CNC machines, of the laser or router variety, should do the job nicely.
What about reg'lar old 3D printers? The enviros keep telling us that PVC or polystyrene, or whatever it is those things print with aren't susceptible to biological decay. Perhaps that's a less expensive alternative to wearing out end mills or burning out lasers?
They work when the vendor changes formats for newer releases
They work when civilization collapses and they're found centuries later in a cave
And the don't magically turn into pumpkins when the clock strikes twelve.
There is of course, a way to make a normal book stop working when the availability of its content becomes a problem. It's called fire. It's generally bad form to burn a paper book. Why exactly is it socially acceptable to DRM a book again?
Just to underscore that he's not a good guy, he orders bombs dropped on crowds of civilians and he jams your TV.
Re:Yell "Format C ... Yes, Yes, Yes" at work...
on
Talking To Computers?
·
· Score: 2
The beauty of the almighty command line, declarative programming language, and any interface with a well-defined command set is that you get exactly what you asked for, at the expense of modifying your thinking to be more exact than natural language. This is a feature. And it's one that I don't think would translate well to the spoken word. I can say
for file in `ls -1 *.txt`; do echo something about $file; done;
on a keyboard, but I can't even begin to thing how I could get my mouth to say that out loud, unambiguously and consistently every time.
It's not a pathology. It's a natural consequence of wanting to live in a nice house where you're far enough away from your neighbors that they can be loud assholes and it won't bother you, and you can be a loud asshole and it won't bother them.
Sure it's known. Coal -> gasoline, sugar cane -> ethanol, shale -> petroleum. Given the cost of reconverting from liquid fuel infrastructure to something else, I'm pretty sure an economically viable synthetic gasoline will magically materialize from currently known methods once the Saudis, Canadians, etc really start to run dry.
Right on. People like to bitch about how airplanes are inefficient and wasteful, but when you have to maintain thousands of miles of high quality track in remote locations, having to maintain a few miles of runway in populated areas will suddenly look a lot more attractive and efficient.
If indeed it came to that, I don't think anyone would be terribly offended. In fact, I'm pretty sure the citizenry would be dealing with more immediate problems should the federal government decide to through the First Amendment out the window like that.
OK, let's get this out of the way: if a private citizen advocates for 1) freedom of expression 2) accountability of governments to their citizens and 3) some other basic human rights, and sets up a FOSS software project to advocate these things to people living under statist governments, is it good? If his government does the same thing, is it bad? It's the messenger AND the message that distinguishes good from bad, not just a question of who's doing the talking.
From my read of TFA, it looks like they didn't generate random boards and then picked winners, but generated winning board/hidden tickets and losing board/hidden tickets from different distributions, yielding the easy crack.
If you generate all random boards with a full set of 72 symbols (to guarantee no repeats on a ticket), then you can uniquely identify a winning streak anywhere on the board and write it in the hidden spaces. I'll buy that my guess about sufficient rarity with a reduced set of 39 symbols may be BS, but I don't think they were trying to do what I suggested.
Even still. In the tic-tac-toe game, it seems like you should be able to generate a set N of truly random tickets, and then randomly select exactly M of them to be winners by choosing the hidden numbers after you've picked which tickets should win and which should lose? The only quirk would be having to validate each loser to verify that you don't accidentally make a winner, but that should be sufficiently rare to not through a wrench into the plan.
This is taking the entirely wrong approach here. The thing I never quite understood about ignition interlocks is why repeat DUI offenders are even allowed to drive a car at all. If after $N_MAX_OFFENSES you still can't control yourself, I don't trust you with a car, period. What this idea says is that because we've decided in giving an infinite number of second chances to the small fraction of the population that can't realistically be expected to act responsibly on their own, we're now going to impose an expensive mandatory new toy on everyone else, out of their pockets, and if the thing screws up and gives a false alarm, too bad.
If the court can order you to pay for an ignition interlock after a DUI, then it can sure as hell order you to sell your car, period.
The saving grace of Western civilization is that while much of the rest of the world is sufficiently uncivilized to be susceptible to Islamic extremism, it seems that an overwhelming majority of candidate True Believers are too damn stupid to learn to fly airplanes, not blow themselves up, or even aim when they shoot.
No, I didn't. My claim was that the magnitude of the current spike is less than feature sizes observed previously, and is smaller than the noise in those features. My subsequent conjecture is that the current rise is therefor noise.
Freedom is hard. We killed a whole lot of ourselves getting where we are now. So did most of the Western democracies, before they became democracies. See for example: England, France, Spain, Poland, Italy, etc. The only ones who didn't have a major bloodbath that they themselves instigated before they became more or less civilized are ???
It's extremely handy. Makes it easier to shoot the enemy without excessive paperwork.
Incidentally, as far as I am aware, no civilized military in the history of earth has extended to "enemy combatants"/"evil doers"/"bad guys" the same protection that its controlling government has extended to its citizens. Even the Geneva Conventions, which is the closest thing anyone ever came to codifying and "civilizing" mass violence, let you shoot to kill without having the other guy lawyer up and seek an injunction against the bullet.
Here's something I dug up after 5 minutes worth of googling and clicking:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/temperature/
(search for "Note this timeline is not to scale" to get to a representative figure, out of one of James Hansen's papers, no less:-P).
It's not the same as global temperatures talked about in TFA, but to my admittedly untrained eye, the hump representing the recent temperature rise correlates with a similar hump in Hansen's figure, and the magnitudes of the other features (ie steps, dips) in the time history look bigger and noiser than the current rise.
I don't have a master's in statistical inference, just a plain old BS in engineering. And even I can tell that all of this "warmest year on record" business is just people getting worked up about short timescale noise in a signal with periodicity on the order of 400? 11,000? 400,000? years.
Maybe it is the warmest year on record. So what? Keep records for long enough and you'll wind up with a coldest year too.
Slashdot Mirror
CNC machines, of the laser or router variety, should do the job nicely.
What about reg'lar old 3D printers? The enviros keep telling us that PVC or polystyrene, or whatever it is those things print with aren't susceptible to biological decay. Perhaps that's a less expensive alternative to wearing out end mills or burning out lasers?
They work when the power goes out
They work when the vendor changes formats for newer releases
They work when civilization collapses and they're found centuries later in a cave
And the don't magically turn into pumpkins when the clock strikes twelve.
There is of course, a way to make a normal book stop working when the availability of its content becomes a problem. It's called fire. It's generally bad form to burn a paper book. Why exactly is it socially acceptable to DRM a book again?
Just to underscore that he's not a good guy, he orders bombs dropped on crowds of civilians and he jams your TV.
The beauty of the almighty command line, declarative programming language, and any interface with a well-defined command set is that you get exactly what you asked for, at the expense of modifying your thinking to be more exact than natural language. This is a feature. And it's one that I don't think would translate well to the spoken word. I can say
for file in `ls -1 *.txt`; do echo something about $file; done;
on a keyboard, but I can't even begin to thing how I could get my mouth to say that out loud, unambiguously and consistently every time.
For years man has yearned to destroy the sun. Now he has a reason: self-defense.
If you speed on the streets with the potholes, your mechanic will be collecting more revenue than the local cops soon enough.
It's not a pathology. It's a natural consequence of wanting to live in a nice house where you're far enough away from your neighbors that they can be loud assholes and it won't bother you, and you can be a loud asshole and it won't bother them.
Sure it's known. Coal -> gasoline, sugar cane -> ethanol, shale -> petroleum. Given the cost of reconverting from liquid fuel infrastructure to something else, I'm pretty sure an economically viable synthetic gasoline will magically materialize from currently known methods once the Saudis, Canadians, etc really start to run dry.
Right on. People like to bitch about how airplanes are inefficient and wasteful, but when you have to maintain thousands of miles of high quality track in remote locations, having to maintain a few miles of runway in populated areas will suddenly look a lot more attractive and efficient.
If indeed it came to that, I don't think anyone would be terribly offended. In fact, I'm pretty sure the citizenry would be dealing with more immediate problems should the federal government decide to through the First Amendment out the window like that.
OK, let's get this out of the way: if a private citizen advocates for 1) freedom of expression 2) accountability of governments to their citizens and 3) some other basic human rights, and sets up a FOSS software project to advocate these things to people living under statist governments, is it good? If his government does the same thing, is it bad? It's the messenger AND the message that distinguishes good from bad, not just a question of who's doing the talking.
From my read of TFA, it looks like they didn't generate random boards and then picked winners, but generated winning board/hidden tickets and losing board/hidden tickets from different distributions, yielding the easy crack.
If you generate all random boards with a full set of 72 symbols (to guarantee no repeats on a ticket), then you can uniquely identify a winning streak anywhere on the board and write it in the hidden spaces. I'll buy that my guess about sufficient rarity with a reduced set of 39 symbols may be BS, but I don't think they were trying to do what I suggested.
Even still. In the tic-tac-toe game, it seems like you should be able to generate a set N of truly random tickets, and then randomly select exactly M of them to be winners by choosing the hidden numbers after you've picked which tickets should win and which should lose? The only quirk would be having to validate each loser to verify that you don't accidentally make a winner, but that should be sufficiently rare to not through a wrench into the plan.
You're done alright. The modem won't give you an IP address (as of Jul 10) if your MAC doesn't match what it's activated against.
It's not like they can't borrow a car without an interlock.
This is taking the entirely wrong approach here. The thing I never quite understood about ignition interlocks is why repeat DUI offenders are even allowed to drive a car at all. If after $N_MAX_OFFENSES you still can't control yourself, I don't trust you with a car, period. What this idea says is that because we've decided in giving an infinite number of second chances to the small fraction of the population that can't realistically be expected to act responsibly on their own, we're now going to impose an expensive mandatory new toy on everyone else, out of their pockets, and if the thing screws up and gives a false alarm, too bad.
If the court can order you to pay for an ignition interlock after a DUI, then it can sure as hell order you to sell your car, period.
The saving grace of Western civilization is that while much of the rest of the world is sufficiently uncivilized to be susceptible to Islamic extremism, it seems that an overwhelming majority of candidate True Believers are too damn stupid to learn to fly airplanes, not blow themselves up, or even aim when they shoot.
and it seems to have stayed deleted. So that's still an option.
No, I didn't. My claim was that the magnitude of the current spike is less than feature sizes observed previously, and is smaller than the noise in those features. My subsequent conjecture is that the current rise is therefor noise.
Freedom is hard. We killed a whole lot of ourselves getting where we are now. So did most of the Western democracies, before they became democracies. See for example: England, France, Spain, Poland, Italy, etc. The only ones who didn't have a major bloodbath that they themselves instigated before they became more or less civilized are ???
It's extremely handy. Makes it easier to shoot the enemy without excessive paperwork.
Incidentally, as far as I am aware, no civilized military in the history of earth has extended to "enemy combatants"/"evil doers"/"bad guys" the same protection that its controlling government has extended to its citizens. Even the Geneva Conventions, which is the closest thing anyone ever came to codifying and "civilizing" mass violence, let you shoot to kill without having the other guy lawyer up and seek an injunction against the bullet.
Here's something I dug up after 5 minutes worth of googling and clicking: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/temperature/ (search for "Note this timeline is not to scale" to get to a representative figure, out of one of James Hansen's papers, no less :-P).
It's not the same as global temperatures talked about in TFA, but to my admittedly untrained eye, the hump representing the recent temperature rise correlates with a similar hump in Hansen's figure, and the magnitudes of the other features (ie steps, dips) in the time history look bigger and noiser than the current rise.
But if you look at the tens of thousands of years of proxy data that's also available, suddenly it's not the warmest.
Too many unknown unknowns to make firm conclusions about any superlatives.
I don't have a master's in statistical inference, just a plain old BS in engineering. And even I can tell that all of this "warmest year on record" business is just people getting worked up about short timescale noise in a signal with periodicity on the order of 400? 11,000? 400,000? years.
Maybe it is the warmest year on record. So what? Keep records for long enough and you'll wind up with a coldest year too.
For the last time: the US military operating on foreign soil is not the same thing as civilian police operating on American soil. Get over it.