Take every variable possible, make sure you include them all, and put them on one side of the equation. Now, on the other side, put 42. I guarantee either you find me correct or I'll find something you are missing.
This is a good plan. I saw that one movie, the Italian Job, I know how sturdy Mini coopers can be. I'm sure they can handle the harsh environment of mars.
I think most people who go to a Post Secondary that takes researching seriously all agree with your point of view. The thing is that for a paper you normally want either a primary source or a peer-reviewed piece. Wikipedia is a great source of knowledge but its none of those - as much as they TRY to be a peer-reviewed source of information they lack the structure to ensure it is that way.
What they need to do is make an application process so that if you want to be an editor for a specific field, you need a Doctorate in that field or something. Then when you get multiple editors together from around the globe all with 8+ years studying Egyptian History, they can shell out what makes it on the page and what doesn't. Even discrepancies can be noted on the article!
I think it'd be a better system, but theres too many things with logistics and politics to have that work, especially when people don't get paid for doing so.
So, as it stands, people are forced to use Google Scholar.
It's not as bad as you might think. It also means that people have to pick a subject THAT MATTERS, so you can't just pick a paper about nothing. And your creative writing skills mean you make it interesting for the editors. But thats just for whole new articles. The idea of Wikipedia for school projects isn't new.
My girlfriend does Ancient Medieval History and Archaeology at the University of Calgary. One of her assignments last semester was either a large paper (which she chose) or you could edit an existing Wikipedia Article that was innaccurate and needed an update. Specifically, my Girlfriend could edit this: Women in ancient Rome
But she chose not too. Not as Web Savvy as others.
I know exactly what you mean. Basically a Sunday evening goes like this:
Me + 2 roomates. Lets play a PC Game. What genre? If its RTS we'll go with Either Starcraft or Age of Empires 2 mostly. Turn Based? Probably one of the Civs, or Age of Wonders. First Person shooter? Well we got Rainbow 6 Rogue Spear or the Original Ghost Recon if we're in the tactical mode. Original Halo. Anything in the Half Life verse, 1 or 2. If we want to try a new FPS we normally just browse the free HL2 Mods on Steam - find one we want. No need for Nazi Zombies on CoD when theres half a dozen zombie games already made online. Roleplaying, probably DotA. And I got Madden 98 should we feel the need for a sports game, but thats never actually happened.
Basically, all the bases are covered already. And we don't have to worry about buying the next gen console to play em, making sure our internet speed is the decent and not flaky, and in most cases, you can make an ISO of the CD without any hitches, and just use that in a virtual drive (no need to CD Swap like in the old days). In the case that you want to play online against other people, most games have CD Keys built into their DRM, so you can't have 2 people online with the same Key at once. And thats fine, thats DRM we can live with, because it still means we can play it locally and have fun.
I don't get why they had to mess with that structure - it worked VERY very well.
A) Games were inclined to create multiplayer content, so that limitting their online usage to 1 key was understandable and accepted. B) You never needed a connection to play the single player content. This means you could share with your friends but thats like what, maybe a dozen people if you're slutty with your games. And that'll incline them to go out and buy the game themselves if they really enjoy it, so they can continue to play it when they give you your game back. C) It's lifespan still has not died, and won't likely. Sure - their hosting servers might go down and the large matchmaking system could go under in a decade, but so long as you can still host a lan party, its all good.
Even Spore or World of Warcraft's system works, where you Register online ONCE, with your CD Key, and you don't have to enter it ever again. Then all you need to remember is your account info (*Yes, I know WoW you need a constant connection, but the DRM otherwise is pretty weak. This is why private WoW servers can run). You can share your account info, but you can't both login online at the same time. Which means you can't play together, usually, but allows you to share it enough to the point where it'll convince the other person to buy it if they enjoy playing it and want to face off against you.
Really? I'd think it's just the opposite. Even a lowly-rated comment here will be read by hundreds, if not thousands, whereas if you're just some loser on Twitter with no followers, anything you post will probably be read by no one at all.
Twitter has the live feed. You make a tweet, and anyone trollin' will read your tweet, whether they are following you or not.
Suppose you wanted someone to hear you about how you think Twitter is useless? I suppose you could use twitter to broadcast it. You'd probably get more people to read it than/.
Irrelevant to the point. The fact that the door was latched means they don't want people snooping around.
And password is the lock.... Becasue any password scheme is 'guessable' It's just the amount of time used.
Its not irrelevant. The fact that a password exists suggests that you don't want people to get in. But its only as effective as its weakest link, in this case, the security question.
Yes - any password is guessable, but the idea is to make it more difficult to guess, so that it takes so much time that its impractical to guess it. This is why various capital, lower letters, and symbols make stronger passwords, since every brute force script in the world tries known dictionary words with numbers around it first.
Just like any lock is pickable, it just takes time. Clearly you aren't going to use the kind of lock on your bathroom that you would on your front door, anyone with a nail could break in. I'm just pointing out, if they don't want people logging in other people's twitters account, take out the weak point. Because the password is fine, the security question idea is just ridiculous.
Having a security question that is easily guessable is like leaving your car door unlocked. I wouldn't be surprised if it got stolen. Simple as that.
However, not using a security question, or using one that is as difficult to guess (Symbols, upper lower case, etc) - is like locking the doors. It will deter most criminals.
If someone SERIOUSLY wanted to hack into Obama's Twitter and cause a ruckus, they would, and I would sympathize for the Prez. But when some dude in France is pulling it off to show off his "leet skills", when all he's doing is guessing, yeah - I think I know who to really blame.
Next thing I know I'm going to read the NSA is still using WEP/TKA!
The "Security question" system in itself is the weak point in most security situations.
Mother's Maiden name?
Pet's first name?
Favourite Band?
How long do you think it would take to brute force any of those with a simple script? There's no point in making sure your passwords Really strong if your security question can be as weak as a noodle.
While true, I don't think thats quite what he was asking about.
He means, if they lose a packet, or if it is going to recieve false data from other countries - how does NASA handle it? The latency between here and Mars is high enough that something like TCP is impractical and UDP doesn't really preform for an update, so what protocol are they using to transmit upgrades that has enough security built into it?
'following/photographing/filming/detaining' an editor for 22 hours
Following someone for 22 hours and detaining someone for 22 hours are so incredibly different they should not be lumped together like that. It's the difference between a creepy stalker and an oppression of basic freedoms.
Don't leave it up to my imagination how long each of those 4 actions took place. Because I'm imagining the "detaining" being about 15 seconds as they accidentally walked into each other, and then they both stepped to the side, oops still in the way, stepped to the side again, oops, and did this about 5 times.
Well, whatever wacky-ass conspiricy stuff the federal government supposedly does with ID's -- I'll have to wait for Glenn Beck to tell me exactly why it'll be such a problem, but I'm sure it will be.
Oh it's a problem alright. Lets look at one scenario: I want to become a world class Ninja Assassin. However, the trick to this is of course not having an Identity. I don't want myself to be identifyable. My Identity is MY OWN. Not yours, and not the governments either. So if I'm at home, making some home made French Fries by slicing potatoes with katanas, all it takes is one pedophile who thinks I'm an under-aged teen to peer in through the window and see my precious face, before running off and telling someone that he saw me. Now - in an ideal scenario, no one knows who I am, and thus, makes the entire situation Moot. But under this new "National ID Card" Idea, every police officer in the city will know who I am and will set up cameras outside my nice urban rent-controlled 1 bedroom appartment, hoping to catch me in the act of Nun-chucking some serious face. This will not suffice.
And remember, this is just if I wanted to become a Ninja Assassin. What if I wanted to become a Master Ninja Veterinarian? I won't be able to hide my identity then either!
Trust me, nothing is more dangerous to the preservation of our society than government issued ID's.
Why not though? If the App costs money - wouldn't Apple take its cut, make money off of it? It's not like they make money selling Safari, a product that comes free on every Apple Product.
If the Chinese government wants to filter the internet, the onus should be on the Government, not the corporations. They've already built their great firewall - why is that not working fine enough?
Seriously, Google has to alter the way it serves up web pages? Thats like re-programming the entire application! Why not have China Filter everything that goes out and comes in, and if its not to their liking - its their own problem? And if Google doesn't like it - then they shouldn't be there.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got a theory.
Take every variable possible, make sure you include them all, and put them on one side of the equation. Now, on the other side, put 42. I guarantee either you find me correct or I'll find something you are missing.
This is a good plan. I saw that one movie, the Italian Job, I know how sturdy Mini coopers can be. I'm sure they can handle the harsh environment of mars.
I think most people who go to a Post Secondary that takes researching seriously all agree with your point of view. The thing is that for a paper you normally want either a primary source or a peer-reviewed piece. Wikipedia is a great source of knowledge but its none of those - as much as they TRY to be a peer-reviewed source of information they lack the structure to ensure it is that way.
What they need to do is make an application process so that if you want to be an editor for a specific field, you need a Doctorate in that field or something. Then when you get multiple editors together from around the globe all with 8+ years studying Egyptian History, they can shell out what makes it on the page and what doesn't. Even discrepancies can be noted on the article!
I think it'd be a better system, but theres too many things with logistics and politics to have that work, especially when people don't get paid for doing so.
So, as it stands, people are forced to use Google Scholar.
It's not as bad as you might think. It also means that people have to pick a subject THAT MATTERS, so you can't just pick a paper about nothing. And your creative writing skills mean you make it interesting for the editors. But thats just for whole new articles. The idea of Wikipedia for school projects isn't new.
My girlfriend does Ancient Medieval History and Archaeology at the University of Calgary. One of her assignments last semester was either a large paper (which she chose) or you could edit an existing Wikipedia Article that was innaccurate and needed an update. Specifically, my Girlfriend could edit this:
Women in ancient Rome
But she chose not too. Not as Web Savvy as others.
Since its no longer an island, but more likely to become a Coral Reef just off the surface, they'll probably call it Nothing Atoll.
I know exactly what you mean. Basically a Sunday evening goes like this:
Me + 2 roomates. Lets play a PC Game. What genre? If its RTS we'll go with Either Starcraft or Age of Empires 2 mostly. Turn Based? Probably one of the Civs, or Age of Wonders. First Person shooter? Well we got Rainbow 6 Rogue Spear or the Original Ghost Recon if we're in the tactical mode. Original Halo. Anything in the Half Life verse, 1 or 2. If we want to try a new FPS we normally just browse the free HL2 Mods on Steam - find one we want. No need for Nazi Zombies on CoD when theres half a dozen zombie games already made online. Roleplaying, probably DotA. And I got Madden 98 should we feel the need for a sports game, but thats never actually happened.
Basically, all the bases are covered already. And we don't have to worry about buying the next gen console to play em, making sure our internet speed is the decent and not flaky, and in most cases, you can make an ISO of the CD without any hitches, and just use that in a virtual drive (no need to CD Swap like in the old days). In the case that you want to play online against other people, most games have CD Keys built into their DRM, so you can't have 2 people online with the same Key at once. And thats fine, thats DRM we can live with, because it still means we can play it locally and have fun.
I don't get why they had to mess with that structure - it worked VERY very well.
A) Games were inclined to create multiplayer content, so that limitting their online usage to 1 key was understandable and accepted.
B) You never needed a connection to play the single player content. This means you could share with your friends but thats like what, maybe a dozen people if you're slutty with your games. And that'll incline them to go out and buy the game themselves if they really enjoy it, so they can continue to play it when they give you your game back.
C) It's lifespan still has not died, and won't likely. Sure - their hosting servers might go down and the large matchmaking system could go under in a decade, but so long as you can still host a lan party, its all good.
Even Spore or World of Warcraft's system works, where you Register online ONCE, with your CD Key, and you don't have to enter it ever again. Then all you need to remember is your account info (*Yes, I know WoW you need a constant connection, but the DRM otherwise is pretty weak. This is why private WoW servers can run). You can share your account info, but you can't both login online at the same time. Which means you can't play together, usually, but allows you to share it enough to the point where it'll convince the other person to buy it if they enjoy playing it and want to face off against you.
If it ain't broken, why did they fix it?
Really? I'd think it's just the opposite. Even a lowly-rated comment here will be read by hundreds, if not thousands, whereas if you're just some loser on Twitter with no followers, anything you post will probably be read by no one at all.
Twitter has the live feed. You make a tweet, and anyone trollin' will read your tweet, whether they are following you or not.
Suppose you wanted someone to hear you about how you think Twitter is useless? I suppose you could use twitter to broadcast it. You'd probably get more people to read it than /.
Irrelevant to the point. The fact that the door was latched means they don't want people snooping around.
And password is the lock.... Becasue any password scheme is 'guessable' It's just the amount of time used.
Its not irrelevant. The fact that a password exists suggests that you don't want people to get in. But its only as effective as its weakest link, in this case, the security question.
Yes - any password is guessable, but the idea is to make it more difficult to guess, so that it takes so much time that its impractical to guess it. This is why various capital, lower letters, and symbols make stronger passwords, since every brute force script in the world tries known dictionary words with numbers around it first.
Just like any lock is pickable, it just takes time. Clearly you aren't going to use the kind of lock on your bathroom that you would on your front door, anyone with a nail could break in. I'm just pointing out, if they don't want people logging in other people's twitters account, take out the weak point. Because the password is fine, the security question idea is just ridiculous.
You didn't learn Polynomials in Grade 7? Fractions by Grade 4, Algebra by grade 6! Man, Canada is ahead of the curve!
Suppose your door is left unlocked, but latched. And there are about A hundred Doorknobs on your door, only one of them actually opens the door.
This is essentially what happened. Had they locked the door, IE, not made a guessable password or security answer, he wouldn't have gotten in.
Having a security question that is easily guessable is like leaving your car door unlocked. I wouldn't be surprised if it got stolen. Simple as that.
However, not using a security question, or using one that is as difficult to guess (Symbols, upper lower case, etc) - is like locking the doors. It will deter most criminals.
If someone SERIOUSLY wanted to hack into Obama's Twitter and cause a ruckus, they would, and I would sympathize for the Prez. But when some dude in France is pulling it off to show off his "leet skills", when all he's doing is guessing, yeah - I think I know who to really blame.
Next thing I know I'm going to read the NSA is still using WEP/TKA!
The "Security question" system in itself is the weak point in most security situations.
Mother's Maiden name?
Pet's first name?
Favourite Band?
How long do you think it would take to brute force any of those with a simple script? There's no point in making sure your passwords Really strong if your security question can be as weak as a noodle.
Apparently he guesses the answer to a question related to password recovery in order to break into the accounts of famous people
If thats all it takes then the system is broken, not the people abusing it.
Now that there are a lot of 3D solutions for PCs that actually work, I'd love to see a new version of Descent.
It is absolutely infathomable to understand exactly how much you just blew my mind.
Can I make a phone call with it yet?
Be careful or you'll summon the fail whale!
While true, I don't think thats quite what he was asking about.
He means, if they lose a packet, or if it is going to recieve false data from other countries - how does NASA handle it? The latency between here and Mars is high enough that something like TCP is impractical and UDP doesn't really preform for an update, so what protocol are they using to transmit upgrades that has enough security built into it?
'following/photographing/filming/detaining' an editor for 22 hours
Following someone for 22 hours and detaining someone for 22 hours are so incredibly different they should not be lumped together like that. It's the difference between a creepy stalker and an oppression of basic freedoms.
Don't leave it up to my imagination how long each of those 4 actions took place. Because I'm imagining the "detaining" being about 15 seconds as they accidentally walked into each other, and then they both stepped to the side, oops still in the way, stepped to the side again, oops, and did this about 5 times.
ymbnh
Well, whatever wacky-ass conspiricy stuff the federal government supposedly does with ID's -- I'll have to wait for Glenn Beck to tell me exactly why it'll be such a problem, but I'm sure it will be.
Oh it's a problem alright. Lets look at one scenario: I want to become a world class Ninja Assassin. However, the trick to this is of course not having an Identity. I don't want myself to be identifyable. My Identity is MY OWN. Not yours, and not the governments either. So if I'm at home, making some home made French Fries by slicing potatoes with katanas, all it takes is one pedophile who thinks I'm an under-aged teen to peer in through the window and see my precious face, before running off and telling someone that he saw me. Now - in an ideal scenario, no one knows who I am, and thus, makes the entire situation Moot. But under this new "National ID Card" Idea, every police officer in the city will know who I am and will set up cameras outside my nice urban rent-controlled 1 bedroom appartment, hoping to catch me in the act of Nun-chucking some serious face. This will not suffice.
And remember, this is just if I wanted to become a Ninja Assassin. What if I wanted to become a Master Ninja Veterinarian? I won't be able to hide my identity then either!
Trust me, nothing is more dangerous to the preservation of our society than government issued ID's.
Ah. Didn't even think of that.
But wait, why can't people write apps that run off Safari in the same way?
Why not though? If the App costs money - wouldn't Apple take its cut, make money off of it? It's not like they make money selling Safari, a product that comes free on every Apple Product.
Well then you've justified why Microsoft wouldn't be evil.
This should have been the way its done all along!
If the Chinese government wants to filter the internet, the onus should be on the Government, not the corporations. They've already built their great firewall - why is that not working fine enough?
Seriously, Google has to alter the way it serves up web pages? Thats like re-programming the entire application! Why not have China Filter everything that goes out and comes in, and if its not to their liking - its their own problem? And if Google doesn't like it - then they shouldn't be there.