Devizes Tory MP Claire Perry raised the issue at a special Commons debate, because as a mother-of-three she knew how difficult it was to keep youngsters from seeing inappropriate material.
I was raised in a small village with several farms around. By the age of ten I had seen all sorts of animals having sex, cattle, horses, dogs, birds, snakes, the rule is: if it moves it fucks.
Why should children be "protected" from seeing sex?
Most people believe they kinda know if they truly have a solid idea.
FTFY.
Remember, "ideas are a dime a dozen" and "invention is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration".
If a young person has what he believes is a truly great idea while he is at college, the best thing for him would be to finish college first. Yes, I know, there are many counterexamples to this, but if you also count all those who dropped out of college and failed you will see that the probability of success in this path is abysmally low.
Besides, it's not as if $100k is that much capital to begin with. If that idea succeeds you will pretty soon need more investors, and if you started with some prize money you will not know how to get more.
If someone has a great idea *and* he has the entrepreneur mindset he will be able to get someone to invest in this idea. To make a great idea work you need leadership talent, which includes convincing people of the merits of your idea.
people like to be vigilantes just to go around playing surrogate parent against the homeless, or hoping to be the next one to call the police on street people
If so, then they are only performing their duty as responsible citizens.
A few miles south of La Jolla there's a city called Tijuana. Have you ever been there? Have you noticed how many people from those sunny countries south of Tijuana want to come to the USA? Have you ever seen a homeless person from Honduras, Ecuador, or Guatemala?
If you are homeless in La Jolla, perhaps you should try earning a living south of the border to learn what real life is all about. Anyone in the USA who really wants to work for a living will not stay homeless very long.
If atomic weight weren't dimensionless you would be measuring it in ounces, but it would be slightly different values of ounce for both sides of the pond. Shame on you!
I didn't say "over the network", did I? POP3 and SNMP are typically services that you find in an academic network, but nowadays everything else that is provided by a commercial service comes through port 80. My ISP does have a POP3 option, but why would I have an email address that's attached to an ISP when I can use gmail?
Killing one doesn't stop the next one, its not even a particularly good deterrent (actually severity of punishment is easy to show is not a good deterrent) on the other hand, increasing the likelyhood of being caught, even with relatively minor punishment, turns out to be a far more effective deterrent. (lojack is more effective, for example, than long jail sentences at reducing theft rates).
[citation needed]. The problem with every study about crime deterrent is that almost everyone who writes about it is so politicized, either left or right.
I have absolutely no idea whether some kind of punishment is a good deterrent or not. There's only one certainty, dead people don't commit crimes, so I support the death penalty for heinous crimes.
Other than that, is it better to have stiffer punishment or to increase the likelihood of getting caught? I don't know, so let's have both.
harsh punishments are really just petty attempts to make the victim FEEL better.
Well, if something makes the victim FEEL better, why not? Do you have anything against the victim?
from my experience and what I've heard from others, generally if you do your own detective work and put together a case like that and hand it to the police, they're probably going to do something about it
Same experience here. My sister's weekend home was burglarized and she and her husband gave the police a list of what had been stolen.
A few weeks later the police caught a man who had a lot of stolen stuff in his home. It was only because they had the serial number of my sister's stolen TV that they could press charges against him.
They told her that the biggest problem with burglary is that people don't report it so they cannot prosecute someone that gets arrested. If you have the receipts for the stolen goods the serial numbers are logged in the police files and every time they arrest someone who is suspect of burglary or receiving stolen goods they will check the serial numbers of anything they find with the suspects.
The exploits named in the summary are mostly for locally connected users, which means academic environments. I mean, how would you send a message to syslog over the web?
The kind of secure system one needs today is mostly about the web server, if it doesn't come through port 80 it never reaches the server because the router blocks it.
So what DOES someone do who has bankrolled their digital creation and would like to recoup their investment, even make a profit, only to find that it's spread amongst 10,000 people without a penny returned.
Invent a different business model. Reality is like this, not everything that's valuable will bring you a profit.
I think a good analogy for this is oxygen. There are many companies selling bottled oxygen, which is a valuable gas for medical and industrial purposes. Those companies get their oxygen from the atmosphere and they don't pay anyone for that.
On the other side are farmers whose plants ingest carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen as part of their life cycle. Those farmers are giving away for free something that gas companies sell.
If there existed some kind of absolute justice like the *AA want, the farmers should get paid for the oxygen their plants release in the atmosphere, but there is no practical way of doing it.
So to me this raises a fundamental philosophical question: why keep secrets at all, as a government?
Because we need the military to protect us. You wouldn't want an enemy country to know all about the military operations in your country. And before you propose to completely eliminate the military, remember 1939.
No, they are shipping a Linux system that doesn't run under any recent hardware.
Not that bad, assuming someone else will write a script that configures the system and loads all proprietary firmware.
I guess we need both kinds of people, the idealists that keep the system clean and the pragmatists that make the system work. Without them we would either be at the mercy of Microsoft or struggling to boot The Hurd.
The constancy of the speed of light was postulated by Albert Einstein in 1905, motivated by Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism and the lack of evidence for the luminiferous ether but not, contrary to widespread belief, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment.
Ah, the dangers of Wikipedia! That citation is from a footnote in a book mentioning what someone said Einstein told him. Polanyi wrote in a footnote that Balzas told him that Einstein said that it was not the Michelson-Morley experiment that motivated the special theory of relativity.
The truth is that when Maxwell published his equations they were obviously right according to everything that was known about electromagnetism, but they were logically flawed according to classical mechanics.
When you see two electric charges moving side by side, for instance, electric current in parallel wires, there is a magnetic force between them, in addition to the electrostatic force. However, if you are moving along with the charges, then you should observe no magnetic force, since both charges aren't moving with respect to you. That was a paradox of Maxwell's equations and something that seemed to demonstrate that Maxwell was wrong, but magnetism exists and no one could explain why.
The Michelson-Morley experiment presented another mystery, that the speed of light seemed constant and did not depend on the speed of either the emitter or the receiver of the light. Another paradox that no one could explain yet was demonstrated in practice by experiment.
Einstein was the first person to create a theory that explained both of these results. He showed that an always constant speed of light could explain magnetic force if one applied a Lorenz contraction to moving electric charges. The magnetic force between two moving charges is equal to the difference between the electrostatic force of the charges while standing still and the electrostatic force reduced by a Lorenz contraction due to the speed.
In that way both the observer that's standing still and the observer that's moving along with the charges will measure the same force between the charges, only one of them will see a pure electrostatic force and the other one will see an electrostatic force between two slightly larger electric charges plus a magnetic force.
In conclusion, Maxwell was right, but without the Michelson-Morley experiment he would be only empirically right. And even the general theory of relativity wasn't fully proved from an experimental point of view until the Moessbauer effect was discovered.
We are not anywhere near the ideal system because of runaway costs in the system,
And why are those costs running away?
First, because people pay for insurance and they feel that they are entitled to recover what they paid for that insurance. Too many people get unneeded medical examinations that they wouldn't dream of getting if they had to pay a fair price for each one.
Second, too many juries award damages for medical malpractice that are totally out of proportion. In a response to that, doctors started prescribing every possible sort of test to each patient, just to make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
If you want a reasonable health care system, there must be a way to avoid all those unneeded tests and examinations. There should exist a reasonable limit on what can be claimed as damages for malpractice and hypochondria should be punished as insurance fraud.
Without controlling costs, there's no chance of a reasonable system, either free market or state provided.
Given how small cameras are today, it seems like a no-brainer.
Perhaps the name "NanoSail-D" will give a hint on how small this satellite is.
However, the camera size itself is not all that matters. In order to send telemetry down there must exist a telemetry transmitter on board. It might surprise you to know that even large satellites often transmit telemetry at 1 kbps or so.
Transmitting wide band, such as needed by a video signal, requires higher power. Sending high power down needs a bulkier and heavier transmitter. More power in the telemetry beacon requires more DC power, which means bigger batteries and bigger solar panels.
These are the two main constraints in a spacecraft: mass and consumed power. Every piece of equipment on board must be screened for these two parameters, nothing is included unless it's absolutely certain that it couldn't be done with less mass and less power.
The higher part count is surely on the side of the digital controller
It may look so, until you realize that all the parts in the digital controller are in a single chip.
When I got my EE degree one of the most widely used analog chips was the 555. With an eight-pin chip plus a few capacitors and resistors one could perform a wide range of timing tasks.
Well, it has been several years now since I last touched a 555. Today I use a 12F675 PIC instead. The same eight-pin count, but it can do anything a 555 does, plus a lot more, without any external components. A/D conversion, PWM, counters, 4 MHz clock oscillator, everything is inside that chip.
Need a filter? I can design an elliptic IIR filter in a few seconds using Pyhton and SciPy, and implement it in a short routine in the PIC. And if those six I/O pins are not enough you can use bigger chips from the same line. The only analog parts needed is the anti-aliasing filter in the A/D input.
your free speech is only as free as the money/means you have -> you can blabber to your friends, family, close circle, or people in your locale about everything. But, for your free speech to actually matter, you would need to reach millions of people
That's why no society can be truly free unless they have a capitalistic economic system.
When all the press is under the economic control of the state, no dissenting opinion will have a chance of being heard by a significant percentage of the people.
It has nothing to do with socialism... it has to do with is idiots like you who make it into an economic issue
Sorry, but it's socialists who always try to make everything into an economic issue.
We, the libertarians, are always ready to accept whatever motivation an individual person chooses, but socialists always reduce everything to the economic level.
Slashdot Mirror
Devizes Tory MP Claire Perry raised the issue at a special Commons debate, because as a mother-of-three she knew how difficult it was to keep youngsters from seeing inappropriate material.
I was raised in a small village with several farms around. By the age of ten I had seen all sorts of animals having sex, cattle, horses, dogs, birds, snakes, the rule is: if it moves it fucks.
Why should children be "protected" from seeing sex?
Most people believe they kinda know if they truly have a solid idea.
FTFY.
Remember, "ideas are a dime a dozen" and "invention is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration".
If a young person has what he believes is a truly great idea while he is at college, the best thing for him would be to finish college first. Yes, I know, there are many counterexamples to this, but if you also count all those who dropped out of college and failed you will see that the probability of success in this path is abysmally low.
Besides, it's not as if $100k is that much capital to begin with. If that idea succeeds you will pretty soon need more investors, and if you started with some prize money you will not know how to get more.
If someone has a great idea *and* he has the entrepreneur mindset he will be able to get someone to invest in this idea. To make a great idea work you need leadership talent, which includes convincing people of the merits of your idea.
If they let the person whose computer found a planet name it, I'm sure they'd get lots of people.
Not on Slashdot, they won't. No way they will let a planet be named "Goatse".
we are still in the midst of a recession
Yet, there are still people coming illegally from Honduras, Guatemala, and Ecuador, and many other countries to the USA.
The problem is not about finding a job, it's accepting to do the jobs that are available.
people like to be vigilantes just to go around playing surrogate parent against the homeless, or hoping to be the next one to call the police on street people
If so, then they are only performing their duty as responsible citizens.
A few miles south of La Jolla there's a city called Tijuana. Have you ever been there? Have you noticed how many people from those sunny countries south of Tijuana want to come to the USA? Have you ever seen a homeless person from Honduras, Ecuador, or Guatemala?
If you are homeless in La Jolla, perhaps you should try earning a living south of the border to learn what real life is all about. Anyone in the USA who really wants to work for a living will not stay homeless very long.
If atomic weight weren't dimensionless you would be measuring it in ounces, but it would be slightly different values of ounce for both sides of the pond. Shame on you!
I'm curious as to how you implement SNMP and POP3 over port 80.
Sorry, I didn't know that the World Wide Web had been expanded to include network management or email. I was under the impression that it was only about hypertext.
I didn't say "over the network", did I? POP3 and SNMP are typically services that you find in an academic network, but nowadays everything else that is provided by a commercial service comes through port 80. My ISP does have a POP3 option, but why would I have an email address that's attached to an ISP when I can use gmail?
If you mean over the network when you say "over the web"
When I say "over the web" I mean TCP port 80. Everything else stops at the router.
Killing one doesn't stop the next one, its not even a particularly good deterrent (actually severity of punishment is easy to show is not a good deterrent) on the other hand, increasing the likelyhood of being caught, even with relatively minor punishment, turns out to be a far more effective deterrent. (lojack is more effective, for example, than long jail sentences at reducing theft rates).
[citation needed]. The problem with every study about crime deterrent is that almost everyone who writes about it is so politicized, either left or right.
I have absolutely no idea whether some kind of punishment is a good deterrent or not. There's only one certainty, dead people don't commit crimes, so I support the death penalty for heinous crimes.
Other than that, is it better to have stiffer punishment or to increase the likelihood of getting caught? I don't know, so let's have both.
harsh punishments are really just petty attempts to make the victim FEEL better.
Well, if something makes the victim FEEL better, why not? Do you have anything against the victim?
from my experience and what I've heard from others, generally if you do your own detective work and put together a case like that and hand it to the police, they're probably going to do something about it
Same experience here. My sister's weekend home was burglarized and she and her husband gave the police a list of what had been stolen.
A few weeks later the police caught a man who had a lot of stolen stuff in his home. It was only because they had the serial number of my sister's stolen TV that they could press charges against him.
They told her that the biggest problem with burglary is that people don't report it so they cannot prosecute someone that gets arrested. If you have the receipts for the stolen goods the serial numbers are logged in the police files and every time they arrest someone who is suspect of burglary or receiving stolen goods they will check the serial numbers of anything they find with the suspects.
The exploits named in the summary are mostly for locally connected users, which means academic environments. I mean, how would you send a message to syslog over the web?
The kind of secure system one needs today is mostly about the web server, if it doesn't come through port 80 it never reaches the server because the router blocks it.
So what DOES someone do who has bankrolled their digital creation and would like to recoup their investment, even make a profit, only to find that it's spread amongst 10,000 people without a penny returned.
Invent a different business model. Reality is like this, not everything that's valuable will bring you a profit.
I think a good analogy for this is oxygen. There are many companies selling bottled oxygen, which is a valuable gas for medical and industrial purposes. Those companies get their oxygen from the atmosphere and they don't pay anyone for that.
On the other side are farmers whose plants ingest carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen as part of their life cycle. Those farmers are giving away for free something that gas companies sell.
If there existed some kind of absolute justice like the *AA want, the farmers should get paid for the oxygen their plants release in the atmosphere, but there is no practical way of doing it.
Do we get a bad car analogy down the line?
Yes, copyright infringement is like when you put a Mercedes star on your Ford's hood.
Is this bad enough, or do you want worse?
Too bad they seem to be in his brain, instead of the regular place.
So to me this raises a fundamental philosophical question: why keep secrets at all, as a government?
Because we need the military to protect us. You wouldn't want an enemy country to know all about the military operations in your country. And before you propose to completely eliminate the military, remember 1939.
So they are switching to BSD, I take it?
No, they are shipping a Linux system that doesn't run under any recent hardware.
Not that bad, assuming someone else will write a script that configures the system and loads all proprietary firmware.
I guess we need both kinds of people, the idealists that keep the system clean and the pragmatists that make the system work. Without them we would either be at the mercy of Microsoft or struggling to boot The Hurd.
According to my experience and my digital thermometer salt melts at 800 Celsius.
Of course, my thermometer has a 0.5% +/-1 digit accuracy, so that's consistent with the 801 degree theory ;)
From the Wikipedia article on Michelson-Morley,
The constancy of the speed of light was postulated by Albert Einstein in 1905, motivated by Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism and the lack of evidence for the luminiferous ether but not, contrary to widespread belief, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment.
Ah, the dangers of Wikipedia! That citation is from a footnote in a book mentioning what someone said Einstein told him. Polanyi wrote in a footnote that Balzas told him that Einstein said that it was not the Michelson-Morley experiment that motivated the special theory of relativity.
The truth is that when Maxwell published his equations they were obviously right according to everything that was known about electromagnetism, but they were logically flawed according to classical mechanics.
When you see two electric charges moving side by side, for instance, electric current in parallel wires, there is a magnetic force between them, in addition to the electrostatic force. However, if you are moving along with the charges, then you should observe no magnetic force, since both charges aren't moving with respect to you. That was a paradox of Maxwell's equations and something that seemed to demonstrate that Maxwell was wrong, but magnetism exists and no one could explain why.
The Michelson-Morley experiment presented another mystery, that the speed of light seemed constant and did not depend on the speed of either the emitter or the receiver of the light. Another paradox that no one could explain yet was demonstrated in practice by experiment.
Einstein was the first person to create a theory that explained both of these results. He showed that an always constant speed of light could explain magnetic force if one applied a Lorenz contraction to moving electric charges. The magnetic force between two moving charges is equal to the difference between the electrostatic force of the charges while standing still and the electrostatic force reduced by a Lorenz contraction due to the speed.
In that way both the observer that's standing still and the observer that's moving along with the charges will measure the same force between the charges, only one of them will see a pure electrostatic force and the other one will see an electrostatic force between two slightly larger electric charges plus a magnetic force.
In conclusion, Maxwell was right, but without the Michelson-Morley experiment he would be only empirically right. And even the general theory of relativity wasn't fully proved from an experimental point of view until the Moessbauer effect was discovered.
The Creator obviously didn't NULL-terminate.
Of course not. Lisp strings aren't null terminated.
We are not anywhere near the ideal system because of runaway costs in the system,
And why are those costs running away?
First, because people pay for insurance and they feel that they are entitled to recover what they paid for that insurance. Too many people get unneeded medical examinations that they wouldn't dream of getting if they had to pay a fair price for each one.
Second, too many juries award damages for medical malpractice that are totally out of proportion. In a response to that, doctors started prescribing every possible sort of test to each patient, just to make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
If you want a reasonable health care system, there must be a way to avoid all those unneeded tests and examinations. There should exist a reasonable limit on what can be claimed as damages for malpractice and hypochondria should be punished as insurance fraud.
Without controlling costs, there's no chance of a reasonable system, either free market or state provided.
Given how small cameras are today, it seems like a no-brainer.
Perhaps the name "NanoSail-D" will give a hint on how small this satellite is.
However, the camera size itself is not all that matters. In order to send telemetry down there must exist a telemetry transmitter on board. It might surprise you to know that even large satellites often transmit telemetry at 1 kbps or so.
Transmitting wide band, such as needed by a video signal, requires higher power. Sending high power down needs a bulkier and heavier transmitter. More power in the telemetry beacon requires more DC power, which means bigger batteries and bigger solar panels.
These are the two main constraints in a spacecraft: mass and consumed power. Every piece of equipment on board must be screened for these two parameters, nothing is included unless it's absolutely certain that it couldn't be done with less mass and less power.
The higher part count is surely on the side of the digital controller
It may look so, until you realize that all the parts in the digital controller are in a single chip.
When I got my EE degree one of the most widely used analog chips was the 555. With an eight-pin chip plus a few capacitors and resistors one could perform a wide range of timing tasks.
Well, it has been several years now since I last touched a 555. Today I use a 12F675 PIC instead. The same eight-pin count, but it can do anything a 555 does, plus a lot more, without any external components. A/D conversion, PWM, counters, 4 MHz clock oscillator, everything is inside that chip.
Need a filter? I can design an elliptic IIR filter in a few seconds using Pyhton and SciPy, and implement it in a short routine in the PIC. And if those six I/O pins are not enough you can use bigger chips from the same line. The only analog parts needed is the anti-aliasing filter in the A/D input.
your free speech is only as free as the money/means you have -> you can blabber to your friends, family, close circle, or people in your locale about everything. But, for your free speech to actually matter, you would need to reach millions of people
That's why no society can be truly free unless they have a capitalistic economic system.
When all the press is under the economic control of the state, no dissenting opinion will have a chance of being heard by a significant percentage of the people.
It has nothing to do with socialism ... it has to do with is idiots like you who make it into an economic issue
Sorry, but it's socialists who always try to make everything into an economic issue.
We, the libertarians, are always ready to accept whatever motivation an individual person chooses, but socialists always reduce everything to the economic level.
Doesn't work with HTML codes either, I tried writing it as ° and as ° and it didn't work with either one