Of course, it is different in this way. But would this difference have stopped those people, whom we honor today as heroes, or would they have gone ahead anyway — just like their descendants at NSA, whom we jeer?
Bletchley Park listened to all radio traffic they could capture. Today we sneer and jeer at the NSA for doing (or attempting to do) that. Yep, today's all is much bigger than it was then, but still...
It shows, that 2015 was not the warmest on record.
You, dywolf, of all people, should be quiet — with your dytail between dylegs. You were asked before to list successful predictions made by "Climate Scientists" — and could not. Remember? Pairs of links — first link to a prediction, second — to its success.
Any replies not offering such a list of pairs will be returned unopened.
thinkprogress.org
Ah, yes, sure... Scratch a climate alarmist, and find a Che Guevara T-shirt...
JavaScript itself must be delivered on a authenticated encrypted channel
Yes, but this download can arrive from an SSL-using server run by a company big enough to actually have its certificate application properly validated. Think jquery.js.
The question was not, whether SSL is needed at all, but how can a small operator secure logins without going through the extensive and expensive validation originally envisioned for SSL-certificates.
But in the original model, how was the hobbyist operator of a web site supposed to protect passwords of the site's users from eavesdropping?
The original model was meant to facilitate online commerce. Netscape invented SSL and was pushing it despite the opposition from IPsec proponents — because SSL-certificates were to provide assurance, that the remote end is a legitimate business. One may argue, the encryption aspect was secondary.
If it is only a small part of data, that actually needs encryption — the password and the credit card number — you can do that (using the well-known and studied protocols) in JavaScript.
This style of attack would have been able to get an SSL cert from most cheap cert providers
It used to be, one had to prove being "a legitimate business" to obtain an SSL certificate. But you are right, that proliferation of cheap — and therefore not caring — CAs has devalued it.
Because they are "cheaper than cheap"?
Yes. As long as some kind of payment is required, it is usually possible to identify the buyer. This possibility itself is a deterrent...
I am all for the ability to remain anonymous, but we must realize, that anonymity can be abused — otherwise we'll lose what little of it remains to more knee-jerk reactions.
Fact is, when comparing unions to corporations, there are no angels.
While I've never seen angels — and doubt they exist in this sorry world of ours — corporations are inherently better than unions.
Troll my tail — for a corporation to make money, it has to sell something people want. Unions far too often have a captive "customer base — one must join, if one wishes to work in a properly "unionized workplace". Such as be a public school teacher or even a New York City carpenter.
Restricting workers rights to organize is a very communist thing to do:-)
Fortunately, nobody does that in the US. USSR — unlike China — was a completely different story. Union membership was mandatory. Their role was kinda-sorta like that of social services here, however. Not really, but that's the closest analogy I could find — they certainly weren't protecting workers' rights.
But I don't care, which plant does better — as long as something remains to eat up the CO2 (producing O2 for the rest of us), the system remains self-regulating, does not it?
The "drowning in too much water" analogies above would make one believe, excessive CO2 would kill off all plants leading to eventual sterilization of the planet... Thankfully, the opposite is true.
A quick google tells me that the EPA limit for air quality is 100 ug/m3.
I wonder, how they arrived at this number, however.
Ouch. If you have a lot of roads and traffic all day long, that's a big contribution.
Yes, living next to high-traffic roads sucks — always has. The question is, are today's diesels especially bad, or are they better than the previous generation — just not better enough for someone somewhere?
Is it? My understanding always was, plants produce O2 from CO2 — and can live even in a pure CO2 atmosphere. Even if they'll grow different, they'll still thrive, no?
because it can always run at optimal temperature and RPM.
Basically, you have something spinning, use that to produce electricity, which is then used to make something else spin. Such conversions inevitably eat into efficiency... And then, of course, there are non-trivial losses due to electricity distribution itself.
would actually be a reduction in pollution if all mobile transport was electric, and all the amps generated to do that came from petroleum-based generation
That may be true, but it is far from obvious. Various transports — including Porsche's sole big vehicle — that used the motors to generate electricity, weren't especially fuel efficient.
Hybrid cars aren't new — they just sucked in 1900. And they still aren't very good today.
That's a statement like: "has golden hair, but not a blond".
The BBC is not owned by the government, it is publicly owned
Again. There is no difference.
You're entitled to your view. But do you have to be so fucking stupid?
Please, don't hate.
a huge difference, both in theory and practice, between a state broadcaster like Zvezda and a public service broadcaster like the BBC
The difference is entirely from the differences between UK and Russia. BBC may have a higher degree of independence, but that's simply because UK is a much nicer country. It is still a government- — or, if you like the sound of it better, publicly- — owned entity.
I seem to remember reading about a family, that could turn sugar into alcohol right in their blood. They would also hypnotize possums into making a fire and roasting themselves. They were capable of other feats too, mostly motivated by laziness, of course. Can't find the author now, though...
Ok, the above is pretty funny, but this is New Year, so I'm allowing for the editor (and the submitter) being wasted... Or, maybe, Siri was wasted and misunderstood them.
But, seriously, replacing FreeBSD with Linux is sort of like making a millionaire out of a billionaire...
Too much blood and tears have been shed over the past two years for this to happen any time soon. Russia will wallow in its own misery, while China eats it up from behind.
If you're able to unify us I'm with you.
I doubt, it is in Ukraine's interests. Good fences make better neighbors.
But we are so far away from the topic now, that I'm ending my participation.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, it is different in this way. But would this difference have stopped those people, whom we honor today as heroes, or would they have gone ahead anyway — just like their descendants at NSA, whom we jeer?
Bletchley Park listened to all radio traffic they could capture. Today we sneer and jeer at the NSA for doing (or attempting to do) that. Yep, today's all is much bigger than it was then, but still...
It shows, that 2015 was not the warmest on record.
You, dywolf, of all people, should be quiet — with your dytail between dylegs. You were asked before to list successful predictions made by "Climate Scientists" — and could not. Remember? Pairs of links — first link to a prediction, second — to its success.
Any replies not offering such a list of pairs will be returned unopened.
Ah, yes, sure... Scratch a climate alarmist, and find a Che Guevara T-shirt...
Not according to satellite data.
Yes, but this download can arrive from an SSL-using server run by a company big enough to actually have its certificate application properly validated. Think jquery.js.
The question was not, whether SSL is needed at all, but how can a small operator secure logins without going through the extensive and expensive validation originally envisioned for SSL-certificates.
IPSec was supposed to do that. But appearance of SSL nipped IPSec' spread in the bud. And the revanche attempts by IPv6 are so far faltering.
The original model was meant to facilitate online commerce. Netscape invented SSL and was pushing it despite the opposition from IPsec proponents — because SSL-certificates were to provide assurance, that the remote end is a legitimate business. One may argue, the encryption aspect was secondary.
If it is only a small part of data, that actually needs encryption — the password and the credit card number — you can do that (using the well-known and studied protocols) in JavaScript.
It used to be, one had to prove being "a legitimate business" to obtain an SSL certificate. But you are right, that proliferation of cheap — and therefore not caring — CAs has devalued it.
Yes. As long as some kind of payment is required, it is usually possible to identify the buyer. This possibility itself is a deterrent...
I am all for the ability to remain anonymous, but we must realize, that anonymity can be abused — otherwise we'll lose what little of it remains to more knee-jerk reactions.
Yes. Because membership in such a union is voluntary.
Only if membership is voluntary. The second they are empowered to force people to join them, they become oppressors.
They also become a monopoly at this point — and corruption sets in immediately — but that's secondary.
While I've never seen angels — and doubt they exist in this sorry world of ours — corporations are inherently better than unions.
Troll my tail — for a corporation to make money, it has to sell something people want. Unions far too often have a captive "customer base — one must join, if one wishes to work in a properly "unionized workplace". Such as be a public school teacher or even a New York City carpenter.
TFA — and the overall decline of union-membership in this country — shows, that, given a choice, people usually prefer to not join a union. Their bosses may whine about it, and make grotesque claims about our not working on weekends, but the simple fact is, their services are overpriced and shoddy. And where they still hold power, they manage to sabotage things while gobbling-up vast amounts of money.
They are stupid and evil — a rare combination. Bugger them. Bugger them with a splintered broomstick. Sideways.
Citations would be useful here.
Fortunately, nobody does that in the US. USSR — unlike China — was a completely different story. Union membership was mandatory. Their role was kinda-sorta like that of social services here, however. Not really, but that's the closest analogy I could find — they certainly weren't protecting workers' rights.
But I don't care, which plant does better — as long as something remains to eat up the CO2 (producing O2 for the rest of us), the system remains self-regulating, does not it?
The "drowning in too much water" analogies above would make one believe, excessive CO2 would kill off all plants leading to eventual sterilization of the planet... Thankfully, the opposite is true.
I wonder, how they arrived at this number, however.
Yes, living next to high-traffic roads sucks — always has. The question is, are today's diesels especially bad, or are they better than the previous generation — just not better enough for someone somewhere?
Yep. In more senses than one...
Is it? My understanding always was, plants produce O2 from CO2 — and can live even in a pure CO2 atmosphere. Even if they'll grow different, they'll still thrive, no?
Basically, you have something spinning, use that to produce electricity, which is then used to make something else spin. Such conversions inevitably eat into efficiency... And then, of course, there are non-trivial losses due to electricity distribution itself.
That may be true, but it is far from obvious. Various transports — including Porsche's sole big vehicle — that used the motors to generate electricity, weren't especially fuel efficient.
Hybrid cars aren't new — they just sucked in 1900. And they still aren't very good today.
That's a statement like: "has golden hair, but not a blond".
Again. There is no difference.
Please, don't hate.
The difference is entirely from the differences between UK and Russia. BBC may have a higher degree of independence, but that's simply because UK is a much nicer country. It is still a government- — or, if you like the sound of it better, publicly- — owned entity.
I seem to remember reading about a family, that could turn sugar into alcohol right in their blood. They would also hypnotize possums into making a fire and roasting themselves. They were capable of other feats too, mostly motivated by laziness, of course. Can't find the author now, though...
In one of Lem's books, the protagonist (Ijon Tichy) picks up the Popov's first radio signal somewhere between stars.
The actual people in charge may have some degree of independence, but they are still owned and controlled by the government.
Ok, the above is pretty funny, but this is New Year, so I'm allowing for the editor (and the submitter) being wasted... Or, maybe, Siri was wasted and misunderstood them.
But, seriously, replacing FreeBSD with Linux is sort of like making a millionaire out of a billionaire...
Too much blood and tears have been shed over the past two years for this to happen any time soon. Russia will wallow in its own misery, while China eats it up from behind.
I doubt, it is in Ukraine's interests. Good fences make better neighbors.
But we are so far away from the topic now, that I'm ending my participation.
Well, you better learn Ukrainian then, mraz'.