These two were tied up in the chain of evidence that led to his conviction, so depending on what gets tossed he has a chance here. Now he did admit that at one time he was DPR and that he had resumed work under the alias so he's probably not going to get everything overturned. But his defense was that someone else associated possibly with MTGOX was the mastermind framing him more recently.

So what's intriguing here is that one of the investigators was doing some shenanigams with MTGOX accounts and was involved in seizing MTGOX assets. Since MT GOX started having liquidity problems right during this investigation of Silk road, it really makes you wonder if this is where some of those missing assets went.

Furthermore the agents appear to have done things as their shenanigans came to light to obfuscate the trail back to them. This is not too far afield from ulricht's claim that someone was framing him, asking him to step in as DPR, and putting keys on his computer.

It actually seems it's not far fetched to imagine Ulricht was telling the truth about having relinquished DPR that someone suddenly invited him back into the game as the FBI closed in. Perhaps there's some grains of truth in there somewhere. e.g. maybe one of the agents did add his bitcoin keys to Urichts computers.

Given those sorts of conjectures it seems very reasonable he should get a new trial. He's guilty by his own admission, but maybe not guilty of everything he's charged with.

this is just a good way of dealing with a shortage of a product availability (since there's such a proliferation of combinations) and minimizing returns of a high wear prone item. It's not supposed to make it seem like you are visiting your personal jeweler at tiffanies.

SLR has announced it's coming out with new boards. But will these be open designs or copyrighted? If they also take over the arduino name for software they control the whole pipeline. Cortex boards are about $20 to $40 right now and they outperform the arduino. SO why are the cortex boards, aside from the raspberry, an idle novelty? because they don't have the unified user base behind the arduino. So who better to come in and scoop this up? after all ardunio is already in this game with the DUE and YUN model which have high perfromance processors like the cortex yet all the existing I/O mapping and IDE of the ardiono. That's where the money lies. Not in the open source arduino hardware but in the next generation built on the user base of the arduino. But it takes the Arduino name to do it, and also someone willing to close the copyright on the desgins while retaining compatibility.

You mean like the Arduino Due? That's an Arduino combined with a cortex-M made by arduino.

I've not seen cortex-Ms for $2.50 but you can buy as many arduino's as you want for that. that's the whole board not just the chip. See alibaba.

Man the whole point is that the arduino is a common platform for tinkers evrywhere. it's the libraries and community know how that make this fun. In some ways it's like the joy of stock car races where exceeding the imposed limits can be the fun of it. It's also really simple so it's something one person can truly master in their spare time. I'm addicted. I've had doofuses tell me about other development boards that are far superior for reans A,B, and C. Sure if I was building something just to be aproduct, But they aren't going to be any fun to goof with in general.

we should also put camera's on computer programers to see if they are slacking off or picking their noses.

Camera camera camera. the benefits of surveilance are not a sufficient reason to overcome the pervasive invasiveness. pychologically were a private species.

For DIY offsite backup I use crashplan. Their system lets you use their servers if you choose (for payment) but it also lets you use a remote disk you have over at a freinds house too, or one attached to your computer. I bought their software after using the free version for years. Besides being a nice automated backup system, the killer thing was the ability to backup offsite to a friends house. I do it mutually with them, each keeping the other's USB disk at our respective homes.

What's great about this is that if I do ever need to do a full backup, I don't have to try streaming it back through a soda straw over the web. I just drive the station wagon over, pick up the disk, and bring it home. Station wagons have very high bandwidth.

The disk is encrypted so no worries about peepers or what happens if my freinds computer gets broken into.

The payware version is a one time payment not a monthly fee. What you get for the payware version is more parsimonious differential backups and some other features about controlling backup times.

The software has gotten much better over the years too. Early on my complaint was the java bloated itself out to huge memory sizes over time. But now I don't even notice it is running.

Anytime I need to do a bigger than normal backup, I go get the disk and attach it locally, then take it back. That only happens when there's an unusual event. For example, if I make a major change in the structure of my file system, copy everything to a new disk or do something that touches all the files, then this could, in most backup systems, trigger a level 0 backup. So when that happens it's much easier to get things up to date then with any on-the-net storage system.

It may not be a cytobot but the synergy is 110% buzz word compliant. We put a bug in an electrical field and it reacted in a way similar to an elastomer or sponge.

You are quite correct that you have to bootstrap the compiler.

I tried to account for that partially by noting that there's plenty of room on the CD to store the epigenetic information. You can think of this epigenetic information as the #PRAGMA compiler directives and differences between non-ANSI compilers. So once we take those into account one could map the source code to the needs of any possible compiler. Thus in principle at least one could build a human using a compiler adapted from another somewhat similar organism. That is to say one could in principle compile a neaderthal on a homosapien compiler or a mammoth on an elephant compiler as long as you have the means to take the epigenetic aspects into account.

there are 3 billion (US definition of Billion not british) base pairs not 3 trillion.

base pair = 2 bits (AGC or T).

3billion bases = 6 billion bits = 750 megaBytes.

A CD holds up to 900MB.

So plenty of room even uncompressed.

3 billion base pairs.

Each base pair is 2 bits (AGC or T). A byte is 8 bits or 4 base pairs. so

3E9 / 4 = 750 MegaBytes.

A CD holds up to 900MB of data. No need to even compress the data, and it would be highly(!) compressible

Q.E.D.

What I find staggering to comprehend is that your genome will easily fit on a CD. Even if you allow for all the midochondrial DNA, and epigenetic information it still would fit on a CD. If not all of it's needed maybe there's a Damn Small Linux version of your DNA that would fit on a floppy.

careful my dear replicant, those are kernel extensions injected into your DNA by the Sony reverse transciptase root kit. Evidently you are a replicant. Look for the Sony Copyright and your model number to see if you have a null pre-programmed life expectancy.

Nanu Nanu. Shazbat!

Yeah, I get the notion that if comcast wants to shake down netflix ("nice packets you got there, shame if they got slowed down by all of your competitors packets") that's bad.
But I don't fully understand how this works practically. For example, lets ignore that Netflix or Google might have its own CDN or peering capability and just think of it as a simple content source. My imagination is that they pay for bandwidth and total data cap in the same sense that I do. That is, Netflix could buy a X gigbit connection or a 10X gigabit connection and there would be some price differential for those. Am I wrong? Assuming I'm not then presumably as it is for me, you don't really get the bandwidth you pay for in the case of ad hoc connection. You only get that under ideal circumstances (such as connecting to speedtest when none of your neighbors are using their connections). So it's not clear to me what Netflix should expect if they buy that. That might be good enough to reach 80% of their customer reliably but some won't ever get a good stream.

But lets say they buy that and Sony buys 10 times as much for their network. Now sony perhaps can eek out a little better performance. some of its network dependent in ways that can't be beaten with more packets from the source, but some things like packet resends and alternative routings might improve things.

So how is this really different than the QOS that comcast wanted netflix to pay for in the first place? One company can pay for more.

Next question is what is QOS. does net nuetrality really mean that the few instance where we do need QOS routing rules that those are now verbotten? Or does it mean that there will be packey kind labels like "video" that get priority for everyone or no one by mutual agreement? If so then presumably no one can charge extra for QOS labels? if you could it seems like a backdoor to paid priority. But if you can't charge more then what prevents me from labeling any packet I send as a priority packet?

Final question is about the fact that something like 35% of your typical cable bandwidth is not internet. It's an RF communincation channel owned by comcast. They use it for their video content. Its not governed by the internet rules. In principle they could stop using it for their content and sell it to sony or netflix or apple or google to use for theirs. So were back to paid priority on a toll road. Comcast so far has said they are leery of that because of the consent agreements they signed when they bought NBC might not allow that. But that's just comcast. AT&T or verizon don't have that restriction. Since both kinds of content enter yout house on the same physical cable any distinction between them is purely virtual

So is this whole no-paid-priority moot?

The thing I worry about is that in order to get the FCC net Neutrality rules the FCC had to agree to not regulate the pricing of internet as well as creating regularoty burdens that will likely act as a barrier to entry. For example, people providing both content and networks (I'm looking at you google) might worry the FCC would start to regulate its content. And so if net neutrality vanishes in virtualization then I just got less than I bargained for in supporting net neutrality.