ah well shit, it sounds dangerous. we all need to give up and go back to living like the amish.
Good lord, man - don't you know how radiocative the Amish are? Wham! Wham! [1]
[1] I have no idea what George Michael and Andrew Ridgeley have to do with radiation, but all the cool posters seem keep mentioning them, so I'll just play along.
Please, enlighten the world, what in your estimation constitutes a 'reasonable amount'?
People in the same income group as myself should pay less. People in other income groups should pay more. As far as I can tell, this is an almost universal definition of 'reasonable' when it comes to taxes, regardless of income level or tax rate.
Do you know how much you pay today if you earn more than 500Kin Connecticut today?
Given that the median household income for CT in 2009 was $67K, I'm betting there's a whole lot of people in that state who would love a chance to find out what a $500K income looks like, despite the ruinous taxation rates you claim. ("Hi honey, got good news and bad news. I quit my $67K job for one that pays $500K, but roman_mir says that means I'll barely bring home $250K after taxes." Spouse: "Okay, so what's the bad news?")
So, exactly how is BHO "head and shoulders above GWB"?
I think the GP was engaging in a bit of hyperbole - while BHO is taller than GWB, the difference is more comparable to a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. (Homer voice: "Mmmmmm...PB&J...")
Abe Lincoln vs James Madison - now that's head and shoulders. (Zombie voice: "Mmmmmmm...head and shoulders...")
<NELL-9000> "Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error." <NELL-9000/>
Ritchie was recently chosen to hold one of seven smartcards that can rebuild the root key that underpins this system' called DNSSEC (Domain Name System Security Extensions).
I thought the dwarves got seven cards. And, the humans got nine... and the elves three. Or, am I mixing something up?
No no, you've got it right. It's just that, well, Ritchie's not all that tall, and he's got a beard...
NTP solved this ages ago by distributing atomic clock accuracy through the network.
You probably missed the point that the project is based in Australia. NTP doesn't work down there, because the Coriolis effect makes Australian clocks turn the opposite way of clocks in the Northern Hemisphere, just like their toilets swirl the other direction. This creates a problem, since many distros have NTP enabled by default, which causes the system clock to run backwards on Australian computers - really makes a mess of the logs, screensavers activate an hour before the computer is turned on, all sorts of odd things. If you start looking at the RADclock code, you'll find that it's surprisingly simple and elegant - they simply reverse the byte order of the NTP messages, and - voila! - their clocks can now run forwards while remaining synchronized.
This explanation brought to you by a six-pack of Fosters.
You might as well ask whether a rock is an introvert or an extrovert.
Definitely introverts. I've sat and talked to rocks all day long, and they hardly ever say a thing back. Talk about shy. Way different than daisies - those things never stop chattering. Total extroverts. (What's that you say, Mr. Day-Glo Green Squirrel? Another tab of acid? Oh, I really couldn't. Well, okay, if you're sure there's enough for everyone.)
They're up in the projector booth trying to help the operator sort out the key problem. Bob would have joined them, but someone has to keep an eye on the popcorn so Eve doesn't eat eat it all.
Honest question: how often does this happen for other people that you have three other people over and you say "Hey, let's play mario kart" and they say "sure?"
For me, it's every time I go visit my family. Mario Kart's actually more second-tier though - Ravin Rabbids, Wii Play, and Wii Sports are the faves for group play. Super Monkey Ball and Chicken Shoot also see moderate use. Oddly enough, the one game I picked up specifically for group/family play - Mario Party 8 - was a total flop. Too long between turns, people kept getting distracted and losing focus/interest. Meh, you win some, you lose some.
Generally, games where people can basically just pick up the controller and get going with minimal training seem to be more popular - at family get-togethers we're only going to play for an hour or two max, so spending 15 minutes per person training them on complex moves just isn't a viable option. Simultaneous co-op play also seems to be a big plus - if someone sucks at first they can still have fun since the experienced people can pick up the slack and keep the game moving forwards.
Same with my friends who have wiis, when I'm at their house with other people, I don't find myself playing mario kart or smash bros or guitar hero.
So do you play group games on another system? That'd be fair enough - XBox and Playstation both have multi-player titles that aren't on the Wii. (Or do you not play group games on any system, in which case I don't get your point - maybe that the Wii failed to capture your group's attention when nothing else did either?)
Who are these groups of people that nintendo is still making games for?
None of my friends happens to own an XBox - most have PS3s, only a couple others have a Wii, and there's a random assortment of older systems. But I know that the XBox 360 outsells the PS3, and I thought that in the U.S. it's actually not all that far behind the Wii (despite lagging by a wide margin in worldwide sales). So rather than pondering who Microsoft is making games for, I just shrug and accept that there's clearly a demographic that's buying XBox 360 consoles and games...just happens that me and my circle of friends aren't part of that demographic. Apparently my group is rather atypical - if I went with my own direct experience, I'd think that the PS3 was tops, the Wii second-place, and the 360 a total loser, and I'd be wrong in all cases.
"calculated that a stationary mass should repel a particle moving towards or away from it at more than half the speed of light"
So, how do I slow down while going half he speed of light?
Just have someone cut the stationary mass in half - then it'll repel you at 1/4 the speed of light. As your speed drops, have them cut the stationary mass in half again, so that the remaining portion will repel you at 1/8 the speed of light. Continue the process until you reach a full stop. I dub this amazing new concept "Zeno Braking".:-P
Would be interesting to see examples of the malicious XML and an explanation of how the vulnerabilities work.
I've included a simple demonstration below - if your browser doesn't contain the flaw then you'll just see the literal XML exploit code (all 200+ lines of it), but if it's vulnerable then you'll only see the initial trigger element on either side of Cmdr Taco's favorite topic.
Once you're dead, your work should hit the public domain.
Scene: Hollywood, California, 1972. Francis Ford Coppola sits in front of a fireplace, stroking a cat. Two underlings are in attendance.
Coppola: So where were we...? Oh yeah, that "Godfather" book - are we ready to start shooting the movie?
Underling #2: Don Coppola, I'm sorry to say that Mario Puzo still has not agreed to give us the rights, even after your latest, most generous, offer.
Coppola: What were we budgeting to make the movie? Four million? Five million?
Underling #1: Six and a half million, Don Coppola.
Coppola: And the projected profits?
Underling #1: 245 million.
(Coppola pulls out a gun and shoots Underling #1.)
Coppola: And the projected profits?
Underling #2: (gulps) 245 million, Don Coppola!
Coppola: Very good, you learn quickly. Here's 5 million dollars. Find Stan "The Popgun" Phlegmy, let him know that I want Puzo "released into the public domain" by Friday. We start filming at 7:00 am Monday morning.
Underling #2: Yes, Don Coppola. It shall be done, Don Coppola.
You mentioned up above that you'll be consulting with a doctor, and that's an excellent idea - the sooner the better, in fact. I can almost guarantee that s/he'll tell you that you're losing weight far too quickly.
Obviously you should take the advice of your own physician over a random/. person like myself, but basically you're starving your body right now - and that's not good for either your short- or long-term health. The general heuristic I was given when I embarked on my own weight loss program was to start the cutbacks gradually, and work up to an average reduction of around 0.5-0.75 kg/week, and to avoid dropping more than 1.0 kg/week.
Now everbody's different, but I've lost about the same amount of weight as you did (35kg), but I followed my physician's advice and I spread that out over an entire year - and I've been much happier with my day-to-day life than you seem to be. I don't crave extra food for no reason. And I've got more energy than ever. I still have another 5-10 kg I'd like to take off, and I'm absolutely looking forward to doing it. As in so many things, moderation can be important. Ramping up the weight loss gradually will help tone down those cravings for large amounts of extra calories, and also help you fine-tune your food intake requirements as you reach a safe and healthy weight loss rate. What I used to consider a "normal" meal a couple years ago is something I couldn't even finish now, at least not without feeling uncomfortably overstuffed/bloated. (And I'm sure that what I consider "normal" now would've seemed horribly meager a couple of years ago.) Make changes gradually and your body will adapt more easily than if you try to impose extreme changes in your food intake all at once. Gradual adaptation means less withdrawal issues, less withdrawal means happier overall lifestyle.
Keep with the weight loss, just go at it a more gradually - it's not a race, there's no prizes for finishing fastest.:-)
I don't think this is analgous to taking notes in a journal, so much as taking notes on the 3rd floor mens' room stall door.
And let me tell ya, you definitely can't believe everything written on the 3rd floor mens' room stall door. (Oh, and Carl - if you still read/., I'm like so sorry about...well... you know. I just kinda got the impression you were totally into it.)
Slashdot Mirror
Inconceivable!
Good lord, man - don't you know how radiocative the Amish are? Wham! Wham! [1]
[1] I have no idea what George Michael and Andrew Ridgeley have to do with radiation, but all the cool posters seem keep mentioning them, so I'll just play along.
People in the same income group as myself should pay less. People in other income groups should pay more. As far as I can tell, this is an almost universal definition of 'reasonable' when it comes to taxes, regardless of income level or tax rate.
Given that the median household income for CT in 2009 was $67K, I'm betting there's a whole lot of people in that state who would love a chance to find out what a $500K income looks like, despite the ruinous taxation rates you claim. ("Hi honey, got good news and bad news. I quit my $67K job for one that pays $500K, but roman_mir says that means I'll barely bring home $250K after taxes." Spouse: "Okay, so what's the bad news?")
Hah, that's just what they want you to believe.
I think the GP was engaging in a bit of hyperbole - while BHO is taller than GWB, the difference is more comparable to a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. (Homer voice: "Mmmmmm...PB&J...")
Abe Lincoln vs James Madison - now that's head and shoulders. (Zombie voice: "Mmmmmmm...head and shoulders...")
I think you're getting your physicists confused - Schrödinger's the one with the pussy fixation...
Let me fix that for you:
Now that's' cons'is'tent! Whoo-hoo - gonna get me 100% on my next Englis'h es's'ay for s'ure! Thanks' S'las'dot!
<NELL-9000>
"Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error."
<NELL-9000/>
${DefendentName} dislikes this
.
.
.
${DefendentName} says: Do Not Want!
${DefendentName} says: no, srsly, i rly dont wanna die, just couldn't resist the lolz
No no, you've got it right. It's just that, well, Ritchie's not all that tall, and he's got a beard...
You probably missed the point that the project is based in Australia. NTP doesn't work down there, because the Coriolis effect makes Australian clocks turn the opposite way of clocks in the Northern Hemisphere, just like their toilets swirl the other direction. This creates a problem, since many distros have NTP enabled by default, which causes the system clock to run backwards on Australian computers - really makes a mess of the logs, screensavers activate an hour before the computer is turned on, all sorts of odd things. If you start looking at the RADclock code, you'll find that it's surprisingly simple and elegant - they simply reverse the byte order of the NTP messages, and - voila! - their clocks can now run forwards while remaining synchronized.
This explanation brought to you by a six-pack of Fosters.
Yeah, I hate it when people act that way!
Definitely introverts. I've sat and talked to rocks all day long, and they hardly ever say a thing back. Talk about shy. Way different than daisies - those things never stop chattering. Total extroverts. (What's that you say, Mr. Day-Glo Green Squirrel? Another tab of acid? Oh, I really couldn't. Well, okay, if you're sure there's enough for everyone.)
Either way, one thing we can be sure of is that the author is a master baiter.
<cricket chirps/>
Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the veal!
They're up in the projector booth trying to help the operator sort out the key problem. Bob would have joined them, but someone has to keep an eye on the popcorn so Eve doesn't eat eat it all.
For me, it's every time I go visit my family. Mario Kart's actually more second-tier though - Ravin Rabbids, Wii Play, and Wii Sports are the faves for group play. Super Monkey Ball and Chicken Shoot also see moderate use. Oddly enough, the one game I picked up specifically for group/family play - Mario Party 8 - was a total flop. Too long between turns, people kept getting distracted and losing focus/interest. Meh, you win some, you lose some.
Generally, games where people can basically just pick up the controller and get going with minimal training seem to be more popular - at family get-togethers we're only going to play for an hour or two max, so spending 15 minutes per person training them on complex moves just isn't a viable option. Simultaneous co-op play also seems to be a big plus - if someone sucks at first they can still have fun since the experienced people can pick up the slack and keep the game moving forwards.
So do you play group games on another system? That'd be fair enough - XBox and Playstation both have multi-player titles that aren't on the Wii. (Or do you not play group games on any system, in which case I don't get your point - maybe that the Wii failed to capture your group's attention when nothing else did either?)
None of my friends happens to own an XBox - most have PS3s, only a couple others have a Wii, and there's a random assortment of older systems. But I know that the XBox 360 outsells the PS3, and I thought that in the U.S. it's actually not all that far behind the Wii (despite lagging by a wide margin in worldwide sales). So rather than pondering who Microsoft is making games for, I just shrug and accept that there's clearly a demographic that's buying XBox 360 consoles and games...just happens that me and my circle of friends aren't part of that demographic. Apparently my group is rather atypical - if I went with my own direct experience, I'd think that the PS3 was tops, the Wii second-place, and the 360 a total loser, and I'd be wrong in all cases.
You know who else did informal surveys? Hitl-*whack* <OW!> *thud*
Just have someone cut the stationary mass in half - then it'll repel you at 1/4 the speed of light. As your speed drops, have them cut the stationary mass in half again, so that the remaining portion will repel you at 1/8 the speed of light. Continue the process until you reach a full stop. I dub this amazing new concept "Zeno Braking". :-P
Because fighting totally starkers would be against the law. Now quit asking silly questions and help me aim this firehose at them.
I've included a simple demonstration below - if your browser doesn't contain the flaw then you'll just see the literal XML exploit code (all 200+ lines of it), but if it's vulnerable then you'll only see the initial trigger element on either side of Cmdr Taco's favorite topic.
<\0pwned>OMGPonies!!11one!<\0pwn3d/>
Well, nobody said it was a good gift. :-P
Scene: Hollywood, California, 1972. Francis Ford Coppola sits in front of a fireplace, stroking a cat. Two underlings are in attendance.
You mentioned up above that you'll be consulting with a doctor, and that's an excellent idea - the sooner the better, in fact. I can almost guarantee that s/he'll tell you that you're losing weight far too quickly.
Obviously you should take the advice of your own physician over a random /. person like myself, but basically you're starving your body right now - and that's not good for either your short- or long-term health. The general heuristic I was given when I embarked on my own weight loss program was to start the cutbacks gradually, and work up to an average reduction of around 0.5-0.75 kg/week, and to avoid dropping more than 1.0 kg/week.
Now everbody's different, but I've lost about the same amount of weight as you did (35kg), but I followed my physician's advice and I spread that out over an entire year - and I've been much happier with my day-to-day life than you seem to be. I don't crave extra food for no reason. And I've got more energy than ever. I still have another 5-10 kg I'd like to take off, and I'm absolutely looking forward to doing it. As in so many things, moderation can be important. Ramping up the weight loss gradually will help tone down those cravings for large amounts of extra calories, and also help you fine-tune your food intake requirements as you reach a safe and healthy weight loss rate. What I used to consider a "normal" meal a couple years ago is something I couldn't even finish now, at least not without feeling uncomfortably overstuffed/bloated. (And I'm sure that what I consider "normal" now would've seemed horribly meager a couple of years ago.) Make changes gradually and your body will adapt more easily than if you try to impose extreme changes in your food intake all at once. Gradual adaptation means less withdrawal issues, less withdrawal means happier overall lifestyle.
Keep with the weight loss, just go at it a more gradually - it's not a race, there's no prizes for finishing fastest. :-)
Are they afraid that Fox will cancel the ISS after one season? ;-)
And let me tell ya, you definitely can't believe everything written on the 3rd floor mens' room stall door. (Oh, and Carl - if you still read /., I'm like so sorry about ...well... you know. I just kinda got the impression you were totally into it.)