You drink the water, not the milk (which is made from white flesh). Should be OK unless you're allergic/sensitive to coconut. Coconut water is hypotonic, so if there's a good supply of coconuts you can live quite long just on coconuts alone - get calories from the coconut flesh. Add fish and you'd do even better.
Modern military is tail heavy and will stay that way till we go back to sticks and stones.
In the old days you had the spear-head, the shaft and the person holding it, and the person who made the spear (who could be the same person as the one holding the spear).
Nowadays the "spear head" could be a bomb, behind this "spear head" could be a bunch of FA/18s (and their pilots), an aircraft carrier, with supporting ships, planes, helis (and maybe even a submarine). And it sure takes a lot of people, factories, mines, farms to build, maintain and supply all that.
A significant part of a country's resources and output is behind the actual "spear head" which is then "thrust" into the enemy. However light you try to make the tail, it's still going to be heavy.
Without the aircraft carrier your options for attacking others[1] become more restricted.
[1] I think US euphemism for that is "projecting force".
Tobacco smoke is far more dangerous than marijuana smoke (yes, really -- marijuana smoke does contain carcinogens, but even heavy marijuana smokers do not show an increased risk of cancer).
I would rather have a legal, regulated chemical plant producing methamphetamine for people to buy over the counter than the system we have today.
Maybe so, but wait till you legalize marijuana and Philip Morris and friends get their hands on it.
1) Go compare what's in tobacco and what's in cigarettes: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3990-crack-nicotine-in-cigarettes-varies-widely.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16728749 2) Industrially farmed tobacco typically is grown from phosphate fertilizers. That results in higher amounts of polonium in the tobacco. Yes there's plenty of other toxic stuff in cigarette smoke that can increase your odds of getting cancer but polonium certainly doesn't help. Anyone going to bet that industrially farmed marijuana won't concentrate polonium?
I think a virtual toilet would be even less satisfying. When you really got to go, you don't want to go virtual.
I don't drink coffee much but I bet many Slashdotters would be unhappier with virtual coffee machines serving virtual coffee than a virtualized cafeteria.
I'd like my office chair and other furniture real and not virtual. But beanbags might be OK if there's a suitable low table to put keyboard and other stuff on.
One potential thing to consider is many databases assume that the OS and drive isn't lying to them when they say "Yes the stuff is written permanently". When you virtualize you are adding another layer which could lie, or have bugs.
Things should be better now, but for important stuff you should test it e.g. set up a similar test environment and hard power-off the host when the guest running the DB server is busy inserting records (and saying OK to a network client when its done). Then you compare the network client's logs with what is actually inserted when you power up the machine. If after X tries everything is fine, then you have some assurance that the stuff isn't lying.
The last I checked amoebas certainly don't have neurons. Where's your proof that they don't feel anything? They sure seem to react to the environment and it's not just dumb reflexes. http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artsep01/feed.html Some even build shells!
I suspect the main difference between single celled creatures and us is the single celled creatures haven't managed to scale to our size and thus get our abilities.
If you pilot an amoeba, you're not going to do that much fancy stuff even if you're a hotshot. Whereas a large committee/organization of neurons controlling a body can do more fancy stuff.
Besides that Humans can feel horror and misery that a brain as simple as a cockroaches almost certainly cannot.
What makes you so certain? If you were in a cockroach body you would have limited senses and physical abilities, so even if you feel horror and misery how would you prove it to some human? Cockroaches may not pass IQ tests, but how can you be so sure they don't feel pain, horror and misery? And how much can you learn with a limited cockroach body? They certainly do have memory: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070927132543.htm
Who knows, an individual amoeba might be potentially more intelligent than a single neuron. But there is currently no way for an amoeba to be hooked up to a suitable body to prove otherwise, no super exoskeleton or mecha robot equivalent that it can pilot and be provide supersenses. In contrast, multi-cellular animals allow a bunch of neurons to pilot a body and have their senses extended. But the neurons still have to specialize and cooperate with other neurons to fire the impulses to move limbs, receive impulses etc. A single cell wouldn't be able to do it plus there is no redundancy - if the entire body is controlled by a single cell and that cell dies without a replacement, the body is in trouble.
One person's "Jennifer Aniston" cell is going to be different from another person's. Or it may not even be present till that person knows more about her...
The only way you can figure out whether a cell is a person's "Halle Berry" cell is if you present a "Halle Berry" stimulus to them and then do the measurement.
That's what a person's wearable computer + BCI could do, and that's how it may be possible to do the virtual eidetic memory + thought pattern store and recall thing. You have an object/media recording, you pick a thought to associate with it, test recall, confirm. So if you ask your computer to do a recall/retrieve and the previous particular bunch of brain cells are firing, your computer recalls that object. You could associate a particular "Jennifer Aniston" picture with a "dancing purple barney" if you want...
Someone might be able to figure out some of what you've been thinking by stealing/accessing your wearable computer or backups, and going through the logs/history (activity, location, storage/recall, etc). But the security conscious might have the stuff encrypted and without the right thought pattern sequence and/or passphrase it might be hard to crack.
It's a start. I hope they get on with it, I've been waiting since the 1990s where we had all the basics (but even the iphone would not have been viable back then - no suitable ecosystem to thrive in).
First generation: virtual telepathy kinda there, but needs brain computer interface for to be more seamless.
Missing: control via thought macros (need brain computer interface for that). Also missing: ability to recall and store stuff by linking them with arbitrary thought patterns/sequences.
Missing: virtual telekinesis- need "building/area/room" servers and similar.
Missing: mindï augmentation stuff like face/object recognition to help you find/track people/objects in a crowd/area. Or count them quickly - the computer can highlight the stuff for the human to confirm/verify (humans can be quite fast at noticing if the computer has highlighted the wrong object, and may notice if the computer has missed stuff). If the Gov is going to track number plates, maybe the citizens should too - all these big shots visiting their mistresses better beware.
The virtual eidetic memory should always record at low res+fps, but keep the past X minutes at high res+fps in a circular buffer, so you can start recording at high res without missing stuff (this applies to both video and sound). It should also try to do a voice recognition transcript (processing realtime or while you are sleeping look up HARK for sound source separation) so you can more easily search for stuff later.
Problems: copyright law might cripple us to be less than what is possible technically.
Yeah every now and then Slashdot has these silly articles about PC power consumption, "kill a watt" etc.
The power consumption of modern PCs (post P4) has gone down to a level where most home users would usually be better off looking for savings in other areas. Driving more efficiently, not using as much cooling/heating (and making it more efficient - insulation, sealing etc).
As for gaming, sure a high powered gaming rig will use a few hundred watts (and usually less if you're not doing SLI). But that's far from the most energy hungry way of having fun. Your hobby could be drag racing, or hiking/rock climbing somewhere that requires a 1 hour drive, or even baking cakes. FWIW even cycling and other sports might be more energy hungry if you replace the calories burnt by eating more of stuff that requires a fair bit of energy to produce ( e.g. US corn fed beef).
So if all that exercise makes you eat an additional half pound of beef (400kcal), that's about the equivalent of running a 300W gaming rig + monitor for 9 to 10 hours.
In contrast 1 pound of chicken = 1.1 pounds of CO2.
I've even seen many people here who say they still prefer to use incandescent lighting. It doesn't take that many bulbs to use as much as a gaming rig, even fewer for a facebook/browsing PC/notebook. A single fluorescent tube lamp uses about 40W already.
So the moral of the story here folks is simple, if you want it done right you do it yourself and you sure as hell don't trust a country known for snatching every idea that ain't nailed down and who is famous for copying other's stuff to do it for you!
How'd you get that moral from this story? There's no evidence yet that the Chinese put the backdoor in.
There is a huge difference between voting on a leader and voting on all the issues the leader will deal with
Voting for/against a war is not voting for all the issues, or each and every issue. It's a rather high level decision. And it has to be proposed by the leader(s) first.
Nor is it a very specific topic. Unlike many other popular issues, War actually affects nearly all the voters.
So give me a believable scenario of when a war would be justified and the people won't vote for it. Are you very sure the US people wouldn't have voted for a war against Germany in WW1 back then? AFAIK much of the USA were even in support of the latest Iraq War at least in the early stages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq
Don't forget with my proposal the leaders don't necessarily get executed even if the people don't believe a war is necessary. As long as they get redeemed in the subsequent referendum. Yes it's risky for the leader, but that's a feature not a bug.
In an age of nuclear weapons and weaponized biological agents, waiting for someone to attack you and only then responding is tantamount to suicide.
Oh really? Then why didn't the USA attack the USSR or vice versa, back in the Cold War? Go figure out why first before calling me batshit insane, or assuming I'm that stupid or ignorant.
In my opinion you're the one who is batshit insane if you think it's a good idea for the leaders to be able to _start_ a war even though they are completely unable to convince the majority of the people that the war is justified.
If the politicians can't convince enough people that the war is justified can you please tell me WHY there should be war? Just because the Great Leader thinks it's a wonderful idea? If you think the majority of your people will be so stupid in such serious and important matters, then using the same reasoning you should do away with democratic elections too right?
After all starting a war is a more serious matter than merely electing leaders, because a war directly affects the people in more than one country. And it involves killing lots of people and getting killed. If you don't think that's serious then you're probably a sociopath.
So if the Great Leader is not willing to risk his own life first for the war, why the fuck should the rest of the country risk their lives on his frigging war? And kill people in another country for him?
As for "In any armed conflict", as I said defence is a different matter. If they attack first, the leaders can nuke them to bits if they think its justified. Once everyone in the world understands how it works, even fewer would attack you first. Or give you a convincing excuse to attack them.
And what did you see after you set a higher log verbosity when you didn't see anything useful in the logs?
Anyway I find it strange that you didn't get any log messages since from a brief look I see there's plenty of logging in the ssl.c of openvpn (at least for version 2.2.2). For most error paths I see there's a "msg (..." line.
There's a line which says " }/* FIXME: Should have better error handling? */" though;).
Anyway I guess you found an error path without a log message.
In the old days kings used to lead their soldiers into battle. In modern times this is impractical and counterproductive.
But you can still have leaders lead the frontline in spirit.
Basically, if leaders are going to send troops on an _offensive_ war/battle (not defensive war) there must be a referendum on the war.
If there are not enough votes for the war, those leaders get put on deathrow.
At a convenient time later, a referendum is held to redeem each leader. Leaders that do not get enough votes get executed. For example if too many people stay at home and don't bother voting - the leaders get executed.
If it turns out later that the war was justified, a fancy ceremony is held, and the executed leaders are awarded a purple heart or equivalent, and you have people say nice things about them, cry and that sort of thing.
If it turns out later that the leaders tricked the voters, a referendum can be held (need to get enough signatories to start such a referendum, just to prevent nutters from wasting everyone elses time).
This proposal has many advantages: 1) Even leaders who don't really care about those "young soldiers on the battlefield" will not consider starting a war lightly. 2) The soldiers will know that the leaders want a war enough to risk their own lives for it. 3) The soldiers will know that X% of the population want the war. 4) Those being attacked will know that X% of the attackers believe in the war - so they want a war, they get a war - for sufficiently high X, collateral damage becomes insignificant. They might even be justified in using WMD and other otherwise dubious tactics. If > 90% of the country attacking you want to kill you and your families, what is so wrong about you using WMD as long as it does not affect neighbouring countries?
# Set the appropriate level of log # file verbosity. # # 0 is silent, except for fatal errors # 4 is reasonable for general usage # 5 and 6 can help to debug connection problems # 9 is extremely verbose verb 3
It is a parsing error because the code/bytecode is only parsed when executed. That also happens with other dynamic languages such as PHP. But even picking up on your example, are you saying that a windows version of Python won't produce the same error? As per my original post, my complaint was about Windows (the product) logs and logging/error messages by other Microsoft stuff. Not about other stuff that runs on Windows.
I was actually using a windows version of Python to get that error. It's not a parsing error because I can write a python program that will only throw that error sometimes ("random" or at a certain time). The parsing and compilation to bytecode is done already by that time.
Maybe Microsoft's philosophy to logging is to take into account internationalization - to make it easy for multilingual log error messages.
However in practice it just makes the messages equally useless in all languages;).
Both of them are system logs, not application logs. Please tell me what advantage would you get from knowing what was the process id at the time of execution, since (usually) you can't have services with the same name running at the same time
The Windows XP event viewer application log does not have the process ID either. I don't think I have seen event viewer application logs include the process ID unless the application itself explicitly logs it. As for actual application specific logging, you can't use that to prove that Windows logging is OK. It's more likely to support the assertion that Windows logging is inadequate/crap!
The advantage of the process ID is you know which process logged the message. A few examples of how it can be useful: 1) If a process with crappy logging is restarted it typically ends up with a different process ID, seeing that different process ID already tells you that it somehow has been restarted even if there is no log of the startup or shutdown events. 2) If there are multiple processes for good or bad reasons, you can tell the difference between them and you can know that there are multiple processes (which sometimes can be the problem - service did not stop properly and another instance is trying to start). 3) you may be already monitoring the processes using procmon or other stuff . Having the process ID allows you to figure out which process logged the messages and correlate it with the other stuff you are monitoring via other means (registry and file access).
Having this included by default in the log means that even if the application logging sucks you still can get some useful info. The process IDs you see in those application logs are because someone decided they would be useful and so logged them.
So I don't know why you claim logging the process ID isn't useful. I think you yourself should be able to come up with many other reasons why it could be useful.
You example is apples and oranges. The errors you mentioned are _parsing errors_, not runtime errors.
That was a run-time error. It only shows up while the program runs. I could write a program that'll only show this error half the time it runs. So how's that a parsing error?
Try with a compiled language.
if you can access the message, you can easily examine the path taken. But hey, maybe your problems are more complex - I don't know.
The issue was the message was not arriving at all. And we had to figure out where it was blocked or died, AND WHY. All we know is the subject, the sender, the recipient and the content. With most "unix" style mail transport that is more than enough to figure stuff out in a few minutes. With Exchange, it seems way harder, just look at this: http://blogs.technet.com/b/messaging_with_communications/archive/2011/04/22/how-to-track-message-in-exchange-2003-2007-2010.aspx I'm sure there are other approaches (we just resorted to trial and error;) ), but do show me a simple one. As simple or simpler than the postfix equivalent (since you're familiar with postfix).
But many applications have separate logging (SQL Server, PostgreSQL, MySQL) to help with that. I'm not saying Windows logging is perfect, but it is not the unusable pile of crap everyone that never tried to use it say it is
I've used it a lot and "windows event viewer" logging is crap and crappier than it should be. That's why my applications by default log to text files instead of the windows event logger.
Then I can use stuff like baretail on the text file and see stuff happening in near real time without having to keep refreshing. With highlighting too.
Or grep for significant events - my log lines have a section that has more hashes for increasing severity, for example INFO level
So, no, this is not about relative living standards you fucking moron, because he obviously has a far better living standard than most americans.
Based on the article and other sources I actually doubt he has a better living standard. He and his family are just more willing to "eat bitterness" than most Americans. Work long hours, earn little, spend very little, save the rest in hope for a better future. Go and see how poor people in poor countries live (or barely survive) sometime.
If all the "bleeding heart" bunch here really wanted to improve the lives of the poor exploited Chinese workers, why not let more of them leave China and move to the USA and work there? Plenty of room in the USA- you can squeeze a whole family in a typical US garage and it'll still seem spacious to them (and maybe even better furnished!).
Of course not. They're poor in a poor country. Not in a rich country like the USA - where the "poor" are often obese (yes they are relatively poor in the USA, but they are rich compared to much of the world).
If you feel so guilty you can go give all your money to them. Divided by 1 billion it's not going to last very long. Or you can choose to buy all your stuff from elsewhere (e.g. Germany, USA), which doesn't help them either.
They are in the process of learning "how to fish". And they are making a fair bit of progress. More than India it seems, which still has lots of people shitting on the streets like stray dogs.
Slashdot Mirror
You drink the water, not the milk (which is made from white flesh). Should be OK unless you're allergic/sensitive to coconut. Coconut water is hypotonic, so if there's a good supply of coconuts you can live quite long just on coconuts alone - get calories from the coconut flesh. Add fish and you'd do even better.
Think of it as recycling ;).
But yeah crab, lobster, prawns are basically roaches of the sea.
Modern military is tail heavy and will stay that way till we go back to sticks and stones.
In the old days you had the spear-head, the shaft and the person holding it, and the person who made the spear (who could be the same person as the one holding the spear).
Nowadays the "spear head" could be a bomb, behind this "spear head" could be a bunch of FA/18s (and their pilots), an aircraft carrier, with supporting ships, planes, helis (and maybe even a submarine). And it sure takes a lot of people, factories, mines, farms to build, maintain and supply all that.
A significant part of a country's resources and output is behind the actual "spear head" which is then "thrust" into the enemy. However light you try to make the tail, it's still going to be heavy.
Without the aircraft carrier your options for attacking others[1] become more restricted.
[1] I think US euphemism for that is "projecting force".
Tobacco smoke is far more dangerous than marijuana smoke (yes, really -- marijuana smoke does contain carcinogens, but even heavy marijuana smokers do not show an increased risk of cancer).
I would rather have a legal, regulated chemical plant producing methamphetamine for people to buy over the counter than the system we have today.
Maybe so, but wait till you legalize marijuana and Philip Morris and friends get their hands on it.
1) Go compare what's in tobacco and what's in cigarettes: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3990-crack-nicotine-in-cigarettes-varies-widely.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16728749
2) Industrially farmed tobacco typically is grown from phosphate fertilizers. That results in higher amounts of polonium in the tobacco. Yes there's plenty of other toxic stuff in cigarette smoke that can increase your odds of getting cancer but polonium certainly doesn't help. Anyone going to bet that industrially farmed marijuana won't concentrate polonium?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/01/opinion
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/tobacco-firms-kept-quiet-on--polonium-role-in-cigarettes-907194.html/01proctor.html
Not saying marijuana shouldn't be legalized, but that you shouldn't be too optimistic about the results.
I think a virtual toilet would be even less satisfying. When you really got to go, you don't want to go virtual.
I don't drink coffee much but I bet many Slashdotters would be unhappier with virtual coffee machines serving virtual coffee than a virtualized cafeteria.
I'd like my office chair and other furniture real and not virtual. But beanbags might be OK if there's a suitable low table to put keyboard and other stuff on.
One potential thing to consider is many databases assume that the OS and drive isn't lying to them when they say "Yes the stuff is written permanently". When you virtualize you are adding another layer which could lie, or have bugs.
Things should be better now, but for important stuff you should test it e.g. set up a similar test environment and hard power-off the host when the guest running the DB server is busy inserting records (and saying OK to a network client when its done). Then you compare the network client's logs with what is actually inserted when you power up the machine. If after X tries everything is fine, then you have some assurance that the stuff isn't lying.
The last I checked amoebas certainly don't have neurons. Where's your proof that they don't feel anything? They sure seem to react to the environment and it's not just dumb reflexes. http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artsep01/feed.html
Some even build shells!
I suspect the main difference between single celled creatures and us is the single celled creatures haven't managed to scale to our size and thus get our abilities.
If you pilot an amoeba, you're not going to do that much fancy stuff even if you're a hotshot. Whereas a large committee/organization of neurons controlling a body can do more fancy stuff.
Besides that Humans can feel horror and misery that a brain as simple as a cockroaches almost certainly cannot.
What makes you so certain? If you were in a cockroach body you would have limited senses and physical abilities, so even if you feel horror and misery how would you prove it to some human? Cockroaches may not pass IQ tests, but how can you be so sure they don't feel pain, horror and misery? And how much can you learn with a limited cockroach body? They certainly do have memory: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070927132543.htm
Maybe amoebas too: http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artsep01/feed.html
Some amoebas even build elaborate shells:
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artsep01/shelled.html
Instinct maybe, but what's instinct then? And how sure are you that horror and misery don't come with instinct either? After all pain, horror and misery would be more useful concepts than passing IQ tests to most creatures on this planet and elsewhere even.
I think we're are still far from understanding thought and consciousness.
By the way there are single neurons that specialize in going "BINGO!" whenever someone thinks "Halle Berry".
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Single-Cell-Recognition-Research-6260.aspx
Who knows, an individual amoeba might be potentially more intelligent than a single neuron. But there is currently no way for an amoeba to be hooked up to a suitable body to prove otherwise, no super exoskeleton or mecha robot equivalent that it can pilot and be provide supersenses. In contrast, multi-cellular animals allow a bunch of neurons to pilot a body and have their senses extended. But the neurons still have to specialize and cooperate with other neurons to fire the impulses to move limbs, receive impulses etc. A single cell wouldn't be able to do it plus there is no redundancy - if the entire body is controlled by a single cell and that cell dies without a replacement, the body is in trouble.
Maybe he was going to use large parts of it as examples of what not to do ;).
Telepathy will be more like voice communication. Reading other people's minds against their will is still going to be difficult.
See:
http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/12710
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1081332/The-Jennifer-Aniston-brain-cell-How-single-neurons-spring-action-pictures-favourite-celebrities.html
One person's "Jennifer Aniston" cell is going to be different from another person's. Or it may not even be present till that person knows more about her...
The only way you can figure out whether a cell is a person's "Halle Berry" cell is if you present a "Halle Berry" stimulus to them and then do the measurement.
That's what a person's wearable computer + BCI could do, and that's how it may be possible to do the virtual eidetic memory + thought pattern store and recall thing. You have an object/media recording, you pick a thought to associate with it, test recall, confirm. So if you ask your computer to do a recall/retrieve and the previous particular bunch of brain cells are firing, your computer recalls that object. You could associate a particular "Jennifer Aniston" picture with a "dancing purple barney" if you want...
Someone might be able to figure out some of what you've been thinking by stealing/accessing your wearable computer or backups, and going through the logs/history (activity, location, storage/recall, etc). But the security conscious might have the stuff encrypted and without the right thought pattern sequence and/or passphrase it might be hard to crack.
It's a start. I hope they get on with it, I've been waiting since the 1990s where we had all the basics (but even the iphone would not have been viable back then - no suitable ecosystem to thrive in).
First generation: virtual telepathy kinda there, but needs brain computer interface for to be more seamless.
Missing: control via thought macros (need brain computer interface for that). Also missing: ability to recall and store stuff by linking them with arbitrary thought patterns/sequences.
Missing: virtual telekinesis- need "building/area/room" servers and similar.
Missing: mindï augmentation stuff like face/object recognition to help you find/track people/objects in a crowd/area. Or count them quickly - the computer can highlight the stuff for the human to confirm/verify (humans can be quite fast at noticing if the computer has highlighted the wrong object, and may notice if the computer has missed stuff). If the Gov is going to track number plates, maybe the citizens should too - all these big shots visiting their mistresses better beware.
The virtual eidetic memory should always record at low res+fps, but keep the past X minutes at high res+fps in a circular buffer, so you can start recording at high res without missing stuff (this applies to both video and sound). It should also try to do a voice recognition transcript (processing realtime or while you are sleeping look up HARK for sound source separation) so you can more easily search for stuff later.
Problems: copyright law might cripple us to be less than what is possible technically.
See also: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2848877&cid=39996993
How can a threat to bomb an airport be considered as a joke?
When it's not even a threat?
How the fuck is this a meaningful threat:
"Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!"
And he's an accountant so that makes the risk even lower, engineers are more likely to be the ones that blow stuff up.
Did the IT head keep his job or even get a bonus?
Yeah every now and then Slashdot has these silly articles about PC power consumption, "kill a watt" etc.
The power consumption of modern PCs (post P4) has gone down to a level where most home users would usually be better off looking for savings in other areas. Driving more efficiently, not using as much cooling/heating (and making it more efficient - insulation, sealing etc).
As for gaming, sure a high powered gaming rig will use a few hundred watts (and usually less if you're not doing SLI). But that's far from the most energy hungry way of having fun. Your hobby could be drag racing, or hiking/rock climbing somewhere that requires a 1 hour drive, or even baking cakes. FWIW even cycling and other sports might be more energy hungry if you replace the calories burnt by eating more of stuff that requires a fair bit of energy to produce ( e.g. US corn fed beef).
From various sources:
1 pound of beef = 13-15 pounds of CO2 ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2009-04-21-carbon-diet_N.htm )
1 kWh = 2.3 pounds of CO2 ( http://cdiac.ornl.gov/pns/faq.html )
so 1 pound of beef = 5.6-6.5kWh
So if all that exercise makes you eat an additional half pound of beef (400kcal), that's about the equivalent of running a 300W gaming rig + monitor for 9 to 10 hours.
In contrast 1 pound of chicken = 1.1 pounds of CO2.
I've even seen many people here who say they still prefer to use incandescent lighting. It doesn't take that many bulbs to use as much as a gaming rig, even fewer for a facebook/browsing PC/notebook. A single fluorescent tube lamp uses about 40W already.
So the moral of the story here folks is simple, if you want it done right you do it yourself and you sure as hell don't trust a country known for snatching every idea that ain't nailed down and who is famous for copying other's stuff to do it for you!
How'd you get that moral from this story? There's no evidence yet that the Chinese put the backdoor in.
What next you're going to blame the Chinese for Apple's backdoor? http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2010/10/25/careful-iphone-owners-simple-backdoor-lets-anyone-bypass-password-protection/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57408370-281/how-apple-and-google-help-police-bypass-iphone-android-lock-screens/
Define it how you will. If you don't know who your leaders are etc, I don't see why it's worth wasting further time with you.
There is a huge difference between voting on a leader and voting on all the issues the leader will deal with
Voting for/against a war is not voting for all the issues, or each and every issue. It's a rather high level decision. And it has to be proposed by the leader(s) first.
Nor is it a very specific topic. Unlike many other popular issues, War actually affects nearly all the voters.
So give me a believable scenario of when a war would be justified and the people won't vote for it. Are you very sure the US people wouldn't have voted for a war against Germany in WW1 back then? AFAIK much of the USA were even in support of the latest Iraq War at least in the early stages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq
Don't forget with my proposal the leaders don't necessarily get executed even if the people don't believe a war is necessary. As long as they get redeemed in the subsequent referendum. Yes it's risky for the leader, but that's a feature not a bug.
In an age of nuclear weapons and weaponized biological agents, waiting for someone to attack you and only then responding is tantamount to suicide.
Oh really? Then why didn't the USA attack the USSR or vice versa, back in the Cold War? Go figure out why first before calling me batshit insane, or assuming I'm that stupid or ignorant.
In my opinion you're the one who is batshit insane if you think it's a good idea for the leaders to be able to _start_ a war even though they are completely unable to convince the majority of the people that the war is justified.
If the politicians can't convince enough people that the war is justified can you please tell me WHY there should be war? Just because the Great Leader thinks it's a wonderful idea? If you think the majority of your people will be so stupid in such serious and important matters, then using the same reasoning you should do away with democratic elections too right?
After all starting a war is a more serious matter than merely electing leaders, because a war directly affects the people in more than one country. And it involves killing lots of people and getting killed. If you don't think that's serious then you're probably a sociopath.
So if the Great Leader is not willing to risk his own life first for the war, why the fuck should the rest of the country risk their lives on his frigging war? And kill people in another country for him?
As for "In any armed conflict", as I said defence is a different matter. If they attack first, the leaders can nuke them to bits if they think its justified. Once everyone in the world understands how it works, even fewer would attack you first. Or give you a convincing excuse to attack them.
And what did you see after you set a higher log verbosity when you didn't see anything useful in the logs?
/* FIXME: Should have better error handling? */" though ;).
Anyway I find it strange that you didn't get any log messages since from a brief look I see there's plenty of logging in the ssl.c of openvpn (at least for version 2.2.2). For most error paths I see there's a "msg (..." line.
There's a line which says " }
Anyway I guess you found an error path without a log message.
And what if they don't have kids? Or don't care about their kids?
Here's my proposal: http://slashdot.org/~TheLink/journal/208853
In the old days kings used to lead their soldiers into battle. In modern times this is impractical and counterproductive.
But you can still have leaders lead the frontline in spirit.
Basically, if leaders are going to send troops on an _offensive_ war/battle (not defensive war) there must be a referendum on the war.
If there are not enough votes for the war, those leaders get put on deathrow.
At a convenient time later, a referendum is held to redeem each leader. Leaders that do not get enough votes get executed. For example if too many people stay at home and don't bother voting - the leaders get executed.
If it turns out later that the war was justified, a fancy ceremony is held, and the executed leaders are awarded a purple heart or equivalent, and you have people say nice things about them, cry and that sort of thing.
If it turns out later that the leaders tricked the voters, a referendum can be held (need to get enough signatories to start such a referendum, just to prevent nutters from wasting everyone elses time).
This proposal has many advantages:
1) Even leaders who don't really care about those "young soldiers on the battlefield" will not consider starting a war lightly.
2) The soldiers will know that the leaders want a war enough to risk their own lives for it.
3) The soldiers will know that X% of the population want the war.
4) Those being attacked will know that X% of the attackers believe in the war - so they want a war, they get a war - for sufficiently high X, collateral damage becomes insignificant. They might even be justified in using WMD and other otherwise dubious tactics. If > 90% of the country attacking you want to kill you and your families, what is so wrong about you using WMD as long as it does not affect neighbouring countries?
I haven't used openvpn for years, but what log verbosity did you set the openvpn server to?
http://openvpn.net/index.php/open-source/documentation/howto.html
# Set the appropriate level of log
# file verbosity.
#
# 0 is silent, except for fatal errors
# 4 is reasonable for general usage
# 5 and 6 can help to debug connection problems
# 9 is extremely verbose
verb 3
It is a parsing error because the code/bytecode is only parsed when executed. That also happens with other dynamic languages such as PHP. But even picking up on your example, are you saying that a windows version of Python won't produce the same error?
As per my original post, my complaint was about Windows (the product) logs and logging/error messages by other Microsoft stuff. Not about other stuff that runs on Windows.
I was actually using a windows version of Python to get that error. It's not a parsing error because I can write a python program that will only throw that error sometimes ("random" or at a certain time). The parsing and compilation to bytecode is done already by that time.
Maybe Microsoft's philosophy to logging is to take into account internationalization - to make it easy for multilingual log error messages.
However in practice it just makes the messages equally useless in all languages ;).
Both of them are system logs, not application logs. Please tell me what advantage would you get from knowing what was the process id at the time of execution, since (usually) you can't have services with the same name running at the same time
The Windows XP event viewer application log does not have the process ID either. I don't think I have seen event viewer application logs include the process ID unless the application itself explicitly logs it. As for actual application specific logging, you can't use that to prove that Windows logging is OK. It's more likely to support the assertion that Windows logging is inadequate/crap!
The advantage of the process ID is you know which process logged the message. A few examples of how it can be useful:
1) If a process with crappy logging is restarted it typically ends up with a different process ID, seeing that different process ID already tells you that it somehow has been restarted even if there is no log of the startup or shutdown events.
2) If there are multiple processes for good or bad reasons, you can tell the difference between them and you can know that there are multiple processes (which sometimes can be the problem - service did not stop properly and another instance is trying to start).
3) you may be already monitoring the processes using procmon or other stuff . Having the process ID allows you to figure out which process logged the messages and correlate it with the other stuff you are monitoring via other means (registry and file access).
Having this included by default in the log means that even if the application logging sucks you still can get some useful info. The process IDs you see in those application logs are because someone decided they would be useful and so logged them.
So I don't know why you claim logging the process ID isn't useful. I think you yourself should be able to come up with many other reasons why it could be useful.
You example is apples and oranges. The errors you mentioned are _parsing errors_, not runtime errors.
That was a run-time error. It only shows up while the program runs. I could write a program that'll only show this error half the time it runs. So how's that a parsing error?
Try with a compiled language.
if you can access the message, you can easily examine the path taken. But hey, maybe your problems are more complex - I don't know.
The issue was the message was not arriving at all. And we had to figure out where it was blocked or died, AND WHY. All we know is the subject, the sender, the recipient and the content. With most "unix" style mail transport that is more than enough to figure stuff out in a few minutes. With Exchange, it seems way harder, just look at this: http://blogs.technet.com/b/messaging_with_communications/archive/2011/04/22/how-to-track-message-in-exchange-2003-2007-2010.aspx ;) ), but do show me a simple one. As simple or simpler than the postfix equivalent (since you're familiar with postfix).
I'm sure there are other approaches (we just resorted to trial and error
But many applications have separate logging (SQL Server, PostgreSQL, MySQL) to help with that. I'm not saying Windows logging is perfect, but it is not the unusable pile of crap everyone that never tried to use it say it is
I've used it a lot and "windows event viewer" logging is crap and crappier than it should be. That's why my applications by default log to text files instead of the windows event logger.
Then I can use stuff like baretail on the text file and see stuff happening in near real time without having to keep refreshing. With highlighting too.
Or grep for significant events - my log lines have a section that has more hashes for increasing severity, for example INFO level
So, no, this is not about relative living standards you fucking moron, because he obviously has a far better living standard than most americans.
Based on the article and other sources I actually doubt he has a better living standard. He and his family are just more willing to "eat bitterness" than most Americans. Work long hours, earn little, spend very little, save the rest in hope for a better future. Go and see how poor people in poor countries live (or barely survive) sometime.
If all the "bleeding heart" bunch here really wanted to improve the lives of the poor exploited Chinese workers, why not let more of them leave China and move to the USA and work there? Plenty of room in the USA- you can squeeze a whole family in a typical US garage and it'll still seem spacious to them (and maybe even better furnished!).
FWIW the new generation of Chinese seem less willing to "eat bitterness": http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/06/us-china-worker-idUSBRE83504T20120406
It may be a sign that more and more workers are no longer that desperate. And with that working conditions may improve.
Or the work will go to Vietnam etc...
Of course not. They're poor in a poor country. Not in a rich country like the USA - where the "poor" are often obese (yes they are relatively poor in the USA, but they are rich compared to much of the world).
If you feel so guilty you can go give all your money to them. Divided by 1 billion it's not going to last very long. Or you can choose to buy all your stuff from elsewhere (e.g. Germany, USA), which doesn't help them either.
They are in the process of learning "how to fish". And they are making a fair bit of progress. More than India it seems, which still has lots of people shitting on the streets like stray dogs.