Ok, "Doom", the movie, wasn't actually that bad. If you want a yardstick to measure that by, consider "The Hulk"....
While I'll be the first to admit "The Hulk" had it's sucky parts - it was also based on the early Hulk comics, and many people were expecting the Bill Bixby version.
Does it make you feel better to point out someones mistakes rather than give someone anyone the benefit or the doubt or try to understand what they are saying.
There is no 'benefit or [sic] of the doubt' to be given - he made an incorrect statement, period. I had no difficulty in understanding what he was saying either, it wasn't phrased oddly or written in nonstandard English.
Therefore your comment is essentially meaningless.
(And I shouldn't have to point out the obvious, but in your case I'll make an exception since you have already indicated an extreme lack of a clue: This is a discussion - part of a discussion is pointing out the mistakes the other participants make. This way, everyone learns something. Your way, all we have is a bunch of soliloquies - rather pointless.)
You can be as cool or as macho as you want but when you're bleeding out and close to death... all that swagger goes away and you will most likely do anything you can to get away from the pain and your own mortality. This doesn't mean that you'd be sobbing or hysterical but *any* comfort you can find you will cling onto.
It's also been proven, time and again, that a patients survival rate is influenced by their state of mind.
Indeed, anyone whose taken a first responder course is taught that one of the most important things (once the ABC's are handled) you can do is to talk to the victim.
Not to mention that roughly zero of the commenters are trained combat troops. If these bots are deployed, troops will see them in training and become used to the fact that 'teddy bear == help' the same way they are to a medic's helmet today.
If you find yourself wounded in the middle of a firefight, which will make you feel more comfortable - being carried out by a carebear that wouldn't hurt a fly, or being carried out by something that looks like it will decimate any opposition in its path?
I'd, personally, feel much more comfortable being carried by a 'carebear' - because carrying me is it's sole job. Stopping to fight means a longer time before I get to safety and medical attention.
This is also why combat medics (for years) have been clearly marked with red crosses on their helmet and carry nothing larger than a personal sidearm - that way the bad guys know they aren't a threat and need not engage them.
You don't even have to ask most sites. Just punch in the person's email address in the "forgot password" form page and see if it corresponds to a registered member's email address. If it's not in the database, you'll get an error. If it is, they'll get a reset password email that they never requested.
Try reading TFA. He not only covers this attack - he discusses it's drawbacks.
Strange thing we have so much trouble preventing paper & color degrading over time when centuries ago the problem has already been solved. Just look at all those books written on hemp that are still in great shape & with bright colours that give us insight over the knowledge of past human civilization.
Actually - the problem hasn't been solved. For every ancient scrap of ancient paper/papyrus/parchment we have, hundreds or thousands (or more) have been lost or destroyed.
Agreed, but I have recorded CDRs that can no longer be read. Same for Iomega ZIP and JAZ disks (no drives).
So do I, but the data that was on them now occupies a tiny portion of the hard drives in my current computers. It's been copied onto half a dozen different backup formats, and I expect it'll migrate across a multitude more in the course of my life.
That's fine while you are alive - but what happens after?
Preserving digital information takes less effort than storing paper prints.
When my grandmother had to be moved into a nursing home, my mom was cleaning out her house and found photograph albums from the 1950's. Preserving them had taken exactly zero effort, they were simply stored on a shelf. They required no hardware to view, there were no worries about changing formats, etc... etc... They simply sat waiting for fifty years.
That's the key difference between physical and digital preservation. Digital preservation requires ongoing maintenance and attention (even if it does make multiple backups to be made much easier). Forget just once to copy those ZIP disks (before the drive dies forever), and the data is gone.
Physical preservation requires much less attention, and will survive even decades of inattention. Even on the bottom shelf of a bookcase in a back bedroom of an un-airconditioned house - in Florida.
You hypocrite! You say that my post is unsubstantiated, which, granted it is,
Thank you for admitting that you had nothing to add to the discussion but FUD.
It is a general trend, I do not provide citations because: a) I know nothing about the details of cars and provided with a list of safety standards I would be unable to compare.
It's funny that you keep admitting you don't know crap about the topic - but you can't resist putting your two cents in.
you call it a slam (even though it is clearly not intended as that) and in the same breath say "what does it say about you that [you] choose to post...".
I call it slam because that's precisely what it is - it contained nothing of use to the discussion, and one tangenital 'fact' which you take in isolation and ignorance of US food laws. Just as in this post you repeat the very same pattern - you take facts in isolation and ignorance and string them together to support an unrelated assumption.
iv) There are restrictions on things such as fuel efficiency in cars which are much stricter than those in America. It would follow that safety and emissions standards are probably also stricter.
After a long chain of handwaving - once again you end with an unsupported assumption.
Here's a hint for you on food: You don't know what the heck you are talking about there either - as the US does have naming and regional restrictions. There are fewer of them not because our restrictions are 'looser', but because our cultures have evolved differently - there are very few historical regional appellations. (Not as in 'they have vanished over time' - as in 'they never existed in the first place'.) Meanwhile, the EU is steadily eroding the existing national restrictions and regulations in Europe.
This wasn't a slam, merely pointing out that American standards are generally looser than those in Europe, which, no matter how much you say it's false, is true.
Had I claimed that American standards weren't looser - you'd have a point. But in reality, that claim is a strawman of your own creation - I merely point that they are different, and that many of the things you assume about US food regulations are in fact incorrect.
Since you don't know the answer to two basic questions - what does it say about you that choose to post anyhow with nothing but an unsubstaniated and factually incorrect slam? (There are food practices in Europe, notably selling unpasturized milk products, that are illegal in the US.)
Revitalization is largely limited to a few glittering showcase projects in a fairly limited area. Get outside of that area and you'd never know it was happening - and at 500 odd feet from the 'convention center' Micheal's building is *well* outside of that area.
You, sadly, make a typical logical error. Your comparisons are between real rockets of today, and theoretical space elevators of tommorow. You allow your elevator to mutate and evolve in response to every criticism - but hold the state of the art in rocketry as a constant. (And you are woefully ignorant of the state of the art.)
Is the UK entry level model street legal in the US? Does it meet US emissions and safety requirements?
Theres a classic example of USian ignorance and hubris. Of course, us Americans have much more stringent safety and emissions standards than other nations.
I'd say the person who can be described as ignorant is the one who responds to a simple question of fact with assumptions and abuse.
Take a look at US and UK BMW websites. The UK entry level model gets 40MPG, which is not much worse than our Prius. Living proof that we can double our car fuel efficiency NOW if we just stop being apathetic about it.
Is the UK entry level model street legal in the US? Does it meet US emissions and safety requirements? (For that matter, what constitues a 'UK entry level model', as no model is designated as such on the UK BMW website that I can find.)
we have been working on several research projects that were - and are - commercially feasible: carbon nanotubes, solar panel technology, lasers and most recently, balloon-based, high-altitude systems for communications, observation and weather monitoring.
The same way TekChek, TekNet and, YelloWWWeb were commercially feasible?
Hey, while implausible today, both technologically and financially, you've got to have some respect for these guys, they ave guts. The thing might actually be built someday when Earth has a much larger industrial capacity (and nanotubes become cheaper to produce).
The problem isn't that nanotubes are expensive to produce - but that nanotubes with the appropriate qualities are difficult to produce at all, and have never been produced in significant quantities. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet together couldn't buy so much as an inch of space elevator grade nanotube ribbon, because it doesn't exist - not at any price.
Does LiftPort's failure reveal systematic shortcomings in the mechanisms now available for funding and enabling innovative and risky projects? Or is the failure a one-off, caused by accidents or the inherent difficulty of the task?
I would suspect it says more about Micheal's inability to manage or to perform as an adequate custodian of other people's money. An awful lot of Liftport money seems to have gone into two buildings, either one of which far exceeded their current or near term needs. Also, this isn't Micheal's first (or even second) failure - though he proudly presents two past failures on his bio on their website, strongly implying they were sucesses.
It's a shame. It's actually worse than the article indicates. Michael just lost a building in downtown Bremerton that was providing some income to the firm.
It's been a few months since I've been past it - but that building has been mostly vacant since long before Micheal bought it. It if provided any income at all - it was far exeeded by the costs. In fact, digging around it appears that Micheal was charging the entire expenses of the building to Liftport, despite Liftport occupying less than 20% of it. (Being unable to raise money to pay the mortgage was the direct cause of losing the building.) If I were an investor, I'd be mad as hell at how my money has been misspent - Liftport was paying for not one but two buildings far in excess of their current or likely near term needs.
One of the risk factors he always said was that of the regulatory bodies, and that's what got him this time.
No, he didn't get 'got' by the regulatory bodies - he got caught violating the law. That's not a business risk, that's malfeasance.
It was embarrassing to be in the presence of a potential investor while they read through it.
Which means nothing more than you were shopping it to wrong class of investor. Real investors know all that stuff - small time chumps who think they are real investors, don't.
Nope. Seems to me a map of fingering -- which may not be strictly correct -- is more like Cliff's notes than photocopying the sheet music
I cannot *imagine* the mental contortions required to believe that black is white. Have you ever actually seen a copy of Cliff's Notes and compared it to the original novel? Cliff's Notes contain excerpts. If tablatures were like Cliff's notes, they'd contain the first nine notes of the opening riff, the midle of the first and third verses, the first and last bar of the refrain, and the next-to-the-last bar of the final verse.
But tablatures aren't like that are they?
Instead, tablatures are a complete set of instructions intended by design to allow the user to construct a complete and recognizeable performance of the original song. Whether or not they are strictly correct is irrelevant. If anything, producing a tablature of somebody else's work is much more akin (though not precisely) to taking a camcorder into a movie theatre to record the movie. It may be good, it may be crap, it may contain hecklers and a crying baby that was in the theatre - but it produces something that is recognizably a copy of the movie.
The likelihood that McCain would pick a good choice -- like the EE department chairman at MIT -- is zero.
Why would the chairman of the EE department at MIT be a good choice? The position doesn't require technical aptitude, it requires the ability to understand the way technology affects public policy. It requires someone to be able to draw on people like the EE department chair to help interpret new technologies.
But it also requires skills that highly technical people usually lack. Engineers and developers often take a myopic view of technology that is often far too black-and-white to be useful in a public policy setting. As much as I hate to say it, lawyers, economists and other non-technical disciplines tend to have skills that transfer over better than strictly-tech people.
There's another factor as well, the EE chair isn't a practicing engineer - nor is he practicing teacher. He's an administrator. Odds on, his highest level skill is department politics - not technology.
Last, go purchase a bucket of 1" swimming pool chlorine tablets and drop them inside the walls ever other stud. This way, if the water rises up, the water in the walls will chlorinate itself and when the water recedes you are guaranteed not to have mold in 'them thar walls'.
Also when the water recedes you'll have a toxic and corrosive residue left inside your walls. (As well as having had it soaking into your studs and sheetrock.) If any moisture gets inside the walls without a flood - you'll have a *very* toxic, *very* dangerous, *very* corrosive puddle of goo in your walls potentially giving off *very* toxic, *very* dangerous, *very* corrosive fumes.
Those tablets aren't toys - and shouldn't be tossed around without some very serious thought as the very serious hazards you can create by doing so.
Slashdot Mirror
While I'll be the first to admit "The Hulk" had it's sucky parts - it was also based on the early Hulk comics, and many people were expecting the Bill Bixby version.
How precisely does a collection of buzzword boilerplate sound promising?
There is no 'benefit or [sic] of the doubt' to be given - he made an incorrect statement, period. I had no difficulty in understanding what he was saying either, it wasn't phrased oddly or written in nonstandard English.
Therefore your comment is essentially meaningless.
(And I shouldn't have to point out the obvious, but in your case I'll make an exception since you have already indicated an extreme lack of a clue: This is a discussion - part of a discussion is pointing out the mistakes the other participants make. This way, everyone learns something. Your way, all we have is a bunch of soliloquies - rather pointless.)
Is reading at least the summary, if not TFA such a bad idea? (You too moderators.) Heck - at least just read the bleeding title!
Gateway isn't suing, they are being sued.
Indeed, anyone whose taken a first responder course is taught that one of the most important things (once the ABC's are handled) you can do is to talk to the victim.
Not to mention that roughly zero of the commenters are trained combat troops. If these bots are deployed, troops will see them in training and become used to the fact that 'teddy bear == help' the same way they are to a medic's helmet today.
I'd, personally, feel much more comfortable being carried by a 'carebear' - because carrying me is it's sole job. Stopping to fight means a longer time before I get to safety and medical attention.
This is also why combat medics (for years) have been clearly marked with red crosses on their helmet and carry nothing larger than a personal sidearm - that way the bad guys know they aren't a threat and need not engage them.
Try reading TFA. He not only covers this attack - he discusses it's drawbacks.
Actually - the problem hasn't been solved. For every ancient scrap of ancient paper/papyrus/parchment we have, hundreds or thousands (or more) have been lost or destroyed.
That's fine while you are alive - but what happens after?
When my grandmother had to be moved into a nursing home, my mom was cleaning out her house and found photograph albums from the 1950's. Preserving them had taken exactly zero effort, they were simply stored on a shelf. They required no hardware to view, there were no worries about changing formats, etc... etc... They simply sat waiting for fifty years.
That's the key difference between physical and digital preservation. Digital preservation requires ongoing maintenance and attention (even if it does make multiple backups to be made much easier). Forget just once to copy those ZIP disks (before the drive dies forever), and the data is gone.
Physical preservation requires much less attention, and will survive even decades of inattention. Even on the bottom shelf of a bookcase in a back bedroom of an un-airconditioned house - in Florida.
Thank you for admitting that you had nothing to add to the discussion but FUD.
It's funny that you keep admitting you don't know crap about the topic - but you can't resist putting your two cents in.
I call it slam because that's precisely what it is - it contained nothing of use to the discussion, and one tangenital 'fact' which you take in isolation and ignorance of US food laws. Just as in this post you repeat the very same pattern - you take facts in isolation and ignorance and string them together to support an unrelated assumption.
After a long chain of handwaving - once again you end with an unsupported assumption.
Here's a hint for you on food: You don't know what the heck you are talking about there either - as the US does have naming and regional restrictions. There are fewer of them not because our restrictions are 'looser', but because our cultures have evolved differently - there are very few historical regional appellations. (Not as in 'they have vanished over time' - as in 'they never existed in the first place'.) Meanwhile, the EU is steadily eroding the existing national restrictions and regulations in Europe.
Had I claimed that American standards weren't looser - you'd have a point. But in reality, that claim is a strawman of your own creation - I merely point that they are different, and that many of the things you assume about US food regulations are in fact incorrect.
Since you don't know the answer to two basic questions - what does it say about you that choose to post anyhow with nothing but an unsubstaniated and factually incorrect slam? (There are food practices in Europe, notably selling unpasturized milk products, that are illegal in the US.)
Revitalization is largely limited to a few glittering showcase projects in a fairly limited area. Get outside of that area and you'd never know it was happening - and at 500 odd feet from the 'convention center' Micheal's building is *well* outside of that area.
You, sadly, make a typical logical error. Your comparisons are between real rockets of today, and theoretical space elevators of tommorow. You allow your elevator to mutate and evolve in response to every criticism - but hold the state of the art in rocketry as a constant. (And you are woefully ignorant of the state of the art.)
I'd say the person who can be described as ignorant is the one who responds to a simple question of fact with assumptions and abuse.
Is the UK entry level model street legal in the US? Does it meet US emissions and safety requirements? (For that matter, what constitues a 'UK entry level model', as no model is designated as such on the UK BMW website that I can find.)
The same way TekChek, TekNet and, YelloWWWeb were commercially feasible?
The problem isn't that nanotubes are expensive to produce - but that nanotubes with the appropriate qualities are difficult to produce at all, and have never been produced in significant quantities. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet together couldn't buy so much as an inch of space elevator grade nanotube ribbon, because it doesn't exist - not at any price.
I would suspect it says more about Micheal's inability to manage or to perform as an adequate custodian of other people's money. An awful lot of Liftport money seems to have gone into two buildings, either one of which far exceeded their current or near term needs. Also, this isn't Micheal's first (or even second) failure - though he proudly presents two past failures on his bio on their website, strongly implying they were sucesses.
It's been a few months since I've been past it - but that building has been mostly vacant since long before Micheal bought it. It if provided any income at all - it was far exeeded by the costs. In fact, digging around it appears that Micheal was charging the entire expenses of the building to Liftport, despite Liftport occupying less than 20% of it. (Being unable to raise money to pay the mortgage was the direct cause of losing the building.) If I were an investor, I'd be mad as hell at how my money has been misspent - Liftport was paying for not one but two buildings far in excess of their current or likely near term needs.
No, he didn't get 'got' by the regulatory bodies - he got caught violating the law. That's not a business risk, that's malfeasance.
Which means nothing more than you were shopping it to wrong class of investor. Real investors know all that stuff - small time chumps who think they are real investors, don't.
Doesn't matter. The law requires full and formal disclosure.
That will work until they sue you personally and collect what assets you have in the US. Woops. Not so simple is it?
I cannot *imagine* the mental contortions required to believe that black is white. Have you ever actually seen a copy of Cliff's Notes and compared it to the original novel? Cliff's Notes contain excerpts. If tablatures were like Cliff's notes, they'd contain the first nine notes of the opening riff, the midle of the first and third verses, the first and last bar of the refrain, and the next-to-the-last bar of the final verse.
But tablatures aren't like that are they?
Instead, tablatures are a complete set of instructions intended by design to allow the user to construct a complete and recognizeable performance of the original song. Whether or not they are strictly correct is irrelevant. If anything, producing a tablature of somebody else's work is much more akin (though not precisely) to taking a camcorder into a movie theatre to record the movie. It may be good, it may be crap, it may contain hecklers and a crying baby that was in the theatre - but it produces something that is recognizably a copy of the movie.
There's another factor as well, the EE chair isn't a practicing engineer - nor is he practicing teacher. He's an administrator. Odds on, his highest level skill is department politics - not technology.
Also when the water recedes you'll have a toxic and corrosive residue left inside your walls. (As well as having had it soaking into your studs and sheetrock.) If any moisture gets inside the walls without a flood - you'll have a *very* toxic, *very* dangerous, *very* corrosive puddle of goo in your walls potentially giving off *very* toxic, *very* dangerous, *very* corrosive fumes.
Those tablets aren't toys - and shouldn't be tossed around without some very serious thought as the very serious hazards you can create by doing so.