The Ramses works great... As long as the missile's radar guided.

Except, you know, for the lack of sand or other abrasives.

I assume this is more along the lines of what you were hoping for?

http://www.realtouch.com/
(NSFW)

If all you were able to do is listen to the network traffic, then yes, you're right.

But we're talking about a special case here, where the online banking is being done from within a VM. In that special case, malware installed in the host OS can monitor both the keystrokes and mouse events that are going to the VM in addition to the network traffic.

If I were going to write malware to try to steal usernames and passwords for "interesting websites", I'd wait until I saw network traffic to one of those sites, and *then* start logging keystrokes and mouse events. The fact that the network traffic is HTTPS doesn't matter. All that matters is *where* it's going, and HTTPS doesn't hide that. I don't care about the payload of the packets or what pages you're requesting. All I care about is the DNS name of the computer you're sending data to.

When the malware is installed in the same machine (real or virtual) as the online banking, you can log only the keyboard and mouse events that are beingg sent to the web browser and ignore everything else. What I proposed above allows you to further limit the data you have to sort through by only logging the keystrokes that are likely to result in data being sent to the websites I care about.

If there's a VM between the malware and the browser, you can no longer monitor just the keystrokes going to the browser -- you have to sift through *everything* that's being sent to the VM. But you can still use the network traffic to provide you with some context of what is likely to be interesting and what isn't.

Yes, it's still a child who was killed senselessly, and a tragedy.

That being said, in this case, the child killed herself, and the parents (step- included) are going to suffer for it.

If she had killed someone else's child, it would still be a tragedy, but then two families would suffer.

Plus, in addition to whatever action the police and prosecutor's office felt justified, you would likely also have "Wrongful Death" and other civil charges pressed, tying up a court, judge, and jury.

To make a one-word change to the parent's comment to make his intended meaning more clear:
"Sites that require flash or javascript for navigation are an abomination."

I'm all for technologies that allow form interfaces to be more intuitive and that reduce the amount of unnecessary traffic.
But said technologies should not be relied upon, exclusively, to provide a functional interface to a site.

Worse yet, sometimes,individual cities levy income and/or property taxes against their citizens.

So, you could end up having to file federal, state, county, and city tax returns.

The problem isn't between Moonlight and Netflix.

The problem is that Microsoft isn't allowing Moonlight access to the PlayReady DRM SDK used by Silverlight. Which means Moonlight can't play any DRM'ed files. Which means Moonlight can't play netflix content, despite really wanting to.

Here is a thread on Microsoft's Silverlight forum discussing the matter.

Yeah. I just used 30hz as an example.

The point I was trying to get at was that you wanted the display to update at 2x your desired frame rate because you wanted that many frames for each eye.

There are three types of "3d glasses" out there... (four if you count the "VR Headset" which actually straps two displays to your head - one for each eye.)
In ascending order of "goodness" (or descending order of "suckitude") they are:

1) red/blue glasses. These work (more or less) with any format from projected images onto a screen to stuff that's printed on a page. But they mess up all of the colors. They're also really cheap to make.

2) polarized glasses. These really only work in situations where you have images projected onto a screen. You need two projectors with their lenses polarized in opposite directions. That way, when you put on the polarized glasses, each eye only sees the image meant for it. These are only slightly less cheap because of the need for polarized plastic film.

3) shutter glasses. These will work with any "motion picture" format -- projected, television, whatever. Here's how they work: Say you're used to watching cinema at 30 frames a second. Double the framerate to 60 frames/sec, *BUT* alternate between frames intended for the left eye and right eye. That way, both eyes still get 30 frames/second. The glasses have a "shutter" or an lcd element that opaques the lenses when told to. These glasses have to receive a synchronization signal from the display to make sure that you can see out of your left eye when the left eye image is displayed and out of the right eye when the right eye is displayed. If the glasses fall out of synch, your brain gets confused.

As you can imagine, shutter glasses are considerably more expensive than the other two types. They're also, by far, vastly superior, and certainly the method they're designing the 3D blu-ray spec for.

And no, I didn't RTFA.

I should have appended to that comment an explanation of how the distinction applies to music players.

Say you have an MP3 player that uses exFAT. The player can read the files off the flash without needing a paid license.

Now, say you plug the player into your computer's USB port and it shows up as a USB-attached disk. (and/or card reader) The OS will need exFAT drivers to be able to copy files to/from it. But when the commands to access the filesystem reach the player, they're not "open suchandsuch file" they're "read/write block 123456".

Now, on the other hand, if the MP3 player included an FM tuner and the manufacturer wanted to allow you to record audio from the radio to the exFAT card, it would require a paid license because it would need to understand how to correctly write to the card.

You don't have to understand the filesystem to be able to write data to it, as long as something else is telling you where to put the bytes.

So, for example, an SD-Card reader doesn't have to have a paid license because the card reader doesn't have to understand the filesystem. All it has to know about is reading and writing blocks. The OS has to know how exFAT works if that's the filesystem on the media.

Yes, exFAT is part of the new SD specifications. So is FAT32.

What's really interesting about the exFAT specification is the terms of the license it's under (at least through the SD Association)

If you need access to the standard so you can build a device (or program) that will only need to understand the contents of the filesystem when it's accessed in a read-only manner, you don't actually have to pay a licensing fee. So, an MP3/4 player won't need a paid license for exFAT. It's only if the device needs to *WRITE* to the filesystem (such as a camera) that a paid license is required.

Quoting the wikipedia article:

Such as HL7 which, from the reading I've been doing is actually quite thorough. And if both sides are using HL7 v3, which is XML-based, you can overcome formatting issues between software packages through the use of XSL stylesheets.