>But he wasn't on the Grassy Knoll, and you sound like a loony.
He was a guest in the parade where Kennedy died, riding in one of the cars in the motorcade. I never said he was on the Knoll. On the other hand, I was on the other side of the plaza (a few months old). Man, that was risky. Now you have some conspiracy nut convinced that you were part of the team that fired the kill shots. Those people are unstable, and you never know what they'll do.
You're just obsessed with death like it is special. How about if we're just celebrating the end of him doing harm? I would have to argue that celebrating his death is important. It tells the world we didn't approve of what he was doing, and reminds others not to act like that. Shame is the mechanism by which society tells its members that this or that is not an appropriate way to act. As you've attempted to shame celebrating death. Each of us must decide whether or not to accept your shame, and anyone who reads this will have to consider whether our shame of Jack Valenti reflects on their actions as well as his.
Since the Godwin rule is long gone in this conversation: do you also attempt to shame those who are glad Hitler is gone? I wouldn't even attempt to say that Valenti is close. But neither were his actions in the last 20 or 30 years of life good for society, though I imagine that both Valenti and Hitler were pretty sure they were doing right, they just weren't very reflective human beings. At least I can say I've thought carefully about it, and have read solid scientific research which backs my position, that shaming Jack Valenti at his death is right and good for human kind.
Public shame is one of the mechanisms by which society corrects egregious behavior in the long run. By speaking, loudly, that his family should be ashamed of him, particularly during publicly notable moments in the life cycle, such as death, we encourage both them and others not to pursue those paths, and make the world a better place for all.
No, unfortunately, the search space is always 2^unforced bits in size, which is always going to be a huge number for any reasonable file. So unfortunately the suggested strategy can pretty much never be made useful. This is essentially because MD5 (or any hash) is just an extreme example of a lossy compression algorithm. And it's extremely lossy.
You'd be surprised at just how large that set would be. Particularly since you presumably can't really rule out most non-binaries without significant difficulties.
For the math: Assume you used a 256 bit version of MD5 with perfect distribution. You encode some 1k byte (8192 bit file). How many possible files must collide on the given hash?
How many if we can also prove that roughly half the bytes (leaving 4096 bits) must fit some odd file format you've picked?
(The answers to both questions are unfortunately uselessly large numbers).
Realistically, to run any likely dx10 app, you'd need at least 64 top of the line cpus to handle the software rendering load.
Re:Question on how PRAM works and is manufactured
on
Intel Set To Demo PRAM
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, the quote you made is quite right, except that you want to write at a rate 10k greater in order to beat out hard disks, so that 0.744 years instead of 744, which doesn't look so hot (or 7 years if you're willing to accept a drive that is almost as fast as a conventional drive, which is almost acceptable). You also assume that wear levelling means getting the statistical average number of writes out of every cell, which it doesn't. Realistically, that factor chops off roughly half of your write capacity.
On the other hand, 10^8 writes with pram will be plenty.
I was assuming they weren't going to patent it until the oil ran out, instead just keeping it secret. In the event that someone else tries to patent the invention out from under them, they have carefully documented their development timeline (said documents destroyed of course before the actual patent application).
As an alternative to the poster who debunked you by assuming that oil companies may only think short term, I'll debunk you by assuming that oil companies think in the long term. Suppose oil company A believes it can sell $100 billion dollars per year of oil for the next 200 years, so long as solar technology is not plentiful, so they would have to bury their solar technology. Alternatively, they could sell powerful solar technology for $1 trillion per year, for the next 5 years, after which the market will be full, and only marginal future sales will be possible.
Even worse: what if they believe they can then sell their solar technology, after finishing off their use of the oil market?
What does the rational, long term planning oil company choose?
Yes, it is easier, but far more problem prone. Nearly every school system that doesn't use a whitelist uses a blacklist, and every story we hear about net access gone wrong is of the blacklist variety. Blacklists will never work effectively. Whitelists solve those problems, but they take more work from everybody, and yes, will lead to frustrated students needing to ask for permission to view pages all the time: THAT'S THE POINT.
I have run a whitelist with 100% success. Yes it frustrated people, but we never had an issue with someone getting access to something we weren't happy with.
Yes, the virtual world is totally non-dependent on telecom fiber lays supported by our governments, don't use any government subsidized power, and never rely on the roads to move server equipment. They'd be totally unaffected if our national government laid down its arms, gave up having a military budget, and let other countries invade at will. And the people who participate in these things are totally independent of the social benefits network, as none of them have any children, or parents or...
It's a matter of long-term vs short-term thinking. Quarterly stock market results drives short term thinking. Why do you suppose private firms have such a surprising ability to outmaneuver public companies?
40 hours is less than 2 days of bt. Lots of people were buying up this service when the terms were less strict expecting to use it as a wireless data service for their laptops. Why else do they even sell those EVDO cards for laptops?
I'm sure he must have meant that it's the Nazi's look that you make good. You know: the brown shirts, red armbands, effeminate breeches. The real mistake is that he should have used well instead of good unless he really believes that looks themselves are good or evil.:-)
It's not me that's forgetting, it's Castro: "In Thursday's article, Castro said more than 3 billion people in the world were condemned to die prematurely of hunger or thirst from plans by his ideological foe, the United States, to convert foodstuffs like corn into fuel for cars."
Slashdot Mirror
He was a guest in the parade where Kennedy died, riding in one of the cars in the motorcade.
I never said he was on the Knoll. On the other hand, I was on the other side of the plaza (a few months old). Man, that was risky. Now you have some conspiracy nut convinced that you were part of the team that fired the kill shots. Those people are unstable, and you never know what they'll do.
You're just obsessed with death like it is special. How about if we're just celebrating the end of him doing harm?
I would have to argue that celebrating his death is important. It tells the world we didn't approve of what he was doing, and reminds others not to act like that. Shame is the mechanism by which society tells its members that this or that is not an appropriate way to act. As you've attempted to shame celebrating death. Each of us must decide whether or not to accept your shame, and anyone who reads this will have to consider whether our shame of Jack Valenti reflects on their actions as well as his.
Since the Godwin rule is long gone in this conversation: do you also attempt to shame those who are glad Hitler is gone? I wouldn't even attempt to say that Valenti is close. But neither were his actions in the last 20 or 30 years of life good for society, though I imagine that both Valenti and Hitler were pretty sure they were doing right, they just weren't very reflective human beings. At least I can say I've thought carefully about it, and have read solid scientific research which backs my position, that shaming Jack Valenti at his death is right and good for human kind.
>>You're not a very good Christian.
;-)
>>You can't just absolve someone, for no reason.
>Unless you're Catholic!
He said not a very good Christian. Or did you miss that day in catechism when they taught idolatry?
Public shame is one of the mechanisms by which society corrects egregious behavior in the long run. By speaking, loudly, that his family should be ashamed of him, particularly during publicly notable moments in the life cycle, such as death, we encourage both them and others not to pursue those paths, and make the world a better place for all.
Is a nonexclusive unlimited license not what you're asking for in some way?
Client goes their own way, and does what they please with the code. Developer goes their own way and does what he pleases with the code.
Afraid of the specific condition of the client selling to a litigation company? Make the source code part of the license non-transferable.
Yeah I'm not sure about the funny mod either ... it was a completely serious response. That it's practically unbuyable was pretty much the point.
No, unfortunately, the search space is always 2^unforced bits in size, which is always going to be a huge number for any reasonable file. So unfortunately the suggested strategy can pretty much never be made useful. This is essentially because MD5 (or any hash) is just an extreme example of a lossy compression algorithm. And it's extremely lossy.
You'd be surprised at just how large that set would be. Particularly since you presumably can't really rule out most non-binaries without significant difficulties.
For the math: Assume you used a 256 bit version of MD5 with perfect distribution. You encode some 1k byte (8192 bit file). How many possible files must collide on the given hash?
How many if we can also prove that roughly half the bytes (leaving 4096 bits) must fit some odd file format you've picked?
(The answers to both questions are unfortunately uselessly large numbers).
Realistically, to run any likely dx10 app, you'd need at least 64 top of the line cpus to handle the software rendering load.
Unfortunately, the quote you made is quite right, except that you want to write at a rate 10k greater in order to beat out hard disks, so that 0.744 years instead of 744, which doesn't look so hot (or 7 years if you're willing to accept a drive that is almost as fast as a conventional drive, which is almost acceptable). You also assume that wear levelling means getting the statistical average number of writes out of every cell, which it doesn't. Realistically, that factor chops off roughly half of your write capacity.
On the other hand, 10^8 writes with pram will be plenty.
I was assuming they weren't going to patent it until the oil ran out, instead just keeping it secret. In the event that someone else tries to patent the invention out from under them, they have carefully documented their development timeline (said documents destroyed of course before the actual patent application).
As an alternative to the poster who debunked you by assuming that oil companies may only think short term, I'll debunk you by assuming that oil companies think in the long term. Suppose oil company A believes it can sell $100 billion dollars per year of oil for the next 200 years, so long as solar technology is not plentiful, so they would have to bury their solar technology. Alternatively, they could sell powerful solar technology for $1 trillion per year, for the next 5 years, after which the market will be full, and only marginal future sales will be possible.
Even worse: what if they believe they can then sell their solar technology, after finishing off their use of the oil market?
What does the rational, long term planning oil company choose?
Yes, it is easier, but far more problem prone. Nearly every school system that doesn't use a whitelist uses a blacklist, and every story we hear about net access gone wrong is of the blacklist variety. Blacklists will never work effectively. Whitelists solve those problems, but they take more work from everybody, and yes, will lead to frustrated students needing to ask for permission to view pages all the time: THAT'S THE POINT.
I have run a whitelist with 100% success. Yes it frustrated people, but we never had an issue with someone getting access to something we weren't happy with.
Whitelists are so so easy to set up and maintain. Every page a kid wants to view at school gets filtered by a responsible adult first. Problem solved.
Yes, the virtual world is totally non-dependent on telecom fiber lays supported by our governments, don't use any government subsidized power, and never rely on the roads to move server equipment. They'd be totally unaffected if our national government laid down its arms, gave up having a military budget, and let other countries invade at will. And the people who participate in these things are totally independent of the social benefits network, as none of them have any children, or parents or ...
Anyway, you get the idea.
It's a matter of long-term vs short-term thinking. Quarterly stock market results drives short term thinking. Why do you suppose private firms have such a surprising ability to outmaneuver public companies?
I've seen plenty of exploits for auction on ebay over the years.
Alternatively, it's great. By being so breakable we sucker the evil DRM lords into another copy protection regime that ultimately doesn't work.
And importantly: by using tidal power, we help prolong the coming of the disastrous day when the moon escapes earth's orbit.
40 hours is less than 2 days of bt.
Lots of people were buying up this service when the terms were less strict expecting to use it as a wireless data service for their laptops. Why else do they even sell those EVDO cards for laptops?
I'm sure he must have meant that it's the Nazi's look that you make good. You know: the brown shirts, red armbands, effeminate breeches. The real mistake is that he should have used well instead of good unless he really believes that looks themselves are good or evil. :-)
It would orbit them typically in the same sense that the earth orbits both the sun and mercury.
Based on all the responses to your message so far, congrats, that was quite a WHOOSH!
It's not me that's forgetting, it's Castro:
"In Thursday's article, Castro said more than 3 billion people in the world were condemned to die prematurely of hunger or thirst from plans by his ideological foe, the United States, to convert foodstuffs like corn into fuel for cars."
He's the one who used the word 'die'.
http://www.starvation.net/
Even if you buy their generous estimate of 35K deaths/day, that's over 200 years to reach 3 billion deaths.