People seldom try to open your locks without you finding out. And when they do manage to open a lock, you likely will change it pretty promptly.
People may try to crack your password quite often without you finding out. And when they do manage to crack your password, you still don't always find out.
No, assassination is not terrorism. Terrorism is killing randomly (bombs are pretty random) so that everyone should feel threatened. Assassination is killing specifically so that no one else should feel threatened.
...put it's money into a sci-fi movie that's original (unlike all the movies that share the same story that the other posts are making fun of) while not trying to be weird (such as the "unspeakable fear in space/ocean/arctic" type) and actually making a proper effort with it.
Every now and then they put a huge effort into a movie and they seem to make lots of money (esp. with merchandise). And that's despite regurgitating the same basic stories and premises. I don't believe that sci-fi is not profitable, even with high production costs. But I do believe that it's a waste of money and effort reproducing the same ideas over and over, and that is not profitable.
Also, everyone sees through the veneer of "famous name" (in this case Space Invaders) but some of us cling to hope enough that we might see a movie anyway, just in case we get lucky. We got lucky with Transformers. Sure, many of you don't like those movies, but many of us do find them very entertaining.:)
But what if a movie was both entertaining and... thought provoking, or even informative, or even tickling our imaginations? When last did we see something like that? Examples are the excitement between The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, and the Matrix movies. (Yes, yes, they only made one according to some, but the other two as least tried, too hard by being cryptic, to be thought provoking as well, though they required too much mental effort for some.)
Surely there's enough written material out there to make use of? Perhaps producers need to start reading books from different authors, instead of using the same script writer every time.
With that, couldn't a scammer walk anonymously though a crowd with a portable payment scanner, automatically charging people for small amounts that would be below a "pay without confirmation" threshold? Those little payments could add up pretty quickly.
People seem to be saying that the bad guys are smarter, better. But the answer to that is 'no.''"
If the good guys ever catch up with the bad guys, then the good guys have nothing more to do, because there will be no more plots to foil... until the bad guys get going again. But the bad guys never stop moving, so the good guys are always playing catch up, and so of course it looks like the bad guys are always winning.
But really, the bad guys only win when the good guys can't play catch up anymore. And that hasn't happened. In fact, that's why the bad guys keep moving.
Of course, we could try to pre-empt the bad guys by developing bug free designs and code in the first place. Heh, yeah that's pretty tough. But when a product does appear too hard to break, then you go around that brick wall. That's why we have trojans and phishing.
Sure, Microsoft has a pretty poor reputation for security (and too often deservedly so). But the statement holds. Bad guys, good guys... we're just people on different sides of the fence. Bad guys are clever enough to find new holes, and good guys are clever enough to plug them.
So sure, it's a big and tough botnet. But for some that just makes the challenge of breaking it all the more interesting.
Most of us are happy to pay artists who have done good work. Very few of of are happy to pay thieves. Those labels are the very reason that so many people happily copy movies and music.
I really do think that everyone (probably inlcuding the labels) would do better if there was more decency and respect in the business, as much more people would be willing to pay for products if the money went where it was well deserved.
When friends taste my homebrew, they sometimes ask me how I got the alcohol in there. I tell them that the yeast eats the sugars, pisses alcohol and farts carbon dioxide. For some reason, that I can't fathom, they loose their appetite for my brew at that point.
GP is probably referring to high concentrations of manufactured chemicals that are intentionally designed to be toxic. Microbes will adapt to those much faster than we will.
A musician once told me how he found a copy of his music education book coming from China or Korea (can't remember which now) that was much prettier than his own release. The cost of both producing the product and publishing it was so high that he and his publisher could not afford to make it any prettier.
But if the ground work is already done for you, and all you need to do is copy it, then of course you make better profits and can afford to make better looking versions... that outcompete the original product, which is was exactly what was happening
That's what I have against copying:
Those who do the work are not rewarded for their efforts, which in turn leads to that those who make the effort don't have the finances to continue making great efforts.
That said, I completely agree that the current state of affairs very much encourages unpaid copying to the point where one doesn't feel guilty if it's from a major publisher. But in my experience, many/most people prefer to pay for products because we have a concience and we see it as a form of thanks.
But when some entity touts its right to claim from us, then most of us respond with matching ire. (Tax departments are another example of this behaviour.)
It's all a matter of respect.
Major copyright campaigners have eroded that respect to almost nothing.
If major publishers respected consumers, then consumers would respect publishers in return.
If now-illegal producers instead respected producers enough to make deals with them, then they would be welcome instead of illegal.
- to help people move whose nerves are damaged. Combine that with mind readers (ex. Emotiv, NeuroSky) and we're part way there. We'd also need something to send feedback feeling from the severed area to the brain.
- to help prevent atrophy in people in coma by animating them. (Hmm... could it be used to animate the dead...?)
- to teach people handy skills (which is what the article suggests), remotely even.
- as material in sci-fi movies to remote control characters, either to commit heinous crimes or remote control the sub-standard hero into moving like an expert.
That alone ought to sound warning bells to even those who support the patenting system that it really is broken.
All that money spent, and most of it wasted on nothing (literally nothing).
Bad enough for huge companies that fund their own full time patenting departments. Even worse for small startups that can barely afford one or two patents.
So much for patents protecting innovation. I'm not considering patenting my innovations. I honestly don't see the point.
Totally with you on that. I'm primarily a Delphi developer, but the same applies. Delphi is not memory managed (save for interface references, sort of). By following the simple rule of "that which initialises also finalises" and always writing initialisation and finalisation together (ie. at the same time, so not writing in top-down order), I've found that I have very few memory leaks, end up with tidier code and, frankly, have fewer bugs overall, including AV's. The code is better. Garbage collection is nice and both have their own distinct uses, but garbage collection does encourage sloppier coding (though a good programmer won't fall for that encouragement;).
Delphi's interface references are a simple way to handle garbage collection. (BTW, the rule here is: parameters are always local, so no const or var declarations for interface parameters.) If C++ uses the same system for its garbage collection, then that's fine. But if I want fully fledged garbage collection, then other languages specialise in that, such as Java and C# (which I also often use).
There's a saying I once read: The problem with a houseboat is that it isn't a good house and it isn't a good boat.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that C++ should not try to compete with other languages in garbage collection. What C++ does, it does well, and what other languages do, they do well.
Delphi is truly undervalued. One of the main reasons for it doing so poorly is that it attracted hordes of... useless developers (putting it kindly) who liked to cobble together components. Very few Delphi developers I've worked with actually knew and applied good programming techniques. The same plague is inflicting.Net, from what a manager friend tells me. Let not C++ suffer the same fate.
Honey is not antiseptic due simply to a high sugar rate.
This page says that honey is antiseptic in various ways and that some types of honey are more antiseptic than others.
And this research seems to suggest that a part of the antibacterial activity might be of plant origin and
the major part of the antibacterial activity of honeydew honey is of bee origin.
Put simply: It's complex, and we don't know it all yet.
Medical grade types of honey are still being discovered. "Medical grade honey"?
Yes,
this article
claims that
eight species of problematic wound pathogens, including those with high levels of innate or acquired antibiotic resistance, were killed by 4.0–14.8% honey
, meaning that they're effective even when diluted.
It's an intersting read, especially the 1st article.
That was my 1st guess too. However, here's a list of the top 45 most common passwords for that site. I've bolded the obvious literature related passwords. Others may be as well, such as person names that might be references to characters. You may be right, of course, but literature related passwords do seem overrepresented.
Slashdot Mirror
"Honey, I was going to enter it into the calendar, but I forgot... I'm so sorry."
People seldom try to open your locks without you finding out. And when they do manage to open a lock, you likely will change it pretty promptly.
People may try to crack your password quite often without you finding out. And when they do manage to crack your password, you still don't always find out.
Vvaassshhhh.... (excuse the almost-pun)
"Mummy, I want more long pig."
No, assassination is not terrorism. Terrorism is killing randomly (bombs are pretty random) so that everyone should feel threatened. Assassination is killing specifically so that no one else should feel threatened.
(I don't disagree with the rest though.)
...put it's money into a sci-fi movie that's original (unlike all the movies that share the same story that the other posts are making fun of) while not trying to be weird (such as the "unspeakable fear in space/ocean/arctic" type) and actually making a proper effort with it.
Every now and then they put a huge effort into a movie and they seem to make lots of money (esp. with merchandise). And that's despite regurgitating the same basic stories and premises. I don't believe that sci-fi is not profitable, even with high production costs. But I do believe that it's a waste of money and effort reproducing the same ideas over and over, and that is not profitable. :)
Also, everyone sees through the veneer of "famous name" (in this case Space Invaders) but some of us cling to hope enough that we might see a movie anyway, just in case we get lucky. We got lucky with Transformers. Sure, many of you don't like those movies, but many of us do find them very entertaining.
But what if a movie was both entertaining and... thought provoking, or even informative, or even tickling our imaginations? When last did we see something like that? Examples are the excitement between The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, and the Matrix movies. (Yes, yes, they only made one according to some, but the other two as least tried, too hard by being cryptic, to be thought provoking as well, though they required too much mental effort for some.)
Surely there's enough written material out there to make use of? Perhaps producers need to start reading books from different authors, instead of using the same script writer every time.
With that, couldn't a scammer walk anonymously though a crowd with a portable payment scanner, automatically charging people for small amounts that would be below a "pay without confirmation" threshold? Those little payments could add up pretty quickly.
People seem to be saying that the bad guys are smarter, better. But the answer to that is 'no.''"
If the good guys ever catch up with the bad guys, then the good guys have nothing more to do, because there will be no more plots to foil... until the bad guys get going again. But the bad guys never stop moving, so the good guys are always playing catch up, and so of course it looks like the bad guys are always winning.
But really, the bad guys only win when the good guys can't play catch up anymore. And that hasn't happened. In fact, that's why the bad guys keep moving.
Of course, we could try to pre-empt the bad guys by developing bug free designs and code in the first place. Heh, yeah that's pretty tough. But when a product does appear too hard to break, then you go around that brick wall. That's why we have trojans and phishing.
Sure, Microsoft has a pretty poor reputation for security (and too often deservedly so). But the statement holds. Bad guys, good guys... we're just people on different sides of the fence. Bad guys are clever enough to find new holes, and good guys are clever enough to plug them.
So sure, it's a big and tough botnet. But for some that just makes the challenge of breaking it all the more interesting.
Most of us are happy to pay artists who have done good work. Very few of of are happy to pay thieves. Those labels are the very reason that so many people happily copy movies and music.
I really do think that everyone (probably inlcuding the labels) would do better if there was more decency and respect in the business, as much more people would be willing to pay for products if the money went where it was well deserved.
Make sure the sugars have fermented and it's called "beer".
When friends taste my homebrew, they sometimes ask me how I got the alcohol in there. I tell them that the yeast eats the sugars, pisses alcohol and farts carbon dioxide. For some reason, that I can't fathom, they loose their appetite for my brew at that point.
GP is probably referring to high concentrations of manufactured chemicals that are intentionally designed to be toxic. Microbes will adapt to those much faster than we will.
Amendment:
If major publishers respected consumers and producers, then consumers would respect publishers in return.
A musician once told me how he found a copy of his music education book coming from China or Korea (can't remember which now) that was much prettier than his own release. The cost of both producing the product and publishing it was so high that he and his publisher could not afford to make it any prettier.
But if the ground work is already done for you, and all you need to do is copy it, then of course you make better profits and can afford to make better looking versions... that outcompete the original product, which is was exactly what was happening
That's what I have against copying:
Those who do the work are not rewarded for their efforts, which in turn leads to that those who make the effort don't have the finances to continue making great efforts.
That said, I completely agree that the current state of affairs very much encourages unpaid copying to the point where one doesn't feel guilty if it's from a major publisher. But in my experience, many/most people prefer to pay for products because we have a concience and we see it as a form of thanks.
But when some entity touts its right to claim from us, then most of us respond with matching ire. (Tax departments are another example of this behaviour.)
It's all a matter of respect.
Major copyright campaigners have eroded that respect to almost nothing.
If major publishers respected consumers, then consumers would respect publishers in return.
If now-illegal producers instead respected producers enough to make deals with them, then they would be welcome instead of illegal.
I could see this used:
- to help people move whose nerves are damaged. Combine that with mind readers (ex. Emotiv, NeuroSky) and we're part way there. We'd also need something to send feedback feeling from the severed area to the brain.
- to help prevent atrophy in people in coma by animating them. (Hmm... could it be used to animate the dead...?)
- to teach people handy skills (which is what the article suggests), remotely even.
- as material in sci-fi movies to remote control characters, either to commit heinous crimes or remote control the sub-standard hero into moving like an expert.
Any other uses?
"Fagging" (same root)
In a sense, that is exacly what it means today.
That alone ought to sound warning bells to even those who support the patenting system that it really is broken.
All that money spent, and most of it wasted on nothing (literally nothing).
Bad enough for huge companies that fund their own full time patenting departments. Even worse for small startups that can barely afford one or two patents.
So much for patents protecting innovation. I'm not considering patenting my innovations. I honestly don't see the point.
Totally with you on that. I'm primarily a Delphi developer, but the same applies. Delphi is not memory managed (save for interface references, sort of). By following the simple rule of "that which initialises also finalises" and always writing initialisation and finalisation together (ie. at the same time, so not writing in top-down order), I've found that I have very few memory leaks, end up with tidier code and, frankly, have fewer bugs overall, including AV's. The code is better. Garbage collection is nice and both have their own distinct uses, but garbage collection does encourage sloppier coding (though a good programmer won't fall for that encouragement ;) .
Delphi's interface references are a simple way to handle garbage collection. (BTW, the rule here is: parameters are always local, so no const or var declarations for interface parameters.) If C++ uses the same system for its garbage collection, then that's fine. But if I want fully fledged garbage collection, then other languages specialise in that, such as Java and C# (which I also often use).
There's a saying I once read: The problem with a houseboat is that it isn't a good house and it isn't a good boat.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that C++ should not try to compete with other languages in garbage collection. What C++ does, it does well, and what other languages do, they do well.
Delphi is truly undervalued. One of the main reasons for it doing so poorly is that it attracted hordes of... useless developers (putting it kindly) who liked to cobble together components. Very few Delphi developers I've worked with actually knew and applied good programming techniques. The same plague is inflicting .Net, from what a manager friend tells me. Let not C++ suffer the same fate.
I see that both Apple and Microsoft fail the test.
If their own websites fail, does that mean that we cannot expect patches to their server software to fix this?
(My specialties do not include web servers.)
Honey is not antiseptic due simply to a high sugar rate.
This page says that honey is antiseptic in various ways and that some types of honey are more antiseptic than others. And this research seems to suggest that a part of the antibacterial activity might be of plant origin and the major part of the antibacterial activity of honeydew honey is of bee origin.
Put simply: It's complex, and we don't know it all yet.
Medical grade types of honey are still being discovered. "Medical grade honey"? Yes, this article claims that eight species of problematic wound pathogens, including those with high levels of innate or acquired antibiotic resistance, were killed by 4.0–14.8% honey , meaning that they're effective even when diluted.
It's an intersting read, especially the 1st article.
What's a "birther"?
We're all pretty clear that dropping bombs is hostile. But what are their grounds for claiming that it isn't?
Does that mean that there won't be enough funding for more UFO's?
That was my 1st guess too. However, here's a list of the top 45 most common passwords for that site. I've bolded the obvious literature related passwords. Others may be as well, such as person names that might be references to characters. You may be right, of course, but literature related passwords do seem overrepresented.
0.9231% "123456"
0.3157% "123456789"
0.2142% "password"
0.1417% "romance"
0.1095% "102030"
0.1079% "mystery"
0.0998% "123"
0.0998% "ajcuivd289"
0.0998% "shadow"
0.0998% "tigger"
0.0869% "bookworm"
0.0869% "dragon"
0.0853% "sunshine"
0.0837% "12345"
0.0837% "reader"
0.0805% "purple"
0.0773% "maggie"
0.0757% "reading"
0.0708% "1234"
0.0563% "angels"
0.0547% "peanut"
0.0547% "vampire"
0.0531% "booklover"
0.0515% "12345678"
0.0515% "charlie"
0.0515% "ginger"
0.0515% "michael"
0.0515% "pepper"
0.0515% "unicorn"
0.0499% "princess"
0.0483% "writerspace"
0.0467% "101010"
0.0467% "242424"
0.0467% "1234567"
0.0467% "cookie"
0.0467% "writer"
0.0451% "buster"
0.0451% "hannah"
0.0434% "bailey"
0.0434% "matthew"
0.0418% "123123"
0.0418% "library"
0.0402% "butterfly"
0.0402% "callie"
0.0402% "flower"
Sitting in a can consuming recyled shit and piss... flying through space with no escape. Any volunteers? ;D
(Yes, I agree with you, but couldn't pass up the comment.)