That's kind of the point. If you're browsing the web insecurely, then it doesn't matter if your wireless network is encrypted; you can still get hacked by someone on the wire. For me the biggest thing opening up my wireless network would do is force me to double check that I'm doing things right.
...for fun and profit. This was the first article I read that really made me want to learn assembly. Also I've taken courses in programming languages which was basically my college's way of forcing people to learn functional programming via Haskell.
From what I have been told, there are more jobs for Java and Data Warehouse development teams compared to lower-level programmers.
Speaking on a purely observational basis, I would have to say that this is true. But this also means that there are more Java devs and DBA's than there are C and Systems programmers, which enables the C programmers to command a higher premium. Also join your local ACM chapter and try out some programming contests. People in this group usually know what they're talking about. If you're strictly talking about what will help you in the business world, people skills are vital (as others have mentioned).
Maybe Negroponte should just pull off the gloves and make a deal with Wal-Mart and Costco to carry OLPC's.
Who would buy them? You get a machine with a tiny keyboard, tiny black and white display, a window manager that with one window manages to take up the whole screen, and not enough disk space to download all the programs you're going to want.
Best course of action is to continue give one get one indefinitely. At least then you're not pretending that the machine is designed for end users in the USA.
Even those that have worked in education for only a short time know that nothing is done "for the children". It's all lip service. Here's the list of people you have to care about in order:
1. Parents
2. Administrators
3. Co-workers
4. Children
If a publicly funded institution can't get their priorities right, I don't expect a for-profit business to be able to.
there is no compelling argument, NO COMPELLING ARGUMENT to use anything more than
1. pencil
2. paper
3. optical scanner
You're right. Except of course for the argument in the article:
Still, optical scanning is hardly a flawless system. If someone doesn't mark a ballot clearly, a recount can wind up back in the morass of arguing over "voter intent." The machines also need to be carefully calibrated so they don't miscount ballots. Blind people may need an extra device installed to help them vote. Poorly trained poll workers could simply lose ballots. And the machines do, in fact, run software that can be hacked: Sancho himself has used computer scientists to hack his machines. It's also possible that any complex software isn't well suited for running elections. Most software firms deal with the inevitable bugs in their product by patching them; Microsoft still patches its seven-year-old Windows XP several times a month. But vendors of electronic voting machines do not have this luxury, because any update must be federally tested for months.
If you did read the article, you would find all the arguments for and against the various voting systems of the past, including paper ballots, lever machines, and punch cards. Hanging chads made touch screen voting a promising technology back in the year 2000.
Propbably the most interesting part of the article: "Amazingly, the Diebold spokesman, Chris Riggal, admitted to me that the company is considering making the software open source on its next generation of touch-screen machines, so that anyone could download, inspect, or repair the code."
...a suit charging the company with maintaining an illegal monopoly on the digital music market.
I don't know about that. I can still buy CD's from any record store.
Slashdot is about as guilty. See repeated stories of "bricking" where no devices were irrecoverably harmed, that is, "bricked".
Slashdot is a small community of like minded people that submits news stories to editors whom are recognized to be worthy of deciding what is relevant. The site is owned by Sourceforge and is mostly controlled by CmdrTaco, who has largely resisted corporatization.
TV news goes out to millions of viewers every day and is owned by corporate interests such as GE, Viacom, and News Corp. These companies control the integrity of their newsrooms, and control the content that keeps Joe Public informed.
Sadly, even though the Slashdot editors/submitters have less of a responsibility to the public, they do a better job than most newsrooms. I get more information reading just the summaries in the politics section than I could ever get watching TV news.
Is After all in Capitalism the, "market will choose" which shows end up coming on the air.
It's precisely the kind of thinking that got us into this mess. Capitalism works in a lot of businesses, but TV news is not one of them. The truth is that the latest missing blond child or mishap with Paris (not the city) will generate more ratings than a story about the latest development in FISA legislation ever will.
Capitalism in news rewards ongoing analysis of unimportant headlines that actually don't matter.
Actually, if you were to pick up on someone's facial expressions, most likely you would be doing it subconsciously. It may be impossible for you to consciously alter your sleep patterns, but it's within the realm of possibility that you could do so subconsciously.
Having just read the article on how people don't care about SACD and rip most things to MP3 anyway, I think this offers a pretty good comparison. Customers just don't care about the extra quality that they can get with HDDVD or Blu Ray. DVD quality is heads and shoulders above vhs and for most people that's good enough. You're more likely to find them buying more and more low def movies for their ipod or phone right now, just like customers buy mp3s for their mp3 players.
1) You can't take your LPs in the car
2) The bass doesn't sound nearly as good; stated in the article there is a limit that is lower than CD limit
3) It's impossible to get rid of the background hiss on an LP
4) Digital formats have been scientifically proven to have more audible information than LP. If you like listening to LPs because they leave this information out (ie. it sounds "warmer"), then more power to you
5) If you buy a NEW LP, it's likely to suffer from the same disastrous digital mastering that the CD format does.
The article is specific in that engineers and producers are now using digital equipment to compress and clip the waveform like never before. Their excuse is that the track will sound better on low quality PC hardware and MP3 players, and that people are unlikely to notice because of this. If you buy a track mastered for MP3 quality on an analog format like LP, you're still fucked.
Also I'd like to point out that these days all the masters are recorded digitally, so even though you're listening to an analog format like LP, the source material (sound) has already undergone digital conversion.
For shitty results from recording engineers' wanking, there's don't buy the shit.
What if I like the songs? It's all about letting musicians and labels know that it's OK not to 'finalize' the record to the brick wall limit of loudness.
The arrest in 2006 of two British Internet gambling executives while traveling through the United States also highlighted the U.S. government's escalation of its battle against the industry.
First Dmitry Sklyarov, now this. Here's an idea, why don't we NOT arrest people that were doing things legal in their country of residence, regardless of wether its are legal here? And people wonder why tourism is down, even though European buying power has skyrocketed in recent months.
People seem to be posting the same thing over and over again:
This guys an idiot/horrible person and got what's coming to him.
Last I checked, here in the USA we grant the same rights to ALL people, regardless of their color, creed, or (I have to say) IQ.
Well, he should have just swapped the hard drives out/encryped the data.
The article isn't about how you can evade being caught if you're a pedophile and have incriminating evidence on your hard drive. They focus on the invasion of his privacy.
He should have expected someone would invade his privacy when bringing stuff to circuit city!
Just because we expect certain people to do immoral things doesn't mean we should allow it.
A tech NEEDS to look at your hard drive pictures and videos in order to test a DVD burner.
No they don't.
If you invite (locksmith/mechanic) to fix your stuff, then the police can look too.
Giving someone permission to enter your house or examine your stuff doesn't give the police the same permission. IANAL, but they need a warrant for that.
The list goes on. I'm tired of reading Red Herrings people! Let us discuss weather the tech was actually right and the evidence should stand instead of all these other things. I think the perp is a bad guy too, but that doesn't allow me to step all over his privacy rights.
Why isn't this being modded off topic? The issue isn't what you can do to prevent being caught with child porn, the issue is weather or not a computer tech is allowed to 'peruse' your drive. Oh, and a definition of peruse for you all, from wordnet:
examine or consider with attention and in detail (emphisis mine).
-The Post Office Analogy: Take large, heavy package to post office. Deliver using media mail rate, the cheapest shipping option. Miss sign claiming that any media mail package is subject to inspection by any PO employee.
They should probably have those same signs at these 'big box retailers'.
It would appear everyone is missing the issue. The plaintiff's argument is that the employee shouldn't have been looking through his hard drive (quite a different thing from burning a dvd), therefore the evidence is inadmissible.
WTF do you expect!?
Just because you expect someone to violate your privacy doesn't mean said person wasn't wrong for doing it in the first place.
For example if a thief breaks into someone's home and discovers child porn and hands it over to the police, the prosecutor should be allowed to use that evidence.
Sure, the judge should admit the thief's testimony. That's quite a different thing than admitting the actual photos.
This is exactly what I have been saying the whole time. It seems to me that the police have every reason to investigate, but only after they get a court issued warrant.
That the tech was rifling through his photos looking for pictures of his wife or hot 19yo daughter is irrelevant. That is a matter of internal security and policy, and potential prosecution in its own right, but Sodomsky's possession of child pornography should not be tainted by this action.
Why not? Evidence gets thrown out all the time due to the fact that it was obtained illegally.
I don't blame the tech for reporting the crime, I blame the police for not getting a warrant first.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. Maybe we should tag this !cell.
That's kind of the point. If you're browsing the web insecurely, then it doesn't matter if your wireless network is encrypted; you can still get hacked by someone on the wire. For me the biggest thing opening up my wireless network would do is force me to double check that I'm doing things right.
I guess that rules out this theory.
Apparently they never read Stroustrup
Even those that have worked in education for only a short time know that nothing is done "for the children". It's all lip service. Here's the list of people you have to care about in order:
1. Parents
2. Administrators
3. Co-workers
4. Children
If a publicly funded institution can't get their priorities right, I don't expect a for-profit business to be able to.
Propbably the most interesting part of the article: "Amazingly, the Diebold spokesman, Chris Riggal, admitted to me that the company is considering making the software open source on its next generation of touch-screen machines, so that anyone could download, inspect, or repair the code."
...a suit charging the company with maintaining an illegal monopoly on the digital music market. I don't know about that. I can still buy CD's from any record store.
TV news goes out to millions of viewers every day and is owned by corporate interests such as GE, Viacom, and News Corp. These companies control the integrity of their newsrooms, and control the content that keeps Joe Public informed.
Sadly, even though the Slashdot editors/submitters have less of a responsibility to the public, they do a better job than most newsrooms. I get more information reading just the summaries in the politics section than I could ever get watching TV news.
Capitalism in news rewards ongoing analysis of unimportant headlines that actually don't matter.
Actually, if you were to pick up on someone's facial expressions, most likely you would be doing it subconsciously. It may be impossible for you to consciously alter your sleep patterns, but it's within the realm of possibility that you could do so subconsciously.
Having just read the article on how people don't care about SACD and rip most things to MP3 anyway, I think this offers a pretty good comparison. Customers just don't care about the extra quality that they can get with HDDVD or Blu Ray. DVD quality is heads and shoulders above vhs and for most people that's good enough. You're more likely to find them buying more and more low def movies for their ipod or phone right now, just like customers buy mp3s for their mp3 players.
I wonder because:
1) You can't take your LPs in the car
2) The bass doesn't sound nearly as good; stated in the article there is a limit that is lower than CD limit
3) It's impossible to get rid of the background hiss on an LP
4) Digital formats have been scientifically proven to have more audible information than LP. If you like listening to LPs because they leave this information out (ie. it sounds "warmer"), then more power to you
5) If you buy a NEW LP, it's likely to suffer from the same disastrous digital mastering that the CD format does.
The article is specific in that engineers and producers are now using digital equipment to compress and clip the waveform like never before. Their excuse is that the track will sound better on low quality PC hardware and MP3 players, and that people are unlikely to notice because of this. If you buy a track mastered for MP3 quality on an analog format like LP, you're still fucked.
Also I'd like to point out that these days all the masters are recorded digitally, so even though you're listening to an analog format like LP, the source material (sound) has already undergone digital conversion.
The list goes on. I'm tired of reading Red Herrings people! Let us discuss weather the tech was actually right and the evidence should stand instead of all these other things. I think the perp is a bad guy too, but that doesn't allow me to step all over his privacy rights.
Why isn't this being modded off topic? The issue isn't what you can do to prevent being caught with child porn, the issue is weather or not a computer tech is allowed to 'peruse' your drive. Oh, and a definition of peruse for you all, from wordnet:
examine or consider with attention and in detail (emphisis mine).
This is exactly what I have been saying the whole time. It seems to me that the police have every reason to investigate, but only after they get a court issued warrant.
I don't blame the tech for reporting the crime, I blame the police for not getting a warrant first.