Have you ever tried getting young people interested in older media? "This is what I watched when I was your age" is not a selling point.
I assume this is what's behind going back and re-grading older films into teal and orange.
"Look, kids! It's just like that terrible blockbuster you saw in theaters three times!"
As a kid in Canada, I thought "Paki" was an accepted term for Indian people. That didn't go over well when I moved to a more ethnic city.
I didn't realize it was a euro slang and not just a generic slang term.
In New England, it's shorthand for "package store" aka "liquor store". The spelling is different, though.
i.e: "I'm gonna head down to the packie before the cookout."
Since moving away, I've had to mentally restrain myself from ever letting it slip. Not that I was ever really a fan of the term "package store".
OK, I'll try to put it into a language
Not necessarily, but blocking traffic completely, rather than trying to allow vehicles to crawl past the crash site on the shoulder, will have less impact on traffic overall.
Yes, but it's not entirely clear that "monitoring makes that impossible". For example, as long as the government doesn't interfere with a political rally, can you really show harm to 1st Amendment rights by the mere fact that the government databased everyone who attended?
In a word, yes. Here's an excellent legal argument from the Harvard Law Review that details how surveillance influences the exercise of First Amendment rights. From the abstract:
Surveillance is harmful because it can chill the exercise of our civil liberties, especially our intellectual privacy. It ialso gives the watcher power over the watched, creating the the risk of a variety of other harms, such as discrimination, coercion, and the threat of selective enforcement, where critics of the government can be prosecuted or blackmailed for wrongdoing unrelated to the purpose of the surveillance.
The author goes on to explain in detail how the chilling effect applies, citing sources for his claim that knowing you're being watched influences even how you think. The practice of widespread, untargeted surveillance has an insidious effect on freedom, and should therefore be subject to significant legal constraints.
Is this entire article some kind of joke? If you have physical access to a machine and are able to "steal" the cookies from their logged in browser session, then on another machine replicate that browser session and utilize that same logged in cookie so that the site can't tell the difference between the machine you HAVE PHYSICAL LOGGED-IN ACCESS TO and the replicated session, so you're able to continue using the site? Isn't this behaviour "as intended"? This would only be a "flaw" if another site could remotely copy my cookies and continue my session 'as me'. (Well, actually, I have Java installed, so they probably can *cough*). Otherwise, it's exactly how a logged in cookie is meant to work. The only tacit connection to "Microsoft" seems to be that "Microsoft, like some other companies.. have websites on the internet."
Well, for services sending clear, unencrypted HTTP traffic, local access isn't necessary. The data interception could be some random Joe or Jane sitting at the same Starbucks as you. Or it could be your friendly neighbourhood ISP, or your telco, or your government.
So yeah, knowing about it and not working out a fix is a problem. It's evidence that, contrary to advertising claims, Microsoft (and others) are not really taking your privacy as seriously as they should.
Given that Orwell got so very much right about the future, why exclude 1984 from the list? Just to make an interesting discussion that would have been largely already well-hashed-out otherwise?
It's just to be fair to the rest of them. There are some artists who simply dominate their genre. A famous singer was once asked who her favourite Jazz vocalist was, and she said, 'You mean, besides Ella Fitzgerald?'
Some CEOs and PHBs might
Indeed. The proper usage these days is
I'd prefer a battery fire than exploding engines a la A380.
Only the Rolls-Royce engines do that. The Engine Alliance (GE/Pratt-Whitney consortium) engines work just fine. Nice to know we still make something that works.
I know people who worked on the A380 program and they're more than happy to fly on one and have their families fly on one. It's a fundamentally sound aircraft.
...in 1971 the recently renamed Kelly Services ran a series of ads in The Office, a human resources journal, promoting the “Never-Never Girl,” who, the company claimed: “Never takes a vacation or holiday. Never asks for a raise. Never costs you a dime for slack time. (When the workload drops, you drop her.) Never has a cold, slipped disc or loose tooth. (Not on your time anyway!) Never costs you for unemployment taxes and Social Security payments. (None of the paperwork, either!) Never costs you for fringe benefits. (They add up to 30% of every payroll dollar.) Never fails to please. (If your Kelly Girl employee doesn’t work out, you don’t pay.)”
You're not a person. You're not an employee. You're not even worthy of respect.
...but if you're running Vista or 7, you're on your own.
If you're running Vista, you've been on your own for a while now....
In a big, healthy company, it is inevitable that you will get "infected" with a bad manager somewhere, sometime. I see it like a body catching a cold. Instead of "inertia", I like to think of a company as having a "immune system" to combat colds. If the immune system is strong enough, it will be able to get rid of the "cold", the bad manager.
I'm going to guess that he died from analogy....
(Read it aloud. You'll get it....)
I think warning systems are one of the best new technologies for dealing with earthquakes.
The technology is pretty straightforward. You network seismic sensors together and create a system that can detect oncoming (and usually unnoticed) P-waves which have a higher velocity than the destructive S-waves that follow anywhere from 30 to 90 seconds later.
The distributed nature of the system ensures that any result is the product of multiple sensors producing the same data.
30 to 90 seconds is a lot of time. You could deploy receivers set accept the existing SAME codes and automatically send building systems into "Earthquake Mode" via simple relays. Virtually everything that would need to happen is already part of the programming of each affected system. In a lot of cases, you wouldn't even need to modify them in any significant way as they already accept inputs from external relays.
Once the alert goes out:
- Emergency messages are sent to all cell phone users - This system exists and is used for other emergencies.
- Fire station doors roll-up. - Add a simple sounding device and momentary contact to the existing door-opening circuit and you're done.
- Earthquake alarms sound in homes and small businesses - Weather radios that accept SAME codes are already programmed to do this.
- Earthquake alarms sound in major buildings - Fire alarm systems with voice evac are already customized and can accept new initiating devices and announcements with a software update.
- Emergency generators and fire pumps spin-up. Smoke handling systems activate. Stairwells are pressurized. - See above.
- Elevators go into "Fire Mode". All cars go to their recall floor, hold the doors open and refuse input. - This programming exists in every elevator installed in the past few decades. Activating a building fire alarm system will trip this anyway.
- Gas main valves are closed. - This is cheap and simple tech.
- Halt surgery - Voice evac / weather radios that accept SAME codes.
- Shut down industrial processes - Some combination of the above.
Wait until someone puts some funny looking USB plug to slurp everything off of the USB charge port.. There was a story on
Yeah, this might (probably wil) turn into a huge problem. They should offer traditional plugs to prevent a PR diaster.
Audio-out cables are the only untrusted ones you should mess with (at least on iOS devices). Anything else that uses the dock connector is extremely risky.
Or they'd simply rather not spend time and money to solve someone else's problem?
Verizon's bandwidth is indeed Verizon's problem.
It's not like rack space is free, or electricity is free...
The backspace and electricity demands of an OpenConnect box are likely negligible in comparison to the overall strain placed on the network by Verizon customers using Netflix en masse.
...or ensuring that someone else's hardware isn't going to harm your network is free. If I were an ISP, Netflix would "get" to install hardware in my network over my dead body - simply because I DO NOT TRUST HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE I HAVEN'T VERIFIED.
Good. You sound like a capable admin. Now, what's to say you cannot verify the box?
What about the people who AREN'T Netflix customers and DON'T want to pay for someone else's service? Why should my ISP fees be used to help someone else stream movies I can't access?!
By having an ISP you are splitting the cost of using the network among X number of people. Since the cost of an OpenConnect box is rackspace + electricity + verification / customer base, the cost to you alone is exceedingly low.
There's absolutely no reason I should be footing the bill for a service I have no intention of using.
This mentality is destroying the country.
It's funny the way they phrase things when governments are involved. If you steal your neighbor's car, they won't call it a "friendly theft" just because you were on good terms prior to the theft.
Oh yeah? Tell Flanders that.
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.
