From a few pages into the write-up (http://www.nanex.net/20100506/FlashCrashAnalysis_Part4-1.html):

What benefit could there be to whomever is generating these extremely high quote rates? After thoughtful analysis, we can only think of one. Competition between HFT systems today has reached the point where microseconds matter. Any edge one has to process information faster than a competitor makes all the difference in this game. If you could generate a large number of quotes that your competitors have to process, but you can ignore since you generated them, you gain valuable processing time. This is an extremely disturbing development, because as more HFT systems start doing this, it is only a matter of time before quote-stuffing shuts down the entire market from congestion.

Definition of a DDOS (from http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid14_gci557336,00.html):

a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack is one in which a multitude of compromised systems attack a single target, thereby causing denial of service for users of the targeted system. The flood of incoming messages to the target system essentially forces it to shut down, thereby denying service to the system to legitimate users.

Quote stuffing looks like a DDOS to me, and should automatically be illegal. Of course, there are several technical differences that any lawyer could point out,thus making quote stuffing legal, so I'd recommend outlawing it just to be sure. Not often I get to say, in all seriousness, "There ought to be a law." {Most situations do not require new laws, only the proper application of existing laws.}

This kind of outflow is seen in protostars...

Anybody else read this as This kind of outflow is seen in pornstars...?

I work for a facility where a large number of our computers are for public use. We do not filter access (but if children are near someone known to be surfing porn, we have that person stop surfing such material). We all know some people choose to surf porn here, though it boggles the mind why.

One day, I saw an older lady take a wet-nap style cleaning towel from the container we provide and begin cleaning the keyboard with it. I expressed my concern over using a WET-nap for an electronic part (they're for cleaning the desk, seat, hands, etc.).

Lady: But you know they watch porn on these PCs, right?
Me: Yes. We aren't allowed to filter the content. But cleaning the key...
Lady: And you know these porn places are infected with all kinds of viruses, don't you?
Me: ....?

1) The leg holes can automatically become tourniquets when excessive blood loss is detected from a leg.

2) A sensor that can tell when a team or individual is ambushed- it senses urine.

3) Chastity belt (nobody should be having sex whilst in the midst of a combat situation)

4) Shock 'collar' for prisoners (kinda like an individually installed taser to keep them from doing stupid things that would otherwise get them or our guys hurt)

5).... the list goes on....

(Oh, some are meant to be funny, other could work; you decide which are which!)

That's what we call the kids on the crotch-rockets. Me? I'm on a cruiser- slow and easy, nice and relaxed.

As a motorcyclist, I run into this some as well, though they have improved greatly (or it's because I have a bigger bike now). I have been pulled over once in my hometown for running a red. I explained to the nice officer (she was hot too, BTW) that I had waited through three cycles of the lights and never was given a green for my left turn, so, when it was clearly safe, I went. She let me go. Now, I hear rumor this is legal, but don't depend on it. It might not be for your jurisdiction (or even mine). However, it might be legal simply based on the idea that the signal is malfunctioning and you must therefore take matters into your own hands. You can solve your problem with a rare-earth magnet stuck to the bottom bracket of your bicycle. I know some bikers who use it and it has helped them.

This is an interesting story for me as it does a wonderful job of pointing out a major similarity between corporations and governments and people's responses to them.

One can gripe and moan all he wants about wanting more freedoms and rights (I do), but the basic truth is that people will put up with a lot, even frequently draconian rules, so long as the rules are non-arbitrary, fairly and equally applied, and the people can be relatively sure of being able to put food on the table and a roof over their heads. The 'Jim Crow' laws of the Southern U.S. broke all these precepts and (thankfully) failed- the targeted people and those who cared about them rallied and brought that system down.

Apple is likewise breaking these precepts and will kill the i-Stuff ecosystem if they don't change how they run things.

***** PREEMPTIVE NOTE: I am NOT in any way, shape, or form stating that Apple is in any way racist! This is just an observational comparison of policy systems. *****

Since it's going out as a VOIP call, why not route it via TOR? Yes, it would likely slow down the talking a bit (great, I could finally take notes while still keeping up with the conversation), but it would make it that much more difficult to track down the caller and/or recipient. Might also work for the SMS if it's using an Internet-based route instead of the actual cell system SMS.

Some are complaining that this was some kind of breach of privacy, maybe breaking several laws (very debateable). Others are asking why this is even an issue since unencrypted wifi is freely viewable. So what on any of that!

Why was the Google StreetView system collecting this data to begin with?

Really, to collect this data, the street-team had to be running wifi in the vehical, purposely vacuuming all the data it could snif out of the air, and dumping it to a rather large drive. Why did this setup exist? Why was this system actively aquiring all this data? Was this being done by some of the streat-teams, or all?

My thoughts are that this really was a simple mistake, likely from a misconfiguration. The likely intent was to gather open access points, like war-driving writ large, but a misconfiguration led to aquiring more than just the AP location/name/basic config- it grabbed whatever was being transmitted at that time. Of course, an oops like that, that was then allowed to continue (possibly), could be a firing-offense as it should have been better setup.

Damn! I KNEW I should've gone to SLO-Poly instead of Pomona!

That is the the root of the issue at hand. From a reductionist standpoint, you could make that argument about anything. An inked cartoon character is just an ordered and structured collection of pigments. This construct can be represented by a polar graph of molecules and their locations. This can be made into an equation, which is just a mathematical construct, which is just an abstract arbitrary construct of mankind, which you cannot patent.

That is the trouble with patents, delineating intellectual property from reductionist components. It can be argued both ways.

Perhaps my understanding of physics is lax, but in what way does this suggest conflicting evidence towards the field equations any more than what we already know about singularity type constructs? We already know that the field equations break down when dealing with the infinities inside black holes, but as far as large amounts of cosmic radiation ripping apart the galaxy forming elemental seeds on the macroscale, I don't see the discontinuity (pun intended) with the field equations. What statement gave you the impression of 'suggested conflicts'? Any astrophysicist care to clarify? IMO, this supports the field equations in that the energies imparted the 'seed clouds' create explosive chaotic forces larger than their internal gravitational attraction, hence the 'ripping apart' that we observe; with energy of this radiation being a byproduct from the mass gobbled up by the black hole.

You can always invoke the fifth, for any question. The purpose of the fifth isn't just to avoid admitting you committed the crime directly under investigation, but also to avoid incriminating yourself in any other crimes the police (or even yourself in some cases) may not know about.

I think perhaps the main point if this is being missed.

Does anyone remember Jini? It was the technology developed by Sun prior to EJBs that promised to make efficient distributed computing and pervasive connectivity a reality. Except, it never caught on because it required software development organizations to invert their staff profile. Instead of having a few device driver coders and enterprise architects, a few more low-level programmers and architect/designers, and the bulk of the staff in standard software development, Jini would have pushed the work to the outsides of that bell curve; nearly every developer would be playing the role of either device driver programmer or enterprise architect on most Jini projects. Recognizing this, Sun's compromise was EJBs, a distributed technology that brought half the functionality with perhaps 10x the weight.

Now we see that Google has rolled out a series of technologies that can all be combined to accomplish a similar vision: Google App Engine (cloud development platform), Chrome browser (thin client presentation layer), Google Apps (useful software including Docs, sensitive data hosting such as Health, etc), Chrome OS / Android (netbook/device hardware layer), and Wave (real time connectivity platform and protocol--the *product* most people think of as Wave is one possible manifestation of a front end to the Wave back-end and GWFP, but largely irrelevant for the purposes of the point I'm making here).

Laugh if you want, but demonstrating this bit about being able to host drivers in the cloud for any old device adds a necessary, though admittedly not particularly flashy, part of a fearsome distributed computing technology stack.

If this were a place where I could choose the best answer for my question, you'd win!

I've always been a proponent of, "Work smarter, not harder." Knowing there are pre-made solutions for the properly lazy, then I guess many of the web programmers are too lazy to do their job correctly (i.e.: LEARN) or incompetent. Based on what I've seen and experienced, along with the commentary here, the majority might be leaning towards incompetent. Seems like a good place for a smart guy like me to make a good living... if I didn't dislike doing programming.

I love the examples you linked to. Even a non-programmer can see how out of hand some of those scripts are. Some might even qualify for posting at http://thedailywtf.com/Default.aspx!