I took the most obvious way after seeing that url in the bottom and had a look in the source: Now, the good thing, it probably prepares you for work at this company: It's full off HTML 3.2 evilness wrapped in a XHTML 1.0 Transitional header, has an invalid tag that contains the solution and is sprinkled with css in places you might not expect.
So what exactly is new about this? I remember Google doing it a few years back?
On the other hand, there might be a real riddle and what they did with that "little" was just to weed out the jerks like me... that would certainly be impressive!:)
"Also, he implemented a super soldier program, where the best soldiers (by physical characteristic measurements and IQ tests) were 'encouraged' to breed with very suitable females. I can't remember what the whorehouses were called but they had a special name."
I believe you're talking about "Lebensborn": the fathers were mostly soldiers in the SS and had to fulfill requirements like the right genealogical tree, looking sufficiently arian, no IQ-test though. Same of course applies to the prospective mothers.
Later in the war they kidnaped children who looked sufficiently arian from the streets to raise them in homes operated by Lebensborn.
According to wikipedia, there were about 7000-8000 births during 1939-1945.
I won't comment on your question concerning the "effectiveness" of that operation. I mean, what do you expect? That german is roamed by super-intelligent blue plasmas... no wait, blue-eyed, blonde-haired arian-caucasian males? Nope.
By the way, maybe it's because I'm german and all, but this whole discussion here smacks of eugenics.
"Altruism is nothing more than emotional hedonism"
Altruism is defined as helping others without ANY exception for an reward, be that material or immaterial: Altruism is the exact opposite of Egoism and therefore the opposite of Hedonism.
And btw, is it really that hard to spend about five seconds to look something up before posting?
I find it quite disturbing how low apparently americans value their privacy when it comes to computers that belong to their employers.
I don't know about other european countries, but at least in Germany it's strictly forbidden, as is video surveillance. It is possible to monitor e-mails and web usage though, as long as the staff association allows it and it is very clear that sending private emails is forbidden (you can get in REALLY deep trouble if you're monitoring your employees without them knowing).
How come surveillance seeming that accepted in the US? It's obviously taking a lot of ressources to monitor (people that watch the people watching the people...) - and I would think that's not a good climate to work in, what with feeling untrusted.
And get this: one of the largest importers (the largest?) offrench electric energy is Germany, who have outlawed and disbanded their nuclear plants due to Green misguided pressure, and are now
The last nuclear reactor is currently[1] scheduled to be shut down in about 27 years. Sorry, they're neither outlawed nor disbanded, there're just no new ones to be built (Apropos "disbanded": in 2003 nuclear energy accounted for 27% of germany's electricity production, while regenerative energies amount for about 9% compared to ~5% in 1991). At least we try.
Oh, and by the way: In 2003Germany had an export surplus of 8 billion MWh. High imports from France are mostly due to it being "routed" through Germany towards the Netherlands and Italy. a) polluting themselves with coal plants, which actually produce more radioactive waste than nuclear plants of same energy output (not to mention other pollutants).
Maybe. According to this site Germany has reduced its CO2-Emissions by 19% between 1990-2002 while France decreased theirs by 1.9%. This may or may not have anything to do with coal plants but was the first thing I found on google - so anyway;).
b) paying for el. energy to France, which is produced by nuclear plants which are close enough to Germany, that if a meltdown happened, they would be just as affected!
Ever heard of something called "leading by example"? Also, do you think that you (wherever you live) would be unaffected by a major nuclear meltdown?
[1] currently meaning that after the next election these plans will probably be scrapped by the conservatives.
1. I'm sorry. It was the page that opened as I clicked your link.
2. So I've read the article. I don't agree with his conclusions. He is downplaying the torture at Abu Ghraib (sorry, but those weren't just panties...), his arguments aren't very deep ("Bush was hardly alone in believing there were WMDs, and given the convictions of so many over such a long period, he erred on the right side.") and all in all his arguments are those I've read about one year ago on FR (albeit less polished;).
The funniest point to me is him protecting Bush from the "leftist media". Funny because out of the US basically no-one would attest the CNN being left-wing and the blatant right-wing attitude of Fox News is almost unbearable if you're used to european media stations that at least TRY to be neutral with their news.
Funny, too, is his point about all these sick countries with their unthankful stance towards the US. I doubt that Mr. Goldberg has been to other countries after 9/11. At least in Germany the sympathy to the US was astonishing. It only began to weaken as Bush began his crusade against Iraq, showing that he would declare war regardless of arguments that spoke against in, trying to justify this illegal war with hillarity, er, WMDs.
3. Maybe. 1. I'm sorry. It was the page that opened as I clicked your link.
2. So I've read the article. I don't agree with his conclusions. He is downplaying the torture at Abu Ghraib (sorry, but those weren't just panties...), his arguments aren't very deep ("Bush was hardly alone in believing there were WMDs, and given the convictions of so many over such a long period, he erred on the right side.") and all in all his arguments are those I've read about one year ago on FR (albeit less polished;).
The funniest point to me is him protecting Bush from the "leftist media". Funny because out of the US basically no-one would attest the CNN being left-wing and the blatant right-wing attitude of Fox News is almost unbearable if you're used to european media stations that at least TRY to be neutral with their news.
Funny, too, is his point about all these sick countries with their unthankful stance towards the US. I doubt that Mr. Goldberg has been to other countries after 9/11. At least in Germany the sympathy to the US was astonishing. It only began to weaken as Bush began his crusade against Iraq, showing that he would declare war regardless of arguments that spoke against in, trying to justify this illegal war with hillarity, er, WMDs.
3. Maybe. I still fail to see what Indians and Terrorists have in common. Anyway, after rereading the mail and after having read some FR which almost sounds exactly the same in expressing their brainless views I doubt that he only meant the terrorists.
5. Yes, that may be, I don't know much of this sphere:).
6. No, it's not my cup. I don't mind anyone being in favor of Bush as long as his arguments aren't full of holes. At least he has a higher level of writing than, seemingly (from what I read 7000 miles away from the US so may point of view may be severly blurred:), most other pro-bush writers.
"2. The Corner [nationalreview.com]. National Review's group weblog. Lots of contributors, who vary widely in tone (after you read it a while you come to recognize who the various authors are, and what points of view they hold). If you're not a conservative, you should check it out -- you won't agree with most of the stuff, but after a while you might learn that the folks on the "other side" aren't a bunch of moronic power-mad nazis: They actually have coherent reasons for believing what they believe, and can ably articulate those views. Understanding their arguments will help you sharpen your own."
I skimped through the page, picking up this gem:
OR MAYBE IT IS AN INDIAN FIGHT [Jonah Goldberg]
Last word on this non-debate, from another military guy:
Jonah,
From a military point of view, the WoT is an indian fight. And this idiot is a keen example of why the left is incapable of winning it. There is no room for PC on the modern asymmetrical battlefield. Any talk about worrying what the islamicist will think is horse crap (cavalry term). This country is in very real danger and if we do not succeed in ensuring that the war is fought on ground we choose then the fanatics will bring the war to us. I'd rather look for WMDs in Iraq than find them the hard way in the US. These people are savages and we must steel ourselves as a nation if we hope to survive. The time for wishy-washy, touchy-feely hand wringing has long since passed. OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE. It's war."
This should convince me of the "other side" not being moronic how? This is fascism, pure and simple. Just being interested and morally high-horsed at the moment:): is that the generally accepted level of political speech over in the US?
"Look at the screenshot on the page. It looks like crap. Usable, sure, but definitely not attractive."
I downloaded WMP 10 yesterday and today tried to watch a few.avi-files with it.
I'm loathing it. Really, the UI is a freakin' mess. The buttons are aligned without any seeming reasoning at all: One here (oh look, "skin mode"... makes the screen smaller and uglier!), one over there (cool, "now playing options" that open the same uninteresting "visualization" dropdown that i get with clicking the right button). And don't get me started with the library mode.
This thing is so bad it makes realplayer look good in comparison. I felt something like bliss when I returned to Winamp 5.
AbiWord is a nice program and it certainly has it's applications: Why use Word (or OO-Writer for that matter) when you don't need the features?
As an example, take a typical journalist: The formatting is done by other people, so all that is important is getting the content right. Office is overkill here.
But there are people who need more features, and AbiWord never was meant for them. "MS Word killer"? Come on, that's so hilarious it's almost funny.
The time will come when it's possible to kill MS Office in medium-sized businesses, and that is the day when the import and export-features of OO have matured to a degree where documents imported and exported have exactly the same (and by exactly I mean like EXACTLY) look that they had before.
That'd be the day ms office dies it's long and painful death.
A tsunami reaches highs of about 30 meters (according to wikipedia).
The idea of a wave that is 3km high is... well, breathtaking: Seeing a wave almost 10 000ft high could only be topped by seeing the apocalyptic riders surfing on top of it;)
SCSI is optimized for heavy workload and performs very, very well with concurrent access (think: many users requesting many files). For sequential access SCSI and ATA are pretty much the same, although the +5krpm you will get from a high-end SCSI HD will of course increase performance.
SCSI really begins to shine with the use of Hardware-RAID controllers; a RAID 1 with 15krpm-hds is something very nice to have. In a server.:)
But your advice is flawed beyond that. A SCSI HD takes more time to spin up than an IDE, A SCSI-Controller takes additional time to initialise itself and its' hard drives which slows boot-up speed: There's more loss than gain. And after boot-up, you're much better served with the massive amount of RAM you could buy for the money of Controller and disk. And, guess what: The speed of SCSI is nothing compared to the speed of RAM.
Furthermore, you'll get problems with heating. If you don't want your computer to sound like a F14 taking off, you really don't want anything over 7200rpm at all (personally, I'd go with a 5200 for sake of silence; but that you'll really notice)
It was election day today for the European Parliament. A populace of 300 Million people, second only to India, voted using paper ballots. You could cast your vote on one of 24 parties.
There were no problems. The first projections of the outcome were available about 10 minutes after the booths closed.
So where the heck is the problem with pen&paper anyway?
I bet you didn't develop web sites back when Netscape 4.5 and IE 5 were new.
IE wasn't a "bit better". There were worlds seperating the quality of IEs rendering and that of NS4. That's not to say that IE was good, it's to say that NS4 was (and of course, still is) a freaking mess considering HTML and CSS compliance.
NS wasn't a cheating girlfriend, it was a frigid girlfriend that would stab you in the back (thrice) if you told her you wanted to talk with her.
"But we take pride in not knowing and not implying that we must know; for believing that there must have been something before the universe is an irrelevant belief: it is impossible to know.
On the one hand, there's always an outcry if people are jailed because of copyright infringment and the like, citing that people aren't physically harmed through these crimes and therefore don't deserve jail time as long as physical offenders.
And on the other hand, this. How the hell can you mod the parent Insightful? Since when is killing people to prove a point Insightful?
Get some fucking principes, people. Sometimes when I'm reading this board it feels like being in the Wild West. Educated people shouldn't behave as those nuts on freerepublic.
"When estimating the value of human life when making laws, a decent estimate would probably be the value of that life to society."
You're on a very slippery slope pursuing this concept. Soon you're discussing about unworthy life, parasites to society and then you're in the middle of nazism.
As consequence the 3rd article of the german constitution now reads "All people are equal before the law".
David Hume, Epikur, Schopenhauer, Thomas Edison, Freud, Pierre Curie, Marie Curie, Bertrand Russell. To name a few in no apparent order (and shamelessly stolen from here), didn't believe in a personal god.
But I think this debate over who can name the most people believing or non-believing in god(s) is a bit futile. And assuming that an educated view of god is also a non-zealous, non-threatening version to others it is also an irrelevant one.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, first of all - that riddle on http://www.proveyourworth.net/ isn't.
t tle and expect your insta-hire you're greeted by a site that wants - your resume.
:)
I took the most obvious way after seeing that url in the bottom and had a look in the source: Now, the good thing, it probably prepares you for work at this company: It's full off HTML 3.2 evilness wrapped in a XHTML 1.0 Transitional header, has an invalid tag that contains the solution and is sprinkled with css in places you might not expect.
Alright, so after you've pasted http://www.proveyourworth.net/?p=begin&mistake=li
So what exactly is new about this? I remember Google doing it a few years back?
On the other hand, there might be a real riddle and what they did with that "little" was just to weed out the jerks like me... that would certainly be impressive!
"Also, he implemented a super soldier program, where the best soldiers (by physical characteristic measurements and IQ tests) were 'encouraged' to breed with very suitable females. I can't remember what the whorehouses were called but they had a special name."
I believe you're talking about "Lebensborn": the fathers were mostly soldiers in the SS and had to fulfill requirements like the right genealogical tree, looking sufficiently arian, no IQ-test though. Same of course applies to the prospective mothers.
Later in the war they kidnaped children who looked sufficiently arian from the streets to raise them in homes operated by Lebensborn.
According to wikipedia, there were about 7000-8000 births during 1939-1945.
I won't comment on your question concerning the "effectiveness" of that operation. I mean, what do you expect? That german is roamed by super-intelligent blue plasmas... no wait, blue-eyed, blonde-haired arian-caucasian males? Nope.
By the way, maybe it's because I'm german and all, but this whole discussion here smacks of eugenics.
"Altruism is nothing more than emotional hedonism"
Altruism is defined as helping others without ANY exception for an reward, be that material or immaterial: Altruism is the exact opposite of Egoism and therefore the opposite of Hedonism.
And btw, is it really that hard to spend about five seconds to look something up before posting?
Somehow I always confuse Toqueville with Torquemada
"Burn, Open Source Heretics! Burn!"
I find it quite disturbing how low apparently americans value their privacy when it comes to computers that belong to their employers.
I don't know about other european countries, but at least in Germany it's strictly forbidden, as is video surveillance. It is possible to monitor e-mails and web usage though, as long as the staff association allows it and it is very clear that sending private emails is forbidden (you can get in REALLY deep trouble if you're monitoring your employees without them knowing).
How come surveillance seeming that accepted in the US? It's obviously taking a lot of ressources to monitor (people that watch the people watching the people...) - and I would think that's not a good climate to work in, what with feeling untrusted.
And get this: one of the largest importers (the largest?) offrench electric energy is Germany, who have outlawed and disbanded their nuclear plants due to Green misguided pressure, and are now
;).
The last nuclear reactor is currently[1] scheduled to be shut down in about 27 years. Sorry, they're neither outlawed nor disbanded, there're just no new ones to be built (Apropos "disbanded": in 2003 nuclear energy accounted for 27% of germany's electricity production, while regenerative energies amount for about 9% compared to ~5% in 1991). At least we try.
Oh, and by the way: In 2003Germany had an export surplus of 8 billion MWh. High imports from France are mostly due to it being "routed" through Germany towards the Netherlands and Italy.
a) polluting themselves with coal plants, which actually produce more radioactive waste than nuclear plants of same energy output (not to mention other pollutants).
Maybe. According to this site Germany has reduced its CO2-Emissions by 19% between 1990-2002 while France decreased theirs by 1.9%. This may or may not have anything to do with coal plants but was the first thing I found on google - so anyway
b) paying for el. energy to France, which is produced by nuclear plants which are close enough to Germany, that if a meltdown happened, they would be just as affected!
Ever heard of something called "leading by example"? Also, do you think that you (wherever you live) would be unaffected by a major nuclear meltdown?
[1] currently meaning that after the next election these plans will probably be scrapped by the conservatives.
Please note that BILD is a tabloid and heavilly slanted. If you rely your knowledge on it you probably don't deserve any better...
1. I'm sorry. It was the page that opened as I clicked your link.
;).
;).
:).
:), most other pro-bush writers.
:)
2. So I've read the article. I don't agree with his conclusions. He is downplaying the torture at Abu Ghraib (sorry, but those weren't just panties...), his arguments aren't very deep ("Bush was hardly alone in believing there were WMDs, and given the convictions of so many over such a long period, he erred on the right side.") and all in all his arguments are those I've read about one year ago on FR (albeit less polished
The funniest point to me is him protecting Bush from the "leftist media". Funny because out of the US basically no-one would attest the CNN being left-wing and the blatant right-wing attitude of Fox News is almost unbearable if you're used to european media stations that at least TRY to be neutral with their news.
Funny, too, is his point about all these sick countries with their unthankful stance towards the US. I doubt that Mr. Goldberg has been to other countries after 9/11. At least in Germany the sympathy to the US was astonishing. It only began to weaken as Bush began his crusade against Iraq, showing that he would declare war regardless of arguments that spoke against in, trying to justify this illegal war with hillarity, er, WMDs.
3. Maybe. 1. I'm sorry. It was the page that opened as I clicked your link.
2. So I've read the article. I don't agree with his conclusions. He is downplaying the torture at Abu Ghraib (sorry, but those weren't just panties...), his arguments aren't very deep ("Bush was hardly alone in believing there were WMDs, and given the convictions of so many over such a long period, he erred on the right side.") and all in all his arguments are those I've read about one year ago on FR (albeit less polished
The funniest point to me is him protecting Bush from the "leftist media". Funny because out of the US basically no-one would attest the CNN being left-wing and the blatant right-wing attitude of Fox News is almost unbearable if you're used to european media stations that at least TRY to be neutral with their news.
Funny, too, is his point about all these sick countries with their unthankful stance towards the US. I doubt that Mr. Goldberg has been to other countries after 9/11. At least in Germany the sympathy to the US was astonishing. It only began to weaken as Bush began his crusade against Iraq, showing that he would declare war regardless of arguments that spoke against in, trying to justify this illegal war with hillarity, er, WMDs.
3. Maybe. I still fail to see what Indians and Terrorists have in common. Anyway, after rereading the mail and after having read some FR which almost sounds exactly the same in expressing their brainless views I doubt that he only meant the terrorists.
5. Yes, that may be, I don't know much of this sphere
6. No, it's not my cup. I don't mind anyone being in favor of Bush as long as his arguments aren't full of holes. At least he has a higher level of writing than, seemingly (from what I read 7000 miles away from the US so may point of view may be severly blurred
I, too, would love to hear from you
Bye,
Jo
I skimped through the page, picking up this gem:
This should convince me of the "other side" not being moronic how? This is fascism, pure and simple.
Just being interested and morally high-horsed at the moment
You forgot about c't. Though it has less DIY-projects than it did in the past it is still by far the best german computer magazine.
Last DIY I remember was the RFID-Detector a few issues ago.
"Look at the screenshot on the page. It looks like crap. Usable, sure, but definitely not attractive."
.avi-files with it.
I downloaded WMP 10 yesterday and today tried to watch a few
I'm loathing it. Really, the UI is a freakin' mess. The buttons are aligned without any seeming reasoning at all: One here (oh look, "skin mode"... makes the screen smaller and uglier!), one over there (cool, "now playing options" that open the same uninteresting "visualization" dropdown that i get with clicking the right button). And don't get me started with the library mode.
This thing is so bad it makes realplayer look good in comparison. I felt something like bliss when I returned to Winamp 5.
AbiWord is a nice program and it certainly has it's applications: Why use Word (or OO-Writer for that matter) when you don't need the features?
As an example, take a typical journalist: The formatting is done by other people, so all that is important is getting the content right. Office is overkill here.
But there are people who need more features, and AbiWord never was meant for them. "MS Word killer"? Come on, that's so hilarious it's almost funny.
The time will come when it's possible to kill MS Office in medium-sized businesses, and that is the day when the import and export-features of OO have matured to a degree where documents imported and exported have exactly the same (and by exactly I mean like EXACTLY) look that they had before.
That'd be the day ms office dies it's long and painful death.
A tsunami reaches highs of about 30 meters (according to wikipedia).
;)
The idea of a wave that is 3km high is... well, breathtaking: Seeing a wave almost 10 000ft high could only be topped by seeing the apocalyptic riders surfing on top of it
SCSI is optimized for heavy workload and performs very, very well with concurrent access (think: many users requesting many files). For sequential access SCSI and ATA are pretty much the same, although the +5krpm you will get from a high-end SCSI HD will of course increase performance.
:)
SCSI really begins to shine with the use of Hardware-RAID controllers; a RAID 1 with 15krpm-hds is something very nice to have. In a server.
But your advice is flawed beyond that. A SCSI HD takes more time to spin up than an IDE, A SCSI-Controller takes additional time to initialise itself and its' hard drives which slows boot-up speed: There's more loss than gain. And after boot-up, you're much better served with the massive amount of RAM you could buy for the money of Controller and disk. And, guess what: The speed of SCSI is nothing compared to the speed of RAM.
Furthermore, you'll get problems with heating. If you don't want your computer to sound like a F14 taking off, you really don't want anything over 7200rpm at all (personally, I'd go with a 5200 for sake of silence; but that you'll really notice)
It was election day today for the European Parliament. A populace of 300 Million people, second only to India, voted using paper ballots. You could cast your vote on one of 24 parties.
There were no problems. The first projections of the outcome were available about 10 minutes after the booths closed.
So where the heck is the problem with pen&paper anyway?
I bet you didn't develop web sites back when Netscape 4.5 and IE 5 were new.
:).
IE wasn't a "bit better". There were worlds seperating the quality of IEs rendering and that of NS4. That's not to say that IE was good, it's to say that NS4 was (and of course, still is) a freaking mess considering HTML and CSS compliance.
NS wasn't a cheating girlfriend, it was a frigid girlfriend that would stab you in the back (thrice) if you told her you wanted to talk with her.
Really, it WAS that bad
"so?"
"But we take pride
:)"
in not knowing and not
implying that we must
know;
for believing that there
must have been something
before the universe
is an irrelevant belief:
it is impossible to know.
now look at me
"And so I say to thee:
:)
The universe was
created in order
to amuse us."
Or whatever
At the beginning there was a point
of almost infinite
matter.
Then it exploded.
Thus began time and space.
I don't get you guys.
On the one hand, there's always an outcry if people are jailed because of copyright infringment and the like, citing that people aren't physically harmed through these crimes and therefore don't deserve jail time as long as physical offenders.
And on the other hand, this. How the hell can you mod the parent Insightful? Since when is killing people to prove a point Insightful?
Get some fucking principes, people. Sometimes when I'm reading this board it feels like being in the Wild West. Educated people shouldn't behave as those nuts on freerepublic.
"When estimating the value of human life when making laws, a decent estimate would probably be the value of that life to society."
You're on a very slippery slope pursuing this concept. Soon you're discussing about unworthy life, parasites to society and then you're in the middle of nazism.
As consequence the 3rd article of the german constitution now reads "All people are equal before the law".
If these are the best, who're these?
Albert Einstein didn't believe in a personal god.
David Hume, Epikur, Schopenhauer, Thomas Edison, Freud, Pierre Curie, Marie Curie, Bertrand Russell. To name a few in no apparent order (and shamelessly stolen from here), didn't believe in a personal god.
But I think this debate over who can name the most people believing or non-believing in god(s) is a bit futile. And assuming that an educated view of god is also a non-zealous, non-threatening version to others it is also an irrelevant one.
No it won't be.
The size of attachments is limited to 10MB.
19 years...
Sure, murderers get 25 years, so why should someone who caused no physical harm to humans but inconvinience and loss of money be fined for much less?
Funny that this is the same slashdot that also rejects the idea of 5 years in jail for copyright infringment (at least when it's about music).
Get some principles, people.