This guy added keys as tools to his multi-tool.

http://geek.phatus.com/2009/08/swiss-army-keys-tutorial-and-instructable/

I have two of those thumb push key-things. You now, where one cylinder goes inside another, and you push the end in and it falls apart? They're a lot easier to use than carabiners, you can detach them one handed. (Erm, except half your keys fall on the floor if you do that.)

I'd recommend using them over carabiners, but for some reason they seem almost impossible to actually find and buy.

I don't use them for different sets of keys, though, I just grab another keyring from my car if I need it. I use them to detach my ignition key to leave my car running, and to detach my leatherman.

I put one of these: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=electric+door+strike between my house and garage 20 years ago, and put a simple keypad on it. Add some kind of CPU and the same strike would work for RFID access.

The keypad is not terribly high security, but my garage has no pedestrian doors to the outside or any windows at all, and the overhead door is quite secure. If a bad guy gets into the garage, they're going to find enough tools to take care of whatever door locks I have anyway -- if they don't simply steal the tools and leave.

I teach a statistics class and its a fun exercise for the students to take a batch of a thousand or so pennies and arrange them by year. Makes a great visual of a skewed distribution. Then they take samples of varying size. Lo and behold, the larger the sample size, the more normal the sample distribution. Makes a great illustration of the central limit theorem.

Please don't abolish the penny! A thousand nickels would be fifty dollars -- not chump change when you're on a teacher's salary!

In both cases that's only due to the constitution and to a degree the judiciary for making it so - in Terri's case they even passed a bill solely for her "benefit" (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLay#Terri_Schiavo). To say they have no real power I think is wrong - take a look at the re-writing of history going on in Texas, the continuing brouhaha over evolution (almost all presidential nominees declared they didn't believe in evolution, none stated flatly that they do) - its really a troubling situation.

It's worse than that: 6to4 is architecturally flawed.

A 6to4 CPE router can only monitor the availability of its own 6to4 relay. It can't do anything about the relay required for the reverse path. Service providers aren't sufficiently moved to deploy their own 6to4 relays because content providers and distributors aren't deploying the reverse path relays needed to make the system functional. The content providers and distributors in turn aren't deploying 6to4 relays because there are too damned many IPv4 firewalls that drop all incoming protocol 41 on general principle, so from their perspective, it's not worth the effort.

Worth noting: Teredo suffers from the same basic architectural flaw. Neither 6to4 nor Teredo should be used, if it can be helped at all.

The root cause here is multipath confusion, but there are lots of other ways the transition will get bumpy.

Once the IPv4 address exhaustion wave starts to break, the Internet community is going to be dealing with all manner of breakage caused by some parts of the Internet resisting the transition to IPv6 while other parts are being forced into the transition by financial considerations. These different parts will be intermediated by things like NAT64 and DNS64, as well as other evils like DS-Lite and the associated AFTR boxes. Meanwhile, there will still be crazy things like 6to4 and Teredo kicking around. For the transition to go smoothly, all these interlocking parts have to work perfectly... everywhere... and we know from long experience that this just cannot happen.

This will all seem fairly familiar to anyone who survived the transition to IPv4 a generation ago. But if you're a young gun, and all you've ever known is the IPv4 we have now because the old-timers spent a long damned time years and years ago making it rock-solid before you got here, then you're about to be schooled.

Get ready for life during wartime—that's what I say.

Yes, firewalls are only a first-line-of-defense tool. Making the assumption that a firewall is an end-all-be-all solution is not a good practice. You do need to have a network perimeter to filter out a large factor of attacks, internal borders to mitigate internal problems, and desktop/server security to protect you from your users.

That is why we have firewalls, content filters, network access control devices, intrusion prevention systems, and desktop products (like Cisco Security Agent).

You can't get your whole network security from a single solution and not necessarily a single vendor.

agreed.

example HL2 is a game ive always thought of as art, the atmosphere and immersiveness are probably mostly why. If you take this strange 'winnable criteria' then yes you can win it, but you win it the same way you finish reading a book. if you stop reading a book half way through (lose a game) then does it cease being art? in summary, this guys an idiot.

This sort of attitude is, based on most feedback we have, BAD FOR US. Its not at all clear that one couldn't perform a rigorous study. Its much less clear that industry wants anyone to DO SO. Fundamentally speaking, if its really impossible to make a meaningful guess, then industry can continue to make up numbers. I just don't believe that. EFF or someone should try to fund their own, serious, in-depth study of the issue. And if that means that phase 1 is a study on how to perform the study, so be it. But do you really believe that if I get a statistician, a computer scientist, and a bunch of their grad students in a room for several months, and give them money to try some methods, they won't be able to come up with something??

Well to be fair you must aknowledge that trains are paked full and there often are no rental cars available anyomre. And if you wan't to go to some place really far away ground transportation is sub optimal if you could not plan for the additional traveling time up front. Relatives of mine wanted to go on a week long vacation in Egypt. They had to cancel that plan.

I had the same outlook about the Linux kernel, but the opposite: I thought it was an understandable fiend, and started to delve in.

This was when 2.6 was in development, and 2.4 was the main branch. And then 2.6 came out, and all was lost...

Very few left-handers are hemispherically reversed in my experience (and how would you measure it?)

Rather, some of the brain functions eg speech are more likely to be represented on the non-dominant hemisphere. It's a different kind of specialisation but probably increases communication across the corpus callosum - which would improve one's ability at synchronising both hemispheres.

You're trying to invoke the "if you don't like them then don't buy their service" argument. This is the greatest part of the free market. Companies that provide shitty products (like comcast) go out of business because everyone has moved to the better companies. There are two problems with this:
1. There is no free market in terms of high speed internet. There are only one or two providers at any given location in most of the United States.
2. Even if there are many companies, they all want to adopt the same "throttle bandwidth and fuck users" strategy. They've learned that if they all do it then consumers have no incentive to switch because provider X is just as shitty as provider Y.

Internet is a critical service (no, it's not a luxury, maybe YOU can perform your job duties with dial up but some of us REQUIRE high speed access to perform critical tasks for our jobs/school) so 90% of consumers can't use the "vote with your wallet" approach. The lack of proper regulation (net neutrality, no throttling) allows companies to take the "free" out of the "free market".

Really this is one of the problems with the free market. The free market, by definition, allows for things like monopolies buying out every competitor and companies colluding together. But those things are, by definition, not a free market. There's a paradox that must be solved with proper regulation.

With the cost of the recent Ultimate Editions of Windows, it's to be argued that consumers do in fact, purchase Windows that happens to also include a PC in the cost. With the upper Windows tiers, the pricing model puts Windows ahead of the hardware costs, at least in the desktop space - when you can go purchase an HP, Dell, etc from Wal-Mart for $699, and the cost of Ultimate was running $399 in some areas of the country, well....