I know but what is the point in targeting the 5%? being very very generous, if of that 5% 50% are fatal thats 2.5% of all accidents then assume you have a 50% (again very generous) success rate you have only reduced fatal accidents overall by 0.625%. WOW my hero, give them a nobel prize.
It will fail but the figures will be tweaked and it implemented anyway just so they look like they are earning the 2nd home & expenses.
Sorry that's just narrow minded.. Speeding DOES NOT cause accidents. Incompetent drivers cause accidents. Not looking, talking on the mobile phone, looking at the kids in the back seat, applying makeup, smoking, drinking, eating, changing the CD, ALL cause more accidents than speeding.
In fact the constant pressure NOT to speed causes accidents because I now spend more time looking at my speedo making sure I ain't speeding as I go through the 20th speed camera instead of looking at the road a head of me.
The reason people target speeding and obsess over it is beacuse it is the one thing they can be visible doing something about whether it works or not.
Take the common if you had hit little girl X and 30 instead of 35 she would have lived arguement. I can counter that with had I been doing 45 I'd have been passed her before she stepped on the road (assuming the same timeline)..
Hell they want to reduce the speed to 50 in order to save lives, why the fuck stop there? how about just make us all fucking walk and then noone can be killed by a speed.
Safe speed is what should be encouraged. On a dry, clear day with a well maintained car do 90mph on the motorway. However when it's dark & foggy slow the fuck down and take it easy..
So I start to over take a car who is going slower than the speed limit who (as I am in the middle of passing) starts to speed up. I exceed the limit to complete the overtake as the gap behind the car has been filled and a truck has appeared coming towards me... Computer detects speeding slows me down to limit.. Truck wins the fight..
You make games that are very replayable and epic.. Then people won't trade them in. I haven't traded in ANY of my GTA series or Fallout 1 & 2, Nor have I traded in Battlefield 2 or Company of heroes or Men of War..
If a game is too easy to complete and only fun on the 1st play through of course I am going to trade it in once I have completed it, there is no incentive to keep it.
Don't release DLC (Downloadable Crap) that I have to pay for instead release expansions.
Another point is don't charge so much for the damn games in the 1st place. PS3 games are £50 ffs 6 games is the price of a brand new console. Try charging £25-£30 for the games and I am more likely to buy them. ALL my PS3 games (and console) are 2nd hand (GTA IV, MGS4, SBK08, GT5 Prologue, HAWX) as I do not have £250 to buy all those games brand new but at between £10 and £20 2nd hand I can afford that.
My PC games are pretty much all new as their price is affordable at £15-£30.
Come on you know our government is great with security. They have never ever lost a latop containing personal details of people, and look at how quiet they kept their expenses.. With security like that what can possibly go wrong..
Just open a new browser so you only have 1 tab. Now middle click on that tab. Pre b4 that would close that instance of FF. Now it does nothing (assuming you have "browser.tabs.closeWindowWithLastTab" set to true)
Surely what they are doing is illegal.. DMCA & copyright in general. The conficker source has been posted online: http://mtc.sri.com/Conficker/contrib/#example-code , and I bet they didn't get written permission either.
Lucky the conficker authors aren't more like the RIAA.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=129 I think there is a more recent report but i could be mistaken..
I know but what is the point in targeting the 5%? being very very generous, if of that 5% 50% are fatal thats 2.5% of all accidents then assume you have a 50% (again very generous) success rate you have only reduced fatal accidents overall by 0.625%. WOW my hero, give them a nobel prize.
It will fail but the figures will be tweaked and it implemented anyway just so they look like they are earning the 2nd home & expenses.
That's why I hate calling them "accidents". 99% are not an accident. I prefer the term "collision" or "crash".
I disagree. 99% (assumed figure) of the time people do not intend to crash. Something that is a unintended is an accident.
The reason police etc shy away from the term is because accident implies noone is to blame.
Please read my post before replying.. The key was "CAUSING FACTOR" as in sole reason for the accident. My god I have to repeat myself..
Please read my post before replying.. The key was "CAUSING FACTOR" as in sole reason for the accident.
I have some advice for you then, don't go for a job in the UK government. You'll fail the interview with an attitude like that.
I have no idea why others do. I sure as hell dont. Mind you gimme a 2nd home and an expenses budget with no limit and I'll defend it..
Sorry that's just narrow minded.. Speeding DOES NOT cause accidents. Incompetent drivers cause accidents. Not looking, talking on the mobile phone, looking at the kids in the back seat, applying makeup, smoking, drinking, eating, changing the CD, ALL cause more accidents than speeding.
In fact the constant pressure NOT to speed causes accidents because I now spend more time looking at my speedo making sure I ain't speeding as I go through the 20th speed camera instead of looking at the road a head of me.
The reason people target speeding and obsess over it is beacuse it is the one thing they can be visible doing something about whether it works or not.
Take the common if you had hit little girl X and 30 instead of 35 she would have lived arguement. I can counter that with had I been doing 45 I'd have been passed her before she stepped on the road (assuming the same timeline)..
Hell they want to reduce the speed to 50 in order to save lives, why the fuck stop there? how about just make us all fucking walk and then noone can be killed by a speed.
Safe speed is what should be encouraged. On a dry, clear day with a well maintained car do 90mph on the motorway. However when it's dark & foggy slow the fuck down and take it easy..
I fail to see why a truck tailgating me is the issue when i said on coming. I.E. coming towards me.
So I start to over take a car who is going slower than the speed limit who (as I am in the middle of passing) starts to speed up. I exceed the limit to complete the overtake as the gap behind the car has been filled and a truck has appeared coming towards me... Computer detects speeding slows me down to limit.. Truck wins the fight..
Oh yeah sign me up for 1 of those.
UK government official figures show speed is only the causing factor in 5-7% of all accidents.
You make games that are very replayable and epic.. Then people won't trade them in. I haven't traded in ANY of my GTA series or Fallout 1 & 2, Nor have I traded in Battlefield 2 or Company of heroes or Men of War..
If a game is too easy to complete and only fun on the 1st play through of course I am going to trade it in once I have completed it, there is no incentive to keep it.
Don't release DLC (Downloadable Crap) that I have to pay for instead release expansions.
Another point is don't charge so much for the damn games in the 1st place. PS3 games are £50 ffs 6 games is the price of a brand new console. Try charging £25-£30 for the games and I am more likely to buy them. ALL my PS3 games (and console) are 2nd hand (GTA IV, MGS4, SBK08, GT5 Prologue, HAWX) as I do not have £250 to buy all those games brand new but at between £10 and £20 2nd hand I can afford that.
My PC games are pretty much all new as their price is affordable at £15-£30.
More than 51,000 children deemed vulnerable will have their identities and information shielded
Kinda defeats the purpose.. :/
Come on you know our government is great with security. They have never ever lost a latop containing personal details of people, and look at how quiet they kept their expenses.. With security like that what can possibly go wrong..
Step 1: Find a large wealthy company.
Step 2: Fine them for anti-competitive behaviour.
because if it is set to true the window does not close. It does nothing.. Pre b4 it did close the window.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=486393 (one of the bug reports. there are several (open and closed) if you search for closeWindowWithLastTab in bugzilla.
Just open a new browser so you only have 1 tab. Now middle click on that tab. Pre b4 that would close that instance of FF. Now it does nothing (assuming you have "browser.tabs.closeWindowWithLastTab" set to true)
http://www.treatyist.com/ is the corrected working link. ( You had com./ )
That is good but in the latest b4 they have disabled closing the windows by middleclicking the last tab, it now defaults to noop.
Now if we can just get IE to follow the real standards then website building will no longer be a task for the damned.
10p per page is too dear. A lot of the books I am after are ~1000 pages, that's £100 (~$150), between 2p & 5p per page is a lot more affordable.
It was for reference, and as was noted above, it is actually not the complete code, just the segment for port generation.
Know thy enemy...
Things just got a lot more interesting...
Yes sadly I hadn't fully looked at the page before I pressed submit and the link had suggested that it was the fully code.
I'd love to see the court case whereby a virus writer tried to assert his copyright, or DMCA on methods of disabling his code.
Surely what they are doing is illegal.. DMCA & copyright in general. The conficker source has been posted online: http://mtc.sri.com/Conficker/contrib/#example-code , and I bet they didn't get written permission either.
Lucky the conficker authors aren't more like the RIAA.