That would mess with some people's water systems, though. In Tucson they treat water and then "discharge" it into artificial ponds constructed to have relatively porous bottoms, letting it seep back down into the aquifer: in a place where water is scarce, we might as well store it in the ground.
I never said it was the optimum solution, just that it's one that's been proposed, and that it's milder than the "ban all fossil fuels" strawman that was trotted out.
Politicians meddle in everything. We ought to work on ways to make them cut it out. Nonetheless, until we stamp out this sort of corruption, we still have to get on with life.
The point isn't whether she's a good or bad leader, just that the Germans are folks who put Gauss on their money and elect a chemist, and the Americans are people who put dead presidents on their money and elect people like Bush.
The idea is that they're not like a "permit" to have a gun or whatever, but are permits that are for sale for a certain price, and that can be bought and sold on the market without going through the government.
I don't like that idea as much as the carbon tax, though, simply because it's simpler. (Most carbon tax proposals include tax cuts elsewhere to stay revenue-neutral.)
A loyalty oath is something imposed from above; a sanity check is something imposed by the electorate. Nobody is proposing barring people who give whackjob answers from running for president; we're just hoping that voters won't vote for them. This is how elections are supposed to work.
I don't know any non-kooks who want to completely ban fossil fuels. Most want either to say "no burning fossil fuel without a permit" and issue permits equal to a desired level of emissions, or implement a carbon tax tuned to reduce emissions to that level.
As for vaccinations: yes, they should be mandatory. No religious whackjob exceptions or crystal-clutching hippie exceptions. Go read about the polio epidemic and you'll understand why. Possibly there can be one exception: a parent puts up a bond for the cost of getting their kid tested for the presence of polio/measles/whatever every couple of months, and if the kid tests positive at any time then parent goes to jail for assault against both the kid and whoever the kid may have infected.
Again, nobody on the Left wants to outlaw water treatment plants, either, given that they're rather fond of building the things in the first place.
Europe is different. In Europe they put people like Gauss on their money, and elect people like Thatcher and Merkel (also a chemist) to positions of power.
Here in the US, we have different attitudes about what sorts of things constitute "qualifications".
Why would we want to do that? That's as silly as declaring Earth a chemistry-free zone, or an electromagnetism-free zone.
Nuclear physics lets us do lots of nifty things. Only a few of them relate to killing people, and murder by nuclear explosion is not really that different from any other sort of murder. The problem has to do with the murder, not with how it's done.
It's worse than that, if they play by the rules completely. As I understand it, even classified information that is widely known is still classified, and has to be handled with silly procedures. Jefferson Lab's computer account rules include the following, for instance: "We handle no classified information at JLab. If you find some on a JLab computer system, that computer system should be considered contaminated. Don't attempt to remove the information yourself; call the Office of Security Wankage." If people are actually playing by the rules, then it's possible to cause something of a DoS condition by spamming people with classified information.
The problem is that any discussion of voting reform has to be somewhat academic, since there is math involved, and somewhat philosophical, since it's not about any issues per se but in how we decide what to do about the issues.
The American people are too uneducated, it seems, to have this discussion -- our political conversations basically come down to "How can I get more cookies from the government at someone else's expense?"
On my phone (Android), though, the performance of the Facebook app is worse than loading their mobile page in Opera. The app looks better, but it performs substantially worse.
There have been no more than in other sorts of competition. There was the big match-fixing scandal (see the liquipedia article), and a couple of more minor things more recently that have been punished harshly, but, well, baseball's seen lots of this nonsense, too.
As for evidence that matches are actually rigged (with the winner decided in advance), well -- do you have any evidence that this is widespread? Actually, a good bit of evidence that it's not is that despite many of them trying, very few foreigners have done all that well in the GSL (Korea's premier Starcraft II competition), despite the fact that it would vastly expand their audience. (Whenever a foreigner seems to have a chance in a major tournament lots of folks outside Korea watch and root for them.) There's a lot of profit to be had if you could order the Koreans to throw a few matches to the foreigners to get them to the finals, but nobody has done it.
There are ways around that -- for instance, by rate-limiting logins from each IP to (say) 1 per 5 seconds, allowing (perhaps) the first ten with only a 500ms delay to deal with NAT shenanigans, and locking an IP out for a significant amount of time after (say) twenty failed logins. An attacker could bypass this with a botnet, of course -- but you'd need an awfully big botnet. Against all but the largest websites this would quickly cause a noticeable spike in "overall failed login rate", which should trigger a more aggressive rate limit (say, each IP gets banned for an hour after three failed login attempts), which is a reasonable thing to do while under heavy attack. This still doesn't cause a DoS condition for any user that remembers his password, or who needs a couple of attempts to get it right.
That's a password with somewhere around ~20 bits of entropy. Let's be generous to weak passwords and consider one with 16 bits of entropy, meaning that a dictionary attack has to make (around half of) 60000 attempts to crack it.
If you've got the hashed password, this is trivial to do. But if you're trying to break a remote login and the computer on the other side lets you make 60000 attempts, then there are far bigger issues at work than a weak password.
It would be better for the US economy if those "jobs" consisted of simply sitting at home wanking, since then we wouldn't be tempted to go get folks killed with the byproducts.
A smartphone is basically a portable computer. We've had computers for ages. Now, how do you get data into a portable computer? The most sensible way is the cell network, so why don't we make these portable computers make phone calls, too?
Okay, so we have a computer. It needs a microphone and a speaker on it, so we can make phone calls. Why not put a camera on it too, since the market has decided that cameraphones are a neat idea.
Okay, how are you going to control your little portable computer? Well, there's not much room for buttons on it, since we need both a big screen so you can see shit and a small device so you can pocket it. Now, computer interfaces have long used the paradigm of "show the user shit on the screen and have a device that simulates pointing at the screen called a mouse for the user to pick stuff to do." So a touchscreen is the obvious way to communicate with a pocketable computer, since it both makes efficient use of area (no buttons) and is pretty similar to what we have been doing for years on ordinary computers.
Now, what shape should it be? Well, we like rectangular screens -- they're easy to code for -- so it should approximate a rectangle. Making it an exact rectangle means that the corners will snag on your pockets, so it ought to be a rounded rectangle.
This happens already in Washington. The average Washington resident has $600 in unpaid parking tickets. Commercial trucks drive around with them still hung under their wipers. They're a significant component of street-gutter litter.
It's run by leftists of the "take money from the wealthy and give it to the poor^Wpeople who vote for us" variety, who are also in this case law-and-order-obsessed authoritarians. Does that help?
Slashdot Mirror
That would mess with some people's water systems, though. In Tucson they treat water and then "discharge" it into artificial ponds constructed to have relatively porous bottoms, letting it seep back down into the aquifer: in a place where water is scarce, we might as well store it in the ground.
The actor didn't do that great of a job, either -- he's the one who started the massive rise in the national debt, after all.
I never said it was the optimum solution, just that it's one that's been proposed, and that it's milder than the "ban all fossil fuels" strawman that was trotted out.
Politicians meddle in everything. We ought to work on ways to make them cut it out. Nonetheless, until we stamp out this sort of corruption, we still have to get on with life.
The point isn't whether she's a good or bad leader, just that the Germans are folks who put Gauss on their money and elect a chemist, and the Americans are people who put dead presidents on their money and elect people like Bush.
The idea is that they're not like a "permit" to have a gun or whatever, but are permits that are for sale for a certain price, and that can be bought and sold on the market without going through the government.
I don't like that idea as much as the carbon tax, though, simply because it's simpler. (Most carbon tax proposals include tax cuts elsewhere to stay revenue-neutral.)
A loyalty oath is something imposed from above; a sanity check is something imposed by the electorate. Nobody is proposing barring people who give whackjob answers from running for president; we're just hoping that voters won't vote for them. This is how elections are supposed to work.
I don't know any non-kooks who want to completely ban fossil fuels. Most want either to say "no burning fossil fuel without a permit" and issue permits equal to a desired level of emissions, or implement a carbon tax tuned to reduce emissions to that level.
As for vaccinations: yes, they should be mandatory. No religious whackjob exceptions or crystal-clutching hippie exceptions. Go read about the polio epidemic and you'll understand why. Possibly there can be one exception: a parent puts up a bond for the cost of getting their kid tested for the presence of polio/measles/whatever every couple of months, and if the kid tests positive at any time then parent goes to jail for assault against both the kid and whoever the kid may have infected.
Again, nobody on the Left wants to outlaw water treatment plants, either, given that they're rather fond of building the things in the first place.
Europe is different. In Europe they put people like Gauss on their money, and elect people like Thatcher and Merkel (also a chemist) to positions of power.
Here in the US, we have different attitudes about what sorts of things constitute "qualifications".
Why would we want to do that? That's as silly as declaring Earth a chemistry-free zone, or an electromagnetism-free zone.
Nuclear physics lets us do lots of nifty things. Only a few of them relate to killing people, and murder by nuclear explosion is not really that different from any other sort of murder. The problem has to do with the murder, not with how it's done.
It's worse than that, if they play by the rules completely. As I understand it, even classified information that is widely known is still classified, and has to be handled with silly procedures. Jefferson Lab's computer account rules include the following, for instance: "We handle no classified information at JLab. If you find some on a JLab computer system, that computer system should be considered contaminated. Don't attempt to remove the information yourself; call the Office of Security Wankage." If people are actually playing by the rules, then it's possible to cause something of a DoS condition by spamming people with classified information.
Polling 1000 people, if it's a representative sample, gives statistical errors of a few percent.
The problem is that any discussion of voting reform has to be somewhat academic, since there is math involved, and somewhat philosophical, since it's not about any issues per se but in how we decide what to do about the issues.
The American people are too uneducated, it seems, to have this discussion -- our political conversations basically come down to "How can I get more cookies from the government at someone else's expense?"
On my phone (Android), though, the performance of the Facebook app is worse than loading their mobile page in Opera. The app looks better, but it performs substantially worse.
There have been no more than in other sorts of competition. There was the big match-fixing scandal (see the liquipedia article), and a couple of more minor things more recently that have been punished harshly, but, well, baseball's seen lots of this nonsense, too.
As for evidence that matches are actually rigged (with the winner decided in advance), well -- do you have any evidence that this is widespread? Actually, a good bit of evidence that it's not is that despite many of them trying, very few foreigners have done all that well in the GSL (Korea's premier Starcraft II competition), despite the fact that it would vastly expand their audience. (Whenever a foreigner seems to have a chance in a major tournament lots of folks outside Korea watch and root for them.) There's a lot of profit to be had if you could order the Koreans to throw a few matches to the foreigners to get them to the finals, but nobody has done it.
There are ways around that -- for instance, by rate-limiting logins from each IP to (say) 1 per 5 seconds, allowing (perhaps) the first ten with only a 500ms delay to deal with NAT shenanigans, and locking an IP out for a significant amount of time after (say) twenty failed logins. An attacker could bypass this with a botnet, of course -- but you'd need an awfully big botnet. Against all but the largest websites this would quickly cause a noticeable spike in "overall failed login rate", which should trigger a more aggressive rate limit (say, each IP gets banned for an hour after three failed login attempts), which is a reasonable thing to do while under heavy attack. This still doesn't cause a DoS condition for any user that remembers his password, or who needs a couple of attempts to get it right.
That's a password with somewhere around ~20 bits of entropy. Let's be generous to weak passwords and consider one with 16 bits of entropy, meaning that a dictionary attack has to make (around half of) 60000 attempts to crack it.
If you've got the hashed password, this is trivial to do. But if you're trying to break a remote login and the computer on the other side lets you make 60000 attempts, then there are far bigger issues at work than a weak password.
It's 4x if you count pixels -- twice as many pixels in each direction.
Copyright != patent.
It would be better for the US economy if those "jobs" consisted of simply sitting at home wanking, since then we wouldn't be tempted to go get folks killed with the byproducts.
Except for Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, etc...
A smartphone is basically a portable computer. We've had computers for ages. Now, how do you get data into a portable computer? The most sensible way is the cell network, so why don't we make these portable computers make phone calls, too?
Okay, so we have a computer. It needs a microphone and a speaker on it, so we can make phone calls. Why not put a camera on it too, since the market has decided that cameraphones are a neat idea.
Okay, how are you going to control your little portable computer? Well, there's not much room for buttons on it, since we need both a big screen so you can see shit and a small device so you can pocket it. Now, computer interfaces have long used the paradigm of "show the user shit on the screen and have a device that simulates pointing at the screen called a mouse for the user to pick stuff to do." So a touchscreen is the obvious way to communicate with a pocketable computer, since it both makes efficient use of area (no buttons) and is pretty similar to what we have been doing for years on ordinary computers.
Now, what shape should it be? Well, we like rectangular screens -- they're easy to code for -- so it should approximate a rectangle. Making it an exact rectangle means that the corners will snag on your pockets, so it ought to be a rounded rectangle.
How is any of this worthy of a patent?
Touche, good sir. Touche.
This happens already in Washington. The average Washington resident has $600 in unpaid parking tickets. Commercial trucks drive around with them still hung under their wipers. They're a significant component of street-gutter litter.
It's run by leftists of the "take money from the wealthy and give it to the poor^Wpeople who vote for us" variety, who are also in this case law-and-order-obsessed authoritarians. Does that help?
You have clearly never been to Washington DC. Attempting to get the police here to investigate the police will result in fuck-all getting done.