Testimony? They don't need testimony. They have chat logs implicating Assange in aiding Bradley Manning with submitting the documents. The law is pretty clear about these things. We'll just have to wait for his trial.
Honestly why was the parent modded a troll? You don't mean to tell me that folks on Slashdot are censoring any negative information related to Assange, do you?
Damn, you got me!
You have a point, but where there is a demand there are people who are willing to supply. I'm pretty convinced that the opportunity to distribute CP is a fuel to add to the fire. If CP was no longer in demand the abuse related to it would certainly decrease, though you are right in saying it is not the root of the problem.
The solution:
1. Buy CPU
2. Wrap computer case in aluminum foil to block ze 3G's.
3. Victory
Astronomers have been looking for alien worlds for more than 15 years, and now you too can join the search.
Yes, and I also could have joined a world-wide search for extra-terrestial life back in 1999 when SETI@Home was launched... (I realize the goal and approach of this planet project is different)
Astronomers are using computers to crunch the data from the Kepler probe and look for planet candidates. "But computers are only good at finding what they've been taught to look for, whereas the human brain has the uncanny ability to recognize patterns and immediately pick out what is strange or unique, far beyond what we can teach machines to do," Meg Schwamb, another Yale astronomer and Planet Hunters co-founder, said in today's news release.
From the article
There's some reasons this won't work.
EG-- Think of what would happen if you used ComCast's various local networks (the neighborhood branch networks that the cable modems are attached to), and all the VoIP connections that are being shuttled through them, and subtly alter their delivery routes a few hops at a time using the distributed arp poisoning approach above. By the time you get it over comcast's backbone connection, you would be directing a huge bitstream of "Legitimate", "high priority" packets. At the same time, you would be doing the same thing with ATT, TimeWarner Cable, etc... The end goal is to get all of those rivers of traffic to flood into the final network segment via its many backbone connections, fully saturating the segment, and overloading the routers at the destination.
1) It's highly unlikely you're going to have drones on continuous subnets, at least continuous enough to hit a target somewhere across a few networks. Outside of the network edge, where are you going to have an infected node? Once you're outside of the cable modem/VoIP access switches it'll be network aggregation. Good luck having an infected device connected on these switch-router or router-to-router network segments, which are probably all subnetted to allow only a few IP hosts anyways (which are other switches/routers).
2) I would assume ISPs are using static ARP entries in that aggregation layer. But, you never know.
3) At the access layer, many switches are configured to only allow 1 or 2 MAC addresses in a time period. If you suddenly change and dump a new MAC out, your port can be auto-disabled. (see port security)
4) Switches can be configured to monitor the DHCP leases granted by the network's trusted DHCP servers. If your port has an ARP packet come in with a source IP that was not leased out in its ARP messages, the packet is dropped. (see DHCP snooping)
From the article: "TMV becomes inert during the manufacturing process; the resulting batteries do not transmit the virus"
Dropped calls of 0.1%? What is that statistic for, where AT&T service is available? The problem is how "gappy" AT&T's coverage is. Within the same town I often find myself going in and out of 3G, or in and out of roaming. That's where my calls of course drop
Firewalls can optionally drop packets from a source IP without really even processing the packet or sending back any kind of "service unavailable/connection refused" reply -- saves on CPU consumption there.
A little more math, an you realize that the rate of exposure is 90 times faster in the machine.
90 times faster exposure of only 0.0027% of your body means that the "only three minutes" argument is true, but misleading. Such things can only happen in a culture where most people are mathematically illiterate.
To make a mathematical analogy. Assume the exposure in the air is like having a match light each second. You feel the heat of one match for 180 seconds. Then standing in such a machine is like being exposed to 36841 matches being lit 90 time a second for 2 seconds. That's 3315690 matches per second for 2 seconds. It's a 3 million plus fold increase in exposure rate.
But I don't think exposure rate matters in this case. It seems that damage due to radiation is caused by the amount of radiation absorbed, not the rate of absorption. So while your match analogy is interesting and a bit scary to think about, I don't think you can use this to say that there's more damage being done to your body over this 2 second period compared with the 3 minute period. In both cases, your body has absorbed the same amount of radiation and the same amount of tissue damage has occurred.
The only argument I could see is that perhaps your body has more time to repair damaged tissue in that 3 minute period, whereas in the "onslaught" brought on during the 2 second period it does not. But I'm not sure if 3 minutes would allow for much to happen as far as tissue repair goes.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Maybe I missed it, but I find it interesting that the patent doesn't explicitly state what a social networking service *is*. Sure, we all "know" what it is -- but in something like a patent shouldn't this be very clearly defined? What if a "social networking service" encompasses presence/IM/chat software? The XMPP protocol (Jabber, now owned by Cisco, is based off this) has drafts (see XEP-0080) already written for providing user location in that context. I'm sure this isn't the only draft written of its kind. Think of large enterprise solutions such as Microsoft OCS, Cisco Unified Presence, Avaya OneX. I bet they all have location solutions in the works. Do these fit into the realm of "social networking services"?
I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato
