I think almost everybody is raised by their parents to throw garbage in the bin, instead of on the street. So why do smokers discard their cigarettes on the ground?
Do you want them to toss it on the ground, or toss it in a bin where there's paper and other flammables? Think about it.
If there's an ashtray around (and not one of those pole-with-a-hole designed by non-smokers with no clue how stubbing out a cigarette works), smokers will generally use it. But the anti-smokers don't want ashtrays.
Anyway, on my day I asked the work detail a simple question: Who here smokes?
No one raised their hand. I asked again, and again. Finally I said "OK. Nonsmokers, point to the smokers." Hands went up pointing out the 7 or 8 smokers.
I don't believe you. No soldier would ever rat out their fellow soldiers. Soldiers would stand there all night if need be, without saying a word, unless the smokers themselves stepped forward. Someone ratting out others would find themselves ostracised at best, and likely the reaction would be more severe, but the real reason they would not betray their fellow soldiers is that the first thing soldiers learn is that they have to be able to trust each other completely, because their lives depend on it. Not betraying trust is a big thing.
They could figure that out relatively easily. Also, the effect would be limited to personnel in/near the embassy. Apparently, some attacks have occurred outside the embassy grounds.
From what I can tell, only in places where the spooks might see reasons to install anti-surveillance equipment, like the domiciles of operatives.
And, again, it's alleged attacks. Without us having seen any actual evidence for it being attacks, you're begging the question.
All we really know is there have been sonic attacks against both US and Canadian government employees.
That's jumping to conclusions. My SWAG is that it's a CIA product that's to blame, like a high frequency vibrator attached to windows to thwart laser listening, and that with the panes used in Cuba, the unfortunate side effect is that it acts as a speaker element and causes the sound "attacks".
You (and the submitter or editor) seem to think that baryonic matter is something exotic. It is not. Baryons are the family of particles that comprise exactly three quarks, and include the protons and neutrons that make up all known (and unknown) elements. You're almost entirely made of baryonic matter. The real article says it's baryonic matter precisely to convey that it's mundane matter, and not mesons like pions or any of the really strange stuff like pentaquarks.
What sort of nonsense would you have to be doing where trust of self would even come up as a security issue?
Anyone who writes code, or configures a computer, or add firewall rules, or pick programs to install should question whether they trust themselves too much, and whether a second and third set of eyes would be useful.
We are easily blind to the problems we ourselves introduce, and tend to trust our own judgement without questioning. And when the brown stuff hits the rotating thing, the natural reaction is to place blame elsewhere, and forget that we shouldn't have trusted our own judgement.
This slashdotter's personal assistant is wont to say "go shut it off yerself, ya lazy basterd".
Anyhow, I don't think voice control is a nerd pursuit. That's what the anti-nerds want, instead of simply coding CD 27 00 into a microcontroller that uses X10 to tell its counterpart to attenuate the amplifier and lights. I know, I don't understand either why the masses trade concise commands and simplicity for a fault-prone analog air vibration system that requires years of training to use.
One of the seriously underutilized areas of perl is the r, reports. The format/write concept really makes life easier when it's reports you have to generate. But it's a completely different concept from how it's done in other languages, Even those who use perl regularly seem to forget about it, and use it as if it was just a more convenient awk. Which has no useful capabilities for reporting except an END clause.
Yes, with some simple precautions, you are reasonably safe. - Do not browse porn or humor sites with flash enabled or without an adblocker. - Do not open unsolicited e-mail attachments. Especially, don't treat the sender address as authentication - look for text that positively identifies that it's the real sender and why it was sent. - If you get a suspicious pop-up, don't click its close button, because it could be a visual overlay for the "install" action. Use ALT-F4 to close the browser. - If in Windows, go to Folder Options - View, and uncheck "Hide extensions for known file types". Then you will see that the attachment that looks like funnycat.jpg really is funnycat.jpg.exe
Thing is, even with antivirus installed, most new infections will go straight past the AV and infect your PC. The reason is of course that those who write malware test it against the AV software first, and make changes until it passes. Then they have several days until the AV software recognizes the change, and they make another permutation. The net effect is that the AV software will scan enormous and ever-growing lists of signatures, and slow your system down more and more, while all new malware still gets through.
An observant user, on the other hand, stops most new malware. Unless you're specifically targeted by a hacker, you're reasonably safe.
As a former antivirus author, I suggest a third alternative: Don't trust your computer to any antivirus. You give these programs full access to your machine, and they become an attack vector as well as slowing down the machine. And it's not like they are going to stop zero day attacks anyhow, and that's the second biggest thing to worry about (after human gullibility).
How many lives were saved or improved by 50% of cancer treatments having a positive effect?
Probably not as many as you might think. Prolonging suffering is considered a "positive effect" from a drug company's perspective, and medicating someone to the point that they're not aware of much is technically effective against pain. It's hard to objectively measure quality of life - quantity is much easier to measure.
Everyone should RTFA. The AI runs in the camera, the data inside is encrypted, only leaves the camera via your phone, and only reaches the net if you upload it.
Only reaches the net if some nincompoop who has one uploads it.
Do you really actually think that anyone cares about anything you do?
You seem to have a delusion that they only do targeted surveillance, and not Elmer Fudd duck hunting. They target the sky, and if you happen to fly by, you risk getting hit even if they didn't aim for you.
That's okay. As long as the data is kept out of reach of the American three letter agencies, I feel better. Those are the ones with an ability to harm me, and an incentive to justify their existence.
Only newer versions of Pale Moon that do not work in still supported OSes like Enterprise Linux 6. NoScript requires Pale Moon 27.2 or newer, and Pale Moon dropped support for anything not having glibc 2.17 or newer, despite not taking advantage of anything that actually requires 2.17 - their team is just too small to build for a lot of platforms.
NoScript also doesn't work on many of the Mozilla based browsers.
And it doesn't do much good in the case of tab-unders, because the original page won't serve you the new content that you wanted to go to, those are only served in the new tab. It can block the ads from appearing in the original tab, but you won't get the content you clicked to go to.
10. Wallets. See 9 above. The new devices will mostly replace wallets and purses. People will wear nifty gem sacks at their belts, in which they store their coins (see how Canada does dollars, or Euro coins).
Wallets are needed for other things. American wallets have (unlike European ones) mostly been without coin compartments to start with, and are used for credit cards, driver's licenses, SSN cards, green cards, card insurance slips and similar. I think coins will go away. The only place I use coins now are toll booths and old style vending machines, and I am fairly certain that both will continue the change that's already underway.
It depends on what you mean by "die". Lots of technologies have gone into niche markets, but if you want to buy a buggy whip today, you still can.
My predictions over a 10-15 year time span is that the following will die or become niche products:
- Hardcover books. Which already is mostly true - what's sold as a hardcover today is only very rarely a bound book, but a paperback that has been slapped a cardboard front and back on, and a fake cloth strip glued to the top and bottom of the spine to simulate it being bound. - Book stores, also for new books. Religious book stores will live a while longer. - DVDs. - Electric guitars. Artists will still need them, but artists are becoming fewer, and youngsters testing the water aren't going for guitar these days. - Suitcases. They are becoming cost-prohibitive for travel, where two bags with the same volume and weight costs less. - Tablets. They are re-introduced as a new thing every 3-4 years, and flop every time. They're too big compared to a phone, and too cumbersome to use compared to a real PC. They'll die and something new with a new name will replace them. - Secret votes for the public. Internet voting will kill that. - Open votes for the legislature. - Twitter and Facebook. If you think they are too big to fail, remember Yahoo, MySpace, LiveJournal... - Large concerts, also known as "targets". - http without an s. - Handwriting being taught in school. - In several countries except the US: coins - TV game consoles. Games will be streamed and TVs will support dumb controllers. - Cable TV. The cable TV companies will still control their oligopoly as internet providers and collect the danegeld, but you'll subscribe to streaming services. - The SysRq, Scroll Lock and Break keys on keyboards. Useful, but not Pareto useful. - Manual toll booths. - Coke Zero Calories, to be replaced with Coke Zero
And I predict that Nehru jackets will make a comeback.
If you need to post more than once per minute, perhaps you are not giving your posts enough thought?
Sometimes, even though you read through the post before hitting Submit, you realize that you made an error, and want to do an immediate follow-up. But then you almost certainly get the "Slow down, cowboy!", and once you get that, you're in a mode where you have to wait a long time before you get to post.
The false positive rate on the delay system is high enough that it causes legitimate users problems. And all the wishes from the (then) new owners to go through and fix what caused the posters pain seems to have been dead dreams. I really haven't seen many (or any!) fixes at all. Just new bugs.
Now that we know based on this single sample that there is a limit to recursion
We know no such thing. That assumes that computational resources and the time to do them in are finite. We are creatures who live in a very short time span, and think everything has to go tick-tock at a comprehendible rate. That's not a given. Nothing prevents a simulation from taking billions of years to simulate a second, which would be undetectable from within the simulation itself. And nothing prevents a simulator from running backwards either, starting with the results and going back to the cause.
But most of all, a simulation doesn't have to simulate the entire universe; it only has to simulate the experiences of a single person.
A simple thing can not simulate a complex thing. That is inherent in the concept of simluation and complexity.
A simple thing like Conway's Game of Life can simulate a CPU.
The assumption is that because complexity increases exponentially, it would be infeasible to do a simulation. That assumes finite resources, like time, which is not a given. And it assumes that the simulation cannot take shortcuts like making up data or retroactively change data, which is also not a given.
Slashdot Mirror
I think almost everybody is raised by their parents to throw garbage in the bin, instead of on the street. So why do smokers discard their cigarettes on the ground?
Do you want them to toss it on the ground, or toss it in a bin where there's paper and other flammables? Think about it.
If there's an ashtray around (and not one of those pole-with-a-hole designed by non-smokers with no clue how stubbing out a cigarette works), smokers will generally use it. But the anti-smokers don't want ashtrays.
(And yes, I'm a non-smoker.)
Anyway, on my day I asked the work detail a simple question: Who here smokes?
No one raised their hand. I asked again, and again. Finally I said "OK. Nonsmokers, point to the smokers." Hands went up pointing out the 7 or 8 smokers.
I don't believe you. No soldier would ever rat out their fellow soldiers.
Soldiers would stand there all night if need be, without saying a word, unless the smokers themselves stepped forward.
Someone ratting out others would find themselves ostracised at best, and likely the reaction would be more severe, but the real reason they would not betray their fellow soldiers is that the first thing soldiers learn is that they have to be able to trust each other completely, because their lives depend on it.
Not betraying trust is a big thing.
They could figure that out relatively easily. Also, the effect would be limited to personnel in/near the embassy. Apparently, some attacks have occurred outside the embassy grounds.
From what I can tell, only in places where the spooks might see reasons to install anti-surveillance equipment, like the domiciles of operatives.
And, again, it's alleged attacks. Without us having seen any actual evidence for it being attacks, you're begging the question.
All we really know is there have been sonic attacks against both US and Canadian government employees.
That's jumping to conclusions.
My SWAG is that it's a CIA product that's to blame, like a high frequency vibrator attached to windows to thwart laser listening, and that with the panes used in Cuba, the unfortunate side effect is that it acts as a speaker element and causes the sound "attacks".
I.e. Hanlon's razor.
You (and the submitter or editor) seem to think that baryonic matter is something exotic. It is not. Baryons are the family of particles that comprise exactly three quarks, and include the protons and neutrons that make up all known (and unknown) elements. You're almost entirely made of baryonic matter.
The real article says it's baryonic matter precisely to convey that it's mundane matter, and not mesons like pions or any of the really strange stuff like pentaquarks.
What sort of nonsense would you have to be doing where trust of self would even come up as a security issue?
Anyone who writes code, or configures a computer, or add firewall rules, or pick programs to install should question whether they trust themselves too much, and whether a second and third set of eyes would be useful.
We are easily blind to the problems we ourselves introduce, and tend to trust our own judgement without questioning. And when the brown stuff hits the rotating thing, the natural reaction is to place blame elsewhere, and forget that we shouldn't have trusted our own judgement.
See subject. Far too many INTELLIGENT POSTS being modded down by ABUSIVE moderators
True. But to weigh up for that, they also mod down your posts, so it's a net win for the community as a whole.
This slashdotter's personal assistant is wont to say "go shut it off yerself, ya lazy basterd".
Anyhow, I don't think voice control is a nerd pursuit. That's what the anti-nerds want, instead of simply coding CD 27 00 into a microcontroller that uses X10 to tell its counterpart to attenuate the amplifier and lights. I know, I don't understand either why the masses trade concise commands and simplicity for a fault-prone analog air vibration system that requires years of training to use.
One of the seriously underutilized areas of perl is the r, reports. The format/write concept really makes life easier when it's reports you have to generate. But it's a completely different concept from how it's done in other languages, Even those who use perl regularly seem to forget about it, and use it as if it was just a more convenient awk. Which has no useful capabilities for reporting except an END clause.
Yes, with some simple precautions, you are reasonably safe.
- Do not browse porn or humor sites with flash enabled or without an adblocker.
- Do not open unsolicited e-mail attachments. Especially, don't treat the sender address as authentication - look for text that positively identifies that it's the real sender and why it was sent.
- If you get a suspicious pop-up, don't click its close button, because it could be a visual overlay for the "install" action. Use ALT-F4 to close the browser.
- If in Windows, go to Folder Options - View, and uncheck "Hide extensions for known file types". Then you will see that the attachment that looks like funnycat.jpg really is funnycat.jpg.exe
Thing is, even with antivirus installed, most new infections will go straight past the AV and infect your PC. The reason is of course that those who write malware test it against the AV software first, and make changes until it passes. Then they have several days until the AV software recognizes the change, and they make another permutation. The net effect is that the AV software will scan enormous and ever-growing lists of signatures, and slow your system down more and more, while all new malware still gets through.
An observant user, on the other hand, stops most new malware. Unless you're specifically targeted by a hacker, you're reasonably safe.
So why are people rushing to defend this attack on our country?
I'm not sure people are, as much as they're not impressed with our country's attack on We The People, even by foreign nationals in CIAs hire.
Plus, is it proven beyond doubt and Hanlon's razor that there was an attack on the attackers?
Absolutely! Trust no one!
Including the guy who says "Trust no one!", and including yourself.
Especially yourself. When it comes to security, the person in charge of a system or a network is its worst enemy.
As a former antivirus author, I suggest a third alternative:
Don't trust your computer to any antivirus. You give these programs full access to your machine, and they become an attack vector as well as slowing down the machine.
And it's not like they are going to stop zero day attacks anyhow, and that's the second biggest thing to worry about (after human gullibility).
How many lives were saved or improved by 50% of cancer treatments having a positive effect?
Probably not as many as you might think. Prolonging suffering is considered a "positive effect" from a drug company's perspective, and medicating someone to the point that they're not aware of much is technically effective against pain.
It's hard to objectively measure quality of life - quantity is much easier to measure.
You know that the NSA has full license to spy on data abroad, right?
That does not imply ability. Secret court orders has no compelling power outside US jurisdiction.
Everyone should RTFA. The AI runs in the camera, the data inside is encrypted, only leaves the camera via your phone, and only reaches the net if you upload it.
Only reaches the net if some nincompoop who has one uploads it.
Do you really actually think that anyone cares about anything you do?
You seem to have a delusion that they only do targeted surveillance, and not Elmer Fudd duck hunting. They target the sky, and if you happen to fly by, you risk getting hit even if they didn't aim for you.
That's okay. As long as the data is kept out of reach of the American three letter agencies, I feel better. Those are the ones with an ability to harm me, and an incentive to justify their existence.
Works just fine in Pale Moon.
Only newer versions of Pale Moon that do not work in still supported OSes like Enterprise Linux 6. NoScript requires Pale Moon 27.2 or newer, and Pale Moon dropped support for anything not having glibc 2.17 or newer, despite not taking advantage of anything that actually requires 2.17 - their team is just too small to build for a lot of platforms.
NoScript also doesn't work on many of the Mozilla based browsers.
And it doesn't do much good in the case of tab-unders, because the original page won't serve you the new content that you wanted to go to, those are only served in the new tab. It can block the ads from appearing in the original tab, but you won't get the content you clicked to go to.
10. Wallets. See 9 above. The new devices will mostly replace wallets and purses. People will wear nifty gem sacks at their belts, in which they store their coins (see how Canada does dollars, or Euro coins).
Wallets are needed for other things. American wallets have (unlike European ones) mostly been without coin compartments to start with, and are used for credit cards, driver's licenses, SSN cards, green cards, card insurance slips and similar.
I think coins will go away. The only place I use coins now are toll booths and old style vending machines, and I am fairly certain that both will continue the change that's already underway.
It depends on what you mean by "die". Lots of technologies have gone into niche markets, but if you want to buy a buggy whip today, you still can.
My predictions over a 10-15 year time span is that the following will die or become niche products:
- Hardcover books. Which already is mostly true - what's sold as a hardcover today is only very rarely a bound book, but a paperback that has been slapped a cardboard front and back on, and a fake cloth strip glued to the top and bottom of the spine to simulate it being bound.
- Book stores, also for new books. Religious book stores will live a while longer.
- DVDs.
- Electric guitars. Artists will still need them, but artists are becoming fewer, and youngsters testing the water aren't going for guitar these days.
- Suitcases. They are becoming cost-prohibitive for travel, where two bags with the same volume and weight costs less.
- Tablets. They are re-introduced as a new thing every 3-4 years, and flop every time. They're too big compared to a phone, and too cumbersome to use compared to a real PC. They'll die and something new with a new name will replace them.
- Secret votes for the public. Internet voting will kill that.
- Open votes for the legislature.
- Twitter and Facebook. If you think they are too big to fail, remember Yahoo, MySpace, LiveJournal...
- Large concerts, also known as "targets".
- http without an s.
- Handwriting being taught in school.
- In several countries except the US: coins
- TV game consoles. Games will be streamed and TVs will support dumb controllers.
- Cable TV. The cable TV companies will still control their oligopoly as internet providers and collect the danegeld, but you'll subscribe to streaming services.
- The SysRq, Scroll Lock and Break keys on keyboards. Useful, but not Pareto useful.
- Manual toll booths.
- Coke Zero Calories, to be replaced with Coke Zero
And I predict that Nehru jackets will make a comeback.
If you need to post more than once per minute, perhaps you are not giving your posts enough thought?
Sometimes, even though you read through the post before hitting Submit, you realize that you made an error, and want to do an immediate follow-up. But then you almost certainly get the "Slow down, cowboy!", and once you get that, you're in a mode where you have to wait a long time before you get to post.
The false positive rate on the delay system is high enough that it causes legitimate users problems.
And all the wishes from the (then) new owners to go through and fix what caused the posters pain seems to have been dead dreams. I really haven't seen many (or any!) fixes at all. Just new bugs.
Now that we know based on this single sample that there is a limit to recursion
We know no such thing. That assumes that computational resources and the time to do them in are finite. We are creatures who live in a very short time span, and think everything has to go tick-tock at a comprehendible rate. That's not a given. Nothing prevents a simulation from taking billions of years to simulate a second, which would be undetectable from within the simulation itself.
And nothing prevents a simulator from running backwards either, starting with the results and going back to the cause.
But most of all, a simulation doesn't have to simulate the entire universe; it only has to simulate the experiences of a single person.
What it comes down to is this:
A simple thing can not simulate a complex thing. That is inherent in the concept of simluation and complexity.
A simple thing like Conway's Game of Life can simulate a CPU.
The assumption is that because complexity increases exponentially, it would be infeasible to do a simulation. That assumes finite resources, like time, which is not a given. And it assumes that the simulation cannot take shortcuts like making up data or retroactively change data, which is also not a given.