Not just China. I know someone who has just accepted a job to help develop a pebble bed reactor in South Africa. And he is not a nuclear scientist but an electrical engineer: i.e. they are actually building something. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
Just as we get to moderate the comments to the stories we should be able to moderate the stories themselves. Then I could set my "newsworthy" threshold just as I can set a threshold on the comments.
(i) You can detach the process, logout, GO HOME, login and reattach.
(ii) The detach can be deliberate or accidental.
(iii) Multiplex several pty's.
Oh, and you can specify it as your shell in/etc/passwd so you never forget to use it. Not that I find this necessary as, with screen, I never logout anymore.
1980 University of the Witwatersrand first year computer science course first taught us machine code and assembly using two synthetic languages Fred and Bassett. There were implemented in Fortran on an IBM 370. The Bassett assembler produced Fred machine code. I am dismayed that any computer science course could start without teaching assembly. Information Technology 101 or Computing for Business 101, OK. But Computer Science!!?!?!?!?
No what really surprises me is that anybody here might think teaching assembly as a first programming language to computer science students can in any way be strange.
Has nobody read Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming? It's all in a (different) synthetic assembly language!
At the same site here is something to get those all worked up over six different types of screws slavering. Some stills for a geek pr0n snuff movie: http://www55.dixiesys.com/~bunker/geekpr0n.html
And you would have to wait for the growing season. And be prepared to go without the food crop in the interim. The investor list for this project is the most valuable thing about it: A list of wealthy suckers.
Landmines are fairly small devices so a high plant density would be required. Much land is not easily planted - esp by airplane. It will have to be a remarkable plant to grow in all the conditions it will be needed. They would need one variety for paddy fields, another for savanna, etc etc. To have a chance of getting growing plants in sufficient density you would have to plough the land first.
I tried and it worked and now I am financially independent. So why can't you do it? At least that is the question being asked by some here.
What most "successful" people forget is that they got lucky. Sure, you make some of your own luck, but not all of it. It is all too easy to become arrogant.
What you are doing is right: You must try multiple times. You are more likely to throw a six if you throw more than once. If you expect to have to try multiple times then you will not chuck all your life savings into one venture. Failing, as it is so likely, must not be disastrous.
Start your venture. Work hard and be focussed. Enjoy the ride. Expect to fail!
And if you do get lucky then do not think you have the Midas touch: Ringfence your financial gain before starting the next venture.
Better to complain about everything you really do not like. What you suggest is not to complain about Bush's wrongdoing because you neglected to complain about Clinton's. No, complain about both. If you "forget" or neglect to complain about the one at least remember to complain about the other.
If the complaint is valid then the complaint is valid! Who the complainant is or the complainant's prior behavious is not relevant. The complainant's neglect to have complained on a previous occasion says something about them - that they are hypocrites or that they have learnt something from the past - not that the complaint should be ignored.
My comment was, I see now, a flawed attempt to politely say that I doubt what you said. I had a look and could find no reference on the Internet to the number of people so identified in Atlanta.
As for falling trees, and I wasn't necessarily looking to independently verify that the arrests actually happened, but that there is someone other than you who quotes the statistic. Which would be a start. Where does the info come from?
This is obviously immigration control disguised as an anti-terrorist measure.
The stories we are being spun just seem like a grown up version of the Man from U.N.C.L.E. and THRUSH. The Man From U.N.C.L.E
I am concerned as to how the War on Terror affects me, personally. Already I was never entirely trusting of tall buildings and so no change there. I am a little nervous of flying but there are enough things to go wrong already that hijacking is just another problem. And as we are going to win the War on Terror, so we are told, I will be able to re-enter high buildings and sleep on planes. But only when everyone who hates us is dead will tall buildings and planes be safe. A lot of people are going to have to die.
Which is insane! There must be another way.
Anyway, back to the mundane issue of how this all effects me. And you. We are all being told by our governments to be vigilent. We are on variously coloured alerts of several levels of seriousness. We have to be on the lookout for terrorists. Which presents us with a problem: How do we identify a terrorist? By suspicious activity. We have no choice but to tolerate being viewed suspiciously by the police and other more secretive government agencies.
This news story from CNN provides insight as to what is meant when the authorities say that some activity is "suspicious" or "consistent with known methods of al-Qaida". You might already be guilty of this behaviour so click here:
Perhaps it is one of my many character flaws but I find I am unable to obey _all_ the laws _all_ the time. Sometimes I feel guilty just passing by a policeman. [Othertimes, like you, I smile and say hello.] Did he see me jay-walking? Have I fastened my seat belt? Is he aware I have annotated my almanac?
I assure you this does not happen often but next time my collar is felt by the local constabulary I wonder if, having now read the CNN article, I will find myself babbling that the jottings in the margins of my copy of Lonely Planet are not "suspicious".
USA and UK law allows a policeman to arrest someone he suspects of terrorist activity and that person can be help incommunicado but lawyers are critical because the laws are pretty vague about what this activity is. Such activity, presumably, would be "consistent with known methods of al-Qaida". By the measure of the USA's FBI advice to policemen described in CNN's above referenced article it seems any of us can be arrested at any time.
Am I the only one who thinks that the erosion of civil liberties is unlikely to address the threat of terrorism? Should you share my opinion about the suspension-of-liberty vs terror issue (i.e. that it's not the either-or choice we are told it is) I advise you not to air it at USA airport security. Were you to do so while you are prodded in the genitals both with enthusiasm and a Geiger counter (or while they flick though your almanac) I bet you would miss your flight.
In my view liberty is fragile and is threatened more by authoritarians than by terrorists. All these supposed counter-terrorist measures are getting too invasive and pervasive for me.
It might look that way, that piracy creates lower prices, but that just cannot be true, long term. Piracy destroys value or, in other words, reduces the incentive to produce. I am a consumer, I want others to produce. They must be rewarded, sometimes (often?) the required reward is financial.
I wish slashdotters (including CowboyNeal) did not seem to be advocating piracy. Let us rather advocate a free market. While arguing for amendment or scrapping laws such as DMCA; while arguing that eventually Mickey Mouse must become public property let us not be seen to advocate theft.
I can express that better. The content has value. Value to you and value to me. Different values. If it's value to you is greater than its price you will buy it. It also has a value to the producer. If the price of production is lower than the proceeds the producer will produce. Pirating destroys value, is a disincentive to production.
Of course, abuses can happen by monopolies and thru too much protection for copyright holders. But that does not excuse theft. Not that I say you are advocating that. But we need incentives for artists and others to PRODUCE. Often the best incentive is financial. I don't program, e.g., just for the love of it.
Slashdot Mirror
This story has featured on Slashdot before.
Very poor moderation: This posting is OBVIOUSLY incorrect.
Good post but poor moderation: Now one can get moderated "insightful" by claiming an insight but declining to say what the insight is.
This is not new news. That the newspaper printed this today still does not make it new news. Not new is: Old!
Not just China. I know someone who has just accepted a job to help develop a pebble bed reactor in South Africa. And he is not a nuclear scientist but an electrical engineer: i.e. they are actually building something. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
Just as we get to moderate the comments to the stories we should be able to moderate the stories themselves. Then I could set my "newsworthy" threshold just as I can set a threshold on the comments.
I read the review. And I already like Ubuntu. But why is this release a milestone? What do I get over and above Warty Warthog?
Dear Sir,
Please give me a job.
Yours sincerely,
B Mandelbrot
At last we get off the flat and can assemble chips in 3d.
"Nurse Jones, the computer is telling me Old Mavis is constipated again."
To be more explicit as to screen's real benefits:
/etc/passwd so you never forget to use it. Not that I find this necessary as, with screen, I never logout anymore.
(i) You can detach the process, logout, GO HOME, login and reattach.
(ii) The detach can be deliberate or accidental.
(iii) Multiplex several pty's.
Oh, and you can specify it as your shell in
"Google doesn't pull much up that I can find: it is mostly targeted towards those building a (free or profit) Internet access point."
Follow those instructions and then disconnect from the Internet.
Note how the Minix code is so much better commented than the Linux code.
1980 University of the Witwatersrand first year computer science course first taught us machine code and assembly using two synthetic languages Fred and Bassett. There were implemented in Fortran on an IBM 370. The Bassett assembler produced Fred machine code. I am dismayed that any computer science course could start without teaching assembly. Information Technology 101 or Computing for Business 101, OK. But Computer Science!!?!?!?!?
No what really surprises me is that anybody here might think teaching assembly as a first programming language to computer science students can in any way be strange.
Has nobody read Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming? It's all in a (different) synthetic assembly language!
The youth of today. What is the world coming to?
At the same site here is something to get those all worked up over six different types of screws slavering. Some stills for a geek pr0n snuff movie: http://www55.dixiesys.com/~bunker/geekpr0n.html
And you would have to wait for the growing season.
And be prepared to go without the food crop in the interim. The investor list for this project is the most valuable thing about it: A list of wealthy suckers.
Landmines are fairly small devices so a high plant density would be required. Much land is not easily planted - esp by airplane. It will have to be a remarkable plant to grow in all the conditions it will be needed. They would need one variety for paddy fields, another for savanna, etc etc. To have a chance of getting growing plants in sufficient density you would have to plough the land first.
I tried and it worked and now I am financially independent. So why can't you do it? At least that is the question being asked by some here.
What most "successful" people forget is that they got lucky. Sure, you make some of your own luck, but not all of it. It is all too easy to become arrogant.
What you are doing is right: You must try multiple times. You are more likely to throw a six if you throw more than once. If you expect to have to try multiple times then you will not chuck all your life savings into one venture. Failing, as it is so likely, must not be disastrous.
Start your venture. Work hard and be focussed. Enjoy the ride. Expect to fail!
And if you do get lucky then do not think you have the Midas touch: Ringfence your financial gain before starting the next venture.
Better to complain about everything you really do not like. What you suggest is not to complain about Bush's wrongdoing because you neglected to complain about Clinton's. No, complain about both. If you "forget" or neglect to complain about the one at least remember to complain about the other.
If the complaint is valid then the complaint is valid! Who the complainant is or the complainant's prior behavious is not relevant. The complainant's neglect to have complained on a previous occasion says something about them - that they are hypocrites or that they have learnt something from the past - not that the complaint should be ignored.
My comment was, I see now, a flawed attempt to politely say that I doubt what you said. I had a look and could find no reference on the Internet to the number of people so identified in Atlanta.
As for falling trees, and I wasn't necessarily looking to independently verify that the arrests actually happened, but that there is someone other than you who quotes the statistic. Which would be a start. Where does the info come from?
they caught over a dozen people on the terrorist watch list
Please tell me where I can independently verify this.
This is obviously immigration control disguised as an anti-terrorist measure.
The stories we are being spun just seem like a grown up version of the Man from U.N.C.L.E. and
THRUSH. The Man From U.N.C.L.E
I am concerned as to how the War on Terror affects me, personally. Already I was never entirely
trusting of tall buildings and so no change there. I am a little nervous of flying but there
are enough things to go wrong already that hijacking is just another problem. And as we are
going to win the War on Terror, so we are told, I will be able to re-enter high buildings and
sleep on planes. But only when everyone who hates us is dead will tall buildings and planes
be safe. A lot of people are going to have to die.
Which is insane! There must be another way.
Anyway, back to the mundane issue of how this all effects me. And you. We are all being told
by our governments to be vigilent. We are on variously coloured alerts of several levels of
seriousness. We have to be on the lookout for terrorists. Which presents us with a problem:
How do we identify a terrorist? By suspicious activity. We have no choice but to tolerate
being viewed suspiciously by the police and other more secretive government agencies.
This news story from CNN provides insight as to what is meant when the authorities say that
some activity is "suspicious" or "consistent with known methods of al-Qaida". You might
already be guilty of this behaviour so click here:
Don't annotate your almanac!
Perhaps it is one of my many character flaws but I find I am unable to obey _all_ the laws
_all_ the time. Sometimes I feel guilty just passing by a policeman. [Othertimes, like you,
I smile and say hello.] Did he see me jay-walking? Have I fastened my seat belt? Is he
aware I have annotated my almanac?
I assure you this does not happen often but next time my collar is felt by the local constabulary
I wonder if, having now read the CNN article, I will find myself babbling that the jottings
in the margins of my copy of Lonely Planet are not "suspicious".
USA and UK law allows a policeman to arrest someone he suspects of terrorist activity and that person can be help incommunicado but lawyers
are critical because the laws are pretty vague about what this activity is. Such activity,
presumably, would be "consistent with known methods of al-Qaida". By the measure of the USA's
FBI advice to policemen described in CNN's above referenced article it seems any of us can be arrested at any time.
Am I the only one who thinks that the erosion of civil liberties is unlikely to address the
threat of terrorism? Should you share my opinion about the suspension-of-liberty vs terror issue
(i.e. that it's not the either-or choice we are told it is) I advise you not to air it at USA
airport security. Were you to do so while you are prodded in the genitals both with enthusiasm
and a Geiger counter (or while they flick though your almanac) I bet you would miss your flight.
In my view liberty is fragile and is threatened more by authoritarians than by terrorists.
All these supposed counter-terrorist measures are getting too invasive and pervasive for me.
I prefer not to live my life that way. Two wrongs don't make a right.
It might look that way, that piracy creates lower prices, but that just cannot be true, long term. Piracy destroys value or, in other words, reduces the incentive to produce. I am a consumer, I want others to produce. They must be rewarded, sometimes (often?) the required reward is financial. I wish slashdotters (including CowboyNeal) did not seem to be advocating piracy. Let us rather advocate a free market. While arguing for amendment or scrapping laws such as DMCA; while arguing that eventually Mickey Mouse must become public property let us not be seen to advocate theft.
I can express that better. The content has value. Value to you and value to me. Different values. If it's value to you is greater than its price you will buy it. It also has a value to the producer. If the price of production is lower than the proceeds the producer will produce. Pirating destroys value, is a disincentive to production.
Of course, abuses can happen by monopolies and thru too much protection for copyright holders. But that does not excuse theft. Not that I say you are advocating that. But we need incentives for artists and others to PRODUCE. Often the best incentive is financial. I don't program, e.g., just for the love of it.