Re: It's great but...
or tree style tab: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/
101 posts • joined 23 Feb 2011
or tree style tab: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/
Star Destroyers? Pfft, they are from a galaxy far far away.
I'm more concerned about those Vogons and their construction ships. They're local.
NSL's and FISA warrants probably compelled Cisco to embed the common SSL certs and give a copy to the NSA.
They didn't want to have to manage device-specific certs, millions of them, so they just dumped a couple hundred into devices so the NSA only has to check against a small database of possible certs to use for espionage purposes (where espionage has been re-defined to mean mass surveillance on everyone irrespective of suspicion).
OMG who downvoted that? It's pure gold, hilarious.
The site is not hosted within Australia, therefore the site is not subject to Australian Law.
If the site is not subject to Australian law, then by definition it cannot be in breach of any Australian law (copyright included).
If it is not in breach of any Australian law, then they can't block it on the grounds of it breaching some Australian law.
"What I don't really understand is why they feel the need to record the communication records of everyone."
It's called Network Analytics.
You can use it to draw links between everyone. Who know's whom. Who is friendly (frequent contact) vs just vaguely adjacent (one-off contact). Who shops where, so if you know person A B and C frequently go to the same Haridresser, with appointments at the same time, they probably know each other. Same doctors.
Say a newspaper publishes a story, a leak (or say just a personally embarrassing story about an MP screwing a cleaner on their desk). Great, newspaper Tablods'R'Us published the story. Cool lets go check all the telephone records of anyone who's ever worked at the newspaper. And their spouses records. Childrens. Friends. Siblings. The team-mates of their siblings. Hey wow, Joe who works for the MP concerned, and 6 months before the story was published (which was 2 years after the actual desk-screwing incident) he called his stepbrother who soon after called his ex-girlfriend who called her mistress who called her father who called his footy teammate who works with a guy that called his lawyer who called his Gentlemen's Club sponsor who called the secretary of the brother of the reporter who wrote the story.
That's why they want to record it all.
to freeze, flick switch down to burn.
Multi-pirpose 'ray gun, freezeray and burnray in one!
I see much rejoicing from the evil super-villains who can't decide whether it's more cool to be Mr Freeze or Mr Burn (or torch?), they can be both without having to carry around 2 guns.
Good play that man. What?
would be better server by being a Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) Thin Blue Line image I feel.
Open up the laptop, unplug a few fans, seal it back up, viola new laptop (would cost them more to send it out for repair then to buy a new one).
"That means that to plan periods, you have to use the computer-based systems; "
I didn't realize periods needed planning, I thought nature had been taking care of that?
"The additional money goes to the lease company, who only provides hardware and an insurance package."
Maybe the insurance rate for Macs is huge? Do they have a higher theft rate?
If they are gonna get so stoned they cause $2m damage, then they should start mandatory drug testing!
Providing entertainment is a business. Therefore using the NBN for entertainment == using the NBN for business.
Also, education, medicine and business can all also be entertainment. And education can also be business (businesses provide education). Medicine is also business. And so on.
The only accurate way to describe the usage of the NBN (or any network) is "for data communications".
Doesn't this require you to have some sort of an account with Microsoft? A store account or an MS account or something? Something I don't have and never want to have?
I assume the 12-30% were the cancelled flights mentioned in the opening paragraphs.
But ti's still concerning they don't know the EXACT number, was it 70% or was it 88%? Surely "scheduled flights - actual flights" are 2 known, discrete numbers that can produce a known discrete number as a solution rather than a range?
...of saying the application has a memory leak.
" I dont think I could prove that I had not downloaded..."
I don't think you understand how the law works...
The coverage of this seems pretty dismal in general, I had to read the full ruling (http://ia600503.us.archive.org/4/items/gov.uscourts.cand.231088/gov.uscourts.cand.231088.1289.0.pdf) to find the invalidated patents:
"Accordingly, the Court grants Defendants’ motion for summary
adjudication that SONIC anticipates the asserted claims of the
‘872 and ‘094 patents. "
"An internet connection, a modern-day communications system, is vastly more sophisticated, allowing people to store, transfer, process, retrieve and use the data sent across through the connection."
'The internet' does the same things as the 1934 telephone network.
In 1934 I (well, the notional I, I'm not that old) could hook up a recorder to the phone line and record (store) the conversation.
In 1934 I could play the recording back down the phone line and listen to it at the other end, 'retrieving' it, and if I had a recorder at that end, i'd be storing it again, processing and using it.
Hell, BEFORE 1934 this could be done. When it was the telegraph this could be done. Telegraph operators would receive morse code and 'store' it by writing it down on a piece of paper or other writing material. They'd then 'process' it (or perhaps process it BEFORE storing it) by converting the morse code to the relevant spoken language. Depending on the requirements of the message, they may 'process' it again and send it in morse code along to the next operator.
In the 60's, 70's and 80's I could connect a modem to the telephone system and transfer digital data by having it modulated/demodulated. I could store, retrieve what have you.
Neither 'The internet' or 'the phone system' allows you to store, retrieve or process data. It's the devices that are connected to the internet that do all that. The internet, just like the phone system, is merely a way of transmitting information. The old phone system had low bandwidth, high latency, and was analog. The internet is merely a faster, digital version that does the same thing - transfers information.
Everything else (storing, processing, 'using') is done by devices at the ends of the connections, and was done using the phone system pre-internet.
"All "conversations" on the Internet are not equal in cost. Your ISP has to pay more to transit Netflix than a Google docs session. So it actually costs cable companies - ISPs in this case - hard cash to let you use a competing service."
It costs the ISP the same for me to download a 1MB document from netflix as it costs to download a 1MB document from Google.
If costs the same for an ISP for me to stream a 100MB video from youtube as it costs to stream it from netflix.
It costs the same for an ISP for me to download a 100MB document from google docs as it would to download a 100MB document from netflix.
The type or source of data is irrelevant, it's the SIZE that matters.
1MB is 1MB whether it's a .doc, .jpg., .mp4, .mkv etc, whether it's from Netflix, Amazon, youtube, facebook, my work's VPN.
1GB is 1GB whether it's a .doc, .jpg. .mp4, .mkv etc, whether it's from Netflix, Amazon, youtube, facebook, my work's VPN.
Downloading a 1GB file should be the same 'cost' no matter where it's sourced from.
If I have 500GB/month, then I should get 500GB/month irrespective of the source of the data.
Right, I'll wait until at least Friday next week (1 1/2 weeks after release) before patching to make sure it hasn't introduced critical issues like the last couple of patch Tuesdays...
Then it'd long and thin and full of seamen....
It'd be a once in a lifetime experience...*splat*
Thinking too small there.
The SGHC (Super-Gigantic Hadron Collider) will span the earth's equator.
The games I play at least once a week take up about 150GB.
If you throw in the games I play at least once a month, we've talking about 500GB.
Having game files on a SSD improves performance significantly. Most games have large numbers of very large textures (why do you think most gaming graphics cards have 1GB+ of video memory?) that are frequently loaded, unloaded and re-loaded.
Game 'world' data can be huge.
In games like diablo, there was a noticeable lag, jerkiness, when the game had to load the next 'room' or set of tiles into memory, which could last a few seconds - while not sounding long, when playing an immersive game frequent 2-3 second pauses can be jarring.
Autosaves can be large, and can cause pauses in games, sometimes 15-20 seconds, which again is jarring.
Moving all this to a SSD pretty much eliminates the 2-3 second loads, and reduces autosaves to 'hiccups' rather than 10's of seconds.
We are not in a space age.
When we have a permanent civilian-majority base on a body that is not Earth (moon, mars, asteroids), THEN we will be in the Space Age.
"Network for controllers should be isolated completely. There is no security on communications between the controllers by design. Without isolation, the virtual network information is exposed to confidentiality, integrity, and availability attacks."
Surely the absolute, most basic security measure would be to force (or at least have it as an option!) the controllers to use SSL between themselves for their comms?
Interesting, I just read up on this, and according to a Wired story after interviewing one of the leaders of the heist, Notarbartolo, it seems:
1) Notarbartolo had business hours access to the vault as he was a customer (for 18 months prior) who had a safety-deposit box in the vault;
2) they were able to install a camera outside the vault (probably by Notarbartolo who had legitimate access) that allowed them to see the door so that they could see the code entered.
3) the original key was kept in a utility closet nearby...which they guessed by the fact that the guard who opened the vault every morning went into this closet before opening the door.
4) Notarbartolo's legitimate access allowed him to degrade the internal heat/motion sensor (apparently he sprayed hair-spray on the sensor during a visit the day before) that degraded it long enough to enable it to be deactivated once the vault door was opened.
The only reason they were caught was due to sloppiness in destroying evidence linking them to the crime - they had a bag of evidence to burn, but it burst open on private property that ran alongside a highway, and they didn't clean it up, they left it there and it was found.
Based on the description of the criminals involved, I find this sloppiness hard to believe. Notarbartolo had an apartment in the region they had used for days, they could have burnt most of the evidence in small wastebin fires inside the apartment before they went to break into the vault. Or surely as part of the plan it wasn't "let's find somewhere to burn the evidence as we flee", surely they would have already picked several suitable locations (1 or 2 on each exit route) that they could use, rather than hoping to just find one.
There was other hard to believe sloppiness - they kept receipts for the buying of equipment such as surveillance systems.
It looks to me that they wanted to get caught. Which is understandable. They had potentially made off with $10+ million EACH. They would be running and looking over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.
Notarbartolo is serving 10 years (well HAS served, he would have been released a year or 2 ago now). Which means he's served his time, he's been convicted. Now he gets to live out the rest of his life without having to look over his shoulder as he's already served his time. While I wouldn't consider it a fair trade-off, 10 years in prison with $10+ million to live on afterwards...some, especially those who have been criminals for years, might consider it a good trade-off. Especially since he'd have enough to 'buy protection' in prison. He was wearing a Rolex during his prison interviews with Wired! Not to mention Notarbartolo is connected to the Italian Mafia, supposedly his cousin was tapped to head the Sicilian Mafia, that would buy a lot of protection all by itself.
Just had a look at their web site...
...and me wants one (or several).
They look like fun.
I actually have no problems with spy agencies spying on other nations government officials, politicians, ministers, senior civil-servants etc. I mean, that's mostly whats worth spying on in the first place. Any government minister, PM, president king, departmental secretary etc who DOESN'T think they are a target, if not actively being spied/eavesdropped on, are morons.
What gets me angry tho, is when the spy agencies 'dabble' in law-enforcement, spying on the general populace, and spying on THEIR OWN CITIZENS. That is NOT the job of the spy agencies. They should be concerned with national defense and security, not criminal (i.e. non-terrorist, non-military, non-espionage activities), not 'home-grown' activities that are better left in the hands of local police forces.
"Until the bigger stuff gets through and slams into a retirement home/puppy rescue center/Pizza place."
Sounds like a win/win to me.
"Weary of the possible antitrust concerns from merging the two largest cable providers in the country, Comcast has proposed a set of deals to.."
While they probably are also weary, I'd say they're actually wary of the possible antitrust problems.
The monkey does not have more rights. The monkey has none. Copyrights can only be assigned to "a person", and monkeys are not 'people' for the purposes of the law.
Copyright laws usually use the term "person" as owning a copyright. And under legal definitions a 'person' is either a "natural person", that is a human being, or a corporate identity. Yes, a corporation is "a person" for the purposes of the law. If a law wishes to exclude corporations from something then it usually refers to "natural persons" when excluding corporations.
>> the only reason to claim copyright would be that he owned the camera, which is not a valid one.
> It is a completely valid reason to claim copyright and one that is used continuously by companies that have employees. If the company supplies the equipment and media to employees then the company owns the copyright.
Most employment contracts have terms in them along the lines of "any work done by the employee is owned by the employer. The employee agrees to assign all copyrights in any work created while an employee to the employer".
If an employment contracts neglects such language, then the employer, even tho owning the equipment and perhaps even directing the creation of the work (take photos at the corporate luncheon), does not own the copyright.
If I work for a company, and I do some video shooting with their equipment, even as part of my job specs (say you are hired as a cameraman) _I_ own the copyright UNLESS there is a SPECIFIC, EXPLICIT contractual language that gives the corporation the copyright. The employment contract (if you are an employee) must state explicitly (like many I've seen) that the employer owns any copyrights in work you have done for them. It must be a SIGNED contract.
Say I work as a burger flipper at Bobs' Burgers, and the manager hands me a camera and says "Take some photo's of the staff for the staff newsletter", and i do. If the employment contract doesn't EXPLICITLY state that Bob's Burgers owns the copyright to any creative work I do while employed by them, then _I_ am the copyright owner, no matter who owns the equipment. It is case-law that a work-for-hire, which is what it's called when you employ someone to create something for you but you retain the copyrights, not the actual creator (e.g. working as an artist for an advertising company, or the cameraman for a TV station), must follow some explicit, specific language to be a valid work-for-hire contract that bestows the copyrights on the employer rather than the creator.
Also, it must be noted that in this case, the photographer has admitted that he did not set up the shot, or plan to leave the camera in a location and 'see what happens'. The photographer absent-mindedly left their camera unattended while doing some other task, and in the photographers own words, "the monkey stole the camera", and took the photos.
You are aware that this is a server-oriented processor are you not?
That You're not likely to care about the performance of a gzip/bzip2/zip whatever?
What you ARE likely to be doing is running 20-30 JVMs of multi-gigabyte heap sizes each handling 100's if not 1000's of user tasks simultaneously.
Or running a whacking-great Database on it (it is from ORACLE now) doing 1000's of simultaneous, independent database queries (selects, inserts, etc).
You don't need to be able to extract instruction-level (or task level) parallelism from a SINGLE process (e.g. transcoding video, compressing) or from single tasks when you are running dozens, hundreds, THOUSANDS of SEPARATE independent processes/tasks simultaneously. As tends to happen on servers, which is what this chip is aimed at.
NEVER accept default installation options.
If offered, ALWAYS select 'customize' install, or Advanced install or similar. The screens shown when you select those options is where you'll usually find (if it exists) additional software installed and the option to disable it.
ALWAYS read the text on the installation wizard pages, as they'll often be different to the heading, e.g. the Heading and title on the page in the wizard might say "Chrome Installation", but there might be a license agreement (with the typical scrollbar to read a huge chunck of license text, this u can probably ignore like everyone else does) but then there might be other text just below the license agreement along the lines of "Click Next to accept the license for Ask Toolbar and install it" with 2 buttons, Cancel and Next, in this case you want the CANCEL button, as it's not the Chrome license or installation it's asking about, but the installation of Ask Toolbar. Clicking Cancel will cancel Ask, not Chrome, and it'll take you to another screen where you might be asked the same type of question for another piece of software, or might be the final cancel/next for installing chrome.
Well, since I don't want Google to know every URL I browse to, I turn the Safe Browsing feature off.
And people wonder how/why Google and whoever know their surfing history...well if you turn Safe Browsing on, every URL you ever visit is sent to Google. Whether you are browsing Facebook, your bank, ebay, pr0n, paypal, kmart, walmart or whoever, it'll get sent to Google if you leave Safe Browsing on. Every link you click, every URL that link loads, all sent to Google.
They also have physical access to the content of whats being sent. As has been reported previously, the intelligence and criminal law enforcement agencies (e.g. NSA,DEA) can, and do, get USPS to make copies of the external surfaces of the envelope and can obtain warrants that let them open, copy, and forward on, the mail.
In fact, if you send it registered post, they don't even need to copy the external envelope as they already have the FROM and TO information which you provide when you send a parcel registered mail.
And even if you didn't care about that component (having the FROM and TO addresses), you would still, if you wanted it SECURE, have to encrypt the contents of the parcel so that the document is unintelligible text to visual examination.
Could the QR code just contain a (https) URL to download the public key from and the fingerprint of the key?
So the QR code could be used to GET the key and verify the key.
Why can't they have 2 'stages' of a canary, both updated daily?
Stage 1, no current warrant has been issued against SpiderOak, sick canary.
Stage 2, no warrant has been ENFORCED against SpiderOak, dead canary.
When a warrant is issued the canary is sick. This covers any period while fighting against a warrant. If all warrants are overturned/denied, the canary gets better. If a warrant is upheld and enforced, the canary denies.
@Yet Another Anonymous coward:
"But if a SWAT team are pointing assault rifles at your head and getting the orange jump suits ready for a long stay in gitmo - you are going to click the everything is OK button."
You obviously didn't read the article.
It takes THREE (3) different people located in 3 DIFFERENT COUNTRIES to ALL 'approve' updating the status of the canary as 'OK'. While it's likely a SWAT team could standover the US member of that team (if there is one), US SWAT teams would have difficulty deploying simultaneously in at least 2 different foreign countries, possibly 3 if none of the people who can sign the canary are located in the US, to standover all 3 signers.
OK, i've just stared looking at that link, and right at the top I see a red flag already:
"However, NAT and NPTv6 should be avoided, if at all possible, to permit transparent end-to-end connectivity."
Errm, while the USER may want transparent end-to-end connectivity, the network engineer/admin may not want NETWORK level end-to-end connectivity. They may WANT to introduce things like proxy servers, which right there break your transparent end-to-end connectivity. Or how about (as my organisation does) an SSL interceptor that basically does a man-in-the-middle attack on all SSL sessions (with the exception of whitelisted known trusted sites, e.g. banks) to virus scan the stream?
From my reading so far, it looks fairly complicated and would require someone with at least reasonable computer/network knowledge and skills. To set up multi-homed NAT IPv4? Simple, buy dual port router, hook one port to ISP one, hook second port to ISP two, enter ISPs authentication (e.g. if its xDSL), setup complete. Multi-homed failover (or even load balancing if the appropriate check-box is ticked) and you are done.
warning: IANANE (I Am Not A Network Engineer)
But do we have to rely on the loss of TCP packets to tell us this at the end-to-end level? Couldn't a router send back to everyone who's swamping it a 'back-off' message from the router? I thought there was already provision for this, but it's rarely, if ever, used?
In the early days of of the internet when router processor capability was low, and bridging was more common than routing due to not being able to produce sufficiently intelligent silicon for routers at appropriate cost points, TCP-retransmission may have made sense as a congestion management mechanism. For the TCP layer at the receiver end to keep sending re-transmits, thus implicitly telling the sender to back-off due to the number of lost packets.
However these days where routers have, compared to their early predecessors, massive processing capability, either what was not so long ago server grade CPUs or efficient lightning fast ASICs, can't the router's tell senders to back-the-FEC-off rather than relying on the receiver losing packets and telling the sender? In this case (where routers actually tell senders to shut-the-FEC-up) FEC may make more sense.
I could see a case for adaptive choosing also. Low error-rates, TCP might make sense as retransmission packets are rare, and the FEC overhead (more data to contain the ECC) might perform worse. If there are slightly higher error-rates, and routers are smart enough to tell a sender swamping them to back off, FEC may make more sense, a little bit more data for the ECC, but less than the extra data TCP retransmissions would cause.
If there are high error rates, then maybe another change? Maybe neither TCP or FEC?
Err, because some apps that you install might NEED to check state more often than the default? near-real time systems might want to wake every 4 or 5 ms, or even as google chrome thinks it needs to, every 1ms.
Unless you've loaded a plugin into chrome that for some reason needs frequent wake-ups, then there's no reason for a browser to want to wake up more frequently than the defauly.
"Tesla should run a competition to see who can be the first person to hack the Chinese government and run apt-get install democracy."
nah, the democracy app is too immature and buggy. It seems to self-destruct all the time.
...however the NSA's (US's) spying, inserting backdoors into US made kit, is documented.
Even worse, when I'm researching a new phone or tablet and ask questions like "How much menory does it have?" I get answers like:"32GB of memory", "64GB of memory", "128GB of memory".
No, if I wanted to know how much STORAGE or NAND or SSD or eMMC it had, that would be the correct answer. I want to know whether it has 1GB, 1.5GB, 2GB, 3GB etc of MEMORY.
Actually, 3.5" disks ARE floppy.
It's the external casing of the disk that isn't floppy.
Break the rigid external casing of the 3.5" disk, and inside is the component that actually stores the data and it is, well, a disk that is floppy.
If you break the rigid external casing of a Hard Disk Drive, inside is the component that actually stores the data, and it is, well, a disk that is RIGID, non-floppy, i.e. HARD.