It would, yes, if you ever knew about it. In the real world, if a potential employer rejects your application based on your political views/sexual orientation, they aren't going to outright say it. No, you'll just get a generic rejection letter along the lines of 'Your application was not successful at this time.' No reason to even suspect they rejected you based on a google background check, and no possibility at all of proving it in court.
It comes in very handy in programming. A lot of algorithms are described mathematically. If you do anything at all with signal processing, you're going to need calculus. If only so you can take those continuous-function complex-number filters that the mathematicians like and figure out how to impliment them on a processor that actually exists.
That was then, this is now. Time changed. Mostly they changed because of mass-media an the internet. Americans get a little uncomfortable at the civilian deaths in Iraq - they'd be outraged seeing the same thing so much closer to home.
And lead to a decades-long insurgency? Messy. It just makes more sense for the federal government to try political means first. Sending in the army is for when all else has failed, and even then they'd need to wait for or else manufacture a suitable crisis to get the public outraged about. Eg, a terrorist attack on the US originating from within California, or a suitably loathed criminal like a pedophile hopping the border to escape prosecution. Something to use to justify the invasion, and arranging something like that takes time.
Probably used the old 32mm hole. Newer computers are built using 64mm bit technology, you need to use a 64-bit to compensate. It's a very delicate operation though, as 64mm is a very big hole and you need to be careful to keep it perfectly round, else the data will be unevenly distributed.
The old write-over trick. Yes, what you're doing is actually forcing the drive to remap bad sectors. How reliably it works after depends on what caused the bad sectors in the first place.
Probably not. Even the federal government has to obey some level of public accountability, or some politicians are going to find themselves out of a job. What senator would dare to authorise the dropping of bombs upon a region that was until recently part of the United States? It's one thing to unleash the national guard upon a few million rebels (Just call them 'rioters,' problem solved) but as soon as the state legislature passes a law declaring independence, there isn't much the federal government can do about it.
Until a few years later, when they finish a treaty that allows California to remain nominally independent while promising to obey federal laws, accept US currency and permit free passage into the US proper.
The US political system is tied up in a duopoly by now that renders votes essentially useless at the national level. The two parties bicker publicly over a few token issues - abortion, gay marriage, healthcare reform - but beneath their surface disagreements, they are really much the same in nature. All politicians are corrupt manipulators, because any who aren't willing to sink so low wouldn't make it that far: Anyone who doesn't have an R or D after their name is just a joke above the local level, and has next to no chance of so much as getting their name on the ballot.
The only other way to change government is violent revolution, but that isn't going to happen. Life is just fairly easy in the US - there is no serious risk of starvation, living is comfortable, all but the very poorest can afford food, home and car. Television provides entertainment. Why rebel against that? A few will try it from time to time, but it'd take a revolutionary army of millions to overthrow even a state government.
Such a mechanism would be more expensive though, and less reliable. Reliability matters when repair is impossible because all components are behind thick sheet steel designed to be impenitrable from the outside.
I have a safe of similar design, and it did come with some rather hefty expanding bolts for just this purpose. I imagine that if there were properly installed in a structural wall, that safe isn't going anywhere even with a crowbar. I'm sure that there are plenty of safes around that have been carefully bolted to drywall or plasterboard though - the bolts may hold, but a thief with a crowbar could steal the safe along with a sizeable piece of wall.
A serious, skilled attacker. Most common burglers probably wouldn't know how. The simplist attack against a small safe is to pick it up and carry it out - then worry about opening it later on. Might need a crowbar if it's been bolted to a wall, but with a crowbar enough force can be applied to rip bolts out of most non-structural walls - along with chunks of wall.
Short version: The locking solonoid mechanism can be mechanically disrupted into an open state by applying a sharp vertical acceleration. The three-year-old used in testing achieved this by picking the safe a few inches off the ground and dropping it. The mechanism design is common across models and manufacturers.
An obvious countermeasure is to use the bolts usually supplied to securely attach the safe to a wall or floor. If it cannot be lifted, there is no way to apply the jolt needed to knock the mechanism open.
In all but the smallest company, they'll have a 'standard build' configuration, so reinstalling the OS would be pointless: If it isn't done to their procedure, they'll have to redo it anyway. But DBAN would destroy the data, and then they can use their automated reinstall procedure. It's usually a very simple thing to do, because Windows needs reinstalling so often.
Microsoft realises that their greatest advantage is their dominance regarding desktop operating systems. Metro can be seen as an effort to take their advantage there and use it to aid their attempt in the mobile space. By unifying the interface and much of the system calls, they can make it very easy to developers to port between Windows 8 desktop, Windows 8 tablets and Windows Phone - and as developers will seek to write software for Windows desktop, with it's massive userbase, this ensures that windows tablet and phone will quickly have a vast software library despite being relative latecomers. They could still screw this up very easily, but at least they do have a plan.
Actually, I know that one dildo manufacturer already uses 3d printing in their R&D. Although the final product is cast in silicone, the prototyping was done with 3d printing. An American company.
Potential, largely. Those technologies are about as good as they are going to get, now. But 3d printing is still in the earliest stage. Give it a decade of refinement, and it has the potential to improve. Most significently, it can be made a zero-skill automated operation: Insert spool, download file, wait. That makes it potentially very good for people who have a hobby that they would benefit with parts, but who do not wish to learn resin casting or spent hours carefully whittling at wood.
Copyright and, to a lesser extent, patents. A lot of surprising things are covered by patents. For example, I own one of those bagless vacuum cleaners. As I empty it of dust I tap it against the edge of the bin and it is quite possible that one day, dislodging a particually stubborn dustball, I may break it. A simple plastic part of a very specific shape that isn't available on the general market - a perfect example of where 3d printing would be of help. I can just jump on the internet, find a 3d model of the part (or failing that, make my own and publish it for anyone else with this problem) and churn off a new piece from the printer. But that bagless cyclone technology is patented by Dyson - and by printing my own component, I'd probably be infringing their patent. But, would this extend also to any site hosting the model file?
In your day, endemic obesity probably wasn't as much of a serious concern. Though you're still right: US schools vary by state a lot, but many still serve pizza and chips both because it's cheap and because various politicians seek to benefit their fast-food-industry and farm-industry supporters (Potato and corn, mostly - chips and corn syrup). Rather infamously this has involved some rather strange classifications as some government agencies declare a slice of pizza to be a fruit or a helping of chips to be a vegetable in order to circumvent nutritional standards set by other agencies. Different parts of the government acting at cross-purposes can lead to some amusing things happen.
The general consensus seems to be that Microsoft knows Windows 8 will flop, and is willing to accept this if it means reorientating the industry in a manner which will be of more benefit to their long-term aims - specifically becoming a serious player in the tablet/mobile space and securing themselves a lucrative slice of app-store pie. They saw how well Apple and even Google, not traditionally an OS vendor, managed to achieve this and now Microsoft wants in - even if it means taking a big short-term hit by releasing an OS everyone loathes.
Slashdot Mirror
It would, yes, if you ever knew about it. In the real world, if a potential employer rejects your application based on your political views/sexual orientation, they aren't going to outright say it. No, you'll just get a generic rejection letter along the lines of 'Your application was not successful at this time.' No reason to even suspect they rejected you based on a google background check, and no possibility at all of proving it in court.
It comes in very handy in programming. A lot of algorithms are described mathematically. If you do anything at all with signal processing, you're going to need calculus. If only so you can take those continuous-function complex-number filters that the mathematicians like and figure out how to impliment them on a processor that actually exists.
That was then, this is now. Time changed. Mostly they changed because of mass-media an the internet. Americans get a little uncomfortable at the civilian deaths in Iraq - they'd be outraged seeing the same thing so much closer to home.
And lead to a decades-long insurgency? Messy. It just makes more sense for the federal government to try political means first. Sending in the army is for when all else has failed, and even then they'd need to wait for or else manufacture a suitable crisis to get the public outraged about. Eg, a terrorist attack on the US originating from within California, or a suitably loathed criminal like a pedophile hopping the border to escape prosecution. Something to use to justify the invasion, and arranging something like that takes time.
Probably used the old 32mm hole. Newer computers are built using 64mm bit technology, you need to use a 64-bit to compensate. It's a very delicate operation though, as 64mm is a very big hole and you need to be careful to keep it perfectly round, else the data will be unevenly distributed.
The old write-over trick. Yes, what you're doing is actually forcing the drive to remap bad sectors. How reliably it works after depends on what caused the bad sectors in the first place.
Probably not. Even the federal government has to obey some level of public accountability, or some politicians are going to find themselves out of a job. What senator would dare to authorise the dropping of bombs upon a region that was until recently part of the United States? It's one thing to unleash the national guard upon a few million rebels (Just call them 'rioters,' problem solved) but as soon as the state legislature passes a law declaring independence, there isn't much the federal government can do about it.
Until a few years later, when they finish a treaty that allows California to remain nominally independent while promising to obey federal laws, accept US currency and permit free passage into the US proper.
The US political system is tied up in a duopoly by now that renders votes essentially useless at the national level. The two parties bicker publicly over a few token issues - abortion, gay marriage, healthcare reform - but beneath their surface disagreements, they are really much the same in nature. All politicians are corrupt manipulators, because any who aren't willing to sink so low wouldn't make it that far: Anyone who doesn't have an R or D after their name is just a joke above the local level, and has next to no chance of so much as getting their name on the ballot.
The only other way to change government is violent revolution, but that isn't going to happen. Life is just fairly easy in the US - there is no serious risk of starvation, living is comfortable, all but the very poorest can afford food, home and car. Television provides entertainment. Why rebel against that? A few will try it from time to time, but it'd take a revolutionary army of millions to overthrow even a state government.
Do I see the gleam of aluminium foil upon your head?
Such a mechanism would be more expensive though, and less reliable. Reliability matters when repair is impossible because all components are behind thick sheet steel designed to be impenitrable from the outside.
And if you rent, you can't really go making holes in the walls.
I have a safe of similar design, and it did come with some rather hefty expanding bolts for just this purpose. I imagine that if there were properly installed in a structural wall, that safe isn't going anywhere even with a crowbar. I'm sure that there are plenty of safes around that have been carefully bolted to drywall or plasterboard though - the bolts may hold, but a thief with a crowbar could steal the safe along with a sizeable piece of wall.
But lock design is news for nerds.
A serious, skilled attacker. Most common burglers probably wouldn't know how. The simplist attack against a small safe is to pick it up and carry it out - then worry about opening it later on. Might need a crowbar if it's been bolted to a wall, but with a crowbar enough force can be applied to rip bolts out of most non-structural walls - along with chunks of wall.
Short version: The locking solonoid mechanism can be mechanically disrupted into an open state by applying a sharp vertical acceleration. The three-year-old used in testing achieved this by picking the safe a few inches off the ground and dropping it. The mechanism design is common across models and manufacturers.
An obvious countermeasure is to use the bolts usually supplied to securely attach the safe to a wall or floor. If it cannot be lifted, there is no way to apply the jolt needed to knock the mechanism open.
In all but the smallest company, they'll have a 'standard build' configuration, so reinstalling the OS would be pointless: If it isn't done to their procedure, they'll have to redo it anyway. But DBAN would destroy the data, and then they can use their automated reinstall procedure. It's usually a very simple thing to do, because Windows needs reinstalling so often.
Unnatural monopolies, perhaps. But it's the natural monopolies that are the real killer of the libertarian ideal.
I was thinking 'corruption.'
I know of them by reputation. Most of their products are really intended as novelty decorations, and are far too large for practical use.
Microsoft realises that their greatest advantage is their dominance regarding desktop operating systems. Metro can be seen as an effort to take their advantage there and use it to aid their attempt in the mobile space. By unifying the interface and much of the system calls, they can make it very easy to developers to port between Windows 8 desktop, Windows 8 tablets and Windows Phone - and as developers will seek to write software for Windows desktop, with it's massive userbase, this ensures that windows tablet and phone will quickly have a vast software library despite being relative latecomers. They could still screw this up very easily, but at least they do have a plan.
Actually, I know that one dildo manufacturer already uses 3d printing in their R&D. Although the final product is cast in silicone, the prototyping was done with 3d printing. An American company.
And they do indeed do a tentacle themed toy: http://bad-dragon.com/products/tentacle (HIGHLY NSFW!).
Potential, largely. Those technologies are about as good as they are going to get, now. But 3d printing is still in the earliest stage. Give it a decade of refinement, and it has the potential to improve. Most significently, it can be made a zero-skill automated operation: Insert spool, download file, wait. That makes it potentially very good for people who have a hobby that they would benefit with parts, but who do not wish to learn resin casting or spent hours carefully whittling at wood.
Copyright and, to a lesser extent, patents. A lot of surprising things are covered by patents. For example, I own one of those bagless vacuum cleaners. As I empty it of dust I tap it against the edge of the bin and it is quite possible that one day, dislodging a particually stubborn dustball, I may break it. A simple plastic part of a very specific shape that isn't available on the general market - a perfect example of where 3d printing would be of help. I can just jump on the internet, find a 3d model of the part (or failing that, make my own and publish it for anyone else with this problem) and churn off a new piece from the printer. But that bagless cyclone technology is patented by Dyson - and by printing my own component, I'd probably be infringing their patent. But, would this extend also to any site hosting the model file?
In your day, endemic obesity probably wasn't as much of a serious concern. Though you're still right: US schools vary by state a lot, but many still serve pizza and chips both because it's cheap and because various politicians seek to benefit their fast-food-industry and farm-industry supporters (Potato and corn, mostly - chips and corn syrup). Rather infamously this has involved some rather strange classifications as some government agencies declare a slice of pizza to be a fruit or a helping of chips to be a vegetable in order to circumvent nutritional standards set by other agencies. Different parts of the government acting at cross-purposes can lead to some amusing things happen.
The general consensus seems to be that Microsoft knows Windows 8 will flop, and is willing to accept this if it means reorientating the industry in a manner which will be of more benefit to their long-term aims - specifically becoming a serious player in the tablet/mobile space and securing themselves a lucrative slice of app-store pie. They saw how well Apple and even Google, not traditionally an OS vendor, managed to achieve this and now Microsoft wants in - even if it means taking a big short-term hit by releasing an OS everyone loathes.