I have never seen a Blu-Ray disk, and I am not too sure anyone I know has. You must live in the USA (not a device for connecting hardware).
The correct capitalization is Blu-ray. Also, are we going to argue the difference between disk and disc? Most (US) dictionaries list them as being the same. A disk can be defined as any thin, flat, circular plate or object or (when talking computers) any of several types of media consisting of thin, round plates of plastic or metal, used for external storage (magnetic disk, floppy disk, optical disk) (taken from dictionary.com). Admittedly, the BDA does use disc to refer to the media.
In general usage, disk and disc are synonymous (with k being preferred in US English, c in British).
Standard practice in computing, though, is for optical discs - Blu-ray, all the way back to Laserdisc - to use a c, while magnetic disks are k. It's to do with hard disks being pioneered in the US and optical discs being pioneered in Europe.
not only are there no people on this site able to "understand the topic", but neither are the folks on any other site. In my opinion, physicists are trying to count to zero, in the most intelligent way possible.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and trust that you are actually aware that the doodad you used to post this comment does not work by magic, even though you seem to be implying that physics is pointless.
“The neutrons behave as if particle and magnetic property are spatially separated while travelling through the interferometer,”
Is it just me, or does anyone else find that completely freaky? Ok, I kinda get how quantum effects don't really occur in a "location", but at a superimposed potential of different locations....but having different properties measured at different locations just freaks me out...
I didn't find it freaky, but I did respond oddly; I burst into a delighted giggle. I'm still grinning like an idiot, and not because of the Cheshire Cat reference.
This news makes me very happy.
Improved security models like SE Linux or now capsicum are intellectually interesting, but do they solve a real problem?
After all there are really few working exploits in the wild against up to date Linux systems, and a non up- to date system will be hacked anyway, with or without fancy security models.
Isn't the whole point of dropping privileges (whether using something fancy like Capsicum, or simply switching to a non-root user after initialisation) to mitigate what happens after a process gets successfully attacked?
Whether a zero-day vuln or an old vuln that hasn't been patched, if the attacker can't do anything important once they get in, doesn't that help?
That's not what the study says. It says that the bacteria in these strains that are born resistant to triclosan are also resistant to certain antibiotics. This "sub-lethal" dose, as you described it, killed 999,999 out of 1,000,000 bacteria in those strains. It just so happened that the specific amino acid expression that allowed those mutants to survive not only made them able to survive the triclosan exposure, but also exposure to certain, named clinical antibiotics. What you're describing was just an implication of the study.
So by killing all the ones that are susceptible to triclosan, you leave a breeding pool of only those few individuals that happen to be antibiotic-resistant as well. How is that "just an implication of the study" and not "the exact outcome you really want to avoid" (a.k.a. "becom[ing] resistant to [some antibiotic] by being exposed [to] Triclosan")?
-the Orwellian 'department of statistics' has (and uses) the legal power to forcibly 'interview' any citizen, asking them the most intrusive and sickening questions about their sex lives and other personal issues.
Sorry, but what are you even talking about?
I can't find anything online called the Department of Statistics (except for in various universities, of course). Do you mean the Australian Bureau of Statistics?
They're the ones who send out a census form to be filled in and mailed back. I have never heard any suggestion that they send representatives to question people directly, let alone "physical inspection" or wielding the threat of jail time.
Do you have a source for this?
Am I just feeding a troll, here?
No, give the guy a break... English is not his first language. You can tell from the "what your compiler is doing in your back", instead of "behind your back", that sort of thing. From timezone, European seems most likely... from the sentence structure... French?
Indeed, godrik's English is quite fluent. It's just those few subtle points that give away that they're probably not a native speaker.
And well picked, AC: godrik has mentioned living in France in the past, so may very well be a French speaker.
Of course, we could just ask... but where's the fun in that?
I thought that was something people used back when MS-DOS was a popular OS was not even aware the product still existed.
I am talking about Watcom C++ of course.
It was open sourced some time ago. Now it supports Linux (to some extent) and some other CPU architectures.
It can still make DOS/4GW exes, though. Ahh, nostalgia.
You do realize that "eyewitness accounts" are considered one of the least reliable forms of evidence, right?
I know they are one of the least reliable forms of evidence, but if you're going to talk about how they are considered then you need to specify who is doing the considering. I don't know about the courts of any particular country, but laypeople often seem to consider eyewitness accounts as infallible.
allowed to dereference it without first checking it for NULL?
dereferencing a NULL pointer is always undefined behavior
Dereferencing without checking for NULL is not the same as dereferencing NULL.
Just because the compiler may not be able to prove that you never call that function with a NULL pointer, that does not mean you can't prove it yourself. If that is the case, why check again?
No, polygraphs are not 85-95% reliable. More like 50%. So save some time and money and just flip a coin.
What's next, phrenology? Polygraphs are scientifically invalid. If you are asked to take one just laugh in their face, and say you would prefer using a seance to have your long-dead grandfather testify.
Did you actually read GP's post?
Polygraphs are at best 85-95% reliable, according to supporters, and the real reliability is probably substantially lower
Your point is entirely correct, but you're not contradicting them, you're agreeing.
There are more comments bitching about the link than comments about the actual nebula. Even the nerds are disinterested in space these days...
No, it's just that the nerds who are interested in space already knew that this happens, so the only new thing here is the presentation.
I was a bit disappointed because I was expecting a time-lapse video.
I still think the video's worth watching, but switching between two images is hardly a revolutionary technique in astronomy.
Baffled by this, I profiled the code, and the entire slowdown was template calls at the lowest level that triggered a lookup table that was abysmally slow (templates were REALLY bad in the compiler I was using, which I think was Borland).
Use of templates had a performance effect at runtime? That is an amazingly bad implementation.
With all those billions of dollars and thousands of smart people why couldn't Microsoft have actually helped us with something like this:
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/29001/
Slashdot Mirror
I have never seen a Blu-Ray disk, and I am not too sure anyone I know has. You must live in the USA (not a device for connecting hardware).
The correct capitalization is Blu-ray. Also, are we going to argue the difference between disk and disc? Most (US) dictionaries list them as being the same. A disk can be defined as any thin, flat, circular plate or object or (when talking computers) any of several types of media consisting of thin, round plates of plastic or metal, used for external storage (magnetic disk, floppy disk, optical disk) (taken from dictionary.com). Admittedly, the BDA does use disc to refer to the media.
In general usage, disk and disc are synonymous (with k being preferred in US English, c in British).
Standard practice in computing, though, is for optical discs - Blu-ray, all the way back to Laserdisc - to use a c, while magnetic disks are k. It's to do with hard disks being pioneered in the US and optical discs being pioneered in Europe.
not only are there no people on this site able to "understand the topic", but neither are the folks on any other site. In my opinion, physicists are trying to count to zero, in the most intelligent way possible.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and trust that you are actually aware that the doodad you used to post this comment does not work by magic, even though you seem to be implying that physics is pointless.
Is it just me, or does anyone else find that completely freaky? Ok, I kinda get how quantum effects don't really occur in a "location", but at a superimposed potential of different locations....but having different properties measured at different locations just freaks me out...
I didn't find it freaky, but I did respond oddly; I burst into a delighted giggle. I'm still grinning like an idiot, and not because of the Cheshire Cat reference.
This news makes me very happy.
Improved security models like SE Linux or now capsicum are intellectually interesting, but do they solve a real problem?
After all there are really few working exploits in the wild against up to date Linux systems, and a non up- to date system will be hacked anyway, with or without fancy security models.
Isn't the whole point of dropping privileges (whether using something fancy like Capsicum, or simply switching to a non-root user after initialisation) to mitigate what happens after a process gets successfully attacked?
Whether a zero-day vuln or an old vuln that hasn't been patched, if the attacker can't do anything important once they get in, doesn't that help?
from my warm, well-sanitized hands.
You're happy for someone to take it away from you while you're still alive? Meaning, you won't put up a fight? Okay, no problem then.
That's not what the study says. It says that the bacteria in these strains that are born resistant to triclosan are also resistant to certain antibiotics. This "sub-lethal" dose, as you described it, killed 999,999 out of 1,000,000 bacteria in those strains. It just so happened that the specific amino acid expression that allowed those mutants to survive not only made them able to survive the triclosan exposure, but also exposure to certain, named clinical antibiotics. What you're describing was just an implication of the study.
So by killing all the ones that are susceptible to triclosan, you leave a breeding pool of only those few individuals that happen to be antibiotic-resistant as well. How is that "just an implication of the study" and not "the exact outcome you really want to avoid" (a.k.a. "becom[ing] resistant to [some antibiotic] by being exposed [to] Triclosan")?
-the Orwellian 'department of statistics' has (and uses) the legal power to forcibly 'interview' any citizen, asking them the most intrusive and sickening questions about their sex lives and other personal issues.
Sorry, but what are you even talking about?
I can't find anything online called the Department of Statistics (except for in various universities, of course). Do you mean the Australian Bureau of Statistics?
They're the ones who send out a census form to be filled in and mailed back. I have never heard any suggestion that they send representatives to question people directly, let alone "physical inspection" or wielding the threat of jail time.
Do you have a source for this?
Am I just feeding a troll, here?
And also angry at the Departments in the Australian Public service that has been caught spying.
And also angry at the Departments in the Australian Public service that are spying but have not been caught.
I am a scholar and study parallel computing.
aka I'm a second year computer science student.
No, give the guy a break... English is not his first language. You can tell from the "what your compiler is doing in your back", instead of "behind your back", that sort of thing. From timezone, European seems most likely... from the sentence structure... French?
Indeed, godrik's English is quite fluent. It's just those few subtle points that give away that they're probably not a native speaker.
And well picked, AC: godrik has mentioned living in France in the past, so may very well be a French speaker.
Of course, we could just ask... but where's the fun in that?
You are an idiot.
NO U
No, _I_ am Idiotus!
I thought that was something people used back when MS-DOS was a popular OS was not even aware the product still existed.
I am talking about Watcom C++ of course.
It was open sourced some time ago. Now it supports Linux (to some extent) and some other CPU architectures.
It can still make DOS/4GW exes, though. Ahh, nostalgia.
You do realize that "eyewitness accounts" are considered one of the least reliable forms of evidence, right?
I know they are one of the least reliable forms of evidence, but if you're going to talk about how they are considered then you need to specify who is doing the considering. I don't know about the courts of any particular country, but laypeople often seem to consider eyewitness accounts as infallible.
Myers-Briggs test, and it's 'N' for intuitive. :)
Yep, the I is for introverted.
allowed to dereference it without first checking it for NULL?
dereferencing a NULL pointer is always undefined behavior
Dereferencing without checking for NULL is not the same as dereferencing NULL.
Just because the compiler may not be able to prove that you never call that function with a NULL pointer, that does not mean you can't prove it yourself. If that is the case, why check again?
"crows" = "crowd". Good grief... :/
Crows are also very detail oriented. I get them to help me with my tax returns.
Thanks, Guppy. That is a fascinating story. The world's quite an interesting place, if you only take the time to look.
Android.
Yeah, I remember that time that Valve embraced, extended and extinguished Android.
Oh wait...
Being a ward of the Bureau of Prisons is not the same as working for the fed.
Yeah, that's more like being a contractor than an employee.
Rubbish. There are a million things the user is may do to their machine that will be more likely to break software than this update to 8.1.
That's beside the point. The whole customer base won't be doing any of those things all at the same time.
No, polygraphs are not 85-95% reliable. More like 50%. So save some time and money and just flip a coin.
What's next, phrenology? Polygraphs are scientifically invalid. If you are asked to take one just laugh in their face, and say you would prefer using a seance to have your long-dead grandfather testify.
Did you actually read GP's post?
Polygraphs are at best 85-95% reliable, according to supporters, and the real reliability is probably substantially lower
Your point is entirely correct, but you're not contradicting them, you're agreeing.
There are more comments bitching about the link than comments about the actual nebula. Even the nerds are disinterested in space these days...
No, it's just that the nerds who are interested in space already knew that this happens, so the only new thing here is the presentation.
I was a bit disappointed because I was expecting a time-lapse video.
I still think the video's worth watching, but switching between two images is hardly a revolutionary technique in astronomy.
I second robot_love. Let's do it.
I also support robot love! Equal rights for all beings!
Oh wait... that's a previous poster's name? My bad.
Baffled by this, I profiled the code, and the entire slowdown was template calls at the lowest level that triggered a lookup table that was abysmally slow (templates were REALLY bad in the compiler I was using, which I think was Borland).
Use of templates had a performance effect at runtime? That is an amazingly bad implementation.
With all those billions of dollars and thousands of smart people why couldn't Microsoft have actually helped us with something like this: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/29001/
Or this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/156693
Instead they come up with Metro...
At least they're trying to help fix this one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1
fuzzyfuzzyfungus was talking about another possible option that Opera didn't choose, and why not. You don't need to tell them that it didn't happen.