A novel about a party weekend in Vegas that one can read in 2 evenings is good journalism?? It reads like a trashy novel... oh, wait... that's what it is!
You mean like Catcher in the Rye? Don't start trashing Hunter S. Thompson just because Katz brings him up.
So the example failed? No, Philo T. Fransworth failed. "Failed" is a verb for the subject "who" in the dependent clause "...who failed because of blah blah blah...". The dependent clause has its own subject (who), not The example which still lacks a verb.
Beginning the sentence with "The article cites the example of...."
would turn the example into a direct object and fix the problem.
The example of Philo T. Fransworth (the "inventor" of Television) who failed because (amongst other reasons) he didn't have the big resources of a company to allow him to focus on his innovations.
Where is the verb in that sentence? "The example" is the subject but it lacks a predicate (even though there are dependent clauses with their own predicates). It doesn't compile.
Water can be used in the production of oxygen, and also fuel (after you break down into Hydrogen and Oxygen).
Molecular hydrogen might be a nice commodity on a planet with an oxidizing atmosphere like Earth, but on Mars, it's a by-product. What are you going to do you do with it? Burn it in a fuel cell or an internal combustion engine with the liberated oxygen to generate electricity? But you have to use a little nuclear reactor to electrolyze the water in the first place. Why don't you just use that for power instead? It's not like the combined electrolysis/recombination process will operate with 100% efficiency.
>> Then your children will get your hereditary conditions and will themselves need replacements from stem cells.
> Not necessarily. That implies that what we are and what we will become is completely determined by our genes. I don't buy that.
The decisions you make (regarding alcoholism, etc.) as an individual are not completely determined by your genes. But they are certainly partially determined by them.
Your personal decision to start or stop drinking alcohol may be influenced by many things. Maybe you're concerned about your health, or you're a salesman entertaining clients, or your wife threatened to leave you, or you're a bartender, or you found Jesus, or whatever. These are things that are important to you, but statistically, they don't have a well-defined effect on the population as a whole. As you look at the decision making of larger and larger groups of people, systematic factors like genetic predisposition and socio-economic status become more important and show a strong correlation to alcoholism. From a public health perspective, they are virtually the only ones that matter.
You actually use hotmail for something other than a "convenience" email address for registering for web sites that you don't want spamming your real address?
Back in 98 I did, before the Borg took it over and promptly messed it up with their spammer-friendly systems that leak valid usernames to anyone with nothing of value to sell.
They actually do, by disabling Javascript. The only you are missing is the purdy tabulations and hypertext links changing colors, oh the humanity!
Well that, and the ability to log into "dot net" sites like Hotmail so you can do your daily chore of shoveling the day's accumulation of ~100 pornographic spams into the trash. (If you don't, Microsoft will clear room for the spam by deleting the juicy old letters from ex-girlfriends you have in there.)
Well, the issue of CDs vs. MP3s is really a matter of personal preference. What is different is that with a CD, there's a greater sense that the purchase is based on the principle of you buy it, it's yours. Perhaps the record companies never saw it that way at all, but the permanence of the medium made it a moot point. We always knew we weren't supposed to make and sell copies of CDs we bought- that was always obvious to everyone. But very few people had the equipment to copy audio CDs anyway. (Except to tape cassettes, but somehow that never became an issue.)
Now we're being rudely informed that all these years we haven't been buying music at all- we've been licensing it. They never charged us a per-play fee only because there was no technology available to enforce such a thing on us. Now they're getting the ability to extend their miniature version of a police state into our living rooms and entertainment systems, so this is becoming an issue. And they've bought legislation that gives their little technological hurdles the force of law. So they're now trying to make it abundantly clear that you buy it, it's yours isn't and wasn't the business model at all- it's more like you rent it, and then you get fucked by us because we can fuck you now for every moment of intellectual property pleasure that enters your senses. But this isn't what customers are used to, it isn't what they want, and they won't stand for it, even if a hated law is purchased that makes all reasonable alternatives illegal.
I hope they do start selling MP3s. I'd buy a dozen.
3: People will rather have a lossless copy of a song on a tangible media format than a file that can be deleted with one bad keystroke.
Oh please. A CD can be destroyed with one bad scratch. And I can make backup copies of an MP3. In fact the first thing I do when I buy a CD is rip it to MP3, then I put the CD away in a rack and never touch it unless I want to play it in the car. (Yeah, bad quality, whatever.) I keep my MP3s at work synchronized with the ones at home, because I don't want to lug CDs back and forth.
My reluctance to pay for the digital media files offered by the cartels so far is really based on the fact that 1. They're designed to expire 2. They're designed to be nonportable 3. You can only play them so many times before they "run out" 4. They require goofy playback software that runs on Windows only and insists on showing me ads 5. I can't reformat my drive without losing everything I've paid for 6. I can't listen to them at work unless I lug my computer back and forth
These aren't considerations at all with an MP3. I might delete it by mistake but I'm not going to reject the idea just because I think I'm too stupid to be trusted with my own files.
The biggest issue I have is with the duration of copyright. Originally set to last 14 to 28 years from date of creation, it now stands as 95 years from the death of the copyright owner.
Is it 95 years? I thought it just went from 50 to 70. If it's 95 then I need to fix my sig.
I started listening to 3wk.com at work recently for the hell of it and was surprised to find out how different it was. First of all, unlike FM, there are no noisy stretches of cheesy LOUD and painful commercials from local businesses like tire salesmen and ripoff dating services. Once in a while a guy with a creepy voice comes on and gives a little spiel about the RIAA and how you should write your Senator, but that's it. And instead of hearing the same mass marketed tiny selection of force-fed boy band / Britney Spears garbage that every FM station pummels you with over and over again, I didn't recognize many of the songs at all. I think it is a mixture of RIAA and non-RIAA artists. Some of it was crap. But a few songs were were really good, enough that I wrote down the artist/album/song title that the site displays while each song is playing. For about half of them, you don't even need a spyware-riddled p2p client to find MP3s- just use Google to find the band's web site and download MP3s right from there completely legally. You can hear what each track on their album sounds like before you decide whether or not to buy it.
You would be surprised how many decent artists never get picked up by the cartel.
This reminds me--the very same people who are now saying that Bush knew about 911 are the very same people that would probably have sluffed off a hijack warning before then.
This is complete conjecture- you can't just blandly assert what someone else would have done in the same situation. The Clinton administration did issue a warning to air travelers before New Year's Eve 2000 that never amounted to anything.
Bunch of morons. The liberal media are a bunch of idiots.
As the media falls under the control of fewer and fewer corporate owners, this screaming about this "liberal" media has been getting more and more shrill. Liberals seem to be like witches, communists, pedophiles, and Satanists. The fewer there are of them, the more you hear about how they're everywhere. As to what a story about rollercoasters has to do with a "liberal media" in the first place, you'll have to explain that one to me. This is a story about health regulators in New Jersey deciding whether to introduce regulations in response to several injuries and deaths from amusement park rides. You can get into an ideological argument about whether government should regulate amusement park rides or about how you deserve what you get when you get on one, but please quit complaining about this "liberal media". They're all corporate drones as far as I can tell.
They need to do their background research better.
Agreed.
I can't believe that they think that a Roller Coasters ride has more Gforce then getting shoot up into space at an ungodly speed. Another reason not to trust the media.
You're comparing speed to acceleration, which is completely apples to oranges. A moon rocket has a steady, solid acceleration that remains pointed in the same direction to accumulate a great speed. A roller coaster is subject to a wild and inconsistent acceleration in all kinds of directions so the cumulative changes in velocity cancel out and you never go faster than 100 mph. Plus the jerk (time derivative of acceleration) during a rocket launch is light and smooth, except right when the engine turns on and off. On a roller coaster the jerk is as crazy and variable as the acceleration. A moon rocket gives a much smoother ride.
Hyuk, hyuk, I made my own word, linsux! Hahahalololoroofles linsux!!!111 I'm a complete genius, yes I am. *droooooool*
Although your word is clearly derived from "linux", so you aren't that much of a genius. You are making a derivative work, so you must make it available to others so they can make further modifications.
> The ancient Romans, Vikings, Aztecs, Mayans, Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Egyptians
As if you knew any of them. What an utterly disparate list of peoples. About the only thing they have in common is that they're all dead. That and the fact that they somehow relate to the subject at hand in your head.
He didn't say he knew any of them. Nor does he have to. That's your own confusion talking. They have one thing in common, besides being dead, that you missed: they all had an absolutist attitude about their own faiths similar to the perspective that you hold about your own.
> In 5,000 years
As if you will be there. In 5000 years time, what? People will be more like you? Just look at what happened to the Mesapotamians I suppose. See how much sense that makes?
In 5000 years time people will believe in some other goofy superstition that has nothing in common with Christianity, if history is a guide. Your own comments reveal that you are unable to grasp the concept of history being a guide at all.
You are an intelligent fellow. So why are you peddling some dreary piece of received knowledge about the "ancient Romans, Vikings, Aztecs, Mayans, Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Egyptians". These people exist only in your head.
Without question the people who worked on Drosophila came up with the best gene names- other organisms have dull names like "MYO4" and "MOG" that look more like license plates.
Physicists like to have fun with names too (e.g. charmed quark, WIMPs and MACHOs, strangelets etc.) Still, these are "cute" and funny, not really "cool". Not like quark star, Schwarzchild radius, absolute zero, magnetic flux quantum, nuclear magneton, quantum entanglement, Planck time, black hole entropy, etc. Those are Star Trek quality terms. And you can even mix and jumble valid terms to support a weak SF plot or to swindle money from people who are trying to lose weight, e.g. flux capacitor, quantum consciousness, etc. In fact, no word in the English language is as marketable as the word quantum. Nobody understands anything that's "quantum", not even physicists, so you can say it means easy weight loss and people will believe you because it's just too sexy to be nonsense. "Quantum" is the "Open Sesame" to the fat sucker's wallet.
Your next statement illustrates that... what they are proposing to force on others could never be accomplished without the apparatus of gov't coercion.
Government coercion is a sufficient but not a necessary requirement. Cabals and monopolies can exert coercive force on a market with no help from the government at all. Just look at the licensing shenanigans that Microsoft uses on OEMs.
Even if the CBDTPA or some variant never gets passed, we can still be screwed. You are unlikely to find anyone manufacturing non-crippled hardware if MS stipulates that Windows may only be licensed to run on systems with DRM ciruitry.
netcraft only measures DNS registered sites so the answer is no.
What, you mean they don't just count unique IP origins of Code Red packets?:)
Re:bletchley park
on
Review: U-571
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Actually, the Enigma's codes were already broken *BEFORE THE WAR* by Polish codebreakers. It's not widely known since they gave all their info to Britian and France after Poland was conquered, and the Brits basically banished them.
The Enigma's cipher was broken before the war by Marian Rejewski in Poland, who succeeded in separating the problem of finding the Enigma's plugboard settings from the problem of finding its initial scrambler settings. Using a catalog created from previous intercepts, decrypting an Enigma message could be done with pencil and paper within hours. In Dec. 1938 the Nazis went from a system of 3 scrambler disks to one with 5. This made the keyspace too vast to calculate by hand and the Poles could no longer intercept German transmissions. But the Polish work did give the British a huge head start.
I would just like to take this opportunity to point out that no other science has quantities in it that have names as cool as the fine structure constant or the permeability of free space.
Too many "dumb usians" type posts fail to realize the essential reason for the lack of a switch: for most of us, slashdot is the only regular contact we have with individuals of a foreign disposition. When in Rome notwithstanding, there is almost ZERO BENEFIT for the layman American to learn Celcius. Ever.
It isn't really that simple. This country mostly uses Fahrenheit in colloquial contexts, but in engineering and in technical applications Celsius is much more common. So we're really using both. We have to keep converting back and forth, and we always have to specify which scale we're using whenever we refer to a temperature or else we lose another Mars probe. I still don't have an intuition for Celsius, and I have to multiply a Celsius temperature by 9/5 and add 32 before I get a feeling for what it is. But I still know that Fahrenheit (and the English system) sucks. Everyone's used to it because everyone uses it, but everyone uses it only because everyone's used to it, even though everyone knows it sucks and a better alternative is available. It's a lot like Windows, or the QWERTY keyboard.
I do agree with you that the smaller-sized F degrees are nice, but I think that's because I'm used to them.
Heh. Don't even get me started about how annoying all the additional syllables in meteric units are to say (cen-ti-me-ter vs inch, ki-lo-me-ter vs mile...).
The extra syllables in metric units are no big deal. Cops find kilos of coke in your trunk. People use the abbreviations ("cm", "km", etc.) And lots of commonly used multiples of metric units have short names like microns, Angstroms, fermis, dynes, ergs, hectares, etc. And really, so what? "Inch" and "mile" are nice short names, but try converting between inches and miles.
The whole reason that Farenheit is better is because it is designed with the livability of humans in mind. A human can't survive below 0 degrees F for very long, nor over 100 degrees F. I'd rather have a temperature systems designed around my living conditions than the physical state of fucking water.
A person can't survive below 0 degrees C very long either, and that's warmer than 0 degrees F. The only reason Fahrenheit is "better" is because you, personally, are familiar with it, even if you can't spell it, and you refuse to learn anything different (maybe because the climate controls in your SUV use Fahrenheit).
Fahrenheit was not "designed with the livability of humans in mind". It was designed partially around the physical state of salty water, which freezes at 0 Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit set the upper end of his scale to what he thought was body temperature. He decided to use 96 since it has a lot of factors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48) which is nice when you're putting tick marks on a thermometer. Except that body temperature is a really bad temperature standard because it varies from time to time and from person to person, and turns out to range from 98.6-99.0, nowhere near 96. Oops. Nowadays the Fahrenheit scale is defined by the freezing and boiling points of water, just like Celsius, except it doesn't make as much sense. To say this scale is "designed around your living conditions" is a real stretch- tissue damage occurs at temperatures outside the range of 39-115 F (or thereabouts). It's pretty obvious that your argument is centered around nothing but parochialism. A temperature scale designed around your personal living conditions would use color codes, like America's Homeland Security system. (So when it's "blue" out, you know to wear a jacket.) Or it would at least set 0 as room temperature, so negative temps mean turn on the heater, and positive means turn on the A/C. At least that would make sense.
They allow reacquisition of expired accounts because they know people are scared of someone getting an account with their old email address. Your email is up for grabs if you don't log in once a month. It's how they keep you logging in.
Slashdot Mirror
A novel about a party weekend in Vegas that one can read in 2 evenings is good journalism?? It reads like a trashy novel... oh, wait... that's what it is!
You mean like Catcher in the Rye?
Don't start trashing Hunter S. Thompson just because Katz brings him up.
So the example failed? No, Philo T. Fransworth failed. "Failed" is a verb for the subject "who" in the dependent clause "...who failed because of blah blah blah...". The dependent clause has its own subject (who), not The example which still lacks a verb.
...."
Beginning the sentence with "The article cites the example of
would turn the example into a direct object and fix the problem.
The example of Philo T. Fransworth (the "inventor" of Television) who failed because (amongst other reasons) he didn't have the big resources of a company to allow him to focus on his innovations.
Where is the verb in that sentence? "The example" is the subject but it lacks a predicate (even though there are dependent clauses with their own predicates). It doesn't compile.
Water can be used in the production of oxygen, and also fuel (after you break down into Hydrogen and Oxygen).
Molecular hydrogen might be a nice commodity on a planet with an oxidizing atmosphere like Earth, but on Mars, it's a by-product. What are you going to do you do with it? Burn it in a fuel cell or an internal combustion engine with the liberated oxygen to generate electricity? But you have to use a little nuclear reactor to electrolyze the water in the first place. Why don't you just use that for power instead? It's not like the combined electrolysis/recombination process will operate with 100% efficiency.
>> Then your children will get your hereditary conditions and will themselves need replacements from stem cells.
> Not necessarily. That implies that what we are and what we will become is completely determined by our genes. I don't buy that.
The decisions you make (regarding alcoholism, etc.) as an individual are not completely determined by your genes. But they are certainly partially determined by them.
Your personal decision to start or stop drinking alcohol may be influenced by many things. Maybe you're concerned about your health, or you're a salesman entertaining clients, or your wife threatened to leave you, or you're a bartender, or you found Jesus, or whatever. These are things that are important to you, but statistically, they don't have a well-defined effect on the population as a whole. As you look at the decision making of larger and larger groups of people, systematic factors like genetic predisposition and socio-economic status become more important and show a strong correlation to alcoholism. From a public health perspective, they are virtually the only ones that matter.
You actually use hotmail for something other than a "convenience" email address for registering for web sites that you don't want spamming your real address?
Back in 98 I did, before the Borg took it over and promptly messed it up with their spammer-friendly systems that leak valid usernames to anyone with nothing of value to sell.
That's business with dot NET.
They actually do, by disabling Javascript. The only you are missing is the purdy tabulations and hypertext links changing colors, oh the humanity!
Well that, and the ability to log into "dot net" sites like Hotmail so you can do your daily chore of shoveling the day's accumulation of ~100 pornographic spams into the trash. (If you don't, Microsoft will clear room for the spam by deleting the juicy old letters from ex-girlfriends you have in there.)
Well, the issue of CDs vs. MP3s is really a matter of personal preference. What is different is that with a CD, there's a greater sense that the purchase is based on the principle of you buy it, it's yours. Perhaps the record companies never saw it that way at all, but the permanence of the medium made it a moot point. We always knew we weren't supposed to make and sell copies of CDs we bought- that was always obvious to everyone. But very few people had the equipment to copy audio CDs anyway. (Except to tape cassettes, but somehow that never became an issue.)
Now we're being rudely informed that all these years we haven't been buying music at all- we've been licensing it. They never charged us a per-play fee only because there was no technology available to enforce such a thing on us. Now they're getting the ability to extend their miniature version of a police state into our living rooms and entertainment systems, so this is becoming an issue. And they've bought legislation that gives their little technological hurdles the force of law. So they're now trying to make it abundantly clear that you buy it, it's yours isn't and wasn't the business model at all- it's more like you rent it, and then you get fucked by us because we can fuck you now for every moment of intellectual property pleasure that enters your senses. But this isn't what customers are used to, it isn't what they want, and they won't stand for it, even if a hated law is purchased that makes all reasonable alternatives illegal.
I hope they do start selling MP3s. I'd buy a dozen.
3: People will rather have a lossless copy of a song on a tangible media format than a file that can be deleted with one bad keystroke.
Oh please. A CD can be destroyed with one bad scratch. And I can make backup copies of an MP3. In fact the first thing I do when I buy a CD is rip it to MP3, then I put the CD away in a rack and never touch it unless I want to play it in the car. (Yeah, bad quality, whatever.) I keep my MP3s at work synchronized with the ones at home, because I don't want to lug CDs back and forth.
My reluctance to pay for the digital media files offered by the cartels so far is really based on the fact that
1. They're designed to expire
2. They're designed to be nonportable
3. You can only play them so many times before they "run out"
4. They require goofy playback software that runs on Windows only and insists on showing me ads
5. I can't reformat my drive without losing everything I've paid for
6. I can't listen to them at work unless I lug my computer back and forth
These aren't considerations at all with an MP3. I might delete it by mistake but I'm not going to reject the idea just because I think I'm too stupid to be trusted with my own files.
The biggest issue I have is with the duration of copyright. Originally set to last 14 to 28 years from date of creation, it now stands as 95 years from the death of the copyright owner.
Is it 95 years? I thought it just went from 50 to 70. If it's 95 then I need to fix my sig.
I started listening to 3wk.com at work recently for the hell of it and was surprised to find out how different it was. First of all, unlike FM, there are no noisy stretches of cheesy LOUD and painful commercials from local businesses like tire salesmen and ripoff dating services. Once in a while a guy with a creepy voice comes on and gives a little spiel about the RIAA and how you should write your Senator, but that's it. And instead of hearing the same mass marketed tiny selection of force-fed boy band / Britney Spears garbage that every FM station pummels you with over and over again, I didn't recognize many of the songs at all. I think it is a mixture of RIAA and non-RIAA artists. Some of it was crap. But a few songs were were really good, enough that I wrote down the artist/album/song title that the site displays while each song is playing. For about half of them, you don't even need a spyware-riddled p2p client to find MP3s- just use Google to find the band's web site and download MP3s right from there completely legally. You can hear what each track on their album sounds like before you decide whether or not to buy it.
You would be surprised how many decent artists never get picked up by the cartel.
This reminds me--the very same people who are now saying that Bush knew about 911 are the very same people that would probably have sluffed off a hijack warning before then.
This is complete conjecture- you can't just blandly assert what someone else would have done in the same situation. The Clinton administration did issue a warning to air travelers before New Year's Eve 2000 that never amounted to anything.
Bunch of morons. The liberal media are a bunch of idiots.
As the media falls under the control of fewer and fewer corporate owners, this screaming about this "liberal" media has been getting more and more shrill. Liberals seem to be like witches, communists, pedophiles, and Satanists. The fewer there are of them, the more you hear about how they're everywhere.
As to what a story about rollercoasters has to do with a "liberal media" in the first place, you'll have to explain that one to me. This is a story about health regulators in New Jersey deciding whether to introduce regulations in response to several injuries and deaths from amusement park rides. You can get into an ideological argument about whether government should regulate amusement park rides or about how you deserve what you get when you get on one, but please quit complaining about this "liberal media". They're all corporate drones as far as I can tell.
They need to do their background research better.
Agreed.
I can't believe that they think that a Roller Coasters ride has more Gforce then getting shoot up into space at an ungodly speed. Another reason not to trust the media.
You're comparing speed to acceleration, which is completely apples to oranges. A moon rocket has a steady, solid acceleration that remains pointed in the same direction to accumulate a great speed. A roller coaster is subject to a wild and inconsistent acceleration in all kinds of directions so the cumulative changes in velocity cancel out and you never go faster than 100 mph. Plus the jerk (time derivative of acceleration) during a rocket launch is light and smooth, except right when the engine turns on and off. On a roller coaster the jerk is as crazy and variable as the acceleration. A moon rocket gives a much smoother ride.
Hyuk, hyuk, I made my own word, linsux! Hahahalololoroofles linsux!!!111 I'm a complete genius, yes I am. *droooooool*
Although your word is clearly derived from "linux", so you aren't that much of a genius. You are making a derivative work, so you must make it available to others so they can make further modifications.
I made one already: "yousuck".
> The ancient Romans, Vikings, Aztecs, Mayans, Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Egyptians
As if you knew any of them. What an utterly disparate list of peoples. About the only thing they have in common is that they're all dead. That and the fact that they somehow relate to the subject at hand in your head.
He didn't say he knew any of them. Nor does he have to. That's your own confusion talking. They have one thing in common, besides being dead, that you missed: they all had an absolutist attitude about their own faiths similar to the perspective that you hold about your own.
> In 5,000 years
As if you will be there. In 5000 years time, what? People will be more like you? Just look at what happened to the Mesapotamians I suppose. See how much sense that makes?
In 5000 years time people will believe in some other goofy superstition that has nothing in common with Christianity, if history is a guide. Your own comments reveal that you are unable to grasp the concept of history being a guide at all.
You are an intelligent fellow. So why are you peddling some dreary piece of received knowledge about the "ancient Romans, Vikings, Aztecs, Mayans, Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Egyptians". These people exist only in your head.
I rest my case.
For me, Darwinism was always a joke. Seriously, NOT A SINGLE PERSON could make the whole theory reasonable. It is seriously flawed. Period.
Your post may just be the most unpersuasive thing I have ever read.
Without question the people who worked on Drosophila came up with the best gene names- other organisms have dull names like "MYO4" and "MOG" that look more like license plates.
Physicists like to have fun with names too (e.g. charmed quark, WIMPs and MACHOs, strangelets etc.) Still, these are "cute" and funny, not really "cool". Not like quark star, Schwarzchild radius, absolute zero, magnetic flux quantum, nuclear magneton, quantum entanglement, Planck time, black hole entropy, etc. Those are Star Trek quality terms. And you can even mix and jumble valid terms to support a weak SF plot or to swindle money from people who are trying to lose weight, e.g. flux capacitor, quantum consciousness, etc. In fact, no word in the English language is as marketable as the word quantum. Nobody understands anything that's "quantum", not even physicists, so you can say it means easy weight loss and people will believe you because it's just too sexy to be nonsense. "Quantum" is the "Open Sesame" to the fat sucker's wallet.
Your next statement illustrates that... what they are proposing to force on others could never be accomplished without the apparatus of gov't coercion.
Government coercion is a sufficient but not a necessary requirement. Cabals and monopolies can exert coercive force on a market with no help from the government at all. Just look at the licensing shenanigans that Microsoft uses on OEMs.
Even if the CBDTPA or some variant never gets passed, we can still be screwed. You are unlikely to find anyone manufacturing non-crippled hardware if MS stipulates that Windows may only be licensed to run on systems with DRM ciruitry.
netcraft only measures DNS registered sites so the answer is no.
:)
What, you mean they don't just count unique IP origins of Code Red packets?
Actually, the Enigma's codes were already broken *BEFORE THE WAR* by Polish codebreakers. It's not widely known since they gave all their info to Britian and France after Poland was conquered, and the Brits basically banished them.
The Enigma's cipher was broken before the war by Marian Rejewski in Poland, who succeeded in separating the problem of finding the Enigma's plugboard settings from the problem of finding its initial scrambler settings. Using a catalog created from previous intercepts, decrypting an Enigma message could be done with pencil and paper within hours. In Dec. 1938 the Nazis went from a system of 3 scrambler disks to one with 5. This made the keyspace too vast to calculate by hand and the Poles could no longer intercept German transmissions. But the Polish work did give the British a huge head start.
I would just like to take this opportunity to point out that no other science has quantities in it that have names as cool as the fine structure constant or the permeability of free space.
Too many "dumb usians" type posts fail to realize the essential reason for the lack of a switch: for most of us, slashdot is the only regular contact we have with individuals of a foreign disposition. When in Rome notwithstanding, there is almost ZERO BENEFIT for the layman American to learn Celcius. Ever.
It isn't really that simple. This country mostly uses Fahrenheit in colloquial contexts, but in engineering and in technical applications Celsius is much more common. So we're really using both. We have to keep converting back and forth, and we always have to specify which scale we're using whenever we refer to a temperature or else we lose another Mars probe. I still don't have an intuition for Celsius, and I have to multiply a Celsius temperature by 9/5 and add 32 before I get a feeling for what it is. But I still know that Fahrenheit (and the English system) sucks. Everyone's used to it because everyone uses it, but everyone uses it only because everyone's used to it, even though everyone knows it sucks and a better alternative is available. It's a lot like Windows, or the QWERTY keyboard.
I do agree with you that the smaller-sized F degrees are nice, but I think that's because I'm used to them.
Heh. Don't even get me started about how annoying all the additional syllables in meteric units are to say (cen-ti-me-ter vs inch, ki-lo-me-ter vs mile...).
The extra syllables in metric units are no big deal. Cops find kilos of coke in your trunk. People use the abbreviations ("cm", "km", etc.) And lots of commonly used multiples of metric units have short names like microns, Angstroms, fermis, dynes, ergs, hectares, etc. And really, so what? "Inch" and "mile" are nice short names, but try converting between inches and miles.
The whole reason that Farenheit is better is because it is designed with the livability of humans in mind. A human can't survive below 0 degrees F for very long, nor over 100 degrees F. I'd rather have a temperature systems designed around my living conditions than the physical state of fucking water.
A person can't survive below 0 degrees C very long either, and that's warmer than 0 degrees F. The only reason Fahrenheit is "better" is because you, personally, are familiar with it, even if you can't spell it, and you refuse to learn anything different (maybe because the climate controls in your SUV use Fahrenheit).
Fahrenheit was not "designed with the livability of humans in mind". It was designed partially around the physical state of salty water, which freezes at 0 Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit set the upper end of his scale to what he thought was body temperature. He decided to use 96 since it has a lot of factors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48) which is nice when you're putting tick marks on a thermometer. Except that body temperature is a really bad temperature standard because it varies from time to time and from person to person, and turns out to range from 98.6-99.0, nowhere near 96. Oops. Nowadays the Fahrenheit scale is defined by the freezing and boiling points of water, just like Celsius, except it doesn't make as much sense. To say this scale is "designed around your living conditions" is a real stretch- tissue damage occurs at temperatures outside the range of 39-115 F (or thereabouts). It's pretty obvious that your argument is centered around nothing but parochialism.
A temperature scale designed around your personal living conditions would use color codes, like America's Homeland Security system. (So when it's "blue" out, you know to wear a jacket.) Or it would at least set 0 as room temperature, so negative temps mean turn on the heater, and positive means turn on the A/C. At least that would make sense.
They allow reacquisition of expired accounts because they know people are scared of someone getting an account with their old email address. Your email is up for grabs if you don't log in once a month. It's how they keep you logging in.
Do these numbers include all the people running IIS who don't realize they're running IIS, or that a web server is running on their machine at all?
Just wondering.