"knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;"
a DoS is transmitting information at some point. Damage is broadly defined: "the term “damage” means any impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system, or information" Protected computer is broadly defined to include: "which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication"
"without authorization" might be an issue, but I can't see courts not deciding that the DoS wasn't authorized even if one a "public" channel is being used (say slamming the authentication servers).
The idea isn't to buy a ticket to your destination that has layovers. The idea is to buy a ticket to an unpopular (and hence cheap) destination that happens to have a layover at where you want to go. And then you simply "miss" your connection.
Someone has to pay. Why does it make sense for the caller to pay instead of the callee, considering that the callee is the one who decided to be on a cellphone rather than a local number?
And of course having the callee pay also means that the caller doesn't have to know if a number is a cellphone or not, and so you don't need a dedicated pool of cellphone numbers and can instead just use numbers from the usual pool.
Whereas some other people would rather the truth, or as good as they can get to it. As opposed to a lie that makes you feel better about yourself. Especially when it makes a lot of people feel worse about themselves in practice.
1.What was the selection process for the studies. The phrase "All 14 of the most highly cited papers in the study" implies that there were papers not in the study. Possible selection bias?
Of course there were papers not in the study, they didn't look at every single paper ever submitted to a peer reviewed journal in all of human history. The paywall means I can't see if they explained how the 1008 got selected - well not can't, won't since my interest isn't so high as to fork over cash for it.
2. They do not go into why the 14 papers were cited so much and if any further research or refinement of the papers were done before they were accepted by other journals. Surface analysis of numbers can be manipulated to say anything.
Did you read the paper? As you said it's behind a paywall. I would hope they'd dig into the top 10 at least.
3. They also say that it might be better to not have a review and just publish everything. This just means that everyone who reads the papers has to do the review. That is not practical. There are many papers that should not be published due to shoddy practices or malfeasance. Instead of trowing out the whole system how about looking at why the 14 papers were rejected and modifying the system accordingly.
I see no such claim is that in the paywalled paper or did you mix up a random commentator and the authors?
The top papers being rejected seems like a perfectly fine system to me. The prestigious elite journals will have some risk aversion to publishing things way out of the mainstream - that's fine because there are other journals that take more risks. And according to this study the most cited articles were in fact not published in those elite journals but were published elsewhere (or else they couldn't be cited) and thus "the system" appears to work just fine.
Deporting her to a country she has never been in seems a strange thing to do. Don't people complain when you do that to human people - deporting people who have only ever lived in whatever country their parent illegally migrated to. Heck it's not even the "native" country of the species in question...
So surely just set her free into the streets of whatever city the zoo is in.
It's a simple extrapolation. Microorganisms are the dominant form of life on the only planet we know that has life on it.
Sure extrapolation is always risky, seems a far better to bet than going with super intelligent robots that don't exist at all on the only planet we know that has life on it.
The file system is independent of the shell. My shell probably uses different special characters than yours too - ^ means something in mine for example.
Adding complexity into the file system because people are idiots is silly. If you really need to you can wrap an idiot layer on top the file system after all.
I promise that officer has not arrested people who were breaking the law numerous times. They've probably let a bunch of people off with warnings for various things, plain ignored an offense they consider minor, and so on.
Obviously every character except for the path separator and the string terminator should be valid. Why should the file system restrict what character encoding I want to use for my names other than restrictions that simply make implementation easier.
Slashdot Mirror
The drive was destroyed in February 2013. The defendant was notified of the lawsuit in October 2012.
Maybe you don't look at calendars often, but no it was not destroyed before he knew about the lawsuit.
A word in English having different meanings in different contexts. It's unheard of!
The "hackers" I've seen in the movies wouldn't have much trouble with combat training:
http://www.allaboutjackman.com...
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Es2uYtSJ...
Because cell phones are the only "personal video recording devices" in existence, right?
https://www.youtube.com/channe... would seem to indicate that getting videos of planes isn't exactly impossible.
I worked in an open plan office before twitter existed, so clearly not.
http://www.officemuseum.com/ph... - lots of open plan offices that ever so slightly predate twitter.
Sure, which is irrelevant given "fine congress critters" is something I've only ever seen in reference to the US.
It comes under the CFAA.- http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc...
"knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;"
a DoS is transmitting information at some point.
Damage is broadly defined: "the term “damage” means any impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system, or information"
Protected computer is broadly defined to include: "which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication"
"without authorization" might be an issue, but I can't see courts not deciding that the DoS wasn't authorized even if one a "public" channel is being used (say slamming the authentication servers).
The "explosives" in question were firecrackers designed to scare birds sold on ebay...
The idea isn't to buy a ticket to your destination that has layovers. The idea is to buy a ticket to an unpopular (and hence cheap) destination that happens to have a layover at where you want to go. And then you simply "miss" your connection.
Because, like any sane business, airlines price according to demand and not just costs.
For SMSes sure but for phone calls they choose to answer or not.
I've lived in countries with both systems. I see advantages to each, with neither of them be "RIDICULOUS".
Why is it ridiculous?
Someone has to pay. Why does it make sense for the caller to pay instead of the callee, considering that the callee is the one who decided to be on a cellphone rather than a local number?
And of course having the callee pay also means that the caller doesn't have to know if a number is a cellphone or not, and so you don't need a dedicated pool of cellphone numbers and can instead just use numbers from the usual pool.
Bombing means not selling tickets, it has nothing to do with the quality of the movie (other than indirectly).
Though it'll bomb due to the limited release, but now Sony has an excuse...
Whereas some other people would rather the truth, or as good as they can get to it. As opposed to a lie that makes you feel better about yourself. Especially when it makes a lot of people feel worse about themselves in practice.
And "Star Trek Into Darkness" out grossed "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" in inflation adjusted dollars. So clearly it's the better version!
Excuse me while I have a shower to get that ick off of me...
Of course there were papers not in the study, they didn't look at every single paper ever submitted to a peer reviewed journal in all of human history. The paywall means I can't see if they explained how the 1008 got selected - well not can't, won't since my interest isn't so high as to fork over cash for it.
Did you read the paper? As you said it's behind a paywall. I would hope they'd dig into the top 10 at least.
I see no such claim is that in the paywalled paper or did you mix up a random commentator and the authors?
The top papers being rejected seems like a perfectly fine system to me. The prestigious elite journals will have some risk aversion to publishing things way out of the mainstream - that's fine because there are other journals that take more risks. And according to this study the most cited articles were in fact not published in those elite journals but were published elsewhere (or else they couldn't be cited) and thus "the system" appears to work just fine.
maybe learn to read?
Deporting her to a country she has never been in seems a strange thing to do. Don't people complain when you do that to human people - deporting people who have only ever lived in whatever country their parent illegally migrated to. Heck it's not even the "native" country of the species in question...
So surely just set her free into the streets of whatever city the zoo is in.
Right because you never know when a tree will need removing on board a plane in mid-flight.
It's a simple extrapolation. Microorganisms are the dominant form of life on the only planet we know that has life on it.
Sure extrapolation is always risky, seems a far better to bet than going with super intelligent robots that don't exist at all on the only planet we know that has life on it.
What the fuck does emailing a vague and rambling threat of violence have to do with coding and superpowers?
so what?
The file system is independent of the shell. My shell probably uses different special characters than yours too - ^ means something in mine for example.
Adding complexity into the file system because people are idiots is silly. If you really need to you can wrap an idiot layer on top the file system after all.
I don't find the case convincing at all.
Surprise, surprise a cop who lies.
I promise that officer has not arrested people who were breaking the law numerous times. They've probably let a bunch of people off with warnings for various things, plain ignored an offense they consider minor, and so on.
Police have discretion: http://www.law.cornell.edu/sup...
Obviously every character except for the path separator and the string terminator should be valid. Why should the file system restrict what character encoding I want to use for my names other than restrictions that simply make implementation easier.