I'm saying the the US health industry costs more for the same thing, that is where the profit comes from. I know that social countries do research, and it pays off when they sell the drugs in America.
In what way was I libertarian about medicine? I think I mentioned a price-cap, If on-patent medicine costs more per a pill in the US than Canada, it factually means the US is funding more of the research (into marketability and profits). I think I said the free market in healthcare was fucking the US people, not helping.
I liked Buzz, it played to google's strengths (I always had a gmail window open for chat and email), and automatic tight communities (people I regularly chatted with). They should of slowly scaled it up, integrated with Picassa, etc.
Instead they dumped it, made something new, and tried to get everyone to switch. 30% tired it out, didn't want to go to yet another site, and staid with the 70% who didn't try it.
Facebook grew naturally, and destroyed Myspace over a long period of time, google fucked that up with google+, but I think Buzz could of done it.
It's a lot easier to be socialist when your defense and medical R&D are covered by other countries.
I wish the US would see this and stop doing so for the rest of the world. It's really annoying as a US citizen to be spending 4 times (as a percentage of GDP) on our military as Germany (I think we can trust them now). Yet we pretty much mandate it to be so.
Additionally we pay more for the same medicine because our government refuses to take a stand on this issue, while other governments do. I'd like to see a law that no medicine or medical devices can be sold in the US for over the average price in the rest of the G8.
I'd much prefer if they were to just design it to all my weird personal preferences. I actually think designed to my esoteric preferences should be rule 0.
that's not true though, according to what actually happened when gawker's unsalted hashes were stolen, and according to the Wikipedia article about rainbow tables.
An unsalted 8 character password is essentially as weak as a plain text one, while an unsalted 30 character one is essentially as strong as a salted one.
as easy as getting a plain text password I would say, and both are essentially not brute forcible.
From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:
Rainbow tables and other precomputation attacks do not work against passwords that contain symbols outside the range presupposed, or that are longer than those precomputed by the attacker. However tables can be generated that take into account common ways in which users attempt to choose more secure passwords, such as adding a number or special character. Because of the sizable investment in computing processing, rainbow tables beyond fourteen places in length are not yet common. So, choosing a password that is longer than fourteen characters may force an attacker to resort to brute-force methods
Essentially, if a database falls (through SQL injection), then there is a good shot your 6-8 character password will fall against an exhaustive rainbow table (if it is unsalted). If it is salted, then both are secure, and if it's plain text both fail.
Actually, I think the common occurrences lately have been getting dumps of non-salted (but hashed) databases, and then running a rainbow tables attack.
This is a completely different problem, as generally tables don't go beyond 14 places. A 30 character very simple password (but outside of a dictionary) will survive if only hashes are found, while a 8 character completely random password will be found.
4 8 digit sequences are unlikely to be cracked in the common occurrence of large password thefts (e.g. gawker).
An example I will use two-finger click on a touch-pad. This is not intuitive, it is learned, but improves things greatly. On small screen using buttons is bad, but the intuitive way to know where to click. Pulling and dragging and gestures need to be learned, but are a better way to interact.
This is what I liked about Buzz, it was integrated into the chat client, and was my actual circle of friends (as it pulled from chat).
Google+ made it yet another place to go do things, it lost what was good about Buzz (right in my mail/chat client, where I interacted with my closer friends), what was good about Facebook (already had interesting content and people), and took what was bad about Facebook (S/N ratio, separate, non-professional page).
We used google chat so much because it wasn't blocked by the state, while facebook was.
It was like a mini facebook, integrated into my e-mail and chat client (gmail.com), and only involving the people I took the time to chat with. Google+ was trying to capture that feel with circles I think, where it was real easy to have conversations you wouldn't in public, but the S/N ratio was way lower (like facebook), and as a facebook type app, it lost the feel of saying the terribly inappropriate things that one talks about with friends.
I was really sad when Buzz closed, who wouldn't want a special mail folder of the idle disctractions of their actual friends, said in a way that friends actually talk.
Wave had other issues. I think the largest 2 problems I has with it were 1) real time, I would see and comment on things that weren't fully submitted, nuisance, and 2) mail search didn't search it.
We tried to use it as a more structured way to thread e-mails at work (on a per project basis), but those two issues made it worthless. Probably should just set-up a forum, but then it's yet another login.
I would agree in general, but the fact that Siri is going for natural language interaction leads me to believe that the blind person has a valid point.
If Siri was done perfect, the phone wouldn't even need a screen to work (though obviously the visual and ability to click on things would make it a better device).
My bluetooth has always worked better in the 5-10 foot range than with phone in my pocket (unless I think about the pocket).
When doing chores I generally leave the phone in the room with me, but not carry it. But it's usually when ironing/folding laundry at a hotel and talking to family that it even matters. I couldn't imagine wearing an earpiece around just to use Siri.
Google isn't consistent. Their servers don't perfectly sync and are always crawling. They talked about it in an interview here years ago I think.
Many large sites with non-critical data work this way (and the nitty gritty exact search order for any given second/minute/hour/day is non-critical).
Facebook does something similar with post visibility (it's not necessarily instant everywhere), and I've had friends call in panic when a mutual friend's memorialized account dropped off the internet for up to a day as it transitioned (some could see it, some couldn't, and it would go back and forth for some people).
Except the fact that the bill of rights exists could be interpreted the exact opposite. One could be argue that we have nothing without the governmentimposing limits on itself (including through the constitution). And, yes I understand that's why some didn't even want to add the bill of rights (as it would imply government could do everything else), of course other founders wanted an elected monarch.
Either way, if the government does not run a place, I think it could be argued the constitution does not apply. I think ammendment IX is the one most people (on the entire political spectrum) crap all over most, which I think was your point.
I still get irritated when I read people quote the declaration of independence as somehow relevant to US law, as it really isn't, and was never meant to be. It's a list of gripes.
The Declaration of Independence applies to no one. It was written without consensus by the more radical elements of the revolutionaries. The Constitution was the negotiated agreement that was to by followed by the whole country.
I do agree that the constitution should apply to everyone, but the declaration of independence is a red herring as far as discussing American law (and certainly WRT international law). I personally think the Constitution (the bill of rights anyway, the parts about how the government runs are less relevant) should apply to anywhere the government has a monopoly on power (which certainly includes gitmo).
Because many of them were grabbed on the say-so of a warlord who they dared to stand up against.
We established bounties, then took the people accused with no evidence except for the say so of someone that is actually a problem for us, payed a bounty, and took them to gitmo.
Perhaps I am being bold when i say a satirical article offering 1,000,000 afghan dinars (is that what they use?) for the assassination of Clinton does not make one a terrorist, and yet, the writer of the article ended up in gitmo (it was in response to Clinton's bounty on Osama, and not really much money). This was a man who was trouble for those taking power in the absence of the taliban, and an ally to a democratic afghanistan.
Many if not most of the people in gitmo are farmers who dared to make an honest living and not submit to warlords, as we deported them indefinitely we paid the warlords for the tip.
Slashdot Mirror
WRT to drugs, that's not what I'm saying at all.
I'm saying the the US health industry costs more for the same thing, that is where the profit comes from. I know that social countries do research, and it pays off when they sell the drugs in America.
In what way was I libertarian about medicine? I think I mentioned a price-cap, If on-patent medicine costs more per a pill in the US than Canada, it factually means the US is funding more of the research (into marketability and profits). I think I said the free market in healthcare was fucking the US people, not helping.
Google+ fucked up by trying too hard.
I liked Buzz, it played to google's strengths (I always had a gmail window open for chat and email), and automatic tight communities (people I regularly chatted with). They should of slowly scaled it up, integrated with Picassa, etc.
Instead they dumped it, made something new, and tried to get everyone to switch. 30% tired it out, didn't want to go to yet another site, and staid with the 70% who didn't try it.
Facebook grew naturally, and destroyed Myspace over a long period of time, google fucked that up with google+, but I think Buzz could of done it.
It's a lot easier to be socialist when your defense and medical R&D are covered by other countries.
I wish the US would see this and stop doing so for the rest of the world. It's really annoying as a US citizen to be spending 4 times (as a percentage of GDP) on our military as Germany (I think we can trust them now). Yet we pretty much mandate it to be so.
Additionally we pay more for the same medicine because our government refuses to take a stand on this issue, while other governments do. I'd like to see a law that no medicine or medical devices can be sold in the US for over the average price in the rest of the G8.
They love to bundle TV with the internet (cable + Internet is $100, either alone is $65).
Except downloading from an unauthorized source for personal use is barley illegal (if at all).
It's the distribution that that is a crime.
Thus my subscription to Usenet.
If providers follow take-down notices, it's legal for them too (and there is a lot of legit content on Usenet).
It's the original uploader that's made the illegal copy (with the provider getting safe-harbor).
IANAL
I'd much prefer if they were to just design it to all my weird personal preferences. I actually think designed to my esoteric preferences should be rule 0.
And does the third have to do with personal esoteric preferences?
that's not true though, according to what actually happened when gawker's unsalted hashes were stolen, and according to the Wikipedia article about rainbow tables.
An unsalted 8 character password is essentially as weak as a plain text one, while an unsalted 30 character one is essentially as strong as a salted one.
as easy as getting a plain text password I would say, and both are essentially not brute forcible.
From Wikipedia, emphasis mine:
Rainbow tables and other precomputation attacks do not work against passwords that contain symbols outside the range presupposed, or that are longer than those precomputed by the attacker. However tables can be generated that take into account common ways in which users attempt to choose more secure passwords, such as adding a number or special character. Because of the sizable investment in computing processing, rainbow tables beyond fourteen places in length are not yet common. So, choosing a password that is longer than fourteen characters may force an attacker to resort to brute-force methods
Essentially, if a database falls (through SQL injection), then there is a good shot your 6-8 character password will fall against an exhaustive rainbow table (if it is unsalted). If it is salted, then both are secure, and if it's plain text both fail.
6-8 character passwords quickly fall if an unsalted hash is stolen (see rainbow tables).
A long, but less random password is much safer.
Actually, I think the common occurrences lately have been getting dumps of non-salted (but hashed) databases, and then running a rainbow tables attack.
This is a completely different problem, as generally tables don't go beyond 14 places. A 30 character very simple password (but outside of a dictionary) will survive if only hashes are found, while a 8 character completely random password will be found.
4 8 digit sequences are unlikely to be cracked in the common occurrence of large password thefts (e.g. gawker).
I disagree, there is a balance to be struck.
An example I will use two-finger click on a touch-pad. This is not intuitive, it is learned, but improves things greatly. On small screen using buttons is bad, but the intuitive way to know where to click. Pulling and dragging and gestures need to be learned, but are a better way to interact.
I find the task-bar hover by far the best window picker I've ever used. I'm pretty sure it relies on Aero.
yeah, looks like I was wrong, i really thought for some reason diesel detonated rather than combusted.
I would describe gasoline as bursting into flames. Diesel is much more stable, but so is C4, and it explodes too.
I could be wrong, but I thought it was combustion vs detonation that made the difference in efficiency.
Diesel explodes, gasoline burns is my understanding of the difference.
This is what I liked about Buzz, it was integrated into the chat client, and was my actual circle of friends (as it pulled from chat).
Google+ made it yet another place to go do things, it lost what was good about Buzz (right in my mail/chat client, where I interacted with my closer friends), what was good about Facebook (already had interesting content and people), and took what was bad about Facebook (S/N ratio, separate, non-professional page).
We used google chat so much because it wasn't blocked by the state, while facebook was.
I really liked Buzz.
It was like a mini facebook, integrated into my e-mail and chat client (gmail.com), and only involving the people I took the time to chat with. Google+ was trying to capture that feel with circles I think, where it was real easy to have conversations you wouldn't in public, but the S/N ratio was way lower (like facebook), and as a facebook type app, it lost the feel of saying the terribly inappropriate things that one talks about with friends.
I was really sad when Buzz closed, who wouldn't want a special mail folder of the idle disctractions of their actual friends, said in a way that friends actually talk.
Wave had other issues. I think the largest 2 problems I has with it were 1) real time, I would see and comment on things that weren't fully submitted, nuisance, and 2) mail search didn't search it.
We tried to use it as a more structured way to thread e-mails at work (on a per project basis), but those two issues made it worthless. Probably should just set-up a forum, but then it's yet another login.
I would agree in general, but the fact that Siri is going for natural language interaction leads me to believe that the blind person has a valid point.
If Siri was done perfect, the phone wouldn't even need a screen to work (though obviously the visual and ability to click on things would make it a better device).
My bluetooth has always worked better in the 5-10 foot range than with phone in my pocket (unless I think about the pocket).
When doing chores I generally leave the phone in the room with me, but not carry it. But it's usually when ironing/folding laundry at a hotel and talking to family that it even matters. I couldn't imagine wearing an earpiece around just to use Siri.
Google isn't consistent. Their servers don't perfectly sync and are always crawling. They talked about it in an interview here years ago I think.
Many large sites with non-critical data work this way (and the nitty gritty exact search order for any given second/minute/hour/day is non-critical).
Facebook does something similar with post visibility (it's not necessarily instant everywhere), and I've had friends call in panic when a mutual friend's memorialized account dropped off the internet for up to a day as it transitioned (some could see it, some couldn't, and it would go back and forth for some people).
That's what I did for my htpc (I Wanted to keep the inside as solid state as possible, as It's so small).
I use a pair of 2.5 inch USB drives for reliability, and lack of cords for /home and backup.
Well said, thank you.
Except the fact that the bill of rights exists could be interpreted the exact opposite. One could be argue that we have nothing without the governmentimposing limits on itself (including through the constitution). And, yes I understand that's why some didn't even want to add the bill of rights (as it would imply government could do everything else), of course other founders wanted an elected monarch.
Either way, if the government does not run a place, I think it could be argued the constitution does not apply. I think ammendment IX is the one most people (on the entire political spectrum) crap all over most, which I think was your point.
I still get irritated when I read people quote the declaration of independence as somehow relevant to US law, as it really isn't, and was never meant to be. It's a list of gripes.
The Declaration of Independence applies to no one. It was written without consensus by the more radical elements of the revolutionaries. The Constitution was the negotiated agreement that was to by followed by the whole country.
I do agree that the constitution should apply to everyone, but the declaration of independence is a red herring as far as discussing American law (and certainly WRT international law). I personally think the Constitution (the bill of rights anyway, the parts about how the government runs are less relevant) should apply to anywhere the government has a monopoly on power (which certainly includes gitmo).
Because many of them were grabbed on the say-so of a warlord who they dared to stand up against.
We established bounties, then took the people accused with no evidence except for the say so of someone that is actually a problem for us, payed a bounty, and took them to gitmo.
Perhaps I am being bold when i say a satirical article offering 1,000,000 afghan dinars (is that what they use?) for the assassination of Clinton does not make one a terrorist, and yet, the writer of the article ended up in gitmo (it was in response to Clinton's bounty on Osama, and not really much money). This was a man who was trouble for those taking power in the absence of the taliban, and an ally to a democratic afghanistan.
Many if not most of the people in gitmo are farmers who dared to make an honest living and not submit to warlords, as we deported them indefinitely we paid the warlords for the tip.