Why would radicals not also be capable of defacing it? And why use the word "deface" anyway? Are any opposing opinions automatically supposed to be "defacing" it?
That's exactly what I wanted to know. It might as well have said "Will this be an effective means to bring the shining light of truth to the unwashed masses, or will the opposing party of darkness be able to subvert it to their own nefarious ends?"
I bet they sprayed some on their research paper
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 2, Funny
The lengths some people will go to to get published.
Wake me when they have language-shifting
on
Television Reloaded
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
There is a lot of anime I'd like to see properly dubbed (or even subbed, for some of the older stuff). On-the-fly translation with a similar-sounding voice would be a killer app.
Too bad I'll probably be drawing my (ten cents on the dollar) Social Security when that happens.
Wow, I didn't realize that the moon was going to be so dangerous, what with water ice lurking in the inky blackness and all.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be drowned by Water. >light lantern That does nothing. It appears the lantern's batteries are dead. >scream for help In space, no one can hear you scream.
...but I have to admit the AltaVista search engine for pictures is pretty nice. I use that when I want to search for pictures of a particular size for wallpaper.
I saw something similar in a tagline back in my BBS days. I like it -- it makes you go "hmm?" the first time you see it, kind of like "I'm not an actor, but I play one on television."
If it's property such that the RIAA and MPAA consider it theft rather than copyright infringement, would states or the federal government have the power to pay "fair market value" (whatever that is) and release it to the public?
Not everything would be that way, of course, but if the government has the right to take land to preserve our natural heritage, why not take art to preserve our cultural heritage?
Every time this happens, everyone in upper management at the company involved gets their personal information released to the public. A time or two with people seeing how a CEO couldn't play nicely with others in grade school or was arrested for shoplifting at 19, and we'd see a bit tighter security.
This reminds me of the story about Mark Twain and the phrenologist Lorenzo Fowler:
"However, he found a cavity, in one place; a cavity where a bump would have been in anyone else's skull. That cavity, he said was all alone, all by itself, occupying a solitude, and had no opposing bump, however slight in elevation, to modify and ameliorate its perfect completeness and isolation. He startled me by saying that that cavity represented the total absence of the sense of humor!"
Three months later, he returned and identified himself first, and then
"Once more he made a striking discovery-the cavity was gone, and in its place was a Mount Everest-figuratively speaking-31,000 feet high, the loftiest bump of humor he had ever encountered in his life-long experience!"
Note to graphologists, palm-readers, astrologers, and other pseudo-scientists: if your "prediction" depends on your audience, you are at best a fraud and a charlatan.
...using the internet has seriously cut into our socializing time. We spend less time watching TV and more time using the internet and following up email.
I was under the opinion that things like writing email or posting here on Slashdot were a bit more "socializing" than sitting in front of the TV watching a set of commercials interspersed with bits and pieces of some reality show.
The important thing to remember is that playing the victim has never solved anyone's problems. If the people in the affected area place the blame on the U.S. rather than their own governments, the problem of early warning for tsunamis and other natural disasters won't be solved, because the problem won't be correctly diagnosed.
Second, the problem of how America is perceived in the area is obviously minor compared to the scope of this disaster, but it's counterproductive to blame someone for something in one breath and then demand help in the next. Treat Americans as friends, and as friends they will help you. Treat them as enemies, and any sympathy will be leached away.
I also saw the 1,000 MT figure for 9.0 magnitude quakes on other pages. I'm not sure where the discrepancy lies, though perhaps there is a range of energy possible for a given magnitude of quake. Since the possible range for an impact of 2004MN4 is in same order of magnitude, it makes for a fair approximation.
...of both major candidates, trying to look on the bright side wherever possible.
Kerry Pluses: Seems more intelligent than Bush, can use coherent sentences, his election would ensure a divided government which may slow down unnecessary spending. Minuses: Changes opinion to appeal to others, never uses one word when he can use a dozen, his election would give the message to other countries that they have some say in American politics.
Bush Pluses: His election would show other countries they can't simply wait out U.S. adminstrations hoping for someone they like better, and that asking newspaper readers to mail Americans telling them how to vote (for example) is stupid. Also, Bush may have learned something from his mistakes. Minuses: I cringe whenever he speaks, a Congress and Presidency in Republican hands breaks down the checks and balances needed to restrain government power and spending, and there is a chance he hasn't learned from his mistakes.
/ I voted for Badnarik -- he won't win, but perhaps momentum will build for the future so a viable candidate I like can be elected.
...at the same time we vote for candidates. This would be a reasonable and relatively straightforward reform that would cut down on the problem of gerrymandering and make it more likely that voters choose the candidate they want to represent them rather than incumbents choosing which voters they want to elect them.
You could make it a rule that for a race involving separate election districts (House of Representatives, for example) every political party or independent candidate eligible for election can offer a districting method (subject to certain objective criteria) on the ballot. Voters could vote for their preferred election map and their preferred candidate at the same time. The votes for the map would be tallied first, then the votes in each district of the winning map would be tallied to elect their preferred candidate.
There are a couple of issues with this -- it is possible that voters might elect a candidate who does not reside in their district (though if a majority preferred him to represent the district this would be minor), and it would be very difficult for candidates to figure out where they should campaign, given that their possible districts might extend over a much larger area than what they'd end up with.
On the other hand, this would take the decision of how voters should be grouped out of the hands of the incumbent political party and place it back in the hands of the voters, and it would definitely cut down on the number of bizarre inkblot-shaped districts.
Seeing Lojban mentioned somewhere other than a constructed languages group was kind of surprising. I know it shouldn't be -- Slashdotter's like arguing what features should go into a computer language, while Conlangers like to do the same with human languages, so there probably is a bit of crossover with people who like both.
Still, I'd give you a mod point if I could just for bringing up something I think is interesting. Constructed languages like Lojban would be interesting in computer games -- they could replace "made up" languages of magic, or aliens, or even be turned into logic puzzles. The better ones have an underlying order that can often be sensed, even if the language itself is totally foreign.
I'll go back to A.C. lurking now, I just wanted to make sure others didn't think someone was schizophrenically responding to their own post.
More seriously, you could probably remove a good portion of the spam short of this draconian step, but it would probably require:
1. Verification of the return address given in e-mail. 2. E-mail being held on the originator's side until requested by the recipient.
For example, you send an e-mail. The recipient's server then sends a one-time key back to the return address on the email. The originating server then includes this key and a link to the body of the message in the e-mail header and sends it back. The link sits on the recipient's mail server until that person either reads the message by clicking on the link to download it, or deletes the link thus removing the key.
The nice thing about leaving the message on the originating server is that spammers would have to give valid return information, and they have to store the spam on their server until someone requests it. There would be higher up-front bandwidth and data storage costs from the verification process, especially for the more prolific spammers, but it would probably lower the overall bandwidth required since header info is usually much smaller than the message itself, and deleting it prevents the larger message from being transmitted. It would also probably slow the spread of many e-mail viruses (and make them far easier to track), because a really prolific one would fill up the originating server with a bunch of garbage while waiting for a response, and they wouldn't be able to mask the return address by giving a phony one.
Check out www.chessvariants.com. They have (almost) every version of square and hexagonal-based chess version you can imagine. If they don't, you can put your game on the site so others can admire it.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would radicals not also be capable of defacing it? And why use the word "deface" anyway? Are any opposing opinions automatically supposed to be "defacing" it?
That's exactly what I wanted to know. It might as well have said "Will this be an effective means to bring the shining light of truth to the unwashed masses, or will the opposing party of darkness be able to subvert it to their own nefarious ends?"
The lengths some people will go to to get published.
There is a lot of anime I'd like to see properly dubbed (or even subbed, for some of the older stuff). On-the-fly translation with a similar-sounding voice would be a killer app.
Too bad I'll probably be drawing my (ten cents on the dollar) Social Security when that happens.
Wow, I didn't realize that the moon was going to be so dangerous, what with water ice lurking in the inky blackness and all.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be drowned by Water.
>light lantern
That does nothing. It appears the lantern's batteries are dead.
>scream for help
In space, no one can hear you scream.
...but I have to admit the AltaVista search engine for pictures is pretty nice. I use that when I want to search for pictures of a particular size for wallpaper.
According to their web site the IMF has taken them seriously.
Yeah, but if they're caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of their actions.
I used to use that sig. I'm gonna sue. ;)
I saw something similar in a tagline back in my BBS days. I like it -- it makes you go "hmm?" the first time you see it, kind of like "I'm not an actor, but I play one on television."
Next thing you know, you'll want to be innocent until proven guilty and question witnesses.
If it's property such that the RIAA and MPAA consider it theft rather than copyright infringement, would states or the federal government have the power to pay "fair market value" (whatever that is) and release it to the public?
Not everything would be that way, of course, but if the government has the right to take land to preserve our natural heritage, why not take art to preserve our cultural heritage?
Every time this happens, everyone in upper management at the company involved gets their personal information released to the public. A time or two with people seeing how a CEO couldn't play nicely with others in grade school or was arrested for shoplifting at 19, and we'd see a bit tighter security.
the ones that headed for the coast at the first sign of danger.
"Of course a man made it, Lois, it's a program not a delicious Thanksgiving dinner"
This reminds me of the story about Mark Twain and the phrenologist Lorenzo Fowler:
"However, he found a cavity, in one place; a cavity where a bump would have been in anyone else's skull. That cavity, he said was all alone, all by itself, occupying a solitude, and had no opposing bump, however slight in elevation, to modify and ameliorate its perfect completeness and isolation. He startled me by saying that that cavity represented the total absence of the sense of humor!"
Three months later, he returned and identified himself first, and then
"Once more he made a striking discovery-the cavity was gone, and in its place was a Mount Everest-figuratively speaking-31,000 feet high, the loftiest bump of humor he had ever encountered in his life-long experience!"
Note to graphologists, palm-readers, astrologers, and other pseudo-scientists: if your "prediction" depends on your audience, you are at best a fraud and a charlatan.
Don't you mean
One ping to rule them all
One ping to find them
One ping to nuke them all
And in the darkness find them
...using the internet has seriously cut into our socializing time. We spend less time watching TV and more time using the internet and following up email.
I was under the opinion that things like writing email or posting here on Slashdot were a bit more "socializing" than sitting in front of the TV watching a set of commercials interspersed with bits and pieces of some reality show.
The important thing to remember is that playing the victim has never solved anyone's problems. If the people in the affected area place the blame on the U.S. rather than their own governments, the problem of early warning for tsunamis and other natural disasters won't be solved, because the problem won't be correctly diagnosed.
Second, the problem of how America is perceived in the area is obviously minor compared to the scope of this disaster, but it's counterproductive to blame someone for something in one breath and then demand help in the next. Treat Americans as friends, and as friends they will help you. Treat them as enemies, and any sympathy will be leached away.
Earthquake energy statistics from About.com
I also saw the 1,000 MT figure for 9.0 magnitude quakes on other pages. I'm not sure where the discrepancy lies, though perhaps there is a range of energy possible for a given magnitude of quake. Since the possible range for an impact of 2004MN4 is in same order of magnitude, it makes for a fair approximation.
A 9.0 earthquake would release the equivalent of 1,800 Megatons, so it would be in the same ballpark.
...of both major candidates, trying to look on the bright side wherever possible.
Kerry
Pluses: Seems more intelligent than Bush, can use coherent sentences, his election would ensure a divided government which may slow down unnecessary spending.
Minuses: Changes opinion to appeal to others, never uses one word when he can use a dozen, his election would give the message to other countries that they have some say in American politics.
Bush
Pluses: His election would show other countries they can't simply wait out U.S. adminstrations hoping for someone they like better, and that asking newspaper readers to mail Americans telling them how to vote (for example) is stupid. Also, Bush may have learned something from his mistakes.
Minuses: I cringe whenever he speaks, a Congress and Presidency in Republican hands breaks down the checks and balances needed to restrain government power and spending, and there is a chance he hasn't learned from his mistakes.
/ I voted for Badnarik -- he won't win, but perhaps momentum will build for the future so a viable candidate I like can be elected.
...at the same time we vote for candidates. This would be a reasonable and relatively straightforward reform that would cut down on the problem of gerrymandering and make it more likely that voters choose the candidate they want to represent them rather than incumbents choosing which voters they want to elect them.
You could make it a rule that for a race involving separate election districts (House of Representatives, for example) every political party or independent candidate eligible for election can offer a districting method (subject to certain objective criteria) on the ballot. Voters could vote for their preferred election map and their preferred candidate at the same time. The votes for the map would be tallied first, then the votes in each district of the winning map would be tallied to elect their preferred candidate.
There are a couple of issues with this -- it is possible that voters might elect a candidate who does not reside in their district (though if a majority preferred him to represent the district this would be minor), and it would be very difficult for candidates to figure out where they should campaign, given that their possible districts might extend over a much larger area than what they'd end up with.
On the other hand, this would take the decision of how voters should be grouped out of the hands of the incumbent political party and place it back in the hands of the voters, and it would definitely cut down on the number of bizarre inkblot-shaped districts.
Seeing Lojban mentioned somewhere other than a constructed languages group was kind of surprising. I know it shouldn't be -- Slashdotter's like arguing what features should go into a computer language, while Conlangers like to do the same with human languages, so there probably is a bit of crossover with people who like both.
Still, I'd give you a mod point if I could just for bringing up something I think is interesting. Constructed languages like Lojban would be interesting in computer games -- they could replace "made up" languages of magic, or aliens, or even be turned into logic puzzles. The better ones have an underlying order that can often be sensed, even if the language itself is totally foreign.
I'll go back to A.C. lurking now, I just wanted to make sure others didn't think someone was schizophrenically responding to their own post.
That would kill the problem at its source.
More seriously, you could probably remove a good portion of the spam short of this draconian step, but it would probably require:
1. Verification of the return address given in e-mail.
2. E-mail being held on the originator's side until requested by the recipient.
For example, you send an e-mail. The recipient's server then sends a one-time key back to the return address on the email. The originating server then includes this key and a link to the body of the message in the e-mail header and sends it back. The link sits on the recipient's mail server until that person either reads the message by clicking on the link to download it, or deletes the link thus removing the key.
The nice thing about leaving the message on the originating server is that spammers would have to give valid return information, and they have to store the spam on their server until someone requests it. There would be higher up-front bandwidth and data storage costs from the verification process, especially for the more prolific spammers, but it would probably lower the overall bandwidth required since header info is usually much smaller than the message itself, and deleting it prevents the larger message from being transmitted. It would also probably slow the spread of many e-mail viruses (and make them far easier to track), because a really prolific one would fill up the originating server with a bunch of garbage while waiting for a response, and they wouldn't be able to mask the return address by giving a phony one.
We could pay for it with the inheritance of just one deposed ruler.
They do. Just replace "human being" with "corporate officer" and "robot" with "worker."
Check out www.chessvariants.com. They have (almost) every version of square and hexagonal-based chess version you can imagine. If they don't, you can put your game on the site so others can admire it.