That's not the point. The point is that instead of making everyone have long passwords, you could take that same time and effort and train them about security risks that are more likely to happen, like them getting an email with an attachment, or using a browser other than IE. The chances of an attacker getting the password file are lower than the chances of a user doing something that will infect their computer because the user hasn't been taught correctly, so why focus on the passwords?
External burner + XO laptop is cheaper than two other laptops, even if you have to replace the burner and XO two or three times on the trip. This is the perfect solution, really.
Robotic missions make a lot of sense at first, and then it becomes more and more practical to send humans. It's a lot easier and more cost-effective for them to just send a robot to antarctica, and they're not sure if it's even worth sending that much. If they send equipment and it turns out to be a lot harder and more worthless than they thought, it's a lot easier to just leave the equipment there for recovery later, if at all. With actual humans down there, they need to send more initially to keep them alive and then they have to get them out.
However, if it turns out to really be the ideal place for an observatory, then they'll be more likely to build the facilities out and actually send a team of people. Since we've already done the robotic exploration of mars, we can now send humans and expect a reasonable rate of return on the risk.
You do realize that Puerto Rico is part of the US, right? That's why they say "mainland" and don't say "foreign" in the summary. What this really shows is that factories everywhere can fuck up.
The problem is that the lawyer was using the wrong piece of software. If you're routinely dealing with communications that are sensitive, then you should be typing the full address in every time or use lists that have been verified to be correct.
What's funny is that the software ended up revealing a lot. Don't you find it interesting that one of the lawyers happened to have this reporter in their contact book?
Fourth, they can do it faster. Since people don't need to get out of their vehicles, it could save time at the pump, especially if mixed with a program where you don't have to present your credit card every time. If the robots have a high enough reliability, they can also push the gas through the nozzle faster. During rush hour this would be very useful, since I've seen cars line up at plenty of gas stations.
Or maybe not allow corporations to own robots, and only let people own 1 robot. One which can either work in place of you and you get a paycheck from that. Right, because societies that have fought progress have traditionally done better than those that haven't.
If robots can replace all the non creative jobs, perhaps it will be time for a form of socialism We're so far away from this it's not even funny. If we can't make an AI that can beat a competent Go player, how are we supposed to create an AI that can properly handle local ad campaigns, program other software with vague parameters, design a more productive model of robot, etc? You're looking at something that will take decades at least to come around. Humans are versatile to the extreme, able to run long distances, manipulate small and large things, climb most surfaces, etc. Robots, on the other hand, are built and designed for one purpose, and trying to do something more complex with a reasonable margin of error has proven to be beyond our current abilities.
Since it'll be decades before this revolution you're hinting at starts, I for one am going to wait to see what happens, because who knows what will have happened by then?
These are not the actions of a country that is afraid of imminent invasion You act as if invasion were our only option, that we didn't have weapons that literally deliver themselves, and that the air force isn't under-utilized compared to the other branches of the armed forces right now.
You do realize that the best way to make sure everyone in the world knows about these cable cuts are to make sure they're all down at once, right? If the NSA wanted to do this, they would do one cable this month, another cable next month, and on and on. The issue wouldn't get a lot of publicity and everyone would go about their lives, with less than 1000 people ever aware that a cable had been cut in the first place.
The whole thing is bullshit. There's no way anyone spent more than 15 minutes on these stupid answers. Also, typical politician speak, in which they take 5 sentences to say "I agree".
. Reading competing materials--seeing things that challenge one's own point of view--can only be healthy for one's point of view That's an over-general statement just waiting for a counter example...
It's traditional for high performance rigs. If someone wants to spend a lot of money on a computer, liquid cooled has been the standard for a while. Considering how much I'm willing to spend on a computer, it's a little ridiculous, but if you're going to spend over $3,000, why not?
And religion can guide us in those decisions?...Why should their writings tell us what's right and wrong? Religion can be viewed as a moral framework that's been handed down through the generations, being added to and subtracted from to reflect what the people of that time thought was good and just. Morals don't change all that much from one generation to another; as you said, they've been evolved into the human race. If this is the case, then having the wisdom of people that came before guide us in those decisions makes sense. Use your own brain, but don't believe for a second that religion doesn't have something to offer. Even if it's just a bunch of shit that someone made up and that some people took too seriously, at least you have the analysis and the critiques and support for the writings that have come down. Relying on your instincts to solve the problems of morality is like relying on your instincts to say what you should and should not eat. Study and thought should be put into it.
The other aspect of this is that people change as they go through their lives. I'm only 23, but I know a lot more about life and morality than I did at 18. I'm sure that perspective will change again by the time I'm a father and again by the time I'm a grandfather. Getting more knowledge of what other people have thought were moral through their lives can help balance your own perspective.
If you nuked the mantle it would in addition to killing lots of people and therefore reducing that countries productivity, also tend to cause all kinds of environmental destruction which has the potential to destroy the biosphere. You're missing the point. The results of nuking the mantle are bad, but science can't show what's bad and why. Your personal morals may say that destroying the biosphere is bad, but there's no experiment you can do to show that it's bad. There is no "evil particle" whose levels go up whenever something bad happens. There's no measurable way to say whether something's good or bad, ultimately it's about someone's opinion and their conscience.
You could just as easily say that about murder, robbery, etc. "Why do some non-sociopathic types feel they need to impart their beliefs on everyone else? Don't agree with or like serial killing - fine - don't do it. Just don't tell me what to do."
If a fetus is a human, then abortion is murder. If a blastocyst is a human, then destroying them to make more stem cell lines is murder. Now, whether or not a fetus or a blastocyst are humans is a good, worthwhile debate. Bitching about "religious types" just clouds the issues of morality.
if he can come up with a rational scientific reason for not cloning There is no rational scientific reason for not doing ANYTHING. Nuking the entire crust of the planet to see if you can get it to liquefy and join with the mantle is a valid scientific experiment. It's an extreme example, but that's the point: science has no morals whatsoever, its only pursuit is knowledge.
What we need to determine is whether it's right or moral to do something. Is a single sperm considered a human life? I would say no. Is an egg? I would say no. What about a blastocyst? Fetus? It's easy to say that a baby's not a life until they're born, but what if my wife's going into labor, but outside the hospital some jackass punches her in the stomach until the baby dies? Is that assault or is it murder?
Science doesn't have these answers. If you look purely to science to see whether research should be done or not, you end up skinning Jews alive to see how long they live just as easily as you end up shooting beta particles at a thin gold sheet. Science can give us the information to make those decisions, but science can't make them for us.
I'm going to disagree with you. This debate's been raging for years, and he's calling for people to try the most available one on the market right now. He's not going to get money from it, all he'll get is maybe some development done for it. Since he's a professor and could just as easily make the development an assignment or extra credit, it's much more likely that he's trying to inject some experience into the debate instead of turning it into some nerdy gladiatorial fight between him and Linus.
The real accusation you should be making is that he's a coward and a chicken because he's really only scared of Linus bringing his wife to the match.
Linux is only cheaper if your time is worthless And if the amount of time that it takes to get linux running is so much more than the time it takes to get OSX running that the time overrides the low cost of the OS. Assuming that everything you need to do is available for Ubuntu (which, for me, 95% of it is), then it literally takes less than an hour or two to get everything running. I've set up a fresh OSX install, and it took longer to set up than Ubuntu did. With its simple interface for adding and removing programs, Ubuntu wins the "easy to use OS" award in my book, hands down. Even after I had to get kpackage to install some of the more advanced software and packages, I came out ahead.
Unless there's a simple to use program in OSX that allows you to download and install (for free) 90% of the software that runs on the platform, then I'm going to have to say that Ubuntu wins the speed contest hands down.
To be fair, though, neither standard is very open at all. I tend to agree with the Opera dude who says that HTML+CSS is already a perfect document standard if it's implemented properly.
You're right, if people don't pay attention to their abuse of the court system and their attacking of people without the resources to fight back, they'll definitely stop on their own. After all, there's no incentive to their suing for thousands of dollars per song unless Slashdot gets indignant, is there?
I don't want to walk in on someone in my bathroom, yet I still keep locks on the door. Sometimes things need protection from stumbling upon them accidentally.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not the point. The point is that instead of making everyone have long passwords, you could take that same time and effort and train them about security risks that are more likely to happen, like them getting an email with an attachment, or using a browser other than IE. The chances of an attacker getting the password file are lower than the chances of a user doing something that will infect their computer because the user hasn't been taught correctly, so why focus on the passwords?
External burner + XO laptop is cheaper than two other laptops, even if you have to replace the burner and XO two or three times on the trip. This is the perfect solution, really.
Robotic missions make a lot of sense at first, and then it becomes more and more practical to send humans. It's a lot easier and more cost-effective for them to just send a robot to antarctica, and they're not sure if it's even worth sending that much. If they send equipment and it turns out to be a lot harder and more worthless than they thought, it's a lot easier to just leave the equipment there for recovery later, if at all. With actual humans down there, they need to send more initially to keep them alive and then they have to get them out.
However, if it turns out to really be the ideal place for an observatory, then they'll be more likely to build the facilities out and actually send a team of people. Since we've already done the robotic exploration of mars, we can now send humans and expect a reasonable rate of return on the risk.
I think WinFS alone has been worse than DNF myself.
You do realize that Puerto Rico is part of the US, right? That's why they say "mainland" and don't say "foreign" in the summary. What this really shows is that factories everywhere can fuck up.
The problem is that the lawyer was using the wrong piece of software. If you're routinely dealing with communications that are sensitive, then you should be typing the full address in every time or use lists that have been verified to be correct.
What's funny is that the software ended up revealing a lot. Don't you find it interesting that one of the lawyers happened to have this reporter in their contact book?
Fourth, they can do it faster. Since people don't need to get out of their vehicles, it could save time at the pump, especially if mixed with a program where you don't have to present your credit card every time. If the robots have a high enough reliability, they can also push the gas through the nozzle faster. During rush hour this would be very useful, since I've seen cars line up at plenty of gas stations.
Since it'll be decades before this revolution you're hinting at starts, I for one am going to wait to see what happens, because who knows what will have happened by then?
You do realize that the best way to make sure everyone in the world knows about these cable cuts are to make sure they're all down at once, right? If the NSA wanted to do this, they would do one cable this month, another cable next month, and on and on. The issue wouldn't get a lot of publicity and everyone would go about their lives, with less than 1000 people ever aware that a cable had been cut in the first place.
The whole thing is bullshit. There's no way anyone spent more than 15 minutes on these stupid answers. Also, typical politician speak, in which they take 5 sentences to say "I agree".
Like that's going to effect the lives of anyone on this site.
It's traditional for high performance rigs. If someone wants to spend a lot of money on a computer, liquid cooled has been the standard for a while. Considering how much I'm willing to spend on a computer, it's a little ridiculous, but if you're going to spend over $3,000, why not?
The other aspect of this is that people change as they go through their lives. I'm only 23, but I know a lot more about life and morality than I did at 18. I'm sure that perspective will change again by the time I'm a father and again by the time I'm a grandfather. Getting more knowledge of what other people have thought were moral through their lives can help balance your own perspective.
You could just as easily say that about murder, robbery, etc. "Why do some non-sociopathic types feel they need to impart their beliefs on everyone else? Don't agree with or like serial killing - fine - don't do it. Just don't tell me what to do."
If a fetus is a human, then abortion is murder. If a blastocyst is a human, then destroying them to make more stem cell lines is murder. Now, whether or not a fetus or a blastocyst are humans is a good, worthwhile debate. Bitching about "religious types" just clouds the issues of morality.
What we need to determine is whether it's right or moral to do something. Is a single sperm considered a human life? I would say no. Is an egg? I would say no. What about a blastocyst? Fetus? It's easy to say that a baby's not a life until they're born, but what if my wife's going into labor, but outside the hospital some jackass punches her in the stomach until the baby dies? Is that assault or is it murder?
Science doesn't have these answers. If you look purely to science to see whether research should be done or not, you end up skinning Jews alive to see how long they live just as easily as you end up shooting beta particles at a thin gold sheet. Science can give us the information to make those decisions, but science can't make them for us.
I'm going to disagree with you. This debate's been raging for years, and he's calling for people to try the most available one on the market right now. He's not going to get money from it, all he'll get is maybe some development done for it. Since he's a professor and could just as easily make the development an assignment or extra credit, it's much more likely that he's trying to inject some experience into the debate instead of turning it into some nerdy gladiatorial fight between him and Linus.
The real accusation you should be making is that he's a coward and a chicken because he's really only scared of Linus bringing his wife to the match.
Unless there's a simple to use program in OSX that allows you to download and install (for free) 90% of the software that runs on the platform, then I'm going to have to say that Ubuntu wins the speed contest hands down.
To be fair, though, neither standard is very open at all. I tend to agree with the Opera dude who says that HTML+CSS is already a perfect document standard if it's implemented properly.
Amen. What does that say about all those European powers who insult the US?
You're right, if people don't pay attention to their abuse of the court system and their attacking of people without the resources to fight back, they'll definitely stop on their own. After all, there's no incentive to their suing for thousands of dollars per song unless Slashdot gets indignant, is there?
I don't want to walk in on someone in my bathroom, yet I still keep locks on the door. Sometimes things need protection from stumbling upon them accidentally.