That's still not going to prevent the phish site from simply acting like a pass-through proxy to the real site while collecting all the necessary information.
At best the users will think the site's a little slower today. At worst they won't even notice.
Why an X? Why not a scanotron sheet, with it's bubble or oblong box? Like dfenstrate said, everybody should be familiar with it by now, the rules are well known and very much readable by both machine and human.
Even an X could be interpreted. Not much room for 'fill in the bubble completely with a #2 pencil, blue or black pen'*. Better yet, we can borrow the school district's machines to tally the votes. Save money.
*#2 pencils are no longer strictly necessary for OCR readers.
btw, dfenstrate, is that short for Defenestrate? I love that word.
Two weeks is the general standard, though many companies will simply pay you the two weeks of pay and kick you out the door. In their mind it's safer than any damage you might cause in those two weeks against lowered production.
In this case it could be argued that the employee entered into a contract(verbal?) to work out the last two weeks. Working only one week would violate the contract. Then the question would become, what's the appropriate penalty? Worst case I can see is the employee having to pay any additional expense for hiring a temp worker for a week. The hiring company shouldn't be involved at all, and are likely only being sued because they're involved and the sueing company is hoping something will stick.
I've pretty much lived only in right to work states where the company wouldn't have a leg to stand on, unless they specified something special in the hiring contract. Under state law, the employee and employer can terminate the hiring agreement at any time and for any reason. So the anybody giving two weeks is being nice. I've given less than two weeks notice twice. Once was a case of management change, the new management was such an annoyance that one worker quit over lunch, and I gave 3 days notice(and that was all I could stand). The second was very similar to this case. I was hired, given a starting date, then they called up and asked if I could come early.
I've heard that it was designed to be brought down by the Challanger, which was unfortuantly lost. The Challanger had a slightly larger cargo bay, so any other shuttle would have to be overhauled in order for it to fit.
upgrade has never meant install from clean hence the price differential
Sure, first install is from the previous OS. However as time goes by the need for a fresh install for anything from a HD crash to a particularly nasty virus/trojan infection increases.
Having to install 2000/XP then upgrade to vista would be a huge pain in the but.
Of course, the sheer number of updates to the OS today already makes any reinstall a huge pain.
Of course, my solution will simply be to not update to vista until I buy/build a new machine.
Goverments exist dude, get over it. I'm a libertarian, not an anarchist. Small l at that.
Electricity generation isn't done by the government, at most it's done by private contractors.
In 1992/3 the salary of every single person working on the Web at CERN was paid for with government funds including me. The US govt picked up the tab for the folk at NCSA as well. In fact that was the case for at least 70% of the people on the project until Netscape was founded.
CERN is a particle physics lab, which developed the web in response to a need of their own. The particle physics part is fundamental science, which I don't have a problem with government doing. Being a public organization, they released the product to the public, and the combination of it's usefulness and open nature made it attractive enough to win.
Kinda like how TCP/IP won over the others, and it started in US military research labs.
However, electricity generation and geothermal power are established arts. That's the purview of private companies.
Another no-brainer is for the government to cough up the $50 million or so it would take to build a serious prototype geothermal plant.
It's probably my libertarain tendencies, but I have to ask why it should be the government to come up with the money? Electricity generation shouldn't be a role of the government. Before you complain, I object to oil industry handouts as well, so I'm fair about that. If it wasn't for the subsidization of the road system, we may have been on efficient rail for years. Maybe even PRT.
As for the earthquakes - yeah, I'd rather endure several dozen 3's rather than one 7.
Heh, speaking of which, my wait for buying a HD solution came far quicker than I imagined. I set the resolution that I wouldn't buy it until it had been hacked/opened to the point that encryption wasn't a factor.
And sometimes this needs to be tweaked. If the first thing everybody does is ignore the machinegun and rush for the RL/BFG, you may have a problem. If everybody with experience goes after the MGs soley, then you may be overbalanced the other way.
'Day of Defeat' seems to have found a nice balance, people pick their guns based somewhat on preference, but also upon the needs of the map. Some maps you want every sniper you can get, others they're virtually useless.
Ouch... That's one thing about living where I do. My electricity is currently $.08, should drop to $.05 once I get the system installed. My house cost $15k, and it's a three bedroom, though an older one, many modern homes have larger closets than my smallest bedroom.
Basically, I'll have plenty of notice from others installing systems before it makes economic sense for me to do so.
So focus more on the exercise (i.e., stop driving) and less on the diets. It may be tough at first, but soon you'll start to feel better than you have in a long, long time.
I already exercise > 3 hours/week. I don't drive when I don't have to. Honestly enough, while I'm better at 10 pounds less, anything more, even with > 7 hours/week, is extremely difficult.
Sure, 'Stop buying cigarettes' is only three words. 'Stop using tobacco'.
I'm about 20 pounds over my 'ideal' weight. However, to try to get there requires restricting my diet to an extreme point and results in my body doing the whole slowdown thing to make it even harder and me feel like crud.
Hopefully they'll come up with a pill to fix that someday.
own ultracapacitors which are filling up off 120V@100-500A).
More likely 240V, or even 600V. 10 charging stations at 100 amps each is quite a bit of power. To avoid having to use power cables the size of telephone poles, you'd want to increase the voltage.
Even for the home example, you'd be better off putting a 240V 'dryer' socket out in the garage. Then you could do it with 6.25 amps, or use 20 amps and have it filled up in two hours. Just use a system so that you get cheap off-peak power.
The higher voltage would mean less waste for any given wire size. It'd also let you get enough charge so you could go out to dinner at, say, seven and still not use any gas.
burning coal results in increased cleaning requirement on nearby solar panels
heh, read the right posts by me and you'll see that I'm downright hostile about coal power.
While these facilities may not require a huge investment, that actually makes it easier; They usually look at percentages. There's plenty of small time investors available for even smaller projects.
The traditional alternative energy sources DO result in cheaper electricty, as the facilities can be so small, that the consumer can carry the investment himself, thus scoring the profit after a reasonable time.
Unfortuantly, I beg to differ. I'm going to sign up with a deal for my electricity, which in exchange for limiting my usage during certain periods of time, they'll sell me my electricity for 4.5 cents/kwh, including fuel charge. At that rate, putting up a turbine would take more than 50 years to pay itself back, effectivly forever when you figure cost of capital. This result means that it is more economical for me to buy my electricity and invest/not borrow the money.
And wind is cheaper than solar.
Well, unless you mean 'traditional alternative energy' to be hydro and geothermal. In which case, yes, a good dam or geothermal plant can beat even coal rather handily, and the lack of emissions is a big plus. Though Geothermal not done right can emit some nasty stuff too.
While they don't have fuel costs, I understand that geothermal power currently has issues with maintenance costs. The steam has corrosive elements in it that results in increased mainentance required. Not saying that this outweighs the fuel costs of coal, but they are there. Just like even wind requires maintenance, and with solar you need to clean the solar panels occasionaly.
significant reduction in oil and gas import requirements
Oil used for electric power is already insignificant, and most gas is domestically produced.
Still, this would allow for a significant decrease in coal usage, which would indeed be very handy.
just make two classes of outgoing mail: addresses you have recieved e-mail from, and addresses where you are initiating the contact. You are only allowed but so many (20 ?) new contacts per day.
That'd work for consumer accounts most of the time. Still have to work on the zombie problem.
Then you contact your ISP and make arrangements, after you convince them that you're not a spammer.
Fairly simply. Though today it should be able to tell the difference between legitimate bulk email* and spam
Such as mail-type discussion groups, business relations like people who want to receive tiger direct's adds, etc...
When you're having to post random segments of encyclopedias and put your actual message into an image to get through the filters, it's a clue that you're not wanted.
Those types I'd like to see shot. Heck, I'd shoot them myself.
Oh, and I don't believe that spammers are truly a dime a dozen. I think that if we removed the 10 worst spammers we'd drop spam in the USA by 50% or more.
Um... I wouldn't forget the cost and hassle of having to wire your entire house with 4 gauge wire.
[quote]12 volts at 700+ amps does just as well as 110 volts at 15-20 amps for electric coil stoves.[/quote]
The resistance would have to be ~1/10th to pull as much power at 12 volts as 120. You'd end up wasting 10 times as much power over a given amount of electrical wire, which would overheat it, to prevent this you'd have to use thicker wire.
For all but the shortest distance applications(like inside the device itself), higher voltage is better. Today's transformers are extremely efficient. It's actually more efficient to run power around using 120 volts(or 240 or, for the adventurous, 600), then convert it to DC in the device.
"Please don't partake of both at the same time." But if you insist, libertarians are OK with that.
Well, as long as you don't do it in a mannor that'll harm somebody else. You get drunk and start shooting at people I'm likely to ventilate you myself.
And you join the libertarian party if you want guns and drugs to be legal*.
Honestly, both parties mean multiple things, not all of them good. As far as I'm concerned both are far too happy to spend money, the republicans are controlled too much by the religious nuts and the democrats too much by the socialist/green fruitcakes. Corruption is rampant among both parties.
Which is why I seem to get irate whenever people start complaining about medical companies making a profit when everybody else is. For pete's sake, funeral homes make a profit.
Look at Viox, pharmacuticals take big risks all the time for these new products, of course they need return on them.
If anything the high profits are a signal that there's space in the market for even more companies.
This just in: developing medecines takes work, and work costs resources. Anybody who can think of a better way to provide resources to the people interested in developing medecines, besides patent royalties and the like, please come forward.
First I'd like to note that I support the patent system in general, though I do recognize that it has problems. I remember that there's quite a bit of public research out there that's done solely for the 'public good', much university research falls into this.
Still, I had an idea once which I will call the 'public health fund'. Please note that it's very rough. Statistics will be kept on how many cases there are for various diseases. Each case will be assigned a level from 1 to 10. A 1 is simply an irritation, such as a cold. Strep throat would be a 3. Death would be a 10. Significant permanent treatment required would be like a 5, something permanently disabling would be an 6-9, as would ones requiring significant effort treatments such as cancer. Bedridden in a hospital would be a 9 for example.
Each disease would have an advocate board that studies and allocates the funds into appropriate measure, the board would be selected by the victims of the diseases or their next of kin.. The basic formula per person would be: level^4 dollars to be spent on researching and advancing cures, treatments, prevention, etc...
So cancer, with 553,400 deaths from it in 2001, would receive $5.5 Billion for research(from the deaths alone), though since cancer isn't actually a single disease I'd likely split that category up. It'd also gain quite a bit more money because the majority of people who die from cancer don't die in under a year, and many survive. So the researchers working on DCA goes before the appropriate cancer boards and point out the possiblities, possibly receiving a grant to further the research.
Type 1 diabetes affects about 1.5 Million Americans, which requires permament and intrusive treatment, more than just taking a pill. There are serious side effects, and it's more or less permament at this point, so it's a 5, resulting in $937.5 million a year in funding. Still, it'd get even more funding because diabetes is listed as a cause of death in nearly 225k cases a year.
Still, even the common cold would get some research money, though even with 15 million sufferers* getting it each year, it's not going to exceed level 1 or 2 in most cases, so it'll likely only get 30 million or so.
*Very rough figure, unable to quickly find a direct statistic.
Slashdot Mirror
That's still not going to prevent the phish site from simply acting like a pass-through proxy to the real site while collecting all the necessary information.
At best the users will think the site's a little slower today. At worst they won't even notice.
I've read about his case, and from that I'd say the 'stalking' material would be his picketing their compound. Complete with big-ass sign.
Going by the standards that it takes to get abortion protestors arrested, there's something fishy about the case.
Why an X? Why not a scanotron sheet, with it's bubble or oblong box? Like dfenstrate said, everybody should be familiar with it by now, the rules are well known and very much readable by both machine and human.
Even an X could be interpreted. Not much room for 'fill in the bubble completely with a #2 pencil, blue or black pen'*. Better yet, we can borrow the school district's machines to tally the votes. Save money.
*#2 pencils are no longer strictly necessary for OCR readers.
btw, dfenstrate, is that short for Defenestrate? I love that word.
It depends on your contract, state laws, etc...
Two weeks is the general standard, though many companies will simply pay you the two weeks of pay and kick you out the door. In their mind it's safer than any damage you might cause in those two weeks against lowered production.
In this case it could be argued that the employee entered into a contract(verbal?) to work out the last two weeks. Working only one week would violate the contract. Then the question would become, what's the appropriate penalty? Worst case I can see is the employee having to pay any additional expense for hiring a temp worker for a week. The hiring company shouldn't be involved at all, and are likely only being sued because they're involved and the sueing company is hoping something will stick.
I've pretty much lived only in right to work states where the company wouldn't have a leg to stand on, unless they specified something special in the hiring contract. Under state law, the employee and employer can terminate the hiring agreement at any time and for any reason. So the anybody giving two weeks is being nice. I've given less than two weeks notice twice. Once was a case of management change, the new management was such an annoyance that one worker quit over lunch, and I gave 3 days notice(and that was all I could stand). The second was very similar to this case. I was hired, given a starting date, then they called up and asked if I could come early.
I've heard that it was designed to be brought down by the Challanger, which was unfortuantly lost. The Challanger had a slightly larger cargo bay, so any other shuttle would have to be overhauled in order for it to fit.
upgrade has never meant install from clean hence the price differential
Sure, first install is from the previous OS. However as time goes by the need for a fresh install for anything from a HD crash to a particularly nasty virus/trojan infection increases.
Having to install 2000/XP then upgrade to vista would be a huge pain in the but.
Of course, the sheer number of updates to the OS today already makes any reinstall a huge pain.
Of course, my solution will simply be to not update to vista until I buy/build a new machine.
Goverments exist dude, get over it.
I'm a libertarian, not an anarchist. Small l at that.
Electricity generation isn't done by the government, at most it's done by private contractors.
In 1992/3 the salary of every single person working on the Web at CERN was paid for with government funds including me. The US govt picked up the tab for the folk at NCSA as well. In fact that was the case for at least 70% of the people on the project until Netscape was founded.
CERN is a particle physics lab, which developed the web in response to a need of their own. The particle physics part is fundamental science, which I don't have a problem with government doing. Being a public organization, they released the product to the public, and the combination of it's usefulness and open nature made it attractive enough to win.
Kinda like how TCP/IP won over the others, and it started in US military research labs.
However, electricity generation and geothermal power are established arts. That's the purview of private companies.
Another no-brainer is for the government to cough up the $50 million or so it would take to build a serious prototype geothermal plant.
It's probably my libertarain tendencies, but I have to ask why it should be the government to come up with the money? Electricity generation shouldn't be a role of the government.
Before you complain, I object to oil industry handouts as well, so I'm fair about that. If it wasn't for the subsidization of the road system, we may have been on efficient rail for years. Maybe even PRT.
As for the earthquakes - yeah, I'd rather endure several dozen 3's rather than one 7.
Heh, speaking of which, my wait for buying a HD solution came far quicker than I imagined. I set the resolution that I wouldn't buy it until it had been hacked/opened to the point that encryption wasn't a factor.
And sometimes this needs to be tweaked. If the first thing everybody does is ignore the machinegun and rush for the RL/BFG, you may have a problem. If everybody with experience goes after the MGs soley, then you may be overbalanced the other way.
'Day of Defeat' seems to have found a nice balance, people pick their guns based somewhat on preference, but also upon the needs of the map. Some maps you want every sniper you can get, others they're virtually useless.
we pay 28 cents/KwH
Ouch... That's one thing about living where I do. My electricity is currently $.08, should drop to $.05 once I get the system installed. My house cost $15k, and it's a three bedroom, though an older one, many modern homes have larger closets than my smallest bedroom.
Basically, I'll have plenty of notice from others installing systems before it makes economic sense for me to do so.
So focus more on the exercise (i.e., stop driving) and less on the diets. It may be tough at first, but soon you'll start to feel better than you have in a long, long time.
I already exercise > 3 hours/week. I don't drive when I don't have to. Honestly enough, while I'm better at 10 pounds less, anything more, even with > 7 hours/week, is extremely difficult.
And it's a lot like quiting smoking...
Sure, 'Stop buying cigarettes' is only three words. 'Stop using tobacco'.
I'm about 20 pounds over my 'ideal' weight. However, to try to get there requires restricting my diet to an extreme point and results in my body doing the whole slowdown thing to make it even harder and me feel like crud.
Hopefully they'll come up with a pill to fix that someday.
own ultracapacitors which are filling up off 120V@100-500A).
More likely 240V, or even 600V. 10 charging stations at 100 amps each is quite a bit of power. To avoid having to use power cables the size of telephone poles, you'd want to increase the voltage.
Even for the home example, you'd be better off putting a 240V 'dryer' socket out in the garage. Then you could do it with 6.25 amps, or use 20 amps and have it filled up in two hours. Just use a system so that you get cheap off-peak power.
The higher voltage would mean less waste for any given wire size. It'd also let you get enough charge so you could go out to dinner at, say, seven and still not use any gas.
Uh, you mentioned an electric coil stove?
Besides, my comment stands, as even if you use a more efficient form of heat generation. You're still using thousands of watts.
burning coal results in increased cleaning requirement on nearby solar panels
heh, read the right posts by me and you'll see that I'm downright hostile about coal power.
While these facilities may not require a huge investment, that actually makes it easier; They usually look at percentages. There's plenty of small time investors available for even smaller projects.
The traditional alternative energy sources DO result in cheaper electricty, as the facilities can be so small, that the consumer can carry the investment himself, thus scoring the profit after a reasonable time.
Unfortuantly, I beg to differ. I'm going to sign up with a deal for my electricity, which in exchange for limiting my usage during certain periods of time, they'll sell me my electricity for 4.5 cents/kwh, including fuel charge. At that rate, putting up a turbine would take more than 50 years to pay itself back, effectivly forever when you figure cost of capital. This result means that it is more economical for me to buy my electricity and invest/not borrow the money.
And wind is cheaper than solar.
Well, unless you mean 'traditional alternative energy' to be hydro and geothermal. In which case, yes, a good dam or geothermal plant can beat even coal rather handily, and the lack of emissions is a big plus. Though Geothermal not done right can emit some nasty stuff too.
no running costs, the consumables are minimal.
While they don't have fuel costs, I understand that geothermal power currently has issues with maintenance costs. The steam has corrosive elements in it that results in increased mainentance required. Not saying that this outweighs the fuel costs of coal, but they are there. Just like even wind requires maintenance, and with solar you need to clean the solar panels occasionaly.
significant reduction in oil and gas import requirements
Oil used for electric power is already insignificant, and most gas is domestically produced.
Still, this would allow for a significant decrease in coal usage, which would indeed be very handy.
just make two classes of outgoing mail: addresses you have recieved e-mail from, and addresses where you are initiating the contact. You are only allowed but so many (20 ?) new contacts per day.
That'd work for consumer accounts most of the time. Still have to work on the zombie problem.
Then you contact your ISP and make arrangements, after you convince them that you're not a spammer.
Fairly simply. Though today it should be able to tell the difference between legitimate bulk email* and spam
Such as mail-type discussion groups, business relations like people who want to receive tiger direct's adds, etc...
When you're having to post random segments of encyclopedias and put your actual message into an image to get through the filters, it's a clue that you're not wanted.
Those types I'd like to see shot. Heck, I'd shoot them myself.
Oh, and I don't believe that spammers are truly a dime a dozen. I think that if we removed the 10 worst spammers we'd drop spam in the USA by 50% or more.
Stop loss, while it can be called for more than just declared war, affects a relativly small number of military members for a limited period of time.
When I signed up they pointed out the 8 year thing 3 different times, and this was before 2001.
Basically, anybody in the military has since re-upped during the 'war on terror', so have chosen to enlist/re-enlist knowning the situation.
Um... I wouldn't forget the cost and hassle of having to wire your entire house with 4 gauge wire.
[quote]12 volts at 700+ amps does just as well as 110 volts at 15-20 amps for electric coil stoves.[/quote]
The resistance would have to be ~1/10th to pull as much power at 12 volts as 120. You'd end up wasting 10 times as much power over a given amount of electrical wire, which would overheat it, to prevent this you'd have to use thicker wire.
For all but the shortest distance applications(like inside the device itself), higher voltage is better. Today's transformers are extremely efficient. It's actually more efficient to run power around using 120 volts(or 240 or, for the adventurous, 600), then convert it to DC in the device.
"Please don't partake of both at the same time." But if you insist, libertarians are OK with that.
Well, as long as you don't do it in a mannor that'll harm somebody else. You get drunk and start shooting at people I'm likely to ventilate you myself.
And you join the libertarian party if you want guns and drugs to be legal*.
Honestly, both parties mean multiple things, not all of them good. As far as I'm concerned both are far too happy to spend money, the republicans are controlled too much by the religious nuts and the democrats too much by the socialist/green fruitcakes. Corruption is rampant among both parties.
*Please don't partake of both at the same time.
Which is why I seem to get irate whenever people start complaining about medical companies making a profit when everybody else is. For pete's sake, funeral homes make a profit.
Look at Viox, pharmacuticals take big risks all the time for these new products, of course they need return on them.
If anything the high profits are a signal that there's space in the market for even more companies.
This just in: developing medecines takes work, and work costs resources. Anybody who can think of a better way to provide resources to the people interested in developing medecines, besides patent royalties and the like, please come forward.
First I'd like to note that I support the patent system in general, though I do recognize that it has problems. I remember that there's quite a bit of public research out there that's done solely for the 'public good', much university research falls into this.
Still, I had an idea once which I will call the 'public health fund'. Please note that it's very rough. Statistics will be kept on how many cases there are for various diseases. Each case will be assigned a level from 1 to 10. A 1 is simply an irritation, such as a cold. Strep throat would be a 3. Death would be a 10. Significant permanent treatment required would be like a 5, something permanently disabling would be an 6-9, as would ones requiring significant effort treatments such as cancer. Bedridden in a hospital would be a 9 for example.
Each disease would have an advocate board that studies and allocates the funds into appropriate measure, the board would be selected by the victims of the diseases or their next of kin.. The basic formula per person would be: level^4 dollars to be spent on researching and advancing cures, treatments, prevention, etc...
So cancer, with 553,400 deaths from it in 2001, would receive $5.5 Billion for research(from the deaths alone), though since cancer isn't actually a single disease I'd likely split that category up. It'd also gain quite a bit more money because the majority of people who die from cancer don't die in under a year, and many survive. So the researchers working on DCA goes before the appropriate cancer boards and point out the possiblities, possibly receiving a grant to further the research.
Type 1 diabetes affects about 1.5 Million Americans, which requires permament and intrusive treatment, more than just taking a pill. There are serious side effects, and it's more or less permament at this point, so it's a 5, resulting in $937.5 million a year in funding. Still, it'd get even more funding because diabetes is listed as a cause of death in nearly 225k cases a year.
Still, even the common cold would get some research money, though even with 15 million sufferers* getting it each year, it's not going to exceed level 1 or 2 in most cases, so it'll likely only get 30 million or so.
*Very rough figure, unable to quickly find a direct statistic.