Try doing a PhD concerned with the hardware implementation of pretty hardcore mathematics for wireless communications and have someone refer what you do to be "IT".
Without trying to sound like some form of zealot, the best thing I did was switch to a Mac. Not because it is a superior environment or anything, but because when someone has a Windows problem I feign ignorance and say "sorry, not sure, I don't use Windows these days".
The way I see it, the problem with encryption is that it's generally computationally expensive and there are bandwidth overheads in performing strong worthwhile encryption. BUT, with the DMCA and other localised laws forbidding cracking of encryption, is strong encryption needed?
Is it worth just encrypting things using a trivial dictionary or some such computationally trivial and zero bandwidth overhead system?
That way if someone wants to look at the data, they'll need a warrant or else they'd be breaking the law.
Is my thinking here valid?
As long as the program never runs with privileges different than the user installing it then it's not really a concern. In fact, it's not really any different to the user running whatever software they want in their home directory.
However, as pointed out by many before, if the program runs with elevated privileges or under a different username or even worse, as root, than it becomes far too dangerous to allow.
Hopefully a sane compromise can be achieved like only requiring root privileges to install programs that run elevated.
You make the fatal mistake that unless your Australian, you probably didn't fund the initial research.
So to put your question back on you, if your tax dollars weren't spent developing it, what right do you have to use the technology for free?
Wouldn't you BLOCK a person on facebook before getting a restraining order out on them?
However, I don't disagree with this decision at all, and strongly agree with the previous comment:
Yep, not really news. Would "Woman with a Restraining Order Against Her Arrested for Calling and Hanging Up" make the front page? Even "Woman with a Restraining Order Against Her Arrested for Texting" wouldn't raise any eyebrows.
It's not newsworthy that a restraining order was violated. It's newsworthy that law enforcement are looking at the violation regardless of the communication channel. It's one more step towards realizing we don't need to create new laws with "e-this, or cyber-that" to have them apply to Internet traffic.
Anyone that joins a group called "windows haters" is a fanboy of some other operating system in my book. Windows frustrates me, but I don't choose to go join "windows haters" groups.
Maybe the current version could be used to simulate how this happened?:P
I used to play with that thing in the high school library far too much during library classes (hey, this was before schools had the internet).
It was always fun making the moon crash into earth.
OK so you've provided an edge case where a complex system would exhibit undocumented behaviour that the software engineers weren't aware of. What part of what I said is therefore Wrong?
Just because things happen that aren't documented/expected, doesn't make them non-deterministic.
If you want me to clarify what I said to the point of nitpicking fine.
Digital hardware designers don't generally concern themselves with the analog behaviour of the underlying technology. Why? Because their lives are hard enough as it is dealing with digital stuff which they presume to be deterministic. Digital guys try and make the algorithm or code as simple as is practicable to minimise space whilst maximising space. Hardware just wouldn't be made if digital guys had to worry about non-deterministic effects of every latch and logic element in a design containing millions of such elements. Hell, digital hardware guys these days don't generally concern themselves with RTL, that's why we have languages like VHDL and Verilog.
Leakage currents, neighbouring circuit interference and temperature are all able to be modelled (again, this is why Cadence et. al. are so expensive), plus hardware engineers worth their salt put in sensible tolerances for all these values.
My point was, hardware design is comparably deterministic as software engineering. Sure, if you break the silicon or run it out of spec it stops doing what you designed it to do, but so does software.
No, the first library does not link against the second. The second links against the first. Essentially the second library is an extension or plug-in. The first library works in it's entirety without the second.
Dear USA,
Please don't nationalise your healthcare or we won't have anyone to point to and say "See, it could be worse".
Regards,
The rest of the world's governments.
I've written a library which can be used fine without any GPL libraries but I wanted to add an extension that was essentially provided by an existing GPL library. So all I did is write a secondary library which links with my my original (non GPL) library and also the GPL library. I'm fairly confident all I have to do is license the second library under the GPL. It's clear my original library isn't a derived work of the GPL library (it doesn't even link with my secondary library nor the GPL library).
Whilst the term "derived work" is a fairly legal term it isn't necessarily ambiguous or confusing to apply in the real world. I would think that the test "can my work operate in any form without the GPL work" is a fairly easy test to apply with regards to libraries and linking.
So? It's just a set of different paradigms. It's just like using a different programming language.
99.9% of the time if your code works during functional verification testing (which doesn't simulate the physics of hardware) it will work fine in timing/hardware verification and then also in real hardware (so long as you don't violate any timing constraints, which your synthesis tool will tell you about). That's one of the reasons why RTL synthesis tools like Cadence are so insanely expensive, because they do allow you to go from function verification which verifies the syntax and semantics of your code to hardware verification which allows you to ensure your design will work as expected in actual hardware.
If you're getting "kicked in the balls really hard" then it's probably because you need to brush up on your VHDL/Verilog, just like if you're getting segfaults when writing C you're doing something wrong. It doesn't mean that the process is any less deterministic.
The beer mat lady?
Her friends later admitted to putting the beer mat in her bag as a joke without her realising, but they still locked her up.
An interesting thing that all your quality examples have in common is that western style judicial process wasn't really followed in any of the cases, their trials were all a farce.
I guess that says something about most of the world.
Way back in the early days of Active X I was trying to do something, can't remember for the life of me what it was. Anyway, I sent Microsoft question about it and the following day whilst I was playing around outside (I was around 12 or so at the time) my mum came out to tell me that a man from Microsoft was on the phone for me. I was impressed at the time, this was back in the days before international calls were cheap enough to enable off-shoring of tech support.
For what it's worth, these days I use a Mac for my primary PC and program in C/C++:P
This is a thousand monkeys working on a thousand SQL joins. Soon, they'll have written the most efficient yet confusing SQL query known to mankind. (reads one of the resultsets) "It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times"?! you stupid monkey! (monkey screeches) Oh, shut up.
By the way, you can be a prosperous 1st world country without being a liberal Western democracy. In fact, Iran in many ways is more prosperous than many other countries you would consider as heading towards 1st-world. Iran is a much cleaner and better developed country than India, China, and I would think Vietnam.
In fact, based on the UN's Human Development Index, Iran (84th) is indeed more highly developed than Vietnam (114th). The world's largest democracy, India, comes in further down the list (132th). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
you're free to port ext3 to windows yourself if you want it that bad.
besides, MS is having a hard enough time dealing with WinFS then have to worry about a third party file system:P
Also,it's easier to store a solid at atmospheric pressure than a gas (C02) that you have to pressurise until it's a liquid and try and pump underground for all eternity.
What's the half life of C02? It never decays, it's always C02.
Once there are plug-ins for Chrome, Firefox probably will die but then people will load up Chrome with plug-ins and it will go slow too. Then the cycle will continue...
Disclaimer: I like both Firefox and Chrome (but I use Safari 4)
I wonder if it would be possible for someone like Dell to allow people to choose to have linux and windows pre-installed except leave windows on a 30 day trial. Then people are free to try out linux and see if it suits their needs. If they then decide they need windows, they can purchase a key for activation.
Slashdot Mirror
Try doing a PhD concerned with the hardware implementation of pretty hardcore mathematics for wireless communications and have someone refer what you do to be "IT". Without trying to sound like some form of zealot, the best thing I did was switch to a Mac. Not because it is a superior environment or anything, but because when someone has a Windows problem I feign ignorance and say "sorry, not sure, I don't use Windows these days".
The way I see it, the problem with encryption is that it's generally computationally expensive and there are bandwidth overheads in performing strong worthwhile encryption. BUT, with the DMCA and other localised laws forbidding cracking of encryption, is strong encryption needed? Is it worth just encrypting things using a trivial dictionary or some such computationally trivial and zero bandwidth overhead system? That way if someone wants to look at the data, they'll need a warrant or else they'd be breaking the law. Is my thinking here valid?
As long as the program never runs with privileges different than the user installing it then it's not really a concern. In fact, it's not really any different to the user running whatever software they want in their home directory. However, as pointed out by many before, if the program runs with elevated privileges or under a different username or even worse, as root, than it becomes far too dangerous to allow. Hopefully a sane compromise can be achieved like only requiring root privileges to install programs that run elevated.
You make the fatal mistake that unless your Australian, you probably didn't fund the initial research. So to put your question back on you, if your tax dollars weren't spent developing it, what right do you have to use the technology for free?
Yep, not really news. Would "Woman with a Restraining Order Against Her Arrested for Calling and Hanging Up" make the front page? Even "Woman with a Restraining Order Against Her Arrested for Texting" wouldn't raise any eyebrows.
It's not newsworthy that a restraining order was violated. It's newsworthy that law enforcement are looking at the violation regardless of the communication channel. It's one more step towards realizing we don't need to create new laws with "e-this, or cyber-that" to have them apply to Internet traffic.
Don't they know that if you surround your enemy with mobile phones and get the phones to ring at the same time they pop like popcorn?
So why bother investing in expensive and high risk research when you can just steal the proven results of everyone else?
Anyone that joins a group called "windows haters" is a fanboy of some other operating system in my book. Windows frustrates me, but I don't choose to go join "windows haters" groups.
Is this post modded "Interesting" because of it's unique interpretation of English grammar?
Maybe the current version could be used to simulate how this happened? :P
I used to play with that thing in the high school library far too much during library classes (hey, this was before schools had the internet).
It was always fun making the moon crash into earth.
OK so you've provided an edge case where a complex system would exhibit undocumented behaviour that the software engineers weren't aware of. What part of what I said is therefore Wrong? Just because things happen that aren't documented/expected, doesn't make them non-deterministic. If you want me to clarify what I said to the point of nitpicking fine. Digital hardware designers don't generally concern themselves with the analog behaviour of the underlying technology. Why? Because their lives are hard enough as it is dealing with digital stuff which they presume to be deterministic. Digital guys try and make the algorithm or code as simple as is practicable to minimise space whilst maximising space. Hardware just wouldn't be made if digital guys had to worry about non-deterministic effects of every latch and logic element in a design containing millions of such elements. Hell, digital hardware guys these days don't generally concern themselves with RTL, that's why we have languages like VHDL and Verilog.
Leakage currents, neighbouring circuit interference and temperature are all able to be modelled (again, this is why Cadence et. al. are so expensive), plus hardware engineers worth their salt put in sensible tolerances for all these values. My point was, hardware design is comparably deterministic as software engineering. Sure, if you break the silicon or run it out of spec it stops doing what you designed it to do, but so does software.
No, the first library does not link against the second. The second links against the first. Essentially the second library is an extension or plug-in. The first library works in it's entirety without the second.
Dear USA, Please don't nationalise your healthcare or we won't have anyone to point to and say "See, it could be worse". Regards, The rest of the world's governments.
I've written a library which can be used fine without any GPL libraries but I wanted to add an extension that was essentially provided by an existing GPL library. So all I did is write a secondary library which links with my my original (non GPL) library and also the GPL library. I'm fairly confident all I have to do is license the second library under the GPL. It's clear my original library isn't a derived work of the GPL library (it doesn't even link with my secondary library nor the GPL library). Whilst the term "derived work" is a fairly legal term it isn't necessarily ambiguous or confusing to apply in the real world. I would think that the test "can my work operate in any form without the GPL work" is a fairly easy test to apply with regards to libraries and linking.
So? It's just a set of different paradigms. It's just like using a different programming language. 99.9% of the time if your code works during functional verification testing (which doesn't simulate the physics of hardware) it will work fine in timing/hardware verification and then also in real hardware (so long as you don't violate any timing constraints, which your synthesis tool will tell you about). That's one of the reasons why RTL synthesis tools like Cadence are so insanely expensive, because they do allow you to go from function verification which verifies the syntax and semantics of your code to hardware verification which allows you to ensure your design will work as expected in actual hardware. If you're getting "kicked in the balls really hard" then it's probably because you need to brush up on your VHDL/Verilog, just like if you're getting segfaults when writing C you're doing something wrong. It doesn't mean that the process is any less deterministic.
The beer mat lady? Her friends later admitted to putting the beer mat in her bag as a joke without her realising, but they still locked her up. An interesting thing that all your quality examples have in common is that western style judicial process wasn't really followed in any of the cases, their trials were all a farce. I guess that says something about most of the world.
Way back in the early days of Active X I was trying to do something, can't remember for the life of me what it was. Anyway, I sent Microsoft question about it and the following day whilst I was playing around outside (I was around 12 or so at the time) my mum came out to tell me that a man from Microsoft was on the phone for me. I was impressed at the time, this was back in the days before international calls were cheap enough to enable off-shoring of tech support. For what it's worth, these days I use a Mac for my primary PC and program in C/C++ :P
This is a thousand monkeys working on a thousand SQL joins. Soon, they'll have written the most efficient yet confusing SQL query known to mankind. (reads one of the resultsets) "It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times"?! you stupid monkey! (monkey screeches) Oh, shut up.
By the way, you can be a prosperous 1st world country without being a liberal Western democracy. In fact, Iran in many ways is more prosperous than many other countries you would consider as heading towards 1st-world. Iran is a much cleaner and better developed country than India, China, and I would think Vietnam. In fact, based on the UN's Human Development Index, Iran (84th) is indeed more highly developed than Vietnam (114th). The world's largest democracy, India, comes in further down the list (132th). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
Too soon?
you're free to port ext3 to windows yourself if you want it that bad. besides, MS is having a hard enough time dealing with WinFS then have to worry about a third party file system :P
Also,it's easier to store a solid at atmospheric pressure than a gas (C02) that you have to pressurise until it's a liquid and try and pump underground for all eternity. What's the half life of C02? It never decays, it's always C02.
Once there are plug-ins for Chrome, Firefox probably will die but then people will load up Chrome with plug-ins and it will go slow too. Then the cycle will continue... Disclaimer: I like both Firefox and Chrome (but I use Safari 4)
I wonder if it would be possible for someone like Dell to allow people to choose to have linux and windows pre-installed except leave windows on a 30 day trial. Then people are free to try out linux and see if it suits their needs. If they then decide they need windows, they can purchase a key for activation.