Actually, it's the right thought. Just the wrong reasoning.
What's the safest terminal?? The unplugged one. Correction- unplugged and then slagged. Anything beyond that is less secure.
It's really sad from both sides- you want data secure? Keep it off the network! Get a 233mhz box for cheap/free and run ancient office on it. You want data from a network- get a machine for that purpose, and understand any information on it is POTENTIALLY VULNERABLE. You want to secure that data? Move it off. Not that hard, really, especially with the newfangled devices available today.
And then on the flip token, a machine put on the network should be as secure as possible until the user states they want to take the risk of opening up a port. Shame on any default setting which fails that test as well- Microsoft is guilty, but keep in mind most Linux(es??) are as well.
Saddest thing is.. I'm not a security expert, but I seem to have the basic theories down better than the ones who let this stuff pass QA.
I find it rather funny, actually, that he's so hated by ALL partys- including the one whose ticket he is running on.
Part of me wonders, though, if Keyes isn't running in Illinois to get the Democrats who supported Hillary to realize what a bad idea that was (She won, so obviously she did something right, but the question remains can she represent a state that she knows nearly nothing of remains). And then make an honest push on creating some residency laws...
I've seen some pretty hideous quotes from Keyes this race, and I find it hard to say that he's actually trying.
More on topic to the original post- I agree about banning polling, especially exit polling, but I would like to see the implementation before it's used. The concept walks a line of censorship/1st amendment rights along with the concept of prohibiting public behavior (one's allowed, one's not.) If anything, polls can encourage fraud if they don't actually impact the results. I'm not saying that it DOES cause that.. but the extra polls can cause action or inaction on both sides of the coin.
I wonder why they can't follow the money... they run these things like credit cards, I would assume there's a log somewhere of the transactions.
Is there a geographical correspondence to where these cards are emptied? Or online?? Get an ip address, subpoena- this sorta stuff isn't taken lightly by the feds anymore.
Or better yet.. can they spot the activation locations.. do THOSE have a correspondence?
It seems to me this case would be simple to solve with some minor investigation of the data. And logs (which can be enabled if they aren't already.)
The only odd thing here is the case went public. Usually you keep these silent until you have a firm suspect. They're easier to catch if they keep at the same routine, instead of getting scared off to not return for a while. I'm guessing they pretty much already have this guy in hand...
For the record, I didn't mean to write that sounding like an AYB post. Jeesh. Let me repost with grammatical and sensical corrections: (DO NOT MOD THIS COMMENT!) ================= As I understand it, and I hope if I'm wrong someone corrects me and gets a +5 mod... I'm going to be very general and semantic, I'm sure you'll see the point, but details as always are better.:)
While software is made to be compatible, Windows has code written into it to help with compatibility, as well as the processors have extensions. Windows also has code in order to take advantage of the 64 bit processor abilities to their fullest. While there's compatibility options available, most of the code that Windows executes was made for 64bit CPU (I should say most of the *compiled* code... I'm not sure how much of a rewrite was needed for porting, as opposed to compiler changes.)
With new code comes new holes, obviously. And the same can be said for third party softwares- that new code which takes advantage of the processors to its fullest will have some new holes (extending through compilation, of course).
I would say, though, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the programs themselves are really quite incompatible, but the files themselves are written for maximum compatibility. Pop one in an email, and it works on a 32 bit based machine I mean.
As an aside, I wonder if this is an attack on AMD's compatibility, or 64 bit code in general.. I note that the article mentions AMD with specitivity, not Intel.
As I understand it, and I hope if I'm wrong someone does so and gets a +5 mod... I'm going to be very general and semantic, I'm sure you'll see the point, but details as always are better.:)
While software is made to be compatible, and Windows has code written into it to help with compatibility, as well as the processors have extensions. Windows also has code in order to take advantage of the 64 bit processor abilities to their fullest. While there's compatibility options available, most of the code that Windows executes was made for 64bit CPU (I should say most of the *compiled* code... I'm not sure how much of a rewrite was needed for porting, as opposed to compiler changes.)
With new code comes new holes, obviously. And the same can be said for third party softwares- that new code which takes advantage of the processors to its fullest will have some new code (extending through compilation, of course).
I would say, though, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the programs themselves are really quite incompatible, but the files themselves are written for maximum compatibility. Pop one in an email, and it works on a 32 bit based machine I mean.
As an aside, I wonder if this is an attack on AMD's compatibility, or 64 bit code in general.. I note that the article mentions AMD with specitivity, not Intel.
I'd love to see what IT jobs you have available, I'm willing to relocate- couldn't find a contact address for you though. If you get the chance, email me, please, I'd be interested to see what you have open out in that direction!
Actually, yes. For some people, card counting isn't that hard. For others, it's damn near impossible. They're kinda like a miniature idiot savant (no, not mini-me you fools...)
The problems with your analogy is that the GOOD cardcounters walk out with much more than $1k if they're not caught. Think in the schemes of $100k minimum. I've actually counted 5 decks shuffled together before. It sucked major bungs for sure, but I did it fairly accurately, and not at a slow pace either. And I'm what would be considered an amateur by the casinos. Consider this, and think what a good person could do.
The loss adds up for the casinos. They're not worried about losing $5k or even $25k to a rookie. It's the big fish who pooches them for lots. That's what this system is out for (note that they seem to indicate that 100 hands are needed for a super-positive match...) The $25k cardcounters inspire. The $100k cardcounters though are a loss.
See the post above you for a GREAT thought... Group cardcounting. Just rotate the team positions, and you'll take the house, based on the current system. I'd actually never thought of it before, and now I'm fascinated.
O is the open class, which has a basic set of restrictions on materials that they may use.
S is stock class, who has a lot more restrictions on what they can use- namely mostly "cheap" materials. The idea is to create a class 1. of Off the shelf components and 2. for schools with smaller budgets (although open class rules also make an attempt to avoid out-budgeting).
Stock class, from what I understand, really gets the shaft on the deal, and that's why they really struggled. Someone told me that it basically limits cars to what was used 4 years ago in 99- which really was not that great compared to today. Don't quote me on that, but the stats from the UMR page linked above was the '99 car. Big sucker.
Hope that helps clear it up a little. For a little more clearness, check the regulations.
The UMR Solar Team site appears to be outdated, and you're citing stats from the Solar Miner II- this year's car was Solar Miner IV. I'm looking for an updated set of stats for us to puruse.
1500W was enough to power the car at 65mph most of the time, from what I've heard. Certainly, that's no 3000lb. But anyone who remembers races from 95, 97, etc. know that's a big improvement over past years. Also, so far as I know UMR only had one "repair" stop during the racing day (on the first day) and the rest of the stops were to refuel the chase vehichles.
The technology isn't useful yet. But it's heading that way.
Last lets say by a miracle you won and your employer was forced to rehire you. Would you really want to continue to work there? Don't you think they will make you quit one way or another? Kind of like the weird guy in the movie office space. (they cut off his paychecks and moved him into the basement, and forced him to setup bug traps)
Actually, I know a couple of people in this situation. Most of the time that I've heard about this, it wasn't their direct boss or an extra level up that was going after them, but quite a few levels up that had been source of the firing action. A few levels, but not the top level type who'd get involved after a lawsuit came to bear. Going back wasn't a problem since either the direct boss was happy with them or the highest-ups would have them reassigned away from the unhappy part of the company. A couple of bosses were even extra nice after they realized that they were wrong to follow the higher up's orders...
Not saying this is typical, but it seems to me larger corporations who are the most typical to end up in this situation, because of their size will actually be very able to rehire someone and put them in a position where they're no longer around the hostility. If it's a small company, don't go back I'd say, but if it's large, see what options you have before refusing to go back- who knows, you might end up off better than before.
I think we can file this under the "Good intentions, bad implementation" section of history. We all know the DMCA was meant as a good intentioned law for piracy/IP protection (reasonable that they can protect their IP I say, within reason...), but the implementation was truly shitty. It's pretty obvious this is a swat at spam, which is a good thing in senses, but bad in the sense that it blocks legitimate email in many cases without a chance of the affected individual having a way of getting their IP moved to an "allowed IP" (whatever the hell that means.)
Makes you wonder though, will protocols ever be changed so that there is a "heirarchy" of hosts, allowing an IP to route email only through/from trusted servers? (Work with me here, I'm sure this isn't the exact implementation by any means, but some variation may be the end result of the attempts to curb spam..) By this I mean I send from foo.org to bar.com. Since I've got my own IP under my ISP, when I send a mail, my server HAS to send to the mail to the ISP server (whose firewall is set to drop outgoing mail except through main server), the ISP server sends up the chain to it's next level (so forth, yadayada) until it gets to a host where it "flows down" to the destination. Under this system, assuming everyone firewalls appropriately, it becomes pretty quick to determine accurately where email came from, and extra easy to blacklist the jackasses responsible. Any unauthorized system trying to send mail in/out is dropped. The only thing is the "big brother" potential behind the mentioned system, plus the ugly TOS possibilities that could arise from this system (you COULD be bound by the TOS of every server in the "upstream swim" of your message! Your ISP allows attachments of 5 megs, but two steps up only allows 1 meg. Or other such likely stupid content restrictions.)
Back on topic: Just one of these days, I hope lawyers get their heads out of their asses, and by writing in traditional English, as opposed to legal English, so many problems would go away. You can read what I wrote above, and (hopefully) understand it. Or at least be able to imply the general meaning that I had intended. Most humans aren't too stupid. Since laws/TOS/AUPs/etc. are goverened by the LETTER of the law, instead of the intention, is why we have such assinine laws/TOSs out there. In trying so hard to make sure that no one can end walk the letters of the law as well as cover asses, the intention is getting trampled. If a TOS which read "No mass sending of unsolicited email. No selling your connection to others. And no activities with intention to harm or invade on others." was legally binding, do you think a judge could read and understand what the intention was behind that? Do you think a common person could as well? Ya think they could understand it if the law said "Don't intentionally kill or hurt someone?" Or how about even "Thou shalt not exceed the posted speed limit?" Or do you think you could understand "Only use someone's creative works with their permission, and in the method they allow you to?" I do. And what harm would it do for a person, on occasion, to call them up and say "I've got x situation which is a gray line. Would you allow it?" (Not a bad idea in any situation really.) If we were to change the laws that my sentences apply to, how many pages would that cut out of the laws, and how much confusion would it cut as well? Certainly you introduce a judge's interpretation, but most intentions would be obvious, if not spelled out in a paragraph above the law... and hopefully the judge uses common sense and conventional thought in reading a law. I know several judges, and of the ones I know, they all do this currently- just within the restrictions of the current system. Their rulings use as much common sense possible as described to them by the law. Bad laws, though, are what creates the bad sentences/judgements/awards.
Common sense. I guess if you read this whole post, except the minor email protocol question, boils down t
From what I recall, seeing a TV interview of him once, he actually knows Esperanto pretty well- I remember him saying something in Esperanto for the interview. It was like 2 or 3 years ago. Anyone remember what I'm talking about? I really don't recall what station/show/etc...
It's actually over the sink, but the size of my kitchen puts the stove about 1 ft (if that) from the sink. It doesn't get direct heat, but may get some ambient heat. The spices are on the opposite side of the cabinet.
Thanks for the advice though. I didn't really know that. The fact that I'd done it was pure luck, not intentional. (I'm a Newbie cook, but love trying..)
Along the same lines- being a college student I rent.. CHEAP. As a result of this, storage space is minimal, if that. Cooking tools I've got a decent selection for (and a place under the sink for.) In the bathroom-sized cabinet above my stove, however, I can't fit many things in. What spices/ingredients (like salt) are essential to be used?
Here's the way I see it though: It's well known that many places can't afford to upgrade all machines at once. Especially if you're doing hardware, OS, and program upgrades at the same time.
So, build in at least a little compatibility, and shops will be more willing to start the upgrade/development/testing process, and then move totally when they see the (ahem) quality* of the product and know it works.
*Statement made for ideal, decent software shop. It may not, and probably doesn't, apply to the current context.
I've actually wondered why they haven't incorporated a tag that hides itself from old versions, is used by new versions.. kinda like a javascript in a web page. When you save in an older format, a "saved version" tag goes at the beginning so you can tell what featureset it used, and whether or not to parse the "hidden" code. I don't think it'd be that hard to develop well.. but I am not a good programmer either.
I went out and got some reynolds wrap and started shootin...
So far, I've only been able to produce what golfers know as a "worm burner."
Of course, seeing the target windows across the field, I think I'm doomed for a crash anyway. I hear penguins are right up there next to humming birds and robins when it comes to large windows with blue reflections...
(disclaimer: I have a hard time pumping gas sometimes) Talking to someone in my office, he says that the oil is actually pretty pollutive. Maybe this isn't a great idear.. I wonder how it stacks up to normal fuel in terms of pollution.
Actually, it does matter to those people who maintain machines in any sort of environment.
/. rails Microsoft for not patching their bugs, and rallies behind patching up the Linux bugs. Well, let me say this: If you make a patch that no one uses, what's the good in doing it?
If we milk up all of the patches that we can, they're more likely to keep popping them out. If we can give them more feedback, let them know what we need, chances are they'll be more willing to give it. At least they're making an effort to patch the bugs, unlike other companies out there.. And certainly, if you're responsibly doing your job in a corporate environment, this matters- don't want no one compromising your system, does ya?
Just because an article doesn't matter to one doesn't mean that other people won't find it interesting. I don't like Mr. Katz, but I realize that other people find him insightful..
And if you don't use windows at all, lucky you, but I'm sure you have a friend out there who runs MS products, and THEY may want to know. So it does matter in some way.
I'm not sure it's gonna be free for him- he had to hire a lawyer, which costs $$, and courts do not always award legal costs. I would certainly hope they would, but dunno if they will.
If anything, he aught to use it as a thesis: "I've already beaten the school's best, doesn't that entitle me to something indicating a high level of success?":)
No, you're not the only one, but IIRC it won't happen.
I **vaguely** recall hearing that the caffiene has an adverse effect on their nervous system, in essense blocking the signals from the brain and to the brain. As in once they get it in them (dunno if it's absorption or consumption) they just don't move.. and shut down.
Someone please correct me. That's so vague on details that I'm SURE I've at least got part, if not all of it, wrong. Hopefully the real solution is better than freezing to death, though...
But you're reading it just right- the schools want the money. The students just learn what they're taught, they generally don't care what it is, so long as it's something..
Politics unfortunately run many parts of the world that they shouldn't, and academia is one of them. Like it or not, MS is good at politicking.. they'll do OK at least with this initiative of theirs. Hopefully that's all the better they do, but I can see them getting a lot of people out of this with just a little effort. And their usual pack of lawyers..:) .
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's the right thought. Just the wrong reasoning.
What's the safest terminal?? The unplugged one. Correction- unplugged and then slagged. Anything beyond that is less secure.
It's really sad from both sides- you want data secure? Keep it off the network! Get a 233mhz box for cheap/free and run ancient office on it. You want data from a network- get a machine for that purpose, and understand any information on it is POTENTIALLY VULNERABLE. You want to secure that data? Move it off. Not that hard, really, especially with the newfangled devices available today.
And then on the flip token, a machine put on the network should be as secure as possible until the user states they want to take the risk of opening up a port. Shame on any default setting which fails that test as well- Microsoft is guilty, but keep in mind most Linux(es??) are as well.
Saddest thing is.. I'm not a security expert, but I seem to have the basic theories down better than the ones who let this stuff pass QA.
I find it rather funny, actually, that he's so hated by ALL partys- including the one whose ticket he is running on.
Part of me wonders, though, if Keyes isn't running in Illinois to get the Democrats who supported Hillary to realize what a bad idea that was (She won, so obviously she did something right, but the question remains can she represent a state that she knows nearly nothing of remains). And then make an honest push on creating some residency laws...
I've seen some pretty hideous quotes from Keyes this race, and I find it hard to say that he's actually trying.
More on topic to the original post- I agree about banning polling, especially exit polling, but I would like to see the implementation before it's used. The concept walks a line of censorship/1st amendment rights along with the concept of prohibiting public behavior (one's allowed, one's not.) If anything, polls can encourage fraud if they don't actually impact the results. I'm not saying that it DOES cause that.. but the extra polls can cause action or inaction on both sides of the coin.
I wonder why they can't follow the money... they run these things like credit cards, I would assume there's a log somewhere of the transactions.
Is there a geographical correspondence to where these cards are emptied? Or online?? Get an ip address, subpoena- this sorta stuff isn't taken lightly by the feds anymore.
Or better yet.. can they spot the activation locations.. do THOSE have a correspondence?
It seems to me this case would be simple to solve with some minor investigation of the data. And logs (which can be enabled if they aren't already.)
The only odd thing here is the case went public. Usually you keep these silent until you have a firm suspect. They're easier to catch if they keep at the same routine, instead of getting scared off to not return for a while. I'm guessing they pretty much already have this guy in hand...
For the record, I didn't mean to write that sounding like an AYB post. Jeesh. Let me repost with grammatical and sensical corrections: (DO NOT MOD THIS COMMENT!) :)
=================
As I understand it, and I hope if I'm wrong someone corrects me and gets a +5 mod... I'm going to be very general and semantic, I'm sure you'll see the point, but details as always are better.
While software is made to be compatible, Windows has code written into it to help with compatibility, as well as the processors have extensions. Windows also has code in order to take advantage of the 64 bit processor abilities to their fullest. While there's compatibility options available, most of the code that Windows executes was made for 64bit CPU (I should say most of the *compiled* code... I'm not sure how much of a rewrite was needed for porting, as opposed to compiler changes.)
With new code comes new holes, obviously. And the same can be said for third party softwares- that new code which takes advantage of the processors to its fullest will have some new holes (extending through compilation, of course).
I would say, though, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the programs themselves are really quite incompatible, but the files themselves are written for maximum compatibility. Pop one in an email, and it works on a 32 bit based machine I mean.
As an aside, I wonder if this is an attack on AMD's compatibility, or 64 bit code in general.. I note that the article mentions AMD with specitivity, not Intel.
As I understand it, and I hope if I'm wrong someone does so and gets a +5 mod... I'm going to be very general and semantic, I'm sure you'll see the point, but details as always are better. :)
While software is made to be compatible, and Windows has code written into it to help with compatibility, as well as the processors have extensions. Windows also has code in order to take advantage of the 64 bit processor abilities to their fullest. While there's compatibility options available, most of the code that Windows executes was made for 64bit CPU (I should say most of the *compiled* code... I'm not sure how much of a rewrite was needed for porting, as opposed to compiler changes.)
With new code comes new holes, obviously. And the same can be said for third party softwares- that new code which takes advantage of the processors to its fullest will have some new code (extending through compilation, of course).
I would say, though, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the programs themselves are really quite incompatible, but the files themselves are written for maximum compatibility. Pop one in an email, and it works on a 32 bit based machine I mean.
As an aside, I wonder if this is an attack on AMD's compatibility, or 64 bit code in general.. I note that the article mentions AMD with specitivity, not Intel.
I'd love to see what IT jobs you have available, I'm willing to relocate- couldn't find a contact address for you though. If you get the chance, email me, please, I'd be interested to see what you have open out in that direction!
Actually, yes. For some people, card counting isn't that hard. For others, it's damn near impossible. They're kinda like a miniature idiot savant (no, not mini-me you fools...)
The problems with your analogy is that the GOOD cardcounters walk out with much more than $1k if they're not caught. Think in the schemes of $100k minimum. I've actually counted 5 decks shuffled together before. It sucked major bungs for sure, but I did it fairly accurately, and not at a slow pace either. And I'm what would be considered an amateur by the casinos. Consider this, and think what a good person could do.
The loss adds up for the casinos. They're not worried about losing $5k or even $25k to a rookie. It's the big fish who pooches them for lots. That's what this system is out for (note that they seem to indicate that 100 hands are needed for a super-positive match...) The $25k cardcounters inspire. The $100k cardcounters though are a loss.
See the post above you for a GREAT thought... Group cardcounting. Just rotate the team positions, and you'll take the house, based on the current system. I'd actually never thought of it before, and now I'm fascinated.
O is the open class, which has a basic set of restrictions on materials that they may use.
S is stock class, who has a lot more restrictions on what they can use- namely mostly "cheap" materials. The idea is to create a class 1. of Off the shelf components and 2. for schools with smaller budgets (although open class rules also make an attempt to avoid out-budgeting).
Stock class, from what I understand, really gets the shaft on the deal, and that's why they really struggled. Someone told me that it basically limits cars to what was used 4 years ago in 99- which really was not that great compared to today. Don't quote me on that, but the stats from the UMR page linked above was the '99 car. Big sucker.
Hope that helps clear it up a little. For a little more clearness, check the regulations.
The UMR Solar Team site appears to be outdated, and you're citing stats from the Solar Miner II- this year's car was Solar Miner IV. I'm looking for an updated set of stats for us to puruse.
1500W was enough to power the car at 65mph most of the time, from what I've heard. Certainly, that's no 3000lb. But anyone who remembers races from 95, 97, etc. know that's a big improvement over past years. Also, so far as I know UMR only had one "repair" stop during the racing day (on the first day) and the rest of the stops were to refuel the chase vehichles.
The technology isn't useful yet. But it's heading that way.
Actually, I know a couple of people in this situation. Most of the time that I've heard about this, it wasn't their direct boss or an extra level up that was going after them, but quite a few levels up that had been source of the firing action. A few levels, but not the top level type who'd get involved after a lawsuit came to bear. Going back wasn't a problem since either the direct boss was happy with them or the highest-ups would have them reassigned away from the unhappy part of the company. A couple of bosses were even extra nice after they realized that they were wrong to follow the higher up's orders...
Not saying this is typical, but it seems to me larger corporations who are the most typical to end up in this situation, because of their size will actually be very able to rehire someone and put them in a position where they're no longer around the hostility. If it's a small company, don't go back I'd say, but if it's large, see what options you have before refusing to go back- who knows, you might end up off better than before.
I think we can file this under the "Good intentions, bad implementation" section of history. We all know the DMCA was meant as a good intentioned law for piracy/IP protection (reasonable that they can protect their IP I say, within reason...), but the implementation was truly shitty. It's pretty obvious this is a swat at spam, which is a good thing in senses, but bad in the sense that it blocks legitimate email in many cases without a chance of the affected individual having a way of getting their IP moved to an "allowed IP" (whatever the hell that means.)
Makes you wonder though, will protocols ever be changed so that there is a "heirarchy" of hosts, allowing an IP to route email only through/from trusted servers? (Work with me here, I'm sure this isn't the exact implementation by any means, but some variation may be the end result of the attempts to curb spam..) By this I mean I send from foo.org to bar.com. Since I've got my own IP under my ISP, when I send a mail, my server HAS to send to the mail to the ISP server (whose firewall is set to drop outgoing mail except through main server), the ISP server sends up the chain to it's next level (so forth, yadayada) until it gets to a host where it "flows down" to the destination. Under this system, assuming everyone firewalls appropriately, it becomes pretty quick to determine accurately where email came from, and extra easy to blacklist the jackasses responsible. Any unauthorized system trying to send mail in/out is dropped. The only thing is the "big brother" potential behind the mentioned system, plus the ugly TOS possibilities that could arise from this system (you COULD be bound by the TOS of every server in the "upstream swim" of your message! Your ISP allows attachments of 5 megs, but two steps up only allows 1 meg. Or other such likely stupid content restrictions.)
Back on topic: Just one of these days, I hope lawyers get their heads out of their asses, and by writing in traditional English, as opposed to legal English, so many problems would go away. You can read what I wrote above, and (hopefully) understand it. Or at least be able to imply the general meaning that I had intended. Most humans aren't too stupid. Since laws/TOS/AUPs/etc. are goverened by the LETTER of the law, instead of the intention, is why we have such assinine laws/TOSs out there. In trying so hard to make sure that no one can end walk the letters of the law as well as cover asses, the intention is getting trampled. If a TOS which read "No mass sending of unsolicited email. No selling your connection to others. And no activities with intention to harm or invade on others." was legally binding, do you think a judge could read and understand what the intention was behind that? Do you think a common person could as well? Ya think they could understand it if the law said "Don't intentionally kill or hurt someone?" Or how about even "Thou shalt not exceed the posted speed limit?" Or do you think you could understand "Only use someone's creative works with their permission, and in the method they allow you to?" I do. And what harm would it do for a person, on occasion, to call them up and say "I've got x situation which is a gray line. Would you allow it?" (Not a bad idea in any situation really.) If we were to change the laws that my sentences apply to, how many pages would that cut out of the laws, and how much confusion would it cut as well? Certainly you introduce a judge's interpretation, but most intentions would be obvious, if not spelled out in a paragraph above the law... and hopefully the judge uses common sense and conventional thought in reading a law. I know several judges, and of the ones I know, they all do this currently- just within the restrictions of the current system. Their rulings use as much common sense possible as described to them by the law. Bad laws, though, are what creates the bad sentences/judgements/awards.
Common sense. I guess if you read this whole post, except the minor email protocol question, boils down t
From what I recall, seeing a TV interview of him once, he actually knows Esperanto pretty well- I remember him saying something in Esperanto for the interview. It was like 2 or 3 years ago. Anyone remember what I'm talking about? I really don't recall what station/show/etc...
It's actually over the sink, but the size of my kitchen puts the stove about 1 ft (if that) from the sink. It doesn't get direct heat, but may get some ambient heat. The spices are on the opposite side of the cabinet.
Thanks for the advice though. I didn't really know that. The fact that I'd done it was pure luck, not intentional. (I'm a Newbie cook, but love trying..)
Along the same lines- being a college student I rent.. CHEAP. As a result of this, storage space is minimal, if that. Cooking tools I've got a decent selection for (and a place under the sink for.) In the bathroom-sized cabinet above my stove, however, I can't fit many things in. What spices/ingredients (like salt) are essential to be used?
I know MS is trying to force upgrades.
Here's the way I see it though: It's well known that many places can't afford to upgrade all machines at once. Especially if you're doing hardware, OS, and program upgrades at the same time.
So, build in at least a little compatibility, and shops will be more willing to start the upgrade/development/testing process, and then move totally when they see the (ahem) quality* of the product and know it works.
*Statement made for ideal, decent software shop. It may not, and probably doesn't, apply to the current context.
I've actually wondered why they haven't incorporated a tag that hides itself from old versions, is used by new versions.. kinda like a javascript in a web page. When you save in an older format, a "saved version" tag goes at the beginning so you can tell what featureset it used, and whether or not to parse the "hidden" code. I don't think it'd be that hard to develop well.. but I am not a good programmer either.
If only my laptop had a decent enough video card to run Tuxracer... *sigh*
I went out and got some reynolds wrap and started shootin...
So far, I've only been able to produce what golfers know as a "worm burner."
Of course, seeing the target windows across the field, I think I'm doomed for a crash anyway. I hear penguins are right up there next to humming birds and robins when it comes to large windows with blue reflections...
.
But Penguins don't fly....
I hope they have better luck than the real birds.
(disclaimer: I have a hard time pumping gas sometimes) Talking to someone in my office, he says that the oil is actually pretty pollutive. Maybe this isn't a great idear.. I wonder how it stacks up to normal fuel in terms of pollution.
Actually, it does matter to those people who maintain machines in any sort of environment.
/. rails Microsoft for not patching their bugs, and rallies behind patching up the Linux bugs. Well, let me say this: If you make a patch that no one uses, what's the good in doing it?
If we milk up all of the patches that we can, they're more likely to keep popping them out. If we can give them more feedback, let them know what we need, chances are they'll be more willing to give it. At least they're making an effort to patch the bugs, unlike other companies out there.. And certainly, if you're responsibly doing your job in a corporate environment, this matters- don't want no one compromising your system, does ya?
Just because an article doesn't matter to one doesn't mean that other people won't find it interesting. I don't like Mr. Katz, but I realize that other people find him insightful..
And if you don't use windows at all, lucky you, but I'm sure you have a friend out there who runs MS products, and THEY may want to know. So it does matter in some way.
.
I'm not sure it's gonna be free for him- he had to hire a lawyer, which costs $$, and courts do not always award legal costs. I would certainly hope they would, but dunno if they will.
:)
If anything, he aught to use it as a thesis: "I've already beaten the school's best, doesn't that entitle me to something indicating a high level of success?"
.
No, you're not the only one, but IIRC it won't happen.
I **vaguely** recall hearing that the caffiene has an adverse effect on their nervous system, in essense blocking the signals from the brain and to the brain. As in once they get it in them (dunno if it's absorption or consumption) they just don't move.. and shut down.
Someone please correct me. That's so vague on details that I'm SURE I've at least got part, if not all of it, wrong. Hopefully the real solution is better than freezing to death, though...
.
Very nice work.. spelling errors, fequently, broken, sentences, and nice formatting!!
:)
**sigh** had I mod points, you earned one on technical merit.
.
You beat me to the point, by one post.. :)
:)
But you're reading it just right- the schools want the money. The students just learn what they're taught, they generally don't care what it is, so long as it's something..
Politics unfortunately run many parts of the world that they shouldn't, and academia is one of them. Like it or not, MS is good at politicking.. they'll do OK at least with this initiative of theirs. Hopefully that's all the better they do, but I can see them getting a lot of people out of this with just a little effort. And their usual pack of lawyers..
.