It's not "livable" in 0F either without heating, so there goes that argument.
I would say 110F is more "livable" than 40F. 110F you need proper hydration. 40F you need heating and or warm clothes. 0 - 100 is not the "best temperatures for survival". 50F - 90F would probably be a better range for that.
I've heard several different "origin" stories. Another one I heard is that 100F was used because it was the body temperature of the horse (horses have more stable body temperatures than humans so he used horses rather than people).
The actual scale though has shifted from when the system was initially set up. 0F and 100F are not what they used to be. To "compete" with Celsius the scale shifted a little to make it so that water froze at 32F and boiled at 212F. Farenheit as a measurement hasn't always been the same.
Covered many times before, but I still think Fahrenheit is the best unit for weather temperature.
0f to 100f is livable.
0c to 100c is not livable.
Who cares if it is "livable"?
It regularly gets 110F here in summer and people still live. In Canada it often gets below 0F and people live.
The measurements 0F to 100F were based upon what at the time were perceived as the min and max temperatures the weather reached in Europe. That's not very scientific, even if it is meaningful.
You can perceive the difference just about in 1C change. You can't perceive the difference in 1F change. A Centigrade is more meaningful to a human being as far as perception goes.
Overall though... who really cares? If talking about the weather, either system works as long as you are familiar with it.
Etienne Kapikian, a forecaster at French meteorological agency MeteoFrance, posted to Twitter that the city of Ahvaz soared to 53.7C (128.7 "degrees Fahrenheit").
Fixed that for you.
Yes, but the headline (until they fix it as I'm sure they must eventually) still says:
Iranian City Soars To Record 129C Degrees: Near Hottest On Earth in Modern Measurements
I know someone who works at Microsoft; Microsoft at one point was in the process of outsourcing a lot of people to India, but customers didn't like that so they started bringing them back home. They still have a lot in India, Australia, and many other countries around the world (including the US). Which call center you hit depends in part on what time of day you call.
I heard of one guy who liked to place his calls at night so that he would get the Australian help centre as he said they seemed to know what they were doing more than the Microsoft employees in other countries.
If your wife was stupid by effectively clicking yes to the "Hey, don't be stupid out there, the world is a dangerous place" box ( http://media.askvg.com/article... ) to a malware laden document she randomly opened, she deserves to be infected.
She opened a Word Document sent from her professor (and had been expecting a Word Document from her so didn't treat it as suspicious).
No one solution is going to stop 100% of all attacks.
If this stops 5% of the attacks it's an improvement and a step in the right direction. By itself it isn't enough but if it stops some attacks (and doesn't introduce other attacks in the process) then I would want this.
Doing this give foreign governments and militaries the excuse they need to move away from American software assets, such as ClamAV, Windows, McAfee, etc.
Maybe they should.
Maybe China and Russia shouldn't be using American software for sensitive equipment. I'd be very surprised if there weren't some American retial software that does spy on foreign computers.
I'm just entirely shocked that Microsoft's stock price hasn't cratered into the pit it deserves. Don't think that the current wave isn't the last or best; ransomware will be iteratively released until bitcoin shoots past $10,000/coin.
Because it's not really hurting Microsoft's pocket. There isn't really a legitimate alternative for windows. The general public seemed baffled by Linux (and Linux isn't getting the marketing spent to promote it). Apple is a walled garden that nobody wants.
Many business apps only run on windows. Microsoft's customers aren't going anywhere.
Well Republicans aren't going to do anything about Trump because they as individuals don't want to be seen by their local constituents as being a traitor. (they might lose the primaries the next time around).
The Democrats aren't going to do anything about Trump (there's a reason they haven't been pushing for an indictment) because the longer Trump is in power the more seats they stand to gain as a party.
Democrats don't want Trump gone because he helps their party win swing states in the next election. Republicans don't want to lose their seats in primaries by being the traitor.
Trump is going to last the full 4 years unless he does something monumentally more stupid than the things he has already done. There's a reason he started fundraising for his re-election 2 years earlier than any other president, he knows he's going to need every bit of help he can get. He will be challenged hard in the primaries despite being the incumbent.
If Kaspersky is corrupt and letting Russian malware through (and I'm not saying they are, they're probably legit) could it be a little late?
If Kaspersky were rotten and letting Russian Malware through, then that software would already be installed and hooked into the computers. Sure, getting rid of Kaspersky may help new computers not be infected, but if they were bad, then the military is already infiltrated to a degree.
odds are that he will have had more luck in the opportunities presented to him
Do you have a better word to describe this phenomena than “privilege”?
Honestly, I hate the term "white privilege" because it is terribly misleading and incorrect. There is no special "privilege" or "advantage" one gains from being white.
The advantages are based on class not race. Being born to a wealthy, educated family infers all sorts of advantages. And... yes, whites tend to be better off than some other races.
A rich black guy has every bit the same opportunity as a rich white guy. A poor black guy has the same opportunities as a poor white guy.
Let's not pretend this is all about race. It's about "socio-economic class".
3) They have a leader who doesn't give a damn what other countries think of them. Putin wants what is best for Russia and doesn't care if that makes people in other countries not like him. He doesn't want to be known as clean or honourable- he just wants to restore the empire.
Fun exercise: Replace Putin with Trump and Russia with USA.
For point 3, I in no way disagree with you. There is a reason those two men admire each other.
The CIA are more than capable of getting their hands dirty, wouldn't make any sense for them to attack a country they're hoping to stay independent just to make someone else randomly look bad.
It doesn't always "have to be Putin" but there is a reason why it frequently is Russia.
1) They have the resources. No country has a better human resource for hacking than Russia. They have a large highly trained tech-savvy population. They've put more effort into teaching people to be computer literate than almost anywhere else. They also have a wild-west type law enforcement that overlooks a lot of hacking and allows people to hone their skills that way.
2) They have a motive. Russia is semi-openly hostile to most countries that lay to it's West. They have a policy of constantly testing our defenses. They frequently fly planes into other countries airspace to see how quickly they will react, the cyber warfare is more of the same testing. They're seeing how we will react.
3) They have a leader who doesn't give a damn what other countries think of them. Putin wants what is best for Russia and doesn't care if that makes people in other countries not like him. He doesn't want to be known as clean or honourable- he just wants to restore the empire. Furthermore, his background is in espionage. Being sneaky is in his blood.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not "livable" in 0F either without heating, so there goes that argument.
I would say 110F is more "livable" than 40F. 110F you need proper hydration. 40F you need heating and or warm clothes. 0 - 100 is not the "best temperatures for survival". 50F - 90F would probably be a better range for that.
I've heard several different "origin" stories. Another one I heard is that 100F was used because it was the body temperature of the horse (horses have more stable body temperatures than humans so he used horses rather than people).
The actual scale though has shifted from when the system was initially set up. 0F and 100F are not what they used to be. To "compete" with Celsius the scale shifted a little to make it so that water froze at 32F and boiled at 212F. Farenheit as a measurement hasn't always been the same.
my glass of water has some salt in it and it's -2c...
I wouldn't recommend drinking that.
Covered many times before, but I still think Fahrenheit is the best unit for weather temperature.
0f to 100f is livable.
0c to 100c is not livable.
Who cares if it is "livable"?
It regularly gets 110F here in summer and people still live. In Canada it often gets below 0F and people live.
The measurements 0F to 100F were based upon what at the time were perceived as the min and max temperatures the weather reached in Europe. That's not very scientific, even if it is meaningful.
You can perceive the difference just about in 1C change. You can't perceive the difference in 1F change. A Centigrade is more meaningful to a human being as far as perception goes.
Overall though... who really cares? If talking about the weather, either system works as long as you are familiar with it.
Etienne Kapikian, a forecaster at French meteorological agency MeteoFrance, posted to Twitter that the city of Ahvaz soared to 53.7C (128.7 "degrees Fahrenheit").
Fixed that for you.
Yes, but the headline (until they fix it as I'm sure they must eventually) still says:
Iranian City Soars To Record 129C Degrees: Near Hottest On Earth in Modern Measurements
That's quite an amusing snafu.
That's pretty intense. Well above boiling point of water.
I know someone who works at Microsoft; Microsoft at one point was in the process of outsourcing a lot of people to India, but customers didn't like that so they started bringing them back home. They still have a lot in India, Australia, and many other countries around the world (including the US). Which call center you hit depends in part on what time of day you call.
I heard of one guy who liked to place his calls at night so that he would get the Australian help centre as he said they seemed to know what they were doing more than the Microsoft employees in other countries.
Queue is 100% correct and what I intended in this scenario.
Queue the
"There's hundreds more working in Redmond"
comments.
If your wife was stupid by effectively clicking yes to the "Hey, don't be stupid out there, the world is a dangerous place" box ( http://media.askvg.com/article... ) to a malware laden document she randomly opened, she deserves to be infected.
She opened a Word Document sent from her professor (and had been expecting a Word Document from her so didn't treat it as suspicious).
No one solution is going to stop 100% of all attacks.
If this stops 5% of the attacks it's an improvement and a step in the right direction. By itself it isn't enough but if it stops some attacks (and doesn't introduce other attacks in the process) then I would want this.
Suckers!
Office has ALWAYS been an attack vector. From damn Macro viruses in the 90's to other tecnhiques that embed in Word or other office products today.
My wife got a virus on her laptop recently opening a Word document. Office is still very much a vector.
Doing this give foreign governments and militaries the excuse they need to move away from American software assets, such as ClamAV, Windows, McAfee, etc.
Maybe they should.
Maybe China and Russia shouldn't be using American software for sensitive equipment. I'd be very surprised if there weren't some American retial software that does spy on foreign computers.
I'm just entirely shocked that Microsoft's stock price hasn't cratered into the pit it deserves. Don't think that the current wave isn't the last or best; ransomware will be iteratively released until bitcoin shoots past $10,000/coin.
Because it's not really hurting Microsoft's pocket. There isn't really a legitimate alternative for windows. The general public seemed baffled by Linux (and Linux isn't getting the marketing spent to promote it). Apple is a walled garden that nobody wants.
Many business apps only run on windows. Microsoft's customers aren't going anywhere.
One extra hurdle for them to clear. Better than no change.
Would that be the barbell curl or the dumbbell curl?
Beats me. I use a machine at the gym.
Your gym has a snack machine too?
The EO only covers six countries; Sweden isn't one of them. Even if Sweden was one of them, Stenberg has a clear relationship with a US Company.
Mozilla starts with "Mo". It's clearly an abbreviation of "Mohammed-Zilla". They're clearly an evil jihadi terrorist organization.
Well Republicans aren't going to do anything about Trump because they as individuals don't want to be seen by their local constituents as being a traitor. (they might lose the primaries the next time around).
The Democrats aren't going to do anything about Trump (there's a reason they haven't been pushing for an indictment) because the longer Trump is in power the more seats they stand to gain as a party.
Democrats don't want Trump gone because he helps their party win swing states in the next election. Republicans don't want to lose their seats in primaries by being the traitor.
Trump is going to last the full 4 years unless he does something monumentally more stupid than the things he has already done. There's a reason he started fundraising for his re-election 2 years earlier than any other president, he knows he's going to need every bit of help he can get. He will be challenged hard in the primaries despite being the incumbent.
If Kaspersky is corrupt and letting Russian malware through (and I'm not saying they are, they're probably legit) could it be a little late?
If Kaspersky were rotten and letting Russian Malware through, then that software would already be installed and hooked into the computers. Sure, getting rid of Kaspersky may help new computers not be infected, but if they were bad, then the military is already infiltrated to a degree.
odds are that he will have had more luck in the opportunities presented to him
Do you have a better word to describe this phenomena than “privilege”?
Honestly, I hate the term "white privilege" because it is terribly misleading and incorrect. There is no special "privilege" or "advantage" one gains from being white.
The advantages are based on class not race. Being born to a wealthy, educated family infers all sorts of advantages. And... yes, whites tend to be better off than some other races.
A rich black guy has every bit the same opportunity as a rich white guy. A poor black guy has the same opportunities as a poor white guy.
Let's not pretend this is all about race. It's about "socio-economic class".
3) They have a leader who doesn't give a damn what other countries think of them. Putin wants what is best for Russia and doesn't care if that makes people in other countries not like him. He doesn't want to be known as clean or honourable- he just wants to restore the empire.
Fun exercise:
Replace Putin with Trump and Russia with USA.
For point 3, I in no way disagree with you. There is a reason those two men admire each other.
The CIA are more than capable of getting their hands dirty, wouldn't make any sense for them to attack a country they're hoping to stay independent just to make someone else randomly look bad.
It doesn't always "have to be Putin" but there is a reason why it frequently is Russia.
1) They have the resources. No country has a better human resource for hacking than Russia. They have a large highly trained tech-savvy population. They've put more effort into teaching people to be computer literate than almost anywhere else. They also have a wild-west type law enforcement that overlooks a lot of hacking and allows people to hone their skills that way.
2) They have a motive. Russia is semi-openly hostile to most countries that lay to it's West. They have a policy of constantly testing our defenses. They frequently fly planes into other countries airspace to see how quickly they will react, the cyber warfare is more of the same testing. They're seeing how we will react.
3) They have a leader who doesn't give a damn what other countries think of them. Putin wants what is best for Russia and doesn't care if that makes people in other countries not like him. He doesn't want to be known as clean or honourable- he just wants to restore the empire. Furthermore, his background is in espionage. Being sneaky is in his blood.
Who has most to gain from russia being blamed for something petty with no gains in it for them whatsoever?
No one really. No one really gains from Russia being blamed if it wasn't Russia. There is no reason to frame Russia.
I mean, what is the motive?
Oh, you mean, like, besides destabalising the country they are trying to stealthily reclaim, that they've already illegally stolen territory from.