Sure there is. Send a GPG encrypted email, and that's private.
By doing that, you are implicitly conceding the OPs point. There would be no need for email encryption if it weren't for the simple fact that sending data over the Internet is a public action.
Second system syndrome? Has no one here studied software engineering?
Software engineering doesn't magically solve the problem of poorly specified requirements or a lack of experience in the problem domain. It simply gives you tools to mitigate their effect (such as XP's approach of build-and-refactor).
IMHO, If you have to solve a problem twice, you didn't solve it the first time at all.
If you believe that, you've never built a complex piece of software before.
We're not talking about a single module, here. We're talking about systems. When building systems, you need to understand the technical and business requirements, and particularly in the case of the latter, often *no one* knows enough about the problem to fully specify those requirements until you've already embarked upon building a solution. This is exceedingly common when one is building software to slot in to an existing workflow, as there is often hidden requirements that aren't uncovered at the outset, for any number of reasons, ranging from domain-specific knowledge hoarding, to people simply taking for granted what they do every day. In the end, this manifests as vague or shifting requirements throughout the course of the project, as new information is discovered during implementation.
I want to rewrite my old code at work... But only for one reason: I am a lot better programmer now than 5 years ago. And 5 years ago, I was a lot better than 10 years ago. And in 5 more years, I have no doubt I'll feel the same way.
There's actually one other reason most programmers would like to rewrite what they're working on: They've solved the problem once, and now they understand it.
IMHO, you can't solve a problem properly without solving it twice. Unfortunately, that's just not, in general, tenable in the industry, and so instead we have things like XP, which encourage prototyping and refactoring, which accept that maxim and attempt to allow for it in the process. Unfortunately, *that* requires preeminent design skills, and that's something lacking in your average developer.
Are you vetting every photo any of your friends or family has every taken? Monitoring their online activies? Are you vetting all photos taken by other people at, say, social events (weddings, etc)? Are you vetting their online activities? No? Then you can *never* be sure if someone isn't posting information about you, somewhere. Well, unless you just hide in a basement with no friends or family to speak of, in which case privacy is the least of your problems.
I don't have a facebook account, and I don't have any idiot farmville playing friends
Are you sure? For all you know, right now, a friend or relative of yours is posting pictures of you on Facebook, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's a brave new world.
Maybe you should try calming down a little. The world isn't out to get you, and big bad Google and Facebook aren't stalking you while you're walking home at night.
People make mistakes. It happens. In the case of organizations that deal in sensitive information, those mistakes can often mean nasty, high-profile bugs like this. But that doesn't change the fact that they're simple mistakes, and not, in fact, a vast conspiracy to share your personal information with all those big, evil corporations.
My experience says that, because most networks re-air content, either multiple times a day, or multiple times a week, two tuners is more than enough with an intelligent DVR that can actually schedule things properly (Myth, for example, will just pick up one of the later showings if there's a scheduling conflict).
According to Myth, my system is recording 36% of the time it's on (it's on 24 hours a day), so roughly 6 hours a day of recording, and I can count the number of honest-to-god scheduling conflicts on one hand (and those primarily because of things like the Olympics, which will dominate one or both tuners for days at a time).
It's like the Arcade owner swapped out all the games for whack-a-mole because it was his most profitable game and now he's wondering why no-one comes around anymore.
I'm confused. So, you're saying no one plays those other MMOs because they're too easy?
Odd, considering many other "whack-a-mole"-level MMOs sport much larger player bases than EVE...
Right... so, according to your argument, all manufacturing should *already* be in China, as it's *already* far more cost effective, regardless of things like carbon taxation. In fact, it seems the US should be an utter economic wasteland, right?
And yet, it's not. Hmm.
'course, that couldn't possibly indicate a flaw in your reasoning. No sir, not at all...
Considering that unilateral taxation will do nothing other than shift production to India and China...
Considering taxing wasteful behaviour will push people and organizations to improve efficiency, thus reducing dependence on foreign energy sources, while simultaneously increasing the competitiveness of domestic business...
See? We can both make unfounded assumptions based on our own political/ideological biases, and then build an entire argument upon those oh-so-sturdy foundations. Fun!
That sounds great and all, but given you don't even know the name of the act was Glass-*Steagall* (ignoring the fact that you spelled it different each time), I honestly don't know how much you should be trusted as a source of financial system information...
The US government created the Department of Energy in the early 1970's to regulate the price of a barrel of oil. It went from $3 to a high around $150 to about $70 today.
Yeah, I'm sure that had absolutely nothing to do with skyrocketing demand, a relative leveling off of production capacity, general inflation, or the cartel that is OPEC. Your simplistic "it's the big bad government" answer *must* be the right one!
Listen to your gut, big guy, I'm sure it's right, facts be damned...
Of course you should see it coming. Any person who understands anything about economics understands that you compensate for negative externalities with taxation.
You may not like it, because the environment has been pounded in the ass to keep your energy prices low, but that's the way real economics works. Suck it up and take responsibility for your actions.
Oh, and do we plan to impose a carbon tax on India and China? Not sure I see much point in crippling our industry unless they do the same, since we won't be solving global warming by any action that's not worldwide....
Exactly. We mustn't do anything about global warming until such time as we find an utterly perfect solution that everyone in the world will participate in. Anything else isn't worth doing at all, and therefore we should just do nothing until that solution is found...
They can go much further than that. The Mimic Octopus mentioned in the article not just changes colour, but also shape, in order to mimic as many as *15* different species! Seriously, the octopus is creepily intelligent, doubly so in this case...
Personally, I rather enjoyed the blanket claim that oil is a poison and utter disregard for the natural seepage that happens (and is delt with) naturally.
Oh come now. Natural seepage doesn't produce 5,000 - 50,000 barrels/day in a concentrated burst. Nor does it result in an unfiltered expulsion of hydrocarbons (natural seepage happens through layers of rock, and so the heavy stuff is filtered out).
Simply put, equating this event to the natural seepage that happens every year is disingenuous and misleading, to say the least.
No, it's not going to wipe out the oceans. But it's not at all comparable to any natural event.
Really? A spelling error in the *first word of the article summary*? Fuck, why the hell do we even have "editors" around here if this kind of shit slips through...
Slashdot Mirror
Sure there is. Send a GPG encrypted email, and that's private.
By doing that, you are implicitly conceding the OPs point. There would be no need for email encryption if it weren't for the simple fact that sending data over the Internet is a public action.
I use to
Random grammar tip: It's "used to"... "use" is present tense, "used" is past tense.
Well, thanks for coming by and wasting your precious time to comment on a show you "dont [sic] give 0.5 shits]" about...
Well, thanks for coming out and taking the time to open an article about, and then post a comment on, a show that's apparently "too stupid" for you...
Second system syndrome? Has no one here studied software engineering?
Software engineering doesn't magically solve the problem of poorly specified requirements or a lack of experience in the problem domain. It simply gives you tools to mitigate their effect (such as XP's approach of build-and-refactor).
IMHO, If you have to solve a problem twice, you didn't solve it the first time at all.
If you believe that, you've never built a complex piece of software before.
We're not talking about a single module, here. We're talking about systems. When building systems, you need to understand the technical and business requirements, and particularly in the case of the latter, often *no one* knows enough about the problem to fully specify those requirements until you've already embarked upon building a solution. This is exceedingly common when one is building software to slot in to an existing workflow, as there is often hidden requirements that aren't uncovered at the outset, for any number of reasons, ranging from domain-specific knowledge hoarding, to people simply taking for granted what they do every day. In the end, this manifests as vague or shifting requirements throughout the course of the project, as new information is discovered during implementation.
I want to rewrite my old code at work... But only for one reason: I am a lot better programmer now than 5 years ago. And 5 years ago, I was a lot better than 10 years ago. And in 5 more years, I have no doubt I'll feel the same way.
There's actually one other reason most programmers would like to rewrite what they're working on: They've solved the problem once, and now they understand it.
IMHO, you can't solve a problem properly without solving it twice. Unfortunately, that's just not, in general, tenable in the industry, and so instead we have things like XP, which encourage prototyping and refactoring, which accept that maxim and attempt to allow for it in the process. Unfortunately, *that* requires preeminent design skills, and that's something lacking in your average developer.
Yes I'm sure
No. That's impossible.
Are you vetting every photo any of your friends or family has every taken? Monitoring their online activies? Are you vetting all photos taken by other people at, say, social events (weddings, etc)? Are you vetting their online activities? No? Then you can *never* be sure if someone isn't posting information about you, somewhere. Well, unless you just hide in a basement with no friends or family to speak of, in which case privacy is the least of your problems.
I don't have a facebook account, and I don't have any idiot farmville playing friends
Are you sure? For all you know, right now, a friend or relative of yours is posting pictures of you on Facebook, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's a brave new world.
Maybe you should try calming down a little. The world isn't out to get you, and big bad Google and Facebook aren't stalking you while you're walking home at night.
People make mistakes. It happens. In the case of organizations that deal in sensitive information, those mistakes can often mean nasty, high-profile bugs like this. But that doesn't change the fact that they're simple mistakes, and not, in fact, a vast conspiracy to share your personal information with all those big, evil corporations.
So Facebook and MySpace were just doing this out of the goodness of their hearts
Or it could just be a bug.
Don't attribute to malice what could easily be explained by sheer incompetence...
My experience says that, because most networks re-air content, either multiple times a day, or multiple times a week, two tuners is more than enough with an intelligent DVR that can actually schedule things properly (Myth, for example, will just pick up one of the later showings if there's a scheduling conflict).
According to Myth, my system is recording 36% of the time it's on (it's on 24 hours a day), so roughly 6 hours a day of recording, and I can count the number of honest-to-god scheduling conflicts on one hand (and those primarily because of things like the Olympics, which will dominate one or both tuners for days at a time).
It's like the Arcade owner swapped out all the games for whack-a-mole because it was his most profitable game and now he's wondering why no-one comes around anymore.
I'm confused. So, you're saying no one plays those other MMOs because they're too easy?
Odd, considering many other "whack-a-mole"-level MMOs sport much larger player bases than EVE...
They have very little of any regulations at all.
Right... so, according to your argument, all manufacturing should *already* be in China, as it's *already* far more cost effective, regardless of things like carbon taxation. In fact, it seems the US should be an utter economic wasteland, right?
And yet, it's not. Hmm.
'course, that couldn't possibly indicate a flaw in your reasoning. No sir, not at all...
Considering that unilateral taxation will do nothing other than shift production to India and China...
Considering taxing wasteful behaviour will push people and organizations to improve efficiency, thus reducing dependence on foreign energy sources, while simultaneously increasing the competitiveness of domestic business...
See? We can both make unfounded assumptions based on our own political/ideological biases, and then build an entire argument upon those oh-so-sturdy foundations. Fun!
Speaking of retarded monkeys... Why the fuck is the parent modded as a troll, exactly?
That sounds great and all, but given you don't even know the name of the act was Glass-*Steagall* (ignoring the fact that you spelled it different each time), I honestly don't know how much you should be trusted as a source of financial system information...
The US government created the Department of Energy in the early 1970's to regulate the price of a barrel of oil. It went from $3 to a high around $150 to about $70 today.
Yeah, I'm sure that had absolutely nothing to do with skyrocketing demand, a relative leveling off of production capacity, general inflation, or the cartel that is OPEC. Your simplistic "it's the big bad government" answer *must* be the right one!
Listen to your gut, big guy, I'm sure it's right, facts be damned...
Of course you should see it coming. Any person who understands anything about economics understands that you compensate for negative externalities with taxation.
You may not like it, because the environment has been pounded in the ass to keep your energy prices low, but that's the way real economics works. Suck it up and take responsibility for your actions.
Oh, and do we plan to impose a carbon tax on India and China? Not sure I see much point in crippling our industry unless they do the same, since we won't be solving global warming by any action that's not worldwide....
Exactly. We mustn't do anything about global warming until such time as we find an utterly perfect solution that everyone in the world will participate in. Anything else isn't worth doing at all, and therefore we should just do nothing until that solution is found...
They can go much further than that. The Mimic Octopus mentioned in the article not just changes colour, but also shape, in order to mimic as many as *15* different species! Seriously, the octopus is creepily intelligent, doubly so in this case...
Wow, that's impressive. You completely missed the GP's point, and simultaneously managed to look like a total douchebag. Well done!
Eh, the OP is undoubtedly a troll. No one could possibly be *that* stupid unless they were doing it on purpose.
Personally, I rather enjoyed the blanket claim that oil is a poison and utter disregard for the natural seepage that happens (and is delt with) naturally.
Oh come now. Natural seepage doesn't produce 5,000 - 50,000 barrels/day in a concentrated burst. Nor does it result in an unfiltered expulsion of hydrocarbons (natural seepage happens through layers of rock, and so the heavy stuff is filtered out).
Simply put, equating this event to the natural seepage that happens every year is disingenuous and misleading, to say the least.
No, it's not going to wipe out the oceans. But it's not at all comparable to any natural event.
Really? A spelling error in the *first word of the article summary*? Fuck, why the hell do we even have "editors" around here if this kind of shit slips through...