NAT mostly works, but it turns a lot of things that should 'just work' into a need to fiddle around with the router config.
I don't see how. Either you keep essentially all ports open to your public IP at all times (bad idea), or you need to open ports on demand.
The latter requires the same fiddling around with the router config as with NAT, assuming UPnP isn't used. If UPnP is enabled it's not an issue with NAT either and the whole point is moot.
Without good results, it doesn't really matter about the bells and whistles. I use a search engine to find information, so it better do that extremely well. For example, I just couldn't stand using DuckDuckGo (aka Bing) because of this, and went back to Google. Bing consistently failed to find information the information I wanted, while Google had it on the first page.
So, after your engine returns as good or, ideally, better results than Google, you can start thinking about other features.
One feature I'd really like is to be able to tweak my result set. Something like if I search for "AC DC", I get a bunch of results about the band "AC/DC". That's not really a bad result given the input, but in this case I was after an explanation for the electrical terms.
So I'm thinking some ability to mark one or more of the results I don't want and say "not pages like this", and it would cull those talking about the band, in a weighted manner. Or some other way to help me find the information I want when I search for some ambiguous terms.
It's called false advertising and Pearson may be left holding the bag if the allegations are true and hold up in court.
That might well be. But it's also very poor project management of the school district not to do a pilot test before running off buying a billion iPads. The pilot test would identify the current problem and leave them with say 1200 iPads and not 120000.
There's talk that they influenced the decision of some recommended constants for Elliptic Curve Cryptography.
You'll want to use constants that ensures the cryptographic strength of the algorithm, so picking them are non-trivial and hence a recommended set was published. This is the same for most algorithms. AES has constants and they are part of what makes the algorithm AES and not some other variant.
Anyway, here's what Bruce Schneier said about ECC:
I no longer trust the constants. I believe the NSA has manipulated them through their relationships with industry.
The link is between nutrition and brain development
Could it also be related to poorer parents working more hours, thus having less time to be with the kids during their early years playing with them, reading for them and otherwise stimulating their brain development? Or has that been corrected for?
Meanwhile, all the other platforms for which LLVM would be the dominant platform and for which there aren't extant major backers are basically on the hook for whatever way LLVM wants to play it, including extinguishing support for their platform.
No, really, I mean it. Explain in detail how FreeBSD will become utterly unusable if LLVM went closed-source today and deleted any FreeBSD related code from their now-internal repository. Or AMD's OpenCL implementation. Or any other project using LLVM.
Sure, it's technically possible to start up a fork tomorrow. But, realistically, it's also just as possible to recreate MS Windows from scratch.
That comparison is utterly silly. You already have the entire source code for LLVM, and forking it is simply pushing it to another repository. That's the complete opposite of Windows, where you'd have to recreate it from scratch.
Well, either way, you're setting yourself up for the risk of the source going closed and you having to support development yourself.
Well yes, but all that does is put you in the same spot as if you had picked a closed-source component to begin with.
And don't think you're safe with GPL. Any GPL code can be re-licensed (and thus made closed-source) if the copyright holders agree. Of course, exactly as with BSD, the code already distributed under GPL/BSD will stay GPL/BSD.
Company A extends out project X until a lot of people depend on your variant. Company A close sources future development of project X or incorporate some patented technology without provisions for use in the open source community
But they can't retroactively close the source, so I don't see how the "extinguish" part comes in. If the LLVM guys closes the source tomorrow it does not affect AMD, who's using LLVM for their OpenCL implementation. If it does, please elaborate, because I'm not seeing how.
I'm ignoring patents because software patents are broken and doesn't apply where I live anyway (and hopefully it stays that way).
OK, these guys are probably far smarter than I'll ever be, but... the universe clearly isn't staying at a finite size, and playing the universe's expansion in reverse would imply that it started at a single point. How do they account for this?
Various Quantum Gravity theories predict different things here. Some, like Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), predict that over extremely short distances gravity is repulsive. Applied to cosmology (Loop Quantum Cosmology, LQC) this leads to a prediction of a "bounce", where a contracting phase flips into an expansion phase.
You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.
That's just silly. There is absolutely nothing in the specs that require you to present all the elements in a web page.
Ads are the most dangerous thing on the internet these days. Last year the ad network of a fairly big Norwegian magazine got hacked and for several hours visitors got exposed to a drive-by-download specifically targeting the largest bank in Norway.
Users just had to have a slightly outdated Java version installed and enabled. No interaction by the user required besides simply visiting the site. And it just so happens the very same bank requires Java for it's login procedure...
As such I see ad blocking as my #1 anti-virus/malware tool.
There are a few sites I frequented which detect my ad blocker and prevents me from reading more than the blurb and I respect that. When I forget and try to access the article and get the "please pay or turn off ad blocker" page instead, I simply close the page and move on.
If you got an enum, you can declare a set of that enum, for example: type
TParam = (pAaa, pBbb, pCcc);
TParams = set of TParam;
You can then easily check for membership: if pBbb in Params then...
However the real power comes from being able to do set operations using + (union), - (difference), * (intersection) and the less than/greater than operators for testing for sub-/supersets, see the documentation for details.
For example, if you want to check if neither pAaa nor pCcc is in Params, you can do
Have you seen Mr Plinkett[1] pick the originals apart? While the presentation is a bit weird, though funny if you like that kind of thing, his points are spot on and overall does a very good job of explaining why the originals were considerably better than the prequels.
Are the Red drives designed to be paired or run in RAID arrays specifically, as opposed to the Green line that is made for power savings?
Pretty much yes. The Red have better vibration tolerance, and the firmware is tweaked to fit a NAS workload better. For example, a Green will park the head as quickly as it can which for always-on machines can lead to a Green disk reaching its "Load/Unload Cycle" tolerance in months and die prematurely. The Red will not do this.
There's also a difference in how they handle unreadable sectors and such errors which makes the Red play nicer with hardware RAID controllers. An unrecoverable read error in a Green can cause the whole array to go down.
You have to get used to that. In functional programming, parentheses are usually used to denote function calls.
I really have tried, but it's just too terse for me.
At this stage I'm pretty certain I won't grok a functional language until someone invents a functional language that doesn't look like some variation of Brainfuck or similar.
Looking over the official tutorial pages, the syntax is really different than anything I've done before. It looks hard to learn.
Indeed. And what's with this obsession amongst the functional language developers to try to use the least amount of characters possible? We're no longer in the 1960's where verbose source code took a lot of valuable space.
For example, when I read fun double n = 2 * n
I see a function called double which implicitly takes a parameter n and returns true if n = 0, and false otherwise. Would it have killed them to separate the parameter from the "body", and used proper names? For example: function double(n) = 2 * n
You'd need offline viewing capabilities, and Netflix has said they will never offer that.
No you don't. The vast majority of people who watch "pirated" movies are online 24/7 with good enough pipes for streaming.
I've got Netflix and HBO (Nordic). Last sunday I wanted to watch the new XMen movie with my gf. Brick and mortar stores aren't open here on Sundays, so no chance there. And of course neither Netflix nor any other similar streaming service available to me carries it yet. But the pirated Bluray is out there, and it would have taken me just 15 minutes or so to download a rip and start playing it on my TV.
No, what I think they need to do is to make a "movie-Steam" Netflix hybrid. That is, a rich catalog of movies for a monthly fee. Then allow me to pay money for early access to new releases. Once I pay I get to keep access to that movie.
And by early access I mean when the first Bluray hits the street. Because that's when people can get the pirated version.
A model helicopter is actually far more dangerous as it has a hardened rotor shaft. Does anybody call for them being banned? No. Has one ever being used to bring down a commercial airliner? No.
It's also significantly more difficult to operate than a quadcopter, as well as more expensive.
As I understand it, the problem is that the batteries must be at 0 degrees C to accept charge. The limited sun it's getting now isn't enough to heat the batteries (surface temperatures are about -70C IIRC).
Time to audit the books to see who pocketed the money a more robust design would have addressed.
I think you guys should play some Kerbal Space Program and see just how much more fuel you need at every stage just to put an extra kg of equipment on that lander.
Slashdot Mirror
NAT mostly works, but it turns a lot of things that should 'just work' into a need to fiddle around with the router config.
I don't see how. Either you keep essentially all ports open to your public IP at all times (bad idea), or you need to open ports on demand.
The latter requires the same fiddling around with the router config as with NAT, assuming UPnP isn't used. If UPnP is enabled it's not an issue with NAT either and the whole point is moot.
Without good results, it doesn't really matter about the bells and whistles. I use a search engine to find information, so it better do that extremely well. For example, I just couldn't stand using DuckDuckGo (aka Bing) because of this, and went back to Google. Bing consistently failed to find information the information I wanted, while Google had it on the first page.
So, after your engine returns as good or, ideally, better results than Google, you can start thinking about other features.
One feature I'd really like is to be able to tweak my result set. Something like if I search for "AC DC", I get a bunch of results about the band "AC/DC". That's not really a bad result given the input, but in this case I was after an explanation for the electrical terms.
So I'm thinking some ability to mark one or more of the results I don't want and say "not pages like this", and it would cull those talking about the band, in a weighted manner. Or some other way to help me find the information I want when I search for some ambiguous terms.
It's called false advertising and Pearson may be left holding the bag if the allegations are true and hold up in court.
That might well be. But it's also very poor project management of the school district not to do a pilot test before running off buying a billion iPads. The pilot test would identify the current problem and leave them with say 1200 iPads and not 120000.
Fair enough, never played the Pre-sequel and just assumed. And that's always a bad idea :)
2K Games is the publisher of Borderlands while the developer is Gearbox Software, which is based in Texas, US.
2K has several studios all over, the one from the article was 2K Australia.
There's talk that they influenced the decision of some recommended constants for Elliptic Curve Cryptography.
You'll want to use constants that ensures the cryptographic strength of the algorithm, so picking them are non-trivial and hence a recommended set was published. This is the same for most algorithms. AES has constants and they are part of what makes the algorithm AES and not some other variant.
Anyway, here's what Bruce Schneier said about ECC:
I no longer trust the constants. I believe the NSA has manipulated them through their relationships with industry.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/09/the_nsa_is_brea.html#c1675929
And here's a nice background on ECC:
https://blog.cloudflare.com/a-relatively-easy-to-understand-primer-on-elliptic-curve-cryptography/
The link is between nutrition and brain development
Could it also be related to poorer parents working more hours, thus having less time to be with the kids during their early years playing with them, reading for them and otherwise stimulating their brain development? Or has that been corrected for?
Meanwhile, all the other platforms for which LLVM would be the dominant platform and for which there aren't extant major backers are basically on the hook for whatever way LLVM wants to play it, including extinguishing support for their platform.
No, really, I mean it. Explain in detail how FreeBSD will become utterly unusable if LLVM went closed-source today and deleted any FreeBSD related code from their now-internal repository. Or AMD's OpenCL implementation. Or any other project using LLVM.
Sure, it's technically possible to start up a fork tomorrow. But, realistically, it's also just as possible to recreate MS Windows from scratch.
That comparison is utterly silly. You already have the entire source code for LLVM, and forking it is simply pushing it to another repository. That's the complete opposite of Windows, where you'd have to recreate it from scratch.
Well, either way, you're setting yourself up for the risk of the source going closed and you having to support development yourself.
Well yes, but all that does is put you in the same spot as if you had picked a closed-source component to begin with.
And don't think you're safe with GPL. Any GPL code can be re-licensed (and thus made closed-source) if the copyright holders agree. Of course, exactly as with BSD, the code already distributed under GPL/BSD will stay GPL/BSD.
Company A extends out project X until a lot of people depend on your variant. Company A close sources future development of project X or incorporate some patented technology without provisions for use in the open source community
But they can't retroactively close the source, so I don't see how the "extinguish" part comes in. If the LLVM guys closes the source tomorrow it does not affect AMD, who's using LLVM for their OpenCL implementation. If it does, please elaborate, because I'm not seeing how.
I'm ignoring patents because software patents are broken and doesn't apply where I live anyway (and hopefully it stays that way).
OK, these guys are probably far smarter than I'll ever be, but... the universe clearly isn't staying at a finite size, and playing the universe's expansion in reverse would imply that it started at a single point. How do they account for this?
Various Quantum Gravity theories predict different things here. Some, like Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), predict that over extremely short distances gravity is repulsive. Applied to cosmology (Loop Quantum Cosmology, LQC) this leads to a prediction of a "bounce", where a contracting phase flips into an expansion phase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
Clang is vulnerable to some future embrace-extend-and-extinguish attack, when GCC doesn't exist as a viable competitor.
I'm having a hard time imagining a plausible scenario for this, care to elaborate how that would play out? And what about llvm?
You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.
That's just silly. There is absolutely nothing in the specs that require you to present all the elements in a web page.
Ads are the most dangerous thing on the internet these days. Last year the ad network of a fairly big Norwegian magazine got hacked and for several hours visitors got exposed to a drive-by-download specifically targeting the largest bank in Norway.
Users just had to have a slightly outdated Java version installed and enabled. No interaction by the user required besides simply visiting the site. And it just so happens the very same bank requires Java for it's login procedure...
As such I see ad blocking as my #1 anti-virus/malware tool.
There are a few sites I frequented which detect my ad blocker and prevents me from reading more than the blurb and I respect that. When I forget and try to access the article and get the "please pay or turn off ad blocker" page instead, I simply close the page and move on.
If you got an enum, you can declare a set of that enum, for example:
type
TParam = (pAaa, pBbb, pCcc);
TParams = set of TParam;
You can then easily check for membership: if pBbb in Params then ...
However the real power comes from being able to do set operations using + (union), - (difference), * (intersection) and the less than/greater than operators for testing for sub-/supersets, see the documentation for details.
For example, if you want to check if neither pAaa nor pCcc is in Params, you can do
if (Params * [pAaa, pCcc]) = [] then ...
[] is an empty set.
Have you seen Mr Plinkett[1] pick the originals apart? While the presentation is a bit weird, though funny if you like that kind of thing, his points are spot on and overall does a very good job of explaining why the originals were considerably better than the prequels.
[1] http://redlettermedia.com/plin...
Are the Red drives designed to be paired or run in RAID arrays specifically, as opposed to the Green line that is made for power savings?
Pretty much yes. The Red have better vibration tolerance, and the firmware is tweaked to fit a NAS workload better. For example, a Green will park the head as quickly as it can which for always-on machines can lead to a Green disk reaching its "Load/Unload Cycle" tolerance in months and die prematurely. The Red will not do this.
There's also a difference in how they handle unreadable sectors and such errors which makes the Red play nicer with hardware RAID controllers. An unrecoverable read error in a Green can cause the whole array to go down.
It would have killed them, because (n) is a tuple of one element.
It's the same in Python, yet I haven't noticed it killing any Python programmers. Perhaps functional language designers are more fragile creatures.
You have to get used to that. In functional programming, parentheses are usually used to denote function calls.
I really have tried, but it's just too terse for me.
At this stage I'm pretty certain I won't grok a functional language until someone invents a functional language that doesn't look like some variation of Brainfuck or similar.
Looking over the official tutorial pages, the syntax is really different than anything I've done before. It looks hard to learn.
Indeed. And what's with this obsession amongst the functional language developers to try to use the least amount of characters possible? We're no longer in the 1960's where verbose source code took a lot of valuable space.
For example, when I read
fun double n = 2 * n
I see a function called double which implicitly takes a parameter n and returns true if n = 0, and false otherwise. Would it have killed them to separate the parameter from the "body", and used proper names? For example:
function double(n) = 2 * n
You'd need offline viewing capabilities, and Netflix has said they will never offer that.
No you don't. The vast majority of people who watch "pirated" movies are online 24/7 with good enough pipes for streaming.
I've got Netflix and HBO (Nordic). Last sunday I wanted to watch the new XMen movie with my gf. Brick and mortar stores aren't open here on Sundays, so no chance there. And of course neither Netflix nor any other similar streaming service available to me carries it yet. But the pirated Bluray is out there, and it would have taken me just 15 minutes or so to download a rip and start playing it on my TV.
No, what I think they need to do is to make a "movie-Steam" Netflix hybrid. That is, a rich catalog of movies for a monthly fee. Then allow me to pay money for early access to new releases. Once I pay I get to keep access to that movie.
And by early access I mean when the first Bluray hits the street. Because that's when people can get the pirated version.
In that case one might be in for a disappointment. The article[1] seems to only contain about a page worth of equations.
[1]: http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0917
A model helicopter is actually far more dangerous as it has a hardened rotor shaft. Does anybody call for them being banned? No. Has one ever being used to bring down a commercial airliner? No.
It's also significantly more difficult to operate than a quadcopter, as well as more expensive.
The one scientists use today: invariant mass aka rest mass.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html
As I understand it, the problem is that the batteries must be at 0 degrees C to accept charge. The limited sun it's getting now isn't enough to heat the batteries (surface temperatures are about -70C IIRC).
That would depend heavily on the radioactive material used, no? For example, Wikipedia lists Pu238 to have just a ~16% drop in output after 20 years.
I'm guessing cost and weight were the key factors for picking solar over an RTG.
Time to audit the books to see who pocketed the money a more robust design would have addressed.
I think you guys should play some Kerbal Space Program and see just how much more fuel you need at every stage just to put an extra kg of equipment on that lander.