In a related story, Slashdot Editors accidentally allowed the correct use of the word "ironic" to appear in a story which made it to the front page of the geek-oriented web site.
I can't wait for someone to pull out the "You are not Apple's target market" argument.
Apparently, Apple's target market is technically ignorant but wealthy who want a phone-thinger/fashion accessory that "just works" as long as you only do approved things in a manner sanctioned by Apple/AT&T, and who never, ever want to extend the functionality of their already insanely(TM)-perfect-out-of-the-box iPhone.
Here's my list of most significant vapor promises that never got delivered:
1) Nuclear Fusion power plants 2) Room-temperature Superconductor 3) Human exploration/Colonization of interplanetary space 4) Faster-than-light space travel 5) Humanlike AI 6) World Peace
If we could get any of these delivered, it'd be really nice. But I'm not holding my breath.
Which is to say that notification provides better security, BUT if you're RELYING on notification, then you've potentially still got a problem.
I would think that the better way to do it would be to scan the file when it is being written; failing that, before the first read event. The I/O subsystem ought to be passing these events to the security application; it shouldn't be up to each and every application running on the system to voluntarily participate in notifications.
Well, right, but is efficiency the goal or is security?
If you have to rely on another app to inform you that it's doing something, that's pretty easy to circumvent if you don't want the scrutiny, and puts a burden on application developers to worry about informing the security app what it's doing.
That's like calling a building secure because visitors must voluntarily report to the security office and check in, as opposed to having guards stationed at the doors checking everybody as they pass through.
I'm curious how having specialized multi-core processors is different from having a single-core processor with specialized subunits. Ie, a single core x86 chip has a section of it devoted to implementing MMC, SSE, etc. Isn't having many specialized cores just a sophisticated way of re-stating that you have a really big single-core processor, in some sense?
Why would the burden of proof be with the guy who refuses to believe the religious crap?
It's not; it's on whichever wants sex/the relationship more. How much will you put up with? If she believes in weird, false things, but is hot and is otherwise into you, do you take that? Or do you insist that she be re-educated to your specifications?
A female scientist merely holds a tarot card to her forehead and "predicts" that her addle-brained boyfriend won't be getting laid tonight; a male scientist has to decide whether or not to accept the irrationality of woman or opt for a homosexual lifestyle.
Right, the Russians want to dismantle the weapons and not have to maintain them or protect them. Problem is, what do they do with the Pu once the weapons have been dismantled? Answer: sell it. But to who? Unsavory guys who'll make it into weapons, or US Science Guys who promise not to? The Russians and US both think it's better for the Pu not to be made into weapons, so we have the arrangement. If we didn't take it, someone would need to do something with it, and who knows what that would be -- probably not something the US would like.
1) Bad behavior will stop, because people won't want to be seen/recorded doing bad things. 2) Good behavior will stop, because people won't want to be seen/recorded doing those things, because a significant number of people think it's bad anyway. 3) Some bad behavior will be reconsidered/redefined as good, because people will realize that everyone does it and it's harmless anyway. 4) Some bad behavior will be encouraged, because enough people want to see it that it will be encouraged/reinforced (Girls Gone Wild). 5) Some innocent behavior will stop, because people look bad doing it (the macarena).
You've got to be kidding. If you can't handle lifting 10 lbs 5 times, you should be on disability. If you *are* on disability, then I'm sorry for you. It's certainly true that levers or somesuch mechanism could make it easier to set the lamp up, but the thing already must weigh 50+ lbs, probably double that in order to not go topheavy when "primed". I'm pretty certain that adding additional complexity and weight to the device would make it more inconvenient, not less.
So, this is also exactly why we also don't drive around in portable oil refineries. A slightly more clever arrangement of the involved technolgoies could prove surprisingly useful in real-world applications.
In 20 years, we'll need human-level artificially intelligent computers to man our fusion-powered flying cars while we sit back and play Duke Nukem Forever on our Linux desktops.
Smell isn't caused by chemicals in the air
on
Outer Space has a Smell
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Smell is caused by chemicals in the air triggering olfactory receptors in our sense organs and causing sense data to be interpreted by the brain as an odor.
If you take away the sense data, the brain is still interpreting something, namely the absence of data. It could be that this odor is simply how the brain handles a null dataset.
I think I've realized something about Microsoft: They really want us to NOT want to use Microsoft products. I finally get it -- It's not sufficient for them to own the market; in order to feel fully dominant, they must own it against our will. It's as though they think that if we wanted to use their products because they were good for us and worked in our best interest, it would not be true show of their power, for we'd be rational in wanting such products. Only if they can force their software down our throats whether we want it or not, do they have full assurance that their power is real.
Spock: Captain, sensors indicate that this creature subsists on a diet of Slim Jims and Cheetos... Fascinating. It's blood is a substance you humans know as 'Mountain Dew'.
Kirk: SPOCK! How. Can that... BE... possible?
McCoy: If what you're describing is true, we've discovered the most extreme organism in the entire galaxy.
Basically this would mean that you would need a license to practice, all your code would be signed by its author, and the association would discipline any software author who wrote bad software, either maliciously or accidentally. Although it means hobbyists could no longer tinker, we are at the point where that hobbyist tinkering could have significant implications for the international system of computing infrastructure.
You are right in that unqualified programmers working on critical systems could have significant implications. Has this ever NOT been the case? No, not really. It's just that, the more we rely on our computing infrastructure, the greater the potential impact.
Does this mean that we need to somehow lock all hobbyist/amateur programmers out of computing, and force everyone to get professionally certified? I don't think so. You don't need an engineering degree to build a tree house in your back yard. You do if you are going to design a bridge or a dam. Require the engineering degree to practice programming professionally, or on sensitive projects which I would think would include the majority of professional programming, though probably not all. Let amateur/hobbyist hackers continue writing, compiling, and running code, and contribute to projects, so long as they are rigorously code-reviewed by appropriately certified professionals before being used in mission critical infrastructure roles.
Considering it's impossible to prevent people without professional certification from gaining access to programming tools, solving the problem this way would be a lot less draconian.
Slashdot Mirror
In a related story, Slashdot Editors accidentally allowed the correct use of the word "ironic" to appear in a story which made it to the front page of the geek-oriented web site.
I can't wait for someone to pull out the "You are not Apple's target market" argument.
Apparently, Apple's target market is technically ignorant but wealthy who want a phone-thinger/fashion accessory that "just works" as long as you only do approved things in a manner sanctioned by Apple/AT&T, and who never, ever want to extend the functionality of their already insanely(TM)-perfect-out-of-the-box iPhone.
Here's my list of most significant vapor promises that never got delivered:
1) Nuclear Fusion power plants
2) Room-temperature Superconductor
3) Human exploration/Colonization of interplanetary space
4) Faster-than-light space travel
5) Humanlike AI
6) World Peace
If we could get any of these delivered, it'd be really nice. But I'm not holding my breath.
You may take our intellectual property, but you'll never take...our FREEDOM!!!
Which is to say that notification provides better security, BUT if you're RELYING on notification, then you've potentially still got a problem.
I would think that the better way to do it would be to scan the file when it is being written; failing that, before the first read event. The I/O subsystem ought to be passing these events to the security application; it shouldn't be up to each and every application running on the system to voluntarily participate in notifications.
Well, right, but is efficiency the goal or is security?
If you have to rely on another app to inform you that it's doing something, that's pretty easy to circumvent if you don't want the scrutiny, and puts a burden on application developers to worry about informing the security app what it's doing.
That's like calling a building secure because visitors must voluntarily report to the security office and check in, as opposed to having guards stationed at the doors checking everybody as they pass through.
I'm curious how having specialized multi-core processors is different from having a single-core processor with specialized subunits. Ie, a single core x86 chip has a section of it devoted to implementing MMC, SSE, etc. Isn't having many specialized cores just a sophisticated way of re-stating that you have a really big single-core processor, in some sense?
Why would the burden of proof be with the guy who refuses to believe the religious crap?
It's not; it's on whichever wants sex/the relationship more. How much will you put up with? If she believes in weird, false things, but is hot and is otherwise into you, do you take that? Or do you insist that she be re-educated to your specifications?
A female scientist merely holds a tarot card to her forehead and "predicts" that her addle-brained boyfriend won't be getting laid tonight; a male scientist has to decide whether or not to accept the irrationality of woman or opt for a homosexual lifestyle.
Right, the Russians want to dismantle the weapons and not have to maintain them or protect them. Problem is, what do they do with the Pu once the weapons have been dismantled? Answer: sell it. But to who? Unsavory guys who'll make it into weapons, or US Science Guys who promise not to? The Russians and US both think it's better for the Pu not to be made into weapons, so we have the arrangement. If we didn't take it, someone would need to do something with it, and who knows what that would be -- probably not something the US would like.
This can have good and bad consequences.
1) Bad behavior will stop, because people won't want to be seen/recorded doing bad things.
2) Good behavior will stop, because people won't want to be seen/recorded doing those things, because a significant number of people think it's bad anyway.
3) Some bad behavior will be reconsidered/redefined as good, because people will realize that everyone does it and it's harmless anyway.
4) Some bad behavior will be encouraged, because enough people want to see it that it will be encouraged/reinforced (Girls Gone Wild).
5) Some innocent behavior will stop, because people look bad doing it (the macarena).
In short, it's complicated.
That's funny, that sounds like just about the same thing the Global Warming Naysayers do, only taking the opposite position.
You've got to be kidding. If you can't handle lifting 10 lbs 5 times, you should be on disability. If you *are* on disability, then I'm sorry for you. It's certainly true that levers or somesuch mechanism could make it easier to set the lamp up, but the thing already must weigh 50+ lbs, probably double that in order to not go topheavy when "primed". I'm pretty certain that adding additional complexity and weight to the device would make it more inconvenient, not less.
So, this is also exactly why we also don't drive around in portable oil refineries. A slightly more clever arrangement of the involved technolgoies could prove surprisingly useful in real-world applications.
In 20 years, we'll need human-level artificially intelligent computers to man our fusion-powered flying cars while we sit back and play Duke Nukem Forever on our Linux desktops.
Smell is caused by chemicals in the air triggering olfactory receptors in our sense organs and causing sense data to be interpreted by the brain as an odor.
If you take away the sense data, the brain is still interpreting something, namely the absence of data. It could be that this odor is simply how the brain handles a null dataset.
Teh kind taht type faster tahn tehy tihnk, I'd say.
I think I've realized something about Microsoft: They really want us to NOT want to use Microsoft products. I finally get it -- It's not sufficient for them to own the market; in order to feel fully dominant, they must own it against our will. It's as though they think that if we wanted to use their products because they were good for us and worked in our best interest, it would not be true show of their power, for we'd be rational in wanting such products. Only if they can force their software down our throats whether we want it or not, do they have full assurance that their power is real.
Spock: Captain, sensors indicate that this creature subsists on a diet of Slim Jims and Cheetos... Fascinating. It's blood is a substance you humans know as 'Mountain Dew'.
Kirk: SPOCK! How. Can that... BE... possible?
McCoy: If what you're describing is true, we've discovered the most extreme organism in the entire galaxy.
Spock: Indeed, Doctor. Most intriguing.
I'd like to file a motion that we observe this 111th anniversary as the centennial. The number 100 is more convenient and aesthetically pleasing.
Did they bring back weapon speed factors and "vs. armor type" modifiers? And are there crude b/w drawings of bare-chested female monsters?
You are right in that unqualified programmers working on critical systems could have significant implications. Has this ever NOT been the case? No, not really. It's just that, the more we rely on our computing infrastructure, the greater the potential impact.
Does this mean that we need to somehow lock all hobbyist/amateur programmers out of computing, and force everyone to get professionally certified? I don't think so. You don't need an engineering degree to build a tree house in your back yard. You do if you are going to design a bridge or a dam. Require the engineering degree to practice programming professionally, or on sensitive projects which I would think would include the majority of professional programming, though probably not all. Let amateur/hobbyist hackers continue writing, compiling, and running code, and contribute to projects, so long as they are rigorously code-reviewed by appropriately certified professionals before being used in mission critical infrastructure roles.
Considering it's impossible to prevent people without professional certification from gaining access to programming tools, solving the problem this way would be a lot less draconian.
Write it once, write it right. Make it perfect and future proof the first time. That'd satisfy everyone
Before you go throwing out the male gender, stop for a moment and consider this:
Sperm extracted from my bone is a lot less painful to obtain than from your bones. Think about it!
Hey, guys, if you want to take over the internet, buy out all the DNS servers and reject queries from non-Windows hosts. You don't need to buy Yahoo!
I feel just the opposite -- 640 pages should have been enough!