See above. But here's the link again: GSM Association Official Document 12FAST.13 - Embedded SIM Remote Provisioning Architecture.
This is an earth-pressure-balance type TBM built for soft sand and dirt, below water level. Compressed air is used to keep water out at the working face. That's what's needed for a tunnel under the Seattle waterfront. It can cope with rocks and boulders, but not a solid rock face. It's not a hard-rock TBM. Those have very different cutters, but can't handle waterlogged soil.
Tunneling is like that. Stuff like this happens. It will be handled.
What this seems to do is take control away from the user, who could swap SIM cards, and give it to some carrier.
When you say "seems to," do you really mean "could possibly some day"?
No, I mean that's what the documentation seems to say. The user can't swap SIM cards when there is no removable SIM card. It has to be done remotely. From the documentation, it seems that the carrier has the keys to do that, but the user does not. Some devices start out in "provisioning mode", from which point (I think) the first carrier to talk to the device downloads a profiile and has control of the device until they release it. Or the device might come pre-locked to a carrier. Whether the user can force the device back to provisioning mode seems to be under the control of the profile downloaded by the carrier.
it's a lot like the way domain transfer works between registrars, with the "domain locked" status being under the control of the "losing registrar". That's led to disputes.
Who tells whom what to do? - V. Lenin
To fix this issue, the GSMA has developed a non-removable SIM that can be embedded in a device for the duration of its life, and remotely assigned to a network. This information can be subsequently modified over-the-air, as many times as necessary.
What this seems to do is take control away from the user, who could swap SIM cards, and give it to some carrier. This looks like something where you beg and plead with your old carrier to let you switch your device to a new carrier. There's a lot of elaborate key management in this system, and compromise of certain keys could break the whole system.
People who use an OpenMoko will love this.
There's something to be said for what the FSF is trying to do. The problem is that they're too slow in doing it.
As a parent, I resent this comment.
I have two children, both were born within 10 months of deciding to have them (apparently we are pretty potent). I would say that we, as parents, understand sex as a reproductive instrument pretty well.
That's why he said the word often, rather than always. You made a decision to have children. I did the same thing. Most of my peers were the same.
However a large number of children are unplanned. Not necessarily because the parents didn't know how to prevent conception, but that they didn't want to.
Since when is 6" x 4" x 4" a cube?
When you're travelling near the speed of light?
Care to expand?
Any site claiming that the tories are bad and labour is the answer is of course allowed.
Any site claiming that labour is bad and the tories are the answer is also allowed.
One needs the illusion of choice, and a healthy dose of I'm a celebrity, to keep the masses happy.
You aren't turning the filters on. If they were on, access to non-BT DNS servers would be filtered.
Right, but I thought these filters went on by default? The BT DNS servers were terrible, hence I changed from them. I was expecting them to be stealing UDP53 traffic, but they're not.
"but it failed to block 7% of the 68 pornographic websites tested"
that's 4.76 websites it failed to block (?)
It blocked 5 out of 76 websites, which is 7.35294..%
This was then correctly rounded to 7%
So I'm on BT, and like most people I've replaced the terrible "home hub" with a simple 4 router solution, 5G backbone to distribute wired around the house, single 2.4G AP for non-wired devices, OSPF to manage it all.
It's connected upstream to the VDSL via a pppoe (username firstname.lastname@example.org, no password), and the central DNS proxy uses either 220.127.116.11 or 18.104.22.168 upstream.
I've spent the morning scientifically browsing lots of porn sites, and haven't found a single one blocked. A google search for "porn" reveals the following sites on the first attempt, all work just fine.
The search also brings up the following site
Which is blocked as being morally unwelcome in my house.
What am I doing wrong?
Heard this one before. On Slashdot, even. Yes, you can do it. No, you don't want to. Remember when LCDs came with a few dead pixels? There used to be a market for DRAM with bad bits for phone answering machines and buffers in low-end CD players. That's essentially over.
Working around bad bits in storage devices is common; just about everything has error correction now. For applications where error correction is feasible, this works. Outside that area, there's some gain in cost and power consumption in exchange for a big gain in headaches.
Median household income in the US is somewhere around $52,000.
But median household income for a family with kids at an age to go to uni is higher, as
1) it's not skewed downwards by retirees
2) it's not skewed downwards by people on their first job
3) it's not skewed downwards by single-earner households
it's just a divide and conquer that the truely rich like to put out there.
I'm really sick of people who make more than 10 times as much as me whining about how they're not truly rich. $150K/yr is rich, even if it's not uber-rich.
I suggest you get a job. If you're on $7,500 a year, you're on $4.50 an hour based on a 35 hour week for 48 weeks a year.
$150k for a typical household is $75k each, which is not "rich" in comparision to the rest of the country, or western world. Obviously $7500 a year is rich compared to people in Burundi.
Close.. but not exactly.
Try a median of 51k.
However that median is brought down by young kids who don't have children who go to university.
The typical wage earners in a family that send their kids to university will be arround the 45-55 mark (having had the kids around 25-35)
On top of that the typical parents of a kid at uni will live in a 2-wageearner households, where the median wage will be pulled down by 1 wage earner households.