Mod the parent up! This is precisely why the cloud is a bad idea. In effect, you are giving up all of the rights to your data for some small amount of convenience. The entire cloud push is an alarming direction for very little return. It is much better to invest in your own hardware and infrastructure. When the cloud vaporizes, what are you left with?
There really isn't anything wrong with the name as I read in the article. If the police in Teaneck, NJ want to face the wrath of the ACLU and possibly civil rights law suits, they may feel free to continue their pursuit. As a tax payer, I would be furious that my tax dollars are going to panty waste investigations such as this. I would be writing editorials in the local newspaper calling for the firing of the police chief. Hell, there are people out there with chain saws and they are going after this guy. This is a freedom of speech issue and the WiFi router owner is NOT screaming fire in a crowded movie theater.
Kodak is an icon and it is unfortunate that poor management and cronyism has lead to this. The company missed the boat on digital photography because they had a pair of blinders on. Upper management continued to deny the inevitable demise of chemical photography. This is ironic because RIM's CEOs made a similar mistake by denying that people would use more than a tiny amount of data per month. Poor, egotistical management has lead to the demise of both icons.
This is a load of crap. If anything, I think the entire RSA incident should serve as an impetus to look for open source, community supported solutions. Security through obscurity works only in government, CIA stuff.
I am guessing that it was Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) that benefited from E85 most. They have some pretty beefy lobby power and the every day average joe certainly did not benefit from it. Not only is E85 not as efficient but it is rough on engines. Let the subsidies expire and pursue hydrogen as the alternative fuel.
The advertiser supported model was tried during the dot-com era and largely failed. Since there really is no such thing as free, I am guessing O2 is going to collect browsing habbits and information to resell to marketing companies in addition to advertisements. O2 might actually make more money by combining reselling user data and advertiser supported services.
This kind of police state activity is why I am currently so behind Ron Paul. Do I necessarily agree with his foreign policy? No. Do I necessarily agree with his monetary policy? No (although I do agree with substantial parts).
But this I do know, out of all the candidates for our next president he is the only one interested in preserving our liberty. As the primaries and subsequent elections come to your state remember that. Everything else is really pretty meaningless in comparison.
Post as non-AC
Ron Paul stated rather openly and publicly that he wants the TSA disbanded. I wholeheartedly support this effort as they do absolutely nothing to protect our nation and are an enormous burden to tax payer dollars.
It was kind of a low thing to do to terminate someone for using linkedin to look for other jobs. If they could prove that he was doing it on company time, that is a entirely different thing but if he was at home or on his own time and resources it is low.
How is California going to afford this venture? The last time that I checked, the entire state is in dire straits financially. A holiday road trip from San Diego to Santa Barbara revealed some roads and infrastructure in terrible condition.
Exactly why is this a good thing? So, if someone vehemently disagrees with content on a website that can just flag it as suspicious for law enforcement review? The language is too vague. Someone could be simply expressing an opinion, which in turn could be misunderstood or purposely misconstrued as terroristic in nature. This is definitely not a good thing at all.
Wait... you seriously think we get a free choice to elect our officials?
At best we get a choice between 2 or 3 identical people who the system has already made sure will all promote the status quo.
No, I neither said nor implied that we have a free choice: we simply vote. The reason for status quo is because that is what the people want. If enough people, and by enough I mean 90% - 95% of the population, suddenly wanted marijuana legalized, it would be foolish for a politician wanting to remain in office not to hop on the legalization band wagon. Actually, our concept of democracy is very much rigged with precious little difference between parties - sometimes none at all - and corporate special interest getting involved. Furthermore, allowing corporations to be treated like individual citizens under the color of the law does further harm to the democratic concept because the monetary power of the corporation vastly outweighs the average person. Change has to be a grass roots effort and corporations and government alike may seek to keep us divided so change would become infeasible. The negative campaigning, finger pointing, and name calling keeps us divided instead of united. Imagine if a majority supported Occupy, politicians would be forced to listen or be made redundant. An ancient warrior/philosopher by the name of Sun Tzu astutely coined the divide and conquer strategy.
Here is my 0.02 cents: neither government nor the courts are to blame, we the citizenry who elect our officials are to blame. We have the media reporting a disporportionate amount of bad news (crime, terrorism, etc) because it sells. In turn this leads people to conclude that times are not getting safer but more dangerous and, in some cases, may actually encourage criminal copycat behaviours because of the basic human tendency to jump to conclusions. The reality is that crime hasn't really skyrocketed and by all accounts might actually be rising at a much lower rate when compared with the population. We just have a distorted perception of rampant crime and danger as a result of what the media reports. So people, and in particular senior citizens due to diminished strength and mobility, experience an irrational amount of fear. Thus we turn to our elected officials to ask for greater safety and security in the form of more laws and restrictions. Hence, many of these laws are poorly written and concieved because they were born out of a knee jerk reaction versus careful thought as to whether these laws are: (a) really necessary and/or (b) will really achieve the end result. Politicians that are wise to the demands of their constituents will of course play the get tough on crime with the hope of winning votes and even push through legislation toughening sentences or expanding the dragnet of what constitutes criminality.
In summary, a vicious cycle is created that no one is really able to break unless there were a sudden breakout of common sense. I would admire the politician that would take the "not get tough on crime stance" because crime is not rampant. I would admire the politican that would take the step back and reflect the negative effects of passing some laws instead of being concerned about some short term gain in the polls. In reality, we've no one to blame but ourselves. The courts are doing what we are basically asking them. We are willingly giving up liberty for the security that we are asking for. Thomas Jefferson noted that, "Those that would give up some liberty to gain security get none and deserve neither."
Now, AT&T can quit whining or lying about not having enough spectrum to build out its LTE network. I'd never give AT&T a dime of my money even if their network was faster than T-Mobile's. Simply on principle alone, I will be staying with T-Mobile for some time to come.
Sure, it is dirty. Politics are a dirty business though, and to be frank, the Super PAC just borrowed a page from the GOP playbook. No big deal. Both parties suck equally!
Louis CK's experiment is proof that you don't need DRM to make a profit and, a decent amount at that. Good for him! It is nice to see someone with behaving rationally!
I think election fraud is more common in Democracies than one would think or, at the very least, attempts are common. One only need point out the Diebold electronic voting machine scandal where a purported "bug" skewed election results in favor of the Republicans. While there is a remote possibility that this was an honest bug, I am not naive enough to believe it. Diebold refused to divulge their code and the machines didn't even have any auditing facilities. It is absolutely ripe for manipulation and enough money secretly changing hands can sway an election. I guess an honest politician is mostly an oxymoron.
Unfortunately, Capitalism is a form of Social Darwinism in which the strong. It is inherrently unequal and unfair. That much said, as imperfect as the system is, it is better than Communism.
Your logic is flawed because if you have something that is vital to your ability to remain competitive, then opening your innovation books is to shoot yourself in the foot. Especially when as a young company, you don't have the awesome capital reserves of the Googles and Apples of the world. A giant software machine like Google, could easily come over like a tidal wave! On the hardware side, take a giant that has almost unlimited cash reserves and just goes to China to manufacture under really gorgeous terms due to previous business.
I thought there was an announcement that the IPv4 address space is now totally exhausted. Or at least there are no new blocks to be assigned. The tunnel broker, Hurricane Electric indicates that IPv4 is exahusted.
Slashdot Mirror
The entire push to go to the cloud is something the dumbass, PHB would come up with.
Mod the parent up! This is precisely why the cloud is a bad idea. In effect, you are giving up all of the rights to your data for some small amount of convenience. The entire cloud push is an alarming direction for very little return. It is much better to invest in your own hardware and infrastructure. When the cloud vaporizes, what are you left with?
I'm going to dream about an old woman in a cornfield on a porch soon, aren't I?
Too funny, I thought the same thing. Well, I guess it is better than dreaming about the dark man, Flagg.
There really isn't anything wrong with the name as I read in the article. If the police in Teaneck, NJ want to face the wrath of the ACLU and possibly civil rights law suits, they may feel free to continue their pursuit. As a tax payer, I would be furious that my tax dollars are going to panty waste investigations such as this. I would be writing editorials in the local newspaper calling for the firing of the police chief. Hell, there are people out there with chain saws and they are going after this guy. This is a freedom of speech issue and the WiFi router owner is NOT screaming fire in a crowded movie theater.
Kodak is an icon and it is unfortunate that poor management and cronyism has lead to this. The company missed the boat on digital photography because they had a pair of blinders on. Upper management continued to deny the inevitable demise of chemical photography. This is ironic because RIM's CEOs made a similar mistake by denying that people would use more than a tiny amount of data per month. Poor, egotistical management has lead to the demise of both icons.
This is a load of crap. If anything, I think the entire RSA incident should serve as an impetus to look for open source, community supported solutions. Security through obscurity works only in government, CIA stuff.
I am guessing that it was Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) that benefited from E85 most. They have some pretty beefy lobby power and the every day average joe certainly did not benefit from it. Not only is E85 not as efficient but it is rough on engines. Let the subsidies expire and pursue hydrogen as the alternative fuel.
When this article makes the rounds on Associated Press, it should really help disperse the 2012 apocalypse bullshit.
Trust me the apocalypse topic just will not die .... especially this year.
This is so stupid. I'm a lefty eco groovy person, but this is just pathetic. Almost as sad as Heston's "From my cold dead hands" battlecry.
It just puts emphasis on the moonbats on the left, and ammo for Faux News, rather than addressing the issues in a non sensationalist way.
Sigh.
I prefer the battlecry, "From my cold dead ass!" a la The Matrix.
The advertiser supported model was tried during the dot-com era and largely failed. Since there really is no such thing as free, I am guessing O2 is going to collect browsing habbits and information to resell to marketing companies in addition to advertisements. O2 might actually make more money by combining reselling user data and advertiser supported services.
This kind of police state activity is why I am currently so behind Ron Paul. Do I necessarily agree with his foreign policy? No. Do I necessarily agree with his monetary policy? No (although I do agree with substantial parts).
But this I do know, out of all the candidates for our next president he is the only one interested in preserving our liberty. As the primaries and subsequent elections come to your state remember that. Everything else is really pretty meaningless in comparison.
Post as non-AC
Ron Paul stated rather openly and publicly that he wants the TSA disbanded. I wholeheartedly support this effort as they do absolutely nothing to protect our nation and are an enormous burden to tax payer dollars.
It was kind of a low thing to do to terminate someone for using linkedin to look for other jobs. If they could prove that he was doing it on company time, that is a entirely different thing but if he was at home or on his own time and resources it is low.
How is California going to afford this venture? The last time that I checked, the entire state is in dire straits financially. A holiday road trip from San Diego to Santa Barbara revealed some roads and infrastructure in terrible condition.
Exactly why is this a good thing? So, if someone vehemently disagrees with content on a website that can just flag it as suspicious for law enforcement review? The language is too vague. Someone could be simply expressing an opinion, which in turn could be misunderstood or purposely misconstrued as terroristic in nature. This is definitely not a good thing at all.
Wait... you seriously think we get a free choice to elect our officials? At best we get a choice between 2 or 3 identical people who the system has already made sure will all promote the status quo.
No, I neither said nor implied that we have a free choice: we simply vote. The reason for status quo is because that is what the people want. If enough people, and by enough I mean 90% - 95% of the population, suddenly wanted marijuana legalized, it would be foolish for a politician wanting to remain in office not to hop on the legalization band wagon. Actually, our concept of democracy is very much rigged with precious little difference between parties - sometimes none at all - and corporate special interest getting involved. Furthermore, allowing corporations to be treated like individual citizens under the color of the law does further harm to the democratic concept because the monetary power of the corporation vastly outweighs the average person. Change has to be a grass roots effort and corporations and government alike may seek to keep us divided so change would become infeasible. The negative campaigning, finger pointing, and name calling keeps us divided instead of united. Imagine if a majority supported Occupy, politicians would be forced to listen or be made redundant. An ancient warrior/philosopher by the name of Sun Tzu astutely coined the divide and conquer strategy.
Here is my 0.02 cents: neither government nor the courts are to blame, we the citizenry who elect our officials are to blame. We have the media reporting a disporportionate amount of bad news (crime, terrorism, etc) because it sells. In turn this leads people to conclude that times are not getting safer but more dangerous and, in some cases, may actually encourage criminal copycat behaviours because of the basic human tendency to jump to conclusions. The reality is that crime hasn't really skyrocketed and by all accounts might actually be rising at a much lower rate when compared with the population. We just have a distorted perception of rampant crime and danger as a result of what the media reports. So people, and in particular senior citizens due to diminished strength and mobility, experience an irrational amount of fear. Thus we turn to our elected officials to ask for greater safety and security in the form of more laws and restrictions. Hence, many of these laws are poorly written and concieved because they were born out of a knee jerk reaction versus careful thought as to whether these laws are: (a) really necessary and/or (b) will really achieve the end result. Politicians that are wise to the demands of their constituents will of course play the get tough on crime with the hope of winning votes and even push through legislation toughening sentences or expanding the dragnet of what constitutes criminality. In summary, a vicious cycle is created that no one is really able to break unless there were a sudden breakout of common sense. I would admire the politician that would take the "not get tough on crime stance" because crime is not rampant. I would admire the politican that would take the step back and reflect the negative effects of passing some laws instead of being concerned about some short term gain in the polls. In reality, we've no one to blame but ourselves. The courts are doing what we are basically asking them. We are willingly giving up liberty for the security that we are asking for. Thomas Jefferson noted that, "Those that would give up some liberty to gain security get none and deserve neither."
Now, AT&T can quit whining or lying about not having enough spectrum to build out its LTE network. I'd never give AT&T a dime of my money even if their network was faster than T-Mobile's. Simply on principle alone, I will be staying with T-Mobile for some time to come.
Sure, it is dirty. Politics are a dirty business though, and to be frank, the Super PAC just borrowed a page from the GOP playbook. No big deal. Both parties suck equally!
Louis CK's experiment is proof that you don't need DRM to make a profit and, a decent amount at that. Good for him! It is nice to see someone with behaving rationally!
I think election fraud is more common in Democracies than one would think or, at the very least, attempts are common. One only need point out the Diebold electronic voting machine scandal where a purported "bug" skewed election results in favor of the Republicans. While there is a remote possibility that this was an honest bug, I am not naive enough to believe it. Diebold refused to divulge their code and the machines didn't even have any auditing facilities. It is absolutely ripe for manipulation and enough money secretly changing hands can sway an election. I guess an honest politician is mostly an oxymoron.
Unfortunately, Capitalism is a form of Social Darwinism in which the strong. It is inherrently unequal and unfair. That much said, as imperfect as the system is, it is better than Communism.
You can make money, you just need large volumes of business on a smaller margin. SugarCRM is probably not wildly profitable but does well.
Your logic is flawed because if you have something that is vital to your ability to remain competitive, then opening your innovation books is to shoot yourself in the foot. Especially when as a young company, you don't have the awesome capital reserves of the Googles and Apples of the world. A giant software machine like Google, could easily come over like a tidal wave! On the hardware side, take a giant that has almost unlimited cash reserves and just goes to China to manufacture under really gorgeous terms due to previous business.
I think that is the best move. When you are profitable, then you can open source your stuff. Don't give the key to the candy store away.
I thought there was an announcement that the IPv4 address space is now totally exhausted. Or at least there are no new blocks to be assigned. The tunnel broker, Hurricane Electric indicates that IPv4 is exahusted.