Just because A can cause B, does not entail that A is a B in the sense you are implying.
Nor does it preclude the possibility. The entire concept of insurance is cost distribution to begin with, by taking a small portion of the income of all of those involved so as to mitigate the large expenses when those in the group require them. Now this law has made it mandatory to include more people in these groups. More people means more risk, more risk means more cost, that cost is distributed among the group by taking more of their income. Ergo, more income is being redistributed. So although you are technically correct in your statement about causality; in the context of this scenario your statement is wrong.
Everyone has the right to free speech, but it ceases being free speech when it crosses certain bounds (shouting fire in a crowded theatre, incitement to violence, solicitation of criminal activity, etc). All of these cases are nuanced and require careful balance...
And everyone of those crimes are accounted for in already existing laws. So political peacocking for the sake of their constituents, or whatever they are known as over there, doesn't do anything productive. All they are doing is fuzzing the line of demarcation for what is a crime and what isn't in the hopes that they can grab more supporters or hold on to the ones who are already there.
Let me ask you for your honest opinion on this; if I anonymously threaten to hurt you, does it make a difference to you whether it's done by phone, Facebook post, Email or snail mail? Is the threat to you any more or less real depending on the medium of delivery? Why then do we have to explicitly state that is a crime if done by a different form of communication and potentially proscribe a separate penalty? Do you think this law actually does anything or helps anybody?
I believe the idea that unions are still relevant is a popular message among the corporate media. For example when Hostess went bankrupt in 2012 due to mismanagement, the press reported mostly that the business would have to close if the unions didn't make concessions. Never mind the fact that they had previously made many concessions in the past, and the new contract would result in wages barely over minimum wage yet would not touch executive bonuses. OCP owns the police.
Now let's compare that situation with a list recent failures from say the IBEW: queue crickets.... Maybe this trend actually says more about unions who provide protection for skilled labor and actual talent vs. monkeys who press a button on an assembly line and who don't actually know what that button does.
Here's a hint for all of those who are for a a union to protect their job; if your employer threatens to hire a scab from outside of your union, and your reaction is anything other then either A.) laughing in his face until you need to be hospitalized asphyxia or B.) grabbing a bag of popcorn to watch the inevitable shit show. Then your "union" never had any leverage to begin with.
I don't think that the dogs protecting the white house are trained simply for pain compliance like your day to day police dogs are. I've always imagined them to be German Shepard's that are trained to think they are Terriers and Whippets. When the rep made that comment about not using the dogs when the runner is not carrying a bag, he was probably referring to the protocol that tells them when it is OK to use the dogs, like when the suspect has to be stopped but the risk to the human agent is too great. As for the utilization of snipers in that scenario, I'll admit that I don't know too many snipers in person but I would hope that at some point in their training some one tells them that shooting at a home made explosive device is generally a bad idea.
... Their defense? You got it. Second amendment, their right to stack their real and loaded rifles and their children's rifles in the same place. Their one kid is dead, and the other is living with the fact that he gut shot her and killed her.
I personally see this as a failure in the court system that allows an inapplicable defense plea to be submitted. They were correct, they did have the right to do stupid things. What makes that irrelevant, and what they clearly did not understand, is that when those stupid things lead to a fatality then they will be charged with negligent homicide. It's their counsel's fault that they didn't understand the situation well enough to put together a better defense. And now, because the testimony of the defendant is not adherent to any of the same guidelines as say the testimony from a witness or even that of the plaintive, the press is provided with an unlimited range of sound bites to politicize, skew and spin to their black little hearts delight. Call me a liberal if you want to, but I believe that your right to not self incriminate implicitly allows you the right to understand what the hell you're being charged with in the first place! If that really were the case here then you wouldn't see asinine statements like this one made.
In the end though, can you really be surprised at the seemingly insane attempt to defend themselves? How many times have you done or said something stupid for which there was no excuse? Didn't you still try to flounder for an argument that would prevent the backlash at least some of the time?
It's a third- world environment, but with unions and Democrat labor laws.
Normally I wouldn't entertain the idea of politicizing what is clearly an economic and social development issue; but what the hell I'll respond.
I'm not sure how you think that unions work where you are from. But here in the US what they do is monopolize the labor pool for a given trade on a per entity basis; they do not annex an entire cities population all at one a time. But, solely for the sake of your argument, let's say that a labor union somehow actually DID manage to maintain the peoples faith, in a swing state that has been losing jobs and economically depressed for the passed four decades, and which also currently has a Republican Governor, enough so that they still have some semblance of a presence. And just to get it out of the way let's assume that this union also specialized in shale oil extraction, something that Ohio has never exported on any kind of a scale before. That union is only going to concern itself with it's niche in the host entity. Where as the over whelming majority of jobs and wealth being created are going to be from externalities that are not directly associated with this market. Now if you are contending that the unions are the reason that the jobs left this area in the first place then you are making the mistake of assuming that any of the host entities production models stood a snowballs chance in hell of competing with or catering too emerging markets. They didn't, not a single one of them even tried.
Please remember that this is Slashdot, not Facebook. You will occasionally be asked to back up your claims with something that at least appears to be evidence.
From what the article says, this is a bump in manufacturing from short term contracts, this is hardly a sustainable client base. My guess is that at the very most this will be a benefit for one generation, maybe two at the very most. A few thousand jobs is nothing to shrug off but I hope that these towns are prepared for what is going to happen within the next 20 to 40 years. The cheap housing and sharp increase in demand will attract real-estate prospectors; and just like these sociopathic leeches always do, they will start building up their little housing price bubbles and once again the idea that maybe "infinite growth" can be a real thing is going to settle in the backs of peoples minds. I'm not saying that we should stop this kind of thing mind you. The money generated in this way is very real, even if the actual wealth is not. But we should be better prepared for the fallout this time.
Comments are a hack to work around the failure to write code which is sufficiently clear and expressive (note that I'm talking about inline comments, not comments used to generate documentation). When I find myself typing a comment, I step back and look for ways to improve naming, or refactor, until the comment is no longer necessary.
Talk about misleading advice. I agree with your premise that the purpose of your code should be apparent through a the use of a meaningful naming convention but that does NOT eliminate the need for comments. Comments should be redundant, they are meant to confirm the obvious so that there is no room to second guess what that section of code is meant to do. Your code may be "clean" and "easy to read" but that means something between jack and shit to the poor PFY who has to bring it into compliance with a new standard. Who do you honestly think is better off? The intern who has the privilege of learning from your immaculate structure while basking in the glow of your brilliance; or the guy who can read what you've done and make the changes he needs to and make it out of the office in time to meet that new blonde from accounting out for drinks?
The physical examination should never be dispensed with in the long run. But in the case of a routine checkup for someone like myself, mid 20's non-smoking male, it seems like one of those things that is done just because I happen to be there anyway. Maybe the frequency of a physical visit could be cut down to once a year, or every 18 months with this system. It would mean one less potential scheduling conflict for the both of use without completely ignoring my health and if I could double book and have a check-up interview while I'm already away on vacation with the family then I'm all for it. The pointed questions that a doctor asks are the really valuable part of the check-up because something that sets on gradually, like my carpel-tunnel, isn't something that I would ever have noticed until it was far too late. But since my doctor knows what I do for a career and asked that one direct question; I can start to take steps to mitigate the problem before surgery is even a consideration.
The difference is that its a lot harder for the NSA to get a microphone into the office of a German agency (and a lot worse for international relations if the NSA did it and the Germans found out) than it is for the NSA to hack into the computers at a German agency from a computer room at Ft Meade.
Even I own a laser mic; I'm sure the NSA has way cooler stuff at their disposal for extracting sound remotely.
Does this whole hipster throw back move to antiquated technology seem ass backward to anyone else? Is it that hard to simply not plug a PC into a network? You're worried about someone with a thumb drive? Fill the USB slots with non-conductive wood glue and let's see what they do then.
Damn it, you're going to make me burn the mod points I have already spent in this thread to educate the other *nix fan boys like you. First of all Windows offers a boat load more process memory protection then most other major Linux distros out there which is why DLL injection is necessary in the first place where as in Linux I can just dump the data I want from any memory page I damn well please once I'm running on the remote system. UAC may have been a bit late to the game but it's here now. However despite this solid protections scheme Windows must still remain functional for developers, so the WinAPI is forced to offer some method of run-time debugging for most processes (it does NOT allow this for all of them; things like csrss and lsass are off limits). DLL injection is accomplished by first locating the load point of the Kernel32 DLL in the target process and then going to the offset where the exported GetProcAddress() and LoadLibrary() functions are and invoking them through CreateRemoteThread(). Before even that occurs though the strings that all three of those functions rely on have to already be present in the remote process, this is done with first allocating the memory with VirtualAllocEx() and then writing to it with WriteProcessMemory(). In order for any part of this operation to be possible the end user would have had to of allowed the infection to enable the SeDebug privilege for the malicious process in the first place. Meaning that at some point the end user f***ed the pooch all on their own without Evil Old Microsoft having done anything stupid. Further more absolutely NONE of this would be in the slightest bit relevant if the information was encrypted in process to begin with and that is the fault of the banking systems software vendor. So get off of your wooden high horse, a well documented API being utilized by incompetent third parties is not an insecure one.
How is it that batteries work in your little world then? Please, enlighten us. Because here in reality they operate by using a chemical reaction to transfer electrons between two differing metal plates. You could try to argue and say that isn't generating energy, it is simply releasing it. But then I would be unable to help myself from pointing out that energy in fact cannot be created or destroyed.
Batteries != Capacitors;
You're right about solar panels in that they do take up a metric butt-load of space. As for cleaning them, that is a real problem. If only we had the technology to do that automatically. Maybe some kind of wiper blades attached to an oscillating motor to clear away particulates so that light could pass through a transparent medium designed to shield the panels from the wind... Hmmm... What technology could we possibly posses that would accomplish this feat of engineering?
>The problem with that is, is if was sent to your email address, you are the intended recipient.
No you're not, when the email was sent by mistake.
I'm having trouble figuring out where to begin explaining how incorrect this statement is. Your argument is intent? OK, let's start there. The users intent was to send an Email. This user intentionally entered real world confidential information into the body of this Email message. Then this user intentionally entered a fully qualified and valid Email address into the "TO:" field of the Emails header and finally they intentionally sent this message to the previously mentioned Email address. Tripping over a power cable is a mistake, everything about this action was deliberate.
Probable old school Slashdot troll, but what the hey, I'll bite. I won't even mention their complete refusal to upgrade our decaying infrastructer because that would just be too easy. When you consume a Kilowatt you are consuming an actual resource. This is a unit of energy that requires a certain amount of fuel to generate. There is actually a potential compounding effect with it's usage since the power company has to plan to over produce in order to prevent potential brown outs. So a rising trend in power usage over a long enough period of time will cause a shift in the power generated by the plant. This is why we except that the do-do running the space heater will except the monetary penalty involved with being a moron.
On the other hand a Kilobyte is an abstraction that is used to quantify data, it is not finite resource. This is not a commodity and the cost of it's existence is covered in the static overhead of the entire operation. There is hardly anything (as far as the ISP is concerned) consumed by its use, and if it is not used then it is not wasted and it's existence adds nothing to their cost of operation.
Carbon dioxide, however, is the single biggest contributor to the temperature on earth there is. Also, I suspect you're just a troll:-)
No, the sun is still the largest factor determining the temperature on this planet. In fact, I have it on good authority that Carbon Dioxide doesn't generate any energy what so ever and it is in simply a by-product of a reaction that does. Keeping this in mind allows us to explore options beyond just burying crap in the ground.
Alright wiseguy, then tell me what the "open source" solution is to my companies key fob system that periodically runs a hash against itself to protect against code injections, checks against VM's by dialing out of the system to an external client and only runs on XP? Is someone handing these systems out? Are we going to organize a flash-mob to come in and rip apart our walls and rerun the cabling to and from the locks on all of the doors on two separate floors and through concrete flooring while replacing the proprietary locking mechanisms? Who is it that is going to be so generous with their time and reprogram this thing for our 200+ employees? There are in fact some things that your precious open source community does not provide and that are necessary for businesses to meet certain industry standards
Yeah, more roundabouts are a great idea. Maybe if every ass-hat in an SUV didn't think that "Yield" was a synonym for "close-your-eyes-and-accelerate" then roundabouts might be a decent solution. But as it stands increasing everyone else's stress just because you can't bother to break for a half-second is a stupid idea.
You're only seeing the face value here, what is interesting is that Visa is being sued for price collusion by an entity that is large enough to follow through with the action. The ideal end result of lower swipe fees for merchants would benefit every business across the board. The only significance of the $5 billion number is that it says Walmart is serious about this and it is not going to settle this out of court, if they had picked a reasonable number Visa would have just payed the money and told them to go away. The goal here is not simply to get the money, it's to lower the fees.
Then prove it. Show one piece of holistic/homeopathic medicine which does the equivalent of real medicine.
If all I have to prove is that my approach is as effective as the current high cholesterol on the market then I'm pretty confident I could meet your challenge.
"Come one! Come all! Allow Geeks thrice blessed face whacking paddle to reduce your risk of heart attack by up to two whole percent!"
And you seriously have to wonder why some of us want to see a non-fiat currency succeed?
Yes I often do wonder why you think it's any different from your system. There are two inherent problems with a purely gold standard that at least some of the mineral backers would agree with. One, if you are only using gold, for example, then you are failing to diversify your countries wealth based on it's other mineral resources. Two, there is no granularity with gold, sometimes you only need 12 widgets and not 12,000 but no one is going to let you pay for it with smatterings of gold dust. These used to be solved problems, the US for instance used to use both gold and silver and before the Bessemer process I believe we used aluminium (pronounces 'Ah-Loo-Min-Uhm') as well. This provided granularity and stabilized market fluctuations. But what about our copper? What about our steel? You can't tell me that these other minerals are worthless to an industrialized nation. And if that is what everyone is buying from you then why not allow it to back your currency? The demand for that mineral raises it's market value, so why not allow it to raise the strength of your dollar along with it while providing yet more diversification and more granularity?
What you mineral-backers refuse to see, or consciously ignore I honestly don't know which, is that a countries labor force is just as monetizable as it's mineral wealth. That's the biggest difference between the two systems, that inclusion of the countries ability to provide more then just raw materials. If they want a car then they can buy a car, and the need for that car makes the dollar valuable.
You do realize that countries can still buy gold from us right? Gold Bullion is selling for around $1,300 USD right now and nothing is stopping other countries from exchanging the US dollar for gold if that is what they want.
The reason this type of propaganda is effective is because you can't dispute the statement, the statement being the California (a state consisting mostly of desert) is having a drought. Also, the numbers are likely correct. What makes this annoying is the proposed "solution" that people should eat less meat which conveniently helps their agenda. Where in the article do they mention desalinization? How about switching from cattle to a less stupid animal? Is there any mention of a solution that makes an actual effort to solve the issue and not to simply mitigate it?
You could just constantly play a movie in each corner of the vehicle. This way anyone trying to film your clients would inevitably end up making an unlawful reproduction of the film and then you just sick the MPAA on them.
Have you done any research into "The Cone of Silence"?
How is grading on a curve better than a strict percentile rank? Is there any benefit to the complexity it adds?
Answer 1: It isn't.
Answer 2: There is no benefit anywhere regardless of what you compare it against.
Teachers who grade on a curve don't understand what a GPA is meant to represent. They are taking something that actually a representation of a students performance in a course (since the raw score is an average of their scores in assignments, tests and projects for the class) and they are trying to hammer it into some half-assed solution to compare students against one and other. They are saying "It doesn't matter how well you have demonstrated your understanding of the course material, or how well you've done in regards to the individual assessments that I myself assigned and evaluated. Instead of getting out from behind my desk and developing a system that reflects what I am trying to show here, I'm going to deprecate your grade until it suggests that you have a less then basic understanding of the material that was taught. Because that's just easier for me to do."
Have any of these Gen X retards even considered the students who, despite knowing the material, will have to sign up for, pay for and hope to find an empty seat in a class all over again just because they didn't try hard enough to impress their narcissistic teacher? Probably not because that wouldn't be helpful in stroking their ego and making them feel more important in the world. What actually needs to happen is for teachers from all schools and disciplines need to sit down, STFU and realize that outside of the classroom they have no authority, nobody gives a damn about their opinion and that even those glowing recommendations that they wrote for their favorite students mean slightly less then whether or not the applicants socks match this morning. Their job is to teach and evaluate their students understanding of the material, that's it. It is not to try and decide if one student is better then another or if Little Bobby Tables needs to apply himself more. You want a way to compare potential employee's? It's called a fucking portfolio.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because A can cause B, does not entail that A is a B in the sense you are implying.
Nor does it preclude the possibility. The entire concept of insurance is cost distribution to begin with, by taking a small portion of the income of all of those involved so as to mitigate the large expenses when those in the group require them. Now this law has made it mandatory to include more people in these groups. More people means more risk, more risk means more cost, that cost is distributed among the group by taking more of their income. Ergo, more income is being redistributed. So although you are technically correct in your statement about causality; in the context of this scenario your statement is wrong.
Everyone has the right to free speech, but it ceases being free speech when it crosses certain bounds (shouting fire in a crowded theatre, incitement to violence, solicitation of criminal activity, etc). All of these cases are nuanced and require careful balance...
And everyone of those crimes are accounted for in already existing laws. So political peacocking for the sake of their constituents, or whatever they are known as over there, doesn't do anything productive. All they are doing is fuzzing the line of demarcation for what is a crime and what isn't in the hopes that they can grab more supporters or hold on to the ones who are already there.
Let me ask you for your honest opinion on this; if I anonymously threaten to hurt you, does it make a difference to you whether it's done by phone, Facebook post, Email or snail mail? Is the threat to you any more or less real depending on the medium of delivery? Why then do we have to explicitly state that is a crime if done by a different form of communication and potentially proscribe a separate penalty? Do you think this law actually does anything or helps anybody?
I believe the idea that unions are still relevant is a popular message among the corporate media. For example when Hostess went bankrupt in 2012 due to mismanagement, the press reported mostly that the business would have to close if the unions didn't make concessions. Never mind the fact that they had previously made many concessions in the past, and the new contract would result in wages barely over minimum wage yet would not touch executive bonuses. OCP owns the police.
Now let's compare that situation with a list recent failures from say the IBEW: queue crickets.... Maybe this trend actually says more about unions who provide protection for skilled labor and actual talent vs. monkeys who press a button on an assembly line and who don't actually know what that button does.
Here's a hint for all of those who are for a a union to protect their job; if your employer threatens to hire a scab from outside of your union, and your reaction is anything other then either A.) laughing in his face until you need to be hospitalized asphyxia or B.) grabbing a bag of popcorn to watch the inevitable shit show. Then your "union" never had any leverage to begin with.
I don't think that the dogs protecting the white house are trained simply for pain compliance like your day to day police dogs are. I've always imagined them to be German Shepard's that are trained to think they are Terriers and Whippets. When the rep made that comment about not using the dogs when the runner is not carrying a bag, he was probably referring to the protocol that tells them when it is OK to use the dogs, like when the suspect has to be stopped but the risk to the human agent is too great. As for the utilization of snipers in that scenario, I'll admit that I don't know too many snipers in person but I would hope that at some point in their training some one tells them that shooting at a home made explosive device is generally a bad idea.
... Their defense? You got it. Second amendment, their right to stack their real and loaded rifles and their children's rifles in the same place. Their one kid is dead, and the other is living with the fact that he gut shot her and killed her.
I personally see this as a failure in the court system that allows an inapplicable defense plea to be submitted. They were correct, they did have the right to do stupid things. What makes that irrelevant, and what they clearly did not understand, is that when those stupid things lead to a fatality then they will be charged with negligent homicide. It's their counsel's fault that they didn't understand the situation well enough to put together a better defense. And now, because the testimony of the defendant is not adherent to any of the same guidelines as say the testimony from a witness or even that of the plaintive, the press is provided with an unlimited range of sound bites to politicize, skew and spin to their black little hearts delight. Call me a liberal if you want to, but I believe that your right to not self incriminate implicitly allows you the right to understand what the hell you're being charged with in the first place! If that really were the case here then you wouldn't see asinine statements like this one made.
In the end though, can you really be surprised at the seemingly insane attempt to defend themselves? How many times have you done or said something stupid for which there was no excuse? Didn't you still try to flounder for an argument that would prevent the backlash at least some of the time?
It's a third- world environment, but with unions and Democrat labor laws.
Normally I wouldn't entertain the idea of politicizing what is clearly an economic and social development issue; but what the hell I'll respond.
I'm not sure how you think that unions work where you are from. But here in the US what they do is monopolize the labor pool for a given trade on a per entity basis; they do not annex an entire cities population all at one a time. But, solely for the sake of your argument, let's say that a labor union somehow actually DID manage to maintain the peoples faith, in a swing state that has been losing jobs and economically depressed for the passed four decades, and which also currently has a Republican Governor, enough so that they still have some semblance of a presence. And just to get it out of the way let's assume that this union also specialized in shale oil extraction, something that Ohio has never exported on any kind of a scale before. That union is only going to concern itself with it's niche in the host entity. Where as the over whelming majority of jobs and wealth being created are going to be from externalities that are not directly associated with this market. Now if you are contending that the unions are the reason that the jobs left this area in the first place then you are making the mistake of assuming that any of the host entities production models stood a snowballs chance in hell of competing with or catering too emerging markets. They didn't, not a single one of them even tried.
Please remember that this is Slashdot, not Facebook. You will occasionally be asked to back up your claims with something that at least appears to be evidence.
From what the article says, this is a bump in manufacturing from short term contracts, this is hardly a sustainable client base. My guess is that at the very most this will be a benefit for one generation, maybe two at the very most. A few thousand jobs is nothing to shrug off but I hope that these towns are prepared for what is going to happen within the next 20 to 40 years. The cheap housing and sharp increase in demand will attract real-estate prospectors; and just like these sociopathic leeches always do, they will start building up their little housing price bubbles and once again the idea that maybe "infinite growth" can be a real thing is going to settle in the backs of peoples minds. I'm not saying that we should stop this kind of thing mind you. The money generated in this way is very real, even if the actual wealth is not. But we should be better prepared for the fallout this time.
Comments are a hack to work around the failure to write code which is sufficiently clear and expressive (note that I'm talking about inline comments, not comments used to generate documentation). When I find myself typing a comment, I step back and look for ways to improve naming, or refactor, until the comment is no longer necessary.
Talk about misleading advice. I agree with your premise that the purpose of your code should be apparent through a the use of a meaningful naming convention but that does NOT eliminate the need for comments. Comments should be redundant, they are meant to confirm the obvious so that there is no room to second guess what that section of code is meant to do. Your code may be "clean" and "easy to read" but that means something between jack and shit to the poor PFY who has to bring it into compliance with a new standard. Who do you honestly think is better off? The intern who has the privilege of learning from your immaculate structure while basking in the glow of your brilliance; or the guy who can read what you've done and make the changes he needs to and make it out of the office in time to meet that new blonde from accounting out for drinks?
The physical examination should never be dispensed with in the long run. But in the case of a routine checkup for someone like myself, mid 20's non-smoking male, it seems like one of those things that is done just because I happen to be there anyway. Maybe the frequency of a physical visit could be cut down to once a year, or every 18 months with this system. It would mean one less potential scheduling conflict for the both of use without completely ignoring my health and if I could double book and have a check-up interview while I'm already away on vacation with the family then I'm all for it. The pointed questions that a doctor asks are the really valuable part of the check-up because something that sets on gradually, like my carpel-tunnel, isn't something that I would ever have noticed until it was far too late. But since my doctor knows what I do for a career and asked that one direct question; I can start to take steps to mitigate the problem before surgery is even a consideration.
You laugh, but it just goes to show that you have no idea what kind of trouble we are having in integrating Internet Explorer with that project.
The difference is that its a lot harder for the NSA to get a microphone into the office of a German agency (and a lot worse for international relations if the NSA did it and the Germans found out) than it is for the NSA to hack into the computers at a German agency from a computer room at Ft Meade.
Even I own a laser mic; I'm sure the NSA has way cooler stuff at their disposal for extracting sound remotely.
Does this whole hipster throw back move to antiquated technology seem ass backward to anyone else? Is it that hard to simply not plug a PC into a network? You're worried about someone with a thumb drive? Fill the USB slots with non-conductive wood glue and let's see what they do then.
Damn it, you're going to make me burn the mod points I have already spent in this thread to educate the other *nix fan boys like you. First of all Windows offers a boat load more process memory protection then most other major Linux distros out there which is why DLL injection is necessary in the first place where as in Linux I can just dump the data I want from any memory page I damn well please once I'm running on the remote system. UAC may have been a bit late to the game but it's here now. However despite this solid protections scheme Windows must still remain functional for developers, so the WinAPI is forced to offer some method of run-time debugging for most processes (it does NOT allow this for all of them; things like csrss and lsass are off limits). DLL injection is accomplished by first locating the load point of the Kernel32 DLL in the target process and then going to the offset where the exported GetProcAddress() and LoadLibrary() functions are and invoking them through CreateRemoteThread(). Before even that occurs though the strings that all three of those functions rely on have to already be present in the remote process, this is done with first allocating the memory with VirtualAllocEx() and then writing to it with WriteProcessMemory(). In order for any part of this operation to be possible the end user would have had to of allowed the infection to enable the SeDebug privilege for the malicious process in the first place. Meaning that at some point the end user f***ed the pooch all on their own without Evil Old Microsoft having done anything stupid. Further more absolutely NONE of this would be in the slightest bit relevant if the information was encrypted in process to begin with and that is the fault of the banking systems software vendor. So get off of your wooden high horse, a well documented API being utilized by incompetent third parties is not an insecure one.
Java is a decent language for a lot of different areas but doesn't come to the table in any one area and own the hill.
Except, you know, that whole Android API thing...
As for batteries -- they don't generate energy.
How is it that batteries work in your little world then? Please, enlighten us. Because here in reality they operate by using a chemical reaction to transfer electrons between two differing metal plates. You could try to argue and say that isn't generating energy, it is simply releasing it. But then I would be unable to help myself from pointing out that energy in fact cannot be created or destroyed.
Batteries != Capacitors;
You're right about solar panels in that they do take up a metric butt-load of space. As for cleaning them, that is a real problem. If only we had the technology to do that automatically. Maybe some kind of wiper blades attached to an oscillating motor to clear away particulates so that light could pass through a transparent medium designed to shield the panels from the wind ... Hmmm ... What technology could we possibly posses that would accomplish this feat of engineering?
>The problem with that is, is if was sent to your email address, you are the intended recipient. No you're not, when the email was sent by mistake.
I'm having trouble figuring out where to begin explaining how incorrect this statement is. Your argument is intent? OK, let's start there. The users intent was to send an Email. This user intentionally entered real world confidential information into the body of this Email message. Then this user intentionally entered a fully qualified and valid Email address into the "TO:" field of the Emails header and finally they intentionally sent this message to the previously mentioned Email address. Tripping over a power cable is a mistake, everything about this action was deliberate.
Probable old school Slashdot troll, but what the hey, I'll bite. I won't even mention their complete refusal to upgrade our decaying infrastructer because that would just be too easy. When you consume a Kilowatt you are consuming an actual resource. This is a unit of energy that requires a certain amount of fuel to generate. There is actually a potential compounding effect with it's usage since the power company has to plan to over produce in order to prevent potential brown outs. So a rising trend in power usage over a long enough period of time will cause a shift in the power generated by the plant. This is why we except that the do-do running the space heater will except the monetary penalty involved with being a moron.
On the other hand a Kilobyte is an abstraction that is used to quantify data, it is not finite resource. This is not a commodity and the cost of it's existence is covered in the static overhead of the entire operation. There is hardly anything (as far as the ISP is concerned) consumed by its use, and if it is not used then it is not wasted and it's existence adds nothing to their cost of operation.
Carbon dioxide, however, is the single biggest contributor to the temperature on earth there is. Also, I suspect you're just a troll :-)
No, the sun is still the largest factor determining the temperature on this planet. In fact, I have it on good authority that Carbon Dioxide doesn't generate any energy what so ever and it is in simply a by-product of a reaction that does. Keeping this in mind allows us to explore options beyond just burying crap in the ground.
That is not the pain of XP EoL, it is the self inflicted torture by those who refuse to use free and open source software.
It is a shame, but I have no sympathy for those who embrace planned obsolescence.
Alright wiseguy, then tell me what the "open source" solution is to my companies key fob system that periodically runs a hash against itself to protect against code injections, checks against VM's by dialing out of the system to an external client and only runs on XP? Is someone handing these systems out? Are we going to organize a flash-mob to come in and rip apart our walls and rerun the cabling to and from the locks on all of the doors on two separate floors and through concrete flooring while replacing the proprietary locking mechanisms? Who is it that is going to be so generous with their time and reprogram this thing for our 200+ employees? There are in fact some things that your precious open source community does not provide and that are necessary for businesses to meet certain industry standards
Yeah, more roundabouts are a great idea. Maybe if every ass-hat in an SUV didn't think that "Yield" was a synonym for "close-your-eyes-and-accelerate" then roundabouts might be a decent solution. But as it stands increasing everyone else's stress just because you can't bother to break for a half-second is a stupid idea.
You're only seeing the face value here, what is interesting is that Visa is being sued for price collusion by an entity that is large enough to follow through with the action. The ideal end result of lower swipe fees for merchants would benefit every business across the board. The only significance of the $5 billion number is that it says Walmart is serious about this and it is not going to settle this out of court, if they had picked a reasonable number Visa would have just payed the money and told them to go away. The goal here is not simply to get the money, it's to lower the fees.
Then prove it. Show one piece of holistic/homeopathic medicine which does the equivalent of real medicine.
If all I have to prove is that my approach is as effective as the current high cholesterol on the market then I'm pretty confident I could meet your challenge.
"Come one! Come all! Allow Geeks thrice blessed face whacking paddle to reduce your risk of heart attack by up to two whole percent!"
And you seriously have to wonder why some of us want to see a non-fiat currency succeed?
Yes I often do wonder why you think it's any different from your system. There are two inherent problems with a purely gold standard that at least some of the mineral backers would agree with. One, if you are only using gold, for example, then you are failing to diversify your countries wealth based on it's other mineral resources. Two, there is no granularity with gold, sometimes you only need 12 widgets and not 12,000 but no one is going to let you pay for it with smatterings of gold dust. These used to be solved problems, the US for instance used to use both gold and silver and before the Bessemer process I believe we used aluminium (pronounces 'Ah-Loo-Min-Uhm') as well. This provided granularity and stabilized market fluctuations. But what about our copper? What about our steel? You can't tell me that these other minerals are worthless to an industrialized nation. And if that is what everyone is buying from you then why not allow it to back your currency? The demand for that mineral raises it's market value, so why not allow it to raise the strength of your dollar along with it while providing yet more diversification and more granularity?
What you mineral-backers refuse to see, or consciously ignore I honestly don't know which, is that a countries labor force is just as monetizable as it's mineral wealth. That's the biggest difference between the two systems, that inclusion of the countries ability to provide more then just raw materials. If they want a car then they can buy a car, and the need for that car makes the dollar valuable.
You do realize that countries can still buy gold from us right? Gold Bullion is selling for around $1,300 USD right now and nothing is stopping other countries from exchanging the US dollar for gold if that is what they want.
The reason this type of propaganda is effective is because you can't dispute the statement, the statement being the California (a state consisting mostly of desert) is having a drought. Also, the numbers are likely correct. What makes this annoying is the proposed "solution" that people should eat less meat which conveniently helps their agenda. Where in the article do they mention desalinization? How about switching from cattle to a less stupid animal? Is there any mention of a solution that makes an actual effort to solve the issue and not to simply mitigate it?
You could just constantly play a movie in each corner of the vehicle. This way anyone trying to film your clients would inevitably end up making an unlawful reproduction of the film and then you just sick the MPAA on them.
Have you done any research into "The Cone of Silence"?
How is grading on a curve better than a strict percentile rank? Is there any benefit to the complexity it adds?
Answer 1: It isn't. Answer 2: There is no benefit anywhere regardless of what you compare it against.
Teachers who grade on a curve don't understand what a GPA is meant to represent. They are taking something that actually a representation of a students performance in a course (since the raw score is an average of their scores in assignments, tests and projects for the class) and they are trying to hammer it into some half-assed solution to compare students against one and other. They are saying "It doesn't matter how well you have demonstrated your understanding of the course material, or how well you've done in regards to the individual assessments that I myself assigned and evaluated. Instead of getting out from behind my desk and developing a system that reflects what I am trying to show here, I'm going to deprecate your grade until it suggests that you have a less then basic understanding of the material that was taught. Because that's just easier for me to do."
Have any of these Gen X retards even considered the students who, despite knowing the material, will have to sign up for, pay for and hope to find an empty seat in a class all over again just because they didn't try hard enough to impress their narcissistic teacher? Probably not because that wouldn't be helpful in stroking their ego and making them feel more important in the world. What actually needs to happen is for teachers from all schools and disciplines need to sit down, STFU and realize that outside of the classroom they have no authority, nobody gives a damn about their opinion and that even those glowing recommendations that they wrote for their favorite students mean slightly less then whether or not the applicants socks match this morning. Their job is to teach and evaluate their students understanding of the material, that's it. It is not to try and decide if one student is better then another or if Little Bobby Tables needs to apply himself more. You want a way to compare potential employee's? It's called a fucking portfolio.