You are flat out wrong. Males are not "individuals". They represent a gender of an entire species and are therefore able to evolve differently than the other gender while still remaining the same species. Second, evolution is replete with examples of how specific genders evolved differently for a given species. Usually these changes have to do with attracting a mate in such a way as to not get killed (too much). Perhaps you should read a modern day book on evolution (like Dawkins' latest offering where he sites specific examples regarding this very topic).
NoScript is whitelist oriented. You have to explicitly tell it what sites are ok to run javascript. If you don't do that, you're opening yourself up to a world of hurt (especially if you ever browse porn). Once a site is whitelisted, you shouldn't have any problems with it at all.
More or less this is a pointless question since you would have to violate their borders (by hacking them) to prove your point and even then you can't be certain. They could put botnet software on the machine they use to hack with just to say that they weren't responsible if they are ever caught. In the end, you have to hold their government responsible for what happens with their government's IPs and leave it at that.
"Economics is terrible at predicting the future, but it is great at understanding the past."
It's not even good at that. Different people have different opinions as why the depression was as bad as it was. But you can never get people to agree on history as a rule of thumb so no surprise.
You can't be an expert in CS and something else. For starters, there are so many topics in CS that merely asserting you're a CS expert is laughable. Second, just focusing on the one thing I do for a living as a programmer is more than a full time job. I keep up with the latest trends and technologies and this is very time consuming. I can't even do all the research (and I use the term loosely) I would like in the limited subjects I'm interested in and I don't even have a wife or kids to deal with. So, to claim multiple subjects of expertise is impossible unless your definition of "expert" is very weak and therefore has no meaning.
Having recently just finished Dawkins' latest book, I'm guessing what Wowsers is saying is spot on. Dawkins laments over some new statistics showing the UK backsliding just like the US. They aren't quite as bad as we are in the states yet but that's the direction they are heading. More and more people are starting to by the creationist argument. Sad.
According to the Wired article, there are enough thorium reserves in the US to supply the country with power for about 1000 years. That's about as close to infinite as it gets.
I'm no fan of Steam but you keep saying Steam is spyware without backing it up with any evidence whatsoever. Please provide some citation to justify this claim.
"Modified iterative waterfall" is still waterfall. You can't simply add iterations and declare that it's something else because it's not. Fixed bid contracts are bullshit. I did many of them early in my career so I know what I'm talking about. Either the company under contract is getting screwed or the the client is; it's that simple. Finally, I'll put my success record up against yours any day of the week. I get shit done and my clients like what I do. So don't tell me how "sorely mistaken" I am. I've been in this business for over 20 fucking years and I know what works, what doesn't, and what's bullshit. What you sell is bullshit.
You use a waterfall methodology and you wonder why so many of your projects fail. Interesting.
I'm a contractor and I've been on one failed project in the last 9 years. The one that failed started out outsourced and they decided to finally bring it in house but they burned up too much money already so they cancelled it after we were 85% done with coding (which we managed to accomplish in 3 mo. starting from scratch). I'd actually forgotten what failed projects were like. Of course, I refuse to work on waterfall projects...
So, from my perspective, the problem might be you. Actually, if you're pushing waterfall projects it is you.
I'm not aware of any evidence that makes me believe BG is a particularly impressive programmer and coding for 64k limits is hardly a metric for skill. You're obviously too young but a lot of us were coding to 4k limits or even much less. 64k is downright roomy especially with assembler or procedural languages. When I finally got a Commodore 64, I didn't know what to do with all that memory. It was hard to imagine how to use it all. Shit, I used to write custom databases for the military in Turbo Pascal that compiled to under 8k.
You're confusing love of country with love of government. They are two very different things. It's safe to say that Iranians LOVE their country and its rich history but many passionately hate their government. So, I would find it hard to understand the Chinese loving their government but wouldn't have any difficulty understanding their love of country. In fact, I know many Chinese DO NOT love their government so please don't try to sell that bullshit.
You said, "You might claim that some smart people are troubled and nobody would argue with you. But if you argue that all smart people, or even most smart people are troubled then you are just wrong."
You are tacitly asserting that I'm arguing that "all" or "most" smart people are troubled when I never said any such thing. In short, you're changing my argument into something you can argue against when you have no valid fucking argument to begin with. Also, please show me the definition where it says that "generally" = "all".
Stating that I'm lacking logic without backing it up just makes you look even dumber than you already do. What's truly sad is that you fail to even argue the real point. There's ample evidence readily available on the internet that you cannot deny -- yet you do. Why? Because, as I stated earlier, you're much less intelligent than you think you are.
I find it hilarious that you think I'm lacking logic for simply criticizing you for misquoting me. Once again you prove your intelligence.
No, we're not all depressed because it's hard to spot. Did you ever learn reading comprehension? My point is that just because you can't identify it doesn't mean it's not a common problem.
First off, I stated they were generally troubled, not *all* or *mostly*. "Generally" means that it's common but does not put a hard figure on it. Of course, if you were as smart as you think you are, I wouldn't need to explain this to you. Second, it's not very easy to detect depression. Most smart people are very good at covering it up, especially at work. I know from personal experience. I would go so far as to say, that if you asked my co-workers who was the depressed person in the group, nobody would pick me. Finally, search the fucking internet. There's tons of information about this very subject.
Actually really smart people are generally troubled. By definition you're an outsider and it's difficult for most people in that category to transcend that gap. Keep in mind that being social among your peers does not count for being generally social. I'm a programmer and I'm very social among my peers but not so much outside of it (although I know many who are much worse).
The problem is that check processing isn't free now. In the US, it's done by the Fed with taxpayer money. The cost is merely hidden by the fact that individual businesses aren't hit with a bill by the Fed.
Military people aren't the ones developing these systems. It's the lovely people at General Atomics, Lockheed, etc. that do it. In case of the Predator drone, they probably realized that it would cost them more money (i.e., reduce their profit) to encrypt the signal so they didn't. GA doesn't give a flying shit about the security of the nation, they only care about their bottom line.
Slashdot Mirror
You are flat out wrong. Males are not "individuals". They represent a gender of an entire species and are therefore able to evolve differently than the other gender while still remaining the same species. Second, evolution is replete with examples of how specific genders evolved differently for a given species. Usually these changes have to do with attracting a mate in such a way as to not get killed (too much). Perhaps you should read a modern day book on evolution (like Dawkins' latest offering where he sites specific examples regarding this very topic).
NoScript is whitelist oriented. You have to explicitly tell it what sites are ok to run javascript. If you don't do that, you're opening yourself up to a world of hurt (especially if you ever browse porn). Once a site is whitelisted, you shouldn't have any problems with it at all.
More or less this is a pointless question since you would have to violate their borders (by hacking them) to prove your point and even then you can't be certain. They could put botnet software on the machine they use to hack with just to say that they weren't responsible if they are ever caught. In the end, you have to hold their government responsible for what happens with their government's IPs and leave it at that.
"Economics is terrible at predicting the future, but it is great at understanding the past."
It's not even good at that. Different people have different opinions as why the depression was as bad as it was. But you can never get people to agree on history as a rule of thumb so no surprise.
You can't be an expert in CS and something else. For starters, there are so many topics in CS that merely asserting you're a CS expert is laughable. Second, just focusing on the one thing I do for a living as a programmer is more than a full time job. I keep up with the latest trends and technologies and this is very time consuming. I can't even do all the research (and I use the term loosely) I would like in the limited subjects I'm interested in and I don't even have a wife or kids to deal with. So, to claim multiple subjects of expertise is impossible unless your definition of "expert" is very weak and therefore has no meaning.
Wrong. According to Wikipedia (and this atheist): "Atheism can be either the rejection of theism, or the position that deities do not exist."
Having recently just finished Dawkins' latest book, I'm guessing what Wowsers is saying is spot on. Dawkins laments over some new statistics showing the UK backsliding just like the US. They aren't quite as bad as we are in the states yet but that's the direction they are heading. More and more people are starting to by the creationist argument. Sad.
According to the Wired article, there are enough thorium reserves in the US to supply the country with power for about 1000 years. That's about as close to infinite as it gets.
You would think so but Sarah Palin can see Russia from her back door. They're our next door neighbor!
I'm no fan of Steam but you keep saying Steam is spyware without backing it up with any evidence whatsoever. Please provide some citation to justify this claim.
"Modified iterative waterfall" is still waterfall. You can't simply add iterations and declare that it's something else because it's not. Fixed bid contracts are bullshit. I did many of them early in my career so I know what I'm talking about. Either the company under contract is getting screwed or the the client is; it's that simple. Finally, I'll put my success record up against yours any day of the week. I get shit done and my clients like what I do. So don't tell me how "sorely mistaken" I am. I've been in this business for over 20 fucking years and I know what works, what doesn't, and what's bullshit. What you sell is bullshit.
You use a waterfall methodology and you wonder why so many of your projects fail. Interesting.
I'm a contractor and I've been on one failed project in the last 9 years. The one that failed started out outsourced and they decided to finally bring it in house but they burned up too much money already so they cancelled it after we were 85% done with coding (which we managed to accomplish in 3 mo. starting from scratch). I'd actually forgotten what failed projects were like. Of course, I refuse to work on waterfall projects...
So, from my perspective, the problem might be you. Actually, if you're pushing waterfall projects it is you.
The Russians already did this: http://www.linux-xp.com/desktop/2010-release-notes/
I don't but that's my whole point.
I'm not aware of any evidence that makes me believe BG is a particularly impressive programmer and coding for 64k limits is hardly a metric for skill. You're obviously too young but a lot of us were coding to 4k limits or even much less. 64k is downright roomy especially with assembler or procedural languages. When I finally got a Commodore 64, I didn't know what to do with all that memory. It was hard to imagine how to use it all. Shit, I used to write custom databases for the military in Turbo Pascal that compiled to under 8k.
You're confusing love of country with love of government. They are two very different things. It's safe to say that Iranians LOVE their country and its rich history but many passionately hate their government. So, I would find it hard to understand the Chinese loving their government but wouldn't have any difficulty understanding their love of country. In fact, I know many Chinese DO NOT love their government so please don't try to sell that bullshit.
The only one who failed miserably is your mother. The world would be a better place if you were aborted before birth.
Jesus christ, you're fucking stupid.
You said, "You might claim that some smart people are troubled and nobody would argue with you. But if you argue that all smart people, or even most smart people are troubled then you are just wrong."
You are tacitly asserting that I'm arguing that "all" or "most" smart people are troubled when I never said any such thing. In short, you're changing my argument into something you can argue against when you have no valid fucking argument to begin with. Also, please show me the definition where it says that "generally" = "all".
Stating that I'm lacking logic without backing it up just makes you look even dumber than you already do. What's truly sad is that you fail to even argue the real point. There's ample evidence readily available on the internet that you cannot deny -- yet you do. Why? Because, as I stated earlier, you're much less intelligent than you think you are.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/generally
Note the word "commonly". It's the second word.
I find it hilarious that you think I'm lacking logic for simply criticizing you for misquoting me. Once again you prove your intelligence.
No, we're not all depressed because it's hard to spot. Did you ever learn reading comprehension? My point is that just because you can't identify it doesn't mean it's not a common problem.
First off, I stated they were generally troubled, not *all* or *mostly*. "Generally" means that it's common but does not put a hard figure on it. Of course, if you were as smart as you think you are, I wouldn't need to explain this to you. Second, it's not very easy to detect depression. Most smart people are very good at covering it up, especially at work. I know from personal experience. I would go so far as to say, that if you asked my co-workers who was the depressed person in the group, nobody would pick me. Finally, search the fucking internet. There's tons of information about this very subject.
Actually really smart people are generally troubled. By definition you're an outsider and it's difficult for most people in that category to transcend that gap. Keep in mind that being social among your peers does not count for being generally social. I'm a programmer and I'm very social among my peers but not so much outside of it (although I know many who are much worse).
The problem is that check processing isn't free now. In the US, it's done by the Fed with taxpayer money. The cost is merely hidden by the fact that individual businesses aren't hit with a bill by the Fed.
Yes, using a one-way hash on the video feed is the solution...
Brilliant!
It's just the video feed, moron.
Military people aren't the ones developing these systems. It's the lovely people at General Atomics, Lockheed, etc. that do it. In case of the Predator drone, they probably realized that it would cost them more money (i.e., reduce their profit) to encrypt the signal so they didn't. GA doesn't give a flying shit about the security of the nation, they only care about their bottom line.