"Likely" (in the ordinary sense, roughly p > 0.5) is too high a bar for any discussion of the consequences of pollution. That's a straw man.
One of the consequences of mercury poisoning is hypertension. That shortens lives. One of the consequences of asthma is proneness to lung infections. In turn, that is statistically life-shortening.
Mods, come on... this comment is borderline incoherent, and the point it has doesn't even begin to address the actual article.
...
Nothing like a preemptive defense before any attacks exist...
Wow, high expectations! No, make that just "expectations". Wow, expectations!
None of critical thinking, ethical reasoning, general knowledge, research skill, or confidence in the soundness of their opinions are strengths of slashdot posters. Aggression, on the other hand...
No, being forced to actually operate the sulphur dioxide and particulates scrubbers that the government forced you to install a few years ago, but never got around to checking that you are using.
Those scrubbers shave at least one yuan per megawatt-hour off the profit, you know. Despair!
The PLA is not a single homogeneous mass. It's just as riven with internal factions as any other large organisation.
I guess the Party is using that fact with this law: as soon as one faction cleans up its own pollution sufficiently, it will be able to use the law as a club to beat its rivals. The new stable game-theoretic equilibrium is nobody pollutes.
In the real world cancer is not the only possible way pollution can shorten lives. And no, you don't "either die quickly or completely recover". The in-between outcomes are far more common.
Melamine in milk is not toxic in the way that you seem to be meaning, but it damages kidneys, shortening lives. Certain pesticides disrupt liver function and/or endocrine system function, causing grwoth and development problems. Air-borne particulate pollution triggers and exacerbates chroninc lung disease, shortening lives. Mercury and lead pollution have all kinds of effects that shorten lives.
Please stop subtracting value from the discussion.
If programming were a profession, or even a trade--in other words, required registration with a standards and ethics focused organization--not validating user input in production code would be grounds for a professional misconduct charge and/or dismissal.
What we need is for MySQL/MariaDB, PostgreSQL, FireBird, etc., to come configured so that database updates can only take place in stored procedures in which statement building isn't present; and that they also come configured so that when you create a database, two users/roles are created: a role with stored procedure execute privileges only, and the owner, and the database owner can only access the database through the command-line interface.
In other words, what we need is for web programmers to be forced to learn something about the tools they're using.
You might get that effect by inventing a suitable replacement for SQL and forcing people to use it. But I think they'd just use text files for backing storage.
But FYI, grandparent, Sony is being hammered for its contempt for its customers. A finance analyst caused a small stir recently by suggesting that Sony's consumer electronics business has negative value, and that Sony should sell it, and stick to what it does well: selling insurance.
Sony's contempt for its customers is just ordinary, run-of-the-mill contempt.
Microsoft's contempt for its customers is de luxe, extra virgin, cold pressed contempt, imported from the most famous contempt-growing areas of the world and painstakingly refined into the attitude that you see displayed.
Someone dumped some stuff in a pastebin, and somehow we all *know* it's an internal Microsoft guide for "Reputation Managers".
Why do we *know* this? (Hear me out - I'm not attempting to deny it. I'm making a larger point.)
Perhaps it's because of Microsoft's reputation.
What is that reputation? Contempt.
Microsoft has contempt for the people who are forced to use its products. This is why people react so strongly to Microsoft's recent innovations: it's not the change, but the contempt, that they are reacting to.
Microsoft wasn't always this way, but the attitude was certainly well entrenched by the time that it introduced its Office certification, the "MOUS".[1] The contempt came through with its introduction of the Office Ribbon, immediately after Microsoft said it'd be "too hard" for users to learn the "very different" user interface of OpenOffice. It came through with the total lack of investment in IE. It came through with the introduction of Vista. It came through with WinCE, and the Kin, and with the trashing of Windows Phone 7 users' investment: can't take your apps to 8, suckers! Most strongly, it has come through in the introduction of Windows 8.
The contempt was multi-leveled with 8. An interface designed for touch...and nearly no computers to use it on, nor any in the offing at the time of launch. That was subtle contempt. But the really big, fat, obvious, in-your-face contempt was in the look and feel of the UI. Big blocks of flat primary colors, vocabulary like "charms", dumping you suddenly back at the start page every time Microsoft thinks you're doing something too complicated: this was a UI for pre-schoolers or early primary-school kids. On tranquilizers.[2]
Why did Microsoft think that 8's UI would be acceptable to adults? Because Microsoft has complete contempt for its users. Microsoft has been dissing its users for a long time now. And with "x-bone phone home", always-on cam, etc., the dissing continues: you're a child. You can't handle privacy: you'll just do naughty things with it.
*This* is why we believe some anonymous pastebin: we know, inside, that Microsoft has contempt for its users. We've got the message.
The XBox One was conceived in a culture of contempt, and soaked in it throughout its gestation. If gamers have any self-respect, it will die still-born.
--tl;dr-stop-here--
1. Rebranded the MOS. Would you rather be a mouse, or moss? Which is more respectful?
2. This is what gets people's backs up about the '8 UI. "Can't handle change" never passed the sniff test: tens of millions could handle running away to iOS, Android, OS X... and some can even work with Chrome, according to Amazon's best-seller lists. I've yet to read their complaints about the inefficiency of those UIs.
People (even slashdotters) aren't good at introspection, though, so the unconscious reaction to Microsoft's contempt as embodied in the 8UI came out as a dislike of the mechanics of the UI, rather than as "Microsoft is insulting me! The bastards!"
I well remember the overwhelming sense of 'living large' provided by my first 4MB flash drive. Why, I could practically host a whole OS on there.
And reliability, too. The name brand floppies were worse than the off-brand ones, where I lived. But not by much... Solid-state flash drives were nearly infinitely better.
Nowadays...64 Gigabyte USB3? Lasts for 200 years, you say? Meh. Give me Storage with a capital S! Make it faster! Make it more reliable!
Use The Onion Router Project (TOR), and persuade everyone you know to do so as well. TOR works better the more people use it.
On your phone, use the Guardian Project.
Note: there is no suggestion that the US government has some super-decryption powers. Https is fine, things encrypted with modern techniques and large-enough keys are fine.
The reason the NSA needs supercomputers, rather than a big Hadoop installation, is that it is doing traffic analysis - a massive linear algebra problem. See this for a simplified analogy of what it's doing.
TL;DR: Use TOR Project and the Guardian Project. Don't forget to donate!
What the NSA needs those supercomputers for is traffic analysis. See this for a simplified analogy which hints at some of the techniques used, and, I think, explains why the NSA needs supercomputers rather than Hadoop. The Government may well be telling the truth when they say they don't read your mail. But with enough traffic data, that doesn't really matter.
As I posted above, the problems with this are three. False positives; the potential for abuse; and the inability of government agencies (or any other large organization) to prevent penetration and consequent third-party abuse.
Just in case you're miguided rather than a quisling, here's a clue: there's a difference between the nation and its government, and there is moreover a difference between the institutions of government and the current controllers of those institutions.
The interests of these three do not necessarily coincide. Especially since Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, they do not.
To clarify, the problems with this are firstly the false positives - type I errors, secondly the vast potential for abuse, and thirdly the government's inability to withhold electronic information from anyone else who really really wants it.
Doesn't matter. The headers aren't encrypted; they know what IP addresses are involved. Get enough history, and you don't need the content. Read this (Warning; elementary mathematical concepts involved.)
Slashdot Mirror
"Likely" (in the ordinary sense, roughly p > 0.5) is too high a bar for any discussion of the consequences of pollution. That's a straw man.
One of the consequences of mercury poisoning is hypertension. That shortens lives.
One of the consequences of asthma is proneness to lung infections. In turn, that is statistically life-shortening.
Really, this stuff is ordinary general knowledge.
Mods, come on... this comment is borderline incoherent, and the point it has doesn't even begin to address the actual article.
...
Nothing like a preemptive defense before any attacks exist...
Wow, high expectations! No, make that just "expectations". Wow, expectations!
None of critical thinking, ethical reasoning, general knowledge, research skill, or confidence in the soundness of their opinions are strengths of slashdot posters. Aggression, on the other hand...
Sign up, AC. Help moderate. Lift the standard!
No, being forced to actually operate the sulphur dioxide and particulates scrubbers that the government forced you to install a few years ago, but never got around to checking that you are using.
Those scrubbers shave at least one yuan per megawatt-hour off the profit, you know. Despair!
The PLA is not a single homogeneous mass. It's just as riven with internal factions as any other large organisation.
I guess the Party is using that fact with this law: as soon as one faction cleans up its own pollution sufficiently, it will be able to use the law as a club to beat its rivals. The new stable game-theoretic equilibrium is nobody pollutes.
In the real world cancer is not the only possible way pollution can shorten lives. And no, you don't "either die quickly or completely recover". The in-between outcomes are far more common.
Melamine in milk is not toxic in the way that you seem to be meaning, but it damages kidneys, shortening lives. Certain pesticides disrupt liver function and/or endocrine system function, causing grwoth and development problems. Air-borne particulate pollution triggers and exacerbates chroninc lung disease, shortening lives. Mercury and lead pollution have all kinds of effects that shorten lives.
Please stop subtracting value from the discussion.
Er, woosh?
... of javashit ... er, I mean, javascript.
How about "incompetent"?
If programming were a profession, or even a trade--in other words, required registration with a standards and ethics focused organization--not validating user input in production code would be grounds for a professional misconduct charge and/or dismissal.
SQL Injection
What we need is for MySQL/MariaDB, PostgreSQL, FireBird, etc., to come configured so that database updates can only take place in stored procedures in which statement building isn't present; and that they also come configured so that when you create a database, two users/roles are created: a role with stored procedure execute privileges only, and the owner, and the database owner can only access the database through the command-line interface.
In other words, what we need is for web programmers to be forced to learn something about the tools they're using.
You might get that effect by inventing a suitable replacement for SQL and forcing people to use it. But I think they'd just use text files for backing storage.
Cross-site Scripting
I can't see how a new language stops this.
replying to myself...bad form, I know.
But FYI, grandparent, Sony is being hammered for its contempt for its customers. A finance analyst caused a small stir recently by suggesting that Sony's consumer electronics business has negative value, and that Sony should sell it, and stick to what it does well: selling insurance.
Sony's contempt for its customers is just ordinary, run-of-the-mill contempt.
Microsoft's contempt for its customers is de luxe, extra virgin, cold pressed contempt, imported from the most famous contempt-growing areas of the world and painstakingly refined into the attitude that you see displayed.
Someone dumped some stuff in a pastebin, and somehow we all *know* it's an internal Microsoft guide for "Reputation Managers".
Why do we *know* this? (Hear me out - I'm not attempting to deny it. I'm making a larger point.)
Perhaps it's because of Microsoft's reputation.
What is that reputation? Contempt.
Microsoft has contempt for the people who are forced to use its products. This is why people react so strongly to Microsoft's recent innovations: it's not the change, but the contempt, that they are reacting to.
Microsoft wasn't always this way, but the attitude was certainly well entrenched by the time that it introduced its Office certification, the "MOUS".[1] The contempt came through with its introduction of the Office Ribbon, immediately after Microsoft said it'd be "too hard" for users to learn the "very different" user interface of OpenOffice. It came through with the total lack of investment in IE. It came through with the introduction of Vista. It came through with WinCE, and the Kin, and with the trashing of Windows Phone 7 users' investment: can't take your apps to 8, suckers! Most strongly, it has come through in the introduction of Windows 8.
The contempt was multi-leveled with 8. An interface designed for touch...and nearly no computers to use it on, nor any in the offing at the time of launch. That was subtle contempt. But the really big, fat, obvious, in-your-face contempt was in the look and feel of the UI. Big blocks of flat primary colors, vocabulary like "charms", dumping you suddenly back at the start page every time Microsoft thinks you're doing something too complicated: this was a UI for pre-schoolers or early primary-school kids. On tranquilizers.[2]
Why did Microsoft think that 8's UI would be acceptable to adults? Because Microsoft has complete contempt for its users. Microsoft has been dissing its users for a long time now. And with "x-bone phone home", always-on cam, etc., the dissing continues: you're a child. You can't handle privacy: you'll just do naughty things with it.
*This* is why we believe some anonymous pastebin: we know, inside, that Microsoft has contempt for its users. We've got the message.
The XBox One was conceived in a culture of contempt, and soaked in it throughout its gestation. If gamers have any self-respect, it will die still-born.
--tl;dr-stop-here--
1. Rebranded the MOS. Would you rather be a mouse, or moss? Which is more respectful?
2. This is what gets people's backs up about the '8 UI. "Can't handle change" never passed the sniff test: tens of millions could handle running away to iOS, Android, OS X... and some can even work with Chrome, according to Amazon's best-seller lists. I've yet to read their complaints about the inefficiency of those UIs.
People (even slashdotters) aren't good at introspection, though, so the unconscious reaction to Microsoft's contempt as embodied in the 8UI came out as a dislike of the mechanics of the UI, rather than as "Microsoft is insulting me! The bastards!"
*consults dumpe2fs -h*
Mmm, 91TB in 9 months. SSD? Perhaps not.
In 10 years no company will be manufacturing spinning hard drives.
...or horses.
Correction, on consulting CV: 1988-ish.
IIRC, IBM was using Firewire (IEEE1394) in its System i (AS/400) servers, around 1996-ish. Do you have a reference for Apple's inventing it?
I well remember the overwhelming sense of 'living large' provided by my first 4MB flash drive. Why, I could practically host a whole OS on there.
And reliability, too. The name brand floppies were worse than the off-brand ones, where I lived. But not by much... Solid-state flash drives were nearly infinitely better.
Nowadays...64 Gigabyte USB3? Lasts for 200 years, you say? Meh. Give me Storage with a capital S! Make it faster! Make it more reliable!
Mmm, "Thunderbolt"? Note that the new Mac Pro is almost entirely unexandable internally. PCIe, yes; but over Intel/Apple's proprietary interface.
Haha, but lots of Mac Pro users do exactly this. They edit video.
So, 0.1% or 0.2% of all computer users out there will find increased bandwidth very useful.
Use The Onion Router Project (TOR), and persuade everyone you know to do so as well. TOR works better the more people use it.
On your phone, use the Guardian Project.
Note: there is no suggestion that the US government has some super-decryption powers. Https is fine, things encrypted with modern techniques and large-enough keys are fine.
The reason the NSA needs supercomputers, rather than a big Hadoop installation, is that it is doing traffic analysis - a massive linear algebra problem. See this for a simplified analogy of what it's doing.
TL;DR: Use TOR Project and the Guardian Project. Don't forget to donate!
What the NSA needs those supercomputers for is traffic analysis. See this for a simplified analogy which hints at some of the techniques used, and, I think, explains why the NSA needs supercomputers rather than Hadoop. The Government may well be telling the truth when they say they don't read your mail. But with enough traffic data, that doesn't really matter.
As I posted above, the problems with this are three. False positives; the potential for abuse; and the inability of government agencies (or any other large organization) to prevent penetration and consequent third-party abuse.
Just in case you're miguided rather than a quisling, here's a clue: there's a difference between the nation and its government, and there is moreover a difference between the institutions of government and the current controllers of those institutions.
The interests of these three do not necessarily coincide. Especially since Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, they do not.
To clarify, the problems with this are firstly the false positives - type I errors, secondly the vast potential for abuse, and thirdly the government's inability to withhold electronic information from anyone else who really really wants it.
Doesn't matter. The headers aren't encrypted; they know what IP addresses are involved. Get enough history, and you don't need the content. Read this (Warning; elementary mathematical concepts involved.)
What enemy? China has "most favored nation" status in the USA. That doesn't sound like an enemy.