay, we all need to be healthy to live and children should not be penalized for their parent's ineptitude. Well, in fact if the parents are inept, the children are penalized in many ways already but let's try to make it easier.
"One laptop per child...." Computer literacy is an essential part of modern life. Rare is the job in which someone does not have to use a computer at one point or another. Computers are versatile so the child can use it to write stories, write software, explore mathematical concepts, search about history, learn Sanskrit, etc. etc. etc.
"One telescope per child." Say what? I think we are veering into "pet project" territory here. How about these?
"one terrarium per child"
"one guitar per child"
"one bicycle per child"
"one cadaver per child" (promote medicine)
"one mentally ill person per child" (promote psychiatry)
"one [intentionally left blank] per child" (promote imagination)
Hmm... but maybe I should seize the opportunity and start my own pet project: "One Sanskrit grammar per child."
I'm not going to talk about the worth of iTunes rating or of foreign markets but I find most arguments based on DVR ratings unconvincing.
The reason we have ratings in the first place is that advertisers want to know how much people are watching a show so that if they sponsor that show they don't end up paying a lot of money for a show which no one watches. From the point of view of an advertiser, the only worth of a show is as an effective vehicle for their advertisement. The fact is that people watching a show on DVR usually don't watch the ads. A show on DVR is not an effective vehicle. The advertisers know this. So whatever ratings a show gets on DVR is certainly not going to count for much.
You've hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head. I'm an expert in a relatively obscure field and found that it was not worth my time to fight it out with those who consider themselves the Guardians of Wikipedia(tm). Let's see... I can contribute to Wikipedia and have to fight ad nauseam with a Guardian of Wikipedia(tm) to get my changes to stick. Then, whether my changes stick or not (most likely not), I get no credit for it. Or I can contribute to a scholarly journal, encyclopedia, etc. I might have to defend my contribution but the dialogue will be at a higher level than "tihs iz teh suks0rz, lol! reverting..." It is a dialogue which can really help improve the contribution (rather than a knee-jerk reaction to something which contradicts cherished misconceptions about a given subject). Finally, when the job is done, I do get credit for it.
I think the choice is clear.
So we have guys who were actually working at Area 51 and say there were no ETs or ET technology there.
Will this debunk any conspiracy theory?
No.
The axioms upon which the conspiracy theories are established will be protected. The theorists will interpret reality so as to protect their cherished axioms. The theorists will just say that these men are part of the cover up and that their declaration is in fact proof of ETs at Area 51.
The article is based on nothing but anecdotal evidence.
So it is not a population study.
I teach physics at a community college
I've taught object oriented programming at an engineering university when I was in engineering. I've more recently taught university-level courses in religion. (Graduated in Computer Engineering, started and then abandoned a M.Sc.A. in Computer Engineering, worked as a software engineer, went back to school for an M.A. in South Asia Studies and now finishing a Ph.D. in Religious Studies.)
My default hypothesis about any educational reform movement is that it will have absolutely no effect on anything.
It is a change in attitude which is needed, not a reform.
My default hypothesis is that the self-esteem movement has had absolutely no effect on students' self-esteem, or on their achievement, or on anything else.
Your default hypothesis does not correspond to what I can observe. Yes, I know this is still anecdotal, just like your own observations of your students are anecdotal.
The self-esteem movement teaches students that all opinions are equally valid. This might not be the intended effect but this is what actually happens. Critical thinking is flushed down the drain. This is plain as day when you teach in the humanities. Everybody expects that their opinion, as ill-informed as it is and as badly formulated as it is, is just as valid as their neighbors' and should be rewarded equally. Yay! Everybody gets an "A"!
Students tend to be pretty realistic. They look and compare themselves with other students. They know if they got an F on their physics exam and their lab partner didn't.
This is less of a problem in the sciences and scientifically-oriented domains like engineering. When I was teaching object oriented programming, first of all either the software they had to write was working or not. And then there were quantifiable differences between algorithms. It was fairly easy to convince students that their answers might not be as good as their neighbors'.
It is not so in religion. If I ask an essay question about how modern Buddhists have dealt with abortion, I don't want a personal statement. And yet, I get personal statements and then they are indignant when they don't get an A.
So the OP is talking about software engineering. Still, the question of "how much am I worth to this company" is not primarily a software engineering problem but a socio-economic one. People who can apply rigorous thinking in solving engineering problems are not necessarily rigorous when thinking about their own worth in the workplace. The differences in worth are often difficult to quantify. And this is where the plague of "all opinions are equally valid" creeps in. Since there is no scientific demonstration which can prove the relative worth of different employees, they can't see why someone else would get a better salary than they do.
What they did to replace it, is (IMHO) a very good compromise - VPN access with a system of "recognizing" the computer (Juniper proprietary -- I assume it is some sort of certificate) and enforced strong passwords. You have to answer a bunch of questions to register the computer, but then afterward it is simple username/password signon. Secure enough for banking online, and secure enough for our corporation / hospital.
I'm going to assume that if they require the use of passwords, they have designed a security system in which passwords must remain secret. If it is so, then how do they get users to keep their passwords secret?
Or if it is the case that the system does not rely on the secrecy of passwords for security, then why ask for passwords in the first place?
To put it another way. If after the initial registration only one password is needed by a legitimate user to enter the system and that password is put on a post-it note stuck to the laptop, then what level of security do you actually end up with? You're in the same scenario as what the GP post is talking about. The solution is not to add yet another layer of security which ultimately hinges on users keeping a secret when in fact they are unable or unwilling to do so.
There is no security solution I know of which does not depend on the users behaving in a secure fashion. This does not mean that all solutions are equally likely to help users behave properly. A company which requires their employees to require 10 passwords would do well to switch to a one password system because the inconvenience of managing 10 passwords encourages unsafe behavior.
At any rate, if a system is dependent on user behavior then there has to be a way to enforce proper behavior. I agree that draconian me1asures should be avoided but there has to be a way to verify that the users are behaving properly.
I truly don't know what that sentence is supposed to mean. Is "smack down" a legal term?
Defense: Your Honor, the defense would like to smack down the prosecution's evidence.
Prosecution: Objection, Your Honor. The defense has not demonstrated it possesses the balls to smack us down. We'd also like to put on the record that we've had intercourse with the defense's wife.
Judge: Objection sustained. It has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the court that the defense has no balls. We also note that the prosecution could not have had intercourse with the defense's wife, for lack of penis.
You want TrueCrypt.
You want TrueCrypt to be part of your toolbox but you may not want to have TrueCrypt as your only tool. I use dm-crypt to encrypt my Linux partitions because relying on TrueCrypt would just be a nightmare configuration-wise.
As for speed... I don't know what you're worried about. AES-256-XTS (best-in-breed, the new standard, which TrueCrypt pioneered and uses) runs at over 150MB/sec in benchmark, and that's on one core. Your hard disk very probably doesn't run that fast.
Huh? TrueCrypt is software. Hence whatever benchmarks you will quote is dependent on what hardware it is run. So "one core" of which processor?
With Ubuntu 8.10, I use both TrueCrypt and dm-crypt and in both cases the delays were initially noticeable. My advice for whole-disk encryption is to maximize the RAM. I went from 2GB without encryption to 2GB with encryption. Responsiveness suffered noticeably. I upgraded to 4GB and it made a world of difference.
Are you talking about clients which will automatically put the computer into suspend mode? If so, which are those?
I'm currently using transmission but AFAIK, it is not able to put the computer to sleep once the seeding ratio is reached.
I live in Maryland, USA. My wife and I have recently written up our wills.
I do not have the papers with me now and but if I recall correctly, the list of accounts was not in the will itself. We wrote up another document which had that information. It seems however that it is pretty much standard operating procedure in the US that when someone writes up a will they also create that document. It is possible to create a will without any additional document listing assets but lawyers and will-writing software will typically suggest doing both at the same time. (And will also suggest quite a few other legal documents like power of attorney, advance directive, etc.)
Indeed, Snow Crash probably would have been more effective at half the length, and that's probably his most popular work. It's extremely self-indulgent, and if it weren't for the heavy tongue-in-cheek humor that runs through the whole thing, I doubt it ever would have made it.
Yep. I've been reading Snow Crash and found it an self-indulgent over-rated piece of "who cares?" A good deal of the OP's critique of Anathem reflect what I thought about Snow Crash.