For the record: I *have* had a buddy blown in half in a Humvee. Fortunately I also had some make it home as well. I'm talking from experience. Where are you talking from?
By the way, even though I disagree with you as to the linking between equality from physical fighting prowess, I am grateful for your service. I'm an old geeky man that can't hardly see and has slow reflexes, but yes, if I were younger and Iraq were there, I would go, if I could, not for the flag or anything stupid like that, but because, there are too many good people over there in Iraq and it seems to me that this country has hung them out to dry. It's like, you see an old lady lost in the city, and you help her. You see somebody trying to move a thing, and you help them, and you see your country is sending a lot of good people over to fight a war, and I'd think, jeez, that in some way you would want to join them and help them. It's not about the cause of freedom or george bush and from the vets I know, unit cohesion is way more about just keeping your buddies alive than it is about cheering on the red white and blue.
But as you come back from that, you need to remember that freedom and equality comes from the idea that we each have souls. It doesn't matter if a woman is as strong as a man or even if people have the same utility. A man in a wheelchair has just as much equality as someone who can bench 500lbs and run a 5 minute mile. Race, sex, all of the human markings we create to label and create people with is entirely outside of what equality is. Equality is to say that we are all judged by someone some day, which I call God, and that, we have freedom in our lives in recognition of the idea that we be held to answer for our lives to some higher power.
I could babble on endlessly, but do read the 2nd paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson said it best:
"We hold these truths to be self evident. We are endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Get it? You don't have to have people be of the same physical or even mental skill or -any- human unit of measurement to be equal. It's God's call, not yours, and not mine. All you can do is measure people by their utility to some particular task. So, you can say that women are equal to men, and men can be stronger than women, and, actually women have better stamina. It might be the case that women make better fighter pilots because they are physiologically more adept at dealing with g-forces and they weigh less on average, and it might be the case that men might make better infantry because they are bigger and can probably carry more stuff on average, but, it doesn't mean that men and women are not equal.
I didn't change the subject at all. You've lost the point. You argue that equality is based on physical strength and it isn't. So, in your mind, you have to conjure up some arbitrary list of ways that women can be the same and they aren't. Celebrate that women are different. Pretending everybody is the same is not necessary because you don't need to be the same to be =equal=. Equality is a spiritual thing, it's about us having souls and being possessed of some shred of free will. And you've completely lost the point.
If you want to play with the statistics then I'll give all 100 women (on the island of yours) handguns and tell them it is ok to kill any man who makes them feel threatened and make sure they are mentally equipped to do so.
Again you lose the point that women need to be defended by men, from men. There needs to men that police men, and protects them from other men. If you can't recognize that basic need then, I can't help you. But, if you say that women do not need to be protected, then I'd say that's great because as a rule, I agree with you on self defense being a personal responsibility and to that end I think police are not capable of "protecting and defending" and at all and I question the need to pay for something that cannot do what it says.
The "20 years younger" comment leads me to believe you haven't been in any of the wars (real or fabricated) that we've had either.
No, I haven't. There weren't any long wars when I was younger so I didn't see a point in enlisting. I grew up during the Cold War anyway, so if there was going to be a war, civilians would wind up getting killed in droves from nukes and other stuff.
Your idea of what happened in Okinawa is mistaken as well. Look into it more before you make more references to "cartoon ninjas". I'm talking about reality, not fantasy, here.
My point is that the entire martial arts and ultimate fighting and wrestling is a fantasy. You have all of these people being prepared for entirely the wrong kind of conflicts. You said it yourself... the easiest way to be prepared is to know how to use a handgun.
But with respect to the "warrior" spirit...In a knock down drag out war, ultimate fighting, martial arts...those things don't matter in a world where rifles are accurate, artillery is accurate, bombs do not miss, and the radioactive radius of a single 10MT bomb. Fortunately, the USA has been very fortunate to not have to fight a power that has the same sort of weapons that we do. But, there will be a time, if we are not educating geeks such as myself to stay ahead, when our soldiers will be on the receiving end of cluster bomb drops, JDAM munitions and everything else science has given to the fighting man... and, they will be shooting back at robots in the sky that can be massed produced.
If we took all of these martial arts and fighting things, and replaced them all with calculus, we'd be a lot farther ahead of the game. Math is useful. Karate is not.
And yeah, you could kick my ass, for sure, but I'd still be right.
So you are saying what? All women are weaker than men and less able to defend themselves, automatically? Talk about a BS blanket statement
It's true. Just is. Sure, there's exceptions, but, overwhelmingly the odds are if you put 100 men on and 100 women on an island and there are no rules, the men will come out on top.
I know feminists who might come to blows with you just for implying tha
Yeah, and these very feminists are looking for laws against any expression of male power in the workplace because they know they cannot defend themselves. Feminism only exists because western men have decided to trade for that which men in other cultures simply take, and even the most strident feminist has absolutely no problem summoning the government to ensure such theft never takes place in western culture and many work to extend it around the world.
Heck, any number of women boxers or martial artists in general could (at least) surprise you or I in a physical confrontation.
Probably, unless I was a black belt boxer that could bench 400lbs and carried a pistol, in which case, they would not have good odds at all. Oh, sure, yes, there are some women out there that could beat the rear of many men, but for the most part, men are bigger, stronger, faster and more aggressive, and women are sitting ducks as a whole. Are there women out there that could kick my ass? Probably, evolution isn't about exceptions - its about larger trends, and civilization is nice and all, but ultimately, Darwin doesn't care about how women get pregnant and men are bred to reflect that.
wife has trained with Rorion Gracie for 5 years.
Big deal. If all of these body builders and ultimate fighting people were so fricking tough - why the hell are they not in the war!
They might be able to fight in some mock cage, but, let's see these guys have some real balls and walk down the streets of Ramadi in Iraq. It makes me sick to see all of this ultimate fighting and pro-wrestling circus crap on TV and these guys are acting like badasses when many of them can't be bothered to get in the war.
I'll tell you what. I'm no tough guy. I'm no bad ass. But, if I were twenty years younger, I'd be in Iraq right now, simply because, if I lived through it, no matter how tough someone said they were, I could say, I went through a real war. Toughness isn't flexing in a cage and having 5% body fat. Toughness is riding in an unarmoured HMMV convoy day in and day out wondering if you'll be take out next. Toughness is telling your blown up buddy to hang in there even though half his torso is gone. Toughness is getting blown up, being in a firefight, fighting every sensible instinct to run so that your teamates can get out alive.
Seriously, martial arts is overhyped. If you want a good account of martial arts vs western style fighting, how the hell did the USA successfully invade Okinawa, the birthplace of Karate, with 50,000 Americans killed or wounded, versus 200,000 Japanese -dead-. Suicide charges, ninja sneaking around, night fighting and all of this cartoon stuff they call serious fighting, and the USA kicked their asses with a bunch of conscripts from a country that teaches its children to hunt from an early age and thus kicked their ass.
Do you think women bodybuilders or powerlifters need (or want) a 110 pound rent-a-badge walking them to their cars?
Yeah, but how many women body builders are there? And look what it does to women? And, what if a woman body builder goes up against a male body builder?
I mean, I've never heard of an army where all the men got raped, but I could rattle off plenty of cases in the last century where indeed, mass rapes did take place. Even Boudica, probably the greatest of all women fighters, got raped.
Sorry, but your thesis is a joke. You might ask your feminist friends just how it is that women essentially came to be the property of men, and still are, in many parts of the world. Why can't -those- women defend themselves?
I'm sorry, but, women are different from men. If a women yells at a man, the man thinks, 9/10 out of ten, "I shouldn't have to listen to this crap, because I could totally kick your rear end until you do the dishes". If a man yells at a woman, its much more threatening. Even my 3 year old son knows this. If my wife yells at me, he just tunes it out. But if I yell back, or even raise my voice, it scares him. So, its like, all a man can really do is to eat the stress, accept that the heart attack is inevitable, and move on. The inverse is to have a society, well, like Iran.
So, yeah, let's bring up the silly "think of the women and children" argument, because, we have to. We can't pretend that everyone is equally capable of self defense and have a wild west mentality on the internet because not everyone is. Until men are angels, there has to be law and order to protect women on the internet, just as surely as there must be police to escort women to cars after hours at the office.
My point is that, you can transform FACTOR into SAT. If you have a good algorithm to solve SAT in polynomial time, then FACTOR could benefit from it. So, it doesn't matter entirely if FACTOR is NP-Complete, in the sense that, if you prove P=NP, then, FACTOR can take advantage of it.
We can expand the inverse of any polynomial problem into SAT if we want to. I mean, I've done this and am working on a program to do this for own education and experimentation. So, in the worst case, even if FACTOR is not NP-Complete, by virtue of saying that FACTOR is cast to an SAT problem, you can still get the benefit of using a speedy solution to SAT to factor factor.
In fact, is it not the case that the reigning factoring champ actually uses a big matrix to solve at the end? If that is the case, then clearly, someone has arrived at yet another way to show that FACTOR would benefit from a proof that P=NP.
By the way, thank you all for talking about P=NP. I am no Phd or researcher, but in what spare time I have, when I'm not being a dick trolling for political fights on slashdot, I play with this problem over and over again, and I absolutely love it. If I won the PowerBall lottery, working on P=NP is what I would devote my entire career to, for sure.
Cloud computing and web centric computing is the height of all irresponsibility within the IT field. Network centric computing utterly depends on security and that means encryption. Defeating encryption depends on solving combinatorially difficult problems and it is still theoretically possible that this may well prove to be the case. At any given point in time, we may well wake up in a world where someone has proven P=NP and within a few short weeks from that point we would see utilities to easily forge SSL certificates, code signing, PGP, AES and pretty much every crypto system and identity assurance system out there. The resulting calamity would be so immense, that, it begs to wonder, why are we pushing technologies when we do not know if they will actually work?
I am still disappointed that your brother in law wasn't blasted to smithereens by that IED. **smooches**
Of course you are, you are a liberal! That's like saying the sky is blue. I wouldn't expect any differently, and honestly, if you would say something about the troops or the working man, we'd know it was just a lie anyway. At least you are somewhat honest about where you really stand, I'll give you that.
And the other thing too, that will make it great, is that, Democrats can't genuinely argue against the high prices of commodities because their own green agenda is against so much consumption. That's whole beauty... to go around the country and grab the farmers, miners, the whole middle class of manufacturing and resource extraction, and educate them into Democrats being against them.
Such a stand would probably mean that, Republicans are going to have to change their anti-union tune, and go for a nationalistic tune, and let Democrats become the party of Wall Street. This way, we could let go of the "social issues" that are now harming us more than helping, and focus more on economics versus the environment, and paint Dems as religious nutcakes worshipping the earth.
Nah, its more really about practicing to cash in on Republican political incompetence. I'm just ramping myself up a bit for the election to build my trash Obama web site. 30% of the people in the country actually like Bush and that's a pretty big market out there that has been utterly abandoned.
It's so obvious that McCain could win if he turns "Bush the third term" into an asset. He should go to every state with miners gone up, every state with farmers and be pointing out that the gravy trends when Obama gets elected because all of those "city people" think they have a right to free food. In fact, you could even do a southern strategy and paint it almost like all of these "invaders" in the city are trying to take your farm and your mine and your refinery away, and send them overseas to their buddies back home. You could so totally paint Democrats as the party of Wall Street by pointing out that under Bush, no one gets Wall Street Bonuses, while farmers get raises, but under Clinton, Wall Street got rich, while farmers foreclosed, and a vote for Obama is a vote for foreclosure and your stuff siezed by these city people.
Even though I am a Republican, the mechanical problem, the actual problem of rebuilding the party from its ashes, is such as huge challenge, it interests me. Besides, let's face it, you really aren't cool unless you are Republican, because everyone loves Democrats. We are the ones that the world hates, and that's the way it should be!
Oh, and you write the following, and call yourself something to take seriously?
Conservatism is a failed ideology which has joined communism in the trash heap of history.
George Bush has been the greatest president this country has ever had in decades. If Obama gets in, he's going to put the following jobs onto the trashheap of history.
all the mining all the steel all the plastics all the farms all the biofuels
so, right there, you've got what, 40 million jobs banned so you can have everyone building windmills for your slavemaster Obama?
I'm pretty much a hardcore Republican that thinks Obama is a sort of Pharonic anti-christ, but, Obama's criticisms of NASA suddenly stand in stark relief when we suddenly see that the USAF is actually building a credible spaceplane and NASA, in its Constellation program, is admitting that it can't do it. Sure, one might argue that NASA is strapped for funds, but I like how the USAF had no problem turning to White Knight to test its stuff out rather than NIH'ing the whole program. Maybe we -do- need to kill NASA's manned space flight program.
Dude, you are a complete sociopath in the number of lies you tell. Let's have some facts:
a) Bush replaced LESS, that's right, LESS US Attorneys than any previous president. b) If firing all of the US attorneys at the beginning of a President's term is not a political matter, then, why fire them to begin with?
The great irony of all of this is, is that, you liberal partisans seem to think that you will have some sort of mastery over the country and can get on with whatever dumb earth worshipping humanity destroying projects you decide to embark on, but, we on the right are never going to listen to you, never going to compromise with you and will probably not even support our own candidate simply because he does think peace with you as possible.
The only chance a Democratic congress and Presidency has is between less odds of a civil war or more odds of a civil war, but, we're not going to give you any respect, cooperation, or anything else on any matter whatsover. It's arguably treason to cooperate with a liberal. I mean, you've done the same thing to Bush now for 8 years, to the point where you are willing to side with other countries over your own to score political points in the middle of a war, so why shouldn't we just kick back and bury you people right back? All of this crap about Obama bringing people together will last right until things start blowing up.
I mean, let's have fair is fair. Are we allowed to refer to Obama as "Chimp" too?
Because that's what it sounds like. You know, all of this hypervisor managed memory ala C# XML centric crap sounds good, except that, we now have a computer capable of executing @2 billion instructions in a second take 2 minutes to load up the web 2.0 equivalent to notepad.
You grandma's can have your cushy memory safety. I'm in favor of speed.
For really, being so politically inept. I mean, -everyone- stuffs government with political appointees, even the DOJ. I mean, let's keep in mind that Bill Clinton fired EVERYONE and replaced them with his own people, but Bush couldn't even do that competently with a half a dozen through regular turnover.
The search queries are crazy. They are vetting people based on old issues in the past. Spotted owl is, what, so 1980s, and who cares about the stupid bird anymore. If you are going to vet people for political issues, then vet them based on the decisions you are about to make, not, whether or not they agreed for party doctrine. That way, you can make the argument that such vetting is not political but policy in nature. So, for example, if you are going to have AG's go and prosecute political enemies of the Republican Party, you might go and search for those guys who are gungho on prosecuting the kinds of crimes that align to your enemies...
Should we ever win the White House again, I suggest these kinds of searching:
piracy,dvd,download,bittorrent - really, just find out where your guys are on piracy. If they are lax in enforcing it, that screws hollywood over and takes money out of liberal pockets.
and so forth.
I mean, Bill Clinton's people were MASTERs of this sort of thing. He totally went nuts on right wing institutions, "randomly" auditing the Heritage Foundation every year, etc, but, he always had some legal cover that fufilled an alignment with his policies so he always had that escape trap. Just better politicians. Criminy, when Bill Clinton came over for the holidays, Bush Sr should have invited Bush Jr along just to hear how such political stuffing best be done.
WE should repeal the constitutional amendment prohibiting poll taxes and tests, so that, states would be allowed to ensure that only intelligent, responsible, people were allowed to vote.
The Republican Party sucks. Diane Feinstein is the worst and here we have some supposed Republican guy caving into her left wing fantasies about the need for a manual paper record when no other way of tracking information has the same requirement. It's just absurd.
The Republican rank and file does not want to sit and watch its leaders hide in the shadows and take crap from these traitors. If there was to be any sort of a Republican bill on voting and vote counting, and any sort of compromise, then we should add clauses that benefit Republican concerns as well as Democrat ones and have a real compromise. For example, people that receive federal aid or federal workers should not be allowed to vote because the conflict of interest is terrible.
But hey, you should move somewhere with highly limited government regulation. No overtime, no minimum wage, no environmental limitations. See how life works out for you.
Oh, you mean like those impoverished and ruined Chinese?
Slashdot Mirror
For the record: I *have* had a buddy blown in half in a Humvee. Fortunately I also had some make it home as well.
I'm talking from experience. Where are you talking from?
By the way, even though I disagree with you as to the linking between equality from physical fighting prowess, I am grateful for your service. I'm an old geeky man that can't hardly see and has slow reflexes, but yes, if I were younger and Iraq were there, I would go, if I could, not for the flag or anything stupid like that, but because, there are too many good people over there in Iraq and it seems to me that this country has hung them out to dry. It's like, you see an old lady lost in the city, and you help her. You see somebody trying to move a thing, and you help them, and you see your country is sending a lot of good people over to fight a war, and I'd think, jeez, that in some way you would want to join them and help them. It's not about the cause of freedom or george bush and from the vets I know, unit cohesion is way more about just keeping your buddies alive than it is about cheering on the red white and blue.
But as you come back from that, you need to remember that freedom and equality comes from the idea that we each have souls. It doesn't matter if a woman is as strong as a man or even if people have the same utility. A man in a wheelchair has just as much equality as someone who can bench 500lbs and run a 5 minute mile. Race, sex, all of the human markings we create to label and create people with is entirely outside of what equality is. Equality is to say that we are all judged by someone some day, which I call God, and that, we have freedom in our lives in recognition of the idea that we be held to answer for our lives to some higher power.
I could babble on endlessly, but do read the 2nd paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson said it best:
"We hold these truths to be self evident. We are endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Get it? You don't have to have people be of the same physical or even mental skill or -any- human unit of measurement to be equal. It's God's call, not yours, and not mine. All you can do is measure people by their utility to some particular task. So, you can say that women are equal to men, and men can be stronger than women, and, actually women have better stamina. It might be the case that women make better fighter pilots because they are physiologically more adept at dealing with g-forces and they weigh less on average, and it might be the case that men might make better infantry because they are bigger and can probably carry more stuff on average, but, it doesn't mean that men and women are not equal.
I didn't change the subject at all. You've lost the point. You argue that equality is based on physical strength and it isn't. So, in your mind, you have to conjure up some arbitrary list of ways that women can be the same and they aren't. Celebrate that women are different. Pretending everybody is the same is not necessary because you don't need to be the same to be =equal=. Equality is a spiritual thing, it's about us having souls and being possessed of some shred of free will. And you've completely lost the point.
If you want to play with the statistics then I'll give all 100 women (on the island of yours) handguns and tell them it is ok to kill any man who makes them feel threatened and make sure they are mentally equipped to do so.
Again you lose the point that women need to be defended by men, from men. There needs to men that police men, and protects them from other men. If you can't recognize that basic need then, I can't help you. But, if you say that women do not need to be protected, then I'd say that's great because as a rule, I agree with you on self defense being a personal responsibility and to that end I think police are not capable of "protecting and defending" and at all and I question the need to pay for something that cannot do what it says.
The "20 years younger" comment leads me to believe you haven't been in any of the wars (real or fabricated) that we've had either.
No, I haven't. There weren't any long wars when I was younger so I didn't see a point in enlisting. I grew up during the Cold War anyway, so if there was going to be a war, civilians would wind up getting killed in droves from nukes and other stuff.
Your idea of what happened in Okinawa is mistaken as well. Look into it more before you make more references to "cartoon ninjas". I'm talking about reality, not fantasy, here.
My point is that the entire martial arts and ultimate fighting and wrestling is a fantasy. You have all of these people being prepared for entirely the wrong kind of conflicts. You said it yourself... the easiest way to be prepared is to know how to use a handgun.
But with respect to the "warrior" spirit...In a knock down drag out war, ultimate fighting, martial arts...those things don't matter in a world where rifles are accurate, artillery is accurate, bombs do not miss, and the radioactive radius of a single 10MT bomb. Fortunately, the USA has been very fortunate to not have to fight a power that has the same sort of weapons that we do. But, there will be a time, if we are not educating geeks such as myself to stay ahead, when our soldiers will be on the receiving end of cluster bomb drops, JDAM munitions and everything else science has given to the fighting man... and, they will be shooting back at robots in the sky that can be massed produced.
If we took all of these martial arts and fighting things, and replaced them all with calculus, we'd be a lot farther ahead of the game. Math is useful. Karate is not.
And yeah, you could kick my ass, for sure, but I'd still be right.
It's a simple enough request, even for someone of your eminent stupidity
Except that, you are not my foe. You are just wrong. I have better things to do than to fiddle with slashdot icons and designate enemies.
So you are saying what? All women are weaker than men and less able to defend themselves, automatically?
Talk about a BS blanket statement
It's true. Just is. Sure, there's exceptions, but, overwhelmingly the odds are if you put 100 men on and 100 women on an island and there are no rules, the men will come out on top.
I know feminists who might come to blows with you just for implying tha
Yeah, and these very feminists are looking for laws against any expression of male power in the workplace because they know they cannot defend themselves. Feminism only exists because western men have decided to trade for that which men in other cultures simply take, and even the most strident feminist has absolutely no problem summoning the government to ensure such theft never takes place in western culture and many work to extend it around the world.
Heck, any number of women boxers or martial artists in general could (at least) surprise you or I in a physical confrontation.
Probably, unless I was a black belt boxer that could bench 400lbs and carried a pistol, in which case, they would not have good odds at all. Oh, sure, yes, there are some women out there that could beat the rear of many men, but for the most part, men are bigger, stronger, faster and more aggressive, and women are sitting ducks as a whole. Are there women out there that could kick my ass? Probably, evolution isn't about exceptions - its about larger trends, and civilization is nice and all, but ultimately, Darwin doesn't care about how women get pregnant and men are bred to reflect that.
wife has trained with Rorion Gracie for 5 years.
Big deal. If all of these body builders and ultimate fighting people were so fricking tough - why the hell are they not in the war!
They might be able to fight in some mock cage, but, let's see these guys have some real balls and walk down the streets of Ramadi in Iraq. It makes me sick to see all of this ultimate fighting and pro-wrestling circus crap on TV and these guys are acting like badasses when many of them can't be bothered to get in the war.
I'll tell you what. I'm no tough guy. I'm no bad ass. But, if I were twenty years younger, I'd be in Iraq right now, simply because, if I lived through it, no matter how tough someone said they were, I could say, I went through a real war. Toughness isn't flexing in a cage and having 5% body fat. Toughness is riding in an unarmoured HMMV convoy day in and day out wondering if you'll be take out next. Toughness is telling your blown up buddy to hang in there even though half his torso is gone. Toughness is getting blown up, being in a firefight, fighting every sensible instinct to run so that your teamates can get out alive.
Seriously, martial arts is overhyped. If you want a good account of martial arts vs western style fighting, how the hell did the USA successfully invade Okinawa, the birthplace of Karate, with 50,000 Americans killed or wounded, versus 200,000 Japanese -dead-. Suicide charges, ninja sneaking around, night fighting and all of this cartoon stuff they call serious fighting, and the USA kicked their asses with a bunch of conscripts from a country that teaches its children to hunt from an early age and thus kicked their ass.
Do you think women bodybuilders or powerlifters need (or want) a 110 pound rent-a-badge walking them to their cars?
Yeah, but how many women body builders are there? And look what it does to women? And, what if a woman body builder goes up against a male body builder?
I mean, I've never heard of an army where all the men got raped, but I could rattle off plenty of cases in the last century where indeed, mass rapes did take place. Even Boudica, probably the greatest of all women fighters, got raped.
Sorry, but your thesis is a joke. You might ask your feminist friends just how it is that women essentially came to be the property of men, and still are, in many parts of the world. Why can't -those- women defend themselves?
I'm sorry, but, women are different from men. If a women yells at a man, the man thinks, 9/10 out of ten, "I shouldn't have to listen to this crap, because I could totally kick your rear end until you do the dishes". If a man yells at a woman, its much more threatening. Even my 3 year old son knows this. If my wife yells at me, he just tunes it out. But if I yell back, or even raise my voice, it scares him. So, its like, all a man can really do is to eat the stress, accept that the heart attack is inevitable, and move on. The inverse is to have a society, well, like Iran.
So, yeah, let's bring up the silly "think of the women and children" argument, because, we have to. We can't pretend that everyone is equally capable of self defense and have a wild west mentality on the internet because not everyone is. Until men are angels, there has to be law and order to protect women on the internet, just as surely as there must be police to escort women to cars after hours at the office.
It's just right.
My point is that, you can transform FACTOR into SAT. If you have a good algorithm to solve SAT in polynomial time, then FACTOR could benefit from it. So, it doesn't matter entirely if FACTOR is NP-Complete, in the sense that, if you prove P=NP, then, FACTOR can take advantage of it.
We can expand the inverse of any polynomial problem into SAT if we want to. I mean, I've done this and am working on a program to do this for own education and experimentation. So, in the worst case, even if FACTOR is not NP-Complete, by virtue of saying that FACTOR is cast to an SAT problem, you can still get the benefit of using a speedy solution to SAT to factor factor.
In fact, is it not the case that the reigning factoring champ actually uses a big matrix to solve at the end? If that is the case, then clearly, someone has arrived at yet another way to show that FACTOR would benefit from a proof that P=NP.
By the way, thank you all for talking about P=NP. I am no Phd or researcher, but in what spare time I have, when I'm not being a dick trolling for political fights on slashdot, I play with this problem over and over again, and I absolutely love it. If I won the PowerBall lottery, working on P=NP is what I would devote my entire career to, for sure.
Cloud computing and web centric computing is the height of all irresponsibility within the IT field. Network centric computing utterly depends on security and that means encryption. Defeating encryption depends on solving combinatorially difficult problems and it is still theoretically possible that this may well prove to be the case. At any given point in time, we may well wake up in a world where someone has proven P=NP and within a few short weeks from that point we would see utilities to easily forge SSL certificates, code signing, PGP, AES and pretty much every crypto system and identity assurance system out there. The resulting calamity would be so immense, that, it begs to wonder, why are we pushing technologies when we do not know if they will actually work?
I am still disappointed that your brother in law wasn't blasted to smithereens by that IED. **smooches**
So are about 73 members of Al Qaeda in Iraq, may they rest not so much in peace!
I am still disappointed that your brother in law wasn't blasted to smithereens by that IED. **smooches**
Of course you are, you are a liberal! That's like saying the sky is blue. I wouldn't expect any differently, and honestly, if you would say something about the troops or the working man, we'd know it was just a lie anyway. At least you are somewhat honest about where you really stand, I'll give you that.
And the other thing too, that will make it great, is that, Democrats can't genuinely argue against the high prices of commodities because their own green agenda is against so much consumption. That's whole beauty... to go around the country and grab the farmers, miners, the whole middle class of manufacturing and resource extraction, and educate them into Democrats being against them.
Such a stand would probably mean that, Republicans are going to have to change their anti-union tune, and go for a nationalistic tune, and let Democrats become the party of Wall Street. This way, we could let go of the "social issues" that are now harming us more than helping, and focus more on economics versus the environment, and paint Dems as religious nutcakes worshipping the earth.
Politics is such an interesting game.
Are you attracted to me?
Nah, its more really about practicing to cash in on Republican political incompetence. I'm just ramping myself up a bit for the election to build my trash Obama web site. 30% of the people in the country actually like Bush and that's a pretty big market out there that has been utterly abandoned.
It's so obvious that McCain could win if he turns "Bush the third term" into an asset. He should go to every state with miners gone up, every state with farmers and be pointing out that the gravy trends when Obama gets elected because all of those "city people" think they have a right to free food. In fact, you could even do a southern strategy and paint it almost like all of these "invaders" in the city are trying to take your farm and your mine and your refinery away, and send them overseas to their buddies back home. You could so totally paint Democrats as the party of Wall Street by pointing out that under Bush, no one gets Wall Street Bonuses, while farmers get raises, but under Clinton, Wall Street got rich, while farmers foreclosed, and a vote for Obama is a vote for foreclosure and your stuff siezed by these city people.
Even though I am a Republican, the mechanical problem, the actual problem of rebuilding the party from its ashes, is such as huge challenge, it interests me. Besides, let's face it, you really aren't cool unless you are Republican, because everyone loves Democrats. We are the ones that the world hates, and that's the way it should be!
Oh, and you write the following, and call yourself something to take seriously?
Conservatism is a failed ideology which has joined communism in the trash heap of history.
George Bush has been the greatest president this country has ever had in decades. If Obama gets in, he's going to put the following jobs onto the trashheap of history.
all the mining
all the steel
all the plastics
all the farms
all the biofuels
so, right there, you've got what, 40 million jobs banned so you can have everyone building windmills for your slavemaster Obama?
What a joke!
Unless of course enough of us get together and actually move the market in the direction we want.
Actually, we do have the money to influence a small volume stock, but doing so would be collusion, I would think.
I mean, I'm just shocked that NASA threw in the towel on space planes, and the USAF is flying one. I'm just completely shocked.
I'm pretty much a hardcore Republican that thinks Obama is a sort of Pharonic anti-christ, but, Obama's criticisms of NASA suddenly stand in stark relief when we suddenly see that the USAF is actually building a credible spaceplane and NASA, in its Constellation program, is admitting that it can't do it. Sure, one might argue that NASA is strapped for funds, but I like how the USAF had no problem turning to White Knight to test its stuff out rather than NIH'ing the whole program. Maybe we -do- need to kill NASA's manned space flight program.
That is your *ONLY* semblance of a legitimate purpose in life.
And just um, how do you know that? Please, let's have your two cent Orwellian bit about how everyone who disagrees with you is mentally ill.
Dude, you are a complete sociopath in the number of lies you tell. Let's have some facts:
a) Bush replaced LESS, that's right, LESS US Attorneys than any previous president.
b) If firing all of the US attorneys at the beginning of a President's term is not a political matter, then, why fire them to begin with?
The great irony of all of this is, is that, you liberal partisans seem to think that you will have some sort of mastery over the country and can get on with whatever dumb earth worshipping humanity destroying projects you decide to embark on, but, we on the right are never going to listen to you, never going to compromise with you and will probably not even support our own candidate simply because he does think peace with you as possible.
The only chance a Democratic congress and Presidency has is between less odds of a civil war or more odds of a civil war, but, we're not going to give you any respect, cooperation, or anything else on any matter whatsover. It's arguably treason to cooperate with a liberal. I mean, you've done the same thing to Bush now for 8 years, to the point where you are willing to side with other countries over your own to score political points in the middle of a war, so why shouldn't we just kick back and bury you people right back? All of this crap about Obama bringing people together will last right until things start blowing up.
I mean, let's have fair is fair. Are we allowed to refer to Obama as "Chimp" too?
Because that's what it sounds like. You know, all of this hypervisor managed memory ala C# XML centric crap sounds good, except that, we now have a computer capable of executing @2 billion instructions in a second take 2 minutes to load up the web 2.0 equivalent to notepad.
You grandma's can have your cushy memory safety. I'm in favor of speed.
No, it was political. Clinton fired all 93 US Attorneys in one day.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784
For really, being so politically inept. I mean, -everyone- stuffs government with political appointees, even the DOJ. I mean, let's keep in mind that Bill Clinton fired EVERYONE and replaced them with his own people, but Bush couldn't even do that competently with a half a dozen through regular turnover.
The search queries are crazy. They are vetting people based on old issues in the past. Spotted owl is, what, so 1980s, and who cares about the stupid bird anymore. If you are going to vet people for political issues, then vet them based on the decisions you are about to make, not, whether or not they agreed for party doctrine. That way, you can make the argument that such vetting is not political but policy in nature. So, for example, if you are going to have AG's go and prosecute political enemies of the Republican Party, you might go and search for those guys who are gungho on prosecuting the kinds of crimes that align to your enemies...
Should we ever win the White House again, I suggest these kinds of searching:
piracy,dvd,download,bittorrent - really, just find out where your guys are on piracy. If they are lax in enforcing it, that screws hollywood over and takes money out of liberal pockets.
and so forth.
I mean, Bill Clinton's people were MASTERs of this sort of thing. He totally went nuts on right wing institutions, "randomly" auditing the Heritage Foundation every year, etc, but, he always had some legal cover that fufilled an alignment with his policies so he always had that escape trap. Just better politicians. Criminy, when Bill Clinton came over for the holidays, Bush Sr should have invited Bush Jr along just to hear how such political stuffing best be done.
WE should repeal the constitutional amendment prohibiting poll taxes and tests, so that, states would be allowed to ensure that only intelligent, responsible, people were allowed to vote.
The Republican Party sucks. Diane Feinstein is the worst and here we have some supposed Republican guy caving into her left wing fantasies about the need for a manual paper record when no other way of tracking information has the same requirement. It's just absurd.
The Republican rank and file does not want to sit and watch its leaders hide in the shadows and take crap from these traitors. If there was to be any sort of a Republican bill on voting and vote counting, and any sort of compromise, then we should add clauses that benefit Republican concerns as well as Democrat ones and have a real compromise. For example, people that receive federal aid or federal workers should not be allowed to vote because the conflict of interest is terrible.
At the rate we Republicans are going, all of our guys are going to wind up in jail.
But hey, you should move somewhere with highly limited government regulation. No overtime, no minimum wage, no environmental limitations. See how life works out for you.
Oh, you mean like those impoverished and ruined Chinese?