Wireless Confusion

Grok Headline matches for Wireless Confusion

Confusion surrounds Cisco-Linksys
wireless hole

Confusion surrounds Cisco-Linksys
wireless hole 06/07/2004 04:08 PM
BOSTON - A report last week about a security hole in a wireless broadband router made by Cisco Systems Inc.'s Linksys division overstated the severity of the vulnerability, according to the man who first warned of the problem.

The new IT confusion

The new IT confusion 10/30/2003 08:16 PM
Droplets chairman Philip Brittan warns that lingering customer confusion about the differences between "grid" and "utility" computing could stall their wider adoption.

The Confusion

The Confusion 03/08/2004 11:19 PM

The Confusion is almost here. Amazon UK has a 1 April release date and Amazon US has a 13 April release date, but it's coming soon and I'm eager to continue reading the saga. The UK book jacket artwork is so much more colourful and interesting than the rather plain US edition. I've often wondered why there is such a tremendous difference between many US and UK book jacket designs, especially when there isn't really anything in the title or the design that might offend.

Clearing Up The Confusion

Clearing Up The Confusion 04/15/2004 04:59 AM
Paul Boutin talks with Snow Crash science-fiction writer Neal Stephenson about his latest book, The Confusion, the second part of his ambitious Baroque Cycle of novels.

confusion and the benefits of WS-I

confusion and the benefits of WS-I 06/22/2004 12:13 PM
the great thing about standards...

A Confusion of Styles

A Confusion of Styles 02/10/2004 02:49 AM
In John E. Simpson's latest XML Q&A column he discusses various styling options and alternatives for a nonstandard HTML variant.

.Mac Benefits Confusion

.Mac Benefits Confusion 11/19/2003 08:06 AM
"I looked at that page also, but didn't feel deceived. I felt the page was saying, 'Look what you could have received if you had a .mac account' and [implying] that new subscribers would get equivalent offers in the future." (MacFixIt via MyAppleMenu)

The confusion of the restrooms

The confusion of the restrooms 06/05/2005 11:56 PM

New York Times restaurant critic Frank Bruni has a funny article today entitled, Forget the Specials, Explain the Restroom. He talks about the confusion taking place in many restaurant bathrooms in New York City, including those at such high-end spots as Per Se and The Modern (the new restaurant at the MoMA). I can concur with many of his observations.

...I couldn't figure out how to trigger the electronic-eye sensors above the commodes, motion-detecting flushing mechanisms with enough of a delay that you were sometimes asked simply to trust in a cleansing aftermath to your departure. I've encountered religions with less daunting leaps of faith.

I couldn't figure out how to tell whether commodes were occupied. Neither, apparently, could anyone else, because whenever I was using one, someone in the communal area would rattle the door, not to mention my composure.

And I couldn't figure out why, in restaurant after restaurant, the attempt to relieve oneself turned out to be anything but a relief.

I always panic when, instead of simple labels like "Ladies" and "Gentlemen" or pictures of a man and a woman, they put those gender symbols on the door. I have to stop and think, "Which one does Austin Powers wear around his neck?" and then when I get the answer, I open the opposite door.

In the various parts of Europe I've visited, I've noticed two great things about the restrooms: 1. They put pictures on the door, which are easy to comprehend no matter what language you speak, 2. When you lock the door to your stall (which is really your own private compartment! Nice!), it rotates a little colored panel on the outside of the door to red. So when you enter a restroom, you look at the doors and see either red or green, and voila, you know which are occupied. New York restaurant designers, please take note!

Shuffling confusion

Shuffling confusion 02/07/2005 01:05 AM

Steven Levy over at Newsweek has a great article on the iPod's seemingly non-random random function. See I wasn't crazy when I wrote about the rock block, but I do recall a couple people wrote me explaining much of the same thing Levy heard. I took a few courses on statistics and understand how these things can happen, though they seemed to happen with such frequency that it seemed uncanny. Of course, like Ev, I remember when the Pyra music server seemed to play Cake incessantly, even though there were hundreds of other artists on the drive.

Random really is random, and it's human nature to make sense of it all, looking for patterns wherever you see them and doing your best to make order from the chaos. It's what humans do well and what I notice myself doing everyday.

My 2000+ song libary still constantly surprises me by playing artists twice in a row, multiple times in the same 20 minute car ride, but I've resigned to thinking the random really is just that, and I'm just getting lucky rolls of the dice, remember those instances and forgetting the rest of the randomness.

FAQ | Resolution confusion

FAQ | Resolution confusion 06/17/2004 03:19 AM
Philadelphia Inquirer Jun 17 2004 7:15AM GMT

Calendar Confusion

Calendar Confusion 03/06/2004 02:09 AM
All day I've been thinking it's March already. My watch (the $13 one that has outlasted all other watches combined) tells me it is "3-1" today. I believed it until a few minutes ago. I was catching up weblog reading and came across Brad Fitzpatrick's leap year entry. Then I realized that, while reliable, my cheap-ass watch doesn't have a clue what year it is. Doh! <homer>stupid watch!</homer> On the other hand, this completely rocks. I just got back an...

Confusion over Google IPO

Confusion over Google IPO 07/30/2004 06:51 AM
Sfgate.com - Fri Jul 30, 07:32 am GMT

Future confusion

Future confusion 01/23/2004 02:22 PM

Gender Confusion

Gender Confusion 04/22/2004 10:43 PM
I really wish spammers would get their story straight. Hey, I just wanted to share with you the experiences I've had in the past...

Spam Law Generates Confusion

Spam Law Generates Confusion 01/26/2004 07:09 AM
The federal act meant to reign in spam is creating confusion among e-mail marketers, who say it's unclear how to remain on the right side of the law. Chris Ulbrich reports from San Francisco.

Confusion over high-definition TV

Confusion over high-definition TV 03/22/2005 03:15 PM
According to the BBC, just because a TV set is being sold as HD does not mean that it actually is. The problem stems from these sets being sold as HD without the needed adapter to make this happen. While some people may know to ask about this, many more do not realize that is can be an issue….

Direct and Related Links for 'Confusion over high-definition TV'

Microsoft tries to clear confusion over
SP2

Microsoft tries to clear confusion over
SP2 08/19/2004 02:18 PM

Direct and Related Links for 'Microsoft tries to clear confusion over SP2'

“A week after releasing Windows XP Service Pack 2 to enterprises, Microsoft is trying to quell confusion over an apparent security flaw and applications that won’t work without adjustments. The software giant acknowledged Wednesday it’s investigating reports of a method attackers can use to bypass SP2’s Attachment Execution Service. The feature is designed to help protect users from executing files from unknown sources or untrusted locations….

Stepheon's Confusion on Salon

Stepheon's Confusion on Salon 04/21/2004 03:23 AM
My copy of Neal Stephenson's Confusion, the new, enormous sequel to Quicksilver, arrived in the mail yesterday before I left for Turin, and it's in my suitcase, waiting for me. Quicksilver was a remarkable book, a triumphant combination of Stephenson's trivia-obsessed, research-intensive approach to the precursors of the information age (viz. Snow Crash's Nam-Shub of Enki and Cryptonomicon's Bletchley Park sequences) and his gift for sprawling, braided stoorylines that combine slapstick action scenes with intense, emotional passages.

Salon's running a double feature on Stephenson today: a long interview with Neal, and a review by Andrew Leonard. Both are highly recommended -- I can't wait to sink my teeth into this book.

Science was new and they didn't know how to do it yet. Science was and is a somewhat contentious thing. Someone's got a theory and they promulgate that theory and then something else comes along and alters, improves on or even flatly contradicts it. Now that we've got 350 years of perspective on this, scientists understand that this is how it's done and there's a mechanism in place for how to do it. It's refereed journals and it's become institutionalized. They didn't have that perspective on it. They couldn't stand back and say, Well, my theory may get contradicted here and there, but this guy who's contradicting it will get contradicted in turn. They didn't have that expectation. They didn't have journals. The first two journals were the Journale de Savants, which was about 1665, and the Proceedings of the Royal Society, which was right about the same time. Leibniz had to found his own journal in order to publish his own work. They were kind of banging around in the dark trying to figure out how to do this.

Hooke, for example, when he figured out how arches work, published it as an anagram. He condensed the idea into this pithy statement: "The ideal form of an arch is the form of a chain hanging, flipped upside down." Then he scrambled the letters to make an anagram and published it. That way, he wasn't giving away the secret, but if somebody came along a few years later and claimed that they'd invented it, he could just unscramble what he'd published. He was establishing precedence.

Hooke squabbled with [Christiaan] Huygens over a bunch of clock-related inventions. This kind of thing was just rife. It came to a head in a grotesque way in the priority dispute over [who invented] the calculus. That was so embarrassing to the whole institution of science and people were so nauseated by it that it taught everyone a lesson. After that, no one would dream of doing what Newton did, which was to invent something really important and then sit on it for 30 years.

Confusion over MG Rover's future

Confusion over MG Rover's future 04/07/2005 05:58 PM
MG Rover denies comments by Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt that it has gone into administration.

Confusion reigns over Web services

Confusion reigns over Web services 06/22/2004 07:13 AM
ZDNet Jun 22 2004 11:45AM GMT

SAPPHIRE Responds to 128-bit Confusion

SAPPHIRE Responds to 128-bit Confusion 06/16/2004 05:57 PM

Confusion swirls around Google IPO

Confusion swirls around Google IPO 07/30/2004 08:30 AM
San Francisco Chronicle Jul 30 2004 12:40PM GMT

E-invoice rules cause confusion

E-invoice rules cause confusion 01/26/2004 05:17 PM
vnunet.com Jan 26 2004 9:37PM GMT

TidBITS Goes Med Confusion
(19-Jul-2004; 1.9K)

TidBITS Goes Med Confusion
(19-Jul-2004; 1.9K) 07/19/2004 08:28 PM

Clearing up the confusion over
outsourcing

Clearing up the confusion over
outsourcing 08/09/2004 12:54 PM
Forrester Research's John McCarthy ignited a firestorm when he issued a report on the number of U.S. jobs that would wind up overseas. Only one problem: The press botched the story.

Confusion around child work laws

Confusion around child work laws 02/10/2004 07:56 PM
No-one knows exactly how much teenagers can work, because local authorities don't know the law, new research says.

Wal*Mart Weekend Events Confusion

Wal*Mart Weekend Events Confusion 03/29/2005 11:51 AM
Perplexed by the various store lists describing Wal*Marts weekend plans? Read on as we unravel the complexities of this mystery. . .

Wired News: Clearing Up The Confusion

Wired News: Clearing Up The Confusion 04/16/2004 12:54 AM
Paul Boutin (Wired News) talks with Snow Crash science-fiction writer Neal Stephenson about his latest book, The Confusion

wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,63050,00.html
track this site | 5 links

Confusion and Chaos in the Search Space

Confusion and Chaos in the Search Space 04/09/2004 04:06 PM
POINT: I don't claim to fully understand the product, and the clients definately don't understand it, nor do they have the time and patience. They're still trying to get their heads around putting keywords in title tags. That's their level. COUNTERPOINT: Confusion makes our jobs easier. It also makes Search Engine Marketing an easier SELL! If it was too easy, then anyone could do it. Companies are looking for SEM partners to lead them through the mess. It is a great time for our Industry.

Neal Stephenson's The Confusion Released

Neal Stephenson's The Confusion Released 04/13/2004 12:49 PM

Confusion over tax on technical services
persists

Confusion over tax on technical services
persists 04/03/2005 11:46 PM
Business Standard India Apr 3 2005 11:54PM GMT

Kevin Spacey Sorry for Mugging Confusion
(AP)

Kevin Spacey Sorry for Mugging Confusion
(AP) 04/19/2004 09:42 AM
AP - Kevin Spacey apologized for confusion arising from his report to police that he'd been mugged. The Oscar-winning actor made, then retracted, the complaint after a weekend encounter in a London park that left him dazed and bleeding.

As Confusion Reigned, Cheney Took Charge

As Confusion Reigned, Cheney Took Charge 06/19/2004 02:45 AM

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50745-2004Jun17.html
track this site | 4 links

Seeds of Confusion Land in Court

Seeds of Confusion Land in Court 01/22/2004 02:37 AM
Beleaguered canola farmer Percy Schmeiser makes his last stand against Monsanto in Canada's Supreme Court, but it might be a while before a decision is reached. By Kristen Philipkoski.

Kevin Spacey sorry for mugging confusion

Kevin Spacey sorry for mugging confusion 04/19/2004 12:36 PM

Unscrambling Digital Music Confusion

Unscrambling Digital Music Confusion 07/27/2004 06:17 PM

Direct and Related Links for 'Unscrambling Digital Music Confusion'

“Due to an ever-growing array of digital rights management (DRM) strategies, incompatible file formats, and disparate portable music devices, the digital music scene has gotten complicated. Nevertheless, digital music is selling briskly online, and innovative new strategies for distributing music and sidestepping proprietary formats are appearing.”…

Microsoft clears up confusion regarding
illegal PIDs in XP SP2

Microsoft clears up confusion regarding
illegal PIDs in XP SP2 08/07/2004 10:23 AM

continuing congressional confusion on
copyrights (ie, not just (c), or (cc),
or even (ccc) but (cccc))

continuing congressional confusion on
copyrights (ie, not just (c), or (cc),
or even (ccc) but (cccc)) 07/07/2004 02:51 PM
Word has it that the regulators in Washington are enamored of Professor (in the School of Computing) Hollaar's recent paper, So ny Revisited, and that it is in part responsible for Congress' current infatuation with the Induce Act. Professor Hollaar is a smart guy, and his paper is an interesting and well-researched examination of secondary liability in the context of copyright law. But if Congress thinks this justifies the Induce Act, then there is some deep confusion somewhere. I suspect there are two possible sources for this confusion. (1) Hollaar discusses the scope of "inducement" liability in the context of patent law. There are some in Congress who seem to think that the Induce Act "merely" carries the same idea to copyright law. This is just a mistake. The scope of the Induce Act as written is far broader than the scope of inducing patent infringement as interpreted. And if "all" Congress wants to do is extend patent inducement to copyright law, then it should amendment the Induce Act to state precisely that. That would be a vast improvement over the existing proposal -- not enough to justify it in my mind, but it would make the harm it will cause much much less significant. (2) Hollaar discusses the purpose and meaning of the Sony case. While his discussion is technically correct enough (though the idea that copyright is the right to protect a "business model" is really not right at all), imho, the Professor, and in turn, the supporters of the Induce Act, are really missing the point of Sony. As everybody knows, Sony set the rule that when a new technology has the "potential" to support "substantial noninfringing use" of copyrighted material, the maker of the technology would not face secondary liability for copyright infringement. But what no one (in Washington, at least) seems to understand is why Sony set that standard. It was not because the Supreme Court is filled with copyright infringers who wanted to encourage copyright infringement. It was instead because the Supreme Court was filled with judges not eager to engage in the complex balancing required to judge whether a technology creates more benefit than harm. As the Court stated:

Sound policy, as well as history, supports our consistent deference to Congress when major technological innovations alter the market for copyrighted materials. Congress has the constitutional authority and the institutional ability to accommodate fully the varied permutations of competing interests that are inevitably implicated by such new technology.

This is not an opinion about copyright law alone. It is an opinion about separation of powers -- about which branch is best able to do the necessary balancing that copyright law demands, "within the limits of the constitutional grant." Sony says, in effect, when a technology is not simply a technology for violating the law, then it is left to Congress to decide whether and how that technology is to be regulated. Congress, not the courts. Why is that a great idea? Because (isn't this obvious to Republicans?) courts are awful, expensive, and slow institutions for judging the economic effect of new technology. Soviet planners with better lighting. And rather than bury innovators in years of litigation before their innovation gets to market, the Sony rule says: let the innovation go, if there is a potential for a substantial noninfringing use, and if Congress wants to regulate it more, then let Congress weigh the benefits of the technology against its costs. Ignoring this extremely sensible separation of powers principle has already cost Silicon Valley dearly. See, e.g., ReplayTV. ReplayTV is the digital equivalent of the VCR. It does the job more efficiently, and it promised to do some things the VCR couldn't do, too. But under the principle of Sony (innovate first, regulate later), it should plainly have been allowed into the market without intervention by the courts. Yet precisely the opposite happened. Content owners sued ReplayTV. It was dragged into federal litigation for many many months defending its new technology. And before the case could be resolved, the company effectively declared bankruptcy. Is this the future Senators Hatch and Leahy want for all new technologies that impact copyrighted material? Will every Apple be forced to defend its innovation in a federal court? Will federal judges become the arbiters of good technology? Will technology firms be forced to spend more on lawyers than on R&D? Whatever the lobbyists say about this bill, this is the single most important fact that we should not forget: It is a lawyer employment act. It will force technologists into court before they get to enter the market place. It will shift responsibility for striking the balance in copyright law from Congress to unelected federal judges. That's not a bad thing for me, or my kind. I, after all, think the courts have some role here (in setting the limits of copyright), and I, after all, make lawyers for a living. But for an already overregulated Silicon Valley, it is another nail in the coffin by the regulating-obsessed in Washington.

Yahoo Paid Submittals and Inktomi
Confusion

Yahoo Paid Submittals and Inktomi
Confusion 03/06/2004 02:04 AM
Since it began displaying results from its own search engine in place of Google results, Yahoo controls over 41% of search engine traffic either directly or ...
Grok Description matches for Wireless Confusion
GrokA matches for Wireless Confusion

Wireless Confusion

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: