A more pressing question in my mind is why aren't there any private companies making it for NASA? Does the NRC prohibit private companies from producing it?
I'm sure somewhere in the US exists a company with the technical expertise and equipment to make it. And when I'm pretty sure companies are still willing to cash government checks... I guess I don't understand "shortages" in synthesized isotopes. I heard a while back there is another isotope synthesized in Canada that we have to buy because there isn't enough in the US or something like that. I don't get it.
I agree with all that you said except #2. It's actually quite likely his code followed the exact same process as Shazam. The code might look very different, but it's following the same basic idea.
You're correct in that LPS is crap for plants, but it's a good example of efficient lighting that most people are familiar with because most street lights are LPS. In the US at least, dunno about other places.
HPS is great for any plants, not just cannibis. I haven't tried LED and since I don't do any gardening at all anymore, I doubt I ever will. On paper, it's clearly less efficient at converting electricity into light. I did some amateur indoor tomato farming and am by no means a horticulturist. All I can say is holy cow, HPS is a huge step up from florescent lights which didn't work for shit.
It is all about efficiency. High power LED lighting is actually only just recently getting into the same league as HID lighting when measured on a lumens per watt scale. High pressure sodium and low pressure sodium have been kings for a very long time. Sure, they generate a lot of heat, but they generate a lot of light as well. And when you get up to the 400w or 1000w levels, it's really the only economical solution worthy of consideration.
Small LED's have been produced for some time with higher efficiency than HPS and LPS lighting but scaling them up and retaining that efficiency has been a multi-billion dollar challenge.
I'm 28 and losing interest in phones fast. I have a nice Nokia E71 and it's perfect. It has just the right amount of features to be useful and not so much as to be a clusterfuck. I used to get a new phone every year. Now I just want to use this same phone forever.
It syncs all my shit with my laptop at the click of a button. It has real buttons, no touchscreen crap. Good layout. Easy menus.
In traditional media outlets, the production of video is wholly choreographed by professionals with typically years of experience and education.
I don't think the question is "Can video be art?", but more succinctly "Can amateur video be considered high art?"
Undoubtedly the answer is yes. But if you browse youtube, I think you'll find it takes quite a lot of searching to find really well made video that could be considered high art. The only one I can think of off the top of my head, I can't even find right now. It was a short with a guy whose dog had to be put down. Wish I could remember it now, it was really powerful.
Unauthorized access to a computer is a felony. So is copyright infringement for financial gain. Free speech is our most important right, but aiding and abetting others to commit crimes is a crime itself.
DVD John didn't do anything wrong in my book because DVDCSS had a lot of legitimate uses, despite what the movie studios said.
Selling information about an exploit to a third party while knowing they are likely to commit a crime with it is by definition aiding in the commission of a crime. Giving away that same information to the entire world in full disclosure would be speech, I think. It's for a social benefit, even if it is damaging to the company whose software is exploitable.
I'm all about telling the vendor about the security hole before publicizing it if it's known not to already be in the wild. Give them a chance to do the right thing.
This duration of time should vary based on a variety of factors such as the companies past history in fixing exploits, public disclosure statements, severity, etc.
With that said, there is no reason that after 30 days, any exploit should be fully disclosed to the public. If the vendor doesn't like it, well they should have fixed the problem when only a few people knew about it. If they have egg on their face, it's because they failed to correct the problem.
A good example was the recent major DNS exploit. It was quietly fixed and then fully disclosed. That's how it should work.
It certainly shows a staggering lack of remorse or regret for their actions. The gunners begged for permission to open fire, and they did, and they killed everyone they were shooting at. Like a fucking video game.
Thing is, our soldiers were quite a ways away. The danger wasn't immediate. In a densely populated urban area, you don't shoot until you're sure the target is a combatant. Article 33 of the Geneva Convention says you can't punish one person for the collective actions of their countrymen.
The gunner could have easily guided ground troops in safely to determine if the targets were in fact hostile.
I have seen UN reports detailing the total volume of officially missing sarin and mustard gas canisters from Iraq. I believe this was in the late 90's. The GP is probably correct that we had no good evidence in 2003 when we invaded that Iraq still had WMD's, we knew only that they previously existed and Iraq couldn't account for thousands of tons of chemical weapons.
I'm a firm believer that Bush Jr. was just trying to finish the job his dad left unfinished in '91. He was just looking for a reason and 9/11 was it. Most of the terrorists have had training in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and other places, but there were few confirmed links between terrorism and Iraq. Bush sold the war to us under false pretenses, and he even had good intentions, but it really turned out to be a clusterfuck.
With 20/20 hindsight, I'd say it would have been better to do this in '91. At least then we had a real NATO commitment and the resources to get the job done. We've been in Iraq too long now and probably made more enemies of the civilians than there ever was before Saddam.
If I tell my employees to do something, I want it done whether I said please or not; especially if what I'm telling them to do already falls within the bounds of what they were hired to do.
If I send work over to another department that I do not control and they have a stated policy of getting said work done in 24 hours, I expect it done whether I said please or not. Pleasantries and civility go a long way towards making coworkers happy, but they shouldn't be a prerequisite for people to do their damned jobs.
Titles themselves are sourced from a distant past, and more recently from old English traditions. Titles are supposed to represent accomplishment and by calling someone by their title, you give them credit and respect for earning that title.
Why do you think everyone calls Obama "Mr. President"? Do you think it's because they presume you don't know who the president is? Not likely.
Now, this post shouldn't be taken as a defense of titles, just an explanation. I don't call my doctor "Doctor" and I don't want a dr. who demands such. I call her Mary, and that's all there is to it.
If I met my governor, I wouldn't call him Governor Pawlenty. It would be Mr. Pawlenty, most likely. Same goes for Senator Franken, I would likely simply call him Mr. Franken.
People bitch and moan about the price of gas and when there is a spill they bitch and moan about the damaging effects on the environment these evil oil companies are having.
BP is definitely to blame for their poor conduct regarding their failure to meet MMS safety rules, OSHA compliance, platform disaster readiness, telling the truth about their prior knowledge of platform instability, ad nauseum, but the general populace is not without guilt either. People simply need to take moral responsibility for the fact that their choices have costs and we all jointly share in the burden on the environment. Driving a Yukon to work because it's big enough to hold both your laptops, a cup of coffee and the newspaper all at once is a problem. People love to talk about hybrids but in the end they go out and pick up a larger or midsize sedan with 21 MPG because they're cheap.
I'm probably the only democrat who hates big business, wants an end to farm subsidies(maybe if food was more expensive we wouldn't waste so much?), hates big government but desires better more useful regulation in telecommunications, healthcare and consumer privacy sectors, wants all illicit drug control laws repealed.
I would also like to see all handguns banned, no exceptions. They serve no useful purpose for protecting your house or hunting that an AR15 or shotgun can't fill, yet are easily concealable and very easy to commit violent crimes with. Sounds backwards, I know. You can't stuff a rifle in your school backpack, or easily tuck it in your pants to rob the liquor store.
While we're talking about corporations, I think we need an end to different types of stocks for all listed companies. Whats the deal with non-voting stocks? Preferred stocks? You're saying one person who invested $1 in a company is worth more than another person who invested the same $1? The whole investment game is rigged to give institutional investors and rich people the upper hand. Oh, and IPO's should be handled by the SEC directly. No more of this shit where Goldman Sachs or others handle your IPO and give first crack at the shares to all their favorite friends.
It's a good thing I don't run the government. Everyone would accuse me of being crazier than Kim Jong Il. I think the country would be better though.
Probably the simplest solution would be to make a Win32 executable based on the Qt toolkit and statically linked. You get a single executable, a professional looking UI that took minutes or hours to build, and the advantage of a much more powerful and flexible language versus DOS batch files or even powershell scripts.
Qt also provides a dead simple class framework for accessing the network, so that will save you time. You can get Qt, including a really slick IDE for free from Nokia.
The only lobbying organization right now with enough money to get the attention of politicians is the ACLU. They're often too busy worrying constitutional violations to really get into technology, but sooner or later internet access is gonna hit their radar.
The EFF is an excellent organization with exceptionally bright people. They need more money and more clout to be effective though.
Making a profit isn't a right, you have to earn it by competing.
Does anyone remember before broadband? Every metro region had dozens of dialup ISP's and they all competed on service and the prices were very reasonable. At first they charged by the minute or hour, then it was by bandwidth, then it was unlimited. Prices started high and slowly fell.
These are all indications of a normal, healthy, competitive market. What we have now is the exact opposite - ISP's don't always run their own mail servers, prices go up, newsgroup access is a rarity, DNS lookup failures are sold to the highest bidder(bing/google/whatever). There is no competition and consumers are paying the price.
Slashdot Mirror
A more pressing question in my mind is why aren't there any private companies making it for NASA? Does the NRC prohibit private companies from producing it?
I'm sure somewhere in the US exists a company with the technical expertise and equipment to make it. And when I'm pretty sure companies are still willing to cash government checks... I guess I don't understand "shortages" in synthesized isotopes. I heard a while back there is another isotope synthesized in Canada that we have to buy because there isn't enough in the US or something like that. I don't get it.
That's MicrosoftSonyDisneyApple(c)(R)(tm)(pat.pend.) now. Get it right citizen peon.
I agree with all that you said except #2. It's actually quite likely his code followed the exact same process as Shazam. The code might look very different, but it's following the same basic idea.
Right. Because everyone knows all the WTO member countries follow the rules...
not.
That's nice, but will reporters be allowed on board?
You're correct in that LPS is crap for plants, but it's a good example of efficient lighting that most people are familiar with because most street lights are LPS. In the US at least, dunno about other places.
HPS is great for any plants, not just cannibis. I haven't tried LED and since I don't do any gardening at all anymore, I doubt I ever will. On paper, it's clearly less efficient at converting electricity into light. I did some amateur indoor tomato farming and am by no means a horticulturist. All I can say is holy cow, HPS is a huge step up from florescent lights which didn't work for shit.
It is all about efficiency. High power LED lighting is actually only just recently getting into the same league as HID lighting when measured on a lumens per watt scale. High pressure sodium and low pressure sodium have been kings for a very long time. Sure, they generate a lot of heat, but they generate a lot of light as well. And when you get up to the 400w or 1000w levels, it's really the only economical solution worthy of consideration.
Small LED's have been produced for some time with higher efficiency than HPS and LPS lighting but scaling them up and retaining that efficiency has been a multi-billion dollar challenge.
I'm 28 and losing interest in phones fast. I have a nice Nokia E71 and it's perfect. It has just the right amount of features to be useful and not so much as to be a clusterfuck. I used to get a new phone every year. Now I just want to use this same phone forever.
It syncs all my shit with my laptop at the click of a button. It has real buttons, no touchscreen crap. Good layout. Easy menus.
I never want to upgrade.
In traditional media outlets, the production of video is wholly choreographed by professionals with typically years of experience and education.
I don't think the question is "Can video be art?", but more succinctly "Can amateur video be considered high art?"
Undoubtedly the answer is yes. But if you browse youtube, I think you'll find it takes quite a lot of searching to find really well made video that could be considered high art. The only one I can think of off the top of my head, I can't even find right now. It was a short with a guy whose dog had to be put down. Wish I could remember it now, it was really powerful.
Correct, my mistake. Full disclosure must occur in a reasonable time or the vendors will have no reason to patch the exploits.
Unauthorized access to a computer is a felony. So is copyright infringement for financial gain. Free speech is our most important right, but aiding and abetting others to commit crimes is a crime itself.
DVD John didn't do anything wrong in my book because DVDCSS had a lot of legitimate uses, despite what the movie studios said.
Selling information about an exploit to a third party while knowing they are likely to commit a crime with it is by definition aiding in the commission of a crime. Giving away that same information to the entire world in full disclosure would be speech, I think. It's for a social benefit, even if it is damaging to the company whose software is exploitable.
I'm all about telling the vendor about the security hole before publicizing it if it's known not to already be in the wild. Give them a chance to do the right thing.
This duration of time should vary based on a variety of factors such as the companies past history in fixing exploits, public disclosure statements, severity, etc.
With that said, there is no reason that after 30 days, any exploit should be fully disclosed to the public. If the vendor doesn't like it, well they should have fixed the problem when only a few people knew about it. If they have egg on their face, it's because they failed to correct the problem.
A good example was the recent major DNS exploit. It was quietly fixed and then fully disclosed. That's how it should work.
It certainly shows a staggering lack of remorse or regret for their actions. The gunners begged for permission to open fire, and they did, and they killed everyone they were shooting at. Like a fucking video game.
Thing is, our soldiers were quite a ways away. The danger wasn't immediate. In a densely populated urban area, you don't shoot until you're sure the target is a combatant. Article 33 of the Geneva Convention says you can't punish one person for the collective actions of their countrymen.
The gunner could have easily guided ground troops in safely to determine if the targets were in fact hostile.
I have seen UN reports detailing the total volume of officially missing sarin and mustard gas canisters from Iraq. I believe this was in the late 90's. The GP is probably correct that we had no good evidence in 2003 when we invaded that Iraq still had WMD's, we knew only that they previously existed and Iraq couldn't account for thousands of tons of chemical weapons.
I'm a firm believer that Bush Jr. was just trying to finish the job his dad left unfinished in '91. He was just looking for a reason and 9/11 was it. Most of the terrorists have had training in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and other places, but there were few confirmed links between terrorism and Iraq. Bush sold the war to us under false pretenses, and he even had good intentions, but it really turned out to be a clusterfuck.
With 20/20 hindsight, I'd say it would have been better to do this in '91. At least then we had a real NATO commitment and the resources to get the job done. We've been in Iraq too long now and probably made more enemies of the civilians than there ever was before Saddam.
It seems to matter not to law enforcement in general. The mere pretense that something is being done is good enough.
I dont care for titles, but I hate this rule.
If I tell my employees to do something, I want it done whether I said please or not; especially if what I'm telling them to do already falls within the bounds of what they were hired to do.
If I send work over to another department that I do not control and they have a stated policy of getting said work done in 24 hours, I expect it done whether I said please or not. Pleasantries and civility go a long way towards making coworkers happy, but they shouldn't be a prerequisite for people to do their damned jobs.
Titles themselves are sourced from a distant past, and more recently from old English traditions. Titles are supposed to represent accomplishment and by calling someone by their title, you give them credit and respect for earning that title.
Why do you think everyone calls Obama "Mr. President"? Do you think it's because they presume you don't know who the president is? Not likely.
Now, this post shouldn't be taken as a defense of titles, just an explanation. I don't call my doctor "Doctor" and I don't want a dr. who demands such. I call her Mary, and that's all there is to it.
If I met my governor, I wouldn't call him Governor Pawlenty. It would be Mr. Pawlenty, most likely. Same goes for Senator Franken, I would likely simply call him Mr. Franken.
I don't even live in a big city now, although I lived in a huge city for half my life.
Carrying a rifle around is not hard work. Ask any Texan who lives in the country.
Well spank me and call me susie.
You've been here almost as long as me.
People bitch and moan about the price of gas and when there is a spill they bitch and moan about the damaging effects on the environment these evil oil companies are having.
BP is definitely to blame for their poor conduct regarding their failure to meet MMS safety rules, OSHA compliance, platform disaster readiness, telling the truth about their prior knowledge of platform instability, ad nauseum, but the general populace is not without guilt either. People simply need to take moral responsibility for the fact that their choices have costs and we all jointly share in the burden on the environment. Driving a Yukon to work because it's big enough to hold both your laptops, a cup of coffee and the newspaper all at once is a problem. People love to talk about hybrids but in the end they go out and pick up a larger or midsize sedan with 21 MPG because they're cheap.
I'm probably the only democrat who hates big business, wants an end to farm subsidies(maybe if food was more expensive we wouldn't waste so much?), hates big government but desires better more useful regulation in telecommunications, healthcare and consumer privacy sectors, wants all illicit drug control laws repealed.
I would also like to see all handguns banned, no exceptions. They serve no useful purpose for protecting your house or hunting that an AR15 or shotgun can't fill, yet are easily concealable and very easy to commit violent crimes with. Sounds backwards, I know. You can't stuff a rifle in your school backpack, or easily tuck it in your pants to rob the liquor store.
While we're talking about corporations, I think we need an end to different types of stocks for all listed companies. Whats the deal with non-voting stocks? Preferred stocks? You're saying one person who invested $1 in a company is worth more than another person who invested the same $1? The whole investment game is rigged to give institutional investors and rich people the upper hand. Oh, and IPO's should be handled by the SEC directly. No more of this shit where Goldman Sachs or others handle your IPO and give first crack at the shares to all their favorite friends.
It's a good thing I don't run the government. Everyone would accuse me of being crazier than Kim Jong Il. I think the country would be better though.
I'm the corporate asshole, thank you very much.
I also scored a 38 on that empathy quiz(bottom 10%), which explains why I do so well at work.
It doesn't, but you can download it.
Probably the simplest solution would be to make a Win32 executable based on the Qt toolkit and statically linked. You get a single executable, a professional looking UI that took minutes or hours to build, and the advantage of a much more powerful and flexible language versus DOS batch files or even powershell scripts.
Qt also provides a dead simple class framework for accessing the network, so that will save you time. You can get Qt, including a really slick IDE for free from Nokia.
The only lobbying organization right now with enough money to get the attention of politicians is the ACLU. They're often too busy worrying constitutional violations to really get into technology, but sooner or later internet access is gonna hit their radar.
The EFF is an excellent organization with exceptionally bright people. They need more money and more clout to be effective though.
Making a profit isn't a right, you have to earn it by competing.
Does anyone remember before broadband? Every metro region had dozens of dialup ISP's and they all competed on service and the prices were very reasonable. At first they charged by the minute or hour, then it was by bandwidth, then it was unlimited. Prices started high and slowly fell.
These are all indications of a normal, healthy, competitive market. What we have now is the exact opposite - ISP's don't always run their own mail servers, prices go up, newsgroup access is a rarity, DNS lookup failures are sold to the highest bidder(bing/google/whatever). There is no competition and consumers are paying the price.