A similar thing happened to my company, except it was malicious. One of our competitors is apparently very buddy-buddy with Spamhaus. Spamhaus just up and blocked our email server one day (which, up to that point, had a perfect "No-Spam" score). Every time we changed to a different host, just so we could have our website up and communicate with our clients, it was blocked within hours. Our website was erased along with any data that hadn't been backed up from that host, and to top it off: They reported that we were committing credit card fraud, associating with spammers, employing illegal business practices, and we were obviously guilty; as we were 'switching servers to hide our tracks! Only the guilty would do such a thing!' -- Basically committing gross libel against us. We're in the US, though, and they operate out of the UK, so it's not like suing them would be effective.
Eventually they lost their interest in us (took a few weeks) and business has gone back to normal (outside of the loss of webcode that our webadmin had not backed up:\), but I have forever lost my enormous confidence in vigilante groups, and that's something I fear I may never reclaim:(
It is true that vengeance will be yours. My first contract job was as a programmer. I built off a simple core and brought an enormous project together. I was making peanuts off the project, but my company was charging an arm and a leg. The company, within 6 months of hiring us, went from a 90 million dollar to a 1.3 billion dollar company. They felt rather confident at this point, severed our relationship, and replaced me with 2 just-got-my-masters programmers and an overseas "expert". Within a month and a half, they were back below $80 million, and now they are bankrupt.
They didn't insult your mother. They didn't cause the death of one of your children. Your name wasn't slandered, and you have as many fingers and toes today as you had last week. You have no need for someone to grieve for your negligible losses in order for you to recuperate. You were getting exactly what you were paying for -- there is no apology neccessary to complete your transactions.
They tried to increase the revenues it takes to keep these games alive, while providing (what they imagined to be) a fair stipend on the side of the player -- a digital share of the increase. It was a call made in judgement that ran counter to their userbase so they revoked the motion as soon as possible. "Sorry we considered giving you guys some more stuff at no cost to yourselves!" is an unwarranted apology. Demanding an apology only makes the apology meaningless.
So if this is 3.0 can I assume they have had the tool for some time. Why are bothering to tell anyone at this point?
Check out the comments on this article. They just need a quick dredger to go through and find out what additional security measures need to be programmed into 4.0. No need to do their own research, since they have a million know-it-alls at slashdot happy to tell them how they'd hack the NSA if they were to do it via thumbdrive.
If you simply swapped the first and second paragraphs, you probably would have been modded insightful (or at least "Troll") rather than offtopic. Mods rarely make it past the first paragraph before making their decision on topicality.
Let's say that I leave my 1995 Toyota Corolla running outside the Best Buy one day. I come back with my $4 copy of "The Frighteners" to find that my car has been STOLEN! I then file a police report that says my car was worth $6 million... would I be busted for filing a false police report?
(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. A vehicle that is not turning shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. After stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely, and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the operator may...
You were across the "Stop" line when the light turned red, so you cannot be charged for running a red light, in most states, at least. However, you need to be able to clear the intersection before you're busted for "impeding traffic" -- but you can aslo be fined, just as easily, for "impeding traffic" if you do NOT take the chance to wrestle your way into the yellow/red light left-turn by creeping across the line during the green.
Now that you have a group of "friends" to study, perhaps you should check the correlation of those who experienced more depth with those who play more sports. Basketball, Football, Golf, and others heavily rely on binocular vision for success, whereas sitting behind a 2-D computer screen at work all day requires none. Perhaps your binocular vision is atrophic from years and years of 2-D stimulation and theirs is hypersensitive because they've been trying to throw a ball into a hoop at varying distances an hour before the movie started. Or perhaps they prefer sports more than you do because they have greater binocular vision than you do... or maybe there is no correlation at all!
Then, to test for a potential cause/effect, grab a class of students. Have half of them shoot hoops, and half play a computer game or draw, and then have them all watch a 3D movie, and rate the experience (based on scenes), and see if even a small exercise before the movie can prime the binocular controller in your brain.
They've demonstrated adaptation/change via passage of genetic traits. That's literally, without hyperbole, the definition of evolution.
Well, if we change the definition to something we have proof of, then yes, we do have proof! You speak of genetics and inheritence, not EVOLUTIONOLOGY that has so many faux-intellectual zealots masturabating onto each other here. Pay attention to what is being disputed in the article: "Do you believe your ancestors were monkeys despite us never finding a missing link and all supposed missing links up until now have been proven to be different species entirely? If not, it's because YOU HATE SCIENCE!" Yeah, guys, groupthink manipulation tactics REALLY prove your point.
Educated doubt is a noble scientific endeavor, and ad-hominem attacks only invite deeper inspection. In fact, so many slashdotters have become so brainwashed, as soon as I say "I doubt the validity of your unproven/non-disprovable hypothesis, because I find the supporting evidence has been repeatedly gathered under an inadequacy of scientific rigour" then they IMMEDIATELY consider me intellectually inferior. It's conditioned into them -- though if I wanted, I could probably argue FOR evolution better than they ever could.
Consider the following: An esimated 1,000+ species go extinct every year without evolving into something else. Every single one is observable evidence that evolution does NOT happen like predicted. 1,000 pieces of evidence a year, and you just ignore that?
he previous poster was going on about how UNDERSTANDING does not have to lead to AGREEMENT.
I pointed out how, in regards to SCIENCE, that was not possible.
And I was pointing out that this type of reasoning is not rational, rather religious. There is nothing scientific about saying "Science is truth" -- because science is a search for truth. I can understand the ins-outs-and-inbetweens of a theory and still disagree with it. I may even prove it wrong some day. If you tell me that I disagree with it because I misunderstand it, based on the fact that it is SCIENCE, then I'll tell you that you regard science in an improper light, and worship it with the same, blind zealotry as a man who blows himself up for Allah. Evolution and the Big Bang are not established fact. They're not even properly OBSERVABLE or DISPROVABLE in a scientific fashion. They are theoretical at best, and therefore I can say "I understand it" without saying "and I totally buy into it!" You'll think I'm stupid for doing so, but that's YOUR lack of intelligence and sign of brainwashing, not mine.
Evolution: now this is different since it's a demonstrated fact.
No it's not. They've shown a microorganism getting over an allergy. That's literally, without hyperbole, the strongest supporting evidence they have, and it's completely unsubstantial.
Do you understand string theory? Do you accept it as truth? Why do you hate SCIENCE then? Your argument is bullocks and pathologically religious. You just call your gods by a different name than they did in ancient Greece.
All of which are fundamentally governed by the laws of physics. Math.
I believe you have it backward. Physics uses math, but it is not governed by it. Math and physics are simply our understanding of things. When we take one leaf and place it next to another leaf, then having two leaves, math is accomplished, but it's not because of math that we put two leaves together. Math doesn't GOVERN anything. At most, it can suggest, but it's physics' use of math that will push things in motion. That, then, climbs to biology/chemistry to use math to determine proper manipulation of physics. Math is simply man's grasp of universal limitations. To say that math governs everything would be similar to saying that harddrive and RAM chip manufacturers are the ones that have programmed everything ever written on a computer. Perhaps the programmer couldn't do his job without them, but it's the use of the RAM chips and harddrives that matters, and until then, they are useless voids.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you considered moving to Israel?
To be fair to them, [MP/RI]AA's cries are true. It would be the end of civilization as They know it.
A similar thing happened to my company, except it was malicious. One of our competitors is apparently very buddy-buddy with Spamhaus. Spamhaus just up and blocked our email server one day (which, up to that point, had a perfect "No-Spam" score). Every time we changed to a different host, just so we could have our website up and communicate with our clients, it was blocked within hours. Our website was erased along with any data that hadn't been backed up from that host, and to top it off: They reported that we were committing credit card fraud, associating with spammers, employing illegal business practices, and we were obviously guilty; as we were 'switching servers to hide our tracks! Only the guilty would do such a thing!' -- Basically committing gross libel against us. We're in the US, though, and they operate out of the UK, so it's not like suing them would be effective.
:\), but I have forever lost my enormous confidence in vigilante groups, and that's something I fear I may never reclaim :(
Eventually they lost their interest in us (took a few weeks) and business has gone back to normal (outside of the loss of webcode that our webadmin had not backed up
It is true that vengeance will be yours. My first contract job was as a programmer. I built off a simple core and brought an enormous project together. I was making peanuts off the project, but my company was charging an arm and a leg. The company, within 6 months of hiring us, went from a 90 million dollar to a 1.3 billion dollar company. They felt rather confident at this point, severed our relationship, and replaced me with 2 just-got-my-masters programmers and an overseas "expert". Within a month and a half, they were back below $80 million, and now they are bankrupt.
Can they identify these tumors with a simple blood test now or do they still have to do an invasive biopsy?
Don't forget -- you might be able to get it done with a deep anal probe too! Everyone always forgets about the deep anal probe!
If I can replace you with a program, can I get your salary?
They didn't insult your mother. They didn't cause the death of one of your children. Your name wasn't slandered, and you have as many fingers and toes today as you had last week. You have no need for someone to grieve for your negligible losses in order for you to recuperate. You were getting exactly what you were paying for -- there is no apology neccessary to complete your transactions.
They tried to increase the revenues it takes to keep these games alive, while providing (what they imagined to be) a fair stipend on the side of the player -- a digital share of the increase. It was a call made in judgement that ran counter to their userbase so they revoked the motion as soon as possible. "Sorry we considered giving you guys some more stuff at no cost to yourselves!" is an unwarranted apology. Demanding an apology only makes the apology meaningless.
Quit thinking you deserve one.
Anonymous use a single name to hide their numbers...
The award this year was for his piece Fatal Distraction
I just read that for the first time. Thanks for ruining my day, jerk!
So if this is 3.0 can I assume they have had the tool for some time. Why are bothering to tell anyone at this point?
Check out the comments on this article. They just need a quick dredger to go through and find out what additional security measures need to be programmed into 4.0. No need to do their own research, since they have a million know-it-alls at slashdot happy to tell them how they'd hack the NSA if they were to do it via thumbdrive.
Mr. AnalogyGuy,
If you simply swapped the first and second paragraphs, you probably would have been modded insightful (or at least "Troll") rather than offtopic. Mods rarely make it past the first paragraph before making their decision on topicality.
Let's say that I leave my 1995 Toyota Corolla running outside the Best Buy one day. I come back with my $4 copy of "The Frighteners" to find that my car has been STOLEN! I then file a police report that says my car was worth $6 million... would I be busted for filing a false police report?
(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. A vehicle that is not turning shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. After stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely, and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the operator may...
You were across the "Stop" line when the light turned red, so you cannot be charged for running a red light, in most states, at least. However, you need to be able to clear the intersection before you're busted for "impeding traffic" -- but you can aslo be fined, just as easily, for "impeding traffic" if you do NOT take the chance to wrestle your way into the yellow/red light left-turn by creeping across the line during the green.
Now that you have a group of "friends" to study, perhaps you should check the correlation of those who experienced more depth with those who play more sports. Basketball, Football, Golf, and others heavily rely on binocular vision for success, whereas sitting behind a 2-D computer screen at work all day requires none. Perhaps your binocular vision is atrophic from years and years of 2-D stimulation and theirs is hypersensitive because they've been trying to throw a ball into a hoop at varying distances an hour before the movie started. Or perhaps they prefer sports more than you do because they have greater binocular vision than you do... or maybe there is no correlation at all!
Then, to test for a potential cause/effect, grab a class of students. Have half of them shoot hoops, and half play a computer game or draw, and then have them all watch a 3D movie, and rate the experience (based on scenes), and see if even a small exercise before the movie can prime the binocular controller in your brain.
The possibilities, the possibilities!
They've demonstrated adaptation/change via passage of genetic traits. That's literally, without hyperbole, the definition of evolution.
Well, if we change the definition to something we have proof of, then yes, we do have proof! You speak of genetics and inheritence, not EVOLUTIONOLOGY that has so many faux-intellectual zealots masturabating onto each other here. Pay attention to what is being disputed in the article: "Do you believe your ancestors were monkeys despite us never finding a missing link and all supposed missing links up until now have been proven to be different species entirely? If not, it's because YOU HATE SCIENCE!" Yeah, guys, groupthink manipulation tactics REALLY prove your point.
Educated doubt is a noble scientific endeavor, and ad-hominem attacks only invite deeper inspection. In fact, so many slashdotters have become so brainwashed, as soon as I say "I doubt the validity of your unproven/non-disprovable hypothesis, because I find the supporting evidence has been repeatedly gathered under an inadequacy of scientific rigour" then they IMMEDIATELY consider me intellectually inferior. It's conditioned into them -- though if I wanted, I could probably argue FOR evolution better than they ever could.
Consider the following: An esimated 1,000+ species go extinct every year without evolving into something else. Every single one is observable evidence that evolution does NOT happen like predicted. 1,000 pieces of evidence a year, and you just ignore that?
he previous poster was going on about how UNDERSTANDING does not have to lead to AGREEMENT. I pointed out how, in regards to SCIENCE, that was not possible.
And I was pointing out that this type of reasoning is not rational, rather religious. There is nothing scientific about saying "Science is truth" -- because science is a search for truth. I can understand the ins-outs-and-inbetweens of a theory and still disagree with it. I may even prove it wrong some day. If you tell me that I disagree with it because I misunderstand it, based on the fact that it is SCIENCE, then I'll tell you that you regard science in an improper light, and worship it with the same, blind zealotry as a man who blows himself up for Allah. Evolution and the Big Bang are not established fact. They're not even properly OBSERVABLE or DISPROVABLE in a scientific fashion. They are theoretical at best, and therefore I can say "I understand it" without saying "and I totally buy into it!" You'll think I'm stupid for doing so, but that's YOUR lack of intelligence and sign of brainwashing, not mine.
There's a book about that too. Check out "The Emperor's New Clothes" in your library's children's section.
Evolution: now this is different since it's a demonstrated fact.
No it's not. They've shown a microorganism getting over an allergy. That's literally, without hyperbole, the strongest supporting evidence they have, and it's completely unsubstantial.
Do you understand string theory? Do you accept it as truth? Why do you hate SCIENCE then? Your argument is bullocks and pathologically religious. You just call your gods by a different name than they did in ancient Greece.
All of which are fundamentally governed by the laws of physics. Math.
I believe you have it backward. Physics uses math, but it is not governed by it. Math and physics are simply our understanding of things. When we take one leaf and place it next to another leaf, then having two leaves, math is accomplished, but it's not because of math that we put two leaves together. Math doesn't GOVERN anything. At most, it can suggest, but it's physics' use of math that will push things in motion. That, then, climbs to biology/chemistry to use math to determine proper manipulation of physics. Math is simply man's grasp of universal limitations. To say that math governs everything would be similar to saying that harddrive and RAM chip manufacturers are the ones that have programmed everything ever written on a computer. Perhaps the programmer couldn't do his job without them, but it's the use of the RAM chips and harddrives that matters, and until then, they are useless voids.
What would 2 inch thick skin feel like
like an enormous birthmark.
An unit of measurement that's smaller than a yocto?
In English, we call that the "G-spot"
Or how a bucket of these might taste! They live in brine, are from the sea... Imagine these on french fries and potato chips!
still more massive elements with chemical properties no one can predict."
I HAVE discovered the most massive element in the universe.
It's called "your mom."