Comment So, maybe I'm missing something.... (Score 1) 110
Nowhere in TFA does it explain what you get for the $20-$30 that will be forked over to Walgreens.. Does that just buy you a tube and an envelope?
Nowhere in TFA does it explain what you get for the $20-$30 that will be forked over to Walgreens.. Does that just buy you a tube and an envelope?
Yes, but that misses the point.
The four people you listed didn't do the things they did BECAUSE they were Atheists or to advance an Atheistic viewpoint, they did it to advance their own cause, which usually equals "Staying alive and in total control".
OTOH, the far-right "Batshit Crazy" evangelicals (Be they Muslims, Christians or Jews) seem to take the positions that they do precisely BECAUSE, in their view, their religion requires them to take the action(s) that they do. If they weren't "Batshit Crazy", they wouldn't do the things that they do or advocate the things that they advocate.
Are you seriously quoting Wikipedia as an authoritative source?
Not that I necessarily doubt the veracity of the entry, but in an discussion such as this, a "real" source would really be preferable.
Wait.. How do these trucks fit into the tubes?
Swoosh!
After only 2 years (from the perspective of the crew.. 3.75 years from the ground) at a constant 1g acceleration (you know, nice to have a sense of gravity for at least half of the trip..), you'll have traveled 2.9 light years.
After 5 years (using that same perspective) you'll have traveled nearly 83 light years (and nearly 84 years on the ground) and reached
All of this is to say that from the perspective of the crew, this isn't necessarily a multi-lifetime trip.
See http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html for more details
Yes, normally, FTP is an insecure protocol, with known weaknesses including a clear-text password.
I would have to assume, however, that the actual CONTENT that was being transmitted was encrypted prior to transmission.
Is there something about the data we're talking about that would make it somehow impossible to encrypt?
I do realize that the original poster didn't actually say anything about it one way or the other, but I'd have to assume that any hospital with a legal or compliance department would be ensuring that any data that would be covered under HIPA would be sujbect to that laws data security standards (See here ).
I'd give them $500 a year too, if only they would provide me with the secret side-band frequency that would let me bypass the quarterly Beg-A-Thon that they do here in eastern Pennsylvania (on WHYY..). Instead, I give my $60/year, and when they're in begging mode, I just switch to WNYC or WBEZ.
They have a "Quality of Life" score just below the US and considerably better than the UK.
Doubletake software makes an enterprise ready, real time replication suite.
It does block level replication, so only the changed bits of, say, a 10Gb databse gets changed.. It uses on the fly en/decryption so that the data streams are somewhat smaller than they would be otherwise..
I work for a Fortune 10 company, and when we have a need for real-time data replication, this is what we use.
Yep.. I tried installing it last night on my (Intel based) Mac Book Pro, along with about 6 other things (an airport update, a new version of Safari, a camera update and a few other, less memorable ones..), and all but the Java update worked fine.. The Java update abended.
In the sense that at the time this theoretical subpoena was served, I'd hope that the file(s) in question would certainly NOT contain any infringing content, and would have matching CRC/MD5 data and time/date information to whatever file(s) were claimed to have been infringing, assuming this infringer had the tiniest bit of common sense and sense of self-preservation.
The real thing here is that so far, it does not appear that the RIAA or their MediaSentry stooges have actually been downloading the actual files from a single peer seed, instead relying broadly on the meta-data (tags and file sizes/dates) to substantiate their claims of infringement.
To be clear, I'm not a lawyer (nor am I even a "1L", for that matter..) nor do I have a particularly favorable opinion about broad copyright infringement, but at the same time, I really feel like I need to decry the fright tactics employed by the ??AA against broad swaths of people that they feel are vulnerable to this sort of blackmail. Anything that can be done to make their jobs more difficult is fine by me. The tactics that the ??AA use are perfect examples of "The ends do NOT justify the means".
Oh, rest assured that it would be by the time they got their hands on it.
Never trust a computer you can't repair yourself.
