Re: require a whole new system
So you absolutely need a new system but trust no one to get it right, not even yourself...
4031 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
So you absolutely need a new system but trust no one to get it right, not even yourself...
Perhaps going even further back. Wasn't that at least one of Machiavelli's arguments in The Prince in favor of autocracy: that sometimes, you just have to take the direct approach?
" If only it was modular..."
many modern PC kernels are modular (both the NT and Linux kernels are modular). Some things are shunted to user space for security while others (like graphics) are kept in kernel space for performance reasons. The complaint should be which parts should be where.
"The vast majority of desktop pcs can boot to MS-DOS. Only yesterday I was reaching for a USB floppy drive"
But what are you going to do beyond that? Trust me; I've tried. Most hard drives aren't formatted FAT16 anymore (about the only format MS-DOS will be able to see). DOS TSR drivers to support other filesystems and bus architectures? Don't count on it. Just about everything these days depends on a flat memory model which isn't built into MS-DOS. And 64-bit computing on an OS that's 16-bit? (rolls eyes).
About the only way to run MS-DOS in any practical manner these days is by virtual machine.
And there's still the unanswered chicken-and-egg issue of consumer-oriented non-mobile-friendly software.
"Although, I've personally never understood why some people were so bothered about Desktop dominance. As long as I can run what I choose, frankly you're free to run MSDOS if that's what you prefer."
Actually, IIRC, MS-DOS doesn't like modern hardware. And as for desktop dominance, consider the games market. Even with Valve's recent push, 8 or 9 out of every 10 games that comes out ignores Linux. About half are Windows-only. And then there are all those other pieces of productivity software the average person needs once in a while (like tax preparation software) but isn't available for Linux (sure there's the Web, but only if your tax situation is relatively simple). So the question of desktop dominance goes to the "chicken and egg" problem of desktop Linux. People won't go there if their software doesn't work on it, but software developers won't code for Linux without sufficient consumer market presence.
He's saying blocking Google at all prevents the sites from running at all. And if there are no alternative sites that aren't beholden to Google, you're just SOL. Your only choices then are to bend over or to get kicked out.
"I forget the author who wrote the Sci Fi book on corporations becoming government, but this is another step to that happening."
Could be William Gibson. His Sprawl trilogy mentioned megacorps that were basically self-contained worlds unto themselves complete with born-and-raised yes-men. I also know Shadowrun runs on the same principle for its dystopic future.
There's also the matter of having to use Wi-Fi Direct mode, which isn't the norm (AP mode is the norm).
What about companies that match names AND are in the same country but are allowed by the USPTO because they're in different industries? For example, the name "Cracker Barrel" is trademarked TWICE in the US, but both are allowed, as one is a brand name of cheese and the other is a restaurant/novelty store chain; ergo, they don't overlap. It wouldn't apply in the strictest sense here, but I could envision two companies with the same name but in different industries claiming the same CompanyName.inc. What then?
Even if a big-time remote exploit appears for XP which, due to its EOL status, will never get fixed?
Well, given that Win7 was preselling at $49—for a retail box—there may be more eligible copies out there than you think.
"Any of the intel i series chips are more or less the same speed clock for clock. There have been some improvements, but they are incremental. Computers are no longer getting faster. The clock rates have continued to go up, yes, but much of that is artificial."
And the bet is also that multicore computing will hit some kind of limit as well?
Win7 was $49 pre-ordered about six months prior to release. And that was for a boxed retail version, not a hardware-locked OEM version.
"That clearly means as long as machine is supported by the OEM who shipped it. "
And if your computer's homebuilt? Where does the line get drawn?
Pro and Ultimate versions are enterprise-oriented and are not the target of this upgrade program IIRC (since these are usually done via enterprise license agreements that typically involve a lot of negotiation and planning). I agree this plan is mainly targeting the consumer.
"16EiB ought to be enough for anybody."
In terms of RAM, the limit is actually 8EiB. The top half of the address space is kernel space and typically reserved for memory mapping (GPU RAM, for example). In fact, no CPU on the market today is actually capable of 64 actual bits of memory addressing (the limit IIRC is 48 bits right now), but credit AMD for coming up with a way to keep things neat while still allowing room to grow into true 64-bit addressing.
That said, 8EiB is about a couple orders of magnitude or so higher than even today's high-end RAM usage. It may not be overkill in perpetuity, but the amount of time it should suffice should be longer than usual so that by the time it becomes an issue, the whole computing landscape would have changed radically along with it: to the point that bits don't really matter that much anymore.
I recall that bit of regulation. Under FCC rules, a device cannot emit EM radiation such that it interferes with another device, nor can it reflect EM energy coming from outside (it must absorb or shunt the energy, to its detriment if need be; it's part of the same rule). Thing is, while metal shields were great for EM protection (both blocking internal radiation and shunting external radiation), it also attracted heat, another Bad Thing for electronics. IINM, the Commodore 128 suffered heat issues due to its EM shield.
The Cuban Missile Crisis happened too quickly for the clock to be reset. It was basically over in a matter of days, and the rate of the clock's change spans years per shift.
The closest the clock's been is two 'til. That was in 1953 when both the US and USSR tested H-bombs.
"Using the MVVM pattern, the front-end is entirely separate from the logic which is entirely separate from the data storage/online API/whatever."
The problem is that they can interrelate in fundamental ways. IOW, the front-end may force you to alter the logic. Same for the storage since an online app may have to cope with lack of online availability and so on.
IOW, the desktop and mobile ecosystems may not have as much in common as developers would like to believe, and the end result is that it may be better to think of them as separate worlds altogether.
Not if you use a drive-by attack to set up a proxy connection between you and the router from the inside. Also, many routers have demonstrated exploits that can expose the admin console to the WAN side.
I suspect Verizon is savvy enough to be able to authenticate its real token via phone-specific information and be able to easily scrub the false ones. The length of the key is indicative of a hash value which could be derived from your phone's identity plus a secret key of Verizon's. About the only way to avoid Verizon's tagging is to use a VPN or not use Verizon, which may not be an option for, say, businesses under contract and so on. And with a pro-business Congress in session, there will be no relief from the government on this.
"The reason hgih-speed broadband is so crappy in New York City - and especially Manhattan - is very simple: Time Warner Cable is a de facto monopoly for Broadband Internet. There is zero competition - unless you count Verizon's crappy FiOS which is even worse than TWC's Cable Broadband."
You just contradicted yourself. You mentioned Verizon (and I was expecting this since one-half of Verizon was GTE). FiOS is supposed to be Fiber To The Premises: just about as good as you can get in terms of consumer broadband. I have that available where I live, and the quality is excellent enough to make it a viable competitor to the cable company. Yet you denounce this supposedly top of the line as "crappy". That indicates something is interfering with the quality of FiOS where you live, and I have to suspect it's the infrastructure.
Which goes to my point about no implosion demolition. Manhattan has been dug up so many times there's no telling what's underneath you. Meaning disturbing the ground can result in unintended consequences, and this also goes to getting right of way and especially digging permissions. Meaning Verizon is probably having a hard time putting down all the fiber it needs for good FiOS service (my location, not nearly so built up, was much easier to transition).
But since both Comcast and Time-Warner Cable are multi-state companies with operations in many states, wouldn't this mean they're subject to the Commerce Clause, which automatically puts them under federal auspices, which in turn trump state matters due to the 14th Amendment?
Compared to the rest of the US, New York is one of the oldest. Not to mention very fragmented and with a peculiar geography and geology to it. Not to mention it's run out of sprawl room so it basically grows vertically.
Here's a hint on how delicate things can get there. Implosion demolition is not allowed in Manhattan.
The trouble with New York City is that it's an old city: full of existing built-up infrastructure above and especially below ground (and this ground is particularly hard at that). The first question you'd have to ask of anyone planning to put down high-speed internet in the heart of Manhattan is, "Where do you plan on laying it all down?"
How when the communities themselves lack the capital to make the 1:1 match matter? That's the big problem with municipal broadband: lack of capital, not just in the local network but in connecting this to the high-speed trunk lines.
How when the merger is under FEDERAL regulation? And if states try to ban the merged company, they can be hit back with anti-competition lawsuits, which federal law bans and trumps.
GPS accuracy drops when the sky's blocked, and the engine can be disengaged from the drivetrain (neutral/clutch up) which requires access to the tachometer to know. Also, what if the speedometer's not calibrated right?
Um...how can it query the bus to get the information it needs if it isn't able to transmit into it?
But a SMART unjust ruler remembers to keep nipping opposition in the bud. Sure, there can be a clash or two, but as long as they're too small to deal with, they're under control. Put it this way. They have the overwhelming force, you don't. And they're willing to send it your way and salt the earth if you blink the wrong way. Syria's still not overthrown, and no one's figured out how to deal with Boko Haram, who seems to not care what anyone else thinks; they'll just wipe you out if they don't like you, and they're savvy enough to keep themselves in places where overwhelming force leads to unacceptable collateral damage. I mean, how do you deal with an opposition with lots of force and no scruples?
How broad are these commercial codes in terns of vocabulary and the ability to convey diverse or voluminous information if necessary? How efficient are they as in how much cover material is needed to conceal the ciphertext without it being seen as suspicious?
Even stego has limits. Any method you can think of, there's probably some way to break it so that trying to pass all but the crudest messages (crude in terms of a particular picture meaning "Now!"). Text can be sanitized and respaced, images and sound can be manipulated, and so on.
So if you get a legitimate but unannounced e-mail from someone, they're screwed since e-mail is the only way they can get the message through?
In many other places, the confession is admissible but only as circumstantial evidence: taken with a grain of salt. Barring it being part of a guilty plea, it's usually up to the prosecution to support the testimony with more reliable evidence.
The gamble is that it will cost less than the existing technology whose price tags make many voters blanch. And just to prove himself, this test isn't supposed to be government supported, so it's being done at little to no taxpayer cost.
All I can say at this point is, "Good luck. I suspect you'll need it."
Besides, doesn't Japan's Shinkansen have to be built to negotiate earthquakes since it's in the Ring of Fire?
Two reasons. One, Steam has its own content distribution system separate and apart from any Linux package manager (and well predates Steam on Linux, for that matter). Second, game updates can be very piecemeal, particularly when the update concerns game content rather than program code, so Valve recently updated its content system to reflect this. It reduces update package sizes most of the time: a kind consideration for people with limited bandwidth allotments.
What goes wrong is that then the smaller communities can't get wired up since this is usually the only way they CAN get wired up, due to the poor return on investment.
IOW, better crappy Internet than NO Internet.
You're not bargain hunting enough if $160 is the lowest you're getting for a used 360 with 250GB hard drive. A little bargain hunting showed me price points closer to $100. Plus you've focused on two games with relatively simple graphics. If you were to give your systems something more demanding like, say, FF13 or GTA5, I think the differences in architecture will probably become more profound. Meanwhile, my point still stands in regards to the current generation. And just to be sure, I also checked Steam Machines, none of which can match the price/spec combination of either the PS4 or XB1.
Trouble is, just about any place you could put a TOR exit node has a snoopy government ready to demand access. If it isn't the US or UK, it's Russia, China, or whomever else is in charge.
The exit nodes would probably be legally covered under the auspices of a Sting Operation. Much as undercover cops are allowed to handle cases of drugs and even child porn so as to facilitate Sting Operations.
"For the supersimian, OpenVPN is still free if memory serves and has a free Android & IOS app"
Any host not owned by you is likely to be backdoored by whoever government runs the country the server's hosted in. As for making your own, that can be tricky. I'd love to use the one built into my home router, but it only supports TAP mode, and TAP support on Android 4 and up is only possible through a convoluted method that, frankly, doesn't work yet with the router.
That's what I'm talking about. Verizon could easily do the same thing for any https request that goes through its network, allowing them to MITM the connection and still insert the supercookie, again at a point beyond your control.
Unless, of course, Verizon MITM's everything that goes through its network, meaning you're screwed no matter what you do. As I understand it, the injection occurs at their which is why you can't remove it (since it occurs at an upstream point beyond your control). The only reasons tunnelled connections aren't tagged is because Verizon's servers can't MITM them and recognize them for what they are.
JAMMING is against FCC rules. SHUNTING (which is what the Faraday cage does) is not.
The difference is that the former is an active method that involves flooding the airwaves with garbage. Since that has inevitable knock-on effects, doing that has been considered bad radio behavior since the tuned circuit was invented. And the FCC takes a firm stance that you're not allowed to interfere with anyone else's radio business without government sanction (and they usually reserve those for emergencies).
The latter is completely passive and, so long as it's only applied on a person's property, reflects a stance of the owner and doesn't usually affect anything outside the shunt. About the only exception I could see is if such a shunt stands between you and the transmitter.
Probably because the municipal government wouldn't agree to an exclusive agreement. That's part of the problem.
Those fat pipes incur continual costs that make it a crap shoot. The smaller the location, the less likely it can pan out. Some of those supposed locations that are out of the way yet have fat pipes usually experienced some lucky break. Olds, Alberta and Grant County, Washington both attracted data centers because their northern location reduces cooling costs, a prospect that's less likely in, say, Tuscon, Arizona.
It's a very basic question. Braodband is great and all...but who foots the bill? Not just for the initial infrastructure, which is significant, but also for the continual upkeep costs in a community without a lot of people to spread it around?
Olds is lucky. The rollout was supported by the Alberta government (a C$2.5m grant for starters) plus they didn't have to worry about the trunk access because of the Alberta Supernet, another project being developed independently by the province.
I can show a related story in Grant County, WA. Supposedly a municipal effort built by forward-thinking municipal authorities in a permissive state (Washington has laws allowing municipal authorities to build wholesale trunk lines). Still, it begs a question. For one, why here and not nearby Seattle with its millions of people...not to mention tech-heavy Redmond? For another, how did they get high speeds up the line at the trunk providers? Last I read, Grant County got lucky because being first and being in the cold North meant they attracted datacenters that were willing to pay top dollar for fat data pipes. So you wonder if a similar setup can still be profitable for a strictly home-based community.
"This solution just seems to systemically embed the generally ambivalent prevailing social attitude towards genuine privacy and security. People don't value what they have in meatspace and aren't bothered about ensuring it online."
IOW, you hit the meatbag problem, "How do you educate people who don't care yet can threaten you with their imcompetence?"
That's probably because coal mines aren't exactly the cleanest or most neighborly of industries. Just ask Buffalo Creek, West Virginia.