This detection method only works if you are monitoring at the last hop before the receiving system, since the packet can become corrupt on any hop after the current one.
You can't be sure exactly which roll is going to be yours vs another gamer's, but you can use the average of say, the next 50 rolls to give yourself an edge the same way a card-counting Blackjack player would.
Only if "high rolls" were automatically better for you than for your opponent. For example, there might be a game where the roll result means the player number that gets a good thing, and you have the higher player number. Otherwise, it's completely useless.
How much value would there be in knowing the next 100 rolls of the dice in a particular casino, but not knowing which table would get which roll? Even knowing that a vast majority are sevens would help only a little at craps, as a seven can be a bad thing based on when the roll happens.
Likewise, for a game like "Risk", lots of high numbers would give a slight advantage to the defender, but since you don't get to choose when you defend, it's not much of a help.
For a game like "Monopoly" or backgammon, rolls are essentially unrelated, and no value is inherently better, but all values are situational. Doubles are good in "Monopoly" because you roll again, but too many and you go to jail. Doubles are very good in backgammon, unless you can't move that number of spaces with any piece, in which case they are the worst roll at that time.
Mod parent up as one of the few who understands how forced password changes are generally bad for security.
When asked, most system admins do not know what the single security issue that is addressed by forced password changes: limiting the amount of time a compromised password can do damage.
The problem is that any forced change time that is short enough to do any good with this (like 30 days) would cause users to always pick the most memorable (i.e., least secure) password that meets the requirements. Worse, it's more likely to cause every monitor in your office to have a password-laden sticky-note. If you have a 90-day change time (about the standard), that gives an average of 45 days that a compromised password can do damage, which is way too much.
Last, forced password changes are still almost certainly nothing but security theater, because once an account is compromised, it's easy to re-compromise it with a keylogger or similar background software.
Mostly the same reasons doctors don't treat themselves.
The big difference is that even an average lawyer should be able to write up a brief concerning himself, or stand up and argue in court in his own behalf, but there aren't any doctors at all who can perform open-heart surgery on themselves.
for some odd reason they move all shows like this to Friday night, you would think by now that these show's target audience isn't home or doing something else on a Friday night...
Pretty much every sci-fi show has a target audience that now doesn't give a damn what night the show is on (because of DVRs).
But, that also leads to the problem that nobody actually watches the commercials on shows that are targeted at geeks.
I guess my real beef is...how many times are they going to tell the exact same story with the same characters for this franchise? The 3 movies are the same story, and the series just looked like the same story told again stretched over a longer time period...and of course it make no sense at all.
The biggest difference in the series is that they explored the fact that not all humans are fighting against Skynet, and not all machines are fighting for Skynet, plus there even appear to be some machines that are self-aware and chose not to fight for Skynet.
I don't think it's really co-incidence that a central theme of Terminator: Salvation is that same "what is a human/machine?" that the series was exploring.
Believe me, they're watching the numbers for iTunes, Hulu, and DVRs. And if those numbers are strong, they can help (signs are that they helped Joss make his case for Dollhouse).
No, Dollhouse was renewed because Fox only has to pay about half per episode as before. At that point, it can't be a money loser on broadcast as far as Fox is concerned.
In the future, I suspect that the only way that TV shows that don't rocket to the #1 spot in their first season are going to have a chance of lasting is if they start thinking long-term and sell at a loss to the network and make money on DVD and reruns.
That's a good point. I think they tried to - but they took more of a "blame the scientists" line, rather than looking at the Governments, which annoyed me.
I thought the whole point of the last episode that we don't know who is going to create the "real" Skynet.
Through the entire season, we believed that Skynet was created by scientists and AI researchers, but that was pretty much blown away by the fact that Sarah and John were still alive at the end of the last episode.
the destruction of Vulcan was a bold move, and demonstrated more clearly than anything else they could've done (including killing off some of the bridge crew) that this is a different universe and no one is safe.
You mean "no one except Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura are safe". If you believe otherwise, then you don't understand Hollywood, actors, agents, and sequels.
As long as the actor is a "good boy" and doesn't piss off management, the character is safe. How, exactly, is this any different from any other incarnation of Star Trek?
Re:Flash memory has a limited number of writes.
on
Phoenix BIOSOS?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Even the absolute worst flash memory can be written hundreds of times without any issues.
At a reasonable update schedule of once a month, that would be no less than 10 years. You would almoste certainly be able to update once a week for 3-4 years. And this is worst case...I would be surprised if you would really even want to use the computer anymore (due to performance issues) by the time the flash wore out 15-20 years down the road.
If everybody stopped posting, do you think people would visit just for the ads and the summaries? Hint: nobody reads the summaries, so it would just be for the ads.
And, not only do I use Adblock Plus and NoScript, I also use Stylish to reformat pages to make them more useful. For/. it means there is no useless (to me) left navigation bar, and the comments fill the whole width of the page. Since that navigation bar scrolls off the top when I get to about the 5th comment, all it does is provide completely useless whitespace to the left of my browser, so it's gone. It's my browser, and it's going to display what I want, damn it.
If I didn't care what my browser displayed, I'd use IE and leave my homepage set to the default, never use any search engine but the default, and never manually type in any web page location, because unless it's linked to by Microsoft, it must not be important.
A warrant must state what crime the suspect is believed to have committed, what the search expects to find, and what reason there is to believe that such a search should take place. In this case, it would be "possession of controlled substances", "drugs or money acquired from the sale of drugs", and "certified drug-sniffing dog indicated the presence of drugs".
Guns, stolen stereos, and papers detailing your Ponzi scheme might be evidence of illegal activity, but they don't fit the definition of "drugs or money", so their discovery while executing a warrant for "controlled substances" would not be admissible in court.
As another example, if someone has been shot to death and the police search a suspect's home for the murder weapon, they might discover thousands of knives, swords, spears, etc., that may be illegal. Legally, they can do nothing about them, as the warrant would most certainly have been written to only cover guns, ammunition, and other direct evidence of the crime in question. It is possible to get very broadly worded warrants, but those are very dangerous to a successful proscecution, as that sort of thing was exactly what the 4th Amendment was written to prevent.
Ones I talked to were, like me, Ex-Trekkers (we got lives...)
Anybody who claims to be an "Ex-Trekker" was just part of the hype machine and not really a die-hard fan.
Die-hard fans of Star Trek always called themselves "Trekkies", while people who were ashamed of their fandom and the somewhat insulting nature of that term (conjuring the images of 30-year-olds living in their parents basements...hello/.) decided that "Trekkers" was what they wanted the media to call them.
I was never either one, as I never dressed up, never attended conventions, etc., but did faithfully watch every episode up until the third season of Voyager (there's only so much dreck you can take), and can hold my own on trivia contests. It was an enjoyable TV show that had a good "reboot" going with Enterprise until the damn Xindi destroyed the third season, thus ruining the audience for what turned out to be an awesome fourth season.
The current movie is mass-market crap with writing that has no idea where it is going, and just makes it up as it goes along...pretty much just like every other JJ Abrams venture. Yes, it might be somewhat entertaining, but now they've written themselves into a hole where you either get a whole new set of older actors for the next movie, or deal with the fact that a crew full of kids really doesn't make any sense at all.
Plus I hate how they turned the original Zephram Cochrane from a genius engineer into a drunken fool.
There have been many brilliant people who have contributed greatly to science, technology, and the arts, even though they were abusing all sorts of substances.
As for the Borg queen, the #1 thing the Borg do is adapt and absorb anything that will make them more effecting at their "prime directive" of assimilating the entire universe. Perhaps there is a need for a leader at times, and with a leader, you get individuality, which is in effect a type of emotion.
I've always felt that way about how they sometimes use canine units to search for drugs. At least in the USA, it would be illegal for a cop to randomly search your car for no reason even if he did find drugs. But if that same officer has a dog and the dog starts barking at your car, he can now legally charge you with whatever contraband he finds.
This is completely wrong. The only time an officer of the law can "legally charge you with whatever contraband he finds" is whenever whatever he finds is covered by a search warrant, or you are subject to a search that does not require a warrant (like if you agree to it).
So, they can only use a canine "hit" for a warrantless search whenever you already are subject to a warrantless search, like at immigration checkpoints.
Otherwise, the officer can detain you and apply for a warrant based on the reaction of the dog. Unless the judge was a real pushover, the warrant would almost certainly only be for drugs (or whatever else the dog is certified for), not any other contraband.
One example from the Java section of Programming Languages, despite being written in a high-level language: having a loop append to a String is very expensive, so using a StringBuilder is a much better practice.
This is not an algorithm issue, but rather caused by Java's poor memory allocator performance. In both cases, the algorithm is O(n), as is all string concatenation. Java could have implemented all string concatenation by internally using the same tricks that the StringBuilder uses (large-block memory allocation, no creation of extra temporary objects, no freeing of memory until destruction of the StringBuilder, etc.), but they chose not to.
An algorithms class would discuss things like why a balanced tree has better worst-case performance than a plain binary tree, and how to decide when to use each of them. Some algorithms classes (like the one I took) will get into how to improve performance without changing the base algorithm, but much of that sort of thing is very specific to the data you are working with.
At around $100/tank of fuel, and a little less than 1 tank of fuel per week it comes to around $7k/year
My loan payments were $650/month
Insurance payments were another $450/month
Add everything up, and it comes to $20200/year.
What, exactly, were you driving...a dump truck?
My F-150 gets a horrible 15mpg, and I commute about 45 miles/day. Even at $4/gallon, that's only $60/week, or about $3000/year.
Our household auto insurance bill is $1700/year with three vehicles (the F-150, my wife's PT Cruiser, and the dog van...yes, a van for our dogs). The cars are all paid for, so that's not an expense anymore, but normal maintenance runs about $3000/year total.
With normal gas prices, it's really only about $8K/year for both of us to drive cars to work. Now, we spend a lot more than that on gas each year for other reasons, but we'd spend that no matter what.
Slashdot Mirror
This detection method only works if you are monitoring at the last hop before the receiving system, since the packet can become corrupt on any hop after the current one.
You can't be sure exactly which roll is going to be yours vs another gamer's, but you can use the average of say, the next 50 rolls to give yourself an edge the same way a card-counting Blackjack player would.
Only if "high rolls" were automatically better for you than for your opponent. For example, there might be a game where the roll result means the player number that gets a good thing, and you have the higher player number. Otherwise, it's completely useless.
How much value would there be in knowing the next 100 rolls of the dice in a particular casino, but not knowing which table would get which roll? Even knowing that a vast majority are sevens would help only a little at craps, as a seven can be a bad thing based on when the roll happens.
Likewise, for a game like "Risk", lots of high numbers would give a slight advantage to the defender, but since you don't get to choose when you defend, it's not much of a help.
For a game like "Monopoly" or backgammon, rolls are essentially unrelated, and no value is inherently better, but all values are situational. Doubles are good in "Monopoly" because you roll again, but too many and you go to jail. Doubles are very good in backgammon, unless you can't move that number of spaces with any piece, in which case they are the worst roll at that time.
Mod parent up as one of the few who understands how forced password changes are generally bad for security.
When asked, most system admins do not know what the single security issue that is addressed by forced password changes: limiting the amount of time a compromised password can do damage.
The problem is that any forced change time that is short enough to do any good with this (like 30 days) would cause users to always pick the most memorable (i.e., least secure) password that meets the requirements. Worse, it's more likely to cause every monitor in your office to have a password-laden sticky-note. If you have a 90-day change time (about the standard), that gives an average of 45 days that a compromised password can do damage, which is way too much.
Last, forced password changes are still almost certainly nothing but security theater, because once an account is compromised, it's easy to re-compromise it with a keylogger or similar background software.
Mostly the same reasons doctors don't treat themselves.
The big difference is that even an average lawyer should be able to write up a brief concerning himself, or stand up and argue in court in his own behalf, but there aren't any doctors at all who can perform open-heart surgery on themselves.
for some odd reason they move all shows like this to Friday night, you would think by now that these show's target audience isn't home or doing something else on a Friday night...
Pretty much every sci-fi show has a target audience that now doesn't give a damn what night the show is on (because of DVRs).
But, that also leads to the problem that nobody actually watches the commercials on shows that are targeted at geeks.
I guess my real beef is...how many times are they going to tell the exact same story with the same characters for this franchise? The 3 movies are the same story, and the series just looked like the same story told again stretched over a longer time period...and of course it make no sense at all.
The biggest difference in the series is that they explored the fact that not all humans are fighting against Skynet, and not all machines are fighting for Skynet, plus there even appear to be some machines that are self-aware and chose not to fight for Skynet.
I don't think it's really co-incidence that a central theme of Terminator: Salvation is that same "what is a human/machine?" that the series was exploring.
Believe me, they're watching the numbers for iTunes, Hulu, and DVRs. And if those numbers are strong, they can help (signs are that they helped Joss make his case for Dollhouse).
No, Dollhouse was renewed because Fox only has to pay about half per episode as before. At that point, it can't be a money loser on broadcast as far as Fox is concerned.
In the future, I suspect that the only way that TV shows that don't rocket to the #1 spot in their first season are going to have a chance of lasting is if they start thinking long-term and sell at a loss to the network and make money on DVD and reruns.
That's a good point. I think they tried to - but they took more of a "blame the scientists" line, rather than looking at the Governments, which annoyed me.
I thought the whole point of the last episode that we don't know who is going to create the "real" Skynet.
Through the entire season, we believed that Skynet was created by scientists and AI researchers, but that was pretty much blown away by the fact that Sarah and John were still alive at the end of the last episode.
the destruction of Vulcan was a bold move, and demonstrated more clearly than anything else they could've done (including killing off some of the bridge crew) that this is a different universe and no one is safe.
You mean "no one except Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura are safe". If you believe otherwise, then you don't understand Hollywood, actors, agents, and sequels.
As long as the actor is a "good boy" and doesn't piss off management, the character is safe. How, exactly, is this any different from any other incarnation of Star Trek?
Even the absolute worst flash memory can be written hundreds of times without any issues.
At a reasonable update schedule of once a month, that would be no less than 10 years. You would almoste certainly be able to update once a week for 3-4 years. And this is worst case...I would be surprised if you would really even want to use the computer anymore (due to performance issues) by the time the flash wore out 15-20 years down the road.
Yes, because the algorithm is as I posted here.
So, you really did the following searches:
I think the Google algorithm for non-alphanumeric is to replace them with spaces, then fold all runs of whitespace into a single space.
So you can aim better.
I know this is a foreign concept to many men, but it's important in the practice of writing your name in the snow.
Probably because NYCL is into civil law, not criminal law.
Civil law, business ethics, military intelligence, etc.
Based on NYCL's writings, there is nothing "civil" about how the **AA lawyers treat their victims.
Posting to /. is supporting it.
If everybody stopped posting, do you think people would visit just for the ads and the summaries? Hint: nobody reads the summaries, so it would just be for the ads.
And, not only do I use Adblock Plus and NoScript, I also use Stylish to reformat pages to make them more useful. For /. it means there is no useless (to me) left navigation bar, and the comments fill the whole width of the page. Since that navigation bar scrolls off the top when I get to about the 5th comment, all it does is provide completely useless whitespace to the left of my browser, so it's gone. It's my browser, and it's going to display what I want, damn it.
If I didn't care what my browser displayed, I'd use IE and leave my homepage set to the default, never use any search engine but the default, and never manually type in any web page location, because unless it's linked to by Microsoft, it must not be important.
Cochrane as portrayed by TOS, was as strait-laced as Bill Gates or Albert Einstein.
Or, maybe something life-changing happened to him, although I can't think of anything *cough*Borg*cough*first contact*cough*.
A warrant must state what crime the suspect is believed to have committed, what the search expects to find, and what reason there is to believe that such a search should take place. In this case, it would be "possession of controlled substances", "drugs or money acquired from the sale of drugs", and "certified drug-sniffing dog indicated the presence of drugs".
Guns, stolen stereos, and papers detailing your Ponzi scheme might be evidence of illegal activity, but they don't fit the definition of "drugs or money", so their discovery while executing a warrant for "controlled substances" would not be admissible in court.
As another example, if someone has been shot to death and the police search a suspect's home for the murder weapon, they might discover thousands of knives, swords, spears, etc., that may be illegal. Legally, they can do nothing about them, as the warrant would most certainly have been written to only cover guns, ammunition, and other direct evidence of the crime in question. It is possible to get very broadly worded warrants, but those are very dangerous to a successful proscecution, as that sort of thing was exactly what the 4th Amendment was written to prevent.
Ones I talked to were, like me, Ex-Trekkers (we got lives...)
Anybody who claims to be an "Ex-Trekker" was just part of the hype machine and not really a die-hard fan.
Die-hard fans of Star Trek always called themselves "Trekkies", while people who were ashamed of their fandom and the somewhat insulting nature of that term (conjuring the images of 30-year-olds living in their parents basements...hello /.) decided that "Trekkers" was what they wanted the media to call them.
I was never either one, as I never dressed up, never attended conventions, etc., but did faithfully watch every episode up until the third season of Voyager (there's only so much dreck you can take), and can hold my own on trivia contests. It was an enjoyable TV show that had a good "reboot" going with Enterprise until the damn Xindi destroyed the third season, thus ruining the audience for what turned out to be an awesome fourth season.
The current movie is mass-market crap with writing that has no idea where it is going, and just makes it up as it goes along...pretty much just like every other JJ Abrams venture. Yes, it might be somewhat entertaining, but now they've written themselves into a hole where you either get a whole new set of older actors for the next movie, or deal with the fact that a crew full of kids really doesn't make any sense at all.
Plus I hate how they turned the original Zephram Cochrane from a genius engineer into a drunken fool.
There have been many brilliant people who have contributed greatly to science, technology, and the arts, even though they were abusing all sorts of substances.
As for the Borg queen, the #1 thing the Borg do is adapt and absorb anything that will make them more effecting at their "prime directive" of assimilating the entire universe. Perhaps there is a need for a leader at times, and with a leader, you get individuality, which is in effect a type of emotion.
SOP in that case...
...would be to send in something or someone to examine the device before blowing up the car and the surrounding neighborhood.
Hopefully, the bomb squad would recognize it as a police-issue GPS tracker, and not go all Mythbusters on the car.
I've always felt that way about how they sometimes use canine units to search for drugs. At least in the USA, it would be illegal for a cop to randomly search your car for no reason even if he did find drugs. But if that same officer has a dog and the dog starts barking at your car, he can now legally charge you with whatever contraband he finds.
This is completely wrong. The only time an officer of the law can "legally charge you with whatever contraband he finds" is whenever whatever he finds is covered by a search warrant, or you are subject to a search that does not require a warrant (like if you agree to it).
So, they can only use a canine "hit" for a warrantless search whenever you already are subject to a warrantless search, like at immigration checkpoints.
Otherwise, the officer can detain you and apply for a warrant based on the reaction of the dog. Unless the judge was a real pushover, the warrant would almost certainly only be for drugs (or whatever else the dog is certified for), not any other contraband.
One example from the Java section of Programming Languages, despite being written in a high-level language: having a loop append to a String is very expensive, so using a StringBuilder is a much better practice.
This is not an algorithm issue, but rather caused by Java's poor memory allocator performance. In both cases, the algorithm is O(n), as is all string concatenation. Java could have implemented all string concatenation by internally using the same tricks that the StringBuilder uses (large-block memory allocation, no creation of extra temporary objects, no freeing of memory until destruction of the StringBuilder, etc.), but they chose not to.
An algorithms class would discuss things like why a balanced tree has better worst-case performance than a plain binary tree, and how to decide when to use each of them. Some algorithms classes (like the one I took) will get into how to improve performance without changing the base algorithm, but much of that sort of thing is very specific to the data you are working with.
With normal gas prices, it's really only about $8K/year for both of us to drive cars to work.
Since even I realize that was unclear, I meant that it was $8K/year total outlay for the insurance, maintenance, plus gas for commuting to work.
Then, too, some of that would be paid regardless of whether or not we use our vehicles to commute to work.
Given that there are ~52 weeks in a year, how can less than $100 a week in fuel add up to $7k/year?
a little less than 1 tank of fuel per week
Right, and that tank of fuel cost $100.
So, as the GP said, how can less than $100/week add up to over $7K in 52 weeks?
Perhaps not normal, but here's the math:
Add everything up, and it comes to $20200/year.
What, exactly, were you driving...a dump truck?
My F-150 gets a horrible 15mpg, and I commute about 45 miles/day. Even at $4/gallon, that's only $60/week, or about $3000/year.
Our household auto insurance bill is $1700/year with three vehicles (the F-150, my wife's PT Cruiser, and the dog van...yes, a van for our dogs). The cars are all paid for, so that's not an expense anymore, but normal maintenance runs about $3000/year total.
With normal gas prices, it's really only about $8K/year for both of us to drive cars to work. Now, we spend a lot more than that on gas each year for other reasons, but we'd spend that no matter what.