Your dumb arguments could apply right here on earth. After all, how can we possibly live under the water without a breathable atmosphere? Are we we expected to wearing a driving suit all the time? What about the burning the diesel? Blah blah blah. Oh wait someone invented a thing called a submarine and developed the means to heat, pressurize and provide oxygen and fresh water to people living inside of it.
There is nothing to "gloss over" since it is obviously hard. Perhaps it boggles your mind but people tasked to do it would break it down into small manageable problems and would come up with practical solutions and contingencies.
It is likely that any human landing to Mars would make extensive use of robotics, possibly with missions beforehand to prepare a site, drop supplies etc. It is likely it would require water but that a nuclear reactor could produce the O2, distilled water and power for life for humans, plants etc. It's likely that the persons would live in a pressurized structure which could be partially or fully buried to shield it from radiation. It is likely that suits would contain extra shielding and humans would only venture outside when the sun was low in the sky and that there would be covered trenches / walkways to travel between any structures.
Perhaps it's all mind boggling to you. I suggest other people see it as a hard but surmountable challenge.
I imagine in much the same way as you dig in a field with sweet fuck all in it. You transport the tools to the site and start using them. Logistically hard when the site is on another planet, but hardly inconceivable and there are a number of ways the initial base might be prepared and improved on.
The irony is that the UK is a net beneficiary of immigration. Immigrants work in the UK, pay their taxes and then return to their own countries before they burden the UK for services that those taxes pay for - benefits, pension, NHS etc.
That isn't to say that all immigrants are welcome of course and some of them are decidedly unwelcome (trafficked slaves, criminal gangs etc.). But it's overblown by the media, particularly those adept at pushing the fear button on their readers like the Daily Mail, Telegraph etc.
Bizarre. The EU has a European parliament with directly elected members from each country with legislative powers. And it has an executive European Commission where each country is represented by a commissioner that they appoint that sets policy (to be voted upon). Plus of course every country has national governments. And local governments. So yes it's a democracy.
It's also clear that you're skipped set theorem and logic when you leapt to the wrong conclusion about what I wrote.
Scotland's independence vote was another example of rationality going out of the window. The SNP wrapped a saltire around a bunch of lies about oil reserves and the standard of living that independence would bring when the reality was it would have been economic and financial suicide. The same applies for the UK and leaving the EU. It might feel good to leave but it sure as heck isn't rational and many studies conclude that the UK's GDP would be permanently reduced if it did.
Ironically the SNP are pro-Europe which makes it all the more bizarre. How can union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland be bad but union with France, Germany etc be good? Same for Sinn Fein. So it's likely if the UK left Europe that Scotland would break from England and become part of the EU. I could see Northern Ireland doing the same. What fun that would be.
Most rational people recognize Britain should be part of the EU. Unfortunately UKIP spooked the Conservative party and they made a bunch of promises about negotiations and a referendum to leave.
Leaving would be economic suicide so I expect Cameron will extract some concessions to persuade people to stay in and dodge that bullet. Because if he doesn't it's likely that the UK will leave the EU and Scotland and Northern Ireland would leave the UK. That would be Cameron's legacy and he knows it as much as anyone. It's probably why the Conservatives are already trying to take the bite out of some of the pro-exit talking points by tackling illegal immigration at the moment.
TinTin could certainly be used for cheating but it also had some useful functionality - hilighting useful info, aliases, command history etc. I expect most people who used it did so in a relatively light manner. They probably had it set to flee if a battle proved too much, had aliases to loot, wear all, hilights for whispers etc,
I don't know what constitutes bot use in WoW but if the bot is designed to enable automated levelling then it's a big no-no. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the gold farmers have such bots running on an almost factory-like basis.
You only have to look at Obj-C code snippets for trivial things like string concatenation to realise what a horrible experience it is. So it's no wonder that Swift is so popular given that it resembles more high level languages like Typescript, Ruby or Python. That said, it's still as proprietary as its predecessor. Nobody but OS X devs will want to touch it unless it becomes a cross platform tool.
People say systemd isn't "rock solid", but I've yet to see any demonstration of that. Major distributions have switched to it, and have been running it successfully for years now.
You can't compare some software on the periphery, in user land to a core component like the pid 1 bootstrap. There is very little reason to support two solutions. It just complicates maintenance and packaging and yields virtually no benefit for the dist, the end user or the overall experience.
The better question is why bother supporting two sets of packages and scripts that accomplish precisely the same thing. Pick one and go with it. Given the support for systemd (by people who matter, not trolls), it seems the logical choice.
I see it another way. If you have a RC drone then chances are you won't let it out of your sight because if you can't see it you can't control it. So you are naturally more cautious about where you fly it, how you fly it and to what distance you allow it to fly.
Conversely these "set it and forget it" drones can be programmed to fly miles. You set a course, off it goes and you'll see it again 20 minutes later. Assuming it hasn't hit a tree, power / cable line, or a bird, or a plane, or been flipped by the weather, or simply suffered a fault and fallen out of the sky. The drone is also likely to be programmed to fly over points of interest which may be roads, buildings, cities etc.
That's where the danger lies. The risk for the operator has disappeared and a laissez faire attitude which could put other people at greater harm.
And the reason he wants opt-in is because he knows that 99% of people would never bother. As a law enforcement official it's understandable that encryption poses barriers to investigations. It doesn't excuse or justify why it should be opt-in in the wider scheme of things.
Secure by default should ALWAYS be the policy pursued in software. People are afraid to change the default setting and if that default setting compromises their safety, privacy or otherwise puts them at risk then the default sucks.
They might not lock-in but we see time and time again that they will still buy shit that contains it - razor blades, electric toothbrushes, coffee pods, ink jet printers, mops, ball point pens, scented air fresheners, iPods / iPhones / iPads / Android, Kindle, countless online services etc. etc.
Anything which has a consumable element to it is manufactured in such a way as to be proprietary and usually protected by design patents and / or DRM.
Exactly why I didn't buy one of these machines. I thought they were totally a-holes for making this move, but I gotta hand it to them, it's a rare thing for a business to admit that they were wrong. Good on them!
The issue is they only said they were wrong because they lost money. If they had made money they'd all be hive fiving each other on their business acumen and other companies would soon follow with their own proprietary DRM systems.
The main question is do you get enough charge from a solar array to actually fill the battery. Because if you don't then you either top up off the mains (which must still get its power from somewhere) or you eat warmed beans by torchlight.
Not saying the concept is a bad idea at all but it might not be ideal. I expect people in sunny climes all year round could easily supply 90-100% of their supply from solar assuming they had the means to capture the energy.
Why doesn't the federal or local government simply commission the books it requires for its educational curriculum? Then give them away for free from a website. It shouldn't be necessary to go cap in hand to publishers begging for a few freebies when the publishers shouldn't be in such a strong position to start with.
Slashdot Mirror
There is nothing to "gloss over" since it is obviously hard. Perhaps it boggles your mind but people tasked to do it would break it down into small manageable problems and would come up with practical solutions and contingencies.
It is likely that any human landing to Mars would make extensive use of robotics, possibly with missions beforehand to prepare a site, drop supplies etc. It is likely it would require water but that a nuclear reactor could produce the O2, distilled water and power for life for humans, plants etc. It's likely that the persons would live in a pressurized structure which could be partially or fully buried to shield it from radiation. It is likely that suits would contain extra shielding and humans would only venture outside when the sun was low in the sky and that there would be covered trenches / walkways to travel between any structures.
Perhaps it's all mind boggling to you. I suggest other people see it as a hard but surmountable challenge.
I imagine in much the same way as you dig in a field with sweet fuck all in it. You transport the tools to the site and start using them. Logistically hard when the site is on another planet, but hardly inconceivable and there are a number of ways the initial base might be prepared and improved on.
These creationist idiots pay for ads by the click. So get clicking.
That isn't to say that all immigrants are welcome of course and some of them are decidedly unwelcome (trafficked slaves, criminal gangs etc.). But it's overblown by the media, particularly those adept at pushing the fear button on their readers like the Daily Mail, Telegraph etc.
It's also clear that you're skipped set theorem and logic when you leapt to the wrong conclusion about what I wrote.
Ironically the SNP are pro-Europe which makes it all the more bizarre. How can union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland be bad but union with France, Germany etc be good? Same for Sinn Fein. So it's likely if the UK left Europe that Scotland would break from England and become part of the EU. I could see Northern Ireland doing the same. What fun that would be.
Leaving would be economic suicide so I expect Cameron will extract some concessions to persuade people to stay in and dodge that bullet. Because if he doesn't it's likely that the UK will leave the EU and Scotland and Northern Ireland would leave the UK. That would be Cameron's legacy and he knows it as much as anyone. It's probably why the Conservatives are already trying to take the bite out of some of the pro-exit talking points by tackling illegal immigration at the moment.
Just learn a popular language and framework or two and become proficient at them. Jeez...
The conference rooms tables in AOL used to have busted up AOL CDs set into them. So a few of them found some lasting use.
I don't know what constitutes bot use in WoW but if the bot is designed to enable automated levelling then it's a big no-no. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the gold farmers have such bots running on an almost factory-like basis.
But only under duress. And by implication it means that in other circumstances they're not put first.
You only have to look at Obj-C code snippets for trivial things like string concatenation to realise what a horrible experience it is. So it's no wonder that Swift is so popular given that it resembles more high level languages like Typescript, Ruby or Python. That said, it's still as proprietary as its predecessor. Nobody but OS X devs will want to touch it unless it becomes a cross platform tool.
People say systemd isn't "rock solid", but I've yet to see any demonstration of that. Major distributions have switched to it, and have been running it successfully for years now.
You can't compare some software on the periphery, in user land to a core component like the pid 1 bootstrap. There is very little reason to support two solutions. It just complicates maintenance and packaging and yields virtually no benefit for the dist, the end user or the overall experience.
The better question is why bother supporting two sets of packages and scripts that accomplish precisely the same thing. Pick one and go with it. Given the support for systemd (by people who matter, not trolls), it seems the logical choice.
Conversely these "set it and forget it" drones can be programmed to fly miles. You set a course, off it goes and you'll see it again 20 minutes later. Assuming it hasn't hit a tree, power / cable line, or a bird, or a plane, or been flipped by the weather, or simply suffered a fault and fallen out of the sky. The drone is also likely to be programmed to fly over points of interest which may be roads, buildings, cities etc.
That's where the danger lies. The risk for the operator has disappeared and a laissez faire attitude which could put other people at greater harm.
Just like British gun control, because only allowing people to own a shotgun or bolt action rifle makes the world so much safer.
Yes as the death / murder statistics in countries with firearm controls would show.
the perils of autocomplete...
Secure by default should ALWAYS be the policy pursued in software. People are afraid to change the default setting and if that default setting compromises their safety, privacy or otherwise puts them at risk then the default sucks.
Anything which has a consumable element to it is manufactured in such a way as to be proprietary and usually protected by design patents and / or DRM.
Or just buy an aerobie and be done with it.
Exactly why I didn't buy one of these machines. I thought they were totally a-holes for making this move, but I gotta hand it to them, it's a rare thing for a business to admit that they were wrong. Good on them!
The issue is they only said they were wrong because they lost money. If they had made money they'd all be hive fiving each other on their business acumen and other companies would soon follow with their own proprietary DRM systems.
There is no "damage" here aside from learning that this secret society is as ludicrous as all the rest. A fact that most people would know already.
Not saying the concept is a bad idea at all but it might not be ideal. I expect people in sunny climes all year round could easily supply 90-100% of their supply from solar assuming they had the means to capture the energy.
Why doesn't the federal or local government simply commission the books it requires for its educational curriculum? Then give them away for free from a website. It shouldn't be necessary to go cap in hand to publishers begging for a few freebies when the publishers shouldn't be in such a strong position to start with.