Go to Panera Bread. They have free wi-fi there, too. The food is quite a bit better, and healthier, than all that fried and preprocessed crap that McDonald's dishes out,...
How do you suggest Panera Bread handle it when their seats start getting filled-up by people using the Wi-Fi?
Your solution has nothing to do with the problem of the article.
Depends on the state. Some states allow violence to stop felonies in progress, and attempted murder is certainly a felony.
People have gone to jail for shooting police who were invading their home. To them, it looked like a criminal invasion, and they would have been completely justified otherwise. But the impossibility of distinguishing a police raid in the night from an armed, criminal invasion isn't always acknowledged by the courts. Shoot an officer planting a GPS on your car, and you can bet you will go to jail--clever arguments or not.
When I was near Anza Borrego this spring, I saw several shipping containers out in the desert where people were living. Most had air-conditioners mounted, but still, it reach 50C in the summer. It just amazes me that anyone can live in one. Maybe they leave for the summer. I don't really know.
This isn't about safety. No, these politicians know exactly what they're doing. They LOVE stuff like this happening. It just gives them one more way to subjugate the public.
Exactly. "...the new rules, which the cabinet hopes to pass before a general election in September...".
The 3cm Wikipedia quotes is *BODY SIZE*. I'm talking toe-to-toe. When someone asks your height, unless you're an amputee you *do* count your legs don't you? "I'm 4 foot. Oh LOL. You mean with my legs too? I always forget those."
To be fair, it didn't clarify that it referred to body size, rather than legspan, until after he had linked to it. When he cited that figure, I reviewed the referenced wikipedia provided, saw that it did indeed refer to body size, and edited the page to reflect that fact.
The wikipedia link you posted says Wolf Spiders don't grow to more than 3cm... so either those aren't Wolf Spiders running around your house or you're rather prone to exaggeration yourself.
Or the wikipedia page is just wrong. He's probably got Carolina Wolf Spiders, which can grow
substantially larger.
They are 6 CENTIMETERS! We Australians were one of the first to convert to metric and that's a metric ruler in the article.
You are correct. However, I meant the leg span, which is 16cm (6.3 inches), as it is the measurement that arachnophiles tend to use when comparing the size of spiders. The length of the body tells relatively little, as the shape varies so dramatically from family to family, or even from genus to genus.
They're only 6 inches across which means they're relatively small tarantulas, and they're not venomous enough to kill you, which by Australian standards is a blessing. And there aren't even that many---the article talks about people finding individual spiders. "It's not plague proportions but a number have been spotted around the district," according to Mr Geiszler. This is a non-story.
This sort of safety mechanism is stupid and expensive and really won't do much to save lives.
35% of pedestrian vehicle collisions are the fault of the driver only, according to this review. Even if we totally discount the lives of idiot pedestrians, approximately 2 700 pedestrians are killed annually through no fault of their own. One can make an argument that that is an insignificant number, and perhaps it is.
I too have seen my share of idiot pedestrians, but let me contribute my anecdote on the incompetence of drivers. As I was walking towards a major intersection, I witnessed a car careen off the road, through the street-sign at the corner I was approaching, along the sidewalk, and back onto the street along which I walked, where it finally came to a stop upon striking the opposite curb. I do not know how the driver managed to lose control so badly, and on such a straight road, but regardless, he managed it, and at the speed he traveled, would likely have killed anyone waiting at the intersection.
This is seriously awesome. I applaud the good work these researchers are doing. However, this line caught my eye:
The system uses radar and infrared technology to "pre-detect" a collision and inflates quickly enough to cushion the impact, said Roger Hardy of the university's Cranfield Impact Centre.
It seems possible that such a sensor could be duped with false input on the proper frequencies, causing the bag to deploy. This would likely be a malicious and expensive prank, as well as obstructing the drivers view. Of course, it would require technical expertise, putting it out of reach of most pranksters.
It doesn't look like a weapon to me. It looks like a camera with a boat paddle attached to it. If a photographer were taking a picture of you, all that you'd notice would be the camera on the bipod.
It probably won't be mistaken for a rifle, but it could easily be mistaken for a poorly conceived improvised grenade launcher. It has the same general form as several non-improvised models, including the China Lake NATIC, M79, and HK69.
If medical records can't even be protected at the state level, what makes people believe that national electronic health records will be any safer?
Single point of failure. It's easier to secure one system with everybody's eyes on it than thousands of systems, when none draws enough attention for their to be any consequences for failure.
Additionally, if only the relevant state computer system goes down, I don't think you're any worse off than in your scenario when the national system is down. Just because there is another database out there with the information they need doesn't mean the hospital will have access to it when the system they've been relying on dies.
I'm not sure I like the idea of a monolithic national electronic health records system, but I don't believe it is flawed for security reasons.
It's a stupid trick, but the whitelist can be disabled easily. Go to Adblock preferences and disable the "NoScript Development Support" filter. It doesn't seem to re-enable the whitelist on restart. It may when it updates.
Note that STL swap(T&,T&) handles this case just fine, even if you try to use it on the same variable. Claim you'd never be so stupid if you'd like, but if anyone else uses your code, they will likely be annoyed if your custom swap(T&,T&) function fails so badly without warning.
You're missing the point---it breaks when one of the variables is a reference to the other.
It's a neat algorithm, but the case in which it fails just goes to show that these skills aren't irrelevant. Yes, you should know what a reference is. Using your compiler and libraries as a crutch for your lack of understanding leads to unpleasant bugs.
Perhaps then there is a market for firearms escrow aboard ships stationed just outside of a nation's territorial waters. You could leave port, arm yourself, sail wherever, and leave your guns behind before arriving in the next port.
Honest question. Does he then argue that men shouldn't have sex with their wives when they are pregnant? Wasted seeds...
It's quite a reasonable question. He doesn't directly address it, but he does address the question of sex between sterile couples.
Now I am speaking of a way from which, in itself, generation could not result: such would be any emission of semen apart from the natural union of male and female. For which reason, sins of this type are called contrary to nature. But, if by accident generation cannot result from the emission of semen, then this is not a reason for it being against nature, or a sin; as for instance, if the woman happens to be sterile.
Thus I would expect him to be perfectly accepting of sex under the conditions you mention. Likewise, he would not accept sex between an unmarried, sterile couple, even though children cannot result, as their sterility is an accident---they should continue to follow the proper and natural order.
Thomas Aquinas argues that "each and every part of man, and every one of his acts, should attain the proper end. Now though the male semen is superfluous in regard to the preservation of the individual, it is nevertheless necessary in regard to the propagation of the species." [He here argues that the purpose of semen is only to be emitted for reproduction] "Therefore the emission of semen ought to be so ordered that it will result in both the production of the proper offspring and in the upbringing of this offspring." That is, he writes that while ejaculation for reproduction is desirable, it is only desirable in marriage, as this is [he goes on to argue] the only natural state in which the offspring will be raised properly. You can't sleep with your neighbor's wife, even if you don't use a condom.
Furthermore, he writes, "It is evident from this that every emission of semen in such a way that generation cannot follow is contrary to the good for man."
The Catholic Church is a rather conservative institution, so yes, such arguments are still relevant.
The source of the preceding quotes is "Summa against the Gentiles" in Reading the Middle Ages, edited by Barbara Rosenwein, in case you wondered and would like to pursue his argument in more depth.
If the legislation is enacted, Karlung said Bahnhof would continue to stay within the bounds of the law.
"If the state decides that everything has to be handed over to various private organisations[sic], then we will of course comply, even if I think it's unfortunate and hope public opinion pushes the matter in a different direction," he said.
According to wikipedia, the Swedish constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto criminal laws, so again, they should be just fine.
Stefan Johansson, deputy director at the Swedish justice ministry, confirmed that Bahnhof was not breaking the law by choosing to destroy IP address details.
"The IPRED regulations do not entail any obligation of this kind. They are only concerned with the retrieval of existing information," he said.
Ah, but nobody is claiming they can do so accurately. They can, however, make educated predictions, some of which will be right. It's the shotgun approach. The point isn't in the predictions, but in the ethical issues they address, so that others can take responsible actions if some of those technologies become big.
The headline could better have read "Academics to predict pitfalls of potential next Twitters."
It's even less ethical than sending your BT traffic over Tor, and strikes me as much less safe. It doesn't seem like it would take many pissed off admins before someone thinks to forward their logs to the appropriate **AA.
You're missing the point. What is sad is this absurd sense of entitlement. YouTube is free. They've put up a website and are willing to host your videos on it. There is no guarantee that they will remain, no contract specifying minimum uptime, not even the slightest suggestion that they will ever fight for you in court. YouTube is not a right---not a natural right, nor a constitutional right. They can keep or remove videos at a whim. If you don't like those terms, go pay for hosting.
You can buy a robotic lawnmower from Walmart. It's about $1600. For much less than that, you can pay a landscaping crew or the kid down the street to mow the lawn. This is one of those tasks that doesn't make sense to automate. It can be done cheaply by willing humans without putting them at unacceptable risk.
This lawnmower? The one that requires a wire be placed around the lawn, and is intended for lawns of only about a 5th of an acre?
You don't seem to get the point of this at all. It's not for mowing small lawns. This is for large fields or parks for which a tractor-mower was the most practical option anyway. I suspect that after a year or two of not needing to hire someone to drive around mowing on that expensive tractor, you can save quite a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
Go to Panera Bread. They have free wi-fi there, too. The food is quite a bit better, and healthier, than all that fried and preprocessed crap that McDonald's dishes out,...
How do you suggest Panera Bread handle it when their seats start getting filled-up by people using the Wi-Fi?
Your solution has nothing to do with the problem of the article.
Depends on the state. Some states allow violence to stop felonies in progress, and attempted murder is certainly a felony.
People have gone to jail for shooting police who were invading their home. To them, it looked like a criminal invasion, and they would have been completely justified otherwise. But the impossibility of distinguishing a police raid in the night from an armed, criminal invasion isn't always acknowledged by the courts. Shoot an officer planting a GPS on your car, and you can bet you will go to jail--clever arguments or not.
When I was near Anza Borrego this spring, I saw several shipping containers out in the desert where people were living. Most had air-conditioners mounted, but still, it reach 50C in the summer. It just amazes me that anyone can live in one. Maybe they leave for the summer. I don't really know.
This isn't about safety. No, these politicians know exactly what they're doing. They LOVE stuff like this happening. It just gives them one more way to subjugate the public.
Exactly. "...the new rules, which the cabinet hopes to pass before a general election in September...".
The 3cm Wikipedia quotes is *BODY SIZE*. I'm talking toe-to-toe. When someone asks your height, unless you're an amputee you *do* count your legs don't you? "I'm 4 foot. Oh LOL. You mean with my legs too? I always forget those."
To be fair, it didn't clarify that it referred to body size, rather than legspan, until after he had linked to it. When he cited that figure, I reviewed the referenced wikipedia provided, saw that it did indeed refer to body size, and edited the page to reflect that fact.
The wikipedia link you posted says Wolf Spiders don't grow to more than 3cm... so either those aren't Wolf Spiders running around your house or you're rather prone to exaggeration yourself.
Or the wikipedia page is just wrong. He's probably got Carolina Wolf Spiders, which can grow substantially larger.
They are 6 CENTIMETERS! We Australians were one of the first to convert to metric and that's a metric ruler in the article.
You are correct. However, I meant the leg span, which is 16cm (6.3 inches), as it is the measurement that arachnophiles tend to use when comparing the size of spiders. The length of the body tells relatively little, as the shape varies so dramatically from family to family, or even from genus to genus.
They're only 6 inches across which means they're relatively small tarantulas, and they're not venomous enough to kill you, which by Australian standards is a blessing. And there aren't even that many---the article talks about people finding individual spiders. "It's not plague proportions but a number have been spotted around the district," according to Mr Geiszler. This is a non-story.
This sort of safety mechanism is stupid and expensive and really won't do much to save lives.
35% of pedestrian vehicle collisions are the fault of the driver only, according to this review. Even if we totally discount the lives of idiot pedestrians, approximately 2 700 pedestrians are killed annually through no fault of their own. One can make an argument that that is an insignificant number, and perhaps it is.
I too have seen my share of idiot pedestrians, but let me contribute my anecdote on the incompetence of drivers. As I was walking towards a major intersection, I witnessed a car careen off the road, through the street-sign at the corner I was approaching, along the sidewalk, and back onto the street along which I walked, where it finally came to a stop upon striking the opposite curb. I do not know how the driver managed to lose control so badly, and on such a straight road, but regardless, he managed it, and at the speed he traveled, would likely have killed anyone waiting at the intersection.
This is seriously awesome. I applaud the good work these researchers are doing. However, this line caught my eye:
The system uses radar and infrared technology to "pre-detect" a collision and inflates quickly enough to cushion the impact, said Roger Hardy of the university's Cranfield Impact Centre.
It seems possible that such a sensor could be duped with false input on the proper frequencies, causing the bag to deploy. This would likely be a malicious and expensive prank, as well as obstructing the drivers view. Of course, it would require technical expertise, putting it out of reach of most pranksters.
It doesn't look like a weapon to me. It looks like a camera with a boat paddle attached to it. If a photographer were taking a picture of you, all that you'd notice would be the camera on the bipod.
It probably won't be mistaken for a rifle, but it could easily be mistaken for a poorly conceived improvised grenade launcher. It has the same general form as several non-improvised models, including the China Lake NATIC, M79, and HK69.
If medical records can't even be protected at the state level, what makes people believe that national electronic health records will be any safer?
Single point of failure. It's easier to secure one system with everybody's eyes on it than thousands of systems, when none draws enough attention for their to be any consequences for failure.
Additionally, if only the relevant state computer system goes down, I don't think you're any worse off than in your scenario when the national system is down. Just because there is another database out there with the information they need doesn't mean the hospital will have access to it when the system they've been relying on dies.
I'm not sure I like the idea of a monolithic national electronic health records system, but I don't believe it is flawed for security reasons.
It's a stupid trick, but the whitelist can be disabled easily. Go to Adblock preferences and disable the "NoScript Development Support" filter. It doesn't seem to re-enable the whitelist on restart. It may when it updates.
Note that STL swap(T&,T&) handles this case just fine, even if you try to use it on the same variable. Claim you'd never be so stupid if you'd like, but if anyone else uses your code, they will likely be annoyed if your custom swap(T&,T&) function fails so badly without warning.
You're missing the point---it breaks when one of the variables is a reference to the other.
It's a neat algorithm, but the case in which it fails just goes to show that these skills aren't irrelevant. Yes, you should know what a reference is. Using your compiler and libraries as a crutch for your lack of understanding leads to unpleasant bugs.
Perhaps then there is a market for firearms escrow aboard ships stationed just outside of a nation's territorial waters. You could leave port, arm yourself, sail wherever, and leave your guns behind before arriving in the next port.
Honest question. Does he then argue that men shouldn't have sex with their wives when they are pregnant? Wasted seeds...
It's quite a reasonable question. He doesn't directly address it, but he does address the question of sex between sterile couples.
Now I am speaking of a way from which, in itself, generation could not result: such would be any emission of semen apart from the natural union of male and female. For which reason, sins of this type are called contrary to nature. But, if by accident generation cannot result from the emission of semen, then this is not a reason for it being against nature, or a sin; as for instance, if the woman happens to be sterile.
Thus I would expect him to be perfectly accepting of sex under the conditions you mention. Likewise, he would not accept sex between an unmarried, sterile couple, even though children cannot result, as their sterility is an accident---they should continue to follow the proper and natural order.
Thomas Aquinas argues that "each and every part of man, and every one of his acts, should attain the proper end. Now though the male semen is superfluous in regard to the preservation of the individual, it is nevertheless necessary in regard to the propagation of the species." [He here argues that the purpose of semen is only to be emitted for reproduction] "Therefore the emission of semen ought to be so ordered that it will result in both the production of the proper offspring and in the upbringing of this offspring." That is, he writes that while ejaculation for reproduction is desirable, it is only desirable in marriage, as this is [he goes on to argue] the only natural state in which the offspring will be raised properly. You can't sleep with your neighbor's wife, even if you don't use a condom.
Furthermore, he writes, "It is evident from this that every emission of semen in such a way that generation cannot follow is contrary to the good for man."
The Catholic Church is a rather conservative institution, so yes, such arguments are still relevant.
The source of the preceding quotes is "Summa against the Gentiles" in Reading the Middle Ages, edited by Barbara Rosenwein, in case you wondered and would like to pursue his argument in more depth.
If the legislation is enacted, Karlung said Bahnhof would continue to stay within the bounds of the law.
"If the state decides that everything has to be handed over to various private organisations[sic], then we will of course comply, even if I think it's unfortunate and hope public opinion pushes the matter in a different direction," he said.
According to wikipedia, the Swedish constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto criminal laws, so again, they should be just fine.
Stefan Johansson, deputy director at the Swedish justice ministry, confirmed that Bahnhof was not breaking the law by choosing to destroy IP address details.
"The IPRED regulations do not entail any obligation of this kind. They are only concerned with the retrieval of existing information," he said.
Ah, but nobody is claiming they can do so accurately. They can, however, make educated predictions, some of which will be right. It's the shotgun approach. The point isn't in the predictions, but in the ethical issues they address, so that others can take responsible actions if some of those technologies become big.
The headline could better have read "Academics to predict pitfalls of potential next Twitters."
Waste those motherfuckers. They are obsolete in the new world order.
You are entirely too eager to provoke conflict. It's as if you're looking for an excuse to kill somebody.
It's even less ethical than sending your BT traffic over Tor, and strikes me as much less safe. It doesn't seem like it would take many pissed off admins before someone thinks to forward their logs to the appropriate **AA.
You're missing the point. What is sad is this absurd sense of entitlement. YouTube is free. They've put up a website and are willing to host your videos on it. There is no guarantee that they will remain, no contract specifying minimum uptime, not even the slightest suggestion that they will ever fight for you in court. YouTube is not a right---not a natural right, nor a constitutional right. They can keep or remove videos at a whim. If you don't like those terms, go pay for hosting.
You can buy a robotic lawnmower from Walmart. It's about $1600. For much less than that, you can pay a landscaping crew or the kid down the street to mow the lawn. This is one of those tasks that doesn't make sense to automate. It can be done cheaply by willing humans without putting them at unacceptable risk.
This lawnmower? The one that requires a wire be placed around the lawn, and is intended for lawns of only about a 5th of an acre?
You don't seem to get the point of this at all. It's not for mowing small lawns. This is for large fields or parks for which a tractor-mower was the most practical option anyway. I suspect that after a year or two of not needing to hire someone to drive around mowing on that expensive tractor, you can save quite a bit.