That's CBC, not CBS. Their noon news show had a pretty glowing report on Firefox 1.0 release and the reasons to move to it. Didn't see anything on their web site though.
It's rather unlikely to result in a positive-feedback loop, since it's bleeding energy out of the system (although stranger things have been known to happen). In general, however, I'd suggest to think of it like putting baffles across part of a stream... Near the baffles you will back up, and slow down the water, but on the sides of the baffles, you'll actually see the water speed up slightly.
My expectation is that one side effect could be an increase in the number and/or severity of hurricanes and tropical storms (unless we build mid-ocean wind farms (!)) as the backed up thermal energy seeks release.
I love how people get this complex that makes them somehow think that humans are the only force of change in the world.
An analogy: If someone looks as if they're about to step in front of a car and you push them, the facth that they might have died anyways won't get you acquitted.
The polar ice caps are far older than the most recent ice age Much of the ice that is now melting is over 100K years old. The last ice age was 25K years ago. Similarly with some of the antarctic ice shelves that have disintegrated in the last year or two.
Personally, I take these sorts of results with a whole shaker full of salt as the researchers need to make a whole raft of assumptions in order to get any result at all. (For instance,who says someone won't build a better windfarm?)
TANSTAAFL (There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch).
The results of this research doesn't surprise me in the least. I agree that the actual results may be a bit different, but the general result is almost a no-brainer.
For the most part, winds are convection currents -- generated by the difference in temperature and humidity between different spots in the world -- but heat is the serious driver in this. As an overall results, physics will call for an equalization of states -- this means cooling the equator and heating the poles.
Windmills bleed off some of the kinetic energy from this process, as such, they're almost guaranteed to slow the process of pumping heat from the equator to the poles.
This is, however, probably a good thing, because other studies have concluded that the arctic will be (and has been) more affected by global warming than the temperate and tropical regions, so slowing the process would actually help to cut back some of the side effects of global warming, and possibly help to protect the polar ice caps (and thus moderate the resulting ocean level rise).
It's not a question if projects like this on a large scale would affect the weather. The answer to that is a no-brainer (yes). The question is how, and (probably more importantly) how we could most beneficially manage the resulting side-effects.
The
note from David Farber which was cited in the main article as being someone wondering about proportionality is NOT wondering if the sentence was too harsh.
Nine years? That *might* be appropriate. But when he gets out, he'll
still have two houses in my town, paid for with the money he stole from
gullible AOL users, and I think that's ridiculous.
The quote wondering at the sentence is from Lauren Weinstein. Even that note doesn't complain about the sentence being unreasonable for this case == rather it wonders if the sentence could come back to bite the larger communite on the ass or elsewhere some time in the indeterminate future.
Quick calcs: If you presume that he sends 10,000,000 spams/day at an average cost to the user of 0.1 seconds (since most now get caught in filters), and presume that he did this for about a year.
That comes to about 11 person-years.
Then you figure in how much money he made from his spamming scams... According to the courts, he was taking in $400K-$700K/month. Much of that was essentially money for SCAMS. Even if you presume $10% net profit, that's still about $50K/month. or 1/2Million/year. If you want to amortize that down to $50K/year, a 9 year sentence for a year's worth of spamming isn't too bad.
Then you should consider the people that he scammed. He scammed probably in the range of a million people -- many of them people who were desparate foe some sort of income to begin with. For many of the most desperate it was money that they could ill afford -- so that he could live the high life.
He cost a lot of people time and money -- time that we'll never get back. He didn't just victimize AOL. he essentially victimized the entire country. There is no way to charge him proportional to what he cost us worldwide. If anything 9 years is actually a little thin on that. However, I think it may be enough to make other spammers think twice about what they're doing, so I'd be happy to let it stand.
Shotgun: Pull trigger, pull pump back, and release to load next round
The pump action would be just a single actuatior... Pull triber, activate eject mechannism.
The advantage of a shotgun is that it doesn't require as much in terms of aim.... As long as you're in the general area, you get some sort of hit. I'm expecting that the purpose of the thing is essentially cover-fire, not hunt and kill.
I mean, who expects a machine to stand up to a hit from a shotgun?
First of all, I'm all with you on the imagining "BLAM!... Man, that's some hard coding!"
As for why they'd do something like that, Given that they're probably paying $4,000,000 a shot (excuse the pun) for these things, you figure they should be able to survive at least light arms fire.
10,000 people fell for it. Isn't that rather depressing?
"A one-in-a-million shot isn't a big deal if you've got 20million bullets."
These people probably sent out 20-100million spams.. that means that the response rate was between 1/2000 and 1/10,000.
Add in that some of these people were desparate not stupid. Desparate people will sometimes do illogical things and try long-shots that seem stupid to us. When nothing else seems to be working, it really is a logical thing to do.
When you remove the impossible, then whatever is left -- no matter how improbable has got to be the truth"
-- Sherlock Holmes (paraphrase)
How many accidents have there been?... Probably less than "normal" energy plants.
Two things to note here:
Nuclear plants are way more tightly regulated than regular power plants are -- so there better be fewer accidents per plant.
The reason why they're more tightly regulated is that the absolute worst case scenario for a conventional plant is a big fire, explosion and, perhaps, a couple hundred dead worksrs
The worst case for a nuclear accident is, uhm, well The Chernobyl accident resulted in 30 immediate deaths, god knows how many cancer deaths and made 4000 square miles of land unusable for the forseeable future.[[ read: centuries if not longer ]].
Those are hefty odds. -- and with bush spending another 4 years semi-randomly blowing up random muslims, somebody might just decide to get nasty BACK, and a nuke plant would make a really juicy target.
The japanese machine is 'only' 2,048 processors. This would give an average of about 6.3GB per processor -- but SGI uses NUMA, so it's not quite that straight-forward.
(from the original article:) In Windows I used the "dir" command to get a directory listing, in Linux I attempted to call the "ls" program.n Windows I used the "dir" command to get a directory listing, in Linux I attempted to call the "ls" program.
It's surprising what you can pull off just using shell builtins...
ls -> echo *
or: for name in *; do echo " $name"; done
cat -> while read line ; do echo "$line" ; done < $file
telnet -> '( { cat 0>&1 1>&2 ; } & { cat ; } ) >/dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/25
(replace 'cat' with the script above, sans redirection)
You think of these things if you've ever had to do a syatem recovery.
Can anybody figure out how to do the equivalent of 'ls -s' using bash builtins?
Guess who didn't read the article...
"accounts for 65.64% of all breaches recorded, with 154,846 successfully compromised Linux 24/7 online computers of all flavours."
That[s 65% of all manual breaches. If you want to breach a Linux box, you pretty much have to do it manually.. There aren't that many automated Linux viruses that actually work. If you want to breach a Windows box, you simply have to figure out which back door it already has installed, and use that.. No need for a manual breach of Windows unless you want one specific box, and you want it today.
Wait! Everytime Microsoft makes this argument in defense of Windows shoddy security, Slashdot laughs them down. Suddenly the argument is valid for Linux?
The response to the 'popularity' point for Linux vs Windows is that the popularity of Windows does not come close to explaining the statistical difference... Counterexamples include considering that Linux is a fer more popular internet server than Windows is, but still gets fewer total exploits in that field.
For Linux Vs Mac, It's harder to say that the difference is or isn't due to the market share, and the authors are simply acknowledging that. Perhaps, in time, someone will do a study to attempt to distinguish that difference (and we can then bash and/or praise that to our hearts' content)
The scary thing about the US is that it's so much better organized than China. It could do a much better job of being totalitarian if it really put it's mind to it.
We'll see what happens after the election, won't we?
Slashdot Mirror
A monkey responds:
That's CBC, not CBS. Their noon news show had a pretty glowing report on Firefox 1.0 release and the reasons to move to it. Didn't see anything on their web site though.
No big deal. Just do the 8-step followed by the 4 step (or vice versa).
And I'm gonna sue you for trying to claim that 'grey' isn't a legal spelling. Gray may be the preferred, but both are legal.
- a really big sonic boom, or
-
a really big boom.
This message brought to you by the letter "B".My expectation is that one side effect could be an increase in the number and/or severity of hurricanes and tropical storms (unless we build mid-ocean wind farms (!)) as the backed up thermal energy seeks release.
An analogy: If someone looks as if they're about to step in front of a car and you push them, the facth that they might have died anyways won't get you acquitted.
The polar ice caps are far older than the most recent ice age Much of the ice that is now melting is over 100K years old. The last ice age was 25K years ago. Similarly with some of the antarctic ice shelves that have disintegrated in the last year or two.
TANSTAAFL (There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch).
The results of this research doesn't surprise me in the least. I agree that the actual results may be a bit different, but the general result is almost a no-brainer.
For the most part, winds are convection currents -- generated by the difference in temperature and humidity between different spots in the world -- but heat is the serious driver in this. As an overall results, physics will call for an equalization of states -- this means cooling the equator and heating the poles.
Windmills bleed off some of the kinetic energy from this process, as such, they're almost guaranteed to slow the process of pumping heat from the equator to the poles.
This is, however, probably a good thing, because other studies have concluded that the arctic will be (and has been) more affected by global warming than the temperate and tropical regions, so slowing the process would actually help to cut back some of the side effects of global warming, and possibly help to protect the polar ice caps (and thus moderate the resulting ocean level rise).
It's not a question if projects like this on a large scale would affect the weather. The answer to that is a no-brainer (yes). The question is how, and (probably more importantly) how we could most beneficially manage the resulting side-effects.
That comes to about 11 person-years.
Then you figure in how much money he made from his spamming scams... According to the courts, he was taking in $400K-$700K/month. Much of that was essentially money for SCAMS. Even if you presume $10% net profit, that's still about $50K/month. or 1/2Million/year. If you want to amortize that down to $50K/year, a 9 year sentence for a year's worth of spamming isn't too bad.
Then you should consider the people that he scammed. He scammed probably in the range of a million people -- many of them people who were desparate foe some sort of income to begin with. For many of the most desperate it was money that they could ill afford -- so that he could live the high life.
He cost a lot of people time and money -- time that we'll never get back. He didn't just victimize AOL. he essentially victimized the entire country. There is no way to charge him proportional to what he cost us worldwide. If anything 9 years is actually a little thin on that. However, I think it may be enough to make other spammers think twice about what they're doing, so I'd be happy to let it stand.
No. He's talking about IE. He has 18 spyware programs installed, and counting.
For some people, that may depend on who's weilding the whips & chains.
No dissention on the bee stings and Outlook.
I'll get around to it. I just haven't figured out what to replace it with yet.
The pump action would be just a single actuatior... Pull triber, activate eject mechannism.
The advantage of a shotgun is that it doesn't require as much in terms of aim.... As long as you're in the general area, you get some sort of hit. I'm expecting that the purpose of the thing is essentially cover-fire, not hunt and kill.
First of all, I'm all with you on the imagining " BLAM! ... Man, that's some hard coding!"
As for why they'd do something like that, Given that they're probably paying $4,000,000 a shot (excuse the pun) for these things, you figure they should be able to survive at least light arms fire.
"A one-in-a-million shot isn't a big deal if you've got 20million bullets."
These people probably sent out 20-100million spams.. that means that the response rate was between 1/2000 and 1/10,000.
Add in that some of these people were desparate not stupid. Desparate people will sometimes do illogical things and try long-shots that seem stupid to us. When nothing else seems to be working, it really is a logical thing to do.
Two things to note here:
- Nuclear plants are way more tightly regulated than regular power plants are -- so there better be fewer accidents per plant.
- The reason why they're more tightly regulated is that the absolute worst case scenario for a conventional plant is a big fire, explosion and, perhaps, a couple hundred dead worksrs
Those are hefty odds. -- and with bush spending another 4 years semi-randomly blowing up random muslims, somebody might just decide to get nasty BACK, and a nuke plant would make a really juicy target.The worst case for a nuclear accident is, uhm, well The Chernobyl accident resulted in 30 immediate deaths, god knows how many cancer deaths and made 4000 square miles of land unusable for the forseeable future.[[ read: centuries if not longer ]].
I mean, They gotta sue somebody!
The japanese machine is 'only' 2,048 processors. This would give an average of about 6.3GB per processor -- but SGI uses NUMA, so it's not quite that straight-forward.
In Windows I used the "dir" command to get a directory listing, in Linux I attempted to call the "ls" program.n Windows I used the "dir" command to get a directory listing, in Linux I attempted to call the "ls" program.
It's surprising what you can pull off just using shell builtins...
- ls -> echo *
- cat -> while read line ; do echo "$line" ; done < $file
- telnet -> '( { cat 0>&1 1>&2 ; } & { cat ; } ) >
/dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/25
You think of these things if you've ever had to do a syatem recovery.or: for name in *; do echo " $name"; done
(replace 'cat' with the script above, sans redirection)
Can anybody figure out how to do the equivalent of 'ls -s' using bash builtins?
[ redacted swearing ]
"accounts for 65.64% of all breaches recorded, with 154,846 successfully compromised Linux 24/7 online computers of all flavours."
That[s 65% of all manual breaches. If you want to breach a Linux box, you pretty much have to do it manually.. There aren't that many automated Linux viruses that actually work. If you want to breach a Windows box, you simply have to figure out which back door it already has installed, and use that.. No need for a manual breach of Windows unless you want one specific box, and you want it today.
The response to the 'popularity' point for Linux vs Windows is that the popularity of Windows does not come close to explaining the statistical difference... Counterexamples include considering that Linux is a fer more popular internet server than Windows is, but still gets fewer total exploits in that field.
For Linux Vs Mac, It's harder to say that the difference is or isn't due to the market share, and the authors are simply acknowledging that. Perhaps, in time, someone will do a study to attempt to distinguish that difference (and we can then bash and/or praise that to our hearts' content)
We'll see what happens after the election, won't we?
I can already see the porn site owners going "Kaching!!!!"
two different ways.