Amusing you brought up SAGE, as ICBM are of course part of and intertwined with the story of the space age and space age technology. In fact, I'd say it was downright stupid of your and hurts your arguments terribly.
Well trolled! For those playing along at home, SAGE was for spotting and intercepting bombers.
Government-started is not the same as Government-provided.
Except that if it were up to you, nothing would get "government-started," since you'd decry the initial involvement of the government as a commie plot, so we're back to you getting off of the Internet.
I don't think that a "huge scaling problem" is necessarily implied -- Twitter is probably slow because it's querying your tweets out of its database, not because the front-end Web servers are CPU bound.
They want to "defend against memory safety vulnerabilities?" I assume that they're talking about buffer overflows, if nothing else, and I can think of a couple of ways to prevent them: 1) non-von Neumann architecture; or, and here I'm going really crazy, I know, with an idea that'd disrupt the entire industry: 2) stop using bloody C.
"Stable equilibrum temperature" implies that the heat from the fuel, including any decay heat, is going somewhere. If that (presumably passive) process can continue indefinitely without risk to the outside world, and if the equilibrium temperature is below any temperature at which melting of the plumbing or new and exciting chemical reactions could occur, then the design would appear not to be vulnerable to a loss of power to the pumps.
Heating up the coolant naturally slows down the reaction.
Except that a runaway reaction isn't the problem here. The reactor reportedly scrammed as designed. As at Three Mile Island, all of this trouble is being caused by the decay heat alone.
I note that the Wikipedia illustration of a molten salt reactor design shows a pump in the cooling system, so it's not immediately clear to me that a molten salt reactor would survive the loss of emergency power reported to have occurred here. And even in the case of a design where the cooling is driven entirely by convection — with, what, giant air-cooled heat-exchangers? — there's the question of earthquake damage to the plumbing, which I suppose is the other obvious possible cause of the current problem.
...that this article is baseless fantasy. Half of it's gibberish: what does "cities heated by servers," even mean? The other half ignores what's known to be possible, with the holographic projections popping out of phones within four years being the most obvious clanger. How's that supposed to work? Like in Star Wars, of course, which is to say only as a special effect in a movie.
When one of the questions is "Are you empathetic?" and the answer "yes" results in your being scored as empathetic, the test is, as others have noted, unlikely to provide any insight. The only way this little test works is as a sort of meta-test: if you can't pick a result and get it on the first try, you're not very good at imagining what the person who designed it was thinking.
Just by answering each question by giving the strongest response in what I judged to be the appropriate direction, I was able to score 70/70 on the empathy scale on the very first try. For my second trick, I successfully scored the minimum possible, an angry red 1/5 on each question. I didn't even bother to systematically check my previous friendly green 5/5 answers and reverse them.
For what it's worth, I then made a half-way honest attempt, without any real soul-searching, to pick responses that I felt described me fairly, picking the middle of the scale on the most egregiously ambiguous statements, and I scored bang in the middle: 51/70. I think it's safe to say that the results mean nothing, alas, so I still can't settle the question of whether I'm an android or not.
It would have been correct if he had said "many more datum", but that's just weird.
No, that would be like saying "many more apple" — "datum" is emphatically singular; it's "data" that people like to play fast and loose with.
The opposite case of "dice" might be of interest to ESL learners: the singular form is "die," but many people say "a dice." Are they ignorant of their mistake or are they speaking a newer dialect of English? Probably.
If the general population has a 1% chance of getting a specific type of cancer over 20 years, and a study found that people using cell phones seemed to have a 2% chance of getting cancer, then that group is twice as likely to get cancer as the general population and that would be huge news that consumers would want to know.
On the other hand, if it were reported in terms of your chances of not getting that hypothetical, specific type of cancer being reduced from 99% to 98%, everyone would conclude that there was nothing to worry about.
Thankfully, health care is one of four things that Canadians love so much that they're willing to stand up and fight for it...
Yet we under-fund it. It's also not as comprehensive as we pretend that it is (no coverage for prescripton medication outside of hospital, and no dental or optical). Stephen Harper is, in a sense, correct that we're more proud of it than we should be. I wouldn't go so far as to endorse any of his solutions.
Plenty of the problems with the Canadian health care system could be solved by throwing money at it, but Christ forbid that anyone do that — it'd be like throwing water on a fire. Or something.
I know nothing about this story, but I just always assume that anything built on Facebook is a scam, whether for money or ID theft. Go sell your virtual cheese elsewhere, vampire gangsters.
Stay away from "enterprise solutions," then — or, rather, make very careful comparisons between the cost of buying a ready-made thing and a DIY effort.
Am I missing something here?
That the thin clients you've been looking at are priced for fat organizations (with, possibly, thick decision-makers).
How would that work with trusted partners who may send mail on your behalf?
There is no such thing (unless you're in the business of spamming people).
I guess my work does its own on-line order processing. I could've sworn that we outsourced it, and that I'd set up our SPF record to allow it, but I must be wrong.
DKIM and it's variants is, IMHO, useless because it only allows you to prove that e-mail came from an authorized sender for a domain, it does *NOT* allow you to tell if e-mail came from an UNAUTHORIZED system for a domain. You cannot use DKIM to tell if a sender address is forging the domain.
Someone who really cares about DKIM can check your domain to see if it publishes a key and reject messages that lack a valid signature. I don't see how that's much different from SPF; I do agree that it's not necessarily better.
Slashdot Mirror
Well trolled! For those playing along at home, SAGE was for spotting and intercepting bombers.
Except that if it were up to you, nothing would get "government-started," since you'd decry the initial involvement of the government as a commie plot, so we're back to you getting off of the Internet.
Actually, it's just proof that either the people you were dealing with were being silly, or that you are lousy at making that kind of deal.
I don't think that a "huge scaling problem" is necessarily implied -- Twitter is probably slow because it's querying your tweets out of its database, not because the front-end Web servers are CPU bound.
They want to "defend against memory safety vulnerabilities?" I assume that they're talking about buffer overflows, if nothing else, and I can think of a couple of ways to prevent them: 1) non-von Neumann architecture; or, and here I'm going really crazy, I know, with an idea that'd disrupt the entire industry: 2) stop using bloody C.
The bar, after all, is so low.
"Stable equilibrum temperature" implies that the heat from the fuel, including any decay heat, is going somewhere. If that (presumably passive) process can continue indefinitely without risk to the outside world, and if the equilibrium temperature is below any temperature at which melting of the plumbing or new and exciting chemical reactions could occur, then the design would appear not to be vulnerable to a loss of power to the pumps.
Except that a runaway reaction isn't the problem here. The reactor reportedly scrammed as designed. As at Three Mile Island, all of this trouble is being caused by the decay heat alone.
I note that the Wikipedia illustration of a molten salt reactor design shows a pump in the cooling system, so it's not immediately clear to me that a molten salt reactor would survive the loss of emergency power reported to have occurred here. And even in the case of a design where the cooling is driven entirely by convection — with, what, giant air-cooled heat-exchangers? — there's the question of earthquake damage to the plumbing, which I suppose is the other obvious possible cause of the current problem.
...that this article is baseless fantasy. Half of it's gibberish: what does "cities heated by servers," even mean? The other half ignores what's known to be possible, with the holographic projections popping out of phones within four years being the most obvious clanger. How's that supposed to work? Like in Star Wars, of course, which is to say only as a special effect in a movie.
I'm not really a COBOL-lover, but you're starting to sell me on it.
A possible response: "Because work that I did two decades ago is still valued and in demand, while nobody cares what you did yesterday."
You do realize that there's more to translation than replacing words, right?
Hah! Well done.
When one of the questions is "Are you empathetic?" and the answer "yes" results in your being scored as empathetic, the test is, as others have noted, unlikely to provide any insight. The only way this little test works is as a sort of meta-test: if you can't pick a result and get it on the first try, you're not very good at imagining what the person who designed it was thinking.
Just by answering each question by giving the strongest response in what I judged to be the appropriate direction, I was able to score 70/70 on the empathy scale on the very first try. For my second trick, I successfully scored the minimum possible, an angry red 1/5 on each question. I didn't even bother to systematically check my previous friendly green 5/5 answers and reverse them.
For what it's worth, I then made a half-way honest attempt, without any real soul-searching, to pick responses that I felt described me fairly, picking the middle of the scale on the most egregiously ambiguous statements, and I scored bang in the middle: 51/70. I think it's safe to say that the results mean nothing, alas, so I still can't settle the question of whether I'm an android or not.
What a pointless truism that is. The worst atrocities in human history, combined, are "nothing on the geological time scale."
No, that would be like saying "many more apple" — "datum" is emphatically singular; it's "data" that people like to play fast and loose with.
The opposite case of "dice" might be of interest to ESL learners: the singular form is "die," but many people say "a dice." Are they ignorant of their mistake or are they speaking a newer dialect of English? Probably.
EI-EI-LEO.
On the other hand, if it were reported in terms of your chances of not getting that hypothetical, specific type of cancer being reduced from 99% to 98%, everyone would conclude that there was nothing to worry about.
Yet we under-fund it. It's also not as comprehensive as we pretend that it is (no coverage for prescripton medication outside of hospital, and no dental or optical). Stephen Harper is, in a sense, correct that we're more proud of it than we should be. I wouldn't go so far as to endorse any of his solutions.
Plenty of the problems with the Canadian health care system could be solved by throwing money at it, but Christ forbid that anyone do that — it'd be like throwing water on a fire. Or something.
[citation needed]
I know nothing about this story, but I just always assume that anything built on Facebook is a scam, whether for money or ID theft. Go sell your virtual cheese elsewhere, vampire gangsters.
How would fuel cells have anything to do with keeping nukes unpopular?
Stay away from "enterprise solutions," then — or, rather, make very careful comparisons between the cost of buying a ready-made thing and a DIY effort.
That the thin clients you've been looking at are priced for fat organizations (with, possibly, thick decision-makers).
I guess my work does its own on-line order processing. I could've sworn that we outsourced it, and that I'd set up our SPF record to allow it, but I must be wrong.
Someone who really cares about DKIM can check your domain to see if it publishes a key and reject messages that lack a valid signature. I don't see how that's much different from SPF; I do agree that it's not necessarily better.