An accident might kill or disable an astronaut who provided some vital expertise. A supply drop might fail, condemning the colonists to starve in a very public way. Even if nothing went wrong, the astronauts' lives would certainly be shortened by the harsh conditions. The lower gravity would create long-term medical problems and the cosmic radiation that penetrates the thin atmosphere is bound to increase the risk of cancer. Add in the debilitating effects of general privation, and the lack of sophisticated medical equipment, and the prospects for longevity look slim.
Oh, poi. There hasn't been a colony in the history of the Earth that didn't face the same level of danger. Colonists to N. America faced limited supplies and had to live in housing and clothing ridiculously far below the standard of living available in Renaissance Europe. And they faced strange agriculture, swamps, hurricanes, and natives, without benefit of military defense. Same with colonists to Africa, who tended to travel further inland, facing some of the meanest beasts on the planet, strange diseases, and treacherous terrain, not to mention generally more territorial natives than in N.A.
Would NASA entertain a one-way policy for human Mars exploration? Probably not. But other, more adventurous space agencies in Europe or Asia might.
A great idea. I can imagine what a lot of Europeans would say to this. "Colonization? We've been mastering that for half a millennium! Americans don't know the half of it."
I'd expect that a fair amount of first-order steg would be detectable by a process that examined all patterns in a data stream, and spotted that or those patterns that were UNLIKE the other patterns in the data, based on some heuristic.
Of course, if you were to steg with an OTP or some such (i.e. your steg is based on deviance from a known data set), you'd more easily escape such detection.
We already hit 1Bsec two years ago. Slashdot's article on this is disturbingly missing (note article title), but luckily this link lists the milestones.
But we're talking about 1.073 billion here, a 'gig' of seconds, not a billion... c|net just doesn't know a damn thing, even after all these years.
(Does it disturb a single other person than me that reporters for technology sites don't know any more about computing than reporters for, like, Fox News?)
I'm sorry, but isn't this the same company/group that made BackOrifice, in an attempt to embarass Microsoft while publicly proclaiming the massive security hole it exposed, while MS denied there were any such holes?
Does anyone see a disconnect here?
And here I thought it was all about information wanting to be free.
is that they believe the satellite actually broke over time, to point where it caused something else that wasn't broken -- the solar power system -- to kick in.
By far and large, the people who would really be upset if Google were "hurt" -- which they already are, because it doesn't look like Google will submit themselves to being sued, so that's a moot point -- are largely the same people who already think that Scientology is dangerous, as a result of widespread criticism of it on the Internet.
In fact, about six years ago, private domains were encouraged to get *.us domains, instead of *.com domains, which were specifically for commercial ventures. Likewise, *.net was only for network providers, and *.org was only for non-profit orgs. But when the NSF stopped paying for everyone's domain name, InterNIC / Network Solutions took control of how the domains would be allocated among purposes, and that was to not allocate them at all, but blow them wide open to everyone. This of course maximised NSI's ability to sell domains. (NSI did not and has not controlled (*.us).
Web-era veterans might remember Netherlands BBS, originally at netherlands.ypsi.mi.us ('ypsi.mi' because it was located in Ypsilanti, Michigan). Eventually it was changed to nether.net. This of course worked in NetherNet's favor, because they then had a shorter hostname, and users did less typing, and there was much rejoicing.
Regardless, the current system is hardly bureaucratic -- its the opposite, uncontrolled and manipulated for profit over most beneficial function. And the solution of throwing more TLDs at the problem will only end up spanning the problem across TLDs. Sure, ICANN tells the TLD applicants who were lucky to win their lottery disguised as a review process that they have to limit who can get domains under their TLDs, but if ICANN's pattern of bending to commercial pressure continues, I expect that rule to hold for two years max.
Phil underestimates the effect that one incorrect line of an interview can have on the reputation of a person whose character is already under attack, whether its because they are "helping terrorists keep secrets" or are "using their com-pyoo-ters to degrade the moral fiber of our country" or just from simply "being one of those no good computer geeks."
I had an extremely similar idea back in 1995 while I was working for Inso (now EBT) in their electronic references group (now long gone). Basically I envisioned a system where news stories would be automatically populated with links around recognizable terms (proper names, scentific words and terms, historic events, etc). Of course, in my much more socially beneficial idea, those links would point to articles in online (subscription-based) versions of our reference products, like the Cambridge Encyclopedia, the New Heritage Dictionary, and the Information Please Almanac.
Unfortunately none of this became reality (I hear even the project I was working on when I thought of this ended up just being merged with ESPN SportZone). I wonder if I have any copies of my prototype for this.
It's clear then that you've never written anything approaching a news story, and it's doubly clear that you've never done it for a publication with limited space.
I expect in everyday speech, and in each email, you make sure to append a name, title, chapter and verse to every concept you get from someone else. Your slashdot post doesnt, though, and is in fact filled with unfounded flamebait that makes anything written New Scientist global-perspective journalist look like a Presbyterian sermon. As for your crusade for objective journalism, you get off on a great foot by starting off by name-calling the author.
This got a 4? Wtf. Things like this almost make me wish I hadn't given up mods.
Slashdot Mirror
An accident might kill or disable an astronaut who provided some vital expertise. A supply drop might fail, condemning the colonists to starve in a very public way. Even if nothing went wrong, the astronauts' lives would certainly be shortened by the harsh conditions. The lower gravity would create long-term medical problems and the cosmic radiation that penetrates the thin atmosphere is bound to increase the risk of cancer. Add in the debilitating effects of general privation, and the lack of sophisticated medical equipment, and the prospects for longevity look slim.
Oh, poi. There hasn't been a colony in the history of the Earth that didn't face the same level of danger. Colonists to N. America faced limited supplies and had to live in housing and clothing ridiculously far below the standard of living available in Renaissance Europe. And they faced strange agriculture, swamps, hurricanes, and natives, without benefit of military defense. Same with colonists to Africa, who tended to travel further inland, facing some of the meanest beasts on the planet, strange diseases, and treacherous terrain, not to mention generally more territorial natives than in N.A.
Would NASA entertain a one-way policy for human Mars exploration? Probably not. But other, more adventurous space agencies in Europe or Asia might.
A great idea. I can imagine what a lot of Europeans would say to this. "Colonization? We've been mastering that for half a millennium! Americans don't know the half of it."
Shows what history you guys know, you should have said "IBM Selectrics that type by themselves!" What's this new fangled 1990's dot matrix nonsense?
Wow. Two alcohol-influenced comments made the same night went from 1 to 5.
I need to drink more.
I'd expect that a fair amount of first-order steg would be detectable by a process that examined all patterns in a data stream, and spotted that or those patterns that were UNLIKE the other patterns in the data, based on some heuristic.
Of course, if you were to steg with an OTP or some such (i.e. your steg is based on deviance from a known data set), you'd more easily escape such detection.
Uh, sure, the "this is supposed to be random noise" trick will work about as long as the average spam-filter-avoidance trick lasts.
"The enemy is sending out an abnormally large amount of random noise data. Must just be having microphone trouble. Nothing to see here."
Roger that.
No +1, cause I've been drinking...
between RFIDs in something I OWN AND PAID FOR, and RFIDs in something that I AM ONLY BORROWING.
Now, if casinos sell souvenir (poker) chips... hopefully those wont have active (rfid) chips in them.
Hell, they should put RFIDs in rental DVD/VHS cases, so they can track down the bastard who hasn't returned that one copy of THX1138.
Actually, inventory departments of companies might do well to RFID their equipment, especially with a wireless network full of floating laptops...
We already hit 1Bsec two years ago. Slashdot's article on this is disturbingly missing (note article title), but luckily this link lists the milestones.
But we're talking about 1.073 billion here, a 'gig' of seconds, not a billion... c|net just doesn't know a damn thing, even after all these years.
(Does it disturb a single other person than me that reporters for technology sites don't know any more about computing than reporters for, like, Fox News?)
Anyway, have a merry 1072310400.
Oh good. Another thing the government can spend untold billions of dollars on instead of job-creating economic investment.
Oh damn. I was hoping for a documentary that exposed brain-dead MIT Media Lab dotcom ventures.
I'm sorry, but isn't this the same company/group that made BackOrifice, in an attempt to embarass Microsoft while publicly proclaiming the massive security hole it exposed, while MS denied there were any such holes?
Does anyone see a disconnect here?
And here I thought it was all about information wanting to be free.
RIP l0pht.
Well, if it can work for the British government, it can work for Microsoft.
If all you want is a good scientific/graphing calculator for your Palm, get EasyCalc. :) )
(It appears to be in English now, too.
is that they believe the satellite actually broke over time, to point where it caused something else that wasn't broken -- the solar power system -- to kick in.
Namely, geeks.
Handy Tip: Provide something of better quality than Rolling Rock.
His consistancy and ethics are admirable, but one wonders if GNOME has grown beyond its roots in the free software community.
I love the inference to be made here. In other words, GNOME has grown so large that it can't be bothered with ethics anymore.
In fact, about six years ago, private domains were encouraged to get *.us domains, instead of *.com domains, which were specifically for commercial ventures. Likewise, *.net was only for network providers, and *.org was only for non-profit orgs. But when the NSF stopped paying for everyone's domain name, InterNIC / Network Solutions took control of how the domains would be allocated among purposes, and that was to not allocate them at all, but blow them wide open to everyone. This of course maximised NSI's ability to sell domains. (NSI did not and has not controlled (*.us).
Web-era veterans might remember Netherlands BBS, originally at netherlands.ypsi.mi.us ('ypsi.mi' because it was located in Ypsilanti, Michigan). Eventually it was changed to nether.net. This of course worked in NetherNet's favor, because they then had a shorter hostname, and users did less typing, and there was much rejoicing.
Regardless, the current system is hardly bureaucratic -- its the opposite, uncontrolled and manipulated for profit over most beneficial function. And the solution of throwing more TLDs at the problem will only end up spanning the problem across TLDs. Sure, ICANN tells the TLD applicants who were lucky to win their lottery disguised as a review process that they have to limit who can get domains under their TLDs, but if ICANN's pattern of bending to commercial pressure continues, I expect that rule to hold for two years max.
Wow. Wil Wheaton doesn't suck.
Though I'd still like to ask him how he feels about telling the children of America that wrestling is for real.
NomRom.
DSL runs $40/mo, bargain basement T1 runs $400/mo (& that's being really optimistic).
TIBCO PortalBuilder, which was the initial engine for My Yahoo! and is used by private firms for personalised customer web services.
Phil underestimates the effect that one incorrect line of an interview can have on the reputation of a person whose character is already under attack, whether its because they are "helping terrorists keep secrets" or are "using their com-pyoo-ters to degrade the moral fiber of our country" or just from simply "being one of those no good computer geeks."
I had an extremely similar idea back in 1995 while I was working for Inso (now EBT) in their electronic references group (now long gone). Basically I envisioned a system where news stories would be automatically populated with links around recognizable terms (proper names, scentific words and terms, historic events, etc). Of course, in my much more socially beneficial idea, those links would point to articles in online (subscription-based) versions of our reference products, like the Cambridge Encyclopedia, the New Heritage Dictionary, and the Information Please Almanac.
Unfortunately none of this became reality (I hear even the project I was working on when I thought of this ended up just being merged with ESPN SportZone). I wonder if I have any copies of my prototype for this.
It's clear then that you've never written anything approaching a news story, and it's doubly clear that you've never done it for a publication with limited space.
I expect in everyday speech, and in each email, you make sure to append a name, title, chapter and verse to every concept you get from someone else. Your slashdot post doesnt, though, and is in fact filled with unfounded flamebait that makes anything written New Scientist global-perspective journalist look like a Presbyterian sermon. As for your crusade for objective journalism, you get off on a great foot by starting off by name-calling the author.
This got a 4? Wtf. Things like this almost make me wish I hadn't given up mods.
Is it me, or do none of the links for either the AVI or RA file and its mirrors work?
No, the charges were brought for distribution of, or "trafficking in", the software.
Now, he didn't hand out copies of the stuff, so how was he trafficking? Answer: he showed people where to get it.