But then we need at least 3 sets of stuff for that to work... which starts adding up real quick in costs. My parents, her parents, and her aunt & uncle's place. Its really not that practical. If anything, the trailer sounds like the best idea of the replies, however, given that newer minivans get the same or better mileage than the Intrepid, its a better bet for us.
I have an 8 month old son. When we travel to see our folks (about an hour or so away), the car is *packed* for a weekend trip. We have a '99 Intrepid, which isn't exactly a small car. However, by the time we pack the playpen (for him to sleep in), the stroller (we like to take him for walks in the evening), his chair, a strap-on high chair, and overnight bag for him, and one for us, the trunk is full. We plan on having a second in a couple years. At that point, we couldn't fit everything in the car.
I'm in complete agreement. I LOVE steam. Its had issues, but not enough to make me cringe. I can buy games online, I can preload them before they're released, and play them moments after being released. I don't even know when my games are updated anymore, Steam takes care of it for me.
Actually, no, because Google charges the owner of the ad for that click and pays you (the adsense hoster) a portion of that amount. So in the end, the company paying to have the ads displayed loses money to invalid clicks. Google still makes money (ignoring legal costs and such) for each false click. However, it does make adsense a less valuable advertising tool and thus would cost them in the long run.
Wow, I think you should have a look at the rest of the world and realize that we don't "import" laws from the US. Most of Europe and Canada are Socialist countries... you don't see us adapting US education and healthcare do you?
The Canadian Privacy Commissioner is currently reviewing cross-border data flow because Canadians' privacy is being compromised by the Patriot Act. If anything, we're seperating ourselves from the US, not the other way around.
but the US implying laws on internet usage will not completely change the internet. The rest of the world won't just follow along, and you'll find hi-tech companies moving to companies that are more forgiving to their line of business.
Re:From the title...
on
PHP Hacks
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Yup, but this comes down to what all dicussions do when a PHP topic is posted to slashdot. Is it the fault of the language when a lot of open source applications are written poorly? There have been very few vulnerabilites in PHP, but lots in apps like Mambo, *Nuke, phpBB, etc.
I like PHP, I can develop stuff very quickly in it, and I know how to secure code against CSS, SQL-Injection, etc. There are shortcomings with it, like basically every other language, but I don't think the fact that all these application with vulnerabilities should be a direct reflection on the language itself.
Since it seems I'm never going to see the end to this type of response: Read the rest of the comments, there are a lot of reasons why a converstaion or other in-car distration is not nearly as bad as a conversation on a cell phone. People in the vehicle with you will react to the same environment as you... sudden stops, heavy traffic, etc. The person on the other end of the phone isn't going to stop feeding you directions because you just got cut off by someone who just slammed their brakes on. There's also some psycology study that says while talking on a phone, you indavertantly imagine the environment of the person you are speaking with, which is another added distraction
Nope, read further into the comments for some links to other studies that show other in-car distractions are nowhere near as bad as talking on the phone.
Wow, how does someone like you even get the +1 modifier? Driving is a privilege. It can be taken away if you abuse it. Want proof? Continue driving the way you think you should be able to.
There's no reason a responsible person should make any of these calls while driving:
a) pass time on boring stretches of roads - no, you're driving, if your that bored, stop and do something else
b) call ahead for take-out, c) call home to see if anything is needed, d) call ahead to let them know you'll be late, e) call and ask for directions - do all of these before you leave
call 9-11 because you just saw an accident - pull over and stop, perhaps you can be off assistance if someone is injured until EMS arrives
or drunk driver - get their plate, pull over call. Don't become part of the problem yourself by worrying more about what he's doing and reporting it than by paying attention to your driving
I'll talk on my phone when I drive, and I've never had anything that could remotely be considered a close call (pardon the pun) while driving while on the phone. I'm sure I've seen hundreds of people on their phone that would say the same thing, and thanks to the quick reactions of those around them, they haven't been in an accident while lane wondering, driving through flashing pedestrian lights, stopping when they have the right of way, breaking suddenly for no reason, etc.
I've driven behind, beside, in front of people on the phone who have had no clue how close they've come to causing an accident. You may be one of the only people who hasn't done something like this, but don't count on it.
I did read your comment, did you read mine? Hands-free means nothing, so don't bother saying you use it because that's not the point. Saying you are not distracted while talking is the same thing everyone else says.
You may be (one of the few) able to drive properly and talk on a phone at the same time. From personal experience and several studies like this one, the majority of people can NOT. Since these people refuse to admit this and continue to cause a problem, a solution is to make it illegal. I like this solution. I don't see a need for people to talk on their phone while driving. If you can't be out of touch for the time it takes you to drive from Point A to point B, then take a cab/bus/train/whatever. Otherwise, let voicemail handle it and call them back.
Just like many people who have been drinking, the cell phone users did not believe themselves to be affected, the researchers found.
They studied 40 volunteers who used a driving simulator four times--while undistracted, using a handheld cell phone, using a hands-free cell phone and while intoxicated to a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level
Motorists who talked on either handheld or hands-free cell phones drove slightly more slowly, were 9 percent slower to hit the brakes, and varied their speed more than undistracted drivers.
"Driving while talking on a cell phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk,"
Everytime this comes up, people always say that they use hands-free. That's not the point. This isn't about having two hands on the wheel. This is about paying attention to what you are doing. Talking on a phone is an added distraction. Its that simple. You can argue to what degree that distraction is, but you cannot deny that it is a distraction.
Then people always talk about how they can drop the phone, or stop the conversation if a situation that requires their complete attention arises. Ever think that situation may not have risen if you hadn't been on the phone in the first place?
That was exactly my thought. I checked the website but there is nothing up yet about it. I would assume at this point she is aware of and looking into the issue. Simply put, in Canada, you cannot just collect, browse, or distribute private information without permission of the person, or without a warrant to do so. I belive if you look closely at the act, you'll see that you have to give express consent for them to do so, they can't just assume you have because you've been notified of the condition, or because you are using the service.
I understand that some things are logged and that given a warrant, they can and will tap my line, but this is the ISP proactively watching what your doing and reporting wrong doing, without cause!
All ISPs cache data to a certain extent. And all governments can strong-arm or bribe companies... It's just that this particular ISP is being honest and saying, "Yea, we'll hand your stats over."
Okay, but the article makes it sound like Bell is going to be watching your traffic and snooping through it, if they see something that looks bad, they'll hand it over to the Government. So, you are not being investigated by any agency. You are not considered suspicious or dangerous in any way. A request from your DSL line (or whatever) comes in for a site that contains or contained [copyrighted marterial|child porn|explosive making instructions|pro-terrorist progaganda|etc] and they are going to send you personal information and details of your visit to the government. No warrants, no due process. If this isn't an invasion of privacy I don't know what is. I certainly hope our privacy commissioner is aware of and looking into this.
No, the simple answer is to have a simple switch on the bullet flipped as the round is chambered which "activates" the bullet. Before this switch is flipped, no radio signal will fire the bullet. Of course this means that somehow the switch must be flipped back if the bullet is removed from the chamber without being fired.
True, but as the feature gap narrows, there will be less reason (for most users) to go through the hassle of downloading and new browser (and any plugins). Microsoft can play catch up with features and maintain or grow its market share while firefox (and others) will have to stay innovative to maintain or grow.
In this analogy, the water levels at the edge would correspond to the water at the equator, and those levels being higher is actually consistent with what he was describing.
Only if the speed does not remain constant. Otherwise adding more water would cause water levels to rise across the entire surface. Since we're not talking about changing speed, my point holds true. The water levels would rise unless another force acted upon them.
I didn't phrase that very well, you are of course correct. Ice has more volume that the amount of water needed to create that ice. I should have gone into more detail and talked about if it is from warming, the ice on land would be melting, breaking off, etc. overall raising the level of the oceans. Even dropping a new iceberg off a glacier will technically raise the level of the oceans slightly.
But why would the levels at the artic drop more? If you fill a bowl 1/2 full with water and spin slowly around and observer the water levels, then add more water and repeat, you wouldn't see the water levels at the edge lower on the 2nd try. They'd be higher. Oh, and I think you mean centripetal force.
Slashdot Mirror
It was IRIX, and it wasn't bad, but was notorius for buffer overflows. Got into a few boxes I shouldn't have been able to because of that.
But then we need at least 3 sets of stuff for that to work... which starts adding up real quick in costs. My parents, her parents, and her aunt & uncle's place. Its really not that practical. If anything, the trailer sounds like the best idea of the replies, however, given that newer minivans get the same or better mileage than the Intrepid, its a better bet for us.
I have an 8 month old son. When we travel to see our folks (about an hour or so away), the car is *packed* for a weekend trip. We have a '99 Intrepid, which isn't exactly a small car. However, by the time we pack the playpen (for him to sleep in), the stroller (we like to take him for walks in the evening), his chair, a strap-on high chair, and overnight bag for him, and one for us, the trunk is full. We plan on having a second in a couple years. At that point, we couldn't fit everything in the car.
I'm in complete agreement. I LOVE steam. Its had issues, but not enough to make me cringe. I can buy games online, I can preload them before they're released, and play them moments after being released. I don't even know when my games are updated anymore, Steam takes care of it for me.
Actually, no, because Google charges the owner of the ad for that click and pays you (the adsense hoster) a portion of that amount. So in the end, the company paying to have the ads displayed loses money to invalid clicks. Google still makes money (ignoring legal costs and such) for each false click. However, it does make adsense a less valuable advertising tool and thus would cost them in the long run.
Wow, I think you should have a look at the rest of the world and realize that we don't "import" laws from the US. Most of Europe and Canada are Socialist countries... you don't see us adapting US education and healthcare do you?
The Canadian Privacy Commissioner is currently reviewing cross-border data flow because Canadians' privacy is being compromised by the Patriot Act. If anything, we're seperating ourselves from the US, not the other way around.
but the US implying laws on internet usage will not completely change the internet. The rest of the world won't just follow along, and you'll find hi-tech companies moving to companies that are more forgiving to their line of business.
Yup, but this comes down to what all dicussions do when a PHP topic is posted to slashdot. Is it the fault of the language when a lot of open source applications are written poorly? There have been very few vulnerabilites in PHP, but lots in apps like Mambo, *Nuke, phpBB, etc.
I like PHP, I can develop stuff very quickly in it, and I know how to secure code against CSS, SQL-Injection, etc. There are shortcomings with it, like basically every other language, but I don't think the fact that all these application with vulnerabilities should be a direct reflection on the language itself.
Since it seems I'm never going to see the end to this type of response: Read the rest of the comments, there are a lot of reasons why a converstaion or other in-car distration is not nearly as bad as a conversation on a cell phone. People in the vehicle with you will react to the same environment as you... sudden stops, heavy traffic, etc. The person on the other end of the phone isn't going to stop feeding you directions because you just got cut off by someone who just slammed their brakes on. There's also some psycology study that says while talking on a phone, you indavertantly imagine the environment of the person you are speaking with, which is another added distraction
Nope, read further into the comments for some links to other studies that show other in-car distractions are nowhere near as bad as talking on the phone.
Wow, how does someone like you even get the +1 modifier? Driving is a privilege. It can be taken away if you abuse it. Want proof? Continue driving the way you think you should be able to.
I'll talk on my phone when I drive, and I've never had anything that could remotely be considered a close call (pardon the pun) while driving while on the phone. I'm sure I've seen hundreds of people on their phone that would say the same thing, and thanks to the quick reactions of those around them, they haven't been in an accident while lane wondering, driving through flashing pedestrian lights, stopping when they have the right of way, breaking suddenly for no reason, etc.
I've driven behind, beside, in front of people on the phone who have had no clue how close they've come to causing an accident. You may be one of the only people who hasn't done something like this, but don't count on it.
I did read your comment, did you read mine? Hands-free means nothing, so don't bother saying you use it because that's not the point. Saying you are not distracted while talking is the same thing everyone else says.
You may be (one of the few) able to drive properly and talk on a phone at the same time. From personal experience and several studies like this one, the majority of people can NOT. Since these people refuse to admit this and continue to cause a problem, a solution is to make it illegal. I like this solution. I don't see a need for people to talk on their phone while driving. If you can't be out of touch for the time it takes you to drive from Point A to point B, then take a cab/bus/train/whatever. Otherwise, let voicemail handle it and call them back.
FTA:
Everytime this comes up, people always say that they use hands-free. That's not the point. This isn't about having two hands on the wheel. This is about paying attention to what you are doing. Talking on a phone is an added distraction. Its that simple. You can argue to what degree that distraction is, but you cannot deny that it is a distraction.
Then people always talk about how they can drop the phone, or stop the conversation if a situation that requires their complete attention arises. Ever think that situation may not have risen if you hadn't been on the phone in the first place?
That was exactly my thought. I checked the website but there is nothing up yet about it. I would assume at this point she is aware of and looking into the issue. Simply put, in Canada, you cannot just collect, browse, or distribute private information without permission of the person, or without a warrant to do so. I belive if you look closely at the act, you'll see that you have to give express consent for them to do so, they can't just assume you have because you've been notified of the condition, or because you are using the service.
I understand that some things are logged and that given a warrant, they can and will tap my line, but this is the ISP proactively watching what your doing and reporting wrong doing, without cause!
All ISPs cache data to a certain extent. And all governments can strong-arm or bribe companies... It's just that this particular ISP is being honest and saying, "Yea, we'll hand your stats over."
Okay, but the article makes it sound like Bell is going to be watching your traffic and snooping through it, if they see something that looks bad, they'll hand it over to the Government. So, you are not being investigated by any agency. You are not considered suspicious or dangerous in any way. A request from your DSL line (or whatever) comes in for a site that contains or contained [copyrighted marterial|child porn|explosive making instructions|pro-terrorist progaganda|etc] and they are going to send you personal information and details of your visit to the government. No warrants, no due process. If this isn't an invasion of privacy I don't know what is. I certainly hope our privacy commissioner is aware of and looking into this.
rats, I was hoping to copy some of the +5 comments from the first story and post them here, but the editors have already done that.
No, the simple answer is to have a simple switch on the bullet flipped as the round is chambered which "activates" the bullet. Before this switch is flipped, no radio signal will fire the bullet. Of course this means that somehow the switch must be flipped back if the bullet is removed from the chamber without being fired.
True, but as the feature gap narrows, there will be less reason (for most users) to go through the hassle of downloading and new browser (and any plugins). Microsoft can play catch up with features and maintain or grow its market share while firefox (and others) will have to stay innovative to maintain or grow.
Glaciers are not on water, they are on land. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacier
In this analogy, the water levels at the edge would correspond to the water at the equator, and those levels being higher is actually consistent with what he was describing.
Only if the speed does not remain constant. Otherwise adding more water would cause water levels to rise across the entire surface. Since we're not talking about changing speed, my point holds true. The water levels would rise unless another force acted upon them.
Or maybe it was more than one. I never suggested that one raised the average level by 3mm.
I didn't phrase that very well, you are of course correct. Ice has more volume that the amount of water needed to create that ice. I should have gone into more detail and talked about if it is from warming, the ice on land would be melting, breaking off, etc. overall raising the level of the oceans. Even dropping a new iceberg off a glacier will technically raise the level of the oceans slightly.
But why would the levels at the artic drop more? If you fill a bowl 1/2 full with water and spin slowly around and observer the water levels, then add more water and repeat, you wouldn't see the water levels at the edge lower on the 2nd try. They'd be higher. Oh, and I think you mean centripetal force.