If you send an aposthrophe for a particular character set you better damn well conform to the right character set. The problem is with assuming that a field is UTF-8 when it clearly is unspecified. Yet I am quite able to make use of these characters in a non-broken browser.
pay out dividends or similar to give an illusion of profits
Haven't you heard the spiel from the recently converted to the cult of bitcoin? 1. Buy BTC 2. Profit
I suspect the speculative bubble was created intentionally. And that some people set themselves up by holding enormous amounts in a hidden and semi-anonymous way. The only thing this plan depended on was people willing to buy lots of bitcoin on the speculation that it would be the exchange medium of the future.
I couldn't care less about the legality of it. Just because something skirts around loopholes in current law doesn't mean we must find the behavior completely acceptable.
A great analogy. For the 20 or so people on/. that program xlib, Xt, and XCB. (I think Xt is throughly dead, and I should probably send my book collection to recycle)
Vulkan is good if you're writing an engine. And most apps are using an engine rather than doing all the low level details themselves. This makes sense because at some layer what you really want is game logic that plugs into a scene graph, not game logic jumping directly to rendering.
What news about Vulkan really translates to is that Unity, Unreal Engine, etc are going to be faster on platforms that support Vulkan. Games that use these frameworks benefit. The developers who roll their own engine probably won't be able to invest in switching to Vulkan/ But that's OK, because OpenGL is no slouch either.
The individual choice is an inalienable right of the Individual. It is up to neither you, nor your nebulous "we", how I choose to pursue my happiness — as long as my pursuit does not unduly limit the same of any other.
That is certainly one view on the subject. But it is not the only view. There is a theory of the social contract, in that we agree to submit to an authority in exchange for protection of our remaining rights. Where each society chooses to draw the line is not universal.
Where a European draws the line versus where an American is extremely slight in practice, but gets blown out of proportion. I think it is because what individual autonomy Americans have actually given up, and the extreme individuality they have romanticized are two very different things. Fantasy vs Reality.
Well, it does not — TFA's title is lying, which is the very subject of this thread.
I am actually very skeptical of the study on the basis that it came from an organization specializing in public transportation. I think there is real potential for there to be bias, if not outright deception.
I do have a (unproven) theory that congestion is worse in the SF Bay Area because of the way public school busing works here. Kids are expected to walk to school, but parents are no willing to let kids walk around unsupervised. So now we have thousands of helicopter parents driving from work to school to after school activities to home, often criss crossing the same routes on the highway multiple times a day. I think we'd see a big improvement if we increased our capacity of school buses and changed the policy on travel distances and setup a stagged schedule for bus pick-up times to accommodate most of the students with after school events. It's a problem that can be solved with data and money, something the Bay Area has an abundance of. (common sense is not something we have a lot of though)
In other words, Uber/Lyft are guilty of offering a good and convenient service.
What benefits the individual does not automatically benefit a community as a whole.
Maximizing indivudal choice seems like a good idealogy to follow. But there are consequences to holding such a philosophy. So I would recommend we carefully weigh and consider everything that we do, rather than rigidly following a dogmatic practice as mentioned above.
I'd rather my car park 5 minutes from my work rather than 25 minutes. Then I can send my car over at the last possible minute, and not have my car congest the highways by making double the trips to suburbia.
But I fear people are going to do exactly what you suggest. And the traffic is going got be epically bad.
When was there last a really important new operating system?
Hi, I'm a kernel developer. And I'd like to say that operating systems aren't important anymore. They used to be. but now they are just a very minor part of a system's design. What is important is paralllel processing on a cluster of multiple computers, and much of these projects are OS-agnostic or hybrids that contain nodes with different environments and hardware. The remaining hard problems in computing aren't going to be solved by us operating system developers. (certainly there is some deep technical expertise that we can offer to improve the performance of a system)
Look if frequent thefts of uninsured capital occur in a market, the attractiveness of that market is going to diminish.
The downfall of BTC is going to be that many people aren't sure if they can trust their wallets or the exchanges. These problems have little to do with the technology and trumps any advantages that cryptocurrency might offer an investor or consumer.
Even the first half of your correction would have removed the sensationalism from the headline.
But I have an alternative propsola for what Apple should do. Apple should move U.S customer accounts to China. Chinese accounts to the U.S. And then when law enforcement demands access to their citizen's data, you bury them in red tape.
I got sick of the spam in my ssh and http logs and also installed fail2ban. It doesn't totally make the problem go away, but it did cut way down on my log file growth rate. I also found increasing the duration of the ban and lowering the number of failed attempts helps, and using a white list for known system admin.
The servers that I have on Comcast IP block get hit harder than the ones I have on Hurricane Electric (co-location business), so it seems likely that these bots/zombies are scanning some ranges of IPs more frequently.
The login attempts I see on my systems aren't even close to what is needed to get in. So in a way I'm saving these
PS - I use to TARPIT or DROP them. but now I REJECT. TARPIT is too mean, and DROP tends to attack more probing or at least more retry attempts.
Sure. but you're still going to bring a mop and bucket. You aren't going to turn off the tap and think that the work is half done. You've only done the easy part.
Yeah, but that's ludicrously expensive compared to making bioplastics in the first place.
I'm not convinced of that. Maybe little solar powered robots. We don't have to have it done fast either. If it takes a century for robots to clean it up, that would be reasonable. As long as removal of trash is faster than adding of trash. (that last part is the hard part, I think)
Why make more work cleaning up a problem at the end when you can spend that money preventing the problem occurring?
Problem is already here. Even if we stopped making it worse today, the problem would still be with us and likely wouldn't go away on its own.
Ocean scrubbing with robots as the "solution" is a lame and incredibly expensive idea that involves non-existent fantasy tech.
Harsh. Have you never watched a pool robot? It's not an idea based on a fantasy, it's not even MY idea. Would it scale? Well that's an engineering problem. I don't think we have enough information to even know if it would work or not.
Not possible, not practical to prevent plastics entering the water system
Oh everything is possible. We could have a militant faction of GreenPeace running PT Boats and sinking violators. Eventually out-of-date barge operations would be have their fleet at the bottom of the ocean. They can either go bankrupt or fix their shit. (I'm not suggesting that as a first option as it is overly extreme)
As for plastics entering the waters system through other means. I never claimed that it was necessary to have zero trash. But it logically is possible to reduce the amount that enters. A net zero should even be possible, where we remove (or debris degrades) at a rate as fast or faster than the amount that enters.
This wouldn't fix the ocean plastics issue.
Bioplastics primarily addresses the fossil fuel issue. It does not (as I have explained) address the ocean plastic issue. But people selling that crap love to conflate the two issues.
It would make it worse, since the price of oil would fall, making plastics cheaper.
I can't think of any examples where we aren't making things out of plastic because it is too expensive today. On the supply-demand curve we may be at maximum demand and could keep feeding supply in to meet it. The material costs could go down if demand for oil were no there, but in some ways our plastic industry is subsidized by the much larger oil industry. Much of the plastic we use comes from the less valuable by-products, rather than the higher profit petroleum products.
Agreed that fiber based products are often preferable. With old fashion paper drinking straws being an obvious choice.
One issue I take with bioplastics is they often use food crops to make non-food items (PLA in the US is primarily made from corn starch). That is we could feed hungry people with corn flour, but instead we make biodegradable restaurant containers with it.
But the whole bioplastic industry is a scam trying to solve a non-problem of carbon-neutral plastics. Petroleum-based plastics are approximately 4% of our petroleum output. The main issue with oil is that we burn so much of it as fuel, not that we're making plastic bags out of it. If I make a widget out of fossil fuels that doesn't degrade for 1000 years, that's a carbon sink. If I burn it so I don't create persistent garbage in the environment, then I've releases some CO2 but compared to all the cars and power plants it's not significant. Bioplastics offering to be biodegradable is a great idea, but in practice much of the PLA available today won't break down without help and can persist in a landfill for decades and possibly centuries.
What we need instead of bioplastics is to: 1. actively clean the plastics from the ocean (robots? nets? incineration of fish guts instead of dumping back into the ocean as waste) 2. quit adding more material to the ocean. (better barges, no dumping in international waters, etc) 3. don't use fossil fuels as our primary energy source
Burn them in an incineration. They are an excellent fuel source. And with a properly designed high-temperature incinerator the pollution is very low. (versus throwing plastic in a camp fire, where the fumes can be quite toxic)
Waste to energy and recycling can coexist and be beneficial. Some things are practical to recycle. Other things take too much effort to collect and clean. And other things take too much energy to recycle and should be reused as many times as possible (ex: glass, steel).
Slashdot Mirror
"dumbass websites that don't just use plain ASCII characters."
Every other website except Slashdot.
Just because everyone is doing something doesn't mean they are right. They could all be dumbasses. And sometimes that is the simpler explaination.
If you send an aposthrophe for a particular character set you better damn well conform to the right character set. The problem is with assuming that a field is UTF-8 when it clearly is unspecified. Yet I am quite able to make use of these characters in a non-broken browser.
' prime
' apostrophe
" plain quotes
“ ” proper left/right double quotes.
Create a message board that goes down for maintenance every hour.
When you're still paying off student debt for the last set of skills you had to acquire, which are now obsolete.
Learning to play the Guitar is hard
Luckily you don't need to play any instrument to be a YouTube rock star. Everyone wants to be famous, they don't actually want to learn to play music.
can't a computer fake it for me!
Definitely.
It should be about quality, not quantity of apps.
But I'm still trying to think of examples of quality apps for Windows 10.
pay out dividends or similar to give an illusion of profits
Haven't you heard the spiel from the recently converted to the cult of bitcoin?
1. Buy BTC
2. Profit
I suspect the speculative bubble was created intentionally. And that some people set themselves up by holding enormous amounts in a hidden and semi-anonymous way. The only thing this plan depended on was people willing to buy lots of bitcoin on the speculation that it would be the exchange medium of the future.
I couldn't care less about the legality of it. Just because something skirts around loopholes in current law doesn't mean we must find the behavior completely acceptable.
Just because they used valid mathematics in the design doesn't mean it wasn't a Ponzi scheme all along.
A great analogy. For the 20 or so people on /. that program xlib, Xt, and XCB. (I think Xt is throughly dead, and I should probably send my book collection to recycle)
Vulkan is good if you're writing an engine. And most apps are using an engine rather than doing all the low level details themselves. This makes sense because at some layer what you really want is game logic that plugs into a scene graph, not game logic jumping directly to rendering.
What news about Vulkan really translates to is that Unity, Unreal Engine, etc are going to be faster on platforms that support Vulkan. Games that use these frameworks benefit. The developers who roll their own engine probably won't be able to invest in switching to Vulkan/ But that's OK, because OpenGL is no slouch either.
The individual choice is an inalienable right of the Individual. It is up to neither you, nor your nebulous "we", how I choose to pursue my happiness — as long as my pursuit does not unduly limit the same of any other.
That is certainly one view on the subject. But it is not the only view. There is a theory of the social contract, in that we agree to submit to an authority in exchange for protection of our remaining rights. Where each society chooses to draw the line is not universal.
Where a European draws the line versus where an American is extremely slight in practice, but gets blown out of proportion. I think it is because what individual autonomy Americans have actually given up, and the extreme individuality they have romanticized are two very different things. Fantasy vs Reality.
Well, it does not — TFA's title is lying, which is the very subject of this thread.
I am actually very skeptical of the study on the basis that it came from an organization specializing in public transportation. I think there is real potential for there to be bias, if not outright deception.
I do have a (unproven) theory that congestion is worse in the SF Bay Area because of the way public school busing works here. Kids are expected to walk to school, but parents are no willing to let kids walk around unsupervised. So now we have thousands of helicopter parents driving from work to school to after school activities to home, often criss crossing the same routes on the highway multiple times a day. I think we'd see a big improvement if we increased our capacity of school buses and changed the policy on travel distances and setup a stagged schedule for bus pick-up times to accommodate most of the students with after school events. It's a problem that can be solved with data and money, something the Bay Area has an abundance of. (common sense is not something we have a lot of though)
Having the ability to destroy civilization doesn't really inspire confidence in fiat money.
That said, I think people day trading Bitcoin's like stocks should pay taxes on gains and be able to claim losses too.
Theoretically this is the law and the IRS is certainly going to come after people once they figure out how.
In other words, Uber/Lyft are guilty of offering a good and convenient service.
What benefits the individual does not automatically benefit a community as a whole.
Maximizing indivudal choice seems like a good idealogy to follow. But there are consequences to holding such a philosophy. So I would recommend we carefully weigh and consider everything that we do, rather than rigidly following a dogmatic practice as mentioned above.
I'd rather my car park 5 minutes from my work rather than 25 minutes. Then I can send my car over at the last possible minute, and not have my car congest the highways by making double the trips to suburbia.
But I fear people are going to do exactly what you suggest. And the traffic is going got be epically bad.
When was there last a really important new operating system?
Hi, I'm a kernel developer. And I'd like to say that operating systems aren't important anymore. They used to be. but now they are just a very minor part of a system's design. What is important is paralllel processing on a cluster of multiple computers, and much of these projects are OS-agnostic or hybrids that contain nodes with different environments and hardware. The remaining hard problems in computing aren't going to be solved by us operating system developers. (certainly there is some deep technical expertise that we can offer to improve the performance of a system)
Look if frequent thefts of uninsured capital occur in a market, the attractiveness of that market is going to diminish.
The downfall of BTC is going to be that many people aren't sure if they can trust their wallets or the exchanges. These problems have little to do with the technology and trumps any advantages that cryptocurrency might offer an investor or consumer.
Even the first half of your correction would have removed the sensationalism from the headline.
But I have an alternative propsola for what Apple should do. Apple should move U.S customer accounts to China. Chinese accounts to the U.S. And then when law enforcement demands access to their citizen's data, you bury them in red tape.
I got sick of the spam in my ssh and http logs and also installed fail2ban. It doesn't totally make the problem go away, but it did cut way down on my log file growth rate. I also found increasing the duration of the ban and lowering the number of failed attempts helps, and using a white list for known system admin.
The servers that I have on Comcast IP block get hit harder than the ones I have on Hurricane Electric (co-location business), so it seems likely that these bots/zombies are scanning some ranges of IPs more frequently.
The login attempts I see on my systems aren't even close to what is needed to get in. So in a way I'm saving these
PS - I use to TARPIT or DROP them. but now I REJECT. TARPIT is too mean, and DROP tends to attack more probing or at least more retry attempts.
Sure. but you're still going to bring a mop and bucket. You aren't going to turn off the tap and think that the work is half done. You've only done the easy part.
Yeah, but that's ludicrously expensive compared to making bioplastics in the first place.
I'm not convinced of that. Maybe little solar powered robots. We don't have to have it done fast either. If it takes a century for robots to clean it up, that would be reasonable. As long as removal of trash is faster than adding of trash. (that last part is the hard part, I think)
Why make more work cleaning up a problem at the end when you can spend that money preventing the problem occurring?
Problem is already here. Even if we stopped making it worse today, the problem would still be with us and likely wouldn't go away on its own.
Ocean scrubbing with robots as the "solution" is a lame and incredibly expensive idea that involves non-existent fantasy tech.
Harsh. Have you never watched a pool robot? It's not an idea based on a fantasy, it's not even MY idea. Would it scale? Well that's an engineering problem. I don't think we have enough information to even know if it would work or not.
Not possible, not practical to prevent plastics entering the water system
Oh everything is possible. We could have a militant faction of GreenPeace running PT Boats and sinking violators. Eventually out-of-date barge operations would be have their fleet at the bottom of the ocean. They can either go bankrupt or fix their shit. (I'm not suggesting that as a first option as it is overly extreme)
As for plastics entering the waters system through other means. I never claimed that it was necessary to have zero trash. But it logically is possible to reduce the amount that enters. A net zero should even be possible, where we remove (or debris degrades) at a rate as fast or faster than the amount that enters.
This wouldn't fix the ocean plastics issue.
Bioplastics primarily addresses the fossil fuel issue. It does not (as I have explained) address the ocean plastic issue. But people selling that crap love to conflate the two issues.
It would make it worse, since the price of oil would fall, making plastics cheaper.
I can't think of any examples where we aren't making things out of plastic because it is too expensive today. On the supply-demand curve we may be at maximum demand and could keep feeding supply in to meet it. The material costs could go down if demand for oil were no there, but in some ways our plastic industry is subsidized by the much larger oil industry. Much of the plastic we use comes from the less valuable by-products, rather than the higher profit petroleum products.
Agreed that fiber based products are often preferable. With old fashion paper drinking straws being an obvious choice.
One issue I take with bioplastics is they often use food crops to make non-food items (PLA in the US is primarily made from corn starch). That is we could feed hungry people with corn flour, but instead we make biodegradable restaurant containers with it.
But the whole bioplastic industry is a scam trying to solve a non-problem of carbon-neutral plastics. Petroleum-based plastics are approximately 4% of our petroleum output. The main issue with oil is that we burn so much of it as fuel, not that we're making plastic bags out of it. If I make a widget out of fossil fuels that doesn't degrade for 1000 years, that's a carbon sink. If I burn it so I don't create persistent garbage in the environment, then I've releases some CO2 but compared to all the cars and power plants it's not significant. Bioplastics offering to be biodegradable is a great idea, but in practice much of the PLA available today won't break down without help and can persist in a landfill for decades and possibly centuries.
What we need instead of bioplastics is to:
1. actively clean the plastics from the ocean (robots? nets? incineration of fish guts instead of dumping back into the ocean as waste)
2. quit adding more material to the ocean. (better barges, no dumping in international waters, etc)
3. don't use fossil fuels as our primary energy source
Burn them in an incineration. They are an excellent fuel source. And with a properly designed high-temperature incinerator the pollution is very low. (versus throwing plastic in a camp fire, where the fumes can be quite toxic)
Waste to energy and recycling can coexist and be beneficial. Some things are practical to recycle. Other things take too much effort to collect and clean. And other things take too much energy to recycle and should be reused as many times as possible (ex: glass, steel).
I just checked, there is no such right.
Just because the media loves sensational titles doesn't mean the predictions are wrong.