Fashion is an art form, and clothing is often stylized after real world objects. It's no leap of the mind to stylize the body that fashionable clothing is worn on as well.
He might not have meant physically difficult. I mean, any country can buy or manufacture chlorine gas and weaponize it fairly easily.
Rather, what I got was that using biological or chemical weapons is a great way to make a whole lot of enemies in world politics very quickly. I mean, look at the fallout the U.S. got from just engaging in a conventional war in Iraq.
It would have been nearly impossible to start firing chemical weapons into Iraq at the start of the war due to the stigma and potential repercussions from allies and neutrals.
So they predict something that they think hasn't existed in the visible universe for 10 billion years (the universe is only 13.75b years old), and even if it did, we wouldn't be able to detect it.
No, because everything in a lower dimension exists potentially in a higher dimension already.
Rather, 2D/3D/4D refers to the dimensions that one can control and manipulate.
For example, we exist in a 3D world because, while there is time, we can only move forward through it in this dimension and cannot move freely through it.
In the same way, someone stuck in a 2D world (like pac-man) could be spinning through a 3D world and never have control over that motion.
In a 4D (3 spatial+spacetime), we would expect to be able to see or experience all time points in our lives from the time we were born until we die simultaneously and perhaps have some amount of control in manipulating which point of time we are experiencing, just as we can experience all 2D planes that make up our body simultaneously and have some amount of control which 2D planes our body parts are in.
In short, just because we experience time (or just because a videogame experiences time) doesn't mean that it's in spatial dimensions+1.
"What can be more democratic than being allowed to start your own country with your own laws if you don't like your current one?"
Giving your opinion and accepting the outcome regardless of whether you like it or not.
Like posters above have said, don't confuse Democracy with Anarchy.
Anarchy: "Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this."
It also makes the assumption that they were fanning the flames of the Jihad in the first place, and not simply providing guides on how to inflict damage.
How to make an IED. How to create deal with a hostage situation. How to fly a plane. Where to purchase a dirty bomb.
All of that is good honeypot material without promoting any radicalized viewpoints.
I think the biggest harm is that now several sources of media are trumpeting that there are honeypots in the first place. If terrorists didn't realize that before, they sure do now.
is that he's saying, in a round-about way, that if we know what everything on the computer is that isn't Malware, then if it's not what we know, then it must be Malware.
That and some test for checking behavior.
The problem which he doesn't seem to resolve is, "How do we know everything that isn't malware?". I mean, I see that he goes on about running this using only in kernel mode, so there should only be kernel memory in RAM, but what if the malware exists hooked in (as many seem to be that I've found) in other programs or window'ing components that don't start up in kernel mode?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that he can only "guarantee" detection of malware when it's already really obvious.
Even though I do 99% of my work in Java, C/C++, VB, or shell scripts, the few times that I have written in Python, it was an absolute pleasure.
The libraries that I used kicked Java/C++ library asses, to the extend that what was going to be a "short" 500 line program in Java dealing with parsing images, turned into an 80 line program in Python.
The best part is, it was extremely easy to debug as I wrote, since just about any line I dropped into the source file, I could check with the interpreter.
It also only took half an hour to pick up from other OOP languages.
Part of it was released by Skid-Row. Specifically, the part that made it so you don't have to be constantly connected to the internet.
The patch UBI Soft was talking about included the fix that Ski-Row made, as well as the server-side save files and game content files that you still need to get from connecting constantly to unlock the majority of the game.
All SR has done so far is given parts of game the ability to be played without internet, the same way some games can be played without a CD using a no-CD crack. They haven't cracked the game such that you can play the FULL game without still having to connect to the internet.
For that, they'd need to get UBI Soft's serverside files.
Chicken or the egg argument. Cattle have been domesticated in sub-saharan africa where lactose intolerance is predominant. Natives of that region instead drink cow blood.
For that reason, I think our ancestors domesticated cattle, then happened to develop a gene to allow them to drink milk, then adapted milk drinking into their culture. Then again, we really don't know.
"Also, if seeing gore is all it takes to be desensitized to it and more likely to inflict it on others, wouldn't surgeons be turning into killers left and right?"
"Now, someone that isn't already twisted isn't going to become so from video games..."
Unless the surgeon is already psychopathic and using surgery as a relief vector for violent fantasies, you cannot make the claim that seeing gore will cause people to turn into killers.
I should clarify that previous post. What I'm surprised about is that you made a snarky reply to only the lesser of the two points that I made:
1. Seeing violence and gore hardens one to it. 2. For some people, satisfying or relieving violent feelings or impulses in video games is analogous (especially the impulses for power and control) to what some psychopathic serial killers describe when torturing small animals in their childhood.
And your evidence doesn't make a clear point to disprove that seeing violence hardens one to it. Listing off wars really doesn't say anything about how the soldiers adapted to the war scenario. In counter-argument, many veterans (in my family and outside) describe having to get used to seeing mutilated bodies frequently in Vietnam.
I also don't see where you think you're getting away with ignoring the 11 wars or military operations that the U.S. has engaged in the past 100 years as not "major" or violent.
Ultimately, I feel that my argument is still successful, despite the sarcasm and attitude you believe counts as a valid counter-argument.
Yea, you know a lot of psychopathic serial killers released their frustrations now and then on cats and small animals.
Because that was a better alternative at the time than on people. Sorta filled the same role that a digital city where you can kill people and cops (GTA anyone?) does.
Now, someone that isn't already twisted isn't going to become so from video games, but it's hard to deny that constantly seeing violence and gore doesn't harden one to it.
"It's really not that difficult, I'm not sure why you're having a hard time understanding this."
Because there's a difference of opinion on the role of Youtube as a publisher or as a medium.
It's not a matter of lack of understanding.
You have a very narrow minded view that an alternative perspective other than your own is "Incorrect", when in reality there is no evidence presented one way or the other.
Clearly, Italy agrees with you that Google is a publisher, while Google has the opposing viewpoint that it is providing a medium for content providers (publishers) to show their work.
Current U.S. copyright law sides with Google on that difference (you are probably well aware of Youtube users getting in trouble for violating music copyrights).
Slashdot Mirror
In the pictures, it seems they intend to fly over the clouds.
Fashion is an art form, and clothing is often stylized after real world objects. It's no leap of the mind to stylize the body that fashionable clothing is worn on as well.
He might not have meant physically difficult. I mean, any country can buy or manufacture chlorine gas and weaponize it fairly easily.
Rather, what I got was that using biological or chemical weapons is a great way to make a whole lot of enemies in world politics very quickly. I mean, look at the fallout the U.S. got from just engaging in a conventional war in Iraq.
It would have been nearly impossible to start firing chemical weapons into Iraq at the start of the war due to the stigma and potential repercussions from allies and neutrals.
So they predict something that they think hasn't existed in the visible universe for 10 billion years (the universe is only 13.75b years old), and even if it did, we wouldn't be able to detect it.
Sounds pretty lame to me.
No, because everything in a lower dimension exists potentially in a higher dimension already.
Rather, 2D/3D/4D refers to the dimensions that one can control and manipulate.
For example, we exist in a 3D world because, while there is time, we can only move forward through it in this dimension and cannot move freely through it.
In the same way, someone stuck in a 2D world (like pac-man) could be spinning through a 3D world and never have control over that motion.
In a 4D (3 spatial+spacetime), we would expect to be able to see or experience all time points in our lives from the time we were born until we die simultaneously and perhaps have some amount of control in manipulating which point of time we are experiencing, just as we can experience all 2D planes that make up our body simultaneously and have some amount of control which 2D planes our body parts are in.
In short, just because we experience time (or just because a videogame experiences time) doesn't mean that it's in spatial dimensions+1.
Right, but at least the passengers are safe.
I doubt it'll ever get out of the Senate.
Oh, I see, you were referring to the Sultan.
The Emissary can host chairs.
From the website:
"Table Height
Standard table height is 29". We find this to be a good fit for most people. People taller than 6' may wish to add an inch or two.
However the height of the table can be any you wish from 12" (if you sit on the floor to eat) to 36" if you want to sit at barstools."
"What can be more democratic than being allowed to start your own country with your own laws if you don't like your current one?"
Giving your opinion and accepting the outcome regardless of whether you like it or not.
Like posters above have said, don't confuse Democracy with Anarchy.
Anarchy:
"Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this."
...the irony...
It also makes the assumption that they were fanning the flames of the Jihad in the first place, and not simply providing guides on how to inflict damage.
How to make an IED.
How to create deal with a hostage situation.
How to fly a plane.
Where to purchase a dirty bomb.
All of that is good honeypot material without promoting any radicalized viewpoints.
I think the biggest harm is that now several sources of media are trumpeting that there are honeypots in the first place. If terrorists didn't realize that before, they sure do now.
is that he's saying, in a round-about way, that if we know what everything on the computer is that isn't Malware, then if it's not what we know, then it must be Malware.
That and some test for checking behavior.
The problem which he doesn't seem to resolve is, "How do we know everything that isn't malware?". I mean, I see that he goes on about running this using only in kernel mode, so there should only be kernel memory in RAM, but what if the malware exists hooked in (as many seem to be that I've found) in other programs or window'ing components that don't start up in kernel mode?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that he can only "guarantee" detection of malware when it's already really obvious.
Even though I do 99% of my work in Java, C/C++, VB, or shell scripts, the few times that I have written in Python, it was an absolute pleasure.
The libraries that I used kicked Java/C++ library asses, to the extend that what was going to be a "short" 500 line program in Java dealing with parsing images, turned into an 80 line program in Python.
The best part is, it was extremely easy to debug as I wrote, since just about any line I dropped into the source file, I could check with the interpreter.
It also only took half an hour to pick up from other OOP languages.
I <3 Python
Part of it was released by Skid-Row. Specifically, the part that made it so you don't have to be constantly connected to the internet.
The patch UBI Soft was talking about included the fix that Ski-Row made, as well as the server-side save files and game content files that you still need to get from connecting constantly to unlock the majority of the game.
All SR has done so far is given parts of game the ability to be played without internet, the same way some games can be played without a CD using a no-CD crack. They haven't cracked the game such that you can play the FULL game without still having to connect to the internet.
For that, they'd need to get UBI Soft's serverside files.
"or a max of 76832TB writing"
*GB
Well realize, Kingston is not a manufacturer of the flash drive chips. They just package and rebrand other manufacturer's flash drive hardware.
There was a Slashdot article on Kingston a week or so ago covering this topic.
Chicken or the egg argument. Cattle have been domesticated in sub-saharan africa where lactose intolerance is predominant. Natives of that region instead drink cow blood.
For that reason, I think our ancestors domesticated cattle, then happened to develop a gene to allow them to drink milk, then adapted milk drinking into their culture. Then again, we really don't know.
"Also, if seeing gore is all it takes to be desensitized to it and more likely to inflict it on others, wouldn't surgeons be turning into killers left and right?"
"Now, someone that isn't already twisted isn't going to become so from video games..."
Unless the surgeon is already psychopathic and using surgery as a relief vector for violent fantasies, you cannot make the claim that seeing gore will cause people to turn into killers.
I should clarify that previous post. What I'm surprised about is that you made a snarky reply to only the lesser of the two points that I made:
1. Seeing violence and gore hardens one to it.
2. For some people, satisfying or relieving violent feelings or impulses in video games is analogous (especially the impulses for power and control) to what some psychopathic serial killers describe when torturing small animals in their childhood.
And your evidence doesn't make a clear point to disprove that seeing violence hardens one to it. Listing off wars really doesn't say anything about how the soldiers adapted to the war scenario. In counter-argument, many veterans (in my family and outside) describe having to get used to seeing mutilated bodies frequently in Vietnam.
I also don't see where you think you're getting away with ignoring the 11 wars or military operations that the U.S. has engaged in the past 100 years as not "major" or violent.
Ultimately, I feel that my argument is still successful, despite the sarcasm and attitude you believe counts as a valid counter-argument.
Seeing violence and being able to freely act on violent impulses are two very different things.
I'm somewhat surprised at you didn't distinguish the two.
Yea, you know a lot of psychopathic serial killers released their frustrations now and then on cats and small animals.
Because that was a better alternative at the time than on people. Sorta filled the same role that a digital city where you can kill people and cops (GTA anyone?) does.
Now, someone that isn't already twisted isn't going to become so from video games, but it's hard to deny that constantly seeing violence and gore doesn't harden one to it.
The threat is intended to scare users into paying closer attention to what they're doing and the errors they get, not to get them fired.
"99 times out of 100 you will NOT win. It's not a rule that works in general"
Is that just your opinion or do you have strong, irrefutable supporting evidence of that claim in the form of historical events?
"It's really not that difficult, I'm not sure why you're having a hard time understanding this."
Because there's a difference of opinion on the role of Youtube as a publisher or as a medium.
It's not a matter of lack of understanding.
You have a very narrow minded view that an alternative perspective other than your own is "Incorrect", when in reality there is no evidence presented one way or the other.
Clearly, Italy agrees with you that Google is a publisher, while Google has the opposing viewpoint that it is providing a medium for content providers (publishers) to show their work.
Current U.S. copyright law sides with Google on that difference (you are probably well aware of Youtube users getting in trouble for violating music copyrights).