I just tried, and I was able to "play" the demo, walking around the environment, etc. I ran the benchmark, and got 57fps, and although I have 120hz monitors, I suspect something is limiting most of the rendering to 60hz. TBH, this is amazing to me. I tested under windows 7 with firefox 20.0.1 however, so I'll have to try booted into Ubuntu and see how it works there.

then disable sending your queries to remote sources. Yes, it is enabled by default, but no, you don't have to use it. I disabled it as soon as I typed in "jockey" to find the additional drivers tool in 12.10, and got ads for underware. Yea. No.

True that on the acronym. What else did I saw was wrong? Release of information is a violation. If someone knows attempts at a violation occur are being attempted by someone not authorized (this is an assumption) is this not knowledge of an attempted crime? I know this is a response to an AC, but the reality is that if you don't CYA, and shit goes south, it will be your ass that gets nailed.

Is the hospital allowed to access records without a release based on HIPPA regulations since it is an independent practice? If not, then report them to the police. Apologize to the hospital, but explain, you have NO CHOICE. HIPPA is not something to mess with, and it doesn't matter who is trying to access the records, it IS a crime if accessing this data is not permitted. Remember the guys that got sent away for accessing the public data for AT&T? Yea... That but worse. Based on the fact that they were sentenced, even if they gained no data, the attempt itself was the crime. Failure to report a crime is a crime itself: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=misprision&url=/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000004----000-.html. Report it. If they gain access to records, and then data from it leaks out, say because someone notable was a patient, then it will be on YOU. If the local police decide not to follow up, it is NOT on you.

if you have a laptop and another computer, then use rdp to use the monitor for both. if just the laptop, ignore the fact the laptop has a monitor, and use the large monitor alone.

If a company did that, I think there would be a nice market for people that want to try both. You would have to choose which you want loaded at any given time, but it will insure that if windows 8 phones do start to look really nice, you won't be stuck with cellphone envy.

This is all easily explained by user experience testing. Take a bunch of people who don't know how to use a computer, put various interfaces in front of them, and see which is easier for them to learn how to use. The net result? The Ribbon, and Windows 8. The reality though is that all the people that were used to the old way now have to relearn how to use the tools, and often, the "easiest" to learn is also the less powerful in getting real work done day in and day out. This what I believe MS has been doing for years now--focusing on "how easy is it to learn" vs. "how useful is it to people that use it every day".

Consider Iceland, which has a great source of cheap renewable electricity with Geothermal power. The issue is them finding good uses for it--you can only smelt so much aluminum before the price goes down. This process would be ideal, as this process would let them create carbon neutral fuel. Other areas have good sources of Geothermal power as well, but often, they are too far from where the power is needed to make them useful in exploiting.

let me summarize the problem that is being observed: On a given interface, if you have more buffer memory than is needed as packet buffer on the transmit side, it can induce latency. As an example, consider a 1Mb/s link. If you want to have a peak of .1s latency added by buffering at high load, then you want 1Mb*.1=12,500 bytes of buffer. If you have 1MB of buffer, then you have 8 seconds of buffer, therefore triggering the "buffer bloat" issue. Part of the problem is that buffer size would be set based on the top speed a piece of hardware could drive, i.e. if you want a 1Gb/s interface to be able to buffer .1s, then you use it at 100Mb/s, then it has 1s worth of buffer. In most home deployments where you have a router that may have a 1Gbps upstream, maybe 4 100Mb/s physical connections, and a 54Mbps wireless router, you probably have a shared buffer for all the interfaces. The result of this is that when using the 54Mb/s wireless, you can easily have the buffer over saturated, while the buffer size may be just right for the 100Mb/s interfaces.

What is the solution to this? Realistically, the alternative is to drop packets that have resided in the buffer longer than a configured amount of time, which causes it's own performance issues. Net result: TCP would slowdown for a period of time, but would speed up again resulting in a sawtooth behavior. This would result in periodic issues with other protocols as well, i.e. VOIP would have dropped packets every time TCP ramps up again, etc.

Solution: Don't download porn when you are trying to do VOIP calls.

I'm not seeing your point. The wife could have legally changed her name, and otherwise insured that she can't be found through normal methods. The only linkage would be the dog, and where the husband made the mistake, the law is the only thing preventing the information from leaking. Security through obscurity often relies on people not looking behind the scenes to see what is going on, and taking the time to piece things together. That isn't what is presented in the scenario.

I posted a scenario that should make you understand why the law is as it is. Think abusive husbands.

Scenario:

Abusive husband and his wife split up, and she goes into hiding fearing retaliation against he and their kids. She goes into hiding for fear of her life, but she left the dog because she didn't have much time. Later she goes back and gets the dog when he wasn't home, since he was in the habit of kicking the dog too, and the kids missed him. Fast forward three years. Her new husband is at the vet with the dog, who scans it, and finds it was chipped. The husband, not thinking about what had happened in the past asks for the address to be updated. Old husband is still furious at his old wife, and wants to extract revenge, so he requests the information so he can find out where she lives. He knows he can't go through the normal process, as the dog was equally the wife's dog, so he tries to bully the chip company.

Now, put in this context, if the chip company had released the information, and the guy kills his ex-wife, her new husband, the two kids, AND the dog, everybody would be on the chip companies ass for releasing private information.

The law IS correct here--he needs to go through the legal process to have information released to him.

While this looks interesting, there isn't enough information to determine the cause. What were the packets?

It could be DNS requests based on the expiration of a domain on the stripes. The content on the website may be expiring at particular times. Someone may be posting on blogs, or tweeting with a link to the page.

Simply put, without knowing what the content is, and filtering out "explainable" traffic, then looking at the result, any pattern is just an interesting curiosity, nothing more.