We're all frogs being boiled alive because we kept getting used to the temperature as it went up.
When and why did we accept needing elaborate programs to throw away our email before we looked at it? When and why did we accept not being able to send files in email, after spending years defining and implementing MIME?
There have been cities that got so accustomed to street crime that people starting blaming the people who got attacked instead of the criminal. When and why did we get to the point that someone could tell a normal (and savvy) user of email >You don't have to be a complete fucking tool you're entire life you know. ?
Not that I have a solution, I'd be out getting rich if I did.
The effect is the same no matter where the choice happens. Email is less useful for communications now than it used to be. It is getting even less useful as time goes on.
I'm behind two layers of professionally administered spam filters, one from a dedicated mail forwarding service and one from a company with world-beating text analysis algorithms.
My experience is irreconcilable with what you report.
The crux of the problem is that people buy from spam.
As long as that happens, spammers will exist and adapt as surely as drug dealers do. There are countries that hang drug dealers but still have a drug problem. Standing between buyers and sellers is like trying to block the Mississippi: it always finds a way around.
I hope nobody actually implements the permanent solution I saw suggested once, which is to send out booby-trapped "enlargement pills" that take all spam customers out of circulation and leave spammers without a market.
Seismic retrofitting, among other things, straps together the different stories of a building and strengthens the connection to the foundation, putting "shear walls" over studs, and generally making the structure more of a unit so that an earthquake can't play divide and conquer (search term: "soft story").
Hurricane resistance requires the same kind of thinking: tie the roof to the rest of the structure.
>a flexible wooden house that 'moves' together with the seismic waves
Unless it slides off the foundation. You need some rigidity.
Wood can be good, steel can be good, even reinforced concrete can be good. The thing you need that no building provides enough of is "damping", energy dissipation, what a shock absorber does. Imagine a car with no springs, then imagine a car with only springs, and you've got two lousy rides. The architectural equivalent of a shock absorber is a material which drags its feet when you deform it. Steel is wonderful for this: an earthquake can lose a lot of energy deforming a beam and then straightening it out again. Concrete will absorb energy by developing small cracks: the problem is that after enough shaking the small cracks join and get large and you have a structure of rebar holding gravel. The rebar can bow outward like a Chinese lantern and the floor collapses, unless the rebar was installed in a helical pattern in which case it may hold the gravel in place long enough to evacuate the building. Look closely at freeway construction in earthquake zones, and you'll see dense rebar that winds around the center of a column.
Wooden houses are great because an earthquake can wear itself out scraping plywood sheathing against studs.
The IEEE article is about what amounts to a strain gauge, which (if confirmed) tells you that something is about to crack but doesn't tell you how far and how widely the fault is going to unload itself. There's some reason to suspect that when an earthquake starts it doesn't "know" how big it's going to be.
Once the p-wave hits, though, you know what kind of ground acceleration to expect.
There's still a door swinging in it. Depending on which way you're facing, you could get your fingers pinched in the hinges and mangled, or slammed into by a closing door and mangled.
Drop, cover, and hold is what the Red Cross is teaching, after considerable research.
First-world building are unlikely to collapse but you don't want to be hit by falling chunks of ceiling. Get under something like a table ("drop and cover") that will intercept some debris before it hits you.
The table will likely start walking across the room as everything moves up and down and sideways. Keep a grip on a leg of the table or whatever and "hold" so that it doesn't walk away from you.
Doesn't have to be a table, and improvising is good. At the grocery store you could use a shopping cart, for example.
At one one-thousandth of c, relativistic corrections are detectable with precision instruments but not significant to engineering. The correction factor is 1 + 5E-7.
The energy cost of accelerating to a speed like that is extraordinary in any event. Imagine something the size of a Shuttle orbiter, 1E5 kg. 0.5mv**2 is (0.5 * 1E5 * (3E5)**2) == 4.5E15 Joules or 1.25 *billion* kilowatt hours. Even with some miraculous 100% efficient technology it would take a big chunk of the US power grid to accelerate that one ship at 1g or better.
Violates old principle of "compartmentalization"
on
Open Source Spying
·
· Score: 1
The old system was geared to limiting the damage that one traitor could do by limiting the amount of intelligence information that one person could see. This made sense when the KGB was dangling money in front of people to get them to reveal information that would weaken US intelligence capabilities.
If OpenID provides interoperability it will be a step upward. For example, none of the OpenPGP signatures in this thread verify under PGP Desktop 7.1 ("ascii armor input incomplete").
>First, for passwords, you only need to remember *1* and have the following javascript (which runs client side) from this most excellent site: GenPass.
Quite a few options for this functionality. Last time I reviewed them, my favorite was pwdhash.
>push Ethernet to a megabits-per-second speed that does not currently exist under any standard
>a comparable 100Mbps standard does not exist now for Ethernet to emulate,
And then neglecting the question a journalist should have asked to add value over a press release, namely "Isn't this going to be way more expensive even than FDDI? How many machines have to be talking on the same LAN segment before this gets cost-effective?"
Build a few world-class universities like IIT and neglect everything else ==> prestige but lots of unemployment and an underperforming economy.
Build lots of perfectly-OK universities ==> educated population, opportunity for the many bright people in your population of a billion, vibrant economy and not just in a few geographical niches.
If he actually believes that the kids "stole" music he should make them put it back so the record label won't have to pay to replace it.
That's what you do if your kids steal something. It doesn't make sense in this case? Damn straight. Teach the kids it's like trespass, and they won't grow up thinking that you talk nonsense when you try to teach them ethics.
>they owe the band a good faith effort to pay for the music
It's good for them to know that this is better done by buying a T-shirt than by buying a CD. It won't meet their legal obligations under today's US law but it does meet the ethical standard of paying the people who make things you use.
"Software developers have become adept at the difficult art of building reasonably reliable systems out of unreliable parts. The snag is that often we do not know exactly how we did it." is one of the most insightful things I've read since Fred Brooks.
A darkroom is the same problem at a different wavelength. Small flaws let small amounts of radiation inside. Get too close to a crack, and there's a fair amount of light: get too close to an opening in your mesh bag or a seam in your metal box and there's signal. The phone has to work over a wide range of signal strengths to begin with. At least it would be easy to test your work.
This case had judicial oversight, but the principle is sound and here's an illustration.
A man living under the Franco dictatorship asked a sympathetic secret policeman how to stay out of trouble with the government.
The secret policeman didn't pull out the usual lie "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear". The secret policeman didn't say "Just obey the law". The advice was far simpler:
Slashdot Mirror
>No reasonable person would dispute that the US tax system is progressive.
Why do you consider it automatically unreasonable to mention payroll taxes?
We're all frogs being boiled alive because we kept getting used to the temperature as it went up.
When and why did we accept needing elaborate programs to throw away our email before we looked at it? When and why did we accept not being able to send files in email, after spending years defining and implementing MIME?
There have been cities that got so accustomed to street crime that people starting blaming the people who got attacked instead of the criminal. When and why did we get to the point that someone could tell a normal (and savvy) user of email
>You don't have to be a complete fucking tool you're entire life you know.
?
Not that I have a solution, I'd be out getting rich if I did.
>Again, that's a choice made by the recipient.
The effect is the same no matter where the choice happens. Email is less useful for communications now than it used to be. It is getting even less useful as time goes on.
I'm behind two layers of professionally administered spam filters, one from a dedicated mail forwarding service and one from a company with world-beating text analysis algorithms.
My experience is irreconcilable with what you report.
The crux of the problem is that people buy from spam.
As long as that happens, spammers will exist and adapt as surely as drug dealers do. There are countries that hang drug dealers but still have a drug problem. Standing between buyers and sellers is like trying to block the Mississippi: it always finds a way around.
I hope nobody actually implements the permanent solution I saw suggested once, which is to send out booby-trapped "enlargement pills" that take all spam customers out of circulation and leave spammers without a market.
Structurally integrated ones help with all those.
Seismic retrofitting, among other things, straps together the different stories of a building and strengthens the connection to the foundation, putting "shear walls" over studs, and generally making the structure more of a unit so that an earthquake can't play divide and conquer (search term: "soft story").
Hurricane resistance requires the same kind of thinking: tie the roof to the rest of the structure.
>a flexible wooden house that 'moves' together with the seismic waves
Unless it slides off the foundation. You need some rigidity.
Wood can be good, steel can be good, even reinforced concrete can be good. The thing you need that no building provides enough of is "damping", energy dissipation, what a shock absorber does. Imagine a car with no springs, then imagine a car with only springs, and you've got two lousy rides. The architectural equivalent of a shock absorber is a material which drags its feet when you deform it. Steel is wonderful for this: an earthquake can lose a lot of energy deforming a beam and then straightening it out again. Concrete will absorb energy by developing small cracks: the problem is that after enough shaking the small cracks join and get large and you have a structure of rebar holding gravel. The rebar can bow outward like a Chinese lantern and the floor collapses, unless the rebar was installed in a helical pattern in which case it may hold the gravel in place long enough to evacuate the building. Look closely at freeway construction in earthquake zones, and you'll see dense rebar that winds around the center of a column.
Wooden houses are great because an earthquake can wear itself out scraping plywood sheathing against studs.
The IEEE article is about what amounts to a strain gauge, which (if confirmed) tells you that something is about to crack but doesn't tell you how far and how widely the fault is going to unload itself. There's some reason to suspect that when an earthquake starts it doesn't "know" how big it's going to be.
Once the p-wave hits, though, you know what kind of ground acceleration to expect.
They need to be warned about their faults, of course.
>What on Earth are Alice and Bob up to that everyone wants to read what they are writing to each other?
http://www.xkcd.com/c177.html
There's still a door swinging in it. Depending on which way you're facing, you could get your fingers pinched in the hinges and mangled, or slammed into by a closing door and mangled.
Drop, cover, and hold is what the Red Cross is teaching, after considerable research.
First-world building are unlikely to collapse but you don't want to be hit by falling chunks of ceiling. Get under something like a table ("drop and cover") that will intercept some debris before it hits you.
The table will likely start walking across the room as everything moves up and down and sideways. Keep a grip on a leg of the table or whatever and "hold" so that it doesn't walk away from you.
Doesn't have to be a table, and improvising is good. At the grocery store you could use a shopping cart, for example.
1985, Mexico City, buildings collapsed when the center of the earthquake was 400 km away. That one was unusual but it shows what's possible.
The other thing you can do with 10-20 seconds of warning is apply emergency brakes on the bullet trains, which I believe Japan has arranged to do.
At one one-thousandth of c, relativistic corrections are detectable with precision instruments but not significant to engineering. The correction factor is 1 + 5E-7.
The energy cost of accelerating to a speed like that is extraordinary in any event. Imagine something the size of a Shuttle orbiter, 1E5 kg. 0.5mv**2 is (0.5 * 1E5 * (3E5)**2) == 4.5E15 Joules or 1.25 *billion* kilowatt hours. Even with some miraculous 100% efficient technology it would take a big chunk of the US power grid to accelerate that one ship at 1g or better.
The old system was geared to limiting the damage that one traitor could do by limiting the amount of intelligence information that one person could see. This made sense when the KGB was dangling money in front of people to get them to reveal information that would weaken US intelligence capabilities.
The cost was severe of course. Maybe the risks are worth the benefits. A lot depends on the likelihood of enemy infiltration of the UN intelligence community.
If OpenID provides interoperability it will be a step upward. For example, none of the OpenPGP signatures in this thread verify under PGP Desktop 7.1 ("ascii armor input incomplete").
>First, for passwords, you only need to remember *1* and have the following javascript (which runs client side) from this most excellent site:
GenPass.
Quite a few options for this functionality. Last time I reviewed them, my favorite was pwdhash.
>push Ethernet to a megabits-per-second speed that does not currently exist under any standard
>a comparable 100Mbps standard does not exist now for Ethernet to emulate,
And then neglecting the question a journalist should have asked to add value over a press release, namely "Isn't this going to be way more expensive even than FDDI? How many machines have to be talking on the same LAN segment before this gets cost-effective?"
Build a few world-class universities like IIT and neglect everything else
==> prestige but lots of unemployment and an underperforming economy.
Build lots of perfectly-OK universities
==> educated population, opportunity for the many bright people in your population of a billion, vibrant economy and not just in a few geographical niches.
Longer wavelength than X-rays...
Everything artificially generated is a longer wavelength than X-rays. Everything shorter we get from nuclear decay.
A sensible comparison might have been to say "longer wavelength than light", or better "longer wavelength than infrared".
The Toyota Camry is longer than a bacterium but shorter than a Lincoln Town car, but it would be retarded to write an article describing it that way.
If he actually believes that the kids "stole" music he should make them put it back so the record label won't have to pay to replace it.
That's what you do if your kids steal something. It doesn't make sense in this case? Damn straight. Teach the kids it's like trespass, and they won't grow up thinking that you talk nonsense when you try to teach them ethics.
>they owe the band a good faith effort to pay for the music
It's good for them to know that this is better done by buying a T-shirt than by buying a CD. It won't meet their legal obligations under today's US law but it does meet the ethical standard of paying the people who make things you use.
I've written commercial software.
"Software developers have become adept at the difficult art of building reasonably reliable systems out of unreliable parts. The snag is that often we do not know exactly how we did it." is one of the most insightful things I've read since Fred Brooks.
>alter the phone's behavior sufficiently to initiate a call without your intervention
All the phone has to do in order to be a bug is to answer an incoming call automatically and without ringing. Small software change.
A darkroom is the same problem at a different wavelength. Small flaws let small amounts of radiation inside. Get too close to a crack, and there's a fair amount of light: get too close to an opening in your mesh bag or a seam in your metal box and there's signal. The phone has to work over a wide range of signal strengths to begin with. At least it would be easy to test your work.
This case had judicial oversight, but the principle is sound and here's an illustration.
A man living under the Franco dictatorship asked a sympathetic secret policeman how to stay out of trouble with the government.
The secret policeman didn't pull out the usual lie "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear". The secret policeman didn't say "Just obey the law". The advice was far simpler:
"Be invisible".