A better title would be "Tour de France announces precisely how it's going to keep an eye out for cheating so everyone can change their processes enough that nobody embarrasses the Tour."
Except, of course, the problematic nail with the google-learning mechanism is this: as much as the historical canon is controlled (more or less) by power elites with a vested interest in presenting a certain historical narrative of what happened, so to is the internet (and really, the wide world) full of smaller groups all EACH insisting that their particular version of events is the "one true narrative".
None of them has a monopoly on the truth, of course.
But one of the facts of 'dealing with the internet' (that even many adults can't seem to cope with) is the cacacophy of noise where everyone insists they're experts in the subject at hand. And if you're just source-counting, there are probably in fact MORE websites - some frighteningly slick and professional - that assert the moon landings were faked (for example) than those that recap what we believe we know is "the truth".
So while I concede that to accept the historical canon is to (in a sense) swallow the kool-aide of a specific viewpoint, to simply refuse to accept any narrative leaves one open to far more pernicious and frankly dangerous ideas.
It's almost like intellectual antibiotics: Aggressive antibiotic sprays will certainly kill those germs (giving us a momentary illusion that our countertops are 'sterile' and uber-clean), but in FACT it means that all the really nasty germs (that the otherwise less-bad biota kept away) can now get a foothold. In the 'establishment' historical canon, we know there are likely ideas that are wrong and/or biased, but at least then there's a framework to start the intellectual process to validate or reject specific assumptions.
Even Archimedes admitted he'd need a fulcrum to move the world.
"Phenomenal reboot" Doesn't apparently mean "Re release of what's basically the exact same game for the 1990s prettified with a lot more triangles and even louder sound"?
What you seem to disregard is the fact that some places are nice. Some places are shitty.
How do you think they got that way? Random chance?
I think there's a valid point to say "We live in a pretty nice place. If you're coming here to be one of us, and follow our cultural mores, then sure, c'mon in. If you're coming here to bring the culture, mores, and choices that left your homeland a craphole, then no, we don't want you here."
Considering we're not really a unitary being, but more or less a hundred million separate entities living in a staggeringly complicated symbiosis, is this really a shock?
Complex systems don't just "stop" on a dime; there's energy distributed through the system that ultimately will be used locally before local processes stop.
Obviously, the 'independent' organisms within us continue to operate after death - bloating, decomposition, etc. How different is it if some of our own more-dependent bits keep cycling until they're "empty"?
To suggest that malware can use fans to 'steal' data would imply that the data is being taken FROM an airgapped system by something outside it.
In fact, what it's talking about is that malware installed on an airgapped system can use the fan system to COMMUNICATE data across an air gap. Still interesting, but a little more honest about what's going on.
Not only this, they talk about how little/trivial security issues were found in her mail...as if the week she spent *denying there were such servers at all* wasn't spent scouring the SHIT out of those hard drives.
What was "found" in the 50k emails she released was either - incompetence on the part of her team (unlikely - she may be a heinous reptile queen but I don't think many people have believed her incompetent. Merely evil.) or - deliberately seeded to give the DoJ something meaningless to find, and the chattering classes something to dismiss.
If someone's worth $100 million or $600 million, does it *really* impact their daily existence?
Do they say "you know, if I was worth $600 mill I could shop at Target, but with only $100 mill I guess it'll have to be Wal-Mart". Is that the driver behind their choice of Chipotle or Taco Bell? Does it determine if they fly first class or tourist?
So the short answer is no, I do not believe that if someone worth even as "little" as $100 million lost 2/3 of their net wealth, that they'd even NOTICE.
"Taylor Swift, U2, Kings of Leon and Paul McCartney are some of the 180 recording artists and labels petitioning Congress to reform the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (D.M.C.A.) In an open letter to Congress, they write that the current online copyright law has allowed YouTube and other sites to "generate huge profits by creating ease of use for consumers to carry almost every recorded song in history in their pocket via a smartphone, while songwriters' and artists' earnings continue to diminish."
Net worth: Taylor Swift: $200 million Bono: $600 million Paul McCartney: $660 million
If they're really just doing it for the poor little indie artists that are being "taken advantage of" then perhaps they could between them drop a cool $1 billion toward those artists - and with their piles of cash they'd never even notice.
Really, the article simply illustrates the woefully ignorant state of reportage by "professional" news sources. No wonder the interwebs are kicking their ass.
The economies of scale are simply inarguable. The daily fuel consumption of a relatively ancient 8000-teu vessel is HIGHER than todays 18k+ teu ships like the Ben Franklin. IIRC it's about $25000/day.
And the fact that the US is scrambling to meet their infrastructure needs is more a comment on the decrepit state of US port and infrastructure that hasn't been materially upgraded since the 1970s. The rest of the world's major ports CAN handle them. (And handle them a shit-ton more efficiently thanks to US unions' lock on the shiphandling bottleneck.)
Ocean carrier profits are flat and worse, but that's nothing intrinsic to the size of the ships, there are just too many ships out there - and this was the result of ridiculous crude prices in the mid 2000s that prompted carriers all more or less simultaneously to make the long-term investment in new vessels. And considering a 10,000 teu ship would cost $150 million, they might as well build a 20,000 teu ship for $200, no? The market currently reflects this gross surplus of capacity, that's all. As these carriers' new big ships all start to come online, what they'll do is retire the crappy, inefficient, polluting smaller older ships and replace say a 5 vessel string with 2-3 new ones. This means the same bandwidth, but less-frequent sailings.
Yes, the industry is due for a round of consolidation, but there's a certain point where the smaller carriers - the Yang Mings, the Zims, etc - aren't operating for profit anyway, they're being sustained by their state as a strategic/commercial resource. The largest carriers are (over the last 16 months) slaughtering each other on the TPEB and Asia/Europe routes, but that's each other and is likely to sort itself out long before pricing ultimately is transmitted through the value chain to the retail level.
It's too bad that Bloomberg couldn't have been bothered to find a professional reporter that understood the market.
Not having cell phones available isn't the same as being denied them.
Let's use a different example: portable defibrillators. Before they had them, yes, some people died. And it was sad, but nothing could be done. Now that they have them, can you imagine the torrent of lawsuits if someone dropped from a heart attack and the only portable defibrillator WAS LOCKED AWAY?
Not at all, depending on how you understand it. EITHER - tax deductions are a primary reduction in the tax owed, in which case you never owed those funds to the government in the first place.
or
- tax deductions are a credit from the government due to something you did that they want to encourage.
So, is a 'tax deduction' you paying less, or the government paying money back to you? Personally, I'd say the former both because it's simpler and because I find any assumption that BEGINS with premise that the government owns it and "gives it" to the citizens both troubling morally and entirely skewed from the fundamental 'government of the people' principle of the United States Constitution.
Curiously, I DID check the original work. https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.076... says "We predict that under 1 percent of the galaxy has been reached at all thus far, and we do not anticipate to be reached until approximately half of the stars/planets have been reached. We offer a prediction that we should not expect this until at least 1,500 years in the future."
Per my previous math, using a simplistic 2d area of the Milky Way and a simplistic smooth distribution of stars (I know they're not, but they're actually denser further in, so this is really giving the paper the benefit of napkin-math), they say that the signal has to reach HALF the systems to have a reasonable chance of response.
Again: The area of the galaxy (50k ly radius) 7.85Ã--10^9 ly. The area of the galaxy covered by our 80 years of emissions - - in their summary, they say 1% - in fact, it's 2.5x10^-6 or about 0.00025%
In 1500 years, the coverage will be: - in their summary, about half. - in fact, 7x10^6 or or 0.09%
To cover half the milky way would take about 35000 years of broadcasting.
Rather than being snarky, could you please point out my error in math or understanding?
I really wonder where some of this shit is coming from.
"Email is dead" "Internet of Things" "Text is dead, everything will be video"
All of these things sound like some idiotic crap that someone "spitballed" in some sort of "what's the conventional wisdom going to be today" meeting at Gawker (or Facebook, or whatever), which is then breathlessly promoted as 'the next big thing'.
We're societally like a bicycle that's slipped its chain - pedalling ever-faster with no resistance but in fact slowing coming to a complete stop. I wonder when we'll fall over?
Except that personal security is the FUNDAMENTAL contract between the governed and the governing.
As a theoretical exercise in a 'State of Nature' you can feed yourself, clothe yourself, house yourself...but protecting yourself is an escalating challenge: it's invariably going to involve 'needing more friends' than the other guy(s) which is the root of social organization. These people can't just do whatever they want, and consensus becomes difficult in larger groups, thus "government".
So I believe that this is the core thing that people expect from government: am I and my family, and to a lesser degree "our stuff" safe?
This is why fear works so well as a political tool, and why when this compact between citizens and government is perceived to be breaking down (ie today) the voters become astonishingly skittish, willing to make what they even may recognize as a stupid leader choice IF that leader is otherwise believed to be bringing them more safety.
Except you're missing the point, likely based on political bias. "Sorry, but I see a blow-hard promising all sorts of shit, but actual delivery? That's another story" IS EXACTLY WHAT EVERY OTHER POLITICIAN DOES, except insofar as in the last 40 years the trend has gotten to be even MORE mealy-mouthed about even making campaign promises. So at the worst, he's being like every other politician, but he's at least putting his points out there.
The last politician that I can recall that dared to make a categorical statement was Bush I, and I believe his "no new taxes" statement was used in pretty nearly every Clinton campaign commercial that season. He was crucified for it.
This is a simple wild-ass guess based on NOTHING. Aside from that simple fact...
They "guess" that signals would have to reach "half the systems in the Milky Way" to have a reasonable chance of being intercepted...but then say that this will happen in only another 1500 years.
Quick hint: just looking at it as a 2d issue, the Milky Way is 100,000 ly across, more or less. It doesn't take a mathematician to realize that a 1500-ly radius circle doesn't come CLOSE to hitting 'half the systems in the Milky Way'.
For those mathematically bent, a 50k ly radius circle has an area of about 8x10^9 sq ly. A 1500 ly radius circle is 7x10^6...so about 1/1000 of the galaxy, not half.
Nuclear subs go on tour for month, not multiple years. Not to mention non-catastrophic breakdowns are things that can be fixed in days - simple resupply from Earth could take years. Finally, they *constantly* are getting O2 from seawater. Earth air is about 21% O2; Martian air is 0.15% O2 - I'm not sure one could even scrub enough CO2 from the Martian atmosphere on the industrial scale needed to support people.
And while South Polar stations are pretty well sealed against WEATHER, I'm going to say that they're not nearly sealed against AIR, that's a few orders of magnitude more difficult.
I would have to say that you're very much trivializing the massive technical difficulties involved in a Martian base 100 million miles from Earth.
I'm pretty sure the "requirement" that drives be scrubbed before "disposal" isn't meant to suggest that they need to be scrubbed before they're handed to the Justice Department.
You seem to forget that it took a good deal of time before she even admitted she HAD a personal email server, and even longer before those hard drives were turned over to investigators. I'm sure that's because they what, wanted to make sure they were clean of dust?
Slashdot Mirror
A better title would be "Tour de France announces precisely how it's going to keep an eye out for cheating so everyone can change their processes enough that nobody embarrasses the Tour."
Let's keep in mind what's really important.
I'd like a friend in her 20s, maybe 30s, with big tits please?
Except, of course, the problematic nail with the google-learning mechanism is this: as much as the historical canon is controlled (more or less) by power elites with a vested interest in presenting a certain historical narrative of what happened, so to is the internet (and really, the wide world) full of smaller groups all EACH insisting that their particular version of events is the "one true narrative".
None of them has a monopoly on the truth, of course.
But one of the facts of 'dealing with the internet' (that even many adults can't seem to cope with) is the cacacophy of noise where everyone insists they're experts in the subject at hand. And if you're just source-counting, there are probably in fact MORE websites - some frighteningly slick and professional - that assert the moon landings were faked (for example) than those that recap what we believe we know is "the truth".
So while I concede that to accept the historical canon is to (in a sense) swallow the kool-aide of a specific viewpoint, to simply refuse to accept any narrative leaves one open to far more pernicious and frankly dangerous ideas.
It's almost like intellectual antibiotics: Aggressive antibiotic sprays will certainly kill those germs (giving us a momentary illusion that our countertops are 'sterile' and uber-clean), but in FACT it means that all the really nasty germs (that the otherwise less-bad biota kept away) can now get a foothold. In the 'establishment' historical canon, we know there are likely ideas that are wrong and/or biased, but at least then there's a framework to start the intellectual process to validate or reject specific assumptions.
Even Archimedes admitted he'd need a fulcrum to move the world.
"Phenomenal reboot"
Doesn't apparently mean
"Re release of what's basically the exact same game for the 1990s prettified with a lot more triangles and even louder sound"?
What you seem to disregard is the fact that some places are nice.
Some places are shitty.
How do you think they got that way? Random chance?
I think there's a valid point to say "We live in a pretty nice place. If you're coming here to be one of us, and follow our cultural mores, then sure, c'mon in. If you're coming here to bring the culture, mores, and choices that left your homeland a craphole, then no, we don't want you here."
Considering we're not really a unitary being, but more or less a hundred million separate entities living in a staggeringly complicated symbiosis, is this really a shock?
Complex systems don't just "stop" on a dime; there's energy distributed through the system that ultimately will be used locally before local processes stop.
Obviously, the 'independent' organisms within us continue to operate after death - bloating, decomposition, etc. How different is it if some of our own more-dependent bits keep cycling until they're "empty"?
Do these morons not understand that this will paralyze democracy?
If the losing side can scream for a "do over" every vote, democracy itself is doomed.
Is a single example produced by researchers really "easy"?
Would that qualify as making downloads "easy"?
To suggest that malware can use fans to 'steal' data would imply that the data is being taken FROM an airgapped system by something outside it.
In fact, what it's talking about is that malware installed on an airgapped system can use the fan system to COMMUNICATE data across an air gap. Still interesting, but a little more honest about what's going on.
Not only this, they talk about how little/trivial security issues were found in her mail...as if the week she spent *denying there were such servers at all* wasn't spent scouring the SHIT out of those hard drives.
What was "found" in the 50k emails she released was either
- incompetence on the part of her team (unlikely - she may be a heinous reptile queen but I don't think many people have believed her incompetent. Merely evil.)
or
- deliberately seeded to give the DoJ something meaningless to find, and the chattering classes something to dismiss.
You have a point. /. post is cheaper than Starbucks plus no snotty barista.
Morning adrenaline rage at some stupid
If someone's worth $100 million or $600 million, does it *really* impact their daily existence?
Do they say "you know, if I was worth $600 mill I could shop at Target, but with only $100 mill I guess it'll have to be Wal-Mart".
Is that the driver behind their choice of Chipotle or Taco Bell?
Does it determine if they fly first class or tourist?
So the short answer is no, I do not believe that if someone worth even as "little" as $100 million lost 2/3 of their net wealth, that they'd even NOTICE.
You should work here!
"Taylor Swift, U2, Kings of Leon and Paul McCartney are some of the 180 recording artists and labels petitioning Congress to reform the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (D.M.C.A.) In an open letter to Congress, they write that the current online copyright law has allowed YouTube and other sites to "generate huge profits by creating ease of use for consumers to carry almost every recorded song in history in their pocket via a smartphone, while songwriters' and artists' earnings continue to diminish."
Net worth:
Taylor Swift: $200 million
Bono: $600 million
Paul McCartney: $660 million
If they're really just doing it for the poor little indie artists that are being "taken advantage of" then perhaps they could between them drop a cool $1 billion toward those artists - and with their piles of cash they'd never even notice.
Really, the article simply illustrates the woefully ignorant state of reportage by "professional" news sources. No wonder the interwebs are kicking their ass.
The economies of scale are simply inarguable. The daily fuel consumption of a relatively ancient 8000-teu vessel is HIGHER than todays 18k+ teu ships like the Ben Franklin. IIRC it's about $25000/day.
And the fact that the US is scrambling to meet their infrastructure needs is more a comment on the decrepit state of US port and infrastructure that hasn't been materially upgraded since the 1970s. The rest of the world's major ports CAN handle them. (And handle them a shit-ton more efficiently thanks to US unions' lock on the shiphandling bottleneck.)
Ocean carrier profits are flat and worse, but that's nothing intrinsic to the size of the ships, there are just too many ships out there - and this was the result of ridiculous crude prices in the mid 2000s that prompted carriers all more or less simultaneously to make the long-term investment in new vessels. And considering a 10,000 teu ship would cost $150 million, they might as well build a 20,000 teu ship for $200, no?
The market currently reflects this gross surplus of capacity, that's all. As these carriers' new big ships all start to come online, what they'll do is retire the crappy, inefficient, polluting smaller older ships and replace say a 5 vessel string with 2-3 new ones. This means the same bandwidth, but less-frequent sailings.
Yes, the industry is due for a round of consolidation, but there's a certain point where the smaller carriers - the Yang Mings, the Zims, etc - aren't operating for profit anyway, they're being sustained by their state as a strategic/commercial resource. The largest carriers are (over the last 16 months) slaughtering each other on the TPEB and Asia/Europe routes, but that's each other and is likely to sort itself out long before pricing ultimately is transmitted through the value chain to the retail level.
It's too bad that Bloomberg couldn't have been bothered to find a professional reporter that understood the market.
Not having cell phones available isn't the same as being denied them.
Let's use a different example: portable defibrillators.
Before they had them, yes, some people died. And it was sad, but nothing could be done.
Now that they have them, can you imagine the torrent of lawsuits if someone dropped from a heart attack and the only portable defibrillator WAS LOCKED AWAY?
Somewhere, a lawyer has a boner.
"Your expected tax burden is reduced by remaining clean."
I'd be all for this.
And I'd absolutely love it to start with Congress or anyone running for office.
Not at all, depending on how you understand it.
EITHER
- tax deductions are a primary reduction in the tax owed, in which case you never owed those funds to the government in the first place.
or
- tax deductions are a credit from the government due to something you did that they want to encourage.
So, is a 'tax deduction' you paying less, or the government paying money back to you?
Personally, I'd say the former both because it's simpler and because I find any assumption that BEGINS with premise that the government owns it and "gives it" to the citizens both troubling morally and entirely skewed from the fundamental 'government of the people' principle of the United States Constitution.
Curiously, I DID check the original work.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.076... says
"We predict that under 1 percent of the galaxy has been reached at all thus far, and we do not anticipate to be reached until approximately half of the stars/planets have been reached. We offer a prediction that we should not expect this until at least 1,500 years in the future."
Per my previous math, using a simplistic 2d area of the Milky Way and a simplistic smooth distribution of stars (I know they're not, but they're actually denser further in, so this is really giving the paper the benefit of napkin-math), they say that the signal has to reach HALF the systems to have a reasonable chance of response.
Again:
The area of the galaxy (50k ly radius) 7.85Ã--10^9 ly.
The area of the galaxy covered by our 80 years of emissions -
- in their summary, they say 1%
- in fact, it's 2.5x10^-6 or about 0.00025%
In 1500 years, the coverage will be:
- in their summary, about half.
- in fact, 7x10^6 or or 0.09%
To cover half the milky way would take about 35000 years of broadcasting.
Rather than being snarky, could you please point out my error in math or understanding?
I really wonder where some of this shit is coming from.
"Email is dead"
"Internet of Things"
"Text is dead, everything will be video"
All of these things sound like some idiotic crap that someone "spitballed" in some sort of "what's the conventional wisdom going to be today" meeting at Gawker (or Facebook, or whatever), which is then breathlessly promoted as 'the next big thing'.
We're societally like a bicycle that's slipped its chain - pedalling ever-faster with no resistance but in fact slowing coming to a complete stop. I wonder when we'll fall over?
Except that personal security is the FUNDAMENTAL contract between the governed and the governing.
As a theoretical exercise in a 'State of Nature' you can feed yourself, clothe yourself, house yourself...but protecting yourself is an escalating challenge: it's invariably going to involve 'needing more friends' than the other guy(s) which is the root of social organization. These people can't just do whatever they want, and consensus becomes difficult in larger groups, thus "government".
So I believe that this is the core thing that people expect from government: am I and my family, and to a lesser degree "our stuff" safe?
This is why fear works so well as a political tool, and why when this compact between citizens and government is perceived to be breaking down (ie today) the voters become astonishingly skittish, willing to make what they even may recognize as a stupid leader choice IF that leader is otherwise believed to be bringing them more safety.
Except you're missing the point, likely based on political bias. "Sorry, but I see a blow-hard promising all sorts of shit, but actual delivery? That's another story" IS EXACTLY WHAT EVERY OTHER POLITICIAN DOES, except insofar as in the last 40 years the trend has gotten to be even MORE mealy-mouthed about even making campaign promises. So at the worst, he's being like every other politician, but he's at least putting his points out there.
The last politician that I can recall that dared to make a categorical statement was Bush I, and I believe his "no new taxes" statement was used in pretty nearly every Clinton campaign commercial that season. He was crucified for it.
"predict from estimates" Really?
Seriously, does anyone even 'journalist' anymore?
This is a simple wild-ass guess based on NOTHING. Aside from that simple fact...
They "guess" that signals would have to reach "half the systems in the Milky Way" to have a reasonable chance of being intercepted...but then say that this will happen in only another 1500 years.
Quick hint: just looking at it as a 2d issue, the Milky Way is 100,000 ly across, more or less. It doesn't take a mathematician to realize that a 1500-ly radius circle doesn't come CLOSE to hitting 'half the systems in the Milky Way'.
For those mathematically bent, a 50k ly radius circle has an area of about 8x10^9 sq ly.
A 1500 ly radius circle is 7x10^6...so about 1/1000 of the galaxy, not half.
"Experts", eh?
Nuclear subs go on tour for month, not multiple years. Not to mention non-catastrophic breakdowns are things that can be fixed in days - simple resupply from Earth could take years.
Finally, they *constantly* are getting O2 from seawater. Earth air is about 21% O2; Martian air is 0.15% O2 - I'm not sure one could even scrub enough CO2 from the Martian atmosphere on the industrial scale needed to support people.
And while South Polar stations are pretty well sealed against WEATHER, I'm going to say that they're not nearly sealed against AIR, that's a few orders of magnitude more difficult.
I would have to say that you're very much trivializing the massive technical difficulties involved in a Martian base 100 million miles from Earth.
I'm pretty sure the "requirement" that drives be scrubbed before "disposal" isn't meant to suggest that they need to be scrubbed before they're handed to the Justice Department.
You seem to forget that it took a good deal of time before she even admitted she HAD a personal email server, and even longer before those hard drives were turned over to investigators. I'm sure that's because they what, wanted to make sure they were clean of dust?