Here's the real problem though: people say they want to decide for themselves what is true, but in the past when presented with obviously fake stories, these same people did not do the research to actually determine if it's true.
These are people who think that they can establish what's true based on faith and feelings, not research and facts. To them, preponderance of evidence means "what does your gut tell you". Trying to sway their opinion with mere facts is an exercise in futility. They believe they have the right to choose what the facts are.
One would presume that someone who was paying attention at the time would at least seek clarification on the mixed message before sending a whole state into a panic.
When there are mere seconds between thousands of lives being saved or lost, I would hope that they do not seek clarification, but err on the side of caution. I would commend this person and fire the idiot who approved the text "This is not a drill" in a drill.
No solar radiation in their normal habitat is the biggest environmental factor.
There are plenty of other underground species that don't show this neoteny. And some that do, like axolotls, but without a greatly increased life span.
Given the amount of data, it seems like it defaults to "public-to-the-world" and not just "private to me (and my friends)"
I can't say about Strava, but Polar defaults to everything being private, and you have to deliberately share data or make it public.
Not that it should matter - if the options to make it private are there, we should expect anyone in secret locations to do so (or even better, don't log GPS coordinates at all). Why do we give them security clearance if they can't be bothered to take the simplest precautions?
And this is why letting some company track your data is a bad idea. This would probably have been avoided if this company didn't track their users and then publish the data.
Don't blame the company. Whether to (a) use location data or not, or (b) sync with the Strava site or not are both voluntary. It's the goons that chose to do both that are to blame here. If they're too stupid to see the problem, why the hell are they cleared to work at secret facilities?
I think another part of the problem is that there's at least fifty minstrels for each bard. But who the public sees and want to reward are the minstrels. Not the guy who wrote the song, but the charismatic people on stage. There's not a lot of incentive to compose great music, and especially so if you're not also a performer.
Good question. Compared to most Europeans, at least. There are countries where "how are you doing?" would be met with a "mind your own business" stare, and others where it would be answered honestly, "my grandmother died, and my shoes chafe". When I moved to the US a generation ago, I had to work at suppressing my desire to just walk away when people were obviously insincere or engaged in false flattery.
There's an exaggerated politeness in some East Asian cultures too, but then it tends to be more class-driven and not as reciprocal. While an American clerk might expect the polite fiction returned, a Japanese clerk would be polite but not expect the customer to politely enquire about his or her well-being.
A lot of conservative fuckwits love him. Not because he's any good, but that he wrote in fiction the most quoted for fact fiction line I see on Slashdot, "An armed society is a polite society." America proves him wrong.
You're doubly wrong. TANSTAAFL is, by far, more quoted than that. And Americans are exceedingly polite. When you meet Americans, they will smile at you, eyeball you, and ask how you are. And expect you to be polite enough to not respond with truth. It's a society built on polite fiction. That doesn't stop them from stepping on your body to make a buck. But they'll smile at you while doing so.
In fact I remember a memorable rant by a physicist at Richard Dawkins where he said that he was bothered by Dawkins' belief that science understands everything when dark matter and dark energy make up most of the mass in the universe and we've got very little idea of what either is.
Damn right.
Except that Dawkins has never claimed that science understands everything. Science is needed precisely because we don't understand everything.
And when science doesn't understand something, that's no justification for picking an unscientific explanation. It's a call to bring more science to bear on the problem so we can understand more. A desert tribe god isn't going to explain dark matter and dark energy. Science may not today, but is working on it.
Instead of 'sudo', but about just 'su' ? So instead of using sudo to do something, I su to the needed user, do that thing with the necessary privilege, then switch back to my regular user/whatever?
If you do "/bin/su -" (including the hyphen), it's safer. You then don't inherit any of the environment that you do with just "su", and don't risk running a different su that someone who hacked your account might have left there.
And yes, it's IMHO much safer than sudo because there's no privilege escalation. Knowing your own password should not be enough to get root access. It's much easier for a hacker to hack any of the user passwords that has sudo access than it is to hack just the root password. And if an admin changes the root password, that doesn't stop sudo users.
That around a third of the Linux rootkits attempt to exploit sudo isn't because sudo is so securely designed and implemented. In general, anything that adds convenience will reduce security.
Of course, closing login sessions when done with them should be done no matter what the user is. Don't leave them open because it's convenient.
Man if you people were around when sudo was adopted you'd still be suggesting everyone log in as root.
Log in with the user/group with the least amount of privileges needed to do the job. Create new users/groups/permissions/contexts if needed. sudo is privilege escalation, which is made for convenience, is inherently insecure and leads to exploits. I don't have sudo on my systems, for security reasons. Privilege escalation is the Windows way of doing things, while the Unix way is to only drop privileges, not escalate them.
If people will be selected to live on mars, chances are we'll look for the emotionally stable to do the first wave of colonisation.... You know, like astronauts.
The difference being that North America had resources that made a profit exploiting. What does Mars have that cannot be procured easier and cheaper elsewhere?
I didn't mean to intentionally cause an accident. I was pointing out the absurdity of your claim that insurance is gambling. IF you have an accident, exactly what have you 'won'?
You win an insurance payout. You would have the accident anyhow, so the zero point is "having had an accident". At that point, getting a payout is a win compared to not getting a payout.
And if enough well-informed bettors make that same bet the odds will be adjusted.
Yes, but for everyone. Not just for the guy who knows a lot about horses, but also for the guy who randomly picked the same horse. The insurance companies, on the other hand, want to set different odds for different customers. Their dream is to know with 100% certainty how much they will pay out to every individual, and charge the customer a bit more than that. If everyone pitches in, the premiums are affordable for everyone, and insurance is attractive. But if the costs start to diverge too much, it no longer is attractive - it is no longer an equalizer.
Reducing payouts is short term thinking. Payouts is the cost of doing business. Making sure that the income from everyone nets an overall profit is what a good bookie or casino does, and what a good insurance company does. Trying to find a way to milk the least profitable customers to reduce payout is just going to give your company a bad rep. An insurance company is meant to pay out, and lose money on some, and win money from others.
Slashdot Mirror
That's for the dozen or so people who read the weekly Slashdot article which concerns Australia.
Doesn't Australia have its own Slashdot, or is that just Japan?
Here's the real problem though: people say they want to decide for themselves what is true, but in the past when presented with obviously fake stories, these same people did not do the research to actually determine if it's true.
These are people who think that they can establish what's true based on faith and feelings, not research and facts. To them, preponderance of evidence means "what does your gut tell you".
Trying to sway their opinion with mere facts is an exercise in futility. They believe they have the right to choose what the facts are.
I really wish I lived in their world.
Fortunately, Mr. Petrov didn't follow your advice or you may well not have been alive today.
Huh? He did err on the side of caution.
One would presume that someone who was paying attention at the time would at least seek clarification on the mixed message before sending a whole state into a panic.
When there are mere seconds between thousands of lives being saved or lost, I would hope that they do not seek clarification, but err on the side of caution. I would commend this person and fire the idiot who approved the text "This is not a drill" in a drill.
No solar radiation in their normal habitat is the biggest environmental factor.
There are plenty of other underground species that don't show this neoteny. And some that do, like axolotls, but without a greatly increased life span.
It happened recently.
Not that much happened, but I guess references to genitalia is enough for some?
You're the one who submitted this "story", and felt a need to add your wit in the comments too? It wasn't inane enough?
Given the amount of data, it seems like it defaults to "public-to-the-world" and not just "private to me (and my friends)"
I can't say about Strava, but Polar defaults to everything being private, and you have to deliberately share data or make it public.
Not that it should matter - if the options to make it private are there, we should expect anyone in secret locations to do so (or even better, don't log GPS coordinates at all). Why do we give them security clearance if they can't be bothered to take the simplest precautions?
And this is why letting some company track your data is a bad idea. This would probably have been avoided if this company didn't track their users and then publish the data.
Don't blame the company. Whether to (a) use location data or not, or (b) sync with the Strava site or not are both voluntary.
It's the goons that chose to do both that are to blame here. If they're too stupid to see the problem, why the hell are they cleared to work at secret facilities?
I think another part of the problem is that there's at least fifty minstrels for each bard. But who the public sees and want to reward are the minstrels. Not the guy who wrote the song, but the charismatic people on stage.
There's not a lot of incentive to compose great music, and especially so if you're not also a performer.
How about my rights, as a web coder, to get paid a percentage every time someone loads a web page I have coded?
Nothing prevents you from paywalling your page.
Good question. Compared to most Europeans, at least. There are countries where "how are you doing?" would be met with a "mind your own business" stare, and others where it would be answered honestly, "my grandmother died, and my shoes chafe".
When I moved to the US a generation ago, I had to work at suppressing my desire to just walk away when people were obviously insincere or engaged in false flattery.
There's an exaggerated politeness in some East Asian cultures too, but then it tends to be more class-driven and not as reciprocal. While an American clerk might expect the polite fiction returned, a Japanese clerk would be polite but not expect the customer to politely enquire about his or her well-being.
"A desert tribe god isn't going to explain dark matter and dark energy."
*no test provided for hypothesis, assertion is pseudoscience
There's no need - the absence of a revelator is the null hypothesis.
In Germany, we would never dare to make movies glorifying anything even remotely close to something like that, given everything it implies.
Uwe Boll...
A lot of conservative fuckwits love him. Not because he's any good, but that he wrote in fiction the most quoted for fact fiction line I see on Slashdot, "An armed society is a polite society." America proves him wrong.
You're doubly wrong. TANSTAAFL is, by far, more quoted than that.
And Americans are exceedingly polite. When you meet Americans, they will smile at you, eyeball you, and ask how you are. And expect you to be polite enough to not respond with truth. It's a society built on polite fiction. That doesn't stop them from stepping on your body to make a buck. But they'll smile at you while doing so.
Sometimes the squeaky wheel gets replaced.
This is true, but when as big as the Gigafactory, chances are that lubing it will be tried first. Likely both by Musk and politicians.
In fact I remember a memorable rant by a physicist at Richard Dawkins where he said that he was bothered by Dawkins' belief that science understands everything when dark matter and dark energy make up most of the mass in the universe and we've got very little idea of what either is.
Damn right.
Except that Dawkins has never claimed that science understands everything. Science is needed precisely because we don't understand everything.
And when science doesn't understand something, that's no justification for picking an unscientific explanation. It's a call to bring more science to bear on the problem so we can understand more. A desert tribe god isn't going to explain dark matter and dark energy. Science may not today, but is working on it.
Oh, and fuck the mods with a broken bottle.
I guess we all have our kinks, but being attracted to mods with a broken bottle is likely an uncommon one.
Yes, that's how it works. You hunt animals, you gather plants. Not the other way around.
You never read or saw the documentary "The Day of the Triffids"?
And don't eat gathered eggs, for that matter?
Instead of 'sudo', but about just 'su' ? So instead of using sudo to do something, I su to the needed user, do that thing with the necessary privilege, then switch back to my regular user/whatever?
If you do "/bin/su -" (including the hyphen), it's safer. You then don't inherit any of the environment that you do with just "su", and don't risk running a different su that someone who hacked your account might have left there.
And yes, it's IMHO much safer than sudo because there's no privilege escalation. Knowing your own password should not be enough to get root access. It's much easier for a hacker to hack any of the user passwords that has sudo access than it is to hack just the root password. And if an admin changes the root password, that doesn't stop sudo users.
That around a third of the Linux rootkits attempt to exploit sudo isn't because sudo is so securely designed and implemented. In general, anything that adds convenience will reduce security.
Of course, closing login sessions when done with them should be done no matter what the user is. Don't leave them open because it's convenient.
Whining about problems will not make the problems go away
On the contrary, squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Man if you people were around when sudo was adopted you'd still be suggesting everyone log in as root.
Log in with the user/group with the least amount of privileges needed to do the job. Create new users/groups/permissions/contexts if needed. sudo is privilege escalation, which is made for convenience, is inherently insecure and leads to exploits. I don't have sudo on my systems, for security reasons. Privilege escalation is the Windows way of doing things, while the Unix way is to only drop privileges, not escalate them.
If people will be selected to live on mars, chances are we'll look for the emotionally stable to do the first wave of colonisation. ... You know, like astronauts.
Like Lisa Nowak, you mean?
The difference being that North America had resources that made a profit exploiting.
What does Mars have that cannot be procured easier and cheaper elsewhere?
I didn't mean to intentionally cause an accident. I was pointing out the absurdity of your claim that insurance is gambling. IF you have an accident, exactly what have you 'won'?
You win an insurance payout. You would have the accident anyhow, so the zero point is "having had an accident". At that point, getting a payout is a win compared to not getting a payout.
And if enough well-informed bettors make that same bet the odds will be adjusted.
Yes, but for everyone. Not just for the guy who knows a lot about horses, but also for the guy who randomly picked the same horse.
The insurance companies, on the other hand, want to set different odds for different customers. Their dream is to know with 100% certainty how much they will pay out to every individual, and charge the customer a bit more than that.
If everyone pitches in, the premiums are affordable for everyone, and insurance is attractive. But if the costs start to diverge too much, it no longer is attractive - it is no longer an equalizer.
Reducing payouts is short term thinking. Payouts is the cost of doing business. Making sure that the income from everyone nets an overall profit is what a good bookie or casino does, and what a good insurance company does.
Trying to find a way to milk the least profitable customers to reduce payout is just going to give your company a bad rep. An insurance company is meant to pay out, and lose money on some, and win money from others.