A few dozen ships running for a year would decimate the thing. I'm talking about the single 100-mile long blob of plastic particles. Obviously you'd need to stop people from dumping shit into the ocean as well.
You literally just drag a fine mesh net behind you and haul it up when it's at a certain weight. You can get several hauls per ship per day. Process (separate plastic from plants and fish and shit) on board like they do for fish and whales. Only need to return to land to dump off a full load of processed material. We can utterly fuck the ocean's supply of fish when we're chasing after $ is governments don't put catch restrictions in place every year. We can do the same for little bits of plastic if ewe gave a fuck. Problem is no one actually gives a fuck until they can profit off of it. If it was giblet specks of gold floating around there'd be an established industry and 3 fucking reality shows about moron clowns chasing after it.
I think too many people confuse "pollutant" with "toxic". The danger of too much CO2 in the air is that it will shift global climates in unpredictable ways, thus because there is a significant danger to the release of CO2 it is a pollutant. It's not toxic at the levels it can reasonably reach in the atmosphere.
Unpredictable ways? Really? We've gone from "The seas will boil" to "it's gonna get hot and some people might have to move" and now to "stuff might change in some ways"? Great science there, climate "scientists"!
Yes, but I still want to breathe clean air and swim in clean water, so what now then?
Then clean up the air and water? Just remember that CO2 is not a pollutant.
There's a huge swath of plastic shit floating in the ocean. A few ships with nets could clean that up lickity split and take it back to land for proper processing.
People who believe in all the climate change bullshit are morons.
People who have dealt with actual science and statistics know the climate is changing as it always has and that the fear mongering and legislation is all greed-driven, political bullshit as usual.
IE9 has given me infinitely less trouble than Chrome and FF. And I CAN point to specific examples.
Chrome will have a conniption fit if you specify a file name with a comma in a header. We serve up PDFs and have to pass the file name through so when a user saves it they get it saved with the intended name. IE and FF will happily eat the commas while Chrome thinks the comma signifies an additional header and cries in the corner with some vague mumblings about a potential security issue.
On a Tuesday, Chrome will take a massive shit if you implement a PDF in an IFRAME on one side of the page and HTML content in an IFRAME on the other side of the page. We use this setup so users see a document and can see/edit its metadata at the same time. This occurs whether or not we use Chrome's built-in PDF shit or Adobe Reader. It worked on Monday but then Chrome updated random shit that caused it to break. It'll be fixed again on Thursday and broken again shortly after.
Even when it works it doesn't work. Both FF and Chrome will have the PDF IFRAME hijack all input. Can't scroll up/down or type into text fields in the metadata input because all your inputs get locked to the PDF IFRAME. This is likely an Adobe Reader issue, but it's fine in IE. Click once in IE and you have focus where you want it. In FF and Chrome it's a voodoo ritual to reclaim focus. Tab, arrow, click, click on the browser's address bar then back into the content, etc. like a spastic clown until shit starts to behave.
Steps to Make Bread: Plant grain, harvest, shell it, grind it. Raise chick, harvest eggs. Cultivate Yeast. Acquire water. Plant some oil producing plant, harvest, press seeds. Plant sugar cane, harvest, somehow turn into sugar. (Honey or maple syrup are more likely substitutes for most climates) Combine, and hope it works.
Like I said, impossible.
And of course I meant from scratch, we were talking about growing your own food?
If you want to make an apple pie^W^W^W a loaf of bread from scratch, you must first invent the Universe.
This is the same Philip Zimbardo who is infamous for the Stamford Experiment in which he placed university students into a jailhouse environment and allowed it to descend into chaos. Whilst it could be argued he's at the top of his field it could equally be argued that he's an idiot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Zimbardo)
The only way you could argue he's at the top of his field is to define the entire field as a clusterfuck of pseudo-science performed by mentally unstable morons who believe their own bullshit.
For example, if you have a one pixel wide line, it is always safe to shift it one third of a pixel to the left. RGB becomes BRG, which still appears the same.
I have a pentile display in portrait mode you insensitive clod!
If you're buying a $500 laptop (with a HDD) then you're buying a turd and you don't care about performance. If you're buying a laptop with an SSD, then you care about performance, and you won't be paying just $500 for the rest of the laptop.
And if you actually care about performance and usability, you stick with a desktop.
Nope, you're wrong. Parity is calculated and written. It is not used for verifying normal reads. You're not going to recover anything via parity until shit breaks. It's not a CRC.
RAID 10 is better than RAID 6. Rebuild time is nothing, your performance doesn't degrade to shit, and you're more than likely going to survive a second failure during rebuilding.
All digital security boils down to the key sharing problem.
And the key sharing problem is "solved" in practice thusly:
Server: O hai! Give me your infos! Here's my certificate. Computer: Warning! This certificate is not trusted! User: Ignore warning, add certificate. Computer: K.
OR
Server: O hai! Give me your infos! Here's my certificate. Computer: This certificate is trusted because VeriSign totally vouches for these guys. User: VeriSign? Computer: Yeah yeah, we totally trust VeriSign. I mean, we've never met them, we don't know their policies, and we rely on VeriSign to tell us if their shit gets stolen, and we basically have no recourse if shit goes wrong, but we trust them. User: K.
Nobody ever actually checks to see if something is legit because they want it to be painless and automatic. I'd love to be able to go to bank.com and view the certificate, then call the number on my credit card (or go in to an actual bank location) and see if the certificate matches up.
sanitize against passwords that contain some variant of "'); drop table students;"
Uh...methinks you're doing it wrong. What if I wanted "'); drop table students;" to be my password??
We had to reject several applicants because when asked how to prevent SQL injection, they said "Strip out words like UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT"... well, what if we want to use those words??
Parameterize user input and stop worrying about SQL injection. This isn't 1992.
The characters are "words in a dictionary" not "glyphs on a keyboard".
But when cracking a password, you look at "words morons on the internet use a lot" and there are probably closer to 5000 of those (compared to 50000 regular words). Combine with noun / verb / article classes and weight words with frequency and you can narrow that down to a LOT less in practice.
According to the Passfault demo (that's the link in the summary above) it would take 18384672610116790 centuries to crack "This chicken tastes like shit!"
Where the xkcd password "Correct horse staple battery" would take 72624497 centuries to crack. That is if it wasn't already on the internet for everyone to see and try.
That estimate is generated by assuming brute force and a specific character set that contains all of your input characters. No one cracks passwords starting with brute force.
Every time a see a password like this "12ol3jkh!!asrdfw9g8" or "^TFGY78UH" I want to vomit. Why not make your password something like "This chicken tastes like shit!"
Because 12ol3jkh!!asrdfw9g8 is a good password and This chicken tastes like shit! is a terrible password. Please quote that XKCD comic all you like, it doesn't make it right.
"Entropy" (can we please stop misusing this word?) is only a useful measure of password strength if you're brute forcing. Password crackers employ methods that are a teeny bit more sophisticated than brute forcing.
We're not doing math? What is it we're doing then?
The math-averse among us couldn't solve (much less formulate) the appropriate equations for crossing a busy street. You cross a busy street successfully by applying prior successful busy-street experiences.
And you prep for your first busy-street experience by playing Frogger.
Slashdot Mirror
A few dozen ships running for a year would decimate the thing. I'm talking about the single 100-mile long blob of plastic particles. Obviously you'd need to stop people from dumping shit into the ocean as well.
You literally just drag a fine mesh net behind you and haul it up when it's at a certain weight. You can get several hauls per ship per day. Process (separate plastic from plants and fish and shit) on board like they do for fish and whales. Only need to return to land to dump off a full load of processed material. We can utterly fuck the ocean's supply of fish when we're chasing after $ is governments don't put catch restrictions in place every year. We can do the same for little bits of plastic if ewe gave a fuck. Problem is no one actually gives a fuck until they can profit off of it. If it was giblet specks of gold floating around there'd be an established industry and 3 fucking reality shows about moron clowns chasing after it.
I think too many people confuse "pollutant" with "toxic". The danger of too much CO2 in the air is that it will shift global climates in unpredictable ways, thus because there is a significant danger to the release of CO2 it is a pollutant. It's not toxic at the levels it can reasonably reach in the atmosphere.
Unpredictable ways?
Really? We've gone from "The seas will boil" to "it's gonna get hot and some people might have to move" and now to "stuff might change in some ways"?
Great science there, climate "scientists"!
Yes, but I still want to breathe clean air and swim in clean water, so what now then?
Then clean up the air and water? Just remember that CO2 is not a pollutant.
There's a huge swath of plastic shit floating in the ocean. A few ships with nets could clean that up lickity split and take it back to land for proper processing.
Fuck the cloud.
You can pry my native installations and data I actually own from my cold, dead boxen.
I'll do you one better:
People who believe in all the climate change bullshit are morons.
People who have dealt with actual science and statistics know the climate is changing as it always has and that the fear mongering and legislation is all greed-driven, political bullshit as usual.
IE9 has given me infinitely less trouble than Chrome and FF.
And I CAN point to specific examples.
Chrome will have a conniption fit if you specify a file name with a comma in a header. We serve up PDFs and have to pass the file name through so when a user saves it they get it saved with the intended name. IE and FF will happily eat the commas while Chrome thinks the comma signifies an additional header and cries in the corner with some vague mumblings about a potential security issue.
On a Tuesday, Chrome will take a massive shit if you implement a PDF in an IFRAME on one side of the page and HTML content in an IFRAME on the other side of the page. We use this setup so users see a document and can see/edit its metadata at the same time. This occurs whether or not we use Chrome's built-in PDF shit or Adobe Reader. It worked on Monday but then Chrome updated random shit that caused it to break. It'll be fixed again on Thursday and broken again shortly after.
Even when it works it doesn't work. Both FF and Chrome will have the PDF IFRAME hijack all input. Can't scroll up/down or type into text fields in the metadata input because all your inputs get locked to the PDF IFRAME. This is likely an Adobe Reader issue, but it's fine in IE. Click once in IE and you have focus where you want it. In FF and Chrome it's a voodoo ritual to reclaim focus. Tab, arrow, click, click on the browser's address bar then back into the content, etc. like a spastic clown until shit starts to behave.
My code validates perfectly.
unlikely:
look at mcdonalds...
look at cigarettes...
look at crack...
(am I too many decades off with the crack joke?)
those are proven killers and people consume them by the ton (well, except for crack).
I'm Charlie Sheen, you insensitive clod!
Steps to Make Bread:
Plant grain, harvest, shell it, grind it.
Raise chick, harvest eggs.
Cultivate Yeast.
Acquire water.
Plant some oil producing plant, harvest, press seeds.
Plant sugar cane, harvest, somehow turn into sugar. (Honey or maple syrup are more likely substitutes for most climates)
Combine, and hope it works.
Like I said, impossible.
And of course I meant from scratch, we were talking about growing your own food?
If you want to make an apple pie^W^W^W a loaf of bread from scratch, you must first invent the Universe.
This is the same Philip Zimbardo who is infamous for the Stamford Experiment in which he placed university students into a jailhouse environment and allowed it to descend into chaos. Whilst it could be argued he's at the top of his field it could equally be argued that he's an idiot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Zimbardo)
The only way you could argue he's at the top of his field is to define the entire field as a clusterfuck of pseudo-science performed by mentally unstable morons who believe their own bullshit.
Oh wait.
Why do profits come at a cost? Sure for the consumer but for the manufacturer? Lower warranties further increase profits. It's a win-win for them.
Because when I can't buy a new hard drive that's guaranteed to last more than 2 years I don't buy a new hard drive.
For example, if you have a one pixel wide line, it is always safe to shift it one third of a pixel to the left. RGB becomes BRG, which still appears the same.
I have a pentile display in portrait mode you insensitive clod!
If you're buying a $500 laptop (with a HDD) then you're buying a turd and you don't care about performance.
If you're buying a laptop with an SSD, then you care about performance, and you won't be paying just $500 for the rest of the laptop.
And if you actually care about performance and usability, you stick with a desktop.
Nope, you're wrong.
Parity is calculated and written. It is not used for verifying normal reads. You're not going to recover anything via parity until shit breaks.
It's not a CRC.
A 500G SSD costs more than the laptop or desktop you would want to connect it to.
You seem to be pining for something that you have no real awareness of.
Wrong. About a year ago I bought two high-end 256 GB SSDs for less than $500.
RAID 10 is better than RAID 6.
Rebuild time is nothing, your performance doesn't degrade to shit, and you're more than likely going to survive a second failure during rebuilding.
If you're paranoid you can run multiple mirrors.
You think it's a mandatorily-enabled setting, do you?
Every default setting is mandatory for 99% of users for the simple fact that they don't know they what it is or how to change it.
We have a winrar!
All digital security boils down to the key sharing problem.
And the key sharing problem is "solved" in practice thusly:
Server: O hai! Give me your infos! Here's my certificate.
Computer: Warning! This certificate is not trusted!
User: Ignore warning, add certificate.
Computer: K.
OR
Server: O hai! Give me your infos! Here's my certificate.
Computer: This certificate is trusted because VeriSign totally vouches for these guys.
User: VeriSign?
Computer: Yeah yeah, we totally trust VeriSign. I mean, we've never met them, we don't know their policies, and we rely on VeriSign to tell us if their shit gets stolen, and we basically have no recourse if shit goes wrong, but we trust them.
User: K.
Nobody ever actually checks to see if something is legit because they want it to be painless and automatic. I'd love to be able to go to bank.com and view the certificate, then call the number on my credit card (or go in to an actual bank location) and see if the certificate matches up.
EFWWH!Bypc,IaCP!
1 bitcoin to anyone who can tell me what that means.
sanitize against passwords that contain some variant of "'); drop table students;"
Uh...methinks you're doing it wrong. What if I wanted "'); drop table students;" to be my password??
We had to reject several applicants because when asked how to prevent SQL injection, they said "Strip out words like UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT" ... well, what if we want to use those words??
Parameterize user input and stop worrying about SQL injection. This isn't 1992.
The characters are "words in a dictionary" not "glyphs on a keyboard".
But when cracking a password, you look at "words morons on the internet use a lot" and there are probably closer to 5000 of those (compared to 50000 regular words). Combine with noun / verb / article classes and weight words with frequency and you can narrow that down to a LOT less in practice.
Pass phrases are dumb.
Funny.
According to the Passfault demo (that's the link in the summary above) it would take 18384672610116790 centuries to crack "This chicken tastes like shit!"
Where the xkcd password "Correct horse staple battery" would take 72624497 centuries to crack. That is if it wasn't already on the internet for everyone to see and try.
That estimate is generated by assuming brute force and a specific character set that contains all of your input characters.
No one cracks passwords starting with brute force.
Every time a see a password like this "12ol3jkh!!asrdfw9g8" or "^TFGY78UH" I want to vomit. Why not make your password something like "This chicken tastes like shit!"
Because 12ol3jkh!!asrdfw9g8 is a good password and This chicken tastes like shit! is a terrible password.
Please quote that XKCD comic all you like, it doesn't make it right.
"Entropy" (can we please stop misusing this word?) is only a useful measure of password strength if you're brute forcing.
Password crackers employ methods that are a teeny bit more sophisticated than brute forcing.
We're not doing math? What is it we're doing then?
The math-averse among us couldn't solve (much less formulate) the appropriate equations for crossing a busy street. You cross a busy street successfully by applying prior successful busy-street experiences.
And you prep for your first busy-street experience by playing Frogger.
Oh-ho-ho! Is funny because grandparent made inconsequential grammatical error when English is probably not his first language!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdQQjfDUBLY
Oh-ho-ho! Is Family Guy clip and is NOT funny.