Well my Saturn uses 300watts/mile.
watts is not an energy unit, it's a power unit. To get a figure for the energy used we need to know how long it took you to travel that mile. If you're* using 300watt-years/mile it's not so good...
* see the punctuation there?
shell is still around 'cos it's still the right tool for some jobs...
These days it is quite easy to get embedded perl or lisp etc.
it allows you to get strings back from commands and use them as the text of the script as if you had typed it directly. I think this was a new idea that I, at least, had not seen in scripting languages, except perhaps LISP,
Greenspun's Tenth Rule: "Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp"
If all JRE's (browsers) are alike in syntax, semantics, security and libraries then the faster one will become the shell of choice to run these cloudy, ajaxy apps. And we'll partying like it's 1980 with browser-and-cloud architectures replacing greenscreen-and-mainframe.
Basically, through superior techy knowledge, most of us have been able to access any information we like, of any kind, on the Internet. We've been able to access stuff that, under other circumstances, would be illegal in our own country.
For example, the UK, like many other countries, has a film classification board that determines "for the public good" what can be shown in cinemas, licensed sex shops, or not at all. With our technical know-how we've been able to punch a hole in the UK's Customs border controls and, now that the government is getting more tech savvy, this hole is slowly being closed... There exist articles of content that, by UK law, would be illegal to import or own if it was rendered in some kind of physical media (books, photos, film etc.). There's no reason to expect a government would allow it to be imported via the Internet for ever...
Shame, we're no longer going to be able to moderate our own behaviour and viewing pleasure.
But, and this is the BIG POINT, ranting on about how "the Internet wants to be free!!!!" is misguided for (at least) two reasons:
1. it never was. It's a redundant network that had the nice feature of being hard to shut down or block off
2. the key issue is WHY are these things illegal in the first place! Write to your MP and get something done (yeah, I know, good luck with that when we're arguing against a "protect the children" mantra, but armchair activism really doesn't cut it).
Of course there's also the question of how good the IWF are at interpreting the law.
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Everything is somewhat vulnerable, and a determined intruder with infinite resource will almost always find a way in.
The point is facial recognition alone is so vulnerable! All you need is a cameraphone and a photo printer - and you can't revoke your face as your password either. At least with fingerprints you can get hacked nearly 10 times (on average) before it becomes a problem.
1. You have to give up some identification when you enter/join (even if it's quite weak: ie. usually you're verified email address)
2. You have to introduce yourself (or be introduced as in LinkedIn) before you can send anyone a message.
3. All you communications are through a central server that verifies the identity of both endpoints and records all communication (possibly for ever!).
And, yes, it's been seen that people happily give up a whole heap of private info to be part of these clubs...
It would be interesting to find out what the ratio is between email and social-site IM'ing these days.