Exactly how do you tell the difference between an accidentally introduced vulnerability facilitating a back door and a back door engineered to look like the former?
There's a phrase you should google: 'plausible deniability'.
The Pi is cheap to the extent that you can throw a bunch of them at specialised applications and use them in environments where you wouldn't risk other options. It's cheap to the extent that you can play around with electronics, without agonising about the cost of doing something stupid. It's low-powered - you can run one on AA batteries making all sorts of mobile applications practical (the avionics for a drone, for example). You can give them to your kids to do with as they please.
For the form factor, they are *powerful* little beasts, making them extremely flexible. Try running python and gpu-intensive code on a pic controller.
Of course, your imagination *does* limit what you can do with them.
I'm not making any claims one way or the other, but the incidence rate of apparently magical things happening *did* seem to go up a lot during my phases of hitting the bong.
There's a place called Pant Y Gwdr in the centre of Swansea, which happens to offer the largest market for magic underwear in the Western Hemisphere and is perhaps the reason for the anomalous concentration of Mormons in the locale. I believe the name roughly translates to 'pantie-girdle'.
I rather suspect that the parent was using artistic license to make a rhetorical point. Obviously, not an entirely popular one. Fun fact: the democracies of Rome and Greece both predate Christianity.
I'm inclined to doubt that the difference in IQ between a human and a chimpanzee is characterised by poor nutrition and poor education, rather than genetic differences. So, if that's the case for the difference between a human and a chimp, why would genetics stop being a factor in the differences between one human and another?
It's not that they don't factor, very obviously, in other aspects of human behaviour and morphology; it therefore seems that the argument against genetic factors for IQ is a case of special pleading predicated on the obviously untrue canon that 'All men are created equal'.
It's partly because life as a peasant sucked so much in the Dark Ages and later times, that suicide was a frequent outcome. In addition, at a time where physical labour was by and large the only kind of labour, having someone die could have serious consequences for his or her family and community. The churches dealt with this in their characteristic way by widely disseminating the thought that the supernatural consequences of dying were even more dire than the prospect of living one's sorry life to its conclusion. For nobles, the story was different - suicide could be viewed as a selfless and honourable act. The attitudes we see from our religious contemporaries are just legalistic echoes of the practical if cruel response to the effects of suicide in earlier times.
It's tempting to troll them by inventing a more plausible scenario involving weather control satellite network utilising Hall Thrusters for position keeping plus gyroscopic attitude control to allow accurate positioning of mylar solar reflectors. The orbits would be a bit of a nightmare, but not beyond the ken of Corona project types. Of course, it could rebound badly if someone with purchasing power within the dark and massive outlines of the military industrial complex sees this post and decides to try to implement it.
As a matter of interest, a common rant from a subset of contemporary programmers related to the space inefficiency of the new '.exe' executable format over that of '.com'. Just like now, a proportion of people were forward-looking, seeing the superiority of processor designs like the Motorola 68K family and operating systems like Microware's OS-9, while a sizeable chunk of the population bought into the idea that 640K really should be enough for everyone.
One of my erstwhile bosses told me quite confidently that computers with graphics capabilities would never take off as there was no need or demand for them. Machines with modern capabilities were well into the realm of unlikely science fiction.
It's hardly proof of the subject, but Newton's Principia Mathematica was developed geometrically, and the geometric truths codified as algebraic equations.
> In the west we tend to reason with words internally.
Um, I don't. My vocabulary is way better than average and on a roll I'm articulate to a degree that can intimidate people, but I think nonverbally. Do you have any research to support this assertion? I'm not saying you're wrong - it's not a strong subject area for me, and I'm intrigued by the prospect that other people might be different.
The fact that you attempt to live according to some moral code doesn't guarantee the truth of that code. I suspect that people often forget this in the excitement of the belief that they are morally superior to people with different moral codes.
Note that I'm not making an argument for moral relativism here, I just think that some people's codes are laughably primitive and based on certain bronze age prejudices.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly how do you tell the difference between an accidentally introduced vulnerability facilitating a back door and a back door engineered to look like the former?
There's a phrase you should google: 'plausible deniability'.
The Pi is cheap to the extent that you can throw a bunch of them at specialised applications and use them in environments where you wouldn't risk other options. It's cheap to the extent that you can play around with electronics, without agonising about the cost of doing something stupid. It's low-powered - you can run one on AA batteries making all sorts of mobile applications practical (the avionics for a drone, for example). You can give them to your kids to do with as they please.
For the form factor, they are *powerful* little beasts, making them extremely flexible. Try running python and gpu-intensive code on a pic controller.
Of course, your imagination *does* limit what you can do with them.
> Do people in Manchester call their police "gimps"?
Well, it's spread to Wales as of my reading this - it's a nice alternative to 'The Feds', 'The Dirt' and/or 'The Bottom Inspectors'.
The first time I ever saw one was on a trip to a ghetto area in Philadelphia. I've never seen one in my home country.
I'm not making any claims one way or the other, but the incidence rate of apparently magical things happening *did* seem to go up a lot during my phases of hitting the bong.
I agree with your points, but Occam's Razor is a heuristic and should be treated as such - often true but not guaranteed so.
The parent was using the word 'recognise' in a metaphorical sense. Obviously.
Hey, I'm a cat that likes boobs, too...
Wanna hook up?
There's a place called Pant Y Gwdr in the centre of Swansea, which happens to offer the largest market for magic underwear in the Western Hemisphere and is perhaps the reason for the anomalous concentration of Mormons in the locale. I believe the name roughly translates to 'pantie-girdle'.
I rather suspect that the parent was using artistic license to make a rhetorical point. Obviously, not an entirely popular one. Fun fact: the democracies of Rome and Greece both predate Christianity.
Please, don't sugar-coat the truth!
I'm inclined to doubt that the difference in IQ between a human and a chimpanzee is characterised by poor nutrition and poor education, rather than genetic differences. So, if that's the case for the difference between a human and a chimp, why would genetics stop being a factor in the differences between one human and another?
It's not that they don't factor, very obviously, in other aspects of human behaviour and morphology; it therefore seems that the argument against genetic factors for IQ is a case of special pleading predicated on the obviously untrue canon that 'All men are created equal'.
Man, it must really suck to be European,
Let me know when you've achieved your goals and I'll join you.
It's an olde englisch tradition, mate.
Heroin and a holiday to Iceland for me - I'm going to be really chill about it ^^
It's partly because life as a peasant sucked so much in the Dark Ages and later times, that suicide was a frequent outcome. In addition, at a time where physical labour was by and large the only kind of labour, having someone die could have serious consequences for his or her family and community. The churches dealt with this in their characteristic way by widely disseminating the thought that the supernatural consequences of dying were even more dire than the prospect of living one's sorry life to its conclusion. For nobles, the story was different - suicide could be viewed as a selfless and honourable act. The attitudes we see from our religious contemporaries are just legalistic echoes of the practical if cruel response to the effects of suicide in earlier times.
My neighbour, although a really nice man with a pet tractor, thinks that David Icke is a splendid fellow with much to recommend his thinking.
We really are doomed.
It's tempting to troll them by inventing a more plausible scenario involving weather control satellite network utilising Hall Thrusters for position keeping plus gyroscopic attitude control to allow accurate positioning of mylar solar reflectors. The orbits would be a bit of a nightmare, but not beyond the ken of Corona project types. Of course, it could rebound badly if someone with purchasing power within the dark and massive outlines of the military industrial complex sees this post and decides to try to implement it.
It would be the ultimate water monopoly empire.
We're doomed.
Does anyone know of any efforts to port Android to them?
As a matter of interest, a common rant from a subset of contemporary programmers related to the space inefficiency of the new '.exe' executable format over that of '.com'. Just like now, a proportion of people were forward-looking, seeing the superiority of processor designs like the Motorola 68K family and operating systems like Microware's OS-9, while a sizeable chunk of the population bought into the idea that 640K really should be enough for everyone.
One of my erstwhile bosses told me quite confidently that computers with graphics capabilities would never take off as there was no need or demand for them. Machines with modern capabilities were well into the realm of unlikely science fiction.
It's hardly proof of the subject, but Newton's Principia Mathematica was developed geometrically, and the geometric truths codified as algebraic equations.
> In the west we tend to reason with words internally.
Um, I don't. My vocabulary is way better than average and on a roll I'm articulate to a degree that can intimidate people, but I think nonverbally. Do you have any research to support this assertion? I'm not saying you're wrong - it's not a strong subject area for me, and I'm intrigued by the prospect that other people might be different.
Maybe you should check out the metric fuck tonneloads of your buddies on youtube who are saying exactly that.
But you're just a troll, aren't you?
The fact that you attempt to live according to some moral code doesn't guarantee the truth of that code. I suspect that people often forget this in the excitement of the belief that they are morally superior to people with different moral codes.
Note that I'm not making an argument for moral relativism here, I just think that some people's codes are laughably primitive and based on certain bronze age prejudices.