Sola dosis facit venenum. Even the most toxic substance on earth (Botulinum toxin) is used in medicine (yes, there are uses beyond the cosmetic area) and safe at the levels used.
Geeze, guy, I said that they don't have to pay back the debts immediately. It's not my problem if you are unable to read.
Nowhere did I say that they don't have to pay back the debts forever. I said that they _currently_ don't have to pay them back. I also mentioned the ten years. I also posted a link. If you're that dense then I can't help you. Moron.
Please, before you're starting to talk you should take time to inform yourself. Yes, they do owe a lot of money to diverse governments and governmental institutions. And, no, they currently don't have to pay that money back and they don't currently have to pay interest.
Paying back money will begin in 10 years time (if ever, actually). This is also the reason why cutting their debt to the EU totally wouldn't change their current position one bit because, again, they currently don't have to pay their debts anyway!
However, don't confuse that money with what they're owing to private investors.
In short, stop talking, you're making yourself look like a fool.
Well, what do you expect me to do? Use chalk to theoretically discuss my Physics experiments on a slate?
Granted, I am doing that from time to time but I'm also a bit annoyed when my pupils still have to use pencil and paper to write down the data from experiments they're doing. That may be worthwhile the first two or three times to show them the ropes, but after that it gets old fast.
Or take chemistry classes - so, first the pupils have to draw the molecular structures on their paper and then draw it again on the whiteboard. That takes time which could be spent on actually discussing the problem.
There are countless of other examples where technology can speed up several processes quite a bit, particularly when it comes to sharing results.
It's the lightfield that's the kicker. Because that makes it NOT a simple 'picture projected onto a surface'. With this technology, your eyes should be able to focus on different parts of the image and actually getting the results your eyes expect.
Thus it should be possible to include a correction for near- or farsightedness. Your other complaints are merely showing your lack of imagination.
That was a time when you could actually easily fix something. Take cars, for example. Fixing a modern car aside from trivial cases is not easy.
Hell, even exchanging a broken lightbulb can pose major problems.
So, the only thing between Cryptolocker and your user's files was the FILESYSTEM? And you think the problem was the OS?
Seriously, this thing was actually running on your Linux distribution (as you yourself admit) and the only thing that saved you was that it wasn't (yet) adapted to the filesystem. So, pray tell, how is Linux the magical mystery sauce which saves the day?
Cryptowall encrypts the data it has access to. It does not need admin rights to do shitloads of damage. This means that Cryptowall could work just as well under Linux / MacOS or any other OS out there.
Not to mention that it's actually the melting point. Even when you have a well-defined pressure of 1 atm, water doesn't have to freeze at 0 C (and it also doesn't have to boil at 100 C). It is likely that it will freeze at that point, but far from being guaranteed. If you're doing things right water can go as far as -50 C before freezing.
You misunderstand. I'm not for prohibition. I'm merely proposing that driving under the influence of any drug is a very bad idea.
In my opinion, you're free to rock your boat with whatever drug you choose - as long as you don't endanger other people. And hurtling along with at least 1 ton of metal while being drugged is endangering others.
Well, I find it hard to sympathize - when you have drunk any amount of alcohol, you shouldn't be behind the wheels for any reason. Precisely because of crap like this. Additionally, counting the drinks is moronic - depending on what you ate and your current bodily constitution, your tolerance for alcohol may vary wildly.
Not to mention that alcohol impairs your judgment - it's like a drug-induced version of the Dunning-Kruger-Effect. You yourself may think that you have no problems driving with, say, a BAC of 0.04 - but how would you realistically know? Your judgment is already impaired...
I don't think that most of the industry understands the internet either. I mean, just look at the debacle with this moronic "Leistungsschutzrecht" where they tried to make Google pay them for advertising for them. And when Google refused to play ball (either by simply delisting them from search results or just returning results without snippets) they tried to get a law passed that would have forced Google to pay and list them.
Indeed. There are also suits and goggles which simulate old age so that youngsters can better empathize with the needs of the elderly. I mean, at some point you'll surely have stood in line behind an older person who took their sweet time to get the spare change out of the purse. With such suits, you can experience for yourself why that took so long.
It's one thing to intellectually know about a concept and a completely different thing to have actually experienced it.
You can do similar stuff when it comes to educating about the dangers of alcohol. Simply put on a special goggle (which emulates your field of view when at about 1.0 BAC and also induces vertigo) and you'll see why driving drunk is dangerous.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who still insists in writing Microsoft as "M$" just shows that you can't take him seriously.
From my own experience in Finland, I can't really agree.
Too bad that sauna is usually single-sex in Finland.
They're a bit on the prudish side :)
Just FYI: Side-loading is perfectly possible on WindowsRT and Windows Phone. Doesn't cost a penny and is not too difficult.
Sola dosis facit venenum. Even the most toxic substance on earth (Botulinum toxin) is used in medicine (yes, there are uses beyond the cosmetic area) and safe at the levels used.
Geeze, guy, I said that they don't have to pay back the debts immediately. It's not my problem if you are unable to read.
Nowhere did I say that they don't have to pay back the debts forever. I said that they _currently_ don't have to pay them back. I also mentioned the ten years. I also posted a link. If you're that dense then I can't help you. Moron.
Please, before you're starting to talk you should take time to inform yourself. Yes, they do owe a lot of money to diverse governments and governmental institutions. And, no, they currently don't have to pay that money back and they don't currently have to pay interest.
Paying back money will begin in 10 years time (if ever, actually). This is also the reason why cutting their debt to the EU totally wouldn't change their current position one bit because, again, they currently don't have to pay their debts anyway!
However, don't confuse that money with what they're owing to private investors.
In short, stop talking, you're making yourself look like a fool.
Wrong. They currently don't even have to pay the interest.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
Well, what do you expect me to do? Use chalk to theoretically discuss my Physics experiments on a slate?
Granted, I am doing that from time to time but I'm also a bit annoyed when my pupils still have to use pencil and paper to write down the data from experiments they're doing. That may be worthwhile the first two or three times to show them the ropes, but after that it gets old fast.
Or take chemistry classes - so, first the pupils have to draw the molecular structures on their paper and then draw it again on the whiteboard. That takes time which could be spent on actually discussing the problem.
There are countless of other examples where technology can speed up several processes quite a bit, particularly when it comes to sharing results.
It's the lightfield that's the kicker. Because that makes it NOT a simple 'picture projected onto a surface'. With this technology, your eyes should be able to focus on different parts of the image and actually getting the results your eyes expect.
Thus it should be possible to include a correction for near- or farsightedness. Your other complaints are merely showing your lack of imagination.
Must be you. I still have that check box.
That's why it's actually illegal to make a photo of anything in the room where you take the vote. At least that's the case here in Germany.
That was a time when you could actually easily fix something. Take cars, for example. Fixing a modern car aside from trivial cases is not easy.
Hell, even exchanging a broken lightbulb can pose major problems.
So, the only thing between Cryptolocker and your user's files was the FILESYSTEM? And you think the problem was the OS?
Seriously, this thing was actually running on your Linux distribution (as you yourself admit) and the only thing that saved you was that it wasn't (yet) adapted to the filesystem. So, pray tell, how is Linux the magical mystery sauce which saves the day?
That's like saying: "Oh, H5N1 is only dangerous to birds, we mammals don't need to worry at all."
The mechanisms of Cryptowall work under any OS. Stupid answer of yours. Oh, well, you are an Anonymous Coward after all.
Cryptowall encrypts the data it has access to. It does not need admin rights to do shitloads of damage. This means that Cryptowall could work just as well under Linux / MacOS or any other OS out there.
Not to mention that it's actually the melting point. Even when you have a well-defined pressure of 1 atm, water doesn't have to freeze at 0 C (and it also doesn't have to boil at 100 C). It is likely that it will freeze at that point, but far from being guaranteed. If you're doing things right water can go as far as -50 C before freezing.
You misunderstand. I'm not for prohibition. I'm merely proposing that driving under the influence of any drug is a very bad idea.
In my opinion, you're free to rock your boat with whatever drug you choose - as long as you don't endanger other people. And hurtling along with at least 1 ton of metal while being drugged is endangering others.
Well, I find it hard to sympathize - when you have drunk any amount of alcohol, you shouldn't be behind the wheels for any reason. Precisely because of crap like this. Additionally, counting the drinks is moronic - depending on what you ate and your current bodily constitution, your tolerance for alcohol may vary wildly.
Not to mention that alcohol impairs your judgment - it's like a drug-induced version of the Dunning-Kruger-Effect. You yourself may think that you have no problems driving with, say, a BAC of 0.04 - but how would you realistically know? Your judgment is already impaired...
I don't think that most of the industry understands the internet either. I mean, just look at the debacle with this moronic "Leistungsschutzrecht" where they tried to make Google pay them for advertising for them. And when Google refused to play ball (either by simply delisting them from search results or just returning results without snippets) they tried to get a law passed that would have forced Google to pay and list them.
Let's not forget this statement of Momma Merkel comes from the same woman who stated that the "Internet is virgin territory" merely a year ago.
She simply does not understand internet issues and thus promptly falls back on an industry-friendly position.
Right. U238 does not decay into Cesium at any point. Neither does U235.
Indeed. There are also suits and goggles which simulate old age so that youngsters can better empathize with the needs of the elderly. I mean, at some point you'll surely have stood in line behind an older person who took their sweet time to get the spare change out of the purse. With such suits, you can experience for yourself why that took so long.
It's one thing to intellectually know about a concept and a completely different thing to have actually experienced it.
You can do similar stuff when it comes to educating about the dangers of alcohol. Simply put on a special goggle (which emulates your field of view when at about 1.0 BAC and also induces vertigo) and you'll see why driving drunk is dangerous.
Since they didn't acquire the whole of Nokia, I'm quite sure that this was the best result available.
They "only" bought the mobile part of Nokia.
Right, because they had a choice...
As part of the acquisition of Nokia's mobile business, they also got the naming rights for a limited time only (two years, if I recall correctly).