So they completely modeled after images and assumptions?
I would understand that no instrument remains playable after >300 years.
But I'm a bit surprised that there aren't any left at all. 300 years
isn't that long, even on the "human history" scale.
All the systems I have access to or control myself allow only certificate+password logins (with
per-accessing-machine and per-user specific certificates for easy access management and revocation)
but will happily ask for a password on any certificate-less login attempt.
Also, remote root logins are completely disallowed.
Combine this with fail2ban and brute-force attacks of any kind are pretty much a non-issue.
I remember discussions around similar projects that all have a common problem: In international waters,
unmanned seacraft or floating objects are considered flotsam and belong to whoever gets on board or fishes
it out of the water.
Now what happens if somebody helpfully "recovers" this craft and claims a reward for his good deed?
I think the best solution would be if Atlantis could be brought back by autopilot. If the damage is marginal (that is they THINK it might destroy the shuttle but are not sure) then bringing it back unmanned would give you the possibility (if the damage is survivable) of recouping your billion dollar plus investment.
Won't work. The landing spots are generally near the takeoff spots. The takeoff spots were located so if it blows up on takeoff, the parts rain down on the dolphins and whales. Unfortunately (?) when it comes in to land, it arrives from the opposite direction, and no one selected landing sites that are empty to the west.
In case you mean the risk of debris from a high-altitude breakup a la Columbia, have a look at the list of emergency landing sites, including such highly populated areas as Diego Garcia, right in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Lots of dolphins and whales, but pretty much nothing else. It might lack the facilities (transponders and stuff) for an automatic landing, but that would be a minor problem to solve in advance of a high-risk mission. And I'd actually bet on them being there already, it being an ETOPS site for civil aviation too.
Even if it is not illegal under French law it almost certainly is something you could take to the European court of human rights since EU law takes precedence over national laws.
Careful. The ECtHR is not an EU institution.
Its foundation precedes even the European Coal and Steel Community, the EU's great-grandfather.
Therefore, its rulings are not even automatically binding to its contracting parties, and especially not so to EU members (who
all are contracting parties, as far as I know).
If and how rulings of the ECtHR are immediately applicable depends on the country. Although all contracting parties have pledged
compliance with ECtHR rulings by their signature of the European Convention on Human Rights, in some countries (e.g. Germany), the local constitution
is still considered to take precedence. I don't know how the situation in France is.
But his thesis is that such events are fundamentally unpredictable. If he made a fortune, it means _he_ was able to predict it, well enough to profit for it.
No. His "system" is indeed based on the assumption that such events are unpredictable. That's why he for years bet simultaneously on a sharp increase and a sharp decrease in stock values - and ran slight daily losses, in the
anticipation and expectation that once such an event inevitably happens, the profits will more than make up for those losses.
It worked.
He basically had no idea - and didn't care too much - when this (and what this "this" would be) would happen though.
We had no reason then or now to expect anything but incremental changes [...in aircraft designs].
Yes we have. There is considerable work being done on flying-wing designs, which promise very significant
improvements in fuel efficiency and don't look too much like the "classical" aircraft body anymore.
There's a very realistic possibility for flying-wing passenger airliners within the next twenty to thirty years,
or about two generations of aircaft design ahead.
The MIG-23 is a awesome jet, but if we wanted any secrets from it, all we had to do was buy one for $20,000 and a case of vodka during the breakup of the Soviet Union.
That's pretty much where the USAF's YF-113 come from...
So they really are comparing this year's maximum thickness to the average of the maximum thickness for all other years.
Again: So?
You just put in "maximum" twice. Using any single point of a measurement in relation to its long-term average to determine a trend is entirely pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
So they completely modeled after images and assumptions?
I would understand that no instrument remains playable after >300 years.
But I'm a bit surprised that there aren't any left at all. 300 years
isn't that long, even on the "human history" scale.
What happened?
I've lost 3 drives due to plugs breaking off into the SATA ports on the 3.5" drives
Agreed, that's the dumbest physical connector I've seen in the longest time.
Nah - that would be SCART
Most awful connector ever, especially in comibation with poor manufacturing.
[...] giving GPS devices to people in developing countries to help make free maps. e.g. see http://foundation.openstreetmap.org/gpstogo/
What about all the people not in Togo? And shouldn't Togo do all right on their own, as they apparently produce >90% of the world's coffee?
Aren't pulsars directional?
You fail at using TLAs to enhance your whatever. GRBs, or Gamma Ray Bursts,
are non-recurring events and don't have much to do with pulsars.
The astronomical acronym you might be trying to refer to is LGM, as in LGM-1.
Germany declared Scientology unconstitutional in '07
No they didn't. However, Scientology is under close scrutiny by the "Verfassungsschutz",
the "contitution protection agency". That started in 1997.
All the systems I have access to or control myself allow only certificate+password logins (with
per-accessing-machine and per-user specific certificates for easy access management and revocation)
but will happily ask for a password on any certificate-less login attempt.
Also, remote root logins are completely disallowed.
Combine this with fail2ban and brute-force attacks of any kind are pretty much a non-issue.
In modern America, college papers write you?
When's the last time you laid out a site without a table element on every page?
Let me think... about 12-15 years ago? And even then, I'd contest the "every".
WTF are you doing? Hosting every election result on the planet?
I remember discussions around similar projects that all have a common problem: In international waters,
unmanned seacraft or floating objects are considered flotsam and belong to whoever gets on board or fishes
it out of the water.
Now what happens if somebody helpfully "recovers" this craft and claims a reward for his good deed?
If I understand it correctly, all Java implementations have this flaw, so why write that it is a "MacOS vulnerability" and not "Java vulnerability"?
Because by now, all others are fixed, and the vulnerability remains only in Apple's Mac-specific version of Java.
GPS Accuracy Could Start Dropping In 2010
Diego Garcia, right in the middle of the Pacific Ocean
Damn. I meant the Indian Ocean obviously. The rest still stands.
I think the best solution would be if Atlantis could be brought back by autopilot. If the damage is marginal (that is they THINK it might destroy the shuttle but are not sure) then bringing it back unmanned would give you the possibility (if the damage is survivable) of recouping your billion dollar plus investment.
Won't work. The landing spots are generally near the takeoff spots. The takeoff spots were located so if it blows up on takeoff, the parts rain down on the dolphins and whales. Unfortunately (?) when it comes in to land, it arrives from the opposite direction, and no one selected landing sites that are empty to the west.
Bullshit. Primary sites: Shuttle Landing Facility. Edwards AFB. White Sands Space Harbor.
None of which looks problematic in case of an early touchdown or an overshoot. WSSH especially.
In case you mean the risk of debris from a high-altitude breakup a la Columbia, have a look at the list of emergency landing sites, including such highly populated areas as Diego Garcia, right in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Lots of dolphins and whales, but pretty much nothing else. It might lack the facilities (transponders and stuff) for an automatic landing, but that would be a minor problem to solve in advance of a high-risk mission. And I'd actually bet on them being there already, it being an ETOPS site for civil aviation too.
Even if it is not illegal under French law it almost certainly is something you could take to the European court of human rights since EU law takes precedence over national laws.
Careful. The ECtHR is not an EU institution.
Its foundation precedes even the European Coal and Steel Community, the EU's great-grandfather.
Therefore, its rulings are not even automatically binding to its contracting parties, and especially not so to EU members (who
all are contracting parties, as far as I know).
If and how rulings of the ECtHR are immediately applicable depends on the country. Although all contracting parties have pledged
compliance with ECtHR rulings by their signature of the European Convention on Human Rights, in some countries (e.g. Germany), the local constitution
is still considered to take precedence. I don't know how the situation in France is.
But where is the male morning after pill?
They are still working on that one. It changes your blood type...
Where in the hell is "Minneosta"?
Right north of Iawo.
By creating a game based on a popular IP [...]
Like what?
Kevin alone at 127.0.0.1?
The Hostmask?
Destination Anycast?
Don't Loop Back?
The Last Broadcast?
Now those are movies I would watch...
I find it incredibly ironic that two ad blockers are at war with each other over blocking ads that support their service.
They aren't. Adblock Plus isn't ad-supported (Wladimir doesn't even want donations),
and NoScript isn't (primarily) an ad blocker.
Why does everyone think wired is so secure?
Because I can hook onto your wireless network from the car park.
Onto mine? No you can't.
Or if you can, you have broken strong public key encryption, and I'd be very interested in reading your paper.
But his thesis is that such events are fundamentally unpredictable. If he made a fortune, it means _he_ was able to predict it, well enough to profit for it.
No. His "system" is indeed based on the assumption that such events are unpredictable. That's why he for years bet
simultaneously on a sharp increase and a sharp decrease in stock values - and ran slight daily losses, in the
anticipation and expectation that once such an event inevitably happens, the profits will more than make up for those
losses.
It worked.
He basically had no idea - and didn't care too much - when this (and what this "this" would be) would happen though.
We had no reason then or now to expect anything but incremental changes [...in aircraft designs].
Yes we have. There is considerable work being done on flying-wing designs, which promise very significant
improvements in fuel efficiency and don't look too much like the "classical" aircraft body anymore.
There's a very realistic possibility for flying-wing passenger airliners within the next twenty to thirty years,
or about two generations of aircaft design ahead.
The MIG-23 is a awesome jet, but if we wanted any secrets from it, all we had to do was buy one for $20,000 and a case of vodka during the breakup of the Soviet Union.
That's pretty much where the USAF's YF-113 come from...
So they really are comparing this year's maximum thickness to the average of the maximum thickness for all other years.
Again: So?
You just put in "maximum" twice. Using any single point of a measurement in relation to its long-term average to determine a trend is entirely pointless.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b4WzWFKQ20
Wow. Just... wow.
last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years. The average thickness of the ice at Davis since the 1950s is 1.67m.
So?