Simple: Is one of the products made by Norton? If so, pick the other.... I'll never get over buying a gaming rig in the late 90s, solely for the purpose of playing Quake and another FPS whose name escapes me, and having to spend hours wiping and reinstalling everything on the computer, simply because Norton AV had decided that it should consistently use over 80% of the system resources, and refuse to turn off for any period.
That damned program was more invasive and crippling than the vast majority of the viruses it was designed to protect against >.<
If the people who create the tools (ie Microsoft) can't get it right using their own products, then what hope does anyone else have?
QFT. Everyone who claims "stop hating on Microsoft simply because an incredibly loosely related product sucks" (or words to that effect) needs to reread the AC's above post. Given the apparently level of involvement Microsoft had with the LSE and the creation of TradElect, they either screwed up using their own products, *or* pushed their own product while knowing that it wouldn't fit the bill. Neither of those absolve the company from deserving every ounce of flak they're taking over this.
It's more than that, it's the OS that the software has to run on (since the OS handles the majority of the context switching and thread prioritization - which affect performance when you're shooting for something that approximates a real-time system), and it's the DB that the software ties into. The fanboism (both on the linux side and microsoft side) is annoying, I'll grant you that, but this DOES have something to do with the OS.
Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect...
I mean, I'll agree that bashing microsoft, solely for the sake of bashing microsoft, is so 10 years ago... but it sounds plausible, given the nature of the CEO change-up, the inside sources, and the wholesale replacement of their microsoft-made system.
Your rhetoric is pretty terrible. You're trying to tell me that an interpol or fbi search on a name takes 4 hours to return a picture (or not), and that searching the man's belongings for contraband/weaponry takes another 4 hours of concurrent activity? Seriously?
It doesn't take very long to confirm someone's identity (provided they're not giving you a false one) regardless of fingerprints, and lists containing known terrorists are fairly widespread. The story is about stupidity and ineptitude in the name of security.
Users attempting to access the site were redirected to a page featuring a climate-change protest.
OHNOES! They breached the admin net!
There's a reason why the protected A/B network is accessible to the intarwebs and the L2 or higher networks are not. This may be interesting from a hacktivism standpoint... but it's not terribly newsworthy... or, at least, it's not got nearly as much shock value as the summary purports it to have.
Seriously!! I mean, how can anyone sleep at night knowing that one of their neighbours might possibly have no fingerprints and be nothing but a terrorist waiting to happen!?!?!?!
Quick, before it's too late, round up all your neighbours and fingerprint them. If you find any without discernible fingerprints, SHOOT THEM RIGHT THERE ON THE SPOT!! After all, you can never be too safe!
As an FYI, drugs aren't required to think that detaining a 62 year old for over 4 hours is retarded; a sense of perspective will accomplish the same thing.
How long does it take to question a man to determine whether or not he has a decent story, and to then determine whether or not he has any biological, nuclear, chemical weapons or explosives?
But if we're talking about fair and right, then it really should be handled by the UN rather than any single country.
No. It should be handled by an organization with a demonstrable history of not fucking things up in the name of censorship. Unfortunately, such a beast does not exist, and insofar as the "choose the lesser of the evils" mantra goes, your country seems to be doing a solid job.
Great! Tell me how I can use a range-based for-loop to generate multiple tree structures and cross-breed them through "snipping" them at various points and exchanging the subtrees, in a manner that is completely free of the possibility of encountering an off-by-one error which either causes snipping at an unintended place or has the potential to introduce a segfault.
I'll be running into that situation quite a bit in the coding that I'll be doing for my PhD, so you'll be saving me potentially countless hours of debugging time.
Yeah, that would be an easier way to calculate distance from the pulsar (like I said, IANAP). However, the onboard clock from which you calculate the expected phase would need to take the change in period with respect to time (ie. the slowing of the pulsar) into consideration. You obviously have a better grasp on how to determine the distance than I do; I was mostly pointing out that, no matter what you do, the braking of the pulsar is understood and either forms the basis for your distance calculations or must absolutely be taken into consideration. It was mostly in response to the since it is poorly understood and not completely predictable crap that was written by Kdawson.
Pulsars slow down over time, and the arXiv paper doesn't seem to mention this. The paper is mainly about establishing a coordinate system and a reference selection of pulsars. Any proposed Galactic Positioning System would have to take the slowing into account, and since it is poorly understood and not completely predictable, this would limit accuracy.
correct, space is not fixed... unless you're talking about a fixed position in time. The point referring to the focus of the radio telescope in Cambridge UK *does* move. But the point referring to the focus of the radio telescope in Cambridge UK at 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001 does NOT.
Which is to say, that receiving signals from pulsars whose signal period NEVER deviated, would tell you absolutely nothing about where you are, unless you're using a really narrow directional antenna to figure out exactly where (directionally, but not positionally) the pulsars are. Which is akin to visual triangulation... something that'd likely be a nightmare to engineer around. What you need is a clock in each of the sats, and the slowing *is* that clock.
Not really... it's just a point in space. They can figure out where everything else in the observable universe was, relative to that point. I mean, the reality is, that nothing in space is really all that fixed (since galaxies are spreading apart), but as far as intra-galaxy positioning goes, one point is just as good as another for a standard point of reference. We know where that point was, relative to most other points, at a specific time. That point doesn't complete an orbit of the sun every 12 months, even though the object it was based on does. Small distinction, but it's all that matters. They're going to be measuring position relative to the pulsars, and not measuring it relative to the focal point of a telescope in Cambridge.
Also, there's a bit of silliness in the summary - the braking index of pulsars is fairly well established. It's the causes that aren't really understood, since most pulsars apparently differ from the theoretical index (IANAP). The slowdown also seems to be constant, and gives pulsars a lifespan of 10^6 years. In a modern GPS system, one needs to know two things from each of the satellites Where the signal came from and when (the reality is that you really just need to know when it was sent, and you program the "where" into the receiver-unit in a manner that lets you know where the object would have been at that time). In a modern GPS system, they put really expensive and accurate clocks into the satellites, and the signal they send out encodes the time that the signal was sent. You figure out where you are, by calculating how long it took that signal to get to you, based off of the time received from other satellites
How the hell would a pulsar encode the time it sent its signal? Simple, the period of the signal from each pulsar changes over time... that's your clock. You know what the period was at 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001, and by how much it increases. So, when you receive the signal, you calculate how long, from 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001, it would take for the signal to have a period matching the one you received. You now know when the signal was sent from, and, the information on where it was sent from is programmed into the receiver-unit. Measure the same from the other pulsars and *bam*, there's your location.
DUDE! Yeah, I have a godaddy server which is largely unused (I had been using it for a guild portal for WoW, but stopped playing a few months ago... server's still kicking around in case I need it). Got any more info detailing how to do what you're suggesting?
I suppose. However, the few times I've tried to find a decent proxy, all I've managed to find is a spam/spyware infested hive of filth. God knows I'd LOVE to get pandora back... it was such an awesome station, and I got hooked on a few bands I'd never have heard (nor heard of) otherwise, had they not gotten tossed into my stream by pandora's matching system.
taking money away from people like Britney Spears. She needs another mansion dammit!
No doubt. Though it does make me rather jealous that KFed (to whom she pays a "pittance" of $40,000 a MONTH in alimony) not only got to bang her repeatedly, but now makes only marginally less in a month than I do in a year, solely for having had to "endure" a couple years with her.
The fact that he's dumb as a post makes that jealousy fade a little, but still...
Oh off-by-one errors. I encounter them a whole helluva lot less than I used to (in my own code), but the odd mistake creeps in every now and then. I think anyone who claims they never make them, or that a professional company should never make them, is either lying or deluded. It's far too easy to make them unless you're doing really simplistic coding and only ever working with arrays.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple: Is one of the products made by Norton? If so, pick the other.... I'll never get over buying a gaming rig in the late 90s, solely for the purpose of playing Quake and another FPS whose name escapes me, and having to spend hours wiping and reinstalling everything on the computer, simply because Norton AV had decided that it should consistently use over 80% of the system resources, and refuse to turn off for any period.
That damned program was more invasive and crippling than the vast majority of the viruses it was designed to protect against >.<
If the people who create the tools (ie Microsoft) can't get it right using their own products, then what hope does anyone else have?
QFT. Everyone who claims "stop hating on Microsoft simply because an incredibly loosely related product sucks" (or words to that effect) needs to reread the AC's above post. Given the apparently level of involvement Microsoft had with the LSE and the creation of TradElect, they either screwed up using their own products, *or* pushed their own product while knowing that it wouldn't fit the bill. Neither of those absolve the company from deserving every ounce of flak they're taking over this.
It's more than that, it's the OS that the software has to run on (since the OS handles the majority of the context switching and thread prioritization - which affect performance when you're shooting for something that approximates a real-time system), and it's the DB that the software ties into. The fanboism (both on the linux side and microsoft side) is annoying, I'll grant you that, but this DOES have something to do with the OS.
You left out this bit:
Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect ...
I mean, I'll agree that bashing microsoft, solely for the sake of bashing microsoft, is so 10 years ago... but it sounds plausible, given the nature of the CEO change-up, the inside sources, and the wholesale replacement of their microsoft-made system.
chode ... although it'd be easier to read if it were hyphenated: chode-aphone.
So it does make sense
*cue "the more you know" splash*
This argument seems to be trotted out more and more these days:
"I don't think that 15 cents per month is too much to ask for our children's protection," said Rep. Simone Champagne, D-Jeanerette.
I don't even know Simone, but I think I'd like to punch them in the face a few times.
Your rhetoric is pretty terrible. You're trying to tell me that an interpol or fbi search on a name takes 4 hours to return a picture (or not), and that searching the man's belongings for contraband/weaponry takes another 4 hours of concurrent activity? Seriously?
It doesn't take very long to confirm someone's identity (provided they're not giving you a false one) regardless of fingerprints, and lists containing known terrorists are fairly widespread. The story is about stupidity and ineptitude in the name of security.
Users attempting to access the site were redirected to a page featuring a climate-change protest.
OHNOES! They breached the admin net!
There's a reason why the protected A/B network is accessible to the intarwebs and the L2 or higher networks are not. This may be interesting from a hacktivism standpoint... but it's not terribly newsworthy... or, at least, it's not got nearly as much shock value as the summary purports it to have.
+1, entirely apropos geek humor
A+, would lol again
Quick, before it's too late, round up all your neighbours and fingerprint them. If you find any without discernible fingerprints, SHOOT THEM RIGHT THERE ON THE SPOT!! After all, you can never be too safe!
As an FYI, drugs aren't required to think that detaining a 62 year old for over 4 hours is retarded; a sense of perspective will accomplish the same thing.
How long does it take to question a man to determine whether or not he has a decent story, and to then determine whether or not he has any biological, nuclear, chemical weapons or explosives?
I sense a new market just waiting to be tapped into!...
... or maybe it's just gas
probably a wheelchair
But if we're talking about fair and right, then it really should be handled by the UN rather than any single country.
No. It should be handled by an organization with a demonstrable history of not fucking things up in the name of censorship. Unfortunately, such a beast does not exist, and insofar as the "choose the lesser of the evils" mantra goes, your country seems to be doing a solid job.
teach me obiwan codeobi - it's a genetic programming application. So using something other than a tree structure isn't really in the cards.
Great! Tell me how I can use a range-based for-loop to generate multiple tree structures and cross-breed them through "snipping" them at various points and exchanging the subtrees, in a manner that is completely free of the possibility of encountering an off-by-one error which either causes snipping at an unintended place or has the potential to introduce a segfault.
I'll be running into that situation quite a bit in the coding that I'll be doing for my PhD, so you'll be saving me potentially countless hours of debugging time.
Thanks again! =)
Pulsars slow down over time, and the arXiv paper doesn't seem to mention this. The paper is mainly about establishing a coordinate system and a reference selection of pulsars. Any proposed Galactic Positioning System would have to take the slowing into account, and since it is poorly understood and not completely predictable, this would limit accuracy.
correct, space is not fixed... unless you're talking about a fixed position in time. The point referring to the focus of the radio telescope in Cambridge UK *does* move. But the point referring to the focus of the radio telescope in Cambridge UK at 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001 does NOT.
Which is to say, that receiving signals from pulsars whose signal period NEVER deviated, would tell you absolutely nothing about where you are, unless you're using a really narrow directional antenna to figure out exactly where (directionally, but not positionally) the pulsars are. Which is akin to visual triangulation... something that'd likely be a nightmare to engineer around. What you need is a clock in each of the sats, and the slowing *is* that clock.
Not really ... it's just a point in space. They can figure out where everything else in the observable universe was, relative to that point. I mean, the reality is, that nothing in space is really all that fixed (since galaxies are spreading apart), but as far as intra-galaxy positioning goes, one point is just as good as another for a standard point of reference. We know where that point was, relative to most other points, at a specific time. That point doesn't complete an orbit of the sun every 12 months, even though the object it was based on does. Small distinction, but it's all that matters. They're going to be measuring position relative to the pulsars, and not measuring it relative to the focal point of a telescope in Cambridge.
Also, there's a bit of silliness in the summary - the braking index of pulsars is fairly well established. It's the causes that aren't really understood, since most pulsars apparently differ from the theoretical index (IANAP). The slowdown also seems to be constant, and gives pulsars a lifespan of 10^6 years. In a modern GPS system, one needs to know two things from each of the satellites Where the signal came from and when (the reality is that you really just need to know when it was sent, and you program the "where" into the receiver-unit in a manner that lets you know where the object would have been at that time). In a modern GPS system, they put really expensive and accurate clocks into the satellites, and the signal they send out encodes the time that the signal was sent. You figure out where you are, by calculating how long it took that signal to get to you, based off of the time received from other satellites
How the hell would a pulsar encode the time it sent its signal? Simple, the period of the signal from each pulsar changes over time... that's your clock. You know what the period was at 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001, and by how much it increases. So, when you receive the signal, you calculate how long, from 0000hrs 1 Jan 2001, it would take for the signal to have a period matching the one you received. You now know when the signal was sent from, and, the information on where it was sent from is programmed into the receiver-unit. Measure the same from the other pulsars and *bam*, there's your location.
Also, my comment was modded Troll? WTF? It might have been offtopic, but I wasn't fishing for a flamefest ...
DUDE! Yeah, I have a godaddy server which is largely unused (I had been using it for a guild portal for WoW, but stopped playing a few months ago... server's still kicking around in case I need it). Got any more info detailing how to do what you're suggesting?
Know any good free/cheap ones?
They've said they want to expand once again, but I haven't heard anything from them for quite some time...
Dear Pandora: Come to Canada. We have cake.
taking money away from people like Britney Spears. She needs another mansion dammit!
No doubt. Though it does make me rather jealous that KFed (to whom she pays a "pittance" of $40,000 a MONTH in alimony) not only got to bang her repeatedly, but now makes only marginally less in a month than I do in a year, solely for having had to "endure" a couple years with her.
The fact that he's dumb as a post makes that jealousy fade a little, but still...
Oh off-by-one errors. I encounter them a whole helluva lot less than I used to (in my own code), but the odd mistake creeps in every now and then. I think anyone who claims they never make them, or that a professional company should never make them, is either lying or deluded. It's far too easy to make them unless you're doing really simplistic coding and only ever working with arrays.