What if you are the person responsible for designing self destruct mechanisms for landmines to reduce the risk to civilians when the conflict is over? is that ethical?
while google in the US is rolling out gigabit, and the private sector in UK is doing the same....
In a few small areas.
Most of suburbia in the UK is getting fiber to the cabinet from BT openreach, better than what we had before certainly but way off what fiber to the home can deliver. Openreach are planning to do a "fiber to the premisis on demand" service but it looks like it will be pretty expensive (installation charges predicted to be in the thousands iirc making it impractical for anyone who isn't well settled) and they don't seem to be planning to offer gigabit speeds, upstream in particular seems to be being artificially limited (presumablly to protect expensive buisness fiber services).
Many rural areas look like they will either continue to be stuck with ADSL or possiblly get fiber to the cabinet but not be able to take full advantage of it due to long subloops.
Note: this post is from a UK perspective, things may vary a little arround the world.
By the 1980s, we had developed mathematics and modems that could use the same lines to get up to about 33.6kbps at 3,429 baud.
And then things more or less stopped there. There was one more marginal speed increase (56K) but they had pretty much hit fundamental limits of the phone system. Pushing speeds further required bypassing parts of the phone network.
ISDN BRI delivered slightly better speeds in the 90s but the way it was priced (if you wanted a 128k connection you had to pay for two phone calls in addition to the ISDN line itself costing more than twice what an analog phone line did, AIUI most unmetered dialup packages allowed single channel ISDN but not dual channel ISDN) made it an expensive option. ADSL turned up in the early 2000s but again it was initially expensive.
ADSL gradually improved through the 00s first with the providers getting more confident and taking the artificial limits off and then by the providers moving to ADSL2. However while speeds improved so did the gap between the haves and the have nots. Those close to the phone exchange could get 20mpbs, those stuck a long way from the exchange got less than 1mbps and we have pretty much hit the limit of what phone cables can carry over long distances even with advanced modulation techniques.
In any case, odds are, whatever we put in the ground today, in 20 years we'll be able to do more with it than we can today.
The problems with mixed fiber/dsl systems don't really have anything to do with the fiber that is being put in the ground.
1: it still relies on that old phone wiring for the last hop. There are a few tricks we can pull but we have pretty much hit the limits of what those cables can carry over those distances. You still have the "cable length lottery" except now it's distance from the point of fiber to copper transition to the house rather than distance from the phone exchange to your house.
2: having all that infrastructure spread out like that makes it very difficult to do incremental upgrades. When ADSL was introduced they could start by putting one DSLAM in a phone exchange and patching the subscribers to it, when one DSLAM filled up they could add another. It didn't matter that only a few percent of customers were taking DSL intitially because the phone exchange was large. On the other hand there were places in the UK that had their POTs and ISDN delivered over an early fiber to the cabinet system and these were among the last to get ADSL because it wasn't worth putting a DSLAM in a cabinet for a handful of subscribers. So even if there was a system that could get a slight improvement over the current VDSL gear rolling it out would be very expensive.
The only real way to substantially improve a "partial fiber" system (fiber to the cabinet, fiber to the distribution point etc) is to push the fiber closer to the subscriber but each time you do that your infrastructure ends up even more spread out. Eventually you get to the point that you may as well just take the fiber all the way.
On the other hand with a fiber to the home system all you have to upgrade to deliver faster speeds is the consumer premises equipment and the exchange equipment. All the outdoor infrastructure can remain the same. Plus current fiber to the home equipment has a much wider margin over current needs than the VDSL that is being deployed in current fiber to the cabient system.
Deploying fiber to the cabinet now means in a few years time either internet speeds will stagnate again or a fiber to the home project will be needed anyway making the fiber to the cabinet equiment redundant.
Historically propriatary software tends to be rather poor when it comes to cryptography. Cryptography is hard to get right, since even apparently trivial changes can have huge effects on the security of the code. Any requirement for "backdoors" is likely to make things even harder.
Note that "cloud storage" along with "file sharing" can be a method of defeating filesystem encryption. Especially if the communication is itself encrypted so you can't easily tell what is being synchronised/shared.
Or the NSA has checked the software to ensure that they already know/don't need that key.
Suppose you were german but had gone to a big US university (say MIT), while you are there you made contacts and wanted to start a buisness together. You also learnt how things are done in the US.
If you want to start the buisness in the US then you have to get a work visa for the US (much harder than a student visa or a buisness visa). If you go back to Europe you have the reverse problem, you will have to somehow get your american co-entrepreneurs into europe. You will also have to deal with doing things the european way rather than the american way (not saying if it's better or worse just different).
You could split things across two locations but it's much harder to work together if you aren't physically together.
If you start your business on a seastead near the US then you maintain easy access to US customers and services while avoiding the need to get a work visa for the US. When the business is big enough then as I understand it there are methods you can use the fact you are an executive of the company to get a visa and enter the US proper.
That is the idea anyway, whether it will work is more debatable.
The article is light on details but it does mention the vessel having three thrusters at the rear. Not clear whether those are just for direction control or if they can be used to move the whole vessel.
What am I missing here? Don't know of any ISP that supplies routers.
Maybe this is a regional thing, round here pretty much every ISP either gives you a router or tries to sell you one when you sign up for service. Some even insist on you using it.
And even replacing an older router with a faster one won't do a thing for speed. (unless it's bad) Most will handle 10 times the speed that the modem will.
It depends, if you are on ADSL or a slow cable package then it's not going to make much difference.
As you move up to high end cable or FTTC+VDSL services then older routers can certainly become a bottleneck and if you move up to FTTH services then you will allmost certainly need a new router to avoid bottlenecking the connection.
As I understand is there is a much greater range of types of tape drives than types of interface for tape drives. So your chances of being able to quickly buy an interface card locally when you move into the temporary office full of whatever PCs you could buy in a hurry are much greater than your chances of being able to quickly buy a replacement tape drive locally.
Might still be worth storing an interface card with the drive though.
The problem is many webapps are designed with the password hashes stored in a database that is directly accessible to the webapp. So if there is a security hole in the webapp that allows arbitary database queries then the attacker can simply steal the password database and brute force it at their leisure.
Of course now you have posted your scheme on slashdot then you have to assume the password cracker writers will know about it, if indeed they hadn't guessed already.
More can be created, but only if the majority of existing bitcoin holders agree to do so.
People who are merely holding bitcoin are irrelevent.
What ultimately matters is those who accept bitcoin in payment. They are the ones who get to decide whether a change to the rules is legitimate or not by deciding if their software will accept blocks that comply to the new rules but not the old rules. A coin you can't spend is not worth anything.
The largest denomination in circulation is £50 but the largest denomination dispensed by ATMs and commonly seen by normal people (dunno about rich guys who like to flaunt their wealth) is £20. I've lived in the UK all my life and seen a £50 note in person once. Some shops explicitly display notices that they will not take £50 notes. In summary if you want to carry cash you can easilly spend anywhere then you want to carry £20 notes.
That means we are talking between 100 and 250 banknotes. So not "suitcase full" but not "fit in your wallet" either.
Both are equally "real", a "wallet" file doesn't store bitcoins as such, it stores the keys which allow transfer of those bitcoins.
If someone hacked into your system and made an unencrypted copy* of your "wallet" file then they could use the keys in that file to transfer the money to addresses they control. Once they do that you will no longer have access to the coins. On the other hand if they just made a copy and didn't do anything with it (unlikely) then you wouldn't notice anything at all.
* Either because it wasn't encrypted in the first place or because they managed to steal the encryption key for the wallet too.