One man deserves the credit, One man deserves the blame, and Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name. Oy! Nicolai Ivanovich Lobache...
I am never forget the day I first meet the great Lobachevsky. In one word he told me secret of success in mathematics: Plagiarize!
Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes, Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, So don't shade your eyes, But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure always to call it please, "research".
And ever since I meet this man my life is not the same, And Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name. Oy! Nicolai Ivanovich Lobache...
I am never forget the day I am given first original paper to write. It was on Analytic and Algebraic Topology of Locally Euclidean Metrization of Infinitely Differentiable Riemannian Manifold. Bozhe moi! This I know from nothing. But I think of great Lobachevsky and I get idea - haha!
I have a friend in Minsk, Who has a friend in Pinsk, Whose friend in Omsk Has friend in Tomsk With friend in Akmolinsk. His friend in Alexandrovsk Has friend in Petropavlovsk, Whose friend somehow Is solving now The problem in Dnepropetrovsk.
And when his work is done - Haha! - begins the fun. From Dnepropetrovsk To Petropavlovsk, By way of Iliysk, And Novorossiysk, To Alexandrovsk to Akmolinsk To Tomsk to Omsk To Pinsk to Minsk To me the news will run, Yes, to me the news will run!
And then I write By morning, night, And afternoon, And pretty soon My name in Dnepropetrovsk is cursed, When he finds out I published first!
^ Tom Lehrer ^
This was the first thing I thought of when I saw this, and I'm astounded this wasn't posted yet...
I had heard something along these lines...
Apparently, for Porn-star Recognition Day, they were planning to edit their mainpage to show as "the asspirate bay" whilst changing the picture to show a rendering of the goatse.cx image.
In addition, it's porn. Individual end users cannot protest very much without either A: Admitting they pay for porn online or B: being the subject of askance glances and the occasional, "Methinks he doth protest too much."
You do realize that prepaid credit cards exist, right? You can set any name to it and use it. Since you don't have to have anything physical delivered and it's all online, then you can create fake names and leave out addresses.
Do you realize that not every Joe-Sixpack takes the time to think it through before he gives his personal information to third parties?
Contrary to popular belief, we don't all live in our parents' basements. Not all houses have basements. Also, I don't even have 500GB of total hard drive space.
Anyway, it is relevant because it happened through the negligence of the person maintaining the originally compromised system. Had the person(s) responsible done their job in keeping the computer secure, the system wouldn't have been compromised. Thus, it serves as warning to all of us, that if we present a sufficient target, we must be proportionally vigilant at protecting the systems under our stewardship.
It isn't necessaraly the light that some people have issue with; many have issue with the flicker. It is just like CRT's when their refresh rate is set too low: You notice the flicker, and it causes issues (like headaches, or migranes).
This is almost as assinine as the laws dictating how much water a toilet can use per flush, or how much water can pass through a showerhead over a unit time. If I have to flush the 1.3 gallon toilet more than once, it isn't worth the 'savings.' If I have to take four times as long to shower because my showerhead won't give me enough pressure to wash my (long) hair, it isn't worth the 'savings.'
While I don't personally have issues with fluorescent lights, several people I know do (notably my mother, who can get quite bitchy). From my perspective, it is highly unreasonable for the tree-hugging lobbyists to push for this kind of legislation (and even moreso for the politicians to actually buy into it), as not only is it an inconvience to some (like water usage restrictions) it condems others to a lifetime of agony (migranes).
Sorry, I couldn't load TFA.... I'm having DNS issues ATM. I recently had Verizon's FiOS service installed here, and their DNS servers suck and/or are overloaded. I'm leaning towards and.
This is similar to what I say when I go to www.wawa.com and I see the sticker on the counter saying that they card anyone under 27 for tobacco products.
"How are they supposed to know if you are over 27 or not without checking your ID?"
But to get back on topic, this doesn't surprise me. Since the time I found out that stores usually only sell M rated games to those over 17 (when I was about 13) it hasn't been an issue for me to get M rated games. As I see it, there are five options for anyone under 17 to buy M rated games:
1: Go to a store that doesn't treat ESRB ratings as law.
2: Go to a store where employees either don't know about company policies about M rated games, or don't care about said policies.
3: Fake ID.
4: Get a friend/sibling/parent/guardian with valid/fake ID to buy M rated games for you.
5: Wait until you're 17 and use a valid ID
I'm not sure where to find #1, but numbers 2, 4, and 5 worked for me.
As a side note, I found out recently from an employee of GameStop (Formerly EB) that if an employee is caught selling an M rated game to someone under 17, the manager is fired as well, even if the manager was not present at the time of the sale. It seems like hardcore lunacy to me, but could be fun.... Imagine it: You don't like your manager, so you get one of your friends to fill out an application to work in your store, and when they do, catch them selling an M rated game to someone under 17.
But I digress. I have no problem with game ratings being enforced by the state, as long as the agency doing the ratings is transparent in their processes, has NO bias, does not bow to political pressure on individual titles, and requires that stores cannot refuse to sell any game based on its rating.
The final statement "... costs of the carbon coal produces.". Coal does not PRODUCE carbon when it is burned, it RELEASES it.
Furthermore, if you take a picture of a 30 year old coal plant, and a 30 year old nuclear plant, you will see next to the coal plant a MOUNTIAN of coal that DWARFS the power plant;
That is AT MOST a SIXTY DAY SUPPLY, and most of that is being released into the atmosphere.
Look back at that picture of a nuclear plant;
EVERY OUNCE OF FUEL IT HAS EVER USED IS STILL IN THAT PICTURE, in holding tanks within the plant.
Now, the difference in their by-products is that, while the nuclear plant generates less waste matter, it is many times more harmful to us in the long run if not stored properly. Disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are exaggerated; they're not likely to happen again any time soon. The REAL cost of TMI was that the plant was LESS THAN 90 DAYS OLD, and was planned to last at least 30 years. Thus the power company involved had to build ANOTHER BRAND NEW nuclear power plant right next to the old one, and causing them to inflate the price of electricity to cover the costs of both plants.
We also need to be building less hydro plants that rely on blocking rivers to generate power, and more that run in tandem with a nuclear plant to pump water into an artificial lake on off peak hours, and generate electricity during peak hours by draining the lake into a nearby river.
Even FRANCE primarily uses nuclear power, so why shouldn't we? Hell, we consume other Frenchish things; like fries and toast....
I must disagree with you about Microsoft's mice; I've had 4-5 of these http://www.microsoft.com/products/info/product.asp x?view=22&pcid=f918997d-8a10-49a2-86d4-350fc658f44 7&type=ovr
fail (left, right and/or middle mouse buttons cease working) under normal use (web surfing, windows navigation, NOT gaming).
And lets not forget their Habu which wouldn't work as intended if you followed the instructions for installation (something about the driver not recognizing the mouse as a Habu)
Some of you seem to misunderstand probabilities; Many of you assume incorrectly that since the probability of having that many bad units in a row, by one person is something along the lines of 2*10^10 (I might be off by a few orders of magnitude) and thus since it is so utterly improbable that it should never happen. What people drawing this conclusion fail to grasp is that probabilities tell us only how OFTEN we might expect to see such an anomaly, but they don't tell us WHEN we will see them, thus many people incorrectly assume that, to have an event with a probability of 1 in 2*10^10 you have to have reached that number in order to find the anomaly; that is to say they assume that to find that anomaly you must have >2*10^10-1.
In addition, most people seem to treat probabilities as facts instead of logic based guesswork, thus fueling misconceptions. The fact remains that when discussing highly improbable occurrences such as these, they almost invariably happen, the only thing the statistical probability tells us is how many times the event has to happen before such an anomaly results again.
In the case where we are seeing many more anomalies than our calculations of probabilities predict, than it is quite likely that the dataset upon which our predictions are based is flawed.
As to Microsoft's claim of a 3% defect rate, I would wager that in the case of NEW consoles the actual failure rate was about 2-6%, and with REFURBISHED consoles I would guess the defect rate is somewhere between 8-15%, because of undetected/non-repaired issues.
You assume that Technologically superior products are always more successful than their inferiors, and that AMD's multiple core solution is in fact, inferior.
for my first point, I would remind you of BetaMax, and Windows; BetaMax had technological superiority than its competition, but lost (Largely because of cost & capacity) To VHS; whereas Windows was vastly inferior to its competitors yet somehow managed to end up with the largest market share.
As to my second point, AMD's design seems to have some advantages over Intel's, most notably in how it manages the cache; With Intel's quad core, to move data from one core's cache to another's, it has to go out the processor's bus, and back in again, thus creating an unnecessary bottleneck on performance. In AMD's quad core it doesn't have to move the data through the bus for it to be accessible by another core. I'm not sure how useful this is in real world applications, but sure looks good on paper.
Slashdot Mirror
This was the first thing I thought of when I saw this, and I'm astounded this wasn't posted yet...
They should get a stiff fine for not being more vigilant.
I had heard something along these lines... Apparently, for Porn-star Recognition Day, they were planning to edit their mainpage to show as "the asspirate bay" whilst changing the picture to show a rendering of the goatse.cx image.
What a childish sentiment.
Contrary to popular belief, we don't all live in our parents' basements. Not all houses have basements. Also, I don't even have 500GB of total hard drive space. Anyway, it is relevant because it happened through the negligence of the person maintaining the originally compromised system. Had the person(s) responsible done their job in keeping the computer secure, the system wouldn't have been compromised. Thus, it serves as warning to all of us, that if we present a sufficient target, we must be proportionally vigilant at protecting the systems under our stewardship.
I see we're beating this to death...
Yeah, and all because some blowhard didn't keep his system secure...
Someone deserves a spanking over this....
It isn't necessaraly the light that some people have issue with; many have issue with the flicker. It is just like CRT's when their refresh rate is set too low: You notice the flicker, and it causes issues (like headaches, or migranes).
This is almost as assinine as the laws dictating how much water a toilet can use per flush, or how much water can pass through a showerhead over a unit time. If I have to flush the 1.3 gallon toilet more than once, it isn't worth the 'savings.' If I have to take four times as long to shower because my showerhead won't give me enough pressure to wash my (long) hair, it isn't worth the 'savings.'
While I don't personally have issues with fluorescent lights, several people I know do (notably my mother, who can get quite bitchy). From my perspective, it is highly unreasonable for the tree-hugging lobbyists to push for this kind of legislation (and even moreso for the politicians to actually buy into it), as not only is it an inconvience to some (like water usage restrictions) it condems others to a lifetime of agony (migranes).
Using the number of patched vulnerabilities to compair programs is like compairing programmers based on the numeber of lines of code they write. This was already proved by Bill Atkinson at Apple. http://books.google.com/books?id=6ASeeTZbqCQC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=apple+%22lines+of+code%22+%22revolution+in+the+valley%22&source=web&ots=9uh0jyyn6F&sig=8wWekH6iy1wSJATOR4_EVAfTQdM
Sorry, I couldn't load TFA.... I'm having DNS issues ATM. I recently had Verizon's FiOS service installed here, and their DNS servers suck and/or are overloaded. I'm leaning towards and.
What about the song that plays during the credits of Portal?
This is similar to what I say when I go to www.wawa.com and I see the sticker on the counter saying that they card anyone under 27 for tobacco products. "How are they supposed to know if you are over 27 or not without checking your ID?" But to get back on topic, this doesn't surprise me. Since the time I found out that stores usually only sell M rated games to those over 17 (when I was about 13) it hasn't been an issue for me to get M rated games. As I see it, there are five options for anyone under 17 to buy M rated games: 1: Go to a store that doesn't treat ESRB ratings as law. 2: Go to a store where employees either don't know about company policies about M rated games, or don't care about said policies. 3: Fake ID. 4: Get a friend/sibling/parent/guardian with valid/fake ID to buy M rated games for you. 5: Wait until you're 17 and use a valid ID I'm not sure where to find #1, but numbers 2, 4, and 5 worked for me. As a side note, I found out recently from an employee of GameStop (Formerly EB) that if an employee is caught selling an M rated game to someone under 17, the manager is fired as well, even if the manager was not present at the time of the sale. It seems like hardcore lunacy to me, but could be fun.... Imagine it: You don't like your manager, so you get one of your friends to fill out an application to work in your store, and when they do, catch them selling an M rated game to someone under 17. But I digress. I have no problem with game ratings being enforced by the state, as long as the agency doing the ratings is transparent in their processes, has NO bias, does not bow to political pressure on individual titles, and requires that stores cannot refuse to sell any game based on its rating.
It just goes to show the absurdity of the position of the extreme "environmentalists" is not pro-environment, it is anti-human/anti-technology.
The final statement "... costs of the carbon coal produces.". Coal does not PRODUCE carbon when it is burned, it RELEASES it. Furthermore, if you take a picture of a 30 year old coal plant, and a 30 year old nuclear plant, you will see next to the coal plant a MOUNTIAN of coal that DWARFS the power plant; That is AT MOST a SIXTY DAY SUPPLY, and most of that is being released into the atmosphere. Look back at that picture of a nuclear plant; EVERY OUNCE OF FUEL IT HAS EVER USED IS STILL IN THAT PICTURE, in holding tanks within the plant. Now, the difference in their by-products is that, while the nuclear plant generates less waste matter, it is many times more harmful to us in the long run if not stored properly. Disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are exaggerated; they're not likely to happen again any time soon. The REAL cost of TMI was that the plant was LESS THAN 90 DAYS OLD, and was planned to last at least 30 years. Thus the power company involved had to build ANOTHER BRAND NEW nuclear power plant right next to the old one, and causing them to inflate the price of electricity to cover the costs of both plants. We also need to be building less hydro plants that rely on blocking rivers to generate power, and more that run in tandem with a nuclear plant to pump water into an artificial lake on off peak hours, and generate electricity during peak hours by draining the lake into a nearby river. Even FRANCE primarily uses nuclear power, so why shouldn't we? Hell, we consume other Frenchish things; like fries and toast....
I must disagree with you about Microsoft's mice; I've had 4-5 of these http://www.microsoft.com/products/info/product.asp x?view=22&pcid=f918997d-8a10-49a2-86d4-350fc658f44 7&type=ovr
fail (left, right and/or middle mouse buttons cease working) under normal use (web surfing, windows navigation, NOT gaming).
And lets not forget their Habu which wouldn't work as intended if you followed the instructions for installation (something about the driver not recognizing the mouse as a Habu)
What about honour, colour, and theatre?
If target, walmart, etc. won't carry AO games or porn, why not sell AO rated games at porn stores?
If you can't find your original receipt, go back where you purchased it and they will usually just print you out a fresh copy.
Some of you seem to misunderstand probabilities; Many of you assume incorrectly that since the probability of having that many bad units in a row, by one person is something along the lines of 2*10^10 (I might be off by a few orders of magnitude) and thus since it is so utterly improbable that it should never happen. What people drawing this conclusion fail to grasp is that probabilities tell us only how OFTEN we might expect to see such an anomaly, but they don't tell us WHEN we will see them, thus many people incorrectly assume that, to have an event with a probability of 1 in 2*10^10 you have to have reached that number in order to find the anomaly; that is to say they assume that to find that anomaly you must have >2*10^10-1.
In addition, most people seem to treat probabilities as facts instead of logic based guesswork, thus fueling misconceptions. The fact remains that when discussing highly improbable occurrences such as these, they almost invariably happen, the only thing the statistical probability tells us is how many times the event has to happen before such an anomaly results again.
In the case where we are seeing many more anomalies than our calculations of probabilities predict, than it is quite likely that the dataset upon which our predictions are based is flawed.
As to Microsoft's claim of a 3% defect rate, I would wager that in the case of NEW consoles the actual failure rate was about 2-6%, and with REFURBISHED consoles I would guess the defect rate is somewhere between 8-15%, because of undetected/non-repaired issues.
You assume that Technologically superior products are always more successful than their inferiors, and that AMD's multiple core solution is in fact, inferior.
for my first point, I would remind you of BetaMax, and Windows; BetaMax had technological superiority than its competition, but lost (Largely because of cost & capacity) To VHS; whereas Windows was vastly inferior to its competitors yet somehow managed to end up with the largest market share.
As to my second point, AMD's design seems to have some advantages over Intel's, most notably in how it manages the cache; With Intel's quad core, to move data from one core's cache to another's, it has to go out the processor's bus, and back in again, thus creating an unnecessary bottleneck on performance. In AMD's quad core it doesn't have to move the data through the bus for it to be accessible by another core. I'm not sure how useful this is in real world applications, but sure looks good on paper.