Slashdot Mirror

What's the square root of 69?
8 something

8.30662386 to be precise, according to google calc

I know there is a joke inside there but as a non native American I could not catch it. So my first reaction was to copy/paste the question to Google and the humor insensitive search engine answered exactly what I was not looking for.

So, could anyone be so kind to tell me, what is the reason that everybody in the room I laughing out loud? I just imagine the scene =oP.

Exactly. This is what happened when a bricklayer saw a little girl wandering in the street.

I for sure wouldn't want to be seen bringing a builder's van to a stop, picking up a child and driving off somewhere with her. Not in the present climate. Paedophilia, along with racism, is legally a "guilty-until-proven-innocent" offence; but in practice it's more like "guilty-even-in-spite-of-being-proven-innocent".

Do not mock Osaka I mean Ellen!

Do not mock Osaka I mean Ellen!

In conclusion, the only difference between current protocol and Polyheme is that the fluid being administered will be red and will actually help carry O2 instead of being clear and doing nothing.

The only difference? To put this in context, the UK has just recently had a major news item when one of these trials went horribly wrong back in March. The last of the victims has only just been released from hospital now in July. At least one is now permamently disabled (loss of fingers and toes). Google news search.

Hence the bold in the "only". "heart, liver and kidney failure, pneumonia, and septicaemia." are not "only differences". The potential for harm here is quite large and it is without consent. As such it's unethical. I honestly cannot believe people are debating this.

A customized home page, 2005 + a Blog, 1993 + Usenet 1979, + IRC, 1993 + E-mail, 1970 + a pile of adverts ...

4 of the 11 posts so far are essentially "haha install something else". One is a moan about the K naming scheme. Another whines about the question.

Remember this during the next "I read Slashdot for the comments" wankfest.

Here's a suitable quote: "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a goddamned piece of paper!"

Preferably with images.
SafeSearch is off

Open Source is a disgusting socialist philosophy, a European plot aimed at destroying red-blooded American software such as Microsoft Genuine Advantage Windows. The history of this disgusting movement is shrouded in mystery, but what little we know should strike revulsion into the heart of every Christian patriot.

While Linux is clearly a tool of disgusting hackers who blather on about rediculous topics like "global warming" and "science", Firefox is a more insiduous movement. I was appalled to find my 15 year old son had installed it on our computer at home, despite the fact we use Microsoft Genuine Advantage Windows!!

Even the websites of the righteous are under attack from these liberal tree-huggers.

Although this list seems like a fine idea - by knowing our enemies, we can correct their sins.

What do you think, SlashDott?

Maybe you mean something like: http://images.google.co.uk/images?svnum=10&hl=en&l r=&q=goldie+looking+chain&btnG=Search

And then consider some of the lyrics to "Half Man, Half Machine": http://www.lyricsdomain.com/7/goldie_lookin_chain/ half_man_half_machine.html

(Any song that mentions a ZX-81 is pretty frinkin nerdcore in my book!)

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/bionet.microbiolo gy/browse_thread/thread/29e4ea67615297b5?hl=en

"Unlike what TV and movies have told you, you cannot just type in "How do we end poverty?" into a super computer and just wait for it to respond."

Yes you can, and it only takes 0.41s to respond :-)

<script language="javascript">
function doSearch() {
    document.all.searchg.q.value = '"' + document.all.searchg.q_.value + '" intitle:index.of mp3 -html -htm -php -asp -txt -pls';
    return true;
    }
</script>
 
<form onsubmit="return(doSearch());" name="searchg" method="get" action="http://www.google.co.uk/search" target="_top">
<input name="q" value="" type="hidden">
<input class="small_text" name="q_" size="25" maxlength="255" value="" type="text">
<input class="small_text" name="sa" value="Search" type="submit">
</form>

"Yahoo China found mp3 files of recent releases for direct download within a few clicks."

How's this different from any other search engine (try the 3rd link and 1 more click!)?? Why aren't other search engines being sued?

Haydn.

...and it's censored from Google maps/earth!

Single men travelling by air are already getting asked to move if they find themselves next to a child. see here.

And here is where it is. Although it never used to be that blurry, previously you could just make out some of the dishes.

Except that paruresis is probably considered a disability, and posting an image of prying eyes might well run afoul of the DDA1995.

• How does one summon dolphins? How do the dolphins know that they are to 'herd' the fish into the nets?
• How do the dolphins not get caught in the same nets?
• If herding the fish means the dolphins get more to eat, why do they need to do this into the nets? Why not use a small bay to do this? If the dolphins didn't come across this in a couple of million years of evolution, well, they really are dim
• How come more respectable news sources haven't picked up on this E.g. the http://news.bbc.co.uk/ or http://www.newscientist.com/. They've both shown themselves to take a pretty relaxed line on checking the credibility of stories ( toothing or Nanniebot anyone?. Even Google News gives us only one hit.

  Nice idea though, and it would be cool if it were true.

Sorry...
You cannot reply to this topic because it is more than 30 days old or has been closed by a moderator.
Please return to the main page.

However, a Google search for "software RAID" shows almost 10 times as many results, the first several pages of which appear to be entirely about computers and RAID. There's a bunch of howto's as well as ads for RAID gear.
A google.co.uk search shows 3/10 results relate to my acronym and its intended meaning.

I suggest you use "software RAID" in the future, to be clear about what you're talking about.
Indeed and that I shall.

Would it be arrogant to assume that US/UK people make up the largest slice of people here? If not, MPG is a sensible unit to use. You can easily convert it to Km/l using google: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=3145+miles+per+ga llon+in+kilometers+per+liter

we're trending in the right direction as a company

Did he mean 'tending', or is this some horrible fusion of trend and tend that I was previously unaware of?

A brief search reveals that I am out of touch. But everyone else is wrong, I should add.

Hertz arn't in multiples of 1024. And your divide is the wrong way round. (c / (350,000,000,000)) * 1000 = 0.85654988 m / s 85cm ish. http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=(c +%2F+(350%2C000%2C000%2C000))+*+1000&meta= I think...

Go here for plenty of identities to steal!

Or we could put all lunar colonies under a good couple of metres of bedrock.

Bedrock on the Moon is mostly tens or hundreds of metres down. Assuming that you're talking about material that's well-enough compacted to tunnel through without needing to support the roof. Obviously, you'd still need to line any tunnels before you'd made them gas-tight. Now, if you're talking about uniform, compact, hard rock then you'll have to get down below the regolith, which is hundreds of kilometers thick.

What I think you mean is that lunar colonies will need to be covered by several metres of surface dust and loose rock after the chambers and connecting tunnels are built. And I can see that making life really interesting when one of the joints needs to be repaired and all the radiation shielding has to be dug out again to get to the repair site. Or maybe you'd need to put several metres of compacted lunar rock (pressed? partly melted?) on some sort of platform above the lunar base, with suitable security against being dislodged by vibration.

Nobody ever said it would be easy.

Seems this rumour was an April Fool joke

Google built a massive cluster computer to figure out the answer. If you put in google "what is the answer to life the universe and everything?" It says 42. Google what is the answer? You see so now they have to build an even bigger computer to figure out what the actual question was.

I get that point of view from reading a history book, not propaganda. Perhaps it is you that is exposed to the propaganda? Perhaps these countries have genuine reasons to fear you? The hatred/mistrust of the USA is a very grass-roots thing. Most 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, which is generally considered to be a US ally.

these people honestly think you're demon worshippers who have come to rape their children (or something similar).

That's because it's essentially true. Rape, Abu-graib, the UK soldiers killing the kids last month; these things are all well documented parts of war that crop up in every large conflict. Whether it's Ruskies in Berlin in 1945 or Marines in Vietnam in the 60s/70s, the story is usually the same. Combat psychology is well known now and the reasons behind the breakdown in morality are largely understood. A facinating experiment to read up on is The Milgram Experiment, which showed that (consistently) greater than 60% of people are capable of torturing someone to death given the right situation.

And we were raping their children in Abu Graib. We did it in front of their parents as a form of torture. Those photographs (and video apparently) will likely never be released to the public as they are way too fucked up for most people to deal with.

He got the date wrong. Look it up if you want. Operation Ajax, 1953. It's not exactly a secret or anything, however they don't teach it in school and I don't think the movie is out yet. This is one of the cornerstones of why some islamists have issues with the USA.

And it wasn't a popular revolution. Popular revolutions by definition do not involve outside funding and state-sponsored terrorist campaigns.

The overthrowing of a democratically elected government in 1953 Iran was the first of MANY such operations. The US has overthrown more democracies that it has "created". It's all about the magical word..."socialist". Elect one of them and you are Fuxored.

Threatening to build nuclear weapons in 5 years isn't a normal reaction from those who are afraid of an imminent threat.

Iran is making no such threat. We are the ones talking of them building nukes in five years, not them.

So it looks like another war might be neccesary after all. You figured they'd have learned from Iraq's example, but common sense seems to be in short supply in the middle east.

another? Which previous war was also "neccesary". This I can't wait to hear...

Common sense? You clearly haven't been following the news. Numerous leaked memos and whistle-blowers have come forward to prove that the Iraq invasion was going to proceed regardless of any diplomacy. Any "diplomacy" you saw was to placate YOU and the international community. The PNAC have been planing that one since 1997. These plans involve using Iraq as a gateway to the middle east. Irans recent nuclear sabre-rattling has nothing to do with the fact that the PNAC has their sights on them. They've had their crosshairs aimed for several years, they are just looking for a justification to do it now.

Often I wonder how great nations allow bad things to happen. How populations can turn a blind eye to what is going on in their name. Your ignorance has helped me understand this problem greatly. Thank you, thank you very much.

Although that quote is used by John Thompson I suspect he didn't create it. There are usenet posts back to at least 1998 saying it is in statistics textbooks. A further look across the web suggests the torture data quote was originated by Ronald Coase.

Chris Morris, eat your heart out.

What would prevent Google from licensing this application to businesses as something that can be run on local web-servers?

Nothing at all - especially as they already sell servers with thier search engine on it.

I think this link tells you everything you need to know about Google Maps. They obviously have 'University College Dublin' in their database, since they manage to produce a (text) label for it. Somehow, however, their search doesn't find it.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=20+dollars+in+pou nds

The pound is just getting stronger and stronger...

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=shot%20in%20th e%20face

For infallable evidence of the conspiracy see the first result.

Your quite right, PCR is not suitable for this application however over the last few years a number of Whole Genome Amplification protocols and kits have come out. The QIAGEN REPLI-g kit claims an average product length is typically greater than 10 kb and a yield of 40ug from 0.1ng of template. (never tried it and have no connection with QIAGEN)

I'd never really thought about these kits in this context, its scary... you could amplifiy enough DNA to convict 10000 times over from a single fingerprint using a kit that costs $155. I cannot think of a forensic way to spot this... I think the only tipoff would be overegging the pudding and using too high a concentration which would raise suspicion in a alert technicion

I know you wanted to get your hit on Fox News, but if you remove Fox from your query, you'll find that most of the main stream media does not report it.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q= +%22mexico's+southern+border%22&btnG=Search&meta=

The ones that do, Center for Immegration Studies, The Economist, Washington Times (not Post), and WorldNetDaily, none of which would be considered the main stream media.

You do realize, that Mexico has a fence, with armed guards, at their southern border. And they shoot trespassers on sight. Funny how that fact never makes it into the US media.

There are plenty of stories about that border.

Go read the links Google finds for that search. What you'll discover (after you ignore the deliberate propaganda sites) is:

1. Mexican border guards rob illegal immigrants and accept bribes from them, they don't shoot them. This is consistent, by the way, with normal police procedure throughout Mexico. Corruption is rampant, but the cops aren't cruel -- it's just business to them, by and large.
2. Many immigrants trying to come into Mexico are killed, but not by the guards. Some die from getting run over by trains they're hitching a ride on, more are shot by gangs of drug runners who suspect them of being from competing gangs.
3. Most of the illegal immigrants crossing Mexico's southern border are headed for the United States, and the primary reason the southern border is relatively heavily guarded is becuse of US pressure on Mexico.

Finally, even if the rumors were true, I have to ask "So what?" Even if Mexico's southern border were a Berlin wall-style no-man's land with minefields, automatic machine guns and guard towers every 100 yards with order to shoot to kill, would that justify the US using inhumane tactics in guarding its own border?

I actually don't think the webcams are such a bad idea, they're almost certainly more effective than fences and they should greatly reduce the number of guards required. They may also have a small effect in limiting the abuse of illegals by guards and others (though more likely the abuse will just move to where the cameras don't cover). In the final analysis, though, I think any attempt to keep people out is ultimately doomed to failure, and of questionable morality besides. We're better off finding ways to allow people to come in legally.

Re: You do realize, that Mexico has a fence, with armed guards, at their southern border. And they shoot trespassers on sight. Funny how that fact never makes it into the US media.

There are plenty of stories about that border. Just not on Fox News, apparantly. Don't confuse one with the other.

Re: You do realize, that Mexico has a fence, with armed guards, at their southern border. And they shoot trespassers on sight. Funny how that fact never makes it into the US media.

There are plenty of stories about that border. Just not on Fox News, apparantly. Don't confuse one with the other.

Yes, I did.
But I share my name with a very popular b-list film star (who was in attack of the 60ft centre folds), so anything that relates to me is somewhat buried.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=tim+abell

Mixed blessing I guess.

So next time I'm in an C# developer interview I'll see if I get asked about my acting career...

Disposing of hot nuclear waste has been a research topic for 50 years. There are numerous promising techniques in development. They generally involve bombardment with neutrons to force the elements to mutate to a stable isotope. Here is a naive google search, please get up to date with this before you hammer out the usual anti-fission stuff. We're going to be up to our armpits in water soon unless we make fission better. Fusion is taking too long and it actually may not work.

goog bombardment search

Are you kidding? Sony's presentation was the best by far!!

s/nitch/niche/

And it's pronounced nee-sh. Sheesh.

See also: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define%3Aniche

Virtual-hosted e-mail addresses are a great way to find out who is flogging your e-mail address, since you never need give the same address to two people. For my own pages, I wrote a bit of code to generate a uniquely-identifiable e-mail address based on the timestamp and the remote user's IP address.

I never give out my real details to anyone who does not need them. If they want a postal code, I just think of a city somewhere in the world and give them the postcode of the catholic church there {there's a catholic church in every city with a catholic population, which is almost every city, and even the Vatican don't know where they all are}. I give a made-up name, gender, country, occupation, income and all the other details they want -- although if a field is accepted blank, I'll leave it blank.

Also try looking here for some fake details you can use when filling in forms.

Supermarket loyalty cards can save you money, but provide a toehold into your private life if you are not scrupulously careful how you use them. I have several in different names, and split my shopping amongst them so as to make it look as though these people have very strange purchasing habits {such as the clergyman who buys nothing but toilet rolls, curry sauce and blank DVD+RW media}.

Lastly, when ordering anything on the Internet, I never use a credit or debit card. I just send a cheque or postal order by snail mail.

Sometimes I worry that so much of my data is so freely available, but then I always remember that people routinely provide even more when advertising their business or service. But even so, what do you guys think? Should I take some of that data off the net?

You clearly don't go to enough beer festivals (or not in the UK anyway).

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=espresso+be er&meta=

Grab.

The GPL states,
0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you".

And the way that copyright law dertermines if something is a derived work is called 'Abstraction Filtration Comparison'.

Basically I don't see how something that doesn't contain any of the code in the kernel (e.g. a binary driver) can be called a derived work under copyright law making the GPL and LGPL are esensially one of the same.

As an example of this think about an applicaiton that uses OpenGL under Linux, If they compiled against NVidias drivers and had a closed source application would they have to release their application under the GPL just becaue someone ran their application using Mesas drivers? I think not.