I'm glad I wasn't the only one who saw this and went "what the hell?"
Our pre-industrial pattern was to seek out information about people either from them personally or from personal interactions with other people. Not to obsessively gather information anonymously.
NCAR of course isn't in the business of weather forecasting... which renders their opinion irrelevant to some degree. Useful for research isn't the same thing as useful for operations.
Of course, those sorts of stations wouldn't provide coverage of un-populated areas, water-covered areas, etc., and wouldn't provide the same sort of information, so they're not a replacement. Seems like they would be useful, though.
They really wouldn't be all that useful, because they don't provide any information other than what's happening locally at ground level - a very detailed 2D look at a tiny slice of a 3D system.
A cheap decent mid-range laptop is a shining example of *exactly* what I'm talking about. Yes, the price has come down due to competition - because costs have been ruthlessly slashed, and quality pared away to the bare minimum.
Only a true moron would suffer under the delusion that a complex design with unique parts could be built from "specs on the internet". Try reading the last paragraph of the original comment jackass.
No, you don't get it. There's a hell of a lot more to getting a product on the shelves that just designing it, and not all of it is a modest one-off expense.
I wouldn't be surprised if competition wouldn't drive prices down so much that most people who have insurance right now, would be able to afford them (crappy Wal-mart grade models close to what people pay right now for the insurance copay which last maybe a few months). In that scenario (which might be too idealistic), some people wouldn't be able to get them anyhow, same as now people without insurance don't have much option.
There, fixed that for you. For prices to drop, costs have to drop too.
Their broader point may not hold up for other, less topical pages.
For the specific sub-specialty of military history I study, it certainly doesn't. But after the bruising battles I fought (and lost) trying to get the base article even remotely into shape and useful... I'm disinclined to even try and fix/expand the balance. There's a bunch of soi-disant experts on the topic who'll revert any attempt almost immediately - and who'll zerg you if you even try any of the discussion/mediation processes.
And one of Wikipedia's sock puppets/cheerleaders chimes in as expected with his "it's all sweetness and light if you follow the bureaucracy and play Wikipedia the Role Playing Game" posts...
You just don't get it do you? It's exactly that all that bullcrap, favoring those who play Wikipedia The Role Playing Game over those who want to do the work, that has driven the latter away. The lunatics are now running the asylum.
If you think arrogance is a trait only CS majors have, head over to a 500-level philosophy class sometime and talk to some of those majors. Hell, go to pretty much *any* high level class in *any* major.
You're (currently) modded +5 'insightful' - but actually, you're pretty much clueless because you're comparing apples to catfish. The author is a *freshman*. He's taking *100* level classes. And he's correct, many (if not virtually all) 'nerds' and CS majors have an unwarranted arrogance - and it extends beyond their classes.
Ultimately, life will fix the problem.
Reading Slashdot for over a decade now, your optimism is unwarranted.
Modern submarines, especially the boomers aren't all that cramped. (Of course, I'm a former submariner so my perception may be... somewhat warped compared to the norm.)
But seriously, I've been saying the same thing for years. Submariners are used to close conditions. Used to paying 110% attention 24/7/365 to things like life support, propulsion, navigation, and communications. Used to limited and asynchronous communications. Used to missions lasting weeks or months... Etc... etc...
But turning the space program over to a bunch of work-a-day bubbleheads won't square well with the mythology of the steely eyed, square jawed fighter pilot. And the steely eyed, square jawed fighter pilots dominate the NASA astronaut corps.
The problem is... Faraday cages aren't a magic wand. Real world Faraday cages aren't like the little screened off sheds thingies you see on Mythbusters.
Real world Faraday cages have power coming into them. And HVAC systems controlling the environment inside. And communications between the equipment inside and the world outside. And doors for the occupants to enter and leave by... And all of these things can potentially allow RF energy into the "protected" volume, if they don't invalidate the protection completely.
Real world Faraday cages are tricky and expensive to design, picky and difficult and expensive to build, and require significant care and attention in maintenance and operation.
Indeed. And how to resolve date conflicts? (Two different groups of fans a significant distance apart want the same band on consecutive nights.) And venue conflicts? (Two different groups of fans want the same venue on the same night... and the venue owner wants a contract before he reserves a date...)
Absolutely nothing - the iPad mini (and it's specs and costs) are complete fabrications by "journalists" and "analysts" who have to churn out so many words per day to justify their existence.
Unless you're a crytpographer and a programmer... examining the source is pretty much pointless. It may give you a warm happy fuzzy to be able to do so, but you lack the qualifications to actually evaluate it.
The point, surely, is not that I am necessarily a cryptographer, but that the source is available to those who are. It's not necessary for every user to independently audit the code, because the skilled individuals who do audit the code can then communicate their findings.
Which brings you right back to the same dilemma - you have no real ability to evaluate the qualifications and skills of the independent auditors.
"But why trust the skilled individuals?", you may ask. Answer: because I find it unlikely that all the world's cryptographers are conspiring to keep quiet about any vulnerabilities they find the code. At any rate it's a more sensible strategy than "assume that Zimmerman is both infallible and incorruptible".
If all the worlds cryptographers were examining the code - you'd have a point. (And in reality, the cryptographers most likely to find a vulnerability are those also most likely to keep quiet about it.) In the end, you're just being selective about who you're assuming to be "infallible and incorruptible" without actually having any evidence that they actually are... Being "not Zimmerman" is a rational, but flawed strategy - but not realizing and admitting the flaw is not rational. Handwaving away the flaw is irrational.
Except Soyuz isn't a heavy lift booster, in fact it's a fairly modest booster as such things go. Meanwhile, the US has the Delta and the Atlas, and the Falcon 9...
Disclaimer, I've been using GNU/Linux myself almost exclusively since 2003 or something, and so my knowledge of MS Windows is also dated.
It's not that your knowledge is dated, it's that it's clueless, non existent, and based on ignorance and paranoia.
Windows security has been, since back in Win95 days, mostly a matter of running the proper security programs. It's not complicated, and nowadays there's very little worry about "drive by malware" if you have even a smidgen of a clue.
With a modest amount of work and a modest amount of attention, it's quite possible to run Windows without ever getting a virus. (20+ years and counting for me...) Denying the child of the ability to do it right so he makes the right choice of OS is simply wrong. That's kind of like forcing your kid to believe in your religion by lying to him and denying him access to any viewpoint other than his own. Whether the issue is OS's or all powerful imaginary friends... lying to a child to force him to make a decision you approve of is repugnant.
. That degree of privacy ought to be the measure of how a court accesses the information, rather than the medium the information is stored in.
In the real world - there's no such thing as an "expectation of privacy" with regards to the court, only whether or not it is relevant to the case as hand. Which is as it should be, "I expected that to be private" rightfully provides no protection against the discovery of relevant evidence.
Part of it is keeping his work closed source, which is extra scary when talking about cryptography. Being asked to trust a security solution that you can't examine is insane.
Unless you're a crytpographer and a programmer... examining the source is pretty much pointless. It may give you a warm happy fuzzy to be able to do so, but you lack the qualifications to actually evaluate it.
But cryptography is the plaything of the paranoid
No, it's mostly the plaything of those desperately trying to improve their self image. It's the digital equivalent of elevator shoes or SUV's.
The idea is to try to make exploration much cheaper by having modular components. So you can pick a target like the moon. Decide what you want to do like drill some core samples from the polar regions and sample them.
In space, particularly due to the wide range of temperature environments, that's like having a modular system that can go to the bottom of the Marianas Trench, the Greenland ice cap, the Sahara desert, or the Amazon jungle. It's been studied again and again, but it never actually works beyond paper studies and the odd low fidelity demonstrator. You end up spending too much money either hacking existing bits to do what they weren't designed to or building custom modules, and not actually saving any money.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who saw this and went "what the hell?"
Our pre-industrial pattern was to seek out information about people either from them personally or from personal interactions with other people. Not to obsessively gather information anonymously.
NCAR of course isn't in the business of weather forecasting... which renders their opinion irrelevant to some degree. Useful for research isn't the same thing as useful for operations.
They really wouldn't be all that useful, because they don't provide any information other than what's happening locally at ground level - a very detailed 2D look at a tiny slice of a 3D system.
A cheap decent mid-range laptop is a shining example of *exactly* what I'm talking about. Yes, the price has come down due to competition - because costs have been ruthlessly slashed, and quality pared away to the bare minimum.
Only a true moron would suffer under the delusion that a complex design with unique parts could be built from "specs on the internet". Try reading the last paragraph of the original comment jackass.
No, you don't get it. There's a hell of a lot more to getting a product on the shelves that just designing it, and not all of it is a modest one-off expense.
There, fixed that for you. For prices to drop, costs have to drop too.
For the specific sub-specialty of military history I study, it certainly doesn't. But after the bruising battles I fought (and lost) trying to get the base article even remotely into shape and useful... I'm disinclined to even try and fix/expand the balance. There's a bunch of soi-disant experts on the topic who'll revert any attempt almost immediately - and who'll zerg you if you even try any of the discussion/mediation processes.
And one of Wikipedia's sock puppets/cheerleaders chimes in as expected with his "it's all sweetness and light if you follow the bureaucracy and play Wikipedia the Role Playing Game" posts...
You just don't get it do you? It's exactly that all that bullcrap, favoring those who play Wikipedia The Role Playing Game over those who want to do the work, that has driven the latter away. The lunatics are now running the asylum.
You're (currently) modded +5 'insightful' - but actually, you're pretty much clueless because you're comparing apples to catfish. The author is a *freshman*. He's taking *100* level classes. And he's correct, many (if not virtually all) 'nerds' and CS majors have an unwarranted arrogance - and it extends beyond their classes.
Reading Slashdot for over a decade now, your optimism is unwarranted.
You're right of course.
But this is Slashdot, and they know everything and know it better than the professionals.
Modern submarines, especially the boomers aren't all that cramped. (Of course, I'm a former submariner so my perception may be... somewhat warped compared to the norm.)
But seriously, I've been saying the same thing for years. Submariners are used to close conditions. Used to paying 110% attention 24/7/365 to things like life support, propulsion, navigation, and communications. Used to limited and asynchronous communications. Used to missions lasting weeks or months... Etc... etc...
But turning the space program over to a bunch of work-a-day bubbleheads won't square well with the mythology of the steely eyed, square jawed fighter pilot. And the steely eyed, square jawed fighter pilots dominate the NASA astronaut corps.
The problem is... Faraday cages aren't a magic wand. Real world Faraday cages aren't like the little screened off sheds thingies you see on Mythbusters.
Real world Faraday cages have power coming into them. And HVAC systems controlling the environment inside. And communications between the equipment inside and the world outside. And doors for the occupants to enter and leave by... And all of these things can potentially allow RF energy into the "protected" volume, if they don't invalidate the protection completely.
Real world Faraday cages are tricky and expensive to design, picky and difficult and expensive to build, and require significant care and attention in maintenance and operation.
Indeed. And how to resolve date conflicts? (Two different groups of fans a significant distance apart want the same band on consecutive nights.) And venue conflicts? (Two different groups of fans want the same venue on the same night... and the venue owner wants a contract before he reserves a date...)
How do they have the resources to do it on demand, multiple times, to serve it across the web... but not to do it once and upload them to Flickr?
So what do we know about the iPad Mini?
Absolutely nothing - the iPad mini (and it's specs and costs) are complete fabrications by "journalists" and "analysts" who have to churn out so many words per day to justify their existence.
That was my thought too... What the heck is the point of this exercise? Especially since you're supposed to be paying attention to the road anyhow.
Which brings you right back to the same dilemma - you have no real ability to evaluate the qualifications and skills of the independent auditors.
If all the worlds cryptographers were examining the code - you'd have a point. (And in reality, the cryptographers most likely to find a vulnerability are those also most likely to keep quiet about it.) In the end, you're just being selective about who you're assuming to be "infallible and incorruptible" without actually having any evidence that they actually are... Being "not Zimmerman" is a rational, but flawed strategy - but not realizing and admitting the flaw is not rational. Handwaving away the flaw is irrational.
Except Soyuz isn't a heavy lift booster, in fact it's a fairly modest booster as such things go. Meanwhile, the US has the Delta and the Atlas, and the Falcon 9...
It's not that your knowledge is dated, it's that it's clueless, non existent, and based on ignorance and paranoia.
Windows security has been, since back in Win95 days, mostly a matter of running the proper security programs. It's not complicated, and nowadays there's very little worry about "drive by malware" if you have even a smidgen of a clue.
With a modest amount of work and a modest amount of attention, it's quite possible to run Windows without ever getting a virus. (20+ years and counting for me...) Denying the child of the ability to do it right so he makes the right choice of OS is simply wrong. That's kind of like forcing your kid to believe in your religion by lying to him and denying him access to any viewpoint other than his own. Whether the issue is OS's or all powerful imaginary friends... lying to a child to force him to make a decision you approve of is repugnant.
In the real world - there's no such thing as an "expectation of privacy" with regards to the court, only whether or not it is relevant to the case as hand. Which is as it should be, "I expected that to be private" rightfully provides no protection against the discovery of relevant evidence.
Unless you're a crytpographer and a programmer... examining the source is pretty much pointless. It may give you a warm happy fuzzy to be able to do so, but you lack the qualifications to actually evaluate it.
No, it's mostly the plaything of those desperately trying to improve their self image. It's the digital equivalent of elevator shoes or SUV's.
In space, particularly due to the wide range of temperature environments, that's like having a modular system that can go to the bottom of the Marianas Trench, the Greenland ice cap, the Sahara desert, or the Amazon jungle. It's been studied again and again, but it never actually works beyond paper studies and the odd low fidelity demonstrator. You end up spending too much money either hacking existing bits to do what they weren't designed to or building custom modules, and not actually saving any money.
$100 billion budget, 1 million riders. Seems pretty scandalous to me.