I understand Toyota isn't the first to get complaints of brake failure/sudden acceleration, but the concentration of complaints makes it hard to be sure that human error just happens to be more common with certain vehicles (not impossible, if certain vehicles attract the right kind of driver). With the secrecy on the black boxes, I have to give the consumers the benefit of the doubt, as Toyota should have access to the data it needs to prove their case. As much as I agree that rare, unusual reports should be treated with skepticism, when people's lives are at stake you have to give them a fair shake, but Toyota doesn't seem to be doing that.
That said, at the very least Toyota should look into the driver error cases and try to improve safety there. For example, a "big red button" for emergency stops would be impossible to mistake for the accelerator, and could be implemented to circumvent code that could contain a bug causing this whole issue.
I agree with the idea that some students have more potential than others, and that effort teaching one student can be more worthwhile than the same time on another student, but I would be careful going too far with the idea. We clearly only know so much about learning (otherwise someone could link to a few journal articles and end all discussion here), so I would not want to more or less discard a student simply because the current teaching methods aren't working. We do need to do a better job of making sure the good students aren't held back, but the bad students need to be given a good chance too.
Two of my brothers and I have done well in school, but one brother struggles. I have worked with him enough to know that he can learn, but he often needs things explained differently. While I don't expect him to do as well as the other three of us, he can certainly do much better in school if only we knew exactly how his brain works so we could teach him accordingly. I can relate how it is frustrating at times to deal with C students and it can be hard to understand their difficulty learning, but I doubt anyone here disagrees that schooling is only so good at educating.
The most successful demo I've played was the one for Civilization 3. I think it was a two-hour demo, but it let me finish the game I had started (over 10 hours of gameplay). Every other demo I have played either gives you limited features or a hard time limit, which just makes you annoyed at the game. Needless to say, I bought Civilization 3 quickly after finishing my demo game, which is rare for me.
I understand games like Borderlands or Halflife can't let you play through the main story as you need something left to purchase, but they could always use a portion of the story campaign, or even make a short demo campaign properly designed to get you hooked. It just comes across so much better when the demo gives you an honest chance to enjoy their game, rather than coming across as a marketing gimmick as most of these crippled demos do.
A risk of death is a deterrent to taking up any job, and elevator music gave people motive to want to strangle the associated musicians. I'd say yes, some people were turned away due to the dangerous lifestyle elevator music created.
Given how slowly it works, this would only be a risk for the slowest hunt-and-peck typists, who are more vulnerable to an over-the-shoulder attack. Of course with improvement this could become a real issue.
This is the first I have heard of this case, so the extra links helped me cover more of the backstory. That said, I may be the only one who found them helpful.
More people die in car accidents every single day than died in this earthquake. What is with all this sensationalism about such an insignificant event.
I think it has more to do with the movement of the crust- the plate under the Pacific there is going down into the earth. I am assuming any upward motion of the South American plate doesn't compensate enough to cancel, creating this Ice Skater Effect.
I don't know much about this part of science, but does it work to target whatever the bacteria is taking in to produce the next generation, or to produce their toxin (as opposed to targeting the bacteria directly)? I suppose it entirely depends on what the bacteria does that causes the problem, but for example an article linked in another comment mentioned MRSA developing a pump mechanism to deal with disinfectants- if you tricked it into pumping out its 'food', you would kill it and hopefully cause a drug-resisting trait to go out of favor.
I'm making the distinction between maybe the person with an unsecured network "deserves" to have others use it, but that is not the same thing as him giving permission to use it. Like with your car analogy, you may be an idiot to leave it unlocked, it is still wrong for someone to steal it. He is saying there is nothing wrong.
I don't get why slashdot made this 1.5 articles, as it makes discussion of this other article semi-offtopic, but:
The guy may have some decent points, but other than mentioning a counter-argument in order to then tear it apart, he has zero balance to his post, which makes it not so much a thorough evaluation of the issue as much as a vent for someone with an ax to grind. The part that I really didn't agree with is how he goes on about how people get enough warnings to use password protection and whatnot that making wifi unsecured has to be effectively an active decision to want to allow people to connect. It has been commonly mentioned on slashdot that bad users pay no attention to warnings, so they never read them, therefore they don't actually know what is wrong. While you could say they deserve to have others connect to their network, this guy takes it as implicit authorization to connect- these people are not likely aware enough to consider other people at all. He likes to make lots of assumptions about what the uninformed user would do, despite the fact that it isn't that hard to actually talk to one of these people and no longer have to assume anything. I get the feeling if you asked this guy for tech help, he would patronize you to no end.
Either way it still makes me wonder what happens to the people who don't secure their networks well (through ignorance) and end up with neighbors using it, or worse some person in a parked car nearby, as police can at least go talk to the neighbors.
Whoops, A should have 1's across the bottom (thanks for catching that). I didn't ask why we would learn how to do it this way when adding a matrix is easier, but some techniques we learned were useful for speeding up the computation of large matrices, so its probably a computer science question, not a math one.
I just took a linear algebra course, and to perform a translation on a matrix (each column is a coordinate set, each row is x, y or z coordinates), you first add a dimension, and multiply your matrix by an identity matrix with the wanted translation in the extra dimension. In other words, to move stuff using matrix multiplication, you have to add a dimension. It makes no physical sense, but it is interesting to think of time as this added dimension simply facilitating movement.
As for the math I am talking about, I can't format it nicely, but translating by (5,6) looks like this:
Just put a massive data server in a spaceship and accelerate it near the speed of light. Data loss would be slowed enough that it would be negligible, and if we have to retrieve anything it should have a fast enough processor to respond to a request in a timely fashion and send off a pre-made copy of the needed data (as it may take too long to copy petabytes at near light speed).
This should work out perfectly- by the time we have the technology to do this, today's worthwhile material should finally be coming out of copyright.
Talking about parenting, this kind of stuff would be going way too far even for parents. If parents shouldn't do it, schools have no reason to go near it.
Yet again, a plausible/viable alternative energy source requires expensive metals. Wouldn't it be easier to make a list of all these useful-but-expensive technologies, make billions of them all out of tin, then switch all the rare earth and precious metal prices to that of tin, and make tin really expensive? As long as we make enough before raising the price of tin, it should save us a lot of money.
There are already physical random password generators- can they be directly plugged into the computer? If it either sends a password every few seconds or every time you are transmitting any financial information, it would require the attacker to stay in the middle to do anything. If the password generator uses the user input to help seed the password, shouldn't a MitM attack be foiled, as they cannot change the information and still have the password check out? The issue here is that the password generator has to be immune to input from the attacker.
Everything I know about security in these situations is from my misinterpretations of posts here on slashdot, so I must be missing something. Anyone care to elaborate on why this works/doesn't, or perhaps a better solution?
But no matter how quickly you fire Bob, the thieves still have that money, and they will continue to make more attacks. The point isn't to blame the victim, but to figure out how to prevent them from becoming victims in the first place. I'm tempted to join the "he deserved it" crowd, but that is far outweighed by my hate for the jerks who prey upon these people.
The second attack scenario would get around this, as it just "corrects" payments you try to make so that they go to a different account. Using an SMS with a confirmation message could avoid this, though.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand Toyota isn't the first to get complaints of brake failure/sudden acceleration, but the concentration of complaints makes it hard to be sure that human error just happens to be more common with certain vehicles (not impossible, if certain vehicles attract the right kind of driver). With the secrecy on the black boxes, I have to give the consumers the benefit of the doubt, as Toyota should have access to the data it needs to prove their case. As much as I agree that rare, unusual reports should be treated with skepticism, when people's lives are at stake you have to give them a fair shake, but Toyota doesn't seem to be doing that.
That said, at the very least Toyota should look into the driver error cases and try to improve safety there. For example, a "big red button" for emergency stops would be impossible to mistake for the accelerator, and could be implemented to circumvent code that could contain a bug causing this whole issue.
I agree with the idea that some students have more potential than others, and that effort teaching one student can be more worthwhile than the same time on another student, but I would be careful going too far with the idea. We clearly only know so much about learning (otherwise someone could link to a few journal articles and end all discussion here), so I would not want to more or less discard a student simply because the current teaching methods aren't working. We do need to do a better job of making sure the good students aren't held back, but the bad students need to be given a good chance too.
Two of my brothers and I have done well in school, but one brother struggles. I have worked with him enough to know that he can learn, but he often needs things explained differently. While I don't expect him to do as well as the other three of us, he can certainly do much better in school if only we knew exactly how his brain works so we could teach him accordingly. I can relate how it is frustrating at times to deal with C students and it can be hard to understand their difficulty learning, but I doubt anyone here disagrees that schooling is only so good at educating.
The most successful demo I've played was the one for Civilization 3. I think it was a two-hour demo, but it let me finish the game I had started (over 10 hours of gameplay). Every other demo I have played either gives you limited features or a hard time limit, which just makes you annoyed at the game. Needless to say, I bought Civilization 3 quickly after finishing my demo game, which is rare for me.
I understand games like Borderlands or Halflife can't let you play through the main story as you need something left to purchase, but they could always use a portion of the story campaign, or even make a short demo campaign properly designed to get you hooked. It just comes across so much better when the demo gives you an honest chance to enjoy their game, rather than coming across as a marketing gimmick as most of these crippled demos do.
orchestral layout focuses on the music and you can have really stupid lyrics and the song will still be good
I'm sorry, opera just doesn't work for me.
A risk of death is a deterrent to taking up any job, and elevator music gave people motive to want to strangle the associated musicians. I'd say yes, some people were turned away due to the dangerous lifestyle elevator music created.
Given how slowly it works, this would only be a risk for the slowest hunt-and-peck typists, who are more vulnerable to an over-the-shoulder attack. Of course with improvement this could become a real issue.
This is the first I have heard of this case, so the extra links helped me cover more of the backstory. That said, I may be the only one who found them helpful.
More people die in car accidents every single day than died in this earthquake. What is with all this sensationalism about such an insignificant event.
I think my sarcasm detector may be a little slow today...
I think it has more to do with the movement of the crust- the plate under the Pacific there is going down into the earth. I am assuming any upward motion of the South American plate doesn't compensate enough to cancel, creating this Ice Skater Effect.
I don't know much about this part of science, but does it work to target whatever the bacteria is taking in to produce the next generation, or to produce their toxin (as opposed to targeting the bacteria directly)? I suppose it entirely depends on what the bacteria does that causes the problem, but for example an article linked in another comment mentioned MRSA developing a pump mechanism to deal with disinfectants- if you tricked it into pumping out its 'food', you would kill it and hopefully cause a drug-resisting trait to go out of favor.
I'm making the distinction between maybe the person with an unsecured network "deserves" to have others use it, but that is not the same thing as him giving permission to use it. Like with your car analogy, you may be an idiot to leave it unlocked, it is still wrong for someone to steal it. He is saying there is nothing wrong.
I don't get why slashdot made this 1.5 articles, as it makes discussion of this other article semi-offtopic, but:
The guy may have some decent points, but other than mentioning a counter-argument in order to then tear it apart, he has zero balance to his post, which makes it not so much a thorough evaluation of the issue as much as a vent for someone with an ax to grind. The part that I really didn't agree with is how he goes on about how people get enough warnings to use password protection and whatnot that making wifi unsecured has to be effectively an active decision to want to allow people to connect. It has been commonly mentioned on slashdot that bad users pay no attention to warnings, so they never read them, therefore they don't actually know what is wrong. While you could say they deserve to have others connect to their network, this guy takes it as implicit authorization to connect- these people are not likely aware enough to consider other people at all. He likes to make lots of assumptions about what the uninformed user would do, despite the fact that it isn't that hard to actually talk to one of these people and no longer have to assume anything. I get the feeling if you asked this guy for tech help, he would patronize you to no end.
Either way it still makes me wonder what happens to the people who don't secure their networks well (through ignorance) and end up with neighbors using it, or worse some person in a parked car nearby, as police can at least go talk to the neighbors.
Whoops, A should have 1's across the bottom (thanks for catching that). I didn't ask why we would learn how to do it this way when adding a matrix is easier, but some techniques we learned were useful for speeding up the computation of large matrices, so its probably a computer science question, not a math one.
I just took a linear algebra course, and to perform a translation on a matrix (each column is a coordinate set, each row is x, y or z coordinates), you first add a dimension, and multiply your matrix by an identity matrix with the wanted translation in the extra dimension. In other words, to move stuff using matrix multiplication, you have to add a dimension. It makes no physical sense, but it is interesting to think of time as this added dimension simply facilitating movement.
As for the math I am talking about, I can't format it nicely, but translating by (5,6) looks like this:
Format is [[row 1],[row 2],[row 3]]:
A=[[2 3],[4 5]]
A'=[[2 3 0],[4 5 0],[0 0 1]]
T=[[1 0 5],[0 1 6], [0 0 1]]
A'(translated)=T*A'
A'(translated)=[[7 8 0],[10 11 0],[0 0 1]]
Yeah, I thought I turned off advertisements!
Just put a massive data server in a spaceship and accelerate it near the speed of light. Data loss would be slowed enough that it would be negligible, and if we have to retrieve anything it should have a fast enough processor to respond to a request in a timely fashion and send off a pre-made copy of the needed data (as it may take too long to copy petabytes at near light speed).
This should work out perfectly- by the time we have the technology to do this, today's worthwhile material should finally be coming out of copyright.
Talking about parenting, this kind of stuff would be going way too far even for parents. If parents shouldn't do it, schools have no reason to go near it.
Yet again, a plausible/viable alternative energy source requires expensive metals. Wouldn't it be easier to make a list of all these useful-but-expensive technologies, make billions of them all out of tin, then switch all the rare earth and precious metal prices to that of tin, and make tin really expensive? As long as we make enough before raising the price of tin, it should save us a lot of money.
Wow, time to beak out the +5 offtopic mod.
There are already physical random password generators- can they be directly plugged into the computer? If it either sends a password every few seconds or every time you are transmitting any financial information, it would require the attacker to stay in the middle to do anything. If the password generator uses the user input to help seed the password, shouldn't a MitM attack be foiled, as they cannot change the information and still have the password check out? The issue here is that the password generator has to be immune to input from the attacker.
Everything I know about security in these situations is from my misinterpretations of posts here on slashdot, so I must be missing something. Anyone care to elaborate on why this works/doesn't, or perhaps a better solution?
But no matter how quickly you fire Bob, the thieves still have that money, and they will continue to make more attacks. The point isn't to blame the victim, but to figure out how to prevent them from becoming victims in the first place. I'm tempted to join the "he deserved it" crowd, but that is far outweighed by my hate for the jerks who prey upon these people.
The second attack scenario would get around this, as it just "corrects" payments you try to make so that they go to a different account. Using an SMS with a confirmation message could avoid this, though.
Catchier name?