Akamai claims over 1,100 customers and indicated that only 2 percent of them were noticeably impacted by the attack, such as not being available for about an hour.
Theo only statistic they ofer is the percentage of customers that were impacted. To me this hints of trying to play down the severity of the situation. When only 2 percent of your customers comprise (following is is a made up statistic since they didn't give me one) 80 percent of your traffic, you're lying by omission by only giving customer statistics.
I've never had a problem with (my roomate's) DirecTV...
UNTIL THE SUPER BOWL
I swear I thought it was Comcast attacking the satellites, but whatever caused it - we didn't see the last touchdown of the game, and were worried that we'd miss what turned out to be the final field goal.
Of course, I'm not really into football, so it was about the funniest thing I've ever seen. 30-something people all in our house watching the DirecTV reconnect to the satellite. Good stuff.
At the White House, officials said that just before Bush addressed the nation, he pumped his fist, winked, and said "I feel good." He then delivered his address, which lasted four minutes.
Sounds a whole lot like masturbation to me. Proves once and for all that it takes war to get this guy off.
All the pondering about "how" this will actually be done has included statistics of some sort. It feels like that word is simply used because the company used it. The only way to guarantee each merchant recieves his due (and I promise noone will sign up if they're not made that guarantee), is to keep track of how many transactions were made to him. This has absolutely nothing to do with statistics, it's just an accumulator.
1-2-3-4-5 - You get money now! 1-2-3-4-5 - You get money now!
Where'd the statistics go? Saying something happens 10% of the time doesn't mean it took statistics to implement it.
When you see someone who is going to do something really cool in a movie, just remember that in real life really cool problems are not simple enough for one person to figure out and implement, so this 1337 h4x0r couldn't possibly be the end-to-end solution.
Of course this isn't true for Computer Science (if there is indeed a real thing and it isn't the same as mathematics) in the strictest sense, but there's only ever been a few people that made significant contributions to the body of knowledge and all of those resulted in fascinating papers being written, not a planet where everything plugged into a wall socket could be controlled, or where a bank unknowingly reroutes billions of dollars into untraceable accounts (but please keep sending the b00bies hollywood...).
As a side note, Tron rocks. If you haven't made an MCP yet, you're missing out.
When Moore said it, he was observing the pace at which things were going. He didn't say it was always going to be that way. Why it ever started getting called a "Law" is probably the fault of some idiot in Intel Marketing.
It's really just "Moores Semi-Accurate Observation That We Can Use To Help Figure Out How Fast Things Are Changing".
If you're taking a stance against human/mouse hybrids, what's your stance on human/bacteria hybrids, or virus/bacteria hybrids, or bacteria/mouse hybrids? These all already exist if you consider expression of foreign structures in host organisms such as proteins and tissues.
The greatest treatment breakthroughs of the last 30 years have all been made using host cells as test beds - heck, all of the medical treatments that are based on real science have arisen from this type of research. The social implications of full-fledged hybrids certainly need to be addressed, but these new experiments are likely to prove pivotal to biomedical research.
If you're taking a stand against hybridization, then you need to take a stand against all hybridization. If you're against these techniques, then you need to be against every bit of real bio-science that has ever happened, is happening, and is about to happen. You need to personally refuse any treatment in which recombinant techniques have been used in research. If you're going to make a stand against this science (and science as a whole), you need to understand the repercussions. You need to know that you stand against the research that has yielded methods to repair paralyzing nervous system damage. You need to know that you stand against the research that saved your father when he had his heart attack.
Personally I'm grateful that we no longer use medival medical techinques and that we have a decent understanding of what it takes to keep us alive. I think if you're not eager to see people live, and live disease-free and happy, then you're the oddity.
You know, I'm just getting started out in RC plane flying and am interested in learning about dogfighting. With planes they try to cut each other's streamers. Maybe, and I don't wanna be a spoilsport, we could get the ships to work with streamers of sorts too, that way it won't cost so freakin much every round. Imagine a lake covered in ships and aircraft all trying not to (or to) crash into each other. Sign me up.
Now come on. What the fu^H^H heck do you expect from us? The nice thing about high-end equipment of any sort is that you usually buy it through a very experienced salesman. Even if you can find a better deal somewhere else, just get the rundown from a good salesman. You might have to try a few, but it's not bad because you can easily tell if someone knows what they're talking about. The right guy (or gal if you're offended by that) is bound to know more than most of us.
There is a fascinating gap between optimal behavior and animal behavior. Assuming realistic AI is possible, at what point do you feel we have reached some minimally accurate representation? When the AI systems perform with reasoning capabilities of any sort, when they perform with optimal reasoning capabilities, or when they perform with capabilities similar to humans?
If they're already boasting Office 200 compatibility, they've progressed more than a version a year (which is all MS is able to do), so they'll reach Office 1492, Office 1776, and even the coveted Office 1969 fairly quickly.
How long will my life's work be accessible? Will I lose the ability to read my disc/chip before I turn 30? I know this is a bit redundant with other frequent/. topics, but I feel a little helpless. What will my grandchildren do with my outdated chip, just throw it away because it costs to much to get it read?
What we need is a group to take charge of compatibility issues. This group would devise transitional technologies for all types of hardware/software/communications. With such a body, the history of change can be documented as well as the history of us, making any public form of storage accessible.
This sounds eerily similar to the way libraries archive books. Perhaps the perfect place for updating of information is at the library. Imagine stopping by the library to get your pile of cd's thrown onto a DVD through their updating kiosk. I know there are some hurdles to overcome on the copyright front, but if the..PA's realize that they are just a succeptible to data loss internally, perhaps they will lossen their grip for the sake of preservation.
We're brought into this world alone, and leave alone. Somewhere in between, we get the idea that we're not alone. We are wrong.
Sun/solaris. Heck, try any *nix flavor. What happens to your precious "internet use" and "understanding" statistics then? Surprisingly, the people who know what a command line is and can in any limited way use one, have FAR more experience and general computer knowledge. Too bad troll-spawned articles like this never do all their research, or in this case, basically no research at all save to throw some mindless statistics at us and claim they've found something.
A little off topic, but nobody said this before, and it seems incredibly important.
It was unsettling from the first time I read it, but over the holiday it hit me just how bad the ruling on now is now can be. If now is now, what's the publishing date on dynamically generated webpages? Date of the program? Date of the generation?
Even worse, what's the publication date of any information my programs generate? What happens if my program was written, then run for a year, and the resulting information was put on a webpage. Do I have pre-emptive rights over someone who came up with the same information 6 months before? There's another side of this too. What if my program was faster at generating the information, but someone else's was looked at (externally) first?
On the more devious side, what if I make a program that publishes (arguably a poor example, but makes the point clear) DNA sequences and puts them on web pages. Hell, since I'm Megacorp, I'll make it generate every possible arrangement of 15 bases. When someone else comes up with the sequence they wish to patent, I know I published before them.
Even better, what if I make a program that chooses 1 of 100,001 things to say about a person, all nice except 1. When that one thing gets printed, am I guilty of defamation, or was I guilty at the time I wrote it? How can he prove that it actually happened if it's pseudo-random anyway? Could I defend myself saying that I never guaranteed it would actually happen?
I know there was an article about a guy and his family learning to program Java online with a robot programming game. Does anyone remember which website he was talking about? Even better, what's your favorite (preferrably free) robot programming game? Please refrain from listing a google search, I want to hear what YOU think.
I'm not sure it would be very interesting. We'd end up with 2 sides that won't communicate beyond killing a few of each other whenever possible. At least if we were really trying to mimic personality. Just look at the state of global affairs right now - we're just too self-destructive to be interesting.
Forget small robots on wheels? Don't think so.
on
Robocup 2002 Now Underway
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The motivation behind these human-shaped robots is not at all the same as the motivation of the wheeled robot soccer tournaments. The whole point behind the small robots on wheels is to learn and improve on teamplay and improvisional skills from a software level, not in mimicry of physical ability. These approaches to robot design aren't competitive, they are parallel in the pursuit of higher functionality.
I had quite a giggle when I could name all the CD's based on the parts of them that showed around the post-it. I hope it was done not only to avoid entanglements, but also in humor. Kinda like a scrambled pr0n, you can get the whole picture from a little piece of it. I just have to worry about having broken Tom's encryption scheme by figuring it out.
Maybe if you listened to the scrambled music these CDs play you can appreciate the entire sound. Well, no, that's just stupid. So it's not like scrambled pr0n cause I don't enjoy it - more like a girl's phone number that you wrote on your hand and accidentally rubbed off the last 2 numbers.
A bit wandering, but hopefully stimulating in some non-nauseating way.
A job at the lab is about the most secure job on the planet. Haven't you guys counted the number of SCIAM articles based on LLNL technonology?
We'll always need stockpile stewardship (the reason for the lab's existence), and we'll always need cutting edge projects (like the Bio-Terror detection systems used at the Olympics)
fyi -- see
Today's SF Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article. cgi?file=/c/ a/2002/06/11/MN170910.DTL
the jist:
"I just have to give you a better dollar amount," Ridge said. "The bigger issue to be framed here is for you to understand that we are not going to take over the traditional relationship they (the Department of Energy)had with Lawrence Livermore."
Ridge said only employees who work specifically on countermeasures to protect Americans against nuclear, biological or chemical weapons -- a small fraction of the lab's work -- would be affected.
"Historically, and at least for now and for the future, the Department of Energy is going to control and work with Lawrence Livermore as it relates to nuclear weapons systems," Ridge said.
Not unless you count EVERY bit of genetic research ever conducted that led to our ability to map the genome. As a whole, the PCR/Shotgun technique we've used minimizes cost per base, relying on some simple cloning steps, robots to clean up the clones, and some only moderately expensive, Thermo-cyclers and other tools. When you consider the number of bases in our genome (yes, we have to count the junk too), the total bases per dollar (instead of bytes per dollar, because compression makes the storage 1/4 the actual size) couldn't possibly approach cost of byte some series having to do with nuclear weapon launching/disarming/design.
Slashdot Mirror
This really works.
Akamai claims over 1,100 customers and indicated that only 2 percent of them were noticeably impacted by the attack, such as not being available for about an hour.
Theo only statistic they ofer is the percentage of customers that were impacted. To me this hints of trying to play down the severity of the situation. When only 2 percent of your customers comprise (following is is a made up statistic since they didn't give me one) 80 percent of your traffic, you're lying by omission by only giving customer statistics.
I hope you mean goatse.cx, if not, how many times must we do this to make it go away? :-)
I've never had a problem with (my roomate's) DirecTV...
UNTIL THE SUPER BOWL
I swear I thought it was Comcast attacking the satellites, but whatever caused it - we didn't see the last touchdown of the game, and were worried that we'd miss what turned out to be the final field goal.
Of course, I'm not really into football, so it was about the funniest thing I've ever seen. 30-something people all in our house watching the DirecTV reconnect to the satellite. Good stuff.
At the White House, officials said that just before Bush addressed the nation, he pumped his fist, winked, and said "I feel good." He then delivered his address, which lasted four minutes.
Sounds a whole lot like masturbation to me. Proves once and for all that it takes war to get this guy off.
All the pondering about "how" this will actually be done has included statistics of some sort. It feels like that word is simply used because the company used it.
The only way to guarantee each merchant recieves his due (and I promise noone will sign up if they're not made that guarantee), is to keep track of how many transactions were made to him. This has absolutely nothing to do with statistics, it's just an accumulator.
1-2-3-4-5 - You get money now!
1-2-3-4-5 - You get money now!
Where'd the statistics go? Saying something happens 10% of the time doesn't mean it took statistics to implement it.
When you see someone who is going to do something really cool in a movie, just remember that in real life really cool problems are not simple enough for one person to figure out and implement, so this 1337 h4x0r couldn't possibly be the end-to-end solution.
Of course this isn't true for Computer Science (if there is indeed a real thing and it isn't the same as mathematics) in the strictest sense, but there's only ever been a few people that made significant contributions to the body of knowledge and all of those resulted in fascinating papers being written, not a planet where everything plugged into a wall socket could be controlled, or where a bank unknowingly reroutes billions of dollars into untraceable accounts (but please keep sending the b00bies hollywood...).
As a side note, Tron rocks. If you haven't made an MCP yet, you're missing out.
It's really just "Moores Semi-Accurate Observation That We Can Use To Help Figure Out How Fast Things Are Changing".
The greatest treatment breakthroughs of the last 30 years have all been made using host cells as test beds - heck, all of the medical treatments that are based on real science have arisen from this type of research. The social implications of full-fledged hybrids certainly need to be addressed, but these new experiments are likely to prove pivotal to biomedical research.
If you're taking a stand against hybridization, then you need to take a stand against all hybridization. If you're against these techniques, then you need to be against every bit of real bio-science that has ever happened, is happening, and is about to happen. You need to personally refuse any treatment in which recombinant techniques have been used in research. If you're going to make a stand against this science (and science as a whole), you need to understand the repercussions. You need to know that you stand against the research that has yielded methods to repair paralyzing nervous system damage. You need to know that you stand against the research that saved your father when he had his heart attack.
Personally I'm grateful that we no longer use medival medical techinques and that we have a decent understanding of what it takes to keep us alive. I think if you're not eager to see people live, and live disease-free and happy, then you're the oddity.
You know, I'm just getting started out in RC plane flying and am interested in learning about dogfighting. With planes they try to cut each other's streamers. Maybe, and I don't wanna be a spoilsport, we could get the ships to work with streamers of sorts too, that way it won't cost so freakin much every round. Imagine a lake covered in ships and aircraft all trying not to (or to) crash into each other. Sign me up.
Now come on. What the fu^H^H heck do you expect from us? The nice thing about high-end equipment of any sort is that you usually buy it through a very experienced salesman. Even if you can find a better deal somewhere else, just get the rundown from a good salesman. You might have to try a few, but it's not bad because you can easily tell if someone knows what they're talking about. The right guy (or gal if you're offended by that) is bound to know more than most of us.
There is a fascinating gap between optimal behavior and animal behavior. Assuming realistic AI is possible, at what point do you feel we have reached some minimally accurate representation? When the AI systems perform with reasoning capabilities of any sort, when they perform with optimal reasoning capabilities, or when they perform with capabilities similar to humans?
I couldn't imagine a more appropriate use for my spool of AOL CDs.
If they're already boasting Office 200 compatibility, they've progressed more than a version a year (which is all MS is able to do), so they'll reach Office 1492, Office 1776, and even the coveted Office 1969 fairly quickly.
Instead of being redundant, I'll just point you to my previous post.
How long will my life's work be accessible? Will I lose the ability to read my disc/chip before I turn 30? I know this is a bit redundant with other frequent /. topics, but I feel a little helpless. What will my grandchildren do with my outdated chip, just throw it away because it costs to much to get it read?
..PA's realize that they are just a succeptible to data loss internally, perhaps they will lossen their grip for the sake of preservation.
What we need is a group to take charge of compatibility issues. This group would devise transitional technologies for all types of hardware/software/communications. With such a body, the history of change can be documented as well as the history of us, making any public form of storage accessible.
This sounds eerily similar to the way libraries archive books. Perhaps the perfect place for updating of information is at the library. Imagine stopping by the library to get your pile of cd's thrown onto a DVD through their updating kiosk. I know there are some hurdles to overcome on the copyright front, but if the
We're brought into this world alone, and leave alone. Somewhere in between, we get the idea that we're not alone. We are wrong.
Sun/solaris. Heck, try any *nix flavor. What happens to your precious "internet use" and "understanding" statistics then? Surprisingly, the people who know what a command line is and can in any limited way use one, have FAR more experience and general computer knowledge. Too bad troll-spawned articles like this never do all their research, or in this case, basically no research at all save to throw some mindless statistics at us and claim they've found something.
A little off topic, but nobody said this before, and it seems incredibly important.
It was unsettling from the first time I read it, but over the holiday it hit me just how bad the ruling on now is now can be. If now is now, what's the publishing date on dynamically generated webpages? Date of the program? Date of the generation?
Even worse, what's the publication date of any information my programs generate? What happens if my program was written, then run for a year, and the resulting information was put on a webpage. Do I have pre-emptive rights over someone who came up with the same information 6 months before? There's another side of this too. What if my program was faster at generating the information, but someone else's was looked at (externally) first?
On the more devious side, what if I make a program that publishes (arguably a poor example, but makes the point clear) DNA sequences and puts them on web pages. Hell, since I'm Megacorp, I'll make it generate every possible arrangement of 15 bases. When someone else comes up with the sequence they wish to patent, I know I published before them.
Even better, what if I make a program that chooses 1 of 100,001 things to say about a person, all nice except 1. When that one thing gets printed, am I guilty of defamation, or was I guilty at the time I wrote it? How can he prove that it actually happened if it's pseudo-random anyway? Could I defend myself saying that I never guaranteed it would actually happen?
The internet that is. The real question is: will the buffoons in the US Congress screw us over too.
I know there was an article about a guy and his family learning to program Java online with a robot programming game. Does anyone remember which website he was talking about? Even better, what's your favorite (preferrably free) robot programming game?
Please refrain from listing a google search, I want to hear what YOU think.
I'm not sure it would be very interesting. We'd end up with 2 sides that won't communicate beyond killing a few of each other whenever possible. At least if we were really trying to mimic personality. Just look at the state of global affairs right now - we're just too self-destructive to be interesting.
The motivation behind these human-shaped robots is not at all the same as the motivation of the wheeled robot soccer tournaments. The whole point behind the small robots on wheels is to learn and improve on teamplay and improvisional skills from a software level, not in mimicry of physical ability. These approaches to robot design aren't competitive, they are parallel in the pursuit of higher functionality.
I had quite a giggle when I could name all the CD's based on the parts of them that showed around the post-it. I hope it was done not only to avoid entanglements, but also in humor. Kinda like a scrambled pr0n, you can get the whole picture from a little piece of it. I just have to worry about having broken Tom's encryption scheme by figuring it out.
Maybe if you listened to the scrambled music these CDs play you can appreciate the entire sound. Well, no, that's just stupid. So it's not like scrambled pr0n cause I don't enjoy it - more like a girl's phone number that you wrote on your hand and accidentally rubbed off the last 2 numbers.
A bit wandering, but hopefully stimulating in some non-nauseating way.
A job at the lab is about the most secure job on the planet. Haven't you guys counted the number of SCIAM articles based on LLNL technonology?
. cgi?file=/c/ a/2002/06/11/MN170910.DTL
We'll always need stockpile stewardship (the reason for the lab's existence), and we'll always need cutting edge projects (like the Bio-Terror detection systems used at the Olympics)
fyi -- see
Today's SF Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article
the jist:
"I just have to give you a better dollar amount," Ridge said. "The bigger issue to be framed here is for you to understand that we are not going to
take over the traditional relationship they (the Department of Energy)had with Lawrence Livermore."
Ridge said only employees who work specifically on countermeasures to protect Americans against nuclear, biological or chemical weapons -- a small fraction of the lab's work -- would be affected.
"Historically, and at least for now and for the future, the Department of Energy is going to control and work with Lawrence Livermore as it
relates to nuclear weapons systems," Ridge said.
Not unless you count EVERY bit of genetic research ever conducted that led to our ability to map the genome. As a whole, the PCR/Shotgun technique we've used minimizes cost per base, relying on some simple cloning steps, robots to clean up the clones, and some only moderately expensive, Thermo-cyclers and other tools. When you consider the number of bases in our genome (yes, we have to count the junk too), the total bases per dollar (instead of bytes per dollar, because compression makes the storage 1/4 the actual size) couldn't possibly approach cost of byte some series having to do with nuclear weapon launching/disarming/design.