We know what happens when a currency undergoes massive deflation - Germany in the 1930's or, more recently, Zimbabwe happens.
FWIW, my view is it's probably best viewed from a distance with an air of morbid curiosity.
Um... those are examples of massive inflation, not deflation. You have that backwards.
Inflation/deflation relates to the ratio of the amount of currency to the amount of valuable goods in an economy. In Germany and Zimbabwe, the respective governments printed masses of extra money. With more money chasing the same amount of goods, the nominal price of goods increases. (This doesn't really change how functionally wealthy you are... unless you're not the one receiving all this extra cash. If you're not, then you're screwed.) People need more Marks or Z$ in order to buy stuff.
Deflation is just the opposite: the money supply decreases with respect to the supply of valuable goods. This can happen when the money supply stays constant while the supply of good increases (via more productivity, trade, etc).
In Bitcoin's case, the money supply is ultimately finite, unlike any fiat currency like the US Dollar. It's growing now because the miners haven't mined all the possible BitCoins, but eventually they will, and mining becomes gradually harder over time. (BitCoin was explicitly designed this way.) If Bitcoins become a more accepted currency (ie: demand for them rises as they are exchanged for more valuable goods, including other currencies), and they do this faster than their supply increases, then they will experience a deflationary effect. Things will will cost fewer BitCoins over time.
What happens when we have massive deflation? We're not really sure, because it doesn't happen very often (most economies are inflationary, and most rapid changes in money supply happen to be inflationary). The general fear is that, if the currency is increasing in value all on its own, that people will horde them rather than circulate them. This defeats the purpose of a currency (they're exchange vehicles, not investment vehicles).
Here's what Wikipedia says on the topic.
but I don't have the technical knowledge to fully appreciate a DSLR
Don't let your own knowledge & skill level be your reason to choose a MILC over a DSLR. The two kinds of camera are very similar in terms of their capabilities.
The major difference in the two is the way you view your scene prior to taking a picture. The "single lens reflex" in "SLR" means that you get an optical view of your scene through the lens you're using. As a result, what you see is extremely detailed (ie: almost as good as your eyes themselves). This is great for manual focusing. It doesn't suck any battery either.
The "M" in "MILC" (typically) means that you don't get this optical viewpath for composing your shots. Instead, you see your scene on an electronic LCD. This can be easier to view in some situations, but is far less detailed (ie: limited by the resolution of your LCD), so manual focusing is harder. Also, you need to drain your battery in order to see anything.
However, without the physical mirror & prism for the optical viewfinder a MILC can be much smaller and lighter than a corresponding DSLR. Typically, they also use smaller sensors, which in turn require smaller lenses. This further reduces size & weight, at the expense of image quality and optical performance.
That tradeoff is a fair one to consider. Let that be your decision factor, not your own knowledge. The techniques you use with each kind of camera will still be mostly the same.
I'll second this; it pretty much matches my experience too.
My auras are an interesting experience (or would be if they didn't signify several hours worth of misery). It feels like a portion of my vision simply "isn't there"... not "blacked out" or anything, but just gone. I'm wondering if there's any relationship to the sensation of blindness.
It's funny... when the tech industry first started talking about switching to light instead of electricity for the chip insides, the biggest motivating factor was speed. How much faster (usually determined in "clock" speed even) can we make a chip if we can use photons instead of electrons?
These days, I'm more interested in other factors:
How much electricity (per unit of performance) does it use?
How much heat does it put out?
How much smaller can we make the chip and its supporting components?
This is a result of the highly-clustered, highly-mobile computing age we live in today. A single fast chip isn't as applicable any more. Give us tiny and low-power.
You and I might see the logic in the argument, but I doubt there's much legal leg to stand on even if you cared to try and fight it. They're not "refusing to provide service", they're "requiring an update" for a problem which happens to (somehow) conflict with an essential (911) service. Install the fix, and you're back in action, so they're not denying you much at all. All of this will be covered under the Terms of Service I'm sure. I doubt any judge will go for the "they should be doing better than they are" argument.
The user-applied fix isn't available for Mac or Windows 7 users. Those users are required to call into the Rogers tech support line to get the fix.
I did that, and had to wait on hold for over 30 minutes while the phone support waded through the (expected) deluge of calls. When I got through, I was told that I could either:
Go to a Rogers store to get the fix
Have a micro-SD card shipped to me (3-5 biz days wait) that contained a fix. (I don't know why they couldn't offer the fix for download).
I stopped in the Rogers store to get the fix. I waited for about 20 minutes while the customer support people (calling them "techs" wouldn't be accurate) installed the fix software on their in-store computers. Then I was told that the fix would wipe my phone. Did I have a backup? I said no; I haven't been able to find any evidence of Rogers-capable phone-sync software that works on my Mac (it's all Windows only). The store person offered to make a backup there, but after doing so he said that it only backed up my contacts, not my apps or settings (IMO the important parts). I walked out hoping that the SD solution will be better, but at best, I'm locked out of my wireless Internet service for 3-5 days.
It's hard to imagine how Rogers could have made this process worse.
(and then getting yourself killed at the next zebra crossing)
You know, for years I thought Douglas Adams was talking about actual animals when he wrote that. Then, not so long ago, I stumbled upon the wikipedia entry about the term for what I always called a "crosswalk".
But in the end you're going to do yourself in with your attempts to protect yourself. If they can't get at your files to see that you're free of child porn, they're going to get upset, and they're going to make things difficult for you. They could prevent you from crossing, impound your laptop, and possibly even detain you.
Meanwhile, someone who is *actually* smuggling in illicit data simply has to: 1) Encrypt/obfuscate the data, so it's not obvious what that data is. 2) Make it look mundane... hide it in the windows swap file maybe? 3) Gladly offer up full access to the laptop when asked. Customs will probably not bother with a deep search, since it's "obvious" that the smuggler has nothing to hide. They're too busy trying to get figure what to do with the other guy who won't give up the BIOS password to his laptop anyway.
the files of a person's laptop may be searched at U.S. borders without probable cause or even reasonable suspicion.
Elliotte Rusty Harold recently had a good blog post about probable cause. His point is that probable cause isn't just to protect the innocent from abuse; it's also to keep the police effective by forcing them to focus on people who have a high probability of actual wrongdoing. Without that constraint, they're free to go after anyone, and end up wasting their time & effort on wild goose chases.
I assume that there's no legal obligation for you to give US Customs your password. I also assume that they're under no obligation to let you into the country. If you're clearing customs while you're in the US, there's probably no obligation for them to return your laptop to you either.
> Server-side Java (JSPs, servlets, etc.) is unnecessarily complicated and probably designed by Satan himself
I'm no huge fan of JSPs, and the multitude of Java web frameworks is definitely ugly.
However, I'm curious about your beef with servlets. From my own perspective, they're simple enough to work with easily yet complex/powerful enough to handle a lot of uses. Do you have a specific gripe about them? Or did you just lump them in with the others?
> Well at least the olympics are good for reducing spam right ?
Your post advocates a
( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(X) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(X) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
(X) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
Actually, Verizon was rumored to be looking into buying Sprint, even as Sprint was in the middle of buying NexTel. That news kinda gets lost in all the Sprint/NexTel noise though.
XOM is an excellent XML-handling library. It makes XML parsing, interpretation, and generation a breeze, and goes to great lengths to ensure that what you do is correct according to the XML specs. It's an absolute pleasure to use, especially compared to the "standard" SAX and DOM libraries.
It's created by Elliotte Rusty Harold, who is one of the bigwigs in both the XML and Java arenas. XOM is at the intersection of those two sets.
Technically it's still in "beta", but the API hasn't changed at all since the Alpha releases, and all the bugs fixed in the beta stages have been for performance boosts or to fix bugs dealing with the very fringes of XML.
Probably the best part of the library isn't the code itself; it's the design process that went into making it. Check out the Design Principles for a good read.
Such weapons would easy eclipse nuclear weapons in power, e.g., 1 gram of antimatter would equal 23 space shuttle fuel tanks of energy
How many Libraries of Congress would that power?
Seriously, why use such a esoteric unit of measurement, especially when you're going to compare it to nuclear weapons? Would describing it in terms of megatons be too much to ask?
Slashdot Mirror
We know what happens when a currency undergoes massive deflation - Germany in the 1930's or, more recently, Zimbabwe happens.
FWIW, my view is it's probably best viewed from a distance with an air of morbid curiosity.
Um... those are examples of massive inflation, not deflation. You have that backwards. Inflation/deflation relates to the ratio of the amount of currency to the amount of valuable goods in an economy. In Germany and Zimbabwe, the respective governments printed masses of extra money. With more money chasing the same amount of goods, the nominal price of goods increases. (This doesn't really change how functionally wealthy you are... unless you're not the one receiving all this extra cash. If you're not, then you're screwed.) People need more Marks or Z$ in order to buy stuff. Deflation is just the opposite: the money supply decreases with respect to the supply of valuable goods. This can happen when the money supply stays constant while the supply of good increases (via more productivity, trade, etc). In Bitcoin's case, the money supply is ultimately finite, unlike any fiat currency like the US Dollar. It's growing now because the miners haven't mined all the possible BitCoins, but eventually they will, and mining becomes gradually harder over time. (BitCoin was explicitly designed this way.) If Bitcoins become a more accepted currency (ie: demand for them rises as they are exchanged for more valuable goods, including other currencies), and they do this faster than their supply increases, then they will experience a deflationary effect. Things will will cost fewer BitCoins over time. What happens when we have massive deflation? We're not really sure, because it doesn't happen very often (most economies are inflationary, and most rapid changes in money supply happen to be inflationary). The general fear is that, if the currency is increasing in value all on its own, that people will horde them rather than circulate them. This defeats the purpose of a currency (they're exchange vehicles, not investment vehicles). Here's what Wikipedia says on the topic.
but I don't have the technical knowledge to fully appreciate a DSLR
Don't let your own knowledge & skill level be your reason to choose a MILC over a DSLR. The two kinds of camera are very similar in terms of their capabilities.
The major difference in the two is the way you view your scene prior to taking a picture. The "single lens reflex" in "SLR" means that you get an optical view of your scene through the lens you're using. As a result, what you see is extremely detailed (ie: almost as good as your eyes themselves). This is great for manual focusing. It doesn't suck any battery either.
The "M" in "MILC" (typically) means that you don't get this optical viewpath for composing your shots. Instead, you see your scene on an electronic LCD. This can be easier to view in some situations, but is far less detailed (ie: limited by the resolution of your LCD), so manual focusing is harder. Also, you need to drain your battery in order to see anything.
However, without the physical mirror & prism for the optical viewfinder a MILC can be much smaller and lighter than a corresponding DSLR. Typically, they also use smaller sensors, which in turn require smaller lenses. This further reduces size & weight, at the expense of image quality and optical performance.
That tradeoff is a fair one to consider. Let that be your decision factor, not your own knowledge. The techniques you use with each kind of camera will still be mostly the same.
...though you'll need an OKC account to view it. http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison
Does that mean all those Hitler Downfall parodies are now legit?
I'll second this; it pretty much matches my experience too. My auras are an interesting experience (or would be if they didn't signify several hours worth of misery). It feels like a portion of my vision simply "isn't there"... not "blacked out" or anything, but just gone. I'm wondering if there's any relationship to the sensation of blindness.
Yes some cops abuse their powers, but they do that anyway. That's a separate battle.
It seems to me that you should end that battle before you give one of the belligerents a shiny new gun to play with.
This is a result of the highly-clustered, highly-mobile computing age we live in today. A single fast chip isn't as applicable any more. Give us tiny and low-power.
Not to mention domain-name accessibility and Googleability.
You and I might see the logic in the argument, but I doubt there's much legal leg to stand on even if you cared to try and fight it. They're not "refusing to provide service", they're "requiring an update" for a problem which happens to (somehow) conflict with an essential (911) service. Install the fix, and you're back in action, so they're not denying you much at all. All of this will be covered under the Terms of Service I'm sure. I doubt any judge will go for the "they should be doing better than they are" argument.
The user-applied fix isn't available for Mac or Windows 7 users. Those users are required to call into the Rogers tech support line to get the fix.
I did that, and had to wait on hold for over 30 minutes while the phone support waded through the (expected) deluge of calls. When I got through, I was told that I could either:
I stopped in the Rogers store to get the fix. I waited for about 20 minutes while the customer support people (calling them "techs" wouldn't be accurate) installed the fix software on their in-store computers. Then I was told that the fix would wipe my phone. Did I have a backup? I said no; I haven't been able to find any evidence of Rogers-capable phone-sync software that works on my Mac (it's all Windows only). The store person offered to make a backup there, but after doing so he said that it only backed up my contacts, not my apps or settings (IMO the important parts). I walked out hoping that the SD solution will be better, but at best, I'm locked out of my wireless Internet service for 3-5 days.
It's hard to imagine how Rogers could have made this process worse.
Still not as scary as Dolphins with Opposable Thumbs
I don't think that many of you put a photo of their keys online -- with their addresses.
Maybe not, but how many of us expose our keys in places where they could be covertly photographed with telephoto lenses and/or cameraphones?
(and then getting yourself killed at the next zebra crossing)
You know, for years I thought Douglas Adams was talking about actual animals when he wrote that. Then, not so long ago, I stumbled upon the wikipedia entry about the term for what I always called a "crosswalk".
I think my version was funnier.
Alternately, Google those things using the system of the person you'd like to frame for the murder you're going to commit.
But in the end you're going to do yourself in with your attempts to protect yourself. If they can't get at your files to see that you're free of child porn, they're going to get upset, and they're going to make things difficult for you. They could prevent you from crossing, impound your laptop, and possibly even detain you.
Meanwhile, someone who is *actually* smuggling in illicit data simply has to:
1) Encrypt/obfuscate the data, so it's not obvious what that data is.
2) Make it look mundane... hide it in the windows swap file maybe?
3) Gladly offer up full access to the laptop when asked. Customs will probably not bother with a deep search, since it's "obvious" that the smuggler has nothing to hide. They're too busy trying to get figure what to do with the other guy who won't give up the BIOS password to his laptop anyway.
the files of a person's laptop may be searched at U.S. borders without probable cause or even reasonable suspicion.
Elliotte Rusty Harold recently had a good blog post about probable cause. His point is that probable cause isn't just to protect the innocent from abuse; it's also to keep the police effective by forcing them to focus on people who have a high probability of actual wrongdoing. Without that constraint, they're free to go after anyone, and end up wasting their time & effort on wild goose chases.
I assume that there's no legal obligation for you to give US Customs your password. I also assume that they're under no obligation to let you into the country. If you're clearing customs while you're in the US, there's probably no obligation for them to return your laptop to you either.
Yeah, I was guessing you'd say that. BTW have you tried Jetty? It's a heck of a lot less complicated than any of the others.
> Server-side Java (JSPs, servlets, etc.) is unnecessarily complicated and probably designed by Satan himself
I'm no huge fan of JSPs, and the multitude of Java web frameworks is definitely ugly.
However, I'm curious about your beef with servlets. From my own perspective, they're simple enough to work with easily yet complex/powerful enough to handle a lot of uses. Do you have a specific gripe about them? Or did you just lump them in with the others?
Uhhh, I'm pretty sure I don't have a very high RICO score... but I do know that my FICO score is pretty good. Capice?
Yeah, because *nobody* is using Java. Brr!.
> Well at least the olympics are good for reducing spam right ? Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.) ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks (X) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it ( ) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it (X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business Specifically, your plan fails to account for ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (X) Extreme profitability of spam ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook and the following philosophical objections may also apply: ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses (X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email (X) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough Furthermore, this is what I think about you: (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
Actually, Verizon was rumored to be looking into buying Sprint, even as Sprint was in the middle of buying NexTel. That news kinda gets lost in all the Sprint/NexTel noise though.
http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=111230
If that were true, my company would be the most productive on the planet.
Is Christmas vacation here yet? :-\
It's created by Elliotte Rusty Harold, who is one of the bigwigs in both the XML and Java arenas. XOM is at the intersection of those two sets.
Technically it's still in "beta", but the API hasn't changed at all since the Alpha releases, and all the bugs fixed in the beta stages have been for performance boosts or to fix bugs dealing with the very fringes of XML.
Probably the best part of the library isn't the code itself; it's the design process that went into making it. Check out the Design Principles for a good read.
Craig
How many Libraries of Congress would that power?
Seriously, why use such a esoteric unit of measurement, especially when you're going to compare it to nuclear weapons? Would describing it in terms of megatons be too much to ask?