Like others have already stated, I've never paid them a dime, and I always get the answers at the bottom of the page, provided I clicked through from a Google search.
If you go to the site directly, you get no answers, which means if you find a link to another posting on the site, you've got to go back to Google and search for that new posting, which is a pain in the ass. But other than that, I've got no problem with them.
I'm certainly not going to ban a site that often has very good answers, or at least pointers in the right direction, just because they try to encourage you to pay for content.
I'm sure they're probably hoping that people don't notice the answers are at the bottom, and sign up for the site. The thing is - and they probably know this - if they did what people are actually claiming, and gave different page content to Google than to visitors from Google, it would quickly get them banned from Google's results. They're hoping that you'll want them to be your primary site for tech help, and sign up so you can see all answers. But since I've never gone to the site other than as a result of a Google search, their policy doesn't affect me at all. I'll happily help myself to all their free content, since I know how to get it.
Well, it was trumpeted as evidence for evolution before it was ever verified, obviously, and also when there isn't even a peep of an idea that there might actually be life on said planet. I don't see the difference between the religious fanatic creationists, and the religious fanatic evolutionists, to be honest. It's just the object of their unquestionable faith that's different.
It's not the 0-60 time that's great in the Impala, although it's certainly no slouch. It's the fact that the acceleration doesn't slow down.
You can go all the way through first and second gear, by which time you're doing ~ 95 MPH, and your acceleration at the top of second isn't much slower at all than in the middle of first. So no, if you're drag racing a Prius in a 1/4 mile, it seems like the Impala should be faster than it is, but if you're doing a 50-75 MPH passing maneuver, which is much more useful performance than 0-60 in real world driving, there's not much that will touch an Impala for a reasonable price.
I've driven two different Impalas, a 2000, and currently a 2003, and they both behave similarly to what your Prius does, with one exception.
When you press and hold the accelerate button, it speeds up until you release it, at which point, whatever speed you're doing is the new set speed. If you rapidly press and release it 10 times, though, it mashes the accelerator to the floor until it's got up to 10 MPH faster, that it was going before, just like yours.
Although, I should imagine the time span of +10MPH acceleration is a little shorter in an Impala than a Prius. Just guessing.....
For the majority, somehow I imagine that would probably depend on who's bath it was, wouldn't it?
I could imagine most people saying exactly what you did, until they find out it was Halle Berry, or Kim Kardashian in the tub, then suddenly they're OK with it......
I've heard the same fact used as evidence for evolution by one person, and evidence for creation by another person. The surprising thing is, from a logic point of view, both arguments made perfect sense.
I've also seen evolutionists get just as radically religious* about their beliefs, if not more so, than creationists.
I think an awful lot of it is interpretation, due to inherent bias from previous decisions.
(Religious: believing something to be true, and expounding it to others at every opportunity, despite evidence to the contrary, or no evidence whatsoever)
"IPSec does not mean the protocol will be secure." "IPSec will make sure you cannot screw with an application's traffic."
If you can't screw with the traffic, then it's secure. You really need to make up your mind here.
You're right in that a v4 stack can't understand v6 packets, but the rest of what you're saying seems to be regurgitated buzzwords and rumours that you don't really understand.
And as far as NAT goes, it's done at a networking level underneath where IPSec/SSL is handled, so if NAT isn't possible with IPv6, it has nothing to do with IPSec.
There were rumblings from the conservatives about this decision well before this week. You just need to pay attention to news sources that aren't controlled at least partially by Bell and Rogers.
pretty sure the RCMP covers anywhere in Canada that there isn't a local (provincial or muni) force.
You would be correct. Although I suppose if you called about a stolen bike several days deep into the woods in Northern Ontario, it might take them a little while to get there.....
No NAT officially, does not mean it cannot be done.
In fact, since the whole of IPv4 address space is contained within IPv6 address space, that means the IPv4 private addresses are also within the IPv6 space. I don't see any reason why this can't be used to NAT IPv6, unless there's some weird aspect of the spec that is fundamentally incompatible with NAT. (I admit, I haven't read the spec at all.)
Also, you contradict yourself. You bitch about "MUST include full IPSec," then the very next sentence is "No attention on privacy or security." Well, IPSec is about both privacy _and_ security. If you don't understand this, then maybe you're not in a position to be bitching about the technical aspects of a protocol.
I can't believe I'm recommending a Microsoft product. At least it's from Microsoft Research, rather than a regular product from the lying bastard sales division.....
I've used it for panoramic shots before, and it works great. Not sure if it does vertical, as well as horizontal, but you could always do all the horizontal sections, then use Irfanview's lossless JPG rotation, and stitch all the horizontal strips into a whole.
Really? The most vicious attacks on opposing points of view I've ever seen have come from atheists.
I'm not talking about the "I don't know if there is a God or not, and have no way of knowing, so I'm going to live as if there isn't one" type of atheist. I'm talking about the "There is no way to prove God exists, which means it's guaranteed there is no God, and you're a stupid, unintelligent, babbling FUNDAMENTALIST MORON IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE!!111!aneurysm!!!" type.
When you start treating atheism as a religion, which this second class of people does, then you're no better - and arguably worse - than the Christians/Muslims/Buddhists/whatever that try to ram their holy books down your throat.
A better question, rather than nitpicking grammar:
but before the 1940s, aerial ropeways were a common means of cargo transport,.......An innovative system called RopeCon.... can move up to 10,000 tonnes of freight per hour."
How is it innovative if such devices were in common usage over 3/4 or a century ago?
Innovation: taking an old idea and giving it a new name.
Give him another donut Jack hel start talking real soon now. We need TV' show like 24 to remind us to be diligent to the likes of thoes who would let Evil reign un opposed.
These shows explore classic themes of good vs evil and I for one do not welcome our evil bastard overlords.
That's exactly the point. The evil FBI that's breaking the law left, right, and center is your current evil bastard overlord.
As soon as you start along the path of "I can do this illegal activity because it's to stop this evil person over here from doing some illegal activity," you start justifying your own (or people you support) evils, and become the very thing you're trying to stop.
If all of those 7000 criminals were somehow murders, rapists, child molesters etc etc... then by all means, I don't care if they don't get a warrant or whatever, get those peeps off the streets ASAP but if there were people who were wrongfully accused because of lack of evidence and stuff...
The problem is, there is no discernible difference to a jury between these two situations:
1. We searched his house and car illegally without a warrant, but found all this evidence. Convict the bastard.
2. We couldn't find any evidence, and didn't have enough probably cause for a warrant, but we're sure the guy's guilty because we don't like his face, so we're just going to say we searched his house and car and found all this evidence, even though we didn't.
Warrantless evidence has a much higher possibility to be fabricated, which is one of the reasons it's not allowed.
Slashdot Mirror
Like others have already stated, I've never paid them a dime, and I always get the answers at the bottom of the page, provided I clicked through from a Google search.
If you go to the site directly, you get no answers, which means if you find a link to another posting on the site, you've got to go back to Google and search for that new posting, which is a pain in the ass. But other than that, I've got no problem with them.
I'm certainly not going to ban a site that often has very good answers, or at least pointers in the right direction, just because they try to encourage you to pay for content.
I'm sure they're probably hoping that people don't notice the answers are at the bottom, and sign up for the site. The thing is - and they probably know this - if they did what people are actually claiming, and gave different page content to Google than to visitors from Google, it would quickly get them banned from Google's results.
They're hoping that you'll want them to be your primary site for tech help, and sign up so you can see all answers. But since I've never gone to the site other than as a result of a Google search, their policy doesn't affect me at all. I'll happily help myself to all their free content, since I know how to get it.
Well, it was trumpeted as evidence for evolution before it was ever verified, obviously, and also when there isn't even a peep of an idea that there might actually be life on said planet. I don't see the difference between the religious fanatic creationists, and the religious fanatic evolutionists, to be honest. It's just the object of their unquestionable faith that's different.
I believe it was something like:
"I'm going to get something to eat. You hungry?"
It's not the 0-60 time that's great in the Impala, although it's certainly no slouch. It's the fact that the acceleration doesn't slow down.
You can go all the way through first and second gear, by which time you're doing ~ 95 MPH, and your acceleration at the top of second isn't much slower at all than in the middle of first. So no, if you're drag racing a Prius in a 1/4 mile, it seems like the Impala should be faster than it is, but if you're doing a 50-75 MPH passing maneuver, which is much more useful performance than 0-60 in real world driving, there's not much that will touch an Impala for a reasonable price.
I've driven two different Impalas, a 2000, and currently a 2003, and they both behave similarly to what your Prius does, with one exception.
When you press and hold the accelerate button, it speeds up until you release it, at which point, whatever speed you're doing is the new set speed.
If you rapidly press and release it 10 times, though, it mashes the accelerator to the floor until it's got up to 10 MPH faster, that it was going before, just like yours.
Although, I should imagine the time span of +10MPH acceleration is a little shorter in an Impala than a Prius. Just guessing.....
For the majority, somehow I imagine that would probably depend on who's bath it was, wouldn't it?
I could imagine most people saying exactly what you did, until they find out it was Halle Berry, or Kim Kardashian in the tub, then suddenly they're OK with it......
It's still gross, though.....
Define "pirate".
A Somali who owns a boat. ;)
I've heard the same fact used as evidence for evolution by one person, and evidence for creation by another person.
The surprising thing is, from a logic point of view, both arguments made perfect sense.
I've also seen evolutionists get just as radically religious* about their beliefs, if not more so, than creationists.
I think an awful lot of it is interpretation, due to inherent bias from previous decisions.
(Religious: believing something to be true, and expounding it to others at every opportunity, despite evidence to the contrary, or no evidence whatsoever)
Seriously? Are you listening to yourself?
"IPSec does not mean the protocol will be secure."
"IPSec will make sure you cannot screw with an application's traffic."
If you can't screw with the traffic, then it's secure. You really need to make up your mind here.
You're right in that a v4 stack can't understand v6 packets, but the rest of what you're saying seems to be regurgitated buzzwords and rumours that you don't really understand.
And as far as NAT goes, it's done at a networking level underneath where IPSec/SSL is handled, so if NAT isn't possible with IPv6, it has nothing to do with IPSec.
There were rumblings from the conservatives about this decision well before this week. You just need to pay attention to news sources that aren't controlled at least partially by Bell and Rogers.
pretty sure the RCMP covers anywhere in Canada that there isn't a local (provincial or muni) force.
You would be correct. Although I suppose if you called about a stolen bike several days deep into the woods in Northern Ontario, it might take them a little while to get there.....
If it was a 250 GB cap, that would be fine for most people, including myself.
However, when it's a 25 GB cap, then it's a bit of a problem.
In fact, even the 25Mb/7Mb fiber service has only a 75GB cap.
That's what the complaints were about.
Not all Creationists believe Creationism is science. Only a vocal minority.
Don't lump them all together by the actions of these few, otherwise you become no better than the religious bigots.
This, however, doesn't mean that I have to turn into a baboon and agree with those who believe in creationism. .
Huh? Isn't it the evolutionists who believe we're just baboons?
Shit! No wonder tech support sucks.
Computers haven't even been invented yet over there....
No NAT officially, does not mean it cannot be done.
In fact, since the whole of IPv4 address space is contained within IPv6 address space, that means the IPv4 private addresses are also within the IPv6 space.
I don't see any reason why this can't be used to NAT IPv6, unless there's some weird aspect of the spec that is fundamentally incompatible with NAT. (I admit, I haven't read the spec at all.)
Also, you contradict yourself.
You bitch about "MUST include full IPSec," then the very next sentence is "No attention on privacy or security."
Well, IPSec is about both privacy _and_ security. If you don't understand this, then maybe you're not in a position to be bitching about the technical aspects of a protocol.
I can't believe I'm recommending a Microsoft product. At least it's from Microsoft Research, rather than a regular product from the lying bastard sales division.....
Microsoft Image Composite Editor
I've used it for panoramic shots before, and it works great. Not sure if it does vertical, as well as horizontal, but you could always do all the horizontal sections, then use Irfanview's lossless JPG rotation, and stitch all the horizontal strips into a whole.
China keeps their populace in line with shear brutality,
What? If you disagree with the government, they shave your head?
Atheists don't get quite so up-in-arms?
Really? The most vicious attacks on opposing points of view I've ever seen have come from atheists.
I'm not talking about the "I don't know if there is a God or not, and have no way of knowing, so I'm going to live as if there isn't one" type of atheist. I'm talking about the "There is no way to prove God exists, which means it's guaranteed there is no God, and you're a stupid, unintelligent, babbling FUNDAMENTALIST MORON IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE!!111!aneurysm!!!" type.
When you start treating atheism as a religion, which this second class of people does, then you're no better - and arguably worse - than the Christians/Muslims/Buddhists/whatever that try to ram their holy books down your throat.
My data center is powered by pope!!!
My data center is powered by dope!!!
My data center is powered by rote!!!
Yeah....you're right... :)
The problem is a "hot air dirigible" would collapse onto the ground were the heat source to go away. Use a reliable heat source, like a nuke.
While I completely see where you're coming from with this, somehow a nuclear powered dirigible is just bizarre.....
A better question, rather than nitpicking grammar:
but before the 1940s, aerial ropeways were a common means of cargo transport,.......An innovative system called RopeCon .... can move up to 10,000 tonnes of freight per hour."
How is it innovative if such devices were in common usage over 3/4 or a century ago?
Innovation: taking an old idea and giving it a new name.
Give him another donut Jack hel start talking real soon now. We need TV' show like 24 to remind us to be diligent to the likes of thoes who would let Evil reign un opposed.
These shows explore classic themes of good vs evil and I for one do not welcome our evil bastard overlords.
That's exactly the point. The evil FBI that's breaking the law left, right, and center is your current evil bastard overlord.
As soon as you start along the path of "I can do this illegal activity because it's to stop this evil person over here from doing some illegal activity," you start justifying your own (or people you support) evils, and become the very thing you're trying to stop.
If all of those 7000 criminals were somehow murders, rapists, child molesters etc etc... then by all means, I don't care if they don't get a warrant or whatever, get those peeps off the streets ASAP but if there were people who were wrongfully accused because of lack of evidence and stuff...
The problem is, there is no discernible difference to a jury between these two situations:
1. We searched his house and car illegally without a warrant, but found all this evidence. Convict the bastard.
2. We couldn't find any evidence, and didn't have enough probably cause for a warrant, but we're sure the guy's guilty because we don't like his face, so we're just going to say we searched his house and car and found all this evidence, even though we didn't.
Warrantless evidence has a much higher possibility to be fabricated, which is one of the reasons it's not allowed.
Well, that does look like it's going to be a pretty wide open security hole..... :-/