yeah and what about 17 year olds like myself? I'd like to have more options than 30 year olds screwing. Im an ephebophile, not a pedophile.
Legally speaking, U.S. people under 18 aren't supposed to be looking at any kind of porn. They aren't legally allowed to drink, smoke, or vote, either.
Yep, and so do you in your cache. Whats really fun is a 17 year old with a webcam that doesnt like you and knows you have {autoaccept | web based upload stuff | ftp | whatever}.
Hell, it's a lot easier than that. If you have an email account, anyone can make you a criminal by emailing you some kiddie porn and then calling the authorities to report its presence on your computer. Even if you delete it as soon as you realize what it is, you stilled viewed it, you still posessed it, and the incriminating evidence is still on your hard drive...
No, you are more likely to get the "hive-approval" posts modded up. Eg - Anti-MS, Pro-OpenSource, Anti-?IAA, Pro-Apple, Anti-Bush, Pro-Science-funding. Regardless how intelligent or accurate or truthful it is. Suppose you disagree with any of these stances?
Well I think you would have to accept that most of the posts claiming to represent the "voice of Slashdot" are in fact going to represent the majority opinion of Slashdot readers (or at least Slashdot moderators... assuming moderators are randomly selected from the readership, that should be about the same thing). If you disagree with one of those stances, your only hope is to write such a convincing and well-crafted post that it gets modded up anyway.
As was pointed out at the top of this thread... if the proposed system doesn't work for you, you still always have the option of writing your Congressman directly.
And if your child searches 'breast"... and finds a sweet pair of titties
And yet some of these same parents have willingly and purposefully let their own children not just see, but touch and even suck on their own breasts! The hypocrisy is astounding...:^)
I can't find the link to constitutional issues here, so I just have to say: wtf?
Apparently the better Google is at filtering out porn from search results that didn't request porn, the more constitutional rights we have.
(That was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I think it is essentially the argument that the DoJ wants to use: if they can show evidence that the Internet is more like, say, broadcast TV, in that anything broadcast goes to everyone, then they will have a better chance of being able to censor the Internet than if the Internet is shown to be more like a collection of bookstores, where the only people who see porn are those who actively look for porn. Personally, I don't think they have a case on those grounds, but you never know)
Is there anyone still willing to stand up and defend this criminal and over-reaching administration? Anyone besides the drug addict windbag, the pervert with anger management issues and the neurotic shrew? Which one of you losers wants to include themselves with those dirtbags?
I believe you've hit the nail on the head... anyone who stands up to the Administration will immediately get tarred with anything the Administration can dig up on them (and if they can't dig up anything valid, they'll find something trivial to twist and distort, until the person can be labelled as non-credible).
So even if you find somebody who is willing to stand up and have their name dragged through the mud, the likelihood is that they already stood up and already covered in it.
Why not email them directly if you care it? Or take the time and write a physical letter? Why would they even bother with a form letter and a url link?
I think there is some merit to the idea... the "Ask So-and-So about such-and-such" Slashdot articles do essentially this already, and in general it means that the posts that So-and-So actually reads and answers are some of the better ones. (note that some Editor person still needs to choose the "best" posts from amongst the +5 ones)
Why would they even bother with a form letter and a url link?
You're right, they probably wouldn't... I think the post(s) would have to be included directly in the message (be it email, fax, or paper mail), and they would probably have to be sent by a constituent of the politician also.
Yes, because if its modded up to +5 anything it MUST be the voice of the people. IT MUST BE!
No, but you're much more likely to find the good stuff amongst the +5 posts than you are by browsing at +0. And presumably our fine Congressmen deserve nothing but the best...:^)
Recall that fflush() blocks until the data makes it to disk; I expect he'd want to block until the socket buffers were empty, too.
I don't know if that really makes sense for networking though... the reason you'd want fflush() to block until the data makes it to disk is so that once your call to fflush() returns you know that your written data is safe in the event of a crash or power failure. (Although with too-clever hard drive firmware I'm not so sure even that's true anymore!). With networking on the other hand, even once the data has left your Ethernet port there is no guarantee that it will get to its destination... so what would be the purpose is waiting?
For an application where I want both low latency AND high bandwidth, it's not enough to leave Nagle's algorithm on or off. If I leave it on, I'll get increased bandwidth, but >200ms latency due to the Nagle delay. If I leave it off, I get low latency, but the computer will (typically?) send out one network packet per send() call, which means inefficient use of bandwidth unless the calling code is very careful to call send() only with large amounts of data per call.
To get around the above problems, I came up with the following scheme: Leave Nagle's algorithm enabled, but create a FlushSocket() function that merely disables Nagle on the socket, then calls send() on the socket with a 0-byte buffer, then enables Nagle again. This apparently forces the TCP stack to immediately send any data that it may have accumulated in its Nagle-buffer. Therefore the only thing the calling code has to remember to do is to call FlushSocket() whenever it has called send() one or more times and doesn't think it will be sending any more data any time soon.
The above technique seems to work pretty well under Linux, Windows, and OS/X (and is more portable than Linux-specific flags like TCP_CORK, etc), but I haven't seen it documented anywhere. Is that simply an oversight, or is there some nasty downside to this technique that I'm overlooking?
Yes, absolutely. Take this concept to its logical conclusion, and you'll have the Recursive Binary Search Elevator system: For a building with N stories, you get in to an elevator car that is (N/2) stories tall, and can move to either of two positions: it can occupy the bottom half of the building, or the top half. Then inside this elevator is a smaller elevator system, and each of its elevator cars can take you to the top of bottom half of the first elevator car. Inside these smaller cars is still a smaller set of elevator cars, and so on, until you get to the base case where each elevator car is only one floor tall and can take you to either of two floors. At that point, you are at your destination.
Hmm, maybe I've been coding for too long now...:^)
It's not that the US doesn't care for other countries, it's just that each country has its own self-interest in mind.
So you are saying the U.S. actually does care for other countries, its just that its caring has no effect on its actions?
Well gosh, that does put things in a different light. I'm sure the rest of the world will rest easier now, knowing that whenever the U.S. screws them over, they feel guilty about it afterwards.
If you are broadcasting with enough energy to disrupt GPS (Galileo or NavStar) you are broadcasting enough energy to be a very nice target for anti-radio missiles
Very true... I suppose the proper countermove then would be to make lots of unmanned jamming devices and spread them around like land mines. Then it would take a lot of missles to get rid of all of them...
Okay, here's a dumb question for you: I've got a pretty good idea what would happen to me if I stood right behind a traditional rocket while it was lit. But what would happen to me if I stood right behind one of these while it was running? Instant death? Intense pain? A refreshing tingly sensation?
Take the space elevator to orbit, use a little bit of conventional thrust to get out of orbit, then fire up the ion drives and eventually hop to the next planet, where your reverse the process.
Actually, in many cases you can get where you want to go with little or no thrust at all, simply by riding the elevator up past the altitude of geosynchronous orbit. The higher above that altitude you go, the greater the centrifugal force from being spun around the Earth, so it's just a matter of calculating when to let go of the elevator.
The article submitter implies that nuclear power isn't the "green route," but I'll argue that it's the "greenest" route that can accommodate future energy demand.
If you want nuclear power to be widely used, you'll need to solve the waste storage issue and the security issue. And keep in mind that a solution that is workable only in "trusted" nations is not a sufficient solution -- all parts of the world will need reliable clean energy, including places like Pakistan and Iran.
Relying solely on solar and wind power for energy is a "green" fantasy that will never be realized
More likely the end game will consist of increased efficiency plus many different types of renewable energy being harnessed simultaneously, with different regions using different methods depending on what is most practical/appropriate. The goal isn't to rely solely on solar and wind power, the goal is to wean ourselves away from fossil fuels and their associated problems.
Why not nuclear? Half the cost per megawatt than wind, doesn't kill any birds, and doesn't pollute like coal and natural gas.
Generates nuclear waste that must be stored securely and guarded indefinitely, requires mining and transport of radioactive materials which also must be guarded carefully, and the U.S. gov't discourages its use in many nations because of nuclear proliferation worries.
For the extra peace of mind, I'm willing to pay twice the price and use wind power. Perhaps the most appealing feature of wind and solar power (other than the environmental benefits) is that you don't ever have to buy fuel from anyone, and thus you don't have to worry about volatility in the price or availability of fuel.
Nobody's compared my signature to the card in years, and it used to be everyone did (then again, I'm also older.)
I think that's probably because most cashiers realize how useless the "can you duplicate the signature on the card you just provided?" test is... I can think of the following problems, off the top of my head:
Are cashiers trained to make signature-matching decisions properly? At $8/hour, I'm guessing most of them are not.
False negatives. Forging someone's signature is hardly a difficult task; most people could probably do a passable job after half an hour of practice.
False positives. People do sign their names differently at different times, depending on whether they are in a hurry, have an injury, etc. As an $8/hour clerk, are you going to risk alienating a customer by challenging his honesty based on something so subjective? Probably not.
Ease of subversion. Even if a thief didn't want to forge a signature, it's easy enough to alter the signature on a stolen credit card, or create a bogus credit card with a signature in your own handwriting.
So the clerks are merely implicitly acknowledging what should be common knowledge anyway: Signatures on credit cards are useless as a form of authentication, and we need something better.
Why? It's worth more used as a 0-day, to penetrate targets you can make real money from (selling zombies is AFAICS relatively recent. I'd bet 0-days have been valuable far before that). And it could be easily triggered by emailing
Selling zombies to spammers seems like chump change, when you could just have your malware silently install a keylogger that grabs the user's credit card information whenever he types it in, and quietly sends out a copy of it to your drop site. In no time you'd end up with thousands of valid credit card numbers to use however you wanted to.
It seems odd that I haven't heard about that actually being done. Has such a piece of malware ever actually been made?
All you'd accomplish by using an all electric car is to shift the pollutants to a more concentrated centralized source.
Unless of course you get your electricity from some other source, like solar or wind. They do exist, you know.
Ignoring the environmental pros and cons, wouldn't it be nice from an economic standpoint to power your car with gas when gas is cheaper, and electricity when electricity is cheaper?
So while this may seem "lazy" and easier than walking or riding a bike
You're right... unless you are going uphill, riding a bike is less work than riding a Segway, because on the bike you get to sit down, whereas the Segway forces you to stand.
The solution, of course, is to place a barstool on the Segway and sit on it while driving.
Slashdot Mirror
Legally speaking, U.S. people under 18 aren't supposed to be looking at any kind of porn. They aren't legally allowed to drink, smoke, or vote, either.
Hell, it's a lot easier than that. If you have an email account, anyone can make you a criminal by emailing you some kiddie porn and then calling the authorities to report its presence on your computer. Even if you delete it as soon as you realize what it is, you stilled viewed it, you still posessed it, and the incriminating evidence is still on your hard drive...
I can't help but think that the phrase "legimitate abuse" is an oxymoron.
Well I think you would have to accept that most of the posts claiming to represent the "voice of Slashdot" are in fact going to represent the majority opinion of Slashdot readers (or at least Slashdot moderators... assuming moderators are randomly selected from the readership, that should be about the same thing). If you disagree with one of those stances, your only hope is to write such a convincing and well-crafted post that it gets modded up anyway.
As was pointed out at the top of this thread... if the proposed system doesn't work for you, you still always have the option of writing your Congressman directly.
And yet some of these same parents have willingly and purposefully let their own children not just see, but touch and even suck on their own breasts! The hypocrisy is astounding...
Apparently the better Google is at filtering out porn from search results that didn't request porn, the more constitutional rights we have.
(That was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I think it is essentially the argument that the DoJ wants to use: if they can show evidence that the Internet is more like, say, broadcast TV, in that anything broadcast goes to everyone, then they will have a better chance of being able to censor the Internet than if the Internet is shown to be more like a collection of bookstores, where the only people who see porn are those who actively look for porn. Personally, I don't think they have a case on those grounds, but you never know)
I believe you've hit the nail on the head... anyone who stands up to the Administration will immediately get tarred with anything the Administration can dig up on them (and if they can't dig up anything valid, they'll find something trivial to twist and distort, until the person can be labelled as non-credible).
So even if you find somebody who is willing to stand up and have their name dragged through the mud, the likelihood is that they already stood up and already covered in it.
I think there is some merit to the idea... the "Ask So-and-So about such-and-such" Slashdot articles do essentially this already, and in general it means that the posts that So-and-So actually reads and answers are some of the better ones. (note that some Editor person still needs to choose the "best" posts from amongst the +5 ones)
Why would they even bother with a form letter and a url link?
You're right, they probably wouldn't... I think the post(s) would have to be included directly in the message (be it email, fax, or paper mail), and they would probably have to be sent by a constituent of the politician also.
Yes, because if its modded up to +5 anything it MUST be the voice of the people. IT MUST BE!
No, but you're much more likely to find the good stuff amongst the +5 posts than you are by browsing at +0. And presumably our fine Congressmen deserve nothing but the best...
I don't know if that really makes sense for networking though... the reason you'd want fflush() to block until the data makes it to disk is so that once your call to fflush() returns you know that your written data is safe in the event of a crash or power failure. (Although with too-clever hard drive firmware I'm not so sure even that's true anymore!). With networking on the other hand, even once the data has left your Ethernet port there is no guarantee that it will get to its destination... so what would be the purpose is waiting?
I agree, that would be nice... good luck getting it into the POSIX standard anytime soon though.
Also could you post the code of your Flush function? I find the description a little confusing at some points.
Sure, here is the code:
void FlushSocketOutput(int s)
{
SetNaglesEnabled(s, false);
send(s, NULL, 0, 0);
SetNaglesEnabled(s, true);
}
void SetNaglesEnabled(int s, bool enabled)
{
int enableNoDelay = enabled ? 0 : 1;
setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, (char *) &enableNoDelay, sizeof(enableNoDelay));
}
See my previous post above ("Nagle's Algorithm") for a way to do it.
To get around the above problems, I came up with the following scheme: Leave Nagle's algorithm enabled, but create a FlushSocket() function that merely disables Nagle on the socket, then calls send() on the socket with a 0-byte buffer, then enables Nagle again. This apparently forces the TCP stack to immediately send any data that it may have accumulated in its Nagle-buffer. Therefore the only thing the calling code has to remember to do is to call FlushSocket() whenever it has called send() one or more times and doesn't think it will be sending any more data any time soon.
The above technique seems to work pretty well under Linux, Windows, and OS/X (and is more portable than Linux-specific flags like TCP_CORK, etc), but I haven't seen it documented anywhere. Is that simply an oversight, or is there some nasty downside to this technique that I'm overlooking?
Yes, absolutely. Take this concept to its logical conclusion, and you'll have the Recursive Binary Search Elevator system: For a building with N stories, you get in to an elevator car that is (N/2) stories tall, and can move to either of two positions: it can occupy the bottom half of the building, or the top half. Then inside this elevator is a smaller elevator system, and each of its elevator cars can take you to the top of bottom half of the first elevator car. Inside these smaller cars is still a smaller set of elevator cars, and so on, until you get to the base case where each elevator car is only one floor tall and can take you to either of two floors. At that point, you are at your destination.
Hmm, maybe I've been coding for too long now...
So you are saying the U.S. actually does care for other countries, its just that its caring has no effect on its actions?
Well gosh, that does put things in a different light. I'm sure the rest of the world will rest easier now, knowing that whenever the U.S. screws them over, they feel guilty about it afterwards.
Very true... I suppose the proper countermove then would be to make lots of unmanned jamming devices and spread them around like land mines. Then it would take a lot of missles to get rid of all of them...
Okay, here's a dumb question for you: I've got a pretty good idea what would happen to me if I stood right behind a traditional rocket while it was lit. But what would happen to me if I stood right behind one of these while it was running? Instant death? Intense pain? A refreshing tingly sensation?
Zero to sixty in 72 hours! Zoom!
Actually, in many cases you can get where you want to go with little or no thrust at all, simply by riding the elevator up past the altitude of geosynchronous orbit. The higher above that altitude you go, the greater the centrifugal force from being spun around the Earth, so it's just a matter of calculating when to let go of the elevator.
If you want nuclear power to be widely used, you'll need to solve the waste storage issue and the security issue. And keep in mind that a solution that is workable only in "trusted" nations is not a sufficient solution -- all parts of the world will need reliable clean energy, including places like Pakistan and Iran.
Relying solely on solar and wind power for energy is a "green" fantasy that will never be realized
More likely the end game will consist of increased efficiency plus many different types of renewable energy being harnessed simultaneously, with different regions using different methods depending on what is most practical/appropriate. The goal isn't to rely solely on solar and wind power, the goal is to wean ourselves away from fossil fuels and their associated problems.
Generates nuclear waste that must be stored securely and guarded indefinitely, requires mining and transport of radioactive materials which also must be guarded carefully, and the U.S. gov't discourages its use in many nations because of nuclear proliferation worries.
For the extra peace of mind, I'm willing to pay twice the price and use wind power. Perhaps the most appealing feature of wind and solar power (other than the environmental benefits) is that you don't ever have to buy fuel from anyone, and thus you don't have to worry about volatility in the price or availability of fuel.
I think that's probably because most cashiers realize how useless the "can you duplicate the signature on the card you just provided?" test is... I can think of the following problems, off the top of my head:
So the clerks are merely implicitly acknowledging what should be common knowledge anyway: Signatures on credit cards are useless as a form of authentication, and we need something better.
Selling zombies to spammers seems like chump change, when you could just have your malware silently install a keylogger that grabs the user's credit card information whenever he types it in, and quietly sends out a copy of it to your drop site. In no time you'd end up with thousands of valid credit card numbers to use however you wanted to.
It seems odd that I haven't heard about that actually being done. Has such a piece of malware ever actually been made?
concentrated centralized source.
Unless of course you get your electricity from some other source, like solar or wind. They do exist, you know.
Ignoring the environmental pros and cons, wouldn't it be nice from an economic standpoint to power your car with gas when gas is cheaper, and electricity when electricity is cheaper?
Marauding bands of slavering, rabid Apple lawyers, maybe...
You're right... unless you are going uphill, riding a bike is less work than riding a Segway, because on the bike you get to sit down, whereas the Segway forces you to stand.
The solution, of course, is to place a barstool on the Segway and sit on it while driving.