For me, everything works at ~35fps on latest Safari on OS X. Strafe, running, jumping, automap, door opening, etc. Only thing that doesn't work is sound. Make sure you focus the canvas (just click on it).
So, where do you draw a line between fucking with people and whistleblowing/exposing incompetence? Exposing incompetence always hurts egos, and by definition it has to hurt wallets since you have to hire new people and perhaps also hire consultants pronto to cover the changeover period. Yet you are merely fixing an existing problem. I think that low-load (non DOS) penetration testing should be made legal even if it's done without consent of the owner of the system. Otherwise we have a reign of complacency. They did alter the content of the site, and that IMHO should always remain a no-no. Just the fact that they "hacked into" a system should be explicitly permitted under the law, as long as confidentiality of the target is respected. Publishing the password lists is retarded. What was done to PBS is illegal, and should remain so, but under specific conditions I'd be more than happy to legalize such activity. Perhaps the law should make small businesses off-limits.
If PBS's IT staff took as much care with backups as they did with system security, I'd say that a lot of FOI hampering could have happened. They could have simply copied contents of/dev/zero to all mounted writable disks on every server and call it a day. My bet is that it'd take a week to get everything restored, in a very lucky outcome. So I do agree that freedom of press was not hampered. I think that there should be a specific legal exception for such actions that merely expose incompetence without causing harm. Perhaps modification of content should be verboten, one has to draw a line somewhere. But simply exposing incompetent sysadmins, I'd be all for making it legal. To do otherwise fosters complacency.
It's not only in agriculture. Animal rights crazies are there too. At the school I go to, the animal lab building is locked 24/7 and requires an access card, whereas you can walk straight in from the street to most of the hospital wards.
I think you must have misunderstood my post, and we principally agree -- I think. What I meant was that herbicides are hardly targeted -- just as you say, and that the way they work is not targeted at a particular type/class of plant other than by chance -- it's essentially a seeming genetic defect that we exploit. Said defect can be fixed, and then you have resistance.
What I further meant to say: eventually, most plants that we care about (read: weeds) will evolve to resist the herbicides that we use. We only control the crop's genetic makeup, after all, weeds simply are given chance to evolve, and some already have.
That's fine and dandy, but Chernobyl's design specifically allowed this to happen. Even with known design issues, the GE Mark I BWRs can't spew so much stuff around. Your argument is similar to arguing that driving cars is horribly unsafe because they all blow up when hit from the back. Well, Pinto did, after all!
10,000 years of human-aided selection isn't enough to know there are no unintended consequences. You're furthering a common fallacy. Maybe it has a fancy name, but I simply call it the fallacy of natural method. You romanticize certain methods that give same outcomes as other methods, and claim that the former ones are somehow OK while the latter one's aren't simply because the latter ones require a lab to perform.
There is no lab-based genetic modification involved in breeding english bulldogs. Yet most of the puppies' heads are too big to fit through the opening in the pelvic bone. Most are born through c-section. This is done entirely via out-of-the-lab breeding. Very natural, huh?
Sorry, you're killing yourself with your own argument. If the nature is smarter, than it will prevail, and potatoes will survive no matter what we stupidly (or not) do.
It should be perhaps explained here that there's no such thing as an "ultimate herbicide" -- at least not in the sense of a relatively simple chemical compound. Existing herbicides exploit essentially genetic defects of certain classes of plants. There's nothing fundamentally different between some weed and crop plant that's useful to us. We can't but expect that eventually the weeds will evolve resistant strains. The fact that a plant is to us a weed doesn't make it somehow indelibly marked "bad", subject to infinite weakness in being affected by herbicides.
In a thousand years or so I fully expect that in developed nations there won't be a single plant that reacts to targeted herbicides: if something will be a herbicide, it will be a universal one. We will have to start using robotic weed-pullers, nanobots, bacteria or viruses, or what have you, but simple chemicals simply won't cut it. It's a fundamental problem, and pretending otherwise is putting one's head into the sand.
(sorry, hit submit too fast) Basically, if you're an adult, whether a U.S. citizen or not, who has locally legal intercourse that would be illegal in the U.S., is automatically in violation of U.S. law. At least that the safe interpretation of it. One wouldn't want to be a test case I'm sure.
It gets worse. There are jurisdictions where the age of majority of less than age of consent. In American Samoa, age of majority is 14 and age of consent is 16.
It doesn't need to involve extradition. There are plenty of people worldwide (I'd say millions, easy), who break U.S. law and that could be, according to law, subject to prosecution in the U.S. for breaking Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b). .
2423(f) refers to Chapter 109A as its bright line for defining "illicit sexual conduct", as far as non-commercial sexual activity is concerned.(see here)
So two under-18 teenagers are in a jurisdiction where them having sex together is OK, but them taking pics of each other for their own use in NOT OK. So you claim they are feeding "lusts of depraved individuals" by snapping and exchanging with each other naked pics of themselves? What tree did you fall from, again?
But guess what: the deal is that there is plenty of countries where more people and businesses thrive than in Poland. Poland simply comes out poorly in comparison.
At least in the U.S., licenses are a matter of public record. That includes some personal data, so, for example, if a female doctor refuses to tell you how old she is, it's just plain silly: everyone can look it up anyway. If you go to talk with any professional or business who requires license in your State, you should do yourself a favor and look it up beforehand.
Land property ownership records are also in public record, and it's routine to have them checked. We've adopted a cat and the first thing the lady at the adoption agency did was to look up my house address -- on the adoption form I claimed that I owned my residence. If I were a renter, they'd call my landlord to make sure they allow pets in the property. It's basic CYA on their end and I'm perfectly OK with that. I'm sure that if they get a bad feeling they'd also run at least a local court case search, looking for cruelty to animals. Plenty of people who hurt pets will try getting another one locally, apparently.
About the only feature that I truly miss, a feature still relevant, is MicroPro WordStar's prioritization of screen updates. We're talking about days of CP/M, and terminals running on serial lines, often through modems. If you were working with a slow terminal (like most were), it really helped that the screen around the cursor had the highest priority. When you would pause typing, it'd then repaint entire text area, then proceed with status bar and menu. The menu was only repainted if it could keep up with your keystrokes. So if you'd do, IIRC, ^K ^S to save the file, ^K would bring up the file menu and start painting it, but as soon as ^S was hit, it'd stop repainting the file menu and display whatever it'd display when it was about to save the file (I don't recall the details).
Most contemporary applications are entirely stupid when it comes to repaints and prioritization of processing to keep up with the user. Their designs all presume that the memory is infinite, and that the hardware is infinitely fast, and that caches are also of infinite size.
Slashdot Mirror
The code is not interpreted, not on any sane recent browser at least.. After a few seconds it's all JIT-compiled.
For me, everything works at ~35fps on latest Safari on OS X. Strafe, running, jumping, automap, door opening, etc. Only thing that doesn't work is sound. Make sure you focus the canvas (just click on it).
So, where do you draw a line between fucking with people and whistleblowing/exposing incompetence? Exposing incompetence always hurts egos, and by definition it has to hurt wallets since you have to hire new people and perhaps also hire consultants pronto to cover the changeover period. Yet you are merely fixing an existing problem. I think that low-load (non DOS) penetration testing should be made legal even if it's done without consent of the owner of the system. Otherwise we have a reign of complacency. They did alter the content of the site, and that IMHO should always remain a no-no. Just the fact that they "hacked into" a system should be explicitly permitted under the law, as long as confidentiality of the target is respected. Publishing the password lists is retarded. What was done to PBS is illegal, and should remain so, but under specific conditions I'd be more than happy to legalize such activity. Perhaps the law should make small businesses off-limits.
If PBS's IT staff took as much care with backups as they did with system security, I'd say that a lot of FOI hampering could have happened. They could have simply copied contents of /dev/zero to all mounted writable disks on every server and call it a day. My bet is that it'd take a week to get everything restored, in a very lucky outcome. So I do agree that freedom of press was not hampered. I think that there should be a specific legal exception for such actions that merely expose incompetence without causing harm. Perhaps modification of content should be verboten, one has to draw a line somewhere. But simply exposing incompetent sysadmins, I'd be all for making it legal. To do otherwise fosters complacency.
Personal experience: Poland used to be a gray hellhole, I agree. Not anymore, not most of it at least.
It's not only in agriculture. Animal rights crazies are there too. At the school I go to, the animal lab building is locked 24/7 and requires an access card, whereas you can walk straight in from the street to most of the hospital wards.
Yeah, and the research here was obviously done by EvilCorp. Haha.
OK, you work for Monsanto, we get it.
I think you must have misunderstood my post, and we principally agree -- I think. What I meant was that herbicides are hardly targeted -- just as you say, and that the way they work is not targeted at a particular type/class of plant other than by chance -- it's essentially a seeming genetic defect that we exploit. Said defect can be fixed, and then you have resistance.
What I further meant to say: eventually, most plants that we care about (read: weeds) will evolve to resist the herbicides that we use. We only control the crop's genetic makeup, after all, weeds simply are given chance to evolve, and some already have.
We'll a bunch of farmers tweeting our crop status to each other.
Like if we weren't already ;)
That's fine and dandy, but Chernobyl's design specifically allowed this to happen. Even with known design issues, the GE Mark I BWRs can't spew so much stuff around. Your argument is similar to arguing that driving cars is horribly unsafe because they all blow up when hit from the back. Well, Pinto did, after all!
I would argue whether it could be called a success, though...
Everyfuckingwhere ;)
10,000 years of human-aided selection isn't enough to know there are no unintended consequences. You're furthering a common fallacy. Maybe it has a fancy name, but I simply call it the fallacy of natural method. You romanticize certain methods that give same outcomes as other methods, and claim that the former ones are somehow OK while the latter one's aren't simply because the latter ones require a lab to perform.
There is no lab-based genetic modification involved in breeding english bulldogs. Yet most of the puppies' heads are too big to fit through the opening in the pelvic bone. Most are born through c-section. This is done entirely via out-of-the-lab breeding. Very natural, huh?
Sorry, you're killing yourself with your own argument. If the nature is smarter, than it will prevail, and potatoes will survive no matter what we stupidly (or not) do.
It should be perhaps explained here that there's no such thing as an "ultimate herbicide" -- at least not in the sense of a relatively simple chemical compound. Existing herbicides exploit essentially genetic defects of certain classes of plants. There's nothing fundamentally different between some weed and crop plant that's useful to us. We can't but expect that eventually the weeds will evolve resistant strains. The fact that a plant is to us a weed doesn't make it somehow indelibly marked "bad", subject to infinite weakness in being affected by herbicides.
In a thousand years or so I fully expect that in developed nations there won't be a single plant that reacts to targeted herbicides: if something will be a herbicide, it will be a universal one. We will have to start using robotic weed-pullers, nanobots, bacteria or viruses, or what have you, but simple chemicals simply won't cut it. It's a fundamental problem, and pretending otherwise is putting one's head into the sand.
So, you mean they are self-centered jerks who try to make everyone think like they do, and when it fails they get destructive? Why yes, I do agree!
(sorry, hit submit too fast) Basically, if you're an adult, whether a U.S. citizen or not, who has locally legal intercourse that would be illegal in the U.S., is automatically in violation of U.S. law. At least that the safe interpretation of it. One wouldn't want to be a test case I'm sure.
It gets worse. There are jurisdictions where the age of majority of less than age of consent. In American Samoa, age of majority is 14 and age of consent is 16.
It doesn't need to involve extradition. There are plenty of people worldwide (I'd say millions, easy), who break U.S. law and that could be, according to law, subject to prosecution in the U.S. for breaking Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b). .
2423(f) refers to Chapter 109A as its bright line for defining "illicit sexual conduct", as far as non-commercial sexual activity is concerned.(see here)
.
It isn't?!
We the people, with our two-bit brains. Electronics on, attention off. Electronics off, attention on. Easy, right?
So two under-18 teenagers are in a jurisdiction where them having sex together is OK, but them taking pics of each other for their own use in NOT OK. So you claim they are feeding "lusts of depraved individuals" by snapping and exchanging with each other naked pics of themselves? What tree did you fall from, again?
But guess what: the deal is that there is plenty of countries where more people and businesses thrive than in Poland. Poland simply comes out poorly in comparison.
At least in the U.S., licenses are a matter of public record. That includes some personal data, so, for example, if a female doctor refuses to tell you how old she is, it's just plain silly: everyone can look it up anyway. If you go to talk with any professional or business who requires license in your State, you should do yourself a favor and look it up beforehand.
Land property ownership records are also in public record, and it's routine to have them checked. We've adopted a cat and the first thing the lady at the adoption agency did was to look up my house address -- on the adoption form I claimed that I owned my residence. If I were a renter, they'd call my landlord to make sure they allow pets in the property. It's basic CYA on their end and I'm perfectly OK with that. I'm sure that if they get a bad feeling they'd also run at least a local court case search, looking for cruelty to animals. Plenty of people who hurt pets will try getting another one locally, apparently.
About the only feature that I truly miss, a feature still relevant, is MicroPro WordStar's prioritization of screen updates. We're talking about days of CP/M, and terminals running on serial lines, often through modems. If you were working with a slow terminal (like most were), it really helped that the screen around the cursor had the highest priority. When you would pause typing, it'd then repaint entire text area, then proceed with status bar and menu. The menu was only repainted if it could keep up with your keystrokes. So if you'd do, IIRC, ^K ^S to save the file, ^K would bring up the file menu and start painting it, but as soon as ^S was hit, it'd stop repainting the file menu and display whatever it'd display when it was about to save the file (I don't recall the details).
Most contemporary applications are entirely stupid when it comes to repaints and prioritization of processing to keep up with the user. Their designs all presume that the memory is infinite, and that the hardware is infinitely fast, and that caches are also of infinite size.