This was all about "sensing". It didn't actually do anything to stop border crossers.
Multiple fences with a patrol road between them, plus a chain of towers to discourage people cutting the fence, might actually work. The sections with physical fences are doing their job now. There's solid fence from the Pacific Ocean to Yuma, AZ., which has pushed crossing attempts into Texas and the desert.
I've heard this come up and the speaker never really supports it but just assumes everyone's on board. I've been to parts of the country without a substantial immigrant population, and believe it or not those crops get picked, those houses get cleaned, and those burgers get flipped.
... You sure those crops aren't being picked by migrants that show up during harvest season and vanish soon after?
Immigrant ninjas?
And when exactly is burger-flipping season, anyway?
It's not the government's job to create jobs, if that's what you're saying.
I don't know. I think it's the government's job to do whatever's necessary to promote the country's overall well-being. (Certainly it's in the government's best long-term interests to do so, as they get to govern a more powerful and prosperous country - and I think the rest of the nation benefits as well) If that means creating jobs, then, yeah, it's the government's job to create jobs.
All this stems from an incident several years back in which Li Yizhong was sent a link in a message online. When he clicked on it, and stared for a moment into the gaping void of a man's disproportionately stretched anus, he was forever changed... Determined to fight a never-ending battle against harmful information so that he would never again face that horror.
Watching your neighbour spending hundreds or more than a thousand to outfit their home with an iLock and having their iPhone run out of juice or fumbling and dropping/breaking it before they could unlock the front door.... Priceless.
Do you ever feel ashamed of the fact that a TV commercial has infiltrated your mind to the point that you spout off imitations of it? And is it really that fun to see your neighbor make bad decisions?
Because most people don't have stuff that justifies the cost (after they factor in the (un)likelihood of getting burgled).
And also because most people do have plenty of windows all over their house. Glass is easy to break. If you're seriously worried about a break-in, you can get a dog or you can get an alarm system. Neither would be fully effective, of course...
Hey, people are constantly knocking the iphone fart apps, but these are an important part of the platform's defense against suddenly bursting into flames.
There's at least one obvious flaw in his reasoning. He talks about removing the 8-bit version field in the header and replacing that with a 1-bit portion of the flags field to distinguish it from a hypothetical future version. That only works if one assumes there will only *ever* be two versions (v1 and v2).
No, the flaw is yours. The 1 bit merely says "this is not the original version" and anyone that only knows the original version just stops there. Anyone that knows the 2nd version has enough smarts to look at the 2nd version bit (or field).
My problem with that is, as others have noted, the optimization is really only useful until you decide it's time for version 2. Then you're back where you started, except you've lost a bit that you still need to test each time.
"Sauropod skolls are rarely found in the fossil record because the soft tissue from which they are constructed is unlikely to be preserved after death."
Correction. They are rarely found because nobody quite knows what a "skoll" is.
Except your comment didn't make any sense. BYU != Utah legislature. Mormons aren't even creationists, so if you were trying to make a joke, it wasn't funny.
Yes! We demand strict factual accuracy in all humor! It is impossible for something to be funny unless it is entirely true! The inclusion of any untrue information in a joke automatically negates any humor which may have been contained within.
Still, that's like a month long walk. He'd have nothing to eat. And he did need to eat, because he was at the Last Supper, and it's not like he was a waiter for his apostles. [...Thinks...] Well, I guess he could do the loaves and fishes trick. There would be plenty of fish for him to catch, and he could make the bread from himself, along with a nice wine to go with it.
No, see, he can only do the loaves-and-fishes trick and the water-into-wine trick if he can get everyone to turn around first.
See, 'cause if they were looking directly at the miracle when it happened, they could go blind...
My phone survived being dropped, twice, in the same day! The first time it fell, the antenna fell off and disappeared somewhere. The second time, it landed on the spot where the antenna was and the screen took enough of the impact to shatter.
That's not the impressive part, though. Any phone can get dropped and break. What's really impressive is that the phone survived my attempts to repair it.:)
Never use the term 'KiB' for kiloBYTES ever again.
"kiB" is for kibibytes, not kilobytes...
The introduction of those new units always kind of grated me, as it went against all the 20-odd years of experience I'd had with computers up to that point. But, I have to say, "kilobytes" and "megabytes" and "gigabytes" had always been ambiguously defined. Usually RAM would use the power-of-two definitions and disks would use the power-of-ten definitions... As someone who appreciates precise language, I think this effort to disambiguate the terminology is a good thing, even if it goes against what I learned about computers as a kid. I don't think making the opposite change (i.e. keeping "kilobyte" = 1024 bytes and making a new term for 1000 bytes) would have made any sense at all - the "kilo" in "kilobyte" goes against the normal definition of "kilo". I think it was always kind of sleazy that hard drive manufacturers could tell you they were giving you a megabyte of storage and it would be less than what the computer considers a "megabyte" - but the prefix has a definition that predates its use in computing, and from that perspective I think that usage, while problematic and misleading, was legitimate.
However, the worst case scenario is that a company can swipe your code, make the product, and then turn around and copyright it themselves and sue you for 'infringement.' You released your code into the Public Domain, so there's no paper trail to convince the judge that you didn't somehow swipe 'their' code and leak it as a free product. Registering the copyright under an open source license protects you from such litigation by creating a paper trail.
How does releasing software under the public domain (is that even possible?) leave more or less of a "paper trail" than releasing it with copyright notices and licensing information? The "paper trail" in either case would be publicly-available information about when the respective versions were first distributed and so on.
I think this notation you've used here will do quite nicely... Though getting it "standardized" is a bit of an adoption problem... There are other solutions presently in common use, such as "Yeah, like totally what I just said. Seriously." and "I WAS BEING SARCASTIC JUST NOW."
Just abstract the problem a bit from an existing special case.
You see, we already take out certain things with laser when we want to while those things are in flight, so obviously, moving from the special case to a higher level general case, it should be possible to apply the same solution to other types of problems.
The question is: do you have to glue mosquito wings to all of the pieces of junk floating around the Earth first or not?
Judging by the video, that system works by using the laser to burn up the mosquito's wings. The laser doesn't make the mosquito fall, however: it's the fact that the mosquito can lo longer use its wings to counteract gravity that causes it to fall. That's not how it works with satellites, however: something in orbit is already in free-fall. It's not doing anything to hold itself up, it's just moving according to its momentum and the effect of gravity.
Likewise, if you had, say, a laser that could shoot down a missile: probably what this really means is that you've got a laser that can destroy some critical component of the missile, preventing it from detonating at the target site. If your laser can punch a hole in a missile, you've got a fair shot at rendering it inoperable. Maybe it'll fall back into the atmosphere, maybe it'll explode harmlessly somewhere, maybe it'll reach its target but with a non-functional warhead, or maybe it'll become another orbiting piece of space junk. But if you punch a hole in a piece of orbiting space junk, you've got... a piece of orbiting space junk with a hole in it. If you use the laser to cut the space junk in half, you wind up with two pieces of orbiting space junk.
nedlohs provided some good answers to how a laser could exert force upon an object... I don't know how practical that is - I don't know how much energy is required, whether we have lasers that can direct that much energy at a target, etc. - but I don't know, maybe it's workable.
I can come up with quite a few ways that we could remove space junk, most aren't very good, but there is one I think would work the best.
Launch a couple satellites with solid state lasers. Heat up the side of the space junk facing earth and let the laser push it into the atmosphere.
Plus if you have a few dozen up there you could perhaps deflect larger objects, yet they would be useless if you wanted to shoot a target on the surface of the Earth.
There has to be a reason that there has been next to no attempt to control the space junk issue, I guess getting funding to clean up orbits is hard to come by.
There will be no concerted effort to remove space junk until the risk of collision with space junk rises to the point that it costs less to remove the junk than to risk being hit by it.
It could be that this is some important idea in physics I simply don't understand... But how does a laser push an object into the atmosphere? What good does heating up one side of it do? How powerful of a laser do you need to significantly alter the trajectory of a piece of space debris? And how do you heat up one side of it if the object is spinning? (Which it almost surely is...) What happens if the laser misses? And if the object you're shooting at doesn't give off a diffuse reflection, how do you know if you hit or missed?
Slashdot Mirror
This was all about "sensing". It didn't actually do anything to stop border crossers.
Multiple fences with a patrol road between them, plus a chain of towers to discourage people cutting the fence, might actually work. The sections with physical fences are doing their job now. There's solid fence from the Pacific Ocean to Yuma, AZ., which has pushed crossing attempts into Texas and the desert.
Hm, I guess we could put down a minefield...
I've heard this come up and the speaker never really supports it but just assumes everyone's on board. I've been to parts of the country without a substantial immigrant population, and believe it or not those crops get picked, those houses get cleaned, and those burgers get flipped.
... You sure those crops aren't being picked by migrants that show up during harvest season and vanish soon after?
Immigrant ninjas?
And when exactly is burger-flipping season, anyway?
It's not the government's job to create jobs, if that's what you're saying.
I don't know. I think it's the government's job to do whatever's necessary to promote the country's overall well-being. (Certainly it's in the government's best long-term interests to do so, as they get to govern a more powerful and prosperous country - and I think the rest of the nation benefits as well) If that means creating jobs, then, yeah, it's the government's job to create jobs.
All this stems from an incident several years back in which Li Yizhong was sent a link in a message online. When he clicked on it, and stared for a moment into the gaping void of a man's disproportionately stretched anus, he was forever changed... Determined to fight a never-ending battle against harmful information so that he would never again face that horror.
Makes it kind of hard to blame it on the dog, I guess...
Which reminds me: one should always have a dog close at hand, just in case.
Watching your neighbour spending hundreds or more than a thousand to outfit their home with an iLock and having their iPhone run out of juice or fumbling and dropping/breaking it before they could unlock the front door.... Priceless.
Do you ever feel ashamed of the fact that a TV commercial has infiltrated your mind to the point that you spout off imitations of it? And is it really that fun to see your neighbor make bad decisions?
Message as subject? Is that really what you meant?
Wild notion: why not use the message as the message, and the subject as the subject.
Because most people don't have stuff that justifies the cost (after they factor in the (un)likelihood of getting burgled).
And also because most people do have plenty of windows all over their house. Glass is easy to break. If you're seriously worried about a break-in, you can get a dog or you can get an alarm system. Neither would be fully effective, of course...
Can you make it fart?
Hey, people are constantly knocking the iphone fart apps, but these are an important part of the platform's defense against suddenly bursting into flames.
There are no longer wild bears roaming the streets at night
You haven't been to Juneau I guess.
There's at least one obvious flaw in his reasoning. He talks about removing the 8-bit version field in the header and replacing that with a 1-bit portion of the flags field to distinguish it from a hypothetical future version. That only works if one assumes there will only *ever* be two versions (v1 and v2).
No, the flaw is yours. The 1 bit merely says "this is not the original version" and anyone that only knows the original version just stops there. Anyone that knows the 2nd version has enough smarts to look at the 2nd version bit (or field).
My problem with that is, as others have noted, the optimization is really only useful until you decide it's time for version 2. Then you're back where you started, except you've lost a bit that you still need to test each time.
"Sauropod skolls are rarely found in the fossil record because the soft tissue from which they are constructed is unlikely to be preserved after death."
Correction. They are rarely found because nobody quite knows what a "skoll" is.
It's a kind of chewing tobacco, right?
Except your comment didn't make any sense. BYU != Utah legislature. Mormons aren't even creationists, so if you were trying to make a joke, it wasn't funny.
Yes! We demand strict factual accuracy in all humor! It is impossible for something to be funny unless it is entirely true! The inclusion of any untrue information in a joke automatically negates any humor which may have been contained within.
iPhonius developed a distaste for most boobies, with the exception of a few big name boobies like Playboyius Boobius. This contributed greatly to it's
parser error
Still, that's like a month long walk. He'd have nothing to eat. And he did need to eat, because he was at the Last Supper, and it's not like he was a waiter for his apostles. [...Thinks...] Well, I guess he could do the loaves and fishes trick. There would be plenty of fish for him to catch, and he could make the bread from himself, along with a nice wine to go with it.
No, see, he can only do the loaves-and-fishes trick and the water-into-wine trick if he can get everyone to turn around first.
See, 'cause if they were looking directly at the miracle when it happened, they could go blind...
And if I ever work phone support again I will assume everything, absolutely everything the person on the other end tells me is a blatant lie.
Is it plugged in? yes? LIER!
It it turned on? yes? LIER!
Can you see any messeges on the screen? no? LIER!
Why do they lie!??!?
"lier"?
My phone survived being dropped, twice, in the same day! The first time it fell, the antenna fell off and disappeared somewhere. The second time, it landed on the spot where the antenna was and the screen took enough of the impact to shatter.
That's not the impressive part, though. Any phone can get dropped and break. What's really impressive is that the phone survived my attempts to repair it. :)
"it's 4 KiB or just 4096 bytes."
No. Just no.
Never use the term 'KiB' for kiloBYTES ever again.
"kiB" is for kibibytes, not kilobytes...
The introduction of those new units always kind of grated me, as it went against all the 20-odd years of experience I'd had with computers up to that point. But, I have to say, "kilobytes" and "megabytes" and "gigabytes" had always been ambiguously defined. Usually RAM would use the power-of-two definitions and disks would use the power-of-ten definitions... As someone who appreciates precise language, I think this effort to disambiguate the terminology is a good thing, even if it goes against what I learned about computers as a kid. I don't think making the opposite change (i.e. keeping "kilobyte" = 1024 bytes and making a new term for 1000 bytes) would have made any sense at all - the "kilo" in "kilobyte" goes against the normal definition of "kilo". I think it was always kind of sleazy that hard drive manufacturers could tell you they were giving you a megabyte of storage and it would be less than what the computer considers a "megabyte" - but the prefix has a definition that predates its use in computing, and from that perspective I think that usage, while problematic and misleading, was legitimate.
- you don't say?!
- you don't say?!
- you don't say?!
What was that about?
He didn't say.
However, the worst case scenario is that a company can swipe your code, make the product, and then turn around and copyright it themselves and sue you for 'infringement.' You released your code into the Public Domain, so there's no paper trail to convince the judge that you didn't somehow swipe 'their' code and leak it as a free product. Registering the copyright under an open source license protects you from such litigation by creating a paper trail.
How does releasing software under the public domain (is that even possible?) leave more or less of a "paper trail" than releasing it with copyright notices and licensing information? The "paper trail" in either case would be publicly-available information about when the respective versions were first distributed and so on.
PS: We need a sarcasm tag.
I think this notation you've used here will do quite nicely... Though getting it "standardized" is a bit of an adoption problem... There are other solutions presently in common use, such as "Yeah, like totally what I just said. Seriously." and "I WAS BEING SARCASTIC JUST NOW."
spanish_main( int arrrrrgc, char *arrrrrgv[] )
That's funny shit right there.
Yeah, he forgot spanish_main()'s return type!
Just abstract the problem a bit from an existing special case.
You see, we already take out certain things with laser when we want to while those things are in flight, so obviously, moving from the special case to a higher level general case, it should be possible to apply the same solution to other types of problems.
The question is: do you have to glue mosquito wings to all of the pieces of junk floating around the Earth first or not?
Judging by the video, that system works by using the laser to burn up the mosquito's wings. The laser doesn't make the mosquito fall, however: it's the fact that the mosquito can lo longer use its wings to counteract gravity that causes it to fall. That's not how it works with satellites, however: something in orbit is already in free-fall. It's not doing anything to hold itself up, it's just moving according to its momentum and the effect of gravity.
Likewise, if you had, say, a laser that could shoot down a missile: probably what this really means is that you've got a laser that can destroy some critical component of the missile, preventing it from detonating at the target site. If your laser can punch a hole in a missile, you've got a fair shot at rendering it inoperable. Maybe it'll fall back into the atmosphere, maybe it'll explode harmlessly somewhere, maybe it'll reach its target but with a non-functional warhead, or maybe it'll become another orbiting piece of space junk. But if you punch a hole in a piece of orbiting space junk, you've got... a piece of orbiting space junk with a hole in it. If you use the laser to cut the space junk in half, you wind up with two pieces of orbiting space junk.
nedlohs provided some good answers to how a laser could exert force upon an object... I don't know how practical that is - I don't know how much energy is required, whether we have lasers that can direct that much energy at a target, etc. - but I don't know, maybe it's workable.
I wonder why this issue hasn't been fixed by now.
I can come up with quite a few ways that we could remove space junk, most aren't very good, but there is one I think would work the best.
Launch a couple satellites with solid state lasers. Heat up the side of the space junk facing earth and let the laser push it into the atmosphere.
Plus if you have a few dozen up there you could perhaps deflect larger objects, yet they would be useless if you wanted to shoot a target on the surface of the Earth.
There has to be a reason that there has been next to no attempt to control the space junk issue, I guess getting funding to clean up orbits is hard to come by.
There will be no concerted effort to remove space junk until the risk of collision with space junk rises to the point that it costs less to remove the junk than to risk being hit by it.
It could be that this is some important idea in physics I simply don't understand... But how does a laser push an object into the atmosphere? What good does heating up one side of it do? How powerful of a laser do you need to significantly alter the trajectory of a piece of space debris? And how do you heat up one side of it if the object is spinning? (Which it almost surely is...) What happens if the laser misses? And if the object you're shooting at doesn't give off a diffuse reflection, how do you know if you hit or missed?
Sounds like it is time an outerspace garbage man.
Where can I apply for that job?
I hear Technora Corp is putting together some kind of department for this...