I beg to differ, for me, this is geek news. I found TFA & the following discussion interesting. It touches subjects that interest me peripherally but that I never needed to research. Now, I've been able to discover some interesting tools it would have taken me a while to discover otherwise.
attacking civilian targets during WWII was never a particularly effective tactic
I read a post-war interview of Bomber Harris where he stated that he was aware that the systematic bombing of German cities was not as militarily effective as it was painted at the time. It was continued:
Because it was needed before D-Day to impress in Stalin that the west was doing it's part.
Because (in late 44 & 45) the investment in bomber infrastructure had been made so they continued using it.
Because in some cases (Schweinfurt, Oil production), it did considerably inconvenience the german war effort.
To punish the german population with the longer term goal of making it clear that attacking your neighboring countries a second time within decades was a mistake they did not want to repeat.
As has been pointed out by others, the last point has borne fruit in the general pacifism of the general German population.
"More balanced"?!?! Bullshit. de Gaulle used the weaknesses of the 4eme republic to justify a quasi monarchy for himself. 7 year terms? No term limitations? Feh!
Even Mitterrand who promised to abolish it after having fought tooth and nail against the 5eme republic for most of his career finally decided it was good to be the Roi & kept the system unchanged.
Your claim that global warming killed off the dinosaurs is patently false. That claim that you made is what brought me into this thread (that you are attempting to back away from by weakly stating that "climate change has the potential to be damaging").
A parakeet with a 15 gram forebrain has more common sense than a twit who posts without thinking on/. Given the lack of reflection and intelligence you display you're either a troll or a preteen. Either way, you visibly have nothing of any value to say & I'm done trying to fruitlessly educate you. Fortunately placing you among my foes will make you disappear, never to be seen again.
So this [edf.org], this [nationalgeographic.com], and this [climatechangefacts.info] are all based on faith?
Miss the point much? None of the references pretend to claim that dinosaurs went extinct nor was the planet destroyed due to global warming as you asserted in your initial post.
What communist countries?
China has one party rule & the rulers are the communist party. You cannot absolve the ruling party of the ecological disaster in the making that is current day china by saying that it's the Chinese capitalist's fault. Water is now so polluted in many parts of the country that significant percentages of it's cropland is being abandoned. The smog shadow produced by it's air pollution can be easily detected across the Pacific.
Russia has massive ecological problems dating back to it's communist days, or have you never heard of the (former) Aral sea, Chernobyl or the abandoned yet still fueled nuclear subs rusting away at Snezhnogorsk & Petropavlovsk?
Yes, you are a zealot. Zealots are those who use faith instead of reasoning to determine their acts. So far, that fits you to a T. The "market" has nothing to do with global warming. Communist countries are no better than the west and are generally far worse in regard to their non-respect of the environment.
What "flaw" do you think you pointed out? The only flaws so far in your posts have been in your reasoning. Global warming killed the dinosaurs? Nope, dinosaurs lived in a time of globally warmer temperatures than those prevalent today and were in fact warmer than those forecast in other than the most extreme "the sky is falling"/"we are all doomed" global warming forecasts.
The first entry for ":define budgie" on google is:
budgerigar: small Australian parakeet usually light green with black and yellow markings in the wild but bred in many colors
I, like Freeman Dyson am upset that people like you who are incapable of looking up a words are pushing politicians who know even less into spending our limited resources on what will ultimately turn out to be a minor problem compared to others that confront us.
So, for you a global warming of a few degrees (which is what the most extreme forecast of global warming has come up with), that has been matched with higher recorded temperatures in the past will now cause global destruction? You also equate a global winter where all crops failed for a multi-year period & which caused recorded extinctions with higher global temperatures which have not.
My budgie tells me that you're a twit with no comprehension of the difference between warmer temperatures being bad for those in sea-level areas and planetary destruction. He says that you are part of the groundswell of uninformed zealots that Freeman Dyson was complaining about. So far, I agree with him.
My budgie (thats dinosaur to you) tells me that way back when his cousins ruled the earth that the average temperature was higher than today and that they were all very happy with the higher temperatures. He adds that almost all of his cousins died when a very very big rock impacted the earth near present day Chicxulub and provoked a few years of global winter.
My initial post mocked idiot webadmins who neither implement access restrictions nor setup robot.txt files. The web server used by the entity that exposed the data to the web is unknown so I was deliberately abstract and did not mention.htaccess files which are specific to the apache family of web servers.
You, using your masterful powers of reading comprehension reply to my post saying "yeah, but you need a.htaccess file too".
I reply asking you if you if a.htaccess file will secure an IIS server (hoping that this would push you into wondering whether the web server had been identified) & clearly stating that you missed the point of half my initial post.
Your reply once again misses the point. You cannot assume that using.htaccess files would have prevented the data breach because the web server used is unknown.
How big a clue stick do I have to whack you over the head with to get it through your skull that you attempt to correct people who visibly know more than you do at the peril of being judged an idiot? We're beyond baseball bat size at this point...
Really? All that is needed is a well placed.htaccess file to secure an IIS server?
Or, could it be that you completely missed the point of "idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net". Could it possibly mean that implementing appropriate access restrictions for both the website & the server implementation are good things to do, in particular for ecommerce sites?
Does the expression "go teach your grandmother to suck an egg" have any meaning for you?
Who said anything about relying only upon a robots.txt file for all "security"? GPP referred to "idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net": Do you think I was referring to sprinkling pixie dust?
In addition to appropriate security access measures, if you're not placing robots.txt files at the root of all pages having to do with payment, you're making a stupid mistake. There is no valid reason to not tell indexers to leave those parts of a web server alone.
It's not a problem with the idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net
didn't you understand?
The robots.txt is not designed for security, but it will stop google from placing content into it's cache where clueless admins are unable to purge it themselves after they finally discover have been hacked.
It's not a problem with the idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net and in addition omitted to place a well placed robots.txt, no...
I didn't mod it troll because I do not have any mod points at present, but I would have.
Contrary to your trollish uninformed opinion, beaming the power back to earth is not a major problem. Google/wiki for "rectenna".
Access to space based power (SBP) would solve many problems: - No more NIMBY for power plants. - Rectenna installations do not need to be exclusive. Farmland & rectennas can be colocated. - Pollutionless power 24 hours a day. - Developing the necessary launch infrastructure may be the leverage needed to break out of the the catch 22 where access to space is expensive because there is not a major market & there is no market because it is too expensive.
From his comments, I suppose that phantom's point is that we should spend on social programs instead of "wasting" it on infrastructure which would wean the world off of fossil & most other fuels. I would prefer that we raise our horizons.
Heh, "the glove doesn't fit"... Not the best expression to use to signify that the facts do not fit the conclusions being proposed. I've increasingly heard it used as "this is the spin we use to try to convince you the opposite of what one would logically conclude".
I've been living in Paris since the early 80's so I remember the EU directive that "settled on a compromise" on copyright protections. Instead of using a median value or using the length used in most countries they used the longest term which was only used in a minority of EU memebers. As always they couched the justification for doing so in terms of the poor starving artists out there. As this was also pushed through the european council of ministers instead of through the european parlement, there was little debate & allegations of unseemly influence have been laid. You shouldn't forget that Euro Disney opened in 1992 & that movement on standardizing on a global EU value started picking up steam at the same point.
Note that I don't think that Disney is the only root of this particular evil. Berthelsmann, Vivendi, etc are just as bad IMO.
The major danger I see for the future I see is yet another extension in the next few years. Even if Disney & co cannot be shown to be at the origin of the current round of copyright extensions, they have clearly understood that permanant copyright is their golden goose & are willing to buy the influence they need, whether that is in the US or in the EU to make sure that the golden eggs keep rolling in.
Actually, no Disney didn't pay US senators a bunch of money to make copyright work well over the human lifespan.
Actually, Yes they did! You seem to be confusing the Copyright Act of 1976 which brought US law pretty much into accord with the Berne Convention with the Mickey Mouse Protection Act where Disney DID finance the campaigns of a number of low life congress critters to chip away at the public domain.
Note that as a fan of yours I agree with most of what you write, but not in this instance...
If you can remember back to the early 70's star trek animated series an episode was written by David Niven which uses his Known Space past history with slavers who seeded the universe with a yeast to feed the bandersnatchi they then implanted & harvested.
When I have english friends who come to France to receive treatment for dental emergencies in under 6 months (& paid for it themselves), I wonder about the "proper" healthcare available over there. Paying enormous amounts of money for something does not mean that the services rendered are worth what you are paying...
What exactly in my truncated sig makes you think that my position is the opposite of yours? You post stating that my sig is all wrong, I say go google it, you find out that you don't disagree with the full quote & then you still don't intuit my position? I hope a lightbulb just went off over there...
I had to edit the sig down to fit signature/.'s limits. It is a statement on group dynamics but is much too short to express my true opinion. Your far fetched conclusion on what I mean by including it thus way off the mark.
If you find the sig interesting I suggest you google it to find the original source & enlighten yourself.
Ringworld, though I don't rememeber if the stasis fiend in the story was supposed to be puppeteer specific technology. Actually I don't think it was. The GIL the A.R.M. story with the slaver used human devised stasis fields.
(Yes, LN is one of my favorite authors. I'm a geek...)
Google has warned that they will not pay for any ideas that are submitted to them through this interface.
If you think that you have an idea that is worth money to Google, then don't use the ideabox. Go negotiate with Google directly. Patent it (Ugh). Sell it to Yahoo. Start your own company & exploit it. Don't expect anyone else to feel sorry for you because you're jealous but can't think of a way to sponge off of google's wealth.
The summary, by decrying that "we won't be compensating users for their ideas" is implying that Google is stealing them. Theft is by definition non-voluntary. Connect the dots little troll...
Don't contribute to their ideabox. It's not like Google is forcing people to contribute.
Why is that too difficult for the article submitter to understand?
Slashdot Mirror
I beg to differ, for me, this is geek news. I found TFA & the following discussion interesting. It touches subjects that interest me peripherally but that I never needed to research. Now, I've been able to discover some interesting tools it would have taken me a while to discover otherwise.
I read a post-war interview of Bomber Harris where he stated that he was aware that the systematic bombing of German cities was not as militarily effective as it was painted at the time. It was continued:
As has been pointed out by others, the last point has borne fruit in the general pacifism of the general German population.
"More balanced"?!?! Bullshit. de Gaulle used the weaknesses of the 4eme republic to justify a quasi monarchy for himself. 7 year terms? No term limitations? Feh!
Even Mitterrand who promised to abolish it after having fought tooth and nail against the 5eme republic for most of his career finally decided it was good to be the Roi & kept the system unchanged.
Your claim that global warming killed off the dinosaurs is patently false. That claim that you made is what brought me into this thread (that you are attempting to back away from by weakly stating that "climate change has the potential to be damaging").
A parakeet with a 15 gram forebrain has more common sense than a twit who posts without thinking on /. Given the lack of reflection and intelligence you display you're either a troll or a preteen. Either way, you visibly have nothing of any value to say & I'm done trying to fruitlessly educate you. Fortunately placing you among my foes will make you disappear, never to be seen again.
Miss the point much? None of the references pretend to claim that dinosaurs went extinct nor was the planet destroyed due to global warming as you asserted in your initial post.
China has one party rule & the rulers are the communist party. You cannot absolve the ruling party of the ecological disaster in the making that is current day china by saying that it's the Chinese capitalist's fault. Water is now so polluted in many parts of the country that significant percentages of it's cropland is being abandoned. The smog shadow produced by it's air pollution can be easily detected across the Pacific.
Russia has massive ecological problems dating back to it's communist days, or have you never heard of the (former) Aral sea, Chernobyl or the abandoned yet still fueled nuclear subs rusting away at Snezhnogorsk & Petropavlovsk?
Yes, you are a zealot. Zealots are those who use faith instead of reasoning to determine their acts. So far, that fits you to a T. The "market" has nothing to do with global warming. Communist countries are no better than the west and are generally far worse in regard to their non-respect of the environment. What "flaw" do you think you pointed out? The only flaws so far in your posts have been in your reasoning. Global warming killed the dinosaurs? Nope, dinosaurs lived in a time of globally warmer temperatures than those prevalent today and were in fact warmer than those forecast in other than the most extreme "the sky is falling"/"we are all doomed" global warming forecasts. The first entry for ":define budgie" on google is: budgerigar: small Australian parakeet usually light green with black and yellow markings in the wild but bred in many colors I, like Freeman Dyson am upset that people like you who are incapable of looking up a words are pushing politicians who know even less into spending our limited resources on what will ultimately turn out to be a minor problem compared to others that confront us.
So, for you a global warming of a few degrees (which is what the most extreme forecast of global warming has come up with), that has been matched with higher recorded temperatures in the past will now cause global destruction? You also equate a global winter where all crops failed for a multi-year period & which caused recorded extinctions with higher global temperatures which have not.
My budgie tells me that you're a twit with no comprehension of the difference between warmer temperatures being bad for those in sea-level areas and planetary destruction. He says that you are part of the groundswell of uninformed zealots that Freeman Dyson was complaining about. So far, I agree with him.
My budgie (thats dinosaur to you) tells me that way back when his cousins ruled the earth that the average temperature was higher than today and that they were all very happy with the higher temperatures. He adds that almost all of his cousins died when a very very big rock impacted the earth near present day Chicxulub and provoked a few years of global winter.
Hey AC, http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-tea1.htm
My initial post mocked idiot webadmins who neither implement access restrictions nor setup robot.txt files. The web server used by the entity that exposed the data to the web is unknown so I was deliberately abstract and did not mention .htaccess files which are specific to the apache family of web servers.
.htaccess file too".
.htaccess file will secure an IIS server (hoping that this would push you into wondering whether the web server had been identified) & clearly stating that you missed the point of half my initial post.
.htaccess files would have prevented the data breach because the web server used is unknown.
You, using your masterful powers of reading comprehension reply to my post saying "yeah, but you need a
I reply asking you if you if a
Your reply once again misses the point. You cannot assume that using
How big a clue stick do I have to whack you over the head with to get it through your skull that you attempt to correct people who visibly know more than you do at the peril of being judged an idiot? We're beyond baseball bat size at this point...
Really? All that is needed is a well placed .htaccess file to secure an IIS server?
Or, could it be that you completely missed the point of "idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net". Could it possibly mean that implementing appropriate access restrictions for both the website & the server implementation are good things to do, in particular for ecommerce sites?
Does the expression "go teach your grandmother to suck an egg" have any meaning for you?
Who said anything about relying only upon a robots.txt file for all "security"? GPP referred to "idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net": Do you think I was referring to sprinkling pixie dust? In addition to appropriate security access measures, if you're not placing robots.txt files at the root of all pages having to do with payment, you're making a stupid mistake. There is no valid reason to not tell indexers to leave those parts of a web server alone.
didn't you understand?
The robots.txt is not designed for security, but it will stop google from placing content into it's cache where clueless admins are unable to purge it themselves after they finally discover have been hacked.
It's not a problem with the idiot sites that let unprotected critical information out on a public accessible net and in addition omitted to place a well placed robots.txt, no...
IT'S GOOGLE'S FAULT!!!
I didn't mod it troll because I do not have any mod points at present, but I would have.
Contrary to your trollish uninformed opinion, beaming the power back to earth is not a major problem. Google/wiki for "rectenna".
Access to space based power (SBP) would solve many problems:
- No more NIMBY for power plants.
- Rectenna installations do not need to be exclusive. Farmland & rectennas can be colocated.
- Pollutionless power 24 hours a day.
- Developing the necessary launch infrastructure may be the leverage needed to break out of the the catch 22 where access to space is expensive because there is not a major market & there is no market because it is too expensive.
From his comments, I suppose that phantom's point is that we should spend on social programs instead of "wasting" it on infrastructure which would wean the world off of fossil & most other fuels. I would prefer that we raise our horizons.
Heh, "the glove doesn't fit"... Not the best expression to use to signify that the facts do not fit the conclusions being proposed. I've increasingly heard it used as "this is the spin we use to try to convince you the opposite of what one would logically conclude".
I've been living in Paris since the early 80's so I remember the EU directive that "settled on a compromise" on copyright protections. Instead of using a median value or using the length used in most countries they used the longest term which was only used in a minority of EU memebers. As always they couched the justification for doing so in terms of the poor starving artists out there. As this was also pushed through the european council of ministers instead of through the european parlement, there was little debate & allegations of unseemly influence have been laid. You shouldn't forget that Euro Disney opened in 1992 & that movement on standardizing on a global EU value started picking up steam at the same point.
Note that I don't think that Disney is the only root of this particular evil. Berthelsmann, Vivendi, etc are just as bad IMO.
The major danger I see for the future I see is yet another extension in the next few years. Even if Disney & co cannot be shown to be at the origin of the current round of copyright extensions, they have clearly understood that permanant copyright is their golden goose & are willing to buy the influence they need, whether that is in the US or in the EU to make sure that the golden eggs keep rolling in.
Actually, Yes they did! You seem to be confusing the Copyright Act of 1976 which brought US law pretty much into accord with the Berne Convention with the Mickey Mouse Protection Act where Disney DID finance the campaigns of a number of low life congress critters to chip away at the public domain.
Note that as a fan of yours I agree with most of what you write, but not in this instance...
If you can remember back to the early 70's star trek animated series an episode was written by David Niven which uses his Known Space past history with slavers who seeded the universe with a yeast to feed the bandersnatchi they then implanted & harvested.
When I have english friends who come to France to receive treatment for dental emergencies in under 6 months (& paid for it themselves), I wonder about the "proper" healthcare available over there. Paying enormous amounts of money for something does not mean that the services rendered are worth what you are paying...
What exactly in my truncated sig makes you think that my position is the opposite of yours? You post stating that my sig is all wrong, I say go google it, you find out that you don't disagree with the full quote & then you still don't intuit my position? I hope a lightbulb just went off over there...
If you find the sig interesting I suggest you google it to find the original source & enlighten yourself.
Ringworld, though I don't rememeber if the stasis fiend in the story was supposed to be puppeteer specific technology. Actually I don't think it was. The GIL the A.R.M. story with the slaver used human devised stasis fields.
(Yes, LN is one of my favorite authors. I'm a geek...)
If you think that you have an idea that is worth money to Google, then don't use the ideabox. Go negotiate with Google directly. Patent it (Ugh). Sell it to Yahoo. Start your own company & exploit it. Don't expect anyone else to feel sorry for you because you're jealous but can't think of a way to sponge off of google's wealth.
The summary, by decrying that "we won't be compensating users for their ideas" is implying that Google is stealing them. Theft is by definition non-voluntary. Connect the dots little troll...
Don't contribute to their ideabox. It's not like Google is forcing people to contribute. Why is that too difficult for the article submitter to understand?