HO
LY
SHIT
!!!!
that is easily the worst thing I have seen online (with the vague possiblility of a few, very select myspace profiles). What I find extra amusing is that their "why use IE" site doesn't even render quite correctly in IE (well, not IE7, the only version I have installed anywhere). Of course, given that FrontPage produces code more standards-compliant than is used in their source, I'm amazed it renders as well as it does... (*only* 411 errors and an invalid doctype).
Their explanation of why you really need to reset your screen resolution to 800x600 is almost as bad, by the way; you might think a web programmer would know how to have multiple stylessheets and select the apropriate one using javascript, but hey, why not break further that which is already broken.
Oh, and the way your ppoup blocker pings you as the site opens? You're prventing their RealAudio streaming pages from opening. Leaving aside the issue of their decision to use Real, are they honestly implying that the decision to use popups is better than an invisible frame that doesn't change on every link click (their justification for not using a stream in the main page) a la AJAX? Sometimes people truly terrify me.
I'm tempted to take a screenshot of their site in a Linux system without Windows fonts, using 800x600 on a natively 1440x900 widescreen LCD, using IE4 installed in Wine... Nah, it's not worth it if I don't get to see their faces. (On a side note, though, I could pretty easily send them one of the site in Konqueror, sans Flash, at my native resolution... it'd be worth creating a throwaway email address for.)
awful hubris of explaining why IE 4.x (!) is the browser I really need to be using
Well... IE4 was made infamous as the browser that ran remote binary code on your machine with hardly any security. Maybe they're too cheap to hire somebody who can hack his way into IE6 but still want their drive-by downloads? I don't know... lameness, seriously.
XP "just plain works" the way 98 "just plain works" which is to say fine for its time but nearly archaic now. For example, no operating system should be run with the user having full permissions all the time. In XP it is *possible* to run as a LUA and still fully use with your system, but it's a pain - Run As... only goes so far, and if you start a program without admin privileges and need them later, your screwed... close it and start again as admin. Vista handles this by allowing programs to change their permissions, while running, at the press of a button.
You only have to recover a couple of otherwise completely lost/changed documents via Volume Shadow Copies ("Previous Versions") to recognize how valuable it is. Yes, it's available on 2003. I know exactly two people who use 2003 on the desktop, and it takes a bit of tinkering to do really well there (enable DirectX if you want games, for example).
Vista uses address space randomization to fight return-to-libc attacks. Something no ordinary user will ever notice, and very few would understand... but it, along with data execute protection (yes, XP has DEP) have the potential to really prevent buffer overruns from doing anything serious (arbitrary code execution).
I have yet to see a desktop search solution that works as handily as Vista's, although Spotlight comes close. Even the best third-party solution (which requires additional installation) isn't as easy as WinKey then start typing, then click or hit enter.
DirectX 10 has the potential to make an incredible leap in graphics performance. Once the new games come out, you can bet many gamers will gladly take Vista just for that.
Protected Mode is the way every browser should run. Nothing stops a user from doing something truly stupid, but protected mode makes it a little clearer what is and isn't smart. It also means that even if somebody does compromise the browser, the won't be able to DO anything with it, unless the user allows them (contrary to a common/. argument, users actually do notice if something - like a UAC prompt - jumps up at them when they don't expect it, and there's a pretty decent chance whey won't automatically click okay).
There are a dozen other things, ranging from built-in calendar to the ability to run Tablet tools and Media Centr on the same machine, that guarantees people will buy. Those who don't upgrade will buy a new computer in a few years. People probably will buy it just for the eye candy, to be honest... people who don't want to buy a Mac or learn how to deal with Linux, but want a pretty, "next-gen" desktop to show off. Heck, I've gotten a number of people in the CSE depratment who were excited to see Vista... and asked me to demo the new UI tricks.
System Restore, Software firewall, DEP support, IE6 w/ SP2 (don't laugh, it's better than 5.5), Remote Desktop, Switch User (without logging off), Security Center (again, don't laugh, it's a good idea to tell most people that they need antivirus software or their firewall is off), the re-designed start menu (I'm not talking eye candy, I'm talking keeping track of your most commonly used apps and pinning a few you always want in the same place, then hiding the rest), lack of any noticable memory leaks and essentially perfect memory recovery from crashed applications (in 2000 you still wanted to reboot after any significant application crashed, and overall stability, while good, wasn't AS good).
Don't forget support for new applications - IE7 is often a much easier sell to people than Firefox, and I don't think Defender or Live OneCare run on 2000 (may be wrong here, but that's my memory).
Fy family and I used 200 on laptops for 3 years (still have one that hasn't been upgraded or replaced, so 5 years now). We almost *never* rebooted, but since we watched every amp-hour (12V system, on a yacht if you must know) we didn't leave them on all the time either.
I'm trying REALLY hard to think of a time resume from hibernate failed without a good reson (such as the old HP with the broken BIOS) and am coming up... blank. This was 4 different laptops from 3 different manufacturers, and except for that one HP (and yes, it was a BIOS bug) they worked fine. My family would still be using those laptops except that electronics only last a few years in a moist salt atmosphere (the last survivor of the batch, a PIII 750 with 512 MB RAM and 20GB hard drive, now at least 5 years old, has developed an internal power supply issue that severely limits the time it can be run without hibernating and cooling off.)
Amazing... your knowledge of history is apparently almost as flawed as your "common sense". In case you were wondering, 100 years ago is nothing. We had airplanes 100 years ago. The Celcius scale was developed over 250 years ago, using Mercury thermometers. Other scales date back even further. Some universities and institutes have been monitoring climate change for over 150 years. Consider both the graphic and the pages linked below it: Instrumental Temperature Record.
As for the margin of error (the +/- you mentioned), this is why scientists have things like standard deviations and statistical analyses. In case you were wondering, the error on core samples is fairly small. Generally speaking, exit polls are probably less accurate. In any case, the precision of ice core samples (precision having to do with the repeatability of a particular finding, the number of digits to which a value can be determined) is quite high enough to be compared against the average change in temperatures occurring worldwide, so unless you are suggesting these PhDs don't know how to do their work, the accuracy is probably quite high as well.
Sorry to intrude on your right-wing bliss. Education is a good thing, though.
First, there's the Run As... option. Annoying, but not significantly more so that Linux.* Second, ther's the option to install a virtual machine (VirtualPC is free these days) for prorams needing admin access Third, there's Vista and UAC... be admin when, and only when, you need it. Nearly painless too, especially in RC1.
* Write a batch file that starts msiexec.exe with elevated permissions for installing.msi packages
This is NOT a "triple-standard disk". It's a hybrid Blu-Ray/HD-DVD disk, which happens to also use the other side for data storage (as opposed to a label). It's the hybrid nature of the two high-definition formats on one side that is worthy of excitement. It would be relatively trivial to, for example, combine the HD-DVD/DVD hybrid with a Blu-Ray surface on the other side. By the standards of this headline, that's a "triple-standard disk" even though it is just an extansion of Toshiba's project.
The significance of this is that it may allow the high-def format war to reach a compromise, or at least allow disc producers to hedge their bets by releasing high-def content in both formats. People might not buy Toshiba's HD-DVD/DVD hybrid right now because if Blu-Ray wins out, they're left with essentially a standard definition disc. However, ANYBODY interested in high-def could buy a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD hybrid and know it will work. Including the movie on standard DVD as well is nice for those of use that don't have a high-def player yet, but I'd actually prefer it to be on a second disk rather than the other side.
Double-sided DVDs are nothing new. I own several double-sided DVDs; usually widescreen on one side and 4:3 on the other. They're a hassle because you can't put either side on anything that might cause a scratch (like a table with a grain of sand). Both sides can be dual-layer and will play in any standard player.
Even low-end CPU towers can take 120W. High-end gaming laptops are 140W+. Are you honestly suggesting that with a high-dev DVD drive, hard disk, insane amount of CPU and graphics capability, and the cooling neccessary to fit everything in in a box that size, you'll get away for under 150W? Thank again... I wouldn't be surprised if it hit 180.
P.S. Gaming desktop systems often have 500W power supplies.
I think BOINC allows processor utilization limits (sorry, I haven't set the configuration in months). Generally, you can also intentionally scale down the processor (tying this to a specifc application might be slightly tricky but should be possible).
Or you could just make sure your laptop has adaquate ventilation and run it like it's supposed to be used.
Actually there is. I'm not saying I agreem but I understand their reasoning:
Movies are not released simultaneously in all locations. In some countries movies are released at a certain timed schedule for maximum marketability, in another country a movie might be released on DVD while still in theaters. Region encoding is intended to prevent people from buying 5000 DVDs in one country where they've been out for a few months and cost $17.95, and shipping them off for sale in another country where the movie is a huge hit in theaters but doesn't come out on DVD for another two months.
Petitions take too long... just go look up the link above, and rig it to select your school mascot for dean. Most schools would be a lot cooler about that then the government.
Unless by transaction systems you mean things like ATMs... I think those are a touch more secure, but you still might want to take a look.
Mod parent up! This is certainly true. However, there's a problem with monohulls: their keels are heavy, and that reduces motoring performance. A catamaran or trimaran might do well with this hybrid system though. Stormy weather would be bad however; pots of wind (possibly to the point that sailing is dangerous, in which case you want powerful engines) but little sunlight.
You speak like somebody familiar with the issues blue water sailors face on passage. Are/were you, by any chance, a cruiser? Always looking to meet other members of the community.
30 days is a glacial amount of time for crossing the Atlantic. Many sailboats (which can cruise at speeds of 7 knots or higher) can do it in 2-3 weeks. A comparably priced cruising powerboat might make it in 10-15 days. "Months" is purely ridiculous... though this boat is so slow it might well take a (single) month...
BIG problem here: sails tend to block a lot of sunlight. Even relatively clear sails will probably cut down on insolation significantly, especially if they're relatively heavy-duty (as moving a 46' boat would suggest). Also, monohulls need keels, which add tremendously to their weight. There goes your motoring performance.
A sailing catamaran might be able to do this, however; if the motors can be used to charge the batteries while under sail, the charging issue goes away (many cruising boats that use propellor shafts will attach a generator to the shaft and leave the engine in neutral to charge the batteries while sailing). I can see myself buying a boat like that... when I find myself with a million dollars to spend... (a new 45' sailing catamaran can cost over half a million easily).
Furthermore, while being becalmed is annoying, diesel will get you out of it nearly as well as electric (or you can wait it out). Near a storm, however, you need serious engine power and can be in overcast weather for weeks. Finally, sometimes 5 knots simply won't cut it; if that's the best this motor can do it is unlikely to get beyond hobbyists.
The logical way around this, which I hope MS takes even though it would be a bit more hassle for us, is to have an "allow sharing" option on our files. Obviously you wouldn't be able to override the "allow/disallow sharing" settings on DRMed files, but things like Creative Commons files could then be tagged for "allow unlimited sharing", files from pro-DRM sources would be tagged with the "3 tries" level, and maybe there would even be intermediates (allow unlimited sharing, but not grandchild sharing, or allow unlimited Zune sharing bot not burning to CD, etc.)
There are two ways this could work: MS has default settings written into their software that assigns settings based on the files' origins (ripped gets level X, self-encoded you can choose, or whatever) but I can see that getting broken easily, so the other option is something where, by an opt-in option, you can send your file/album info and retrieve its license (I know, this sounds like spyware, conspiracy to catch pirates, or whatever, but how many people actually turn off the "download album art" option? This is nearly identical; it's just a database lookup and a download). This way, bands that want to encourage sharing could submit their albums for open sharing, bands that want more restrictions could select their DRM level, CC-licenced music would be unrestricted, and the RIAA-level restrictions (the current 3-tries share mode) could be used for everything else.
This "allow sharing" license would be transferred like a DRM license, but wouldn't violate Creative Commons because it doesn't do anything to the music. Instead, it expands the Zune from its standard 3-try share mode to unlimited distribution mode. Everybody gets what they want, and the process could be completely invisible to the users.
I'm not even sure they're going to make it so the phasers are the same color or same graphical effect from episode to episode... by the look of it, they're basically trying to make painted backdrops look less painted. I'm having a hard time seeing this as a bad thing. While I wouldn't mind terribly if they 're-tuned' the phasers, I don't think they're even going to do that. They certainly wouldn't take it as far as Voyager, where you could see the phaser arrays activate, see shields flash, etc.
So... now that, for the first time since 1987, there's no commercial Star Trek shows in production, they've to "bring back" the classics? I'm not actually upset by them retouching the backgrounds, etc. so much as that after the fiasco of Enterprise, I was hoping for something more progressive, rather than going back and retouching footage from my parents' generation.
On the other hand, one could argue that, at the very least since DS9, Trek has gone downhill with every successive series. Maybe they think they just need to get back to their roots? If they can combine the original story with enough modern SFX to keep viewers happy, this re-run might even beat out the original showing for ratings.That would certainly be good news for trek fans; if the show still has following, we're a lot less likely to go through a repeat of the '69 to '87 dark age.
Your logic is faulty. If store employees, etc. were going to buy them all up anyhow (even if not to resell at higher prices) then nobody - consumers, price gougers, anybody - would be able to get one. Since this if blatantly obviously not the case, your argument is pointless... no, I wouldn't want to be number 6 when only 5 are delivered, and not be able to buy one. However, I'd be WAY more pissed off to be number 3 when 50 are delivered, and have the two people ahead of me buy 25 each and laugh as they walk out at the markup they'll be able to pull. The first is bad luck on my part - I wasn't fast enough to get one of the delivered items - and the second is a couple of scum deciding to screw everybody who would have shopped at that store. I had the money, I've probably been waiting for months, I got there in plenty of time... and a couple of amoral swine decided I (and everybody behind me in line) should have to wait a few weeks longer and pay them a few hundred bucks a piece. They aren't providing a service (they certainly aren't doing anything worth the thousands of dollars it'll make them for a few hours work), they're slapping their own tax on the product because they're too greedy to give a shit about everybody else.
Mind you, if all those marked-up units were being shipped to farmhouses 5 hours from the nearest store - and the units weren't available for preorder online anyhow - then it would qualify as providing a service (of course, since such places are few and far between, and unlikely to be interested in a PS3 at any cost, all that ends up happening is all the people that got laughed at by gougers puching full shopping carts while the store manager came out to explain that they were sold out, try again in two weeks... those people, who would have had the perfect opportunity to buy at the same price and time as everybody else will now line the pockets of a bunch of greedy pigs.
PS: How do you get those cool comment bars in the reply?
You mean that? It's how Slashdot styles the <blockquote>...</blockquote> element.
Also, with regard to form-generated code, I must disagree slightly... while hiding it is good (and.net 2.0, with one partial class holding all the form-designer-generated code, and one holding all 'your' code, does a reasonable job of this) there are times when editing it, or even just viewing it, can be useful. Arguably you should never *need* to, and most VB newbies wouldn't know what to make of it anyhow, but some things - like examples of how to add event handlers - can be easily learned by reading the generated code (learning, or even reminding oneself, by looking at examples.) Also, sometimes it IS necessary to edit the generated code; VB6 allowed control arrays mostly for purposes of allowing more than 128 controls (or whatever the limit was, it's been a few years) per form..NET doesn't have that limitation, but they've made control arrays much harder to use too. Writing a few loops in the form creation code will fix this (though those elements won't appear in the form designer) and sometimes control arrays are downright useful (index-based access for use in loops, easy search tools, etc.) It's not neccessary - For Each loops, for example, make index-based access far less significant - but my point is that somebody who knows how to, and wants to, should be allowed to edit form code. It can also lead to a better understanding of programming; my first language after VB6 was Java, and it took me a while to figure out why I had to have all this explicit frame and control layout code.
Not to sound too 'ButThinkOfTheChildren' but you realize this guy was sending porno ads to minors? I very much doubt most people are okay with that.
Furthermore, this kind of spam has a number of other dangers:
Say you were at work somewhere that monitors your internet access, and you accidentally click the link. Guess what... your machine just requested a highly NSFW site. Even if you don't get in too serious of trouble (there are places where that kind of thing will cost you your job) it's not going to look good to your boss.
If your request gets through, your email address is now marked as valid, and will be sold, along with thousands of others, to other spammers for fractions of a cent each. Once even a few spammers have your address, it will spread until you'll become completely inundated.
In line with the issue above, while clicking delete for a single message isn't too strenuous a task, dealing with hundreds or thousands of spam messages per day can have a noticable productivity hit. You probably can't indescriminitely delete them without checking for valid messages first, and as the percentage of real mail to spam gets worse, this can be difficult. Automated spam checkers usually get some false positives, forcing you to check the junk inbox from time to time, and also significantly increase processor load while downloading mail (again, a real problem if your spam can be measured in messages per minute).
Is it a reasonable assumption that spam will be less profitable (and, sooner or later, unprofitable), if people stop opening spam email and purchasing the products advertised?
In theory, yes. In practice, that's hopeless; whether through ignorance, accident, or faulty pattern recognition, there are people who believe what is advertised in spam and will buy it. Since the cost to operate a server and spew hundreds of spam messages per second is very low, and since spam is almost always either advertising for a product with real profit margin (porn, pirated software) or completely false advertising (fake pharmaceuticals, penis patches, etc.) it takes literally one click in tens of thousands to pay off.
The problem with approach 2 is that Microsoft's suit against the guy was merely for breaking the terms of use for Hotmail. In a sad kind of way, I'm glad they were able to get this much out of him; it's not as if MS lacks lawyers, but that's a lot of money for violation of a checkbox-policy on a free service.
The solution is to let the government convict spammers for serious damages. However, the most a spammer can presently be fined for in the UK is 5,000 GBP (about $9,350 US). This should, in theory, be easy to raise... but I hardly know anything about UK law. In practice though, this "punishment" is nearly useless. Microsoft got 9x as much.
In the UK, there is almost no penalty for the general act of spamming, despite it being technically illegal. FTA:
"What should change is there should be a penalty where somebody is identified as sending spam--at the moment, [all we can do] is send a notice telling them to comply with the law. If they continue... they face a maximum fine of 5,000 pounds ($9,353)."
Microsoft was able to get the (relatively) high amount because, according to the terms of use for Hotmail (see section 3, which also mentions the anti-spam policy) this guy was in violation of the agreement. Individuals are also nearly powerless against spammers, in the legal sense; unless they can sue for significant damages caused by a single spammer, there isn't any legal action they can take against that person.
While this sort of thing does help give Hotmail and Microsoft in general a bad name (thus justifying the fine) the point isn't that MS was able to get $84k out of this spammer; it's that without a violation of the terms of use, the most he could have been fined for is 1/9 of that. That's hardly a deterrent, considering how easy automated spamming is, and how few clicks would be needed to recoup the loss.
Slashdot Mirror
HO LY SHIT !!!! that is easily the worst thing I have seen online (with the vague possiblility of a few, very select myspace profiles). What I find extra amusing is that their "why use IE" site doesn't even render quite correctly in IE (well, not IE7, the only version I have installed anywhere). Of course, given that FrontPage produces code more standards-compliant than is used in their source, I'm amazed it renders as well as it does... (*only* 411 errors and an invalid doctype). Their explanation of why you really need to reset your screen resolution to 800x600 is almost as bad, by the way; you might think a web programmer would know how to have multiple stylessheets and select the apropriate one using javascript, but hey, why not break further that which is already broken. Oh, and the way your ppoup blocker pings you as the site opens? You're prventing their RealAudio streaming pages from opening. Leaving aside the issue of their decision to use Real, are they honestly implying that the decision to use popups is better than an invisible frame that doesn't change on every link click (their justification for not using a stream in the main page) a la AJAX? Sometimes people truly terrify me. I'm tempted to take a screenshot of their site in a Linux system without Windows fonts, using 800x600 on a natively 1440x900 widescreen LCD, using IE4 installed in Wine... Nah, it's not worth it if I don't get to see their faces. (On a side note, though, I could pretty easily send them one of the site in Konqueror, sans Flash, at my native resolution... it'd be worth creating a throwaway email address for.)
Well... IE4 was made infamous as the browser that ran remote binary code on your machine with hardly any security. Maybe they're too cheap to hire somebody who can hack his way into IE6 but still want their drive-by downloads? I don't know... lameness, seriously.
XP "just plain works" the way 98 "just plain works" which is to say fine for its time but nearly archaic now. For example, no operating system should be run with the user having full permissions all the time. In XP it is *possible* to run as a LUA and still fully use with your system, but it's a pain - Run As... only goes so far, and if you start a program without admin privileges and need them later, your screwed... close it and start again as admin. Vista handles this by allowing programs to change their permissions, while running, at the press of a button. You only have to recover a couple of otherwise completely lost/changed documents via Volume Shadow Copies ("Previous Versions") to recognize how valuable it is. Yes, it's available on 2003. I know exactly two people who use 2003 on the desktop, and it takes a bit of tinkering to do really well there (enable DirectX if you want games, for example). Vista uses address space randomization to fight return-to-libc attacks. Something no ordinary user will ever notice, and very few would understand... but it, along with data execute protection (yes, XP has DEP) have the potential to really prevent buffer overruns from doing anything serious (arbitrary code execution). I have yet to see a desktop search solution that works as handily as Vista's, although Spotlight comes close. Even the best third-party solution (which requires additional installation) isn't as easy as WinKey then start typing, then click or hit enter. DirectX 10 has the potential to make an incredible leap in graphics performance. Once the new games come out, you can bet many gamers will gladly take Vista just for that. Protected Mode is the way every browser should run. Nothing stops a user from doing something truly stupid, but protected mode makes it a little clearer what is and isn't smart. It also means that even if somebody does compromise the browser, the won't be able to DO anything with it, unless the user allows them (contrary to a common /. argument, users actually do notice if something - like a UAC prompt - jumps up at them when they don't expect it, and there's a pretty decent chance whey won't automatically click okay).
There are a dozen other things, ranging from built-in calendar to the ability to run Tablet tools and Media Centr on the same machine, that guarantees people will buy. Those who don't upgrade will buy a new computer in a few years. People probably will buy it just for the eye candy, to be honest... people who don't want to buy a Mac or learn how to deal with Linux, but want a pretty, "next-gen" desktop to show off. Heck, I've gotten a number of people in the CSE depratment who were excited to see Vista... and asked me to demo the new UI tricks.
System Restore, Software firewall, DEP support, IE6 w/ SP2 (don't laugh, it's better than 5.5), Remote Desktop, Switch User (without logging off), Security Center (again, don't laugh, it's a good idea to tell most people that they need antivirus software or their firewall is off), the re-designed start menu (I'm not talking eye candy, I'm talking keeping track of your most commonly used apps and pinning a few you always want in the same place, then hiding the rest), lack of any noticable memory leaks and essentially perfect memory recovery from crashed applications (in 2000 you still wanted to reboot after any significant application crashed, and overall stability, while good, wasn't AS good).
Don't forget support for new applications - IE7 is often a much easier sell to people than Firefox, and I don't think Defender or Live OneCare run on 2000 (may be wrong here, but that's my memory).
Fy family and I used 200 on laptops for 3 years (still have one that hasn't been upgraded or replaced, so 5 years now). We almost *never* rebooted, but since we watched every amp-hour (12V system, on a yacht if you must know) we didn't leave them on all the time either.
I'm trying REALLY hard to think of a time resume from hibernate failed without a good reson (such as the old HP with the broken BIOS) and am coming up... blank. This was 4 different laptops from 3 different manufacturers, and except for that one HP (and yes, it was a BIOS bug) they worked fine. My family would still be using those laptops except that electronics only last a few years in a moist salt atmosphere (the last survivor of the batch, a PIII 750 with 512 MB RAM and 20GB hard drive, now at least 5 years old, has developed an internal power supply issue that severely limits the time it can be run without hibernating and cooling off.)
Amazing... your knowledge of history is apparently almost as flawed as your "common sense". In case you were wondering, 100 years ago is nothing. We had airplanes 100 years ago. The Celcius scale was developed over 250 years ago, using Mercury thermometers. Other scales date back even further. Some universities and institutes have been monitoring climate change for over 150 years. Consider both the graphic and the pages linked below it: Instrumental Temperature Record.
As for the margin of error (the +/- you mentioned), this is why scientists have things like standard deviations and statistical analyses. In case you were wondering, the error on core samples is fairly small. Generally speaking, exit polls are probably less accurate. In any case, the precision of ice core samples (precision having to do with the repeatability of a particular finding, the number of digits to which a value can be determined) is quite high enough to be compared against the average change in temperatures occurring worldwide, so unless you are suggesting these PhDs don't know how to do their work, the accuracy is probably quite high as well.
Sorry to intrude on your right-wing bliss. Education is a good thing, though.
First, there's the Run As... option. Annoying, but not significantly more so that Linux.*
.msi packages
Second, ther's the option to install a virtual machine (VirtualPC is free these days) for prorams needing admin access
Third, there's Vista and UAC... be admin when, and only when, you need it. Nearly painless too, especially in RC1.
* Write a batch file that starts msiexec.exe with elevated permissions for installing
This is NOT a "triple-standard disk". It's a hybrid Blu-Ray/HD-DVD disk, which happens to also use the other side for data storage (as opposed to a label). It's the hybrid nature of the two high-definition formats on one side that is worthy of excitement. It would be relatively trivial to, for example, combine the HD-DVD/DVD hybrid with a Blu-Ray surface on the other side. By the standards of this headline, that's a "triple-standard disk" even though it is just an extansion of Toshiba's project.
The significance of this is that it may allow the high-def format war to reach a compromise, or at least allow disc producers to hedge their bets by releasing high-def content in both formats. People might not buy Toshiba's HD-DVD/DVD hybrid right now because if Blu-Ray wins out, they're left with essentially a standard definition disc. However, ANYBODY interested in high-def could buy a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD hybrid and know it will work. Including the movie on standard DVD as well is nice for those of use that don't have a high-def player yet, but I'd actually prefer it to be on a second disk rather than the other side.
Double-sided DVDs are nothing new. I own several double-sided DVDs; usually widescreen on one side and 4:3 on the other. They're a hassle because you can't put either side on anything that might cause a scratch (like a table with a grain of sand). Both sides can be dual-layer and will play in any standard player.
Even low-end CPU towers can take 120W. High-end gaming laptops are 140W+. Are you honestly suggesting that with a high-dev DVD drive, hard disk, insane amount of CPU and graphics capability, and the cooling neccessary to fit everything in in a box that size, you'll get away for under 150W? Thank again... I wouldn't be surprised if it hit 180.
P.S. Gaming desktop systems often have 500W power supplies.
I think BOINC allows processor utilization limits (sorry, I haven't set the configuration in months). Generally, you can also intentionally scale down the processor (tying this to a specifc application might be slightly tricky but should be possible).
Or you could just make sure your laptop has adaquate ventilation and run it like it's supposed to be used.
Actually there is. I'm not saying I agreem but I understand their reasoning:
Movies are not released simultaneously in all locations. In some countries movies are released at a certain timed schedule for maximum marketability, in another country a movie might be released on DVD while still in theaters. Region encoding is intended to prevent people from buying 5000 DVDs in one country where they've been out for a few months and cost $17.95, and shipping them off for sale in another country where the movie is a huge hit in theaters but doesn't come out on DVD for another two months.
Petitions take too long... just go look up the link above, and rig it to select your school mascot for dean. Most schools would be a lot cooler about that then the government.
Unless by transaction systems you mean things like ATMs... I think those are a touch more secure, but you still might want to take a look.
Mod parent up! This is certainly true. However, there's a problem with monohulls: their keels are heavy, and that reduces motoring performance. A catamaran or trimaran might do well with this hybrid system though. Stormy weather would be bad however; pots of wind (possibly to the point that sailing is dangerous, in which case you want powerful engines) but little sunlight.
You speak like somebody familiar with the issues blue water sailors face on passage. Are/were you, by any chance, a cruiser? Always looking to meet other members of the community.
30 days is a glacial amount of time for crossing the Atlantic. Many sailboats (which can cruise at speeds of 7 knots or higher) can do it in 2-3 weeks. A comparably priced cruising powerboat might make it in 10-15 days. "Months" is purely ridiculous... though this boat is so slow it might well take a (single) month...
BIG problem here: sails tend to block a lot of sunlight. Even relatively clear sails will probably cut down on insolation significantly, especially if they're relatively heavy-duty (as moving a 46' boat would suggest). Also, monohulls need keels, which add tremendously to their weight. There goes your motoring performance.
A sailing catamaran might be able to do this, however; if the motors can be used to charge the batteries while under sail, the charging issue goes away (many cruising boats that use propellor shafts will attach a generator to the shaft and leave the engine in neutral to charge the batteries while sailing). I can see myself buying a boat like that... when I find myself with a million dollars to spend... (a new 45' sailing catamaran can cost over half a million easily).
Furthermore, while being becalmed is annoying, diesel will get you out of it nearly as well as electric (or you can wait it out). Near a storm, however, you need serious engine power and can be in overcast weather for weeks. Finally, sometimes 5 knots simply won't cut it; if that's the best this motor can do it is unlikely to get beyond hobbyists.
The logical way around this, which I hope MS takes even though it would be a bit more hassle for us, is to have an "allow sharing" option on our files. Obviously you wouldn't be able to override the "allow/disallow sharing" settings on DRMed files, but things like Creative Commons files could then be tagged for "allow unlimited sharing", files from pro-DRM sources would be tagged with the "3 tries" level, and maybe there would even be intermediates (allow unlimited sharing, but not grandchild sharing, or allow unlimited Zune sharing bot not burning to CD, etc.)
There are two ways this could work: MS has default settings written into their software that assigns settings based on the files' origins (ripped gets level X, self-encoded you can choose, or whatever) but I can see that getting broken easily, so the other option is something where, by an opt-in option, you can send your file/album info and retrieve its license (I know, this sounds like spyware, conspiracy to catch pirates, or whatever, but how many people actually turn off the "download album art" option? This is nearly identical; it's just a database lookup and a download). This way, bands that want to encourage sharing could submit their albums for open sharing, bands that want more restrictions could select their DRM level, CC-licenced music would be unrestricted, and the RIAA-level restrictions (the current 3-tries share mode) could be used for everything else.
This "allow sharing" license would be transferred like a DRM license, but wouldn't violate Creative Commons because it doesn't do anything to the music. Instead, it expands the Zune from its standard 3-try share mode to unlimited distribution mode. Everybody gets what they want, and the process could be completely invisible to the users.
I'm not even sure they're going to make it so the phasers are the same color or same graphical effect from episode to episode... by the look of it, they're basically trying to make painted backdrops look less painted. I'm having a hard time seeing this as a bad thing. While I wouldn't mind terribly if they 're-tuned' the phasers, I don't think they're even going to do that. They certainly wouldn't take it as far as Voyager, where you could see the phaser arrays activate, see shields flash, etc.
So... now that, for the first time since 1987, there's no commercial Star Trek shows in production, they've to "bring back" the classics? I'm not actually upset by them retouching the backgrounds, etc. so much as that after the fiasco of Enterprise, I was hoping for something more progressive, rather than going back and retouching footage from my parents' generation.
On the other hand, one could argue that, at the very least since DS9, Trek has gone downhill with every successive series. Maybe they think they just need to get back to their roots? If they can combine the original story with enough modern SFX to keep viewers happy, this re-run might even beat out the original showing for ratings.That would certainly be good news for trek fans; if the show still has following, we're a lot less likely to go through a repeat of the '69 to '87 dark age.
Your logic is faulty. If store employees, etc. were going to buy them all up anyhow (even if not to resell at higher prices) then nobody - consumers, price gougers, anybody - would be able to get one. Since this if blatantly obviously not the case, your argument is pointless... no, I wouldn't want to be number 6 when only 5 are delivered, and not be able to buy one. However, I'd be WAY more pissed off to be number 3 when 50 are delivered, and have the two people ahead of me buy 25 each and laugh as they walk out at the markup they'll be able to pull. The first is bad luck on my part - I wasn't fast enough to get one of the delivered items - and the second is a couple of scum deciding to screw everybody who would have shopped at that store. I had the money, I've probably been waiting for months, I got there in plenty of time... and a couple of amoral swine decided I (and everybody behind me in line) should have to wait a few weeks longer and pay them a few hundred bucks a piece. They aren't providing a service (they certainly aren't doing anything worth the thousands of dollars it'll make them for a few hours work), they're slapping their own tax on the product because they're too greedy to give a shit about everybody else.
Mind you, if all those marked-up units were being shipped to farmhouses 5 hours from the nearest store - and the units weren't available for preorder online anyhow - then it would qualify as providing a service (of course, since such places are few and far between, and unlikely to be interested in a PS3 at any cost, all that ends up happening is all the people that got laughed at by gougers puching full shopping carts while the store manager came out to explain that they were sold out, try again in two weeks... those people, who would have had the perfect opportunity to buy at the same price and time as everybody else will now line the pockets of a bunch of greedy pigs.
Also, with regard to form-generated code, I must disagree slightly... while hiding it is good (and
Furthermore, this kind of spam has a number of other dangers:
In theory, yes. In practice, that's hopeless; whether through ignorance, accident, or faulty pattern recognition, there are people who believe what is advertised in spam and will buy it. Since the cost to operate a server and spew hundreds of spam messages per second is very low, and since spam is almost always either advertising for a product with real profit margin (porn, pirated software) or completely false advertising (fake pharmaceuticals, penis patches, etc.) it takes literally one click in tens of thousands to pay off.
The problem with approach 2 is that Microsoft's suit against the guy was merely for breaking the terms of use for Hotmail. In a sad kind of way, I'm glad they were able to get this much out of him; it's not as if MS lacks lawyers, but that's a lot of money for violation of a checkbox-policy on a free service.
The solution is to let the government convict spammers for serious damages. However, the most a spammer can presently be fined for in the UK is 5,000 GBP (about $9,350 US). This should, in theory, be easy to raise... but I hardly know anything about UK law. In practice though, this "punishment" is nearly useless. Microsoft got 9x as much.
Of course, with sufficient longbow practice, a bit of justice against spammers (technically outside the legal system) becomes possible...
While this sort of thing does help give Hotmail and Microsoft in general a bad name (thus justifying the fine) the point isn't that MS was able to get $84k out of this spammer; it's that without a violation of the terms of use, the most he could have been fined for is 1/9 of that. That's hardly a deterrent, considering how easy automated spamming is, and how few clicks would be needed to recoup the loss.