Well, presumably Microsoft erased the original code after they copied it from the server. That's how the startup realized it was stolen, because it was missing!
No, if the world were fair, each person would be held to the same standard, and the standard wouldn't make any references to specific people or groups (i.e. "friends of mine get special treatment"). Fair doesn't mean you get treated well, just that it be by the same standard as everyone else.
What a great way to encourage use of open-source software: sue people! Oh, wait, you say you aren't suing them for using the source code, but because they refuse to release their modifications? Hmmm.... er, well nevermind, carry on. Why are they having so much trouble releasing their modifications when someone requests them?
For the record, I [Bruce Schneier] was never approached. But I would certainly decline; this is a political job, and someone political needs to fill it.
He went on to note that he wouldn't even need to be physically present in order to carry out the duties of the position. In fact, he's already carrying them out every morning while he eats breakfast and reads the paper, hence the position remaining apparently vacant for all this time.
I'm still confused. He's saying his own post is correct? There's no link to any other post. I'm not feigning ignorance here, trying to question the legitimacy of some idiom; I sincerely don't understand it, and am always at a total loss when I see it, as I am still in this case. Thanks for any help.
The finding isn't just that the poor get more antipsychotics full stop, but that the poor with the same diagnosis as a wealthy person are more likely to be treated with antipsychotics for that condition.
Well the problem is obvious: wealthy people's kids aren't getting enough medication!
I take all this to mean that there are several inputs, a complex process that determines the output (what action is performed), and the output is one that an intelligent being would be likely to come to, given the same limited available information and amount of time available to deliberate. Given enough complexity, "sophisticated decision-making" could easily be appropriate terms.
Having something published in a journal is not the be-all, end-all, it does not mean that a theory is now correct one and for all time. It means it is time to start wider discussion and testing. [...]
WHAT? Please help me out. I keep seeing the above idiom, a paragraph with the single word "this", but have not figured out what it means. Can you express the above without using this idiom? Or are you literally quoting someone on Fark who said "this"? If so, quoting it makes no sense to me.
I know the perfect social un-networking site for you: isolatr.com. It's worked great for me over the years. No signup, no annoying emails, nobody bothering me, no updates to make, ever.
Okay, from a purely scientific standpoint it would be interesting to know whether or not humans are having an effect on the climate. But as a practical matter I don't see why anyone has a problem with cleaning up our act. The basic goal is "Hey guys, maybe we'd all be better off if we found better ways of producing energy than by burning stuff and letting the smoke into the atmosphere."
We have limited resources, and there are other problems besides the climate that threaten our survival. If we waste vast resources on something that we might not even have any meaningful effect on, we are making our situation worse, because we could have been using these resources to solve problems we're sure exist and that we can have a significant effect on. To argue to do something very costly, even though it might not have any effect, just because it's the socially right thing to do, is irresponsible in the extreme.
He's probably German. In german always Nouns are capitalized.
Close; I'm a spelling Nazi, on a quest to rid American English of random capitalization of words, one word at a time. Oh, and to rid the 'net of this preoccupation with the word "swath". We aren't all farmers!
OK, I see now, you're talking about the "wow look at this amazing tech!" rather than "inside these devices are flexible plastic circuits, but you'll never see them, or even guess they are in there" as the ones I linked to. Yes, you're talking of something where everything is basically printed on, such that it is as flexible as a plastic sheet with any other kind of printing.
You forgot to capitalize an instance of "water" in your first and last sentences. I also think you should capitalize "moons", "worldly", and "substances", for good measure.
One of the very common example is the laser assembly on almost any optical disc reader. This is easy to forget about, even though it most definitely uses a flexible PCB. It's not just for connection, either, because the PCB connects to the laser, often has the adjustment potentiometer soldered on, and connects to the optical pickup block and the focus coils.
Video game controller with flexi-PCB layer over rigid PCB, with plenty of SMT components.
The two main benefits of a flexible PCB that I can see: ability to fit into non-planar space, and ability to solder all components onto PCB, even though component leads don't terminate in a planar space.
combine it with a strong encryption and once a certain amount of data is gone the result become unrecoverable even if the actual password is something as simple as 123.
The data degradation pattern is probably consistent for each particular device. So you'd just need to save the current data, then fill the device with various patterns and see how they degrade. If you find for example that particular bits degrade into set after a day, then you know which bits to try flipping in the original data. You reduce the number of possibilites greatly. So again, you need something that reliably destroys most of the data after some amount of time.
Seriously though, I'm sure it'd be more beneficial if they tried to stop the ACTUAL conflict of interest instead of trying to stop THE APPEARANCE of conflict of interest.
If we did that, then you'd probably next be saying we need to take measures to improve the actual economic situation, not just create the appearance of economic improvement. Bah!
Most certainly have been used. I remember taking apart a Polaroid camera when I was a kid, and finding a flexible light brown plastic circuit with chips soldered to it.
This sounds like a good idea for transferring content securely. The contents of the memory will degrade in a short time, making it ideal for carrying sensitive data.
There's a difference between unreliably storing data after a day, and reliably destroying all data after a day.
IMHO just as thre's a 7-year stature of limitations on law, so too should employers have a limitation on how far back they can dig. Anything that predates this decade should be irrelevant.
The statute of limitations is for being charged with a crime. Why should someone not be able to look far into your past in order to better predict your future behaviors as an employee? If it's an inaccurate method, then it's obviously a bad idea to do, because it'll result in unnecessarily passing up good candidates.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, presumably Microsoft erased the original code after they copied it from the server. That's how the startup realized it was stolen, because it was missing!
Yeah, and?
No, if the world were fair, each person would be held to the same standard, and the standard wouldn't make any references to specific people or groups (i.e. "friends of mine get special treatment"). Fair doesn't mean you get treated well, just that it be by the same standard as everyone else.
What a great way to encourage use of open-source software: sue people! Oh, wait, you say you aren't suing them for using the source code, but because they refuse to release their modifications? Hmmm.... er, well nevermind, carry on. Why are they having so much trouble releasing their modifications when someone requests them?
He went on to note that he wouldn't even need to be physically present in order to carry out the duties of the position. In fact, he's already carrying them out every morning while he eats breakfast and reads the paper, hence the position remaining apparently vacant for all this time.
I'm still confused. He's saying his own post is correct? There's no link to any other post. I'm not feigning ignorance here, trying to question the legitimacy of some idiom; I sincerely don't understand it, and am always at a total loss when I see it, as I am still in this case. Thanks for any help.
Well the problem is obvious: wealthy people's kids aren't getting enough medication!
I take all this to mean that there are several inputs, a complex process that determines the output (what action is performed), and the output is one that an intelligent being would be likely to come to, given the same limited available information and amount of time available to deliberate. Given enough complexity, "sophisticated decision-making" could easily be appropriate terms.
He could get automated page-turning for about $5 per book, or half a pizza.
Oh, and I don't even have to pay my butler; he does everything for free!
WHAT? Please help me out. I keep seeing the above idiom, a paragraph with the single word "this", but have not figured out what it means. Can you express the above without using this idiom? Or are you literally quoting someone on Fark who said "this"? If so, quoting it makes no sense to me.
I know the perfect social un-networking site for you: isolatr.com. It's worked great for me over the years. No signup, no annoying emails, nobody bothering me, no updates to make, ever.
We have limited resources, and there are other problems besides the climate that threaten our survival. If we waste vast resources on something that we might not even have any meaningful effect on, we are making our situation worse, because we could have been using these resources to solve problems we're sure exist and that we can have a significant effect on. To argue to do something very costly, even though it might not have any effect, just because it's the socially right thing to do, is irresponsible in the extreme.
I feel the same. It's terrible to be supporting a new protocol that's worse! But the most important reason I am against this is that it wil
<posted via Twitteriffic>
Moderators, let's try that scheme here. Give this post 0, 5, 10, 20, or 25 points, based on the influence this author wields. I await your judgment.
Close; I'm a spelling Nazi, on a quest to rid American English of random capitalization of words, one word at a time. Oh, and to rid the 'net of this preoccupation with the word "swath". We aren't all farmers!
OK, I see now, you're talking about the "wow look at this amazing tech!" rather than "inside these devices are flexible plastic circuits, but you'll never see them, or even guess they are in there" as the ones I linked to. Yes, you're talking of something where everything is basically printed on, such that it is as flexible as a plastic sheet with any other kind of printing.
You forgot to capitalize an instance of "water" in your first and last sentences. I also think you should capitalize "moons", "worldly", and "substances", for good measure.
One of the very common example is the laser assembly on almost any optical disc reader. This is easy to forget about, even though it most definitely uses a flexible PCB. It's not just for connection, either, because the PCB connects to the laser, often has the adjustment potentiometer soldered on, and connects to the optical pickup block and the focus coils.
Back of lens unit on Sony DSC camera
Odometer with large flexible PCB
Video game controller with flexi-PCB layer over rigid PCB, with plenty of SMT components.
The two main benefits of a flexible PCB that I can see: ability to fit into non-planar space, and ability to solder all components onto PCB, even though component leads don't terminate in a planar space.
The data degradation pattern is probably consistent for each particular device. So you'd just need to save the current data, then fill the device with various patterns and see how they degrade. If you find for example that particular bits degrade into set after a day, then you know which bits to try flipping in the original data. You reduce the number of possibilites greatly. So again, you need something that reliably destroys most of the data after some amount of time.
If we did that, then you'd probably next be saying we need to take measures to improve the actual economic situation, not just create the appearance of economic improvement. Bah!
Any of them dealing with materials that contain carbon.
Most certainly have been used. I remember taking apart a Polaroid camera when I was a kid, and finding a flexible light brown plastic circuit with chips soldered to it.
There's a difference between unreliably storing data after a day, and reliably destroying all data after a day.
The statute of limitations is for being charged with a crime. Why should someone not be able to look far into your past in order to better predict your future behaviors as an employee? If it's an inaccurate method, then it's obviously a bad idea to do, because it'll result in unnecessarily passing up good candidates.