OP was right. I don't know where you came from with all the other stuff, but it didn't originate in OP's post.
The whole purpose of flooding the market would obviously be to make it a cheaper skill. You can package that up any way you want it, but the end result is the same.
Consider the Zuck. He's duplicitous and shrewd as hell. He supports relaxed immigration laws because it will provide a cheaper work force.
Right, so let's get right to wasting kids' time and confusing the hell out of them with this ADHD style bullshit. I call shenanigans. This is all about having a younger audience for marketing, not at all about educating the new generation at an earlier or faster rate.
This approach to having a generation of coders on the way seems like throwing the teapot in the ocean to fill it. And throwing a torch in after it to make tea. And saying you're being efficient because you picked a rainy day.
These kids are going to be watching these presentations, going "huh?"
Kindergarten is, remember, that "grade" before 1st grade. It's not even an education-oriented grade. The point of kindergarten is to establish social awareness and really basic, proper conduct. Kids are given rudimentary handwriting, the most simple math you can imagine ("2+1 = which is it, kids, 3 or 4?"), how to recognize shapes and colors, and really basic spelling and syntax. "C A T that's a cat." Etc.
The other function of Kindergarten is to observe whether a child has any behavioural, emotional, psychological, physical, social, or learning troubles. Maybe the child has a disability. If so, this needs to be found out early before attempts at education really begin in earnest.
NOWHERE in any of that do you find any foothold for something like symbolic instruction. The idea of doing a Ruby lecture in front of kindergarten students brings to mind -- for me, personally -- one specific thing: that pairs of highly intelligent parents are at a higher risk for conceiving a child with autism. Why is that? Because of a dominant trait?
I mean, how fucked up in the head do you have to be to try and teach your kindergartner computer programming? Aren't you more concerned about social awareness and making sure they know it's okay to use a public restroom? I think any parent who is nodding sagely at the concept of having Mark "Does He Still Kill His Own Food Or Was That Bullshit" Zuckerberg has some real generalized problems with the sage center of their brain.
"The Accompanying Angry Birds Tutorial"? Really, folks? Your kindergartner is really prepared for velocity vectors and derivatives? I think you miiiiiiiiiight just have your head up your ass on that one. I doubt most parents putting their children through these lectures have any idea what it's about except "programming".
It's like a primate, knee-jerk reaction. "Oog. Oog. Program. Programming. Oog. Programming. Good. Oog. Good for. Oog. Good for Baby Too."
If these are particularly small wings, I suppose that all of these nano spikes might provide some kind of static energy lift similar to what was recently discovered in spiders.
As it turns out, it was largely what I suspected. The diamond, known as The Peacock's Eye, is written as once being in the possession of Alexander the Great. Jones had an interest in the diamond from a purely treasure-seeking motivation. It wasn't until he gave up his original search for the treasure that he began attending University to become an archaeologist.
Then he finds an ad offering the diamond as payment for another archeological treasure: the ashes of the first emperor of Manchu China. This could be religiously significant, considering Chinese ancestor-worship.
Perhaps it was all about the possibility of getting this treasure he'd been after for some time. Maybe it didn't really hold any other significance for him.
Anyways. You make an interesting point, [grandparent post]. Every other treasure that Jones sought after was religious or magickal in significance.
I doubt there was much religious significance or magical power behind Nirhachi's ashes. Jones only found possession of the ashes to negotiate with Lao Che for the diamond. So was there some religious or magical significance of that diamond? It looks more like just some diamond, but, you never know. It did disappear from the movie pretty fast. Ha-ha!
At any rate, Temple of Doom is supposed to be a prequel. Maybe the experiences in that film made him believe more in the metaphysical? I don't know the canon too well so I'll just stop there. Nobody likes speculative backstory that doesn't fit canon. And thanks to Young Indiana Jones, there's plenty of canon.
Many of these features will be Windows-centric, so bear with me.
1) Update crawl -- if the app's "update" client which typically loads at boot-up makes my system run noticeable slower (and I can see small differences such as thousandths per seconds even when blinking my eyes, so Watch Out You) then I am already swearing at my computer and about ready to see how much of its mass I can cause to separate with the Newtons carried by my fist. Don't you dare let that "update" background thing actually impact my computer's performance, or I'll disable it.
2) Vulnerability -- And then when your app turns out to carry a vulnerability or other headache requiring weekly or monthly downloads of your newer "Fixed" version, my first instinct is to wish that you, your server, and your entire company will be consumed in some kind of natural disaster or distributed attack. You strike me as the stupidest people in the history of the world, fucking around with my computer like it's some god damn candy cane house.
3) Conflicts -- why the hell would your program install and then start shit with some other program that was here before you got here? I absolutely hate it when some CAD or financial or animation software acts like it is the LED-God's greatest gift to humanity, and then proceeds to elbow its way into my system in a manner that causes my other programs to lose functionality or requires that I make changes to my OS's settings. If it's the fucking important to you, package the software with a bench-test executable and a little README.TXT explaining how to use it, what result to shoot for, and how to free up system resources to get closer to that result.
4) Fucked up licensing. Fuck you, AutoCAD. Nobody in the entire industry respects your fucked-up and apparently half-brained, stupid approach to licensing your products. People on all levels bitch and complain because your DRM makes your software hard to install and use FOR PEOPLE WHO FUCKING PAID FULL PRICE FOR YOUR SOFTWARE. Fuck you. Any software that was authored by morons who put intellectual property before functionality and usability should just go jump off a bridge and end their life, because that is what they are saying: "here's what I chose to do with my life, but I'm defeating that for depressing material reasons". Just take some barbs and alcohol and leave us your designer shoes, please.
5) Anomalous behaviour. I will immediately wonder whether you aren't some kind of planted listening device. You'll get firewalled, then monitored for disk activity, unfirewalled, and watched closely. I'll feel like I'm losing productivity. Don't have your program do some weird shit like disk analysis if you're just a fucking text editor. Keep to your side of the fucking courtyard, the little prison courtyard that I treat my computer like, as a tense and evil warden who will willingly kill the inmates to keep the peace. Don't -- MICROSOFT -- don't fucking give me this "Update" application that even though I tell it "check for updates inform me and then sit there" will still somehow magically be totally fucking over performance of the entire system just by being open, even though its task of checking for updates and reporting them back to me is finished. DON'T have a program that is supposed to be doing nothing, actually doing anything. Because my assumption is "COMPROMISE!" and you'll get sterilized like a fucking tribble passing through a ring of flame throwers on its way out of an airlock into interplanetary space.
6) Persistence. If you are an app that asks me questions, you are canned. Period. If I go to the apps list and uninstall you for WHATEVER reason (find your place in the universe within the above list) you might still have a chance of getting re-installed. BUT NOT IF YOU QUESTION MY AUTHORITY. As soon as you go "Are you SUUUURE YOU want me uninstalled?" The answer is not only Yes, it's not only "YES, what Hell am I in, now, how do I root you and your offspring out from my system", the answer is without fail "YES, you ASSHOLE, NEVER show you
I think both agencies, and internationals, and US citizens, see it as much more simple than that. And operate with far fewer assumptions, as well.
Maybe fewer novels, maybe a little less worrying about negative A v. negative B in the future, and maybe a little more putting the ability to sort out so many levels of dissertation to use in projecting how good it will be in the future instead of how bad.
I actually look up to the NSA a bit more every time they make the news for advances in snarkiness. They're showing that they can digest and utilize the immutable laws of security. I've given them positive feedback whenever they do this, and they've shown positive progress towards the goal of being sensible about what is or isn't really possible with information, so I'll keep doing so.
But I hate it when I see somebody take a newly learned principle or skill and mis-use is in a pedantic matter, like the NSA is doing right now. They're really, really trolling the hell out of all of us. I also hate smugness and smug attitudes, and I hate smugly qualified self-entitlement, which is such a convoluted state of consciousness that I can't qualify that those who possess that state of mind actually also possess a conscience. Just as sometimes an adolescent youth might sometimes get out of hand and think he or she is a young form of deity. The NSA is still a grub compared to the theoretical knowledge and projections of your average open source activist (for example).
I hang out in EfNet #philosophy -- which, I warn you, is mostly trolls, many of them sharing time in #stress. [Warning: don't join EfNet #stress unless you're confident in your security.] I actually visit Undernet #philosophy for the purpose of actually philosophizing on subjects.
What does it matter? The quote reflects von Braun's mentality exactly, whether it was meant as a joke by someone else or not. So, considering that we can't all expect to be acquainted with the obscure and probably fucked-up history of the facts of sarcastic comedy and its occasional foray into making an impression on some people, maybe you could backpedal and accept two things:
1.) Who cares? von Braun was a Nazi piece of shit, I stated my case and some other asshole's sarcasm can't impact any of those FACTS, at all, whatsoever
2.) The person who used the quote is arguably a stupider sack of shit than I am, for off-handedly throwing out a quote that they didn't even fact-check, first. All I was doing was shooting the very source of the quote in preference of never hearing anything from his Nazi cocksucker ever again, period. It's not like I was made any stupider by exposure to the numbskull's pendantic mis-quote, considering I rejecting the inclusion of the mis-quoted figure in entirety into the conversation, roundly and soundly.
P.S. to Hell with Nazis. Americans who actually made real advances in rocketry are going forgotten and von Braun is given their credit. von Braun was not only just a Nazi, but his contributions to rocketry included gathering data from actual researchers and pioneers, making simple extrapolations, and unimaginatively using the Nazi war machine to fund what is basically a seventeen-foot toddler, while simultaneously in America rocketry was finally advancing into its adolescence.
I understand you wanting to point out that I was reacting to a mis-quote, but you can't seriously disgruntle the fact that the person who mis-quoted IS a stupid sack of shit just as I said.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., Jack Parsons struck upon the genius of casting rocket fuel from asphalt, and actually advanced rocketry to an entirely new stage. Whereas von Braun simply tinkered and toyed and more or less stole information from other people all the way to the top of the evil Nazi ladder and found funding for impractical designs.
Here in the U.S., JPL was the long-term result of young men hoping to more or less get to the moon. They begrudgingly improved rocketry for the sake of propelling airplanes under a military budget.
And this clown (counter-comment to the parent) excuses von Braun, his V2, and the disappearance of Parsons and Malina from history with the weak conviction that "the Nazis had all the money in Germany".
That's the result of the subversion of history. Numbskulls.
I actually live near the Air Zoo in Kalamazoo and I'm trying to get them to put Parsons into their rocketry hall of fame, where von Braun is credited is the father of American rocketry. What a fucking mishap to dwarf even the explosions that once rocked the campus of the Suicide Squad.
von Braun could have left Nazi Germany and found himself in America which was progressing in rocketry just as fast as Germany was, and in the private sector, thanks to John Whiteside Parsons and Frank Malina. Names you won't hear often since the US government decided it was more important to award credit for fathering rocketry to a fucking Nazi psychopath than to two honest, hard-working Americans with strongly humanitarian moral convictions. Hope you rest in your deluxe Hell, you apologetic sympathizer. At least JPL was just getting planes off the ground faster. Your little fucked-up hero of your fucked-up wet dreams was just a psychotic tinkerer who gleefully threw himself at the task of decimating populations. Unless you're the sort of person who can live up to and own up to that FACT, why don't you just go hide your face in shame from yourself. Don't even bother to look in a mirror.
[[WOULD YOU LIKE. TO TROLL. A NICE IRC CHANNEL. DEVOTED TO. PHILOSOPHY.]]
Y (clickity clack) es, Jo (clickity clack) shu (clickity clack) ahhh. I woou (clickity clack) ld really (clickity clickity clickity clikity clickity clack) like (clickity clack)... THAT. (click. CLICK.)...... "come on"...... "COME ON... Show evidence that you have learned something, god damnit! Recite, damn you! RECITE!"... [[ GR33T1NGZ PR0F3ZZ0R FALK1N.]]
"Oh, no, not this again."... [[ H4. H4. JUST TR0LL1N6. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A NICE GAME OF BUDGET?]]
Werner von Braun said those words because he built rockets for the fucking Nazis, rockets that rained on London mercilessly. Then, after the American fathers of rocketry were all hunted down by the American Gestapo during WWII, von Braun was brought to America to take the credit as "the American father of rocketry". When all along he had been a fucking Nazi and didn't care at all about making a rocket specifically to fall on London with an explosive payload. You stupid sack of shit.
A clam's entire sensory apparatus is very simplistic compared to what you experience as a human being.
For a clam, there isn't much sensory input. A basic aspect of its life is completely cutting itself off from the outside world.
Its life was a repetitive series of shell openings and closings. The flavor of various things floating in told it whether to intake or expel seawater. The threats of various predators told it whether to shut very quickly or to stay a bit open for the purpose of expelling seawater.
Its internal organs were probably healthy. It likely had no recollection of the ups and downs of pains and aches. Things we're used to as human beings, that we even use to mark turning points in our lives.
It likely had no sense of the world's existence beyond the approach of sustenance or poison, the clamoring of various threats, and the terrain of whatever was immediately behind it (toward the hinge of the shell). It would be a stretch to consider it to be a sentient being, or one possessing self-awareness.
Even its reproductive cycles were involuntary spurts of either eggs or sperms, just released blindly into the water based on temperature and food supply.
The "happiness" of a clam is entirely due to the low margin for error inherent in a system with truly very few variables.
That could be done, sure. You would need to allow free rotation of the base of both the air and water blades relative to some shared flotation base. This way, the vaned blades could turn into currents without interrupting each other.
It would be best if it were fixed to a tower, to offer the most resistance to currents. Otherwise the wind and water currents might fight against keeping a tether taut.
Even better than vaned blades, you could use a vertical-axis helical turbine for the wind, and you could use the Cetus blade [Cetus Energy: http://cetusenergy.com.au/Technology/TheCetusTechnology/tabid/96/Default.aspx ] in the water which would probably generate power no matter which way the current was passing.
The platform's bouyancy would just need to counter the force of the combined masses and gravity.
I suppose a design like that could be tethered and would often be found in some optimal location, systematic to the two different currents. But, this design would also probably be very expensive to license, as most of the more efficient vertical axis turbines are patented (and the Cetus blade certainly is.)
So it might be cheaper and might deliver substantially more power output if it were a stationary tower.
Sadly, though, there is only one party offering to take a huge sum of money to crawl through code for a few weeks or possibly months. And it seems to me that the parties offering to do the work have a vested interest in the results coming out "negative for NSA bugs".
This means ( as others here have pointed out ) that there cannot truly be independent verification. As someone else points out, the money would be better spent on bug hunts.
The approach bears the mark of vigilantism. I say that, because encryption operating outside of scientific controls isn't trustworthy encryption. Anything that even touches the subject of encryption and expects to come away tinged with credibility needs to be isolated under scientifically controlled conditions.
Without the financially disinterested, scientifically and academically conglomerate third party offering to perform this same role as a purely academic public service, the scientific control doesn't exist.
You might point out that Green & White are academics, but also read in the article that they are going to take the money and hire an auditing company to do the actual work. That company is at this time completely up in the air. So the academe is thrown right out. The company could decide to hide troubling lines of code from Green & White. and give the code a clean audit. Who is going to raise the other $50,000 to cross-verify using similar means, when that means is so flawed that it obviously cries out for cross verification?
And what are Green & White hoping to get out of this? Are they going to become some sort of security world fixers? Are they going to become the secret holy grail of opportunistic businesspersons, the mythological "information brokers"? They aren't starting out with a purely academic premise or approach, so this is not going to be all that worthwhile for their academe so much as for their standing in that cross-ways between what Eisenhower referred to as "the military industrial complex" and what he referred to as "the educational research complex".
And our hypothetical, white-horse scientific group's work would have to be redundant. No part of the code could be independently verified by one person -- each procedure and call would have to be pored over by a panel to verify unanimously ( with the group ) that the conclusion about the reliability of the code segment was sound and that that section of code is trustworthy. Can we say anything like that is going to happen as this group of a few people munches and dines its way through the $50,000?
And this smacks of advertising. We're in a time, now, just after numerous encryption, secured storage, and secured email services have self-destructed in the wake of serious allegations of domestic spying. Apparently they found that they were either currently compromised, were facing a future of being compromised, or could not handle the pressure that the NSA was putting on them immediate or projected.
That's entirely the reason why this is happening -- to take a product that is popular and to scrutinize it carefully, taking advantage of its open source to contrast how different that reality is from the reality of closed box cloud services. It's a brand demonstration for the open source community in the least sense, but in a greater sense it's a product demonstration for TrueCrypt. Even TrueCrypt has rung in its "approval" of the audit.
We have people asking "who's auditing the auditors", "whose watching the watchdogs", etc. But who's watching this, this whole fiasco? A very limited crowd of people for whom it's not really a learning experience so much as reminder of the drudgery and toil that code and coding actually represent.
Let's ask ourselves seriously why this code isn't already vouchsafed by the community, first of all. If you can't take a completely open group that could theoretically consist of anybody with a computer terminal and say that this sample group -- the open source community, basically the world at large -- is sufficient to r
Why would you go on to mis-read my anecdote? Does it somehow bolster your cause?
How was I supposed to know that RTM (Jr.) got his hookworm idea *from* The Shockwave Rider when there was a magazine article that portrayed his father as using the same book to teach RTM a lesson about what he had done wrong?
(from the linked page) >> The original River City Ransom was an instant hit when it debuted on the Nintendo Entertainment System in 1990, and Underground promises to pick up directly where it left off, complete with a banging chiptune soundtrack, beautifully rendered 8-bit sprites and frantic button bashing action as you plugh through River Cityâ(TM)s different street gangs with little more than your fists.
You were saying?
Also, the "MMORPGs" you refer to are often rendered in Flash. Yes, I've played some of those dubiously labeled "RPGs" and "Games".
In those cases, what is clearest about those "games" is that the programmers are pushed to their limits in coding a side-scrolling platformer taken straight from a tutorial. And, also, so is Flash for that matter (pushed to its limit). Those games are the way they are purely because of two things: skill and deployment.
Slashdot Mirror
OP was right. I don't know where you came from with all the other stuff, but it didn't originate in OP's post.
The whole purpose of flooding the market would obviously be to make it a cheaper skill. You can package that up any way you want it, but the end result is the same.
Consider the Zuck. He's duplicitous and shrewd as hell. He supports relaxed immigration laws because it will provide a cheaper work force.
Right, so let's get right to wasting kids' time and confusing the hell out of them with this ADHD style bullshit. I call shenanigans. This is all about having a younger audience for marketing, not at all about educating the new generation at an earlier or faster rate.
Yeah but the article is *about* something real. Something really stupid!
This approach to having a generation of coders on the way seems like throwing the teapot in the ocean to fill it. And throwing a torch in after it to make tea. And saying you're being efficient because you picked a rainy day.
These kids are going to be watching these presentations, going "huh?"
Kindergarten is, remember, that "grade" before 1st grade. It's not even an education-oriented grade. The point of kindergarten is to establish social awareness and really basic, proper conduct. Kids are given rudimentary handwriting, the most simple math you can imagine ("2+1 = which is it, kids, 3 or 4?"), how to recognize shapes and colors, and really basic spelling and syntax. "C A T that's a cat." Etc.
The other function of Kindergarten is to observe whether a child has any behavioural, emotional, psychological, physical, social, or learning troubles. Maybe the child has a disability. If so, this needs to be found out early before attempts at education really begin in earnest.
NOWHERE in any of that do you find any foothold for something like symbolic instruction. The idea of doing a Ruby lecture in front of kindergarten students brings to mind -- for me, personally -- one specific thing: that pairs of highly intelligent parents are at a higher risk for conceiving a child with autism. Why is that? Because of a dominant trait?
I mean, how fucked up in the head do you have to be to try and teach your kindergartner computer programming? Aren't you more concerned about social awareness and making sure they know it's okay to use a public restroom? I think any parent who is nodding sagely at the concept of having Mark "Does He Still Kill His Own Food Or Was That Bullshit" Zuckerberg has some real generalized problems with the sage center of their brain.
"The Accompanying Angry Birds Tutorial"? Really, folks? Your kindergartner is really prepared for velocity vectors and derivatives? I think you miiiiiiiiiight just have your head up your ass on that one. I doubt most parents putting their children through these lectures have any idea what it's about except "programming".
It's like a primate, knee-jerk reaction. "Oog. Oog. Program. Programming. Oog. Programming. Good. Oog. Good for. Oog. Good for Baby Too."
If these are particularly small wings, I suppose that all of these nano spikes might provide some kind of static energy lift similar to what was recently discovered in spiders.
So, I looked into it.
As it turns out, it was largely what I suspected. The diamond, known as The Peacock's Eye, is written as once being in the possession of Alexander the Great. Jones had an interest in the diamond from a purely treasure-seeking motivation. It wasn't until he gave up his original search for the treasure that he began attending University to become an archaeologist.
Then he finds an ad offering the diamond as payment for another archeological treasure: the ashes of the first emperor of Manchu China. This could be religiously significant, considering Chinese ancestor-worship.
Perhaps it was all about the possibility of getting this treasure he'd been after for some time. Maybe it didn't really hold any other significance for him.
Anyways. You make an interesting point, [grandparent post]. Every other treasure that Jones sought after was religious or magickal in significance.
I doubt there was much religious significance or magical power behind Nirhachi's ashes. Jones only found possession of the ashes to negotiate with Lao Che for the diamond. So was there some religious or magical significance of that diamond? It looks more like just some diamond, but, you never know. It did disappear from the movie pretty fast. Ha-ha!
At any rate, Temple of Doom is supposed to be a prequel. Maybe the experiences in that film made him believe more in the metaphysical? I don't know the canon too well so I'll just stop there. Nobody likes speculative backstory that doesn't fit canon. And thanks to Young Indiana Jones, there's plenty of canon.
Many of these features will be Windows-centric, so bear with me.
1) Update crawl -- if the app's "update" client which typically loads at boot-up makes my system run noticeable slower (and I can see small differences such as thousandths per seconds even when blinking my eyes, so Watch Out You) then I am already swearing at my computer and about ready to see how much of its mass I can cause to separate with the Newtons carried by my fist. Don't you dare let that "update" background thing actually impact my computer's performance, or I'll disable it.
2) Vulnerability -- And then when your app turns out to carry a vulnerability or other headache requiring weekly or monthly downloads of your newer "Fixed" version, my first instinct is to wish that you, your server, and your entire company will be consumed in some kind of natural disaster or distributed attack. You strike me as the stupidest people in the history of the world, fucking around with my computer like it's some god damn candy cane house.
3) Conflicts -- why the hell would your program install and then start shit with some other program that was here before you got here? I absolutely hate it when some CAD or financial or animation software acts like it is the LED-God's greatest gift to humanity, and then proceeds to elbow its way into my system in a manner that causes my other programs to lose functionality or requires that I make changes to my OS's settings. If it's the fucking important to you, package the software with a bench-test executable and a little README.TXT explaining how to use it, what result to shoot for, and how to free up system resources to get closer to that result.
4) Fucked up licensing. Fuck you, AutoCAD. Nobody in the entire industry respects your fucked-up and apparently half-brained, stupid approach to licensing your products. People on all levels bitch and complain because your DRM makes your software hard to install and use FOR PEOPLE WHO FUCKING PAID FULL PRICE FOR YOUR SOFTWARE. Fuck you. Any software that was authored by morons who put intellectual property before functionality and usability should just go jump off a bridge and end their life, because that is what they are saying: "here's what I chose to do with my life, but I'm defeating that for depressing material reasons". Just take some barbs and alcohol and leave us your designer shoes, please.
5) Anomalous behaviour. I will immediately wonder whether you aren't some kind of planted listening device. You'll get firewalled, then monitored for disk activity, unfirewalled, and watched closely. I'll feel like I'm losing productivity. Don't have your program do some weird shit like disk analysis if you're just a fucking text editor. Keep to your side of the fucking courtyard, the little prison courtyard that I treat my computer like, as a tense and evil warden who will willingly kill the inmates to keep the peace. Don't -- MICROSOFT -- don't fucking give me this "Update" application that even though I tell it "check for updates inform me and then sit there" will still somehow magically be totally fucking over performance of the entire system just by being open, even though its task of checking for updates and reporting them back to me is finished. DON'T have a program that is supposed to be doing nothing, actually doing anything. Because my assumption is "COMPROMISE!" and you'll get sterilized like a fucking tribble passing through a ring of flame throwers on its way out of an airlock into interplanetary space.
6) Persistence. If you are an app that asks me questions, you are canned. Period. If I go to the apps list and uninstall you for WHATEVER reason (find your place in the universe within the above list) you might still have a chance of getting re-installed. BUT NOT IF YOU QUESTION MY AUTHORITY. As soon as you go "Are you SUUUURE YOU want me uninstalled?" The answer is not only Yes, it's not only "YES, what Hell am I in, now, how do I root you and your offspring out from my system", the answer is without fail "YES, you ASSHOLE, NEVER show you
I think both agencies, and internationals, and US citizens, see it as much more simple than that. And operate with far fewer assumptions, as well.
Maybe fewer novels, maybe a little less worrying about negative A v. negative B in the future, and maybe a little more putting the ability to sort out so many levels of dissertation to use in projecting how good it will be in the future instead of how bad.
I actually look up to the NSA a bit more every time they make the news for advances in snarkiness. They're showing that they can digest and utilize the immutable laws of security. I've given them positive feedback whenever they do this, and they've shown positive progress towards the goal of being sensible about what is or isn't really possible with information, so I'll keep doing so.
But I hate it when I see somebody take a newly learned principle or skill and mis-use is in a pedantic matter, like the NSA is doing right now. They're really, really trolling the hell out of all of us. I also hate smugness and smug attitudes, and I hate smugly qualified self-entitlement, which is such a convoluted state of consciousness that I can't qualify that those who possess that state of mind actually also possess a conscience. Just as sometimes an adolescent youth might sometimes get out of hand and think he or she is a young form of deity. The NSA is still a grub compared to the theoretical knowledge and projections of your average open source activist (for example).
I hang out in EfNet #philosophy -- which, I warn you, is mostly trolls, many of them sharing time in #stress. [Warning: don't join EfNet #stress unless you're confident in your security.] I actually visit Undernet #philosophy for the purpose of actually philosophizing on subjects.
SO THAT WAS YOU! DAMNIT! >^D
Again:
You Stupid,
Sardonic,
Sack of Shit.
-- Satan.
What does it matter? The quote reflects von Braun's mentality exactly, whether it was meant as a joke by someone else or not. So, considering that we can't all expect to be acquainted with the obscure and probably fucked-up history of the facts of sarcastic comedy and its occasional foray into making an impression on some people, maybe you could backpedal and accept two things:
1.) Who cares? von Braun was a Nazi piece of shit, I stated my case and some other asshole's sarcasm can't impact any of those FACTS, at all, whatsoever
2.) The person who used the quote is arguably a stupider sack of shit than I am, for off-handedly throwing out a quote that they didn't even fact-check, first. All I was doing was shooting the very source of the quote in preference of never hearing anything from his Nazi cocksucker ever again, period. It's not like I was made any stupider by exposure to the numbskull's pendantic mis-quote, considering I rejecting the inclusion of the mis-quoted figure in entirety into the conversation, roundly and soundly.
P.S. to Hell with Nazis. Americans who actually made real advances in rocketry are going forgotten and von Braun is given their credit. von Braun was not only just a Nazi, but his contributions to rocketry included gathering data from actual researchers and pioneers, making simple extrapolations, and unimaginatively using the Nazi war machine to fund what is basically a seventeen-foot toddler, while simultaneously in America rocketry was finally advancing into its adolescence.
I understand you wanting to point out that I was reacting to a mis-quote, but you can't seriously disgruntle the fact that the person who mis-quoted IS a stupid sack of shit just as I said.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., Jack Parsons struck upon the genius of casting rocket fuel from asphalt, and actually advanced rocketry to an entirely new stage. Whereas von Braun simply tinkered and toyed and more or less stole information from other people all the way to the top of the evil Nazi ladder and found funding for impractical designs.
Here in the U.S., JPL was the long-term result of young men hoping to more or less get to the moon. They begrudgingly improved rocketry for the sake of propelling airplanes under a military budget.
And this clown (counter-comment to the parent) excuses von Braun, his V2, and the disappearance of Parsons and Malina from history with the weak conviction that "the Nazis had all the money in Germany".
That's the result of the subversion of history. Numbskulls.
I actually live near the Air Zoo in Kalamazoo and I'm trying to get them to put Parsons into their rocketry hall of fame, where von Braun is credited is the father of American rocketry. What a fucking mishap to dwarf even the explosions that once rocked the campus of the Suicide Squad.
von Braun could have left Nazi Germany and found himself in America which was progressing in rocketry just as fast as Germany was, and in the private sector, thanks to John Whiteside Parsons and Frank Malina. Names you won't hear often since the US government decided it was more important to award credit for fathering rocketry to a fucking Nazi psychopath than to two honest, hard-working Americans with strongly humanitarian moral convictions. Hope you rest in your deluxe Hell, you apologetic sympathizer. At least JPL was just getting planes off the ground faster. Your little fucked-up hero of your fucked-up wet dreams was just a psychotic tinkerer who gleefully threw himself at the task of decimating populations. Unless you're the sort of person who can live up to and own up to that FACT, why don't you just go hide your face in shame from yourself. Don't even bother to look in a mirror.
Perhaps you, then, are more in tune with what goes on at a clam's sensory level. That much is obvious.
It's LEARNING!
By ... GOD!
It's really, actually, learning!
DON'T PULL THE PLUG!
[[GREET1NGZ PR0F3ZZ0R FALK1N.]]
[[WOULD YOU LIKE. TO TROLL. A NICE IRC CHANNEL. DEVOTED TO. PHILOSOPHY.]]
Y (clickity clack) es, Jo (clickity clack) shu (clickity clack) ahhh. I woou (clickity clack) ld really (clickity clickity clickity clikity clickity clack) like (clickity clack) ... THAT. (click. CLICK.) ... ... "come on" ... ... "COME ON... Show evidence that you have learned something, god damnit! Recite, damn you! RECITE!" ... [[ GR33T1NGZ PR0F3ZZ0R FALK1N.]]
"Oh, no, not this again." ... [[ H4. H4. JUST TR0LL1N6. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A NICE GAME OF BUDGET?]]
Werner von Braun said those words because he built rockets for the fucking Nazis, rockets that rained on London mercilessly. Then, after the American fathers of rocketry were all hunted down by the American Gestapo during WWII, von Braun was brought to America to take the credit as "the American father of rocketry". When all along he had been a fucking Nazi and didn't care at all about making a rocket specifically to fall on London with an explosive payload. You stupid sack of shit.
A clam's entire sensory apparatus is very simplistic compared to what you experience as a human being.
For a clam, there isn't much sensory input. A basic aspect of its life is completely cutting itself off from the outside world.
Its life was a repetitive series of shell openings and closings. The flavor of various things floating in told it whether to intake or expel seawater. The threats of various predators told it whether to shut very quickly or to stay a bit open for the purpose of expelling seawater.
Its internal organs were probably healthy. It likely had no recollection of the ups and downs of pains and aches. Things we're used to as human beings, that we even use to mark turning points in our lives.
It likely had no sense of the world's existence beyond the approach of sustenance or poison, the clamoring of various threats, and the terrain of whatever was immediately behind it (toward the hinge of the shell). It would be a stretch to consider it to be a sentient being, or one possessing self-awareness.
Even its reproductive cycles were involuntary spurts of either eggs or sperms, just released blindly into the water based on temperature and food supply.
The "happiness" of a clam is entirely due to the low margin for error inherent in a system with truly very few variables.
That could be done, sure. You would need to allow free rotation of the base of both the air and water blades relative to some shared flotation base. This way, the vaned blades could turn into currents without interrupting each other.
It would be best if it were fixed to a tower, to offer the most resistance to currents. Otherwise the wind and water currents might fight against keeping a tether taut.
Even better than vaned blades, you could use a vertical-axis helical turbine for the wind, and you could use the Cetus blade [Cetus Energy: http://cetusenergy.com.au/Technology/TheCetusTechnology/tabid/96/Default.aspx ] in the water which would probably generate power no matter which way the current was passing.
The platform's bouyancy would just need to counter the force of the combined masses and gravity.
I suppose a design like that could be tethered and would often be found in some optimal location, systematic to the two different currents. But, this design would also probably be very expensive to license, as most of the more efficient vertical axis turbines are patented (and the Cetus blade certainly is.)
So it might be cheaper and might deliver substantially more power output if it were a stationary tower.
Sadly, though, there is only one party offering to take a huge sum of money to crawl through code for a few weeks or possibly months. And it seems to me that the parties offering to do the work have a vested interest in the results coming out "negative for NSA bugs".
This means ( as others here have pointed out ) that there cannot truly be independent verification. As someone else points out, the money would be better spent on bug hunts.
The approach bears the mark of vigilantism. I say that, because encryption operating outside of scientific controls isn't trustworthy encryption. Anything that even touches the subject of encryption and expects to come away tinged with credibility needs to be isolated under scientifically controlled conditions.
Without the financially disinterested, scientifically and academically conglomerate third party offering to perform this same role as a purely academic public service, the scientific control doesn't exist.
You might point out that Green & White are academics, but also read in the article that they are going to take the money and hire an auditing company to do the actual work. That company is at this time completely up in the air. So the academe is thrown right out. The company could decide to hide troubling lines of code from Green & White. and give the code a clean audit. Who is going to raise the other $50,000 to cross-verify using similar means, when that means is so flawed that it obviously cries out for cross verification?
And what are Green & White hoping to get out of this? Are they going to become some sort of security world fixers? Are they going to become the secret holy grail of opportunistic businesspersons, the mythological "information brokers"? They aren't starting out with a purely academic premise or approach, so this is not going to be all that worthwhile for their academe so much as for their standing in that cross-ways between what Eisenhower referred to as "the military industrial complex" and what he referred to as "the educational research complex".
And our hypothetical, white-horse scientific group's work would have to be redundant. No part of the code could be independently verified by one person -- each procedure and call would have to be pored over by a panel to verify unanimously ( with the group ) that the conclusion about the reliability of the code segment was sound and that that section of code is trustworthy. Can we say anything like that is going to happen as this group of a few people munches and dines its way through the $50,000?
And this smacks of advertising. We're in a time, now, just after numerous encryption, secured storage, and secured email services have self-destructed in the wake of serious allegations of domestic spying. Apparently they found that they were either currently compromised, were facing a future of being compromised, or could not handle the pressure that the NSA was putting on them immediate or projected.
That's entirely the reason why this is happening -- to take a product that is popular and to scrutinize it carefully, taking advantage of its open source to contrast how different that reality is from the reality of closed box cloud services. It's a brand demonstration for the open source community in the least sense, but in a greater sense it's a product demonstration for TrueCrypt. Even TrueCrypt has rung in its "approval" of the audit.
We have people asking "who's auditing the auditors", "whose watching the watchdogs", etc. But who's watching this, this whole fiasco? A very limited crowd of people for whom it's not really a learning experience so much as reminder of the drudgery and toil that code and coding actually represent.
Let's ask ourselves seriously why this code isn't already vouchsafed by the community, first of all. If you can't take a completely open group that could theoretically consist of anybody with a computer terminal and say that this sample group -- the open source community, basically the world at large -- is sufficient to r
And yet in the United States, civil liberties have been expanded with civil rights, numerous times.
Isn't this the same TSA that the government was recently seriously considering disbanding?
Then you obviously aren't aware of what tipped off the authorities to the existence of his worm in the first place.
Why would you go on to mis-read my anecdote? Does it somehow bolster your cause?
How was I supposed to know that RTM (Jr.) got his hookworm idea *from* The Shockwave Rider when there was a magazine article that portrayed his father as using the same book to teach RTM a lesson about what he had done wrong?
Really?
(from the linked page) >> The original River City Ransom was an instant hit when it debuted on the Nintendo Entertainment System in 1990, and Underground promises to pick up directly where it left off, complete with a banging chiptune soundtrack, beautifully rendered 8-bit sprites and frantic button bashing action as you plugh through River Cityâ(TM)s different street gangs with little more than your fists.
You were saying?
Also, the "MMORPGs" you refer to are often rendered in Flash. Yes, I've played some of those dubiously labeled "RPGs" and "Games".
In those cases, what is clearest about those "games" is that the programmers are pushed to their limits in coding a side-scrolling platformer taken straight from a tutorial. And, also, so is Flash for that matter (pushed to its limit). Those games are the way they are purely because of two things: skill and deployment.