I charge my smartphone all the time when my PC is OFF (completely, not just stand-by or sleep). It's a BIOS feature maybe? If you use a powered USB hub, it would proably also work?
I was thinking the same thing. But I suppose if you are one of the wealthier people where $15 is only a weeks salary, you might consider this. Afterall, you won't get electrical lighting any other way. But then again, it's probably still much more affordable to go with kerosene.
At what speed do you go into overdrive? At the point that you go into overdrive, don't you want your RPMs to be low to get higher mileage? Maybe just a few hundred higher after an automatic engine would go into overdrive, not more. Based on what you wrote it would seem you're still not in overdrive if you're continually getting better mileage? Also, I'm not real impressed with the method: speed = distance. I would prefer speed over time = gallons missing in tank.
My own compact car actually still gets best mileage (31mpg) when my wife drives it to work: In town, but on backroads where she only has 1 stop light and 2 turns her whole drive while going about 45mph. When I take this to work (3 minutes highway, 17 minutes interstate) cruising at 65mph I get about 29mpg. If I cruise at 75mph on the same stretch I get about 27mpg. It's a CVT automatic and hits overdrive at about 55-60mph - which is probably the sweet spot, but it's actually a little better to at optimal RPM (CVT is always optimal RPM for it's "gear") at a lower gear than go at higher RPMs in overdrive. Of course there are other factors, so I might be mistaken.
My premise here is knowing that it theoretically ALWAYS takes MORE energy PER mph. Meaning the best MPG would always be the slowest speed - but with optimizations and gears this is of course not true.
If you add the cost of a "carbon fee" for the extra fuel you burn, for the energy required to bring that fuel to you, the damage to the environment to extract that fuel
Good point... except that you listed the same "extra costs" twice: "carbon fee" = "damage to the environment". Also, "energy required to bring that fuel to you" (as in transportation costs) are already included in the cost of fuel.
In the end, hybrid cars are adding to our country's debt, don't reduce the ecological impact much and still cost the consumer WAY more than he/she can possibly benefit from it. Hybrid is a fad, not a solution. Not even ethanol can be reasonably useful. It eats up our corn supply for a few drops of combustible liquid and again increases our national debt through subsidies. I'm personally looking for better energy sources still. Algae might be promising. Electric cars are already quite good - we just need more nuclear power plants to feed them.
However, it was cancelled because the subsidies paid by the governments were getting rediculous. Yes, it flew passengers, but it NEVER was economical and when the time came to put in some serious maintenance costs they dumped the program.
My thoughts exactly. Aren't some of the bad people governments? Perhaps Microsoft should only disclose this information to governments with "proper" IP laws.
The problem is not that ugly people get more convictions, but rather that people who break the law are more likely to not care about their personal appearance.
LOL, there's obviously situations where it would confuse people. But the term itself is widely used as a form of "social engineering" (there's another one to pick apart) and is usually understood just fine in that context.
We could also remove words such as running, sneaking, walking, jogging and sprinting and just say "going". Pretexting is a specific type of lie that means setting up the false pretext to be someone else - typically by using valid and/or confidential information about that person or by using the pretext over a prolonged period of time to make the ruse seem more convincing.
I appreciate having this extra bit of information instead of just saying "he lied".
The problem with malware in the restore points is not a flaw with system restore. Malware will hide itself in any of your backups if it can. If you clean a virus from your PC, I would recommend to delete all restore points after you contracted the virus (which is likely all of your remaining restore points as the virus probably already deleted all restore points prior to it's coming on board). However, if your anti-virus does not completely clean the PC, then the malware might automatically restore itself from the restore points. Of course, if it can do that it can also just copy itself back onto your drive. But anti-virus tools can cause confusion when they report the malware located in the "system volume information" directory and therefore most malware removal procedures simply recommend disabling system restore (to clear all restore points).
Just to help you understand: "Last known good configuration" is a copy of your registry (or rather a subset thereof) at the point of your last successful log in. If you log in successfully, but something does not work, then the "last known good configuration" was just saved and is of no use in that situation. This is NOT system restore. System restore is more than just the registry. If you cannot login (even after trying "last known good configuration"), then you can try system restore by booting off of the OS CD/DVD and "repairing" your installation. If you log in successfully and something does not work, then you can also try system restore. And yes, system restore WILL fix your computer by bringing it to an older state at which everything worked, given that: 1) you don't have hardware issues 2) a virus has not infested your restore points and 3) you have restore points before the problem started.
I don't agree with the grandparents reasoning: not ActiveX fault because it's the providers (or attackers) fault, but I still defend ActiveX. I fail (and therein lies the problem perhaps;-) ) to understand how ActiveX is more dangerous than plug-ins. On another note, it's widely known that Adobe Reader is the number one attack vector on the web, so I wonder what percent of successful attacks are due to Adobe Reader vs ActiveX & plug-ins combined?
To each their own. I understand why someone would want to pull out and wait to turn left - it signals to other drivers you're GOING to turn whether you have a red light or not, but I prefer Iowa's less aggressive approach for safety reasons - even if it slows me down.
Though many people pull out to turn left in a busy intersection, Iowa law stipulates that you do not come to a stop in an intersection. It also says you should not enter an intersection until the path is clear (such as when turning left or even going straight if traffic backed up). Iowa "allows" you to enter an intersection on yellow (even if the light turns red while driving through) as long as at the time of entry you're certain the path is clear without having to stop again, although the drivers handbook still recommends to stop as soon as the light turns yellow if it is reasonably possible. Personally, I have often sat through a round of two of changing lights to turn left in a busy intersection without a turn light. There is even a benefit to waiting behind the line to turn left: if you see a gap ahead you can start moving into the intersection and (without stopping) have some momentum to get through the gap safely without having to floor the pedal. Also, if there is a vehicle on the other side turning left, both you and the other driver have better visibility for oncoming traffic. So yeah... don't be one those noobs who sits in an intersection to turn left.
Not exactly. Some vehicles automatically disable the passenger air bag if some weight (but not much) is detected or allow the driver to disable the passenger air bag; but the safest spot for a baby is rear-facing in the back seat - where the driver doesn't see the baby at all.
I was thinking the same thing. Although I think the guy should be prosecuted for exploiting the weak system, I also don't think anyone would give a hoot if John Doe's twitter got hacked. But it's not surprising to see this is the news.
Consider Kevin Mitnik. He was truly a technological wiz. But according to his books, a majority of "hacks" were non-technical. I see the above case as just another social engineering exploit.
To address some of the above comments: Just becuase the victim or even twitter itself made it easy to gain access, that does not make it legal and the offender should be prosecuted. That being said, I personally often do not provide real answers to password recovery questions, because none of the questions available are difficult enough. And if I can pick my own question, I typically just provide a hint for the actual password that only I would understand.
While it is certainly more common to find protestants or baptists as opposed to catholics here, "frothing at the mouth evangelicals" are not "American". Besides, I know countless protestants today who are more scholarly in their pursuits (whether you agree with their presuppositions or not) than the average "expert scholar" we see talking on TV. If you don't believe me, just consider how faith motivates people to the greatest extents. And it's no different when it comes to the study of theology/history/anthropology/language/etc.
I'm not on a crusade here and I don't have time for this every day. How 'bout this: Provide some evidence from a reputable source, then I might look into it some more.
Sorry,
nothing in your arguments means very much. They're still very weak. And yes, any administration would have acted the same. And no, there's no evident that the CDC was supplying checmical weapons.
Slashdot Mirror
I charge my smartphone all the time when my PC is OFF (completely, not just stand-by or sleep). It's a BIOS feature maybe? If you use a powered USB hub, it would proably also work?
I was thinking the same thing. But I suppose if you are one of the wealthier people where $15 is only a weeks salary, you might consider this. Afterall, you won't get electrical lighting any other way. But then again, it's probably still much more affordable to go with kerosene.
At what speed do you go into overdrive? At the point that you go into overdrive, don't you want your RPMs to be low to get higher mileage? Maybe just a few hundred higher after an automatic engine would go into overdrive, not more. Based on what you wrote it would seem you're still not in overdrive if you're continually getting better mileage? Also, I'm not real impressed with the method: speed = distance. I would prefer speed over time = gallons missing in tank.
My own compact car actually still gets best mileage (31mpg) when my wife drives it to work: In town, but on backroads where she only has 1 stop light and 2 turns her whole drive while going about 45mph. When I take this to work (3 minutes highway, 17 minutes interstate) cruising at 65mph I get about 29mpg. If I cruise at 75mph on the same stretch I get about 27mpg. It's a CVT automatic and hits overdrive at about 55-60mph - which is probably the sweet spot, but it's actually a little better to at optimal RPM (CVT is always optimal RPM for it's "gear") at a lower gear than go at higher RPMs in overdrive. Of course there are other factors, so I might be mistaken.
My premise here is knowing that it theoretically ALWAYS takes MORE energy PER mph. Meaning the best MPG would always be the slowest speed - but with optimizations and gears this is of course not true.
If you add the cost of a "carbon fee" for the extra fuel you burn, for the energy required to bring that fuel to you, the damage to the environment to extract that fuel
Good point... except that you listed the same "extra costs" twice: "carbon fee" = "damage to the environment". Also, "energy required to bring that fuel to you" (as in transportation costs) are already included in the cost of fuel.
In the end, hybrid cars are adding to our country's debt, don't reduce the ecological impact much and still cost the consumer WAY more than he/she can possibly benefit from it. Hybrid is a fad, not a solution. Not even ethanol can be reasonably useful. It eats up our corn supply for a few drops of combustible liquid and again increases our national debt through subsidies. I'm personally looking for better energy sources still. Algae might be promising. Electric cars are already quite good - we just need more nuclear power plants to feed them.
Because you don't smell with your visual senses. Try teleolfactory, maybe?
However, it was cancelled because the subsidies paid by the governments were getting rediculous. Yes, it flew passengers, but it NEVER was economical and when the time came to put in some serious maintenance costs they dumped the program.
Featured on pacman.com . I think we're good here.
I saw this earlier this morning. Obviously, productivity around the globe dropped 30% today.
My thoughts exactly. Aren't some of the bad people governments? Perhaps Microsoft should only disclose this information to governments with "proper" IP laws.
The problem is not that ugly people get more convictions, but rather that people who break the law are more likely to not care about their personal appearance.
Sounds like Obama.
LOL, there's obviously situations where it would confuse people. But the term itself is widely used as a form of "social engineering" (there's another one to pick apart) and is usually understood just fine in that context.
We could also remove words such as running, sneaking, walking, jogging and sprinting and just say "going".
Pretexting is a specific type of lie that means setting up the false pretext to be someone else - typically by using valid and/or confidential information about that person or by using the pretext over a prolonged period of time to make the ruse seem more convincing.
I appreciate having this extra bit of information instead of just saying "he lied".
Why are we posting a small bug report on /. anyway?
The problem with malware in the restore points is not a flaw with system restore. Malware will hide itself in any of your backups if it can. If you clean a virus from your PC, I would recommend to delete all restore points after you contracted the virus (which is likely all of your remaining restore points as the virus probably already deleted all restore points prior to it's coming on board). However, if your anti-virus does not completely clean the PC, then the malware might automatically restore itself from the restore points. Of course, if it can do that it can also just copy itself back onto your drive. But anti-virus tools can cause confusion when they report the malware located in the "system volume information" directory and therefore most malware removal procedures simply recommend disabling system restore (to clear all restore points).
Just to help you understand: "Last known good configuration" is a copy of your registry (or rather a subset thereof) at the point of your last successful log in. If you log in successfully, but something does not work, then the "last known good configuration" was just saved and is of no use in that situation. This is NOT system restore.
System restore is more than just the registry. If you cannot login (even after trying "last known good configuration"), then you can try system restore by booting off of the OS CD/DVD and "repairing" your installation. If you log in successfully and something does not work, then you can also try system restore. And yes, system restore WILL fix your computer by bringing it to an older state at which everything worked, given that: 1) you don't have hardware issues 2) a virus has not infested your restore points and 3) you have restore points before the problem started.
I don't agree with the grandparents reasoning: not ActiveX fault because it's the providers (or attackers) fault, but I still defend ActiveX. I fail (and therein lies the problem perhaps ;-) ) to understand how ActiveX is more dangerous than plug-ins.
On another note, it's widely known that Adobe Reader is the number one attack vector on the web, so I wonder what percent of successful attacks are due to Adobe Reader vs ActiveX & plug-ins combined?
To each their own. I understand why someone would want to pull out and wait to turn left - it signals to other drivers you're GOING to turn whether you have a red light or not, but I prefer Iowa's less aggressive approach for safety reasons - even if it slows me down.
Though many people pull out to turn left in a busy intersection, Iowa law stipulates that you do not come to a stop in an intersection. It also says you should not enter an intersection until the path is clear (such as when turning left or even going straight if traffic backed up). Iowa "allows" you to enter an intersection on yellow (even if the light turns red while driving through) as long as at the time of entry you're certain the path is clear without having to stop again, although the drivers handbook still recommends to stop as soon as the light turns yellow if it is reasonably possible.
Personally, I have often sat through a round of two of changing lights to turn left in a busy intersection without a turn light. There is even a benefit to waiting behind the line to turn left: if you see a gap ahead you can start moving into the intersection and (without stopping) have some momentum to get through the gap safely without having to floor the pedal. Also, if there is a vehicle on the other side turning left, both you and the other driver have better visibility for oncoming traffic. So yeah... don't be one those noobs who sits in an intersection to turn left.
Not exactly. Some vehicles automatically disable the passenger air bag if some weight (but not much) is detected or allow the driver to disable the passenger air bag; but the safest spot for a baby is rear-facing in the back seat - where the driver doesn't see the baby at all.
I was thinking the same thing. Although I think the guy should be prosecuted for exploiting the weak system, I also don't think anyone would give a hoot if John Doe's twitter got hacked. But it's not surprising to see this is the news.
Consider Kevin Mitnik. He was truly a technological wiz. But according to his books, a majority of "hacks" were non-technical. I see the above case as just another social engineering exploit.
To address some of the above comments: Just becuase the victim or even twitter itself made it easy to gain access, that does not make it legal and the offender should be prosecuted. That being said, I personally often do not provide real answers to password recovery questions, because none of the questions available are difficult enough. And if I can pick my own question, I typically just provide a hint for the actual password that only I would understand.
While it is certainly more common to find protestants or baptists as opposed to catholics here, "frothing at the mouth evangelicals" are not "American". Besides, I know countless protestants today who are more scholarly in their pursuits (whether you agree with their presuppositions or not) than the average "expert scholar" we see talking on TV.
If you don't believe me, just consider how faith motivates people to the greatest extents. And it's no different when it comes to the study of theology/history/anthropology/language/etc.
I'm not on a crusade here and I don't have time for this every day. How 'bout this: Provide some evidence from a reputable source, then I might look into it some more.
Sorry,
nothing in your arguments means very much. They're still very weak. And yes, any administration would have acted the same. And no, there's no evident that the CDC was supplying checmical weapons.