Please excuse the karma whoring but you did ask: Gregor Mendel was a monk who did pioneering experiments on heredity. Although it seems obvious in retrospect, even after Darwin first published the theory of natural selection it wasn't until it was put together with Mendel's work that evolutionary theory as we understand it today came about.
encryption control and gun control are basically the same thing
Except that the Constitution is quite clear that Americans have certain rights with respect to Arms, backed up by hundreds of years of case law supporting those rights, but it is silent about the question of rights to use ciphers and codes. So when talking about laws they are very different things entirely.
If we cured aging and people could live to several hundred years
If we did that using some hypothetical future technology, it is possible that those beings would not be "human" under our current definition of the species.
Fear not, Evans and partner John Talarico are hiring a “social engineer” who will facilitate group events and maintain harmony among roommates.... the social engineer is there to moderate disputes and kick out anybody who misbehaves.
It is generally thought that the group isomorphism problem is easier than the graph isomorphism problem. If that is the case (and I don't recall whether it is proven or just believed), then based on this result, group isomorphisms are probably in P. This would seem to be a problem for cryptographic applications that rely on the discrete log problem such as Diffie Hellman and elliptic curve, but I would love to hear from someone working in cryptography to explain why that would not be the case.
Although I can imagine a case where this would be a problem. What if Microsoft did tie together some sort of timeline with the EULA? For example, they might have offered free unlimited storage only if you agreed to use OneDrive unencrypted and as your only backup solution for 2 years (maybe so they could see all your stuff), or if you agree to take automatic updates for 2 years (so when they add the bing toolbar you have to take it). In that case, they shouldn't be able to unilaterally say, "we don't want to give unlimited storage anymore, so we are stopping that, and you don't need to do what you agreed to do (even if you still want to fulfill your side)."
But AFAIK, the actual agreement doesn't have anything like that, and is more like a month-to-month rental agreement with the option for either side to stop using or providing the service whenever they want.
No, please *don't* just go posting another project. As you have even discovered yourself, this is probably a solved problem for someone who knows the tools better. Most coding problems don't stem from the fact that there isn't enough code out there; the problem is that there are a lot of libraries and systems (free, gratis, and paid) that do 80% of what needs to be done, and the first job of the developer is to evaluate which of those tools is the right one to start with. Throwing out yet another message passing system into that thoughtstream (one that you admit probably isn't very good) is just going to cause more work than it saves, by making people figure out why they want to filter your codebase out.
If it works for your use cases, then you should keep it in production, while you try to learn more and improve on it (either incrementally or with a whole system re-write). But just putting a code base out there for other people to stumble over seems to be as poor etiquette as throwing a month old newspaper into the middle of the street, just in case somebody might be able to use it.
Although there were certainly exceptions, the one child rule had huge effect on China's demographics. If you look at the 2015 population pyramid, you will see that there is a clear drop between the 40-44 age demographic and the 35-39 demographic, which corresponds exactly to the age that someone would be today (37) if they were born at the start of the policy in 1978. But they weren't born, so they aren't there.
The reason why fountain was art was *not* because of Duchamp's intent. He intended it to be art but it was rejected in its day. However, it was revived in the 60's and was put into museums, and therefore became art. Art is defined by the system that it lives in, and can only be defined within some system.
That said, when you have "artists" such as this reject games as art, what they are doing is trying to reinforce the system that they are currently successful in. But like Duchamp's Fountain, as systems change, what is art can change too.
and what do you call individuals getting together to ensure the rights of all, not for a profit but because it's the right thing to do? a government.
That is not the definition of a government. There are many things throughout history that are governments that have done very little "right things." A government is merely the organization that has a monopoly on the use of force to enforce whatever rules they set (good or evil), including taxation and police functions.
I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general for the intelligence community, found the two emails containing what he determined was “Top Secret” information in the course of reviewing a sampling of 40 of Mrs. Clinton’s work-related emails for potential security breaches.
Note that even though those were only 2 emails out of a sample of 40 that were examined, there are over 30,000 emails that were deleted and so we may never know if they were classified or not.
A lot of people misunderstand how bookies set odds. As you point out, it is about popularity, not expected winners. An ideal book with 80% betting on team A would be something like 1:8 odds for A and 7:2 odds for B. Then if $8,000 is bet on A, and $2,000 is bet on B, then if A wins, the bookie pays out $1,000 to the winners (who bet on A) and collects $2000 from the losers, netting a positive $1,000. If B wins, the bookie pays out $7,000 to the winners (who bet on B) and collects $8,000 from the losers, also netting a positive $1,000.
Even if, in fact, the teams are evenly matched, the bookie cares about balancing his book for a guaranteed profit, not about taking a position on which team will win. However, because of the wisdom of crowds phenomenon, it is generally pretty likely that the implied probabilities determined by a balanced book are pretty good representations of the actual probabilities of the team success.
Not that I am aware of, but they are trying to do a new series about Worf that will probably have the U SH SH Defiant fighting the Kardashians from time to time.
If I'm saying that njnnja is a Martian agent bent on the overthrow of all English-speaking countries, I can't avoid libel by just saying "X said" in front. You are right that you can't avoid liability by reporting what someone else said, but if you have a website and allow people to post on your website themselves, then if X posts that on your website, then you are OK *even though it is on your website*.
It's not about DMCA and copyright. It's the Communications Decency Act of 1996. It basically gives broad protections to a website owner for libelous and defamatory statements made on their website by a third party, and just about every major and minor web player, from Google, to Amazon, to Facebook, to/., to news websites, to every unmoderated blogger, needs this for protection. I can imagine people hating Peeple so much that they demand legislators to strip away this protection and throw away the baby with the bathwater. IANAL, etc.
Even without any credibility this can still hurt people. But beyond just being a troll magnet and a great way for the company to extort people to get good reviews bumped up, the backlash to this service could be a change to internet liability. I could easily see a law being passed that would force liability on site owners for things that individuals post (at least publicly). It would mean the end of free expression on the web.
It's obviously not a programming issue but if the test always hits at,say, exactly 4 inches off center then I could imagine a company designing a car to do very well when hit at exactly 4 inches off center even at the expense of say a 3 inch off center collision. IIRC, the Swedish automakers used to do a ton of "real world" crash testing and were generally considered to be the safest cars on the road even if they didn't score as high on standardized tests as other automakers. That would seem to imply that others were "teaching to the test" to some degree.
I think a reasonable possibility is that if they cheat on one test, they might be cheating on other tests. Maybe American carmakers just aren't as good at gaming the test.
I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that US automakers are so much more dangerous than European cars. In public crash testing by say IIHS and NHTSA, there are differences but nothing to be alarmed about. But in any particular study, if you run 20 tests, you are bound to find something alarming at the 5% level of statistical significance.
That's a solid point. It's not like VW wouldn't fire a bunch of people themselves if they thought it was in their interests to do so. But even still, there's a self-righteous mob mentality that seems to be developing and historically those kinds of movements haven't ended well.
On the flip side, Arthur Andersen was put out of business because of a court ruling that was eventually overturned. A lot of people who never had anything to do with Enron lost their jobs as a result. In VW's case, the number of managers and engineers who had anything to do with the emissions testing of diesel vehicles for export to the US is probably dwarfed by the number of people would could be hurt by an overreaction.
This doesn't mean don't punish the wrongdoers, but saying that you want to "hurt" VW means that you are going to hurt a lot of people who didn't benefit from the original wrongdoing.
Slashdot Mirror
Please excuse the karma whoring but you did ask: Gregor Mendel was a monk who did pioneering experiments on heredity. Although it seems obvious in retrospect, even after Darwin first published the theory of natural selection it wasn't until it was put together with Mendel's work that evolutionary theory as we understand it today came about.
encryption control and gun control are basically the same thing
Except that the Constitution is quite clear that Americans have certain rights with respect to Arms, backed up by hundreds of years of case law supporting those rights, but it is silent about the question of rights to use ciphers and codes. So when talking about laws they are very different things entirely.
Or ask a 7 year old kid from Montreal.
If we cured aging and people could live to several hundred years
If we did that using some hypothetical future technology, it is possible that those beings would not be "human" under our current definition of the species.
Yes there is an RA. From TFA:
Fear not, Evans and partner John Talarico are hiring a “social engineer” who will facilitate group events and maintain harmony among roommates.... the social engineer is there to moderate disputes and kick out anybody who misbehaves.
It is generally thought that the group isomorphism problem is easier than the graph isomorphism problem. If that is the case (and I don't recall whether it is proven or just believed), then based on this result, group isomorphisms are probably in P. This would seem to be a problem for cryptographic applications that rely on the discrete log problem such as Diffie Hellman and elliptic curve, but I would love to hear from someone working in cryptography to explain why that would not be the case.
Although I can imagine a case where this would be a problem. What if Microsoft did tie together some sort of timeline with the EULA? For example, they might have offered free unlimited storage only if you agreed to use OneDrive unencrypted and as your only backup solution for 2 years (maybe so they could see all your stuff), or if you agree to take automatic updates for 2 years (so when they add the bing toolbar you have to take it). In that case, they shouldn't be able to unilaterally say, "we don't want to give unlimited storage anymore, so we are stopping that, and you don't need to do what you agreed to do (even if you still want to fulfill your side)."
But AFAIK, the actual agreement doesn't have anything like that, and is more like a month-to-month rental agreement with the option for either side to stop using or providing the service whenever they want.
No, please *don't* just go posting another project. As you have even discovered yourself, this is probably a solved problem for someone who knows the tools better. Most coding problems don't stem from the fact that there isn't enough code out there; the problem is that there are a lot of libraries and systems (free, gratis, and paid) that do 80% of what needs to be done, and the first job of the developer is to evaluate which of those tools is the right one to start with. Throwing out yet another message passing system into that thoughtstream (one that you admit probably isn't very good) is just going to cause more work than it saves, by making people figure out why they want to filter your codebase out.
If it works for your use cases, then you should keep it in production, while you try to learn more and improve on it (either incrementally or with a whole system re-write). But just putting a code base out there for other people to stumble over seems to be as poor etiquette as throwing a month old newspaper into the middle of the street, just in case somebody might be able to use it.
get the flame war going, I still contend that DS9 was the best of them all.
I doubt you will get a flame war going for contending that http://io9.com/5016403/how-bat...">Ron Moore's DS9 was a great series.
Although there were certainly exceptions, the one child rule had huge effect on China's demographics. If you look at the 2015 population pyramid, you will see that there is a clear drop between the 40-44 age demographic and the 35-39 demographic, which corresponds exactly to the age that someone would be today (37) if they were born at the start of the policy in 1978. But they weren't born, so they aren't there.
Great. The Germans are building a high tech military without the world knowing about it. That ended so well the first time.
Nota bene: on-topic references to the German military do not trigger Godwin's Law.
The reason why fountain was art was *not* because of Duchamp's intent. He intended it to be art but it was rejected in its day. However, it was revived in the 60's and was put into museums, and therefore became art. Art is defined by the system that it lives in, and can only be defined within some system.
That said, when you have "artists" such as this reject games as art, what they are doing is trying to reinforce the system that they are currently successful in. But like Duchamp's Fountain, as systems change, what is art can change too.
and what do you call individuals getting together to ensure the rights of all, not for a profit but because it's the right thing to do? a government.
That is not the definition of a government. There are many things throughout history that are governments that have done very little "right things." A government is merely the organization that has a monopoly on the use of force to enforce whatever rules they set (good or evil), including taxation and police functions.
The top-secret stuff came in different channels.
From the New York Times:
I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general for the intelligence community, found the two emails containing what he determined was “Top Secret” information in the course of reviewing a sampling of 40 of Mrs. Clinton’s work-related emails for potential security breaches.
Note that even though those were only 2 emails out of a sample of 40 that were examined, there are over 30,000 emails that were deleted and so we may never know if they were classified or not.
A lot of people misunderstand how bookies set odds. As you point out, it is about popularity, not expected winners. An ideal book with 80% betting on team A would be something like 1:8 odds for A and 7:2 odds for B. Then if $8,000 is bet on A, and $2,000 is bet on B, then if A wins, the bookie pays out $1,000 to the winners (who bet on A) and collects $2000 from the losers, netting a positive $1,000. If B wins, the bookie pays out $7,000 to the winners (who bet on B) and collects $8,000 from the losers, also netting a positive $1,000.
Even if, in fact, the teams are evenly matched, the bookie cares about balancing his book for a guaranteed profit, not about taking a position on which team will win. However, because of the wisdom of crowds phenomenon, it is generally pretty likely that the implied probabilities determined by a balanced book are pretty good representations of the actual probabilities of the team success.
Not that I am aware of, but they are trying to do a new series about Worf that will probably have the U SH SH Defiant fighting the Kardashians from time to time.
If I'm saying that njnnja is a Martian agent bent on the overthrow of all English-speaking countries, I can't avoid libel by just saying "X said" in front. You are right that you can't avoid liability by reporting what someone else said, but if you have a website and allow people to post on your website themselves, then if X posts that on your website, then you are OK *even though it is on your website*.
/., to news websites, to every unmoderated blogger, needs this for protection. I can imagine people hating Peeple so much that they demand legislators to strip away this protection and throw away the baby with the bathwater. IANAL, etc.
It's not about DMCA and copyright. It's the Communications Decency Act of 1996. It basically gives broad protections to a website owner for libelous and defamatory statements made on their website by a third party, and just about every major and minor web player, from Google, to Amazon, to Facebook, to
I assume it is nothing like technically correct
tl;dr This is why we can't have nice things.
Even without any credibility this can still hurt people. But beyond just being a troll magnet and a great way for the company to extort people to get good reviews bumped up, the backlash to this service could be a change to internet liability. I could easily see a law being passed that would force liability on site owners for things that individuals post (at least publicly). It would mean the end of free expression on the web.
It's obviously not a programming issue but if the test always hits at,say, exactly 4 inches off center then I could imagine a company designing a car to do very well when hit at exactly 4 inches off center even at the expense of say a 3 inch off center collision. IIRC, the Swedish automakers used to do a ton of "real world" crash testing and were generally considered to be the safest cars on the road even if they didn't score as high on standardized tests as other automakers. That would seem to imply that others were "teaching to the test" to some degree.
I think a reasonable possibility is that if they cheat on one test, they might be cheating on other tests. Maybe American carmakers just aren't as good at gaming the test.
I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that US automakers are so much more dangerous than European cars. In public crash testing by say IIHS and NHTSA, there are differences but nothing to be alarmed about. But in any particular study, if you run 20 tests, you are bound to find something alarming at the 5% level of statistical significance.
That's a solid point. It's not like VW wouldn't fire a bunch of people themselves if they thought it was in their interests to do so. But even still, there's a self-righteous mob mentality that seems to be developing and historically those kinds of movements haven't ended well.
On the flip side, Arthur Andersen was put out of business because of a court ruling that was eventually overturned. A lot of people who never had anything to do with Enron lost their jobs as a result. In VW's case, the number of managers and engineers who had anything to do with the emissions testing of diesel vehicles for export to the US is probably dwarfed by the number of people would could be hurt by an overreaction.
This doesn't mean don't punish the wrongdoers, but saying that you want to "hurt" VW means that you are going to hurt a lot of people who didn't benefit from the original wrongdoing.
when the test_mode flag was on
Or more likely, when the US_AM_EMMIS_TST_TLPPE_LOSULF_2008_v3 flag was set to VAL17