The data is the contents of the transmission. The metadata is the data describing the transmission. So yes, the phone number, date/time, etc, are metadata of the actual communication.
The AC above is correct actually. I am a Marine who has spent most of his time in joint-service environments and I know of those in each service who have gotten waivers for various "disqualifying" issues. You may join if you are gay, but not openly. "Don't ask, don't tell" is still in effect, although perhaps not for long. Asthma is not automatically disqualifying, as the AC mentioned, if it is mild enough that you can still fulfill the physical requirements. Credit issues are looked at on a case-by-case basis, and again as the AC mentioned, there is help available within the military community itself. Yes, poor vision can disqualify you, but it depends on the service you plan to join and the job requirements for the work you will do.
You are absolutely correct in saying that the military has to recruit from a smaller pool than other organizations, but it is not as severe as you make it seem. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience and that you were not given the opportunity to serve our country in the fashion that you desired, but please don't let it cloud your judgement. We work with many civilian contractors as well, and they are paid quite well to work with us and to be the resident experts on various topics.
"The best, most talented" is subjective, of course, but the military is actually producing highly skilled and capable workers in the cyber security field. Most of the budget is not spent on equipment, but on training. There are many servicemen and servicewomen who go through NSA training and work closely with their civilian counterparts. If they decide not to continue a career in the armed forces, they will often make the smooth transition to one of our three-letter civilian intelligence agencies. Of course, there are some who also turn to the corporate market and are paid a pretty penny for their skills and security clearances there.
Also, without divulging anything classified, I can only say that our military HAS to stay on the cutting edge of technologies and skills to maintain our military superiority in this day and age. I am often amazed at our capabilities and they continue to expand every day. The history of computing has been tied to military interests from very early on and the military continues to push the envelope. What better place to learn about emerging technologies than the place that requires them?
The difference is that you are comparing history with prophecy. History, as recorded in the Bible, should generally be accepted literally. Prophecy often has both a literal part and a metaphorical part. If you're interested in examples, just ask.
The children of Adam and Eve intermarried. This includes Cain and Seth, and perhaps Abel before he was murdered. The Bible doesn't specifically mention it, but we can extrapolate it because there were no other humans on the earth at the time besides their parents. I see no problem with this.
I have a question for the evolutionists though. How on earth did sexual reproduction ever evolve? Besides the jokes about recreation versus procreation (grow up), can anyone explain it to me?
A life form that reproduces asexually (as is believed about the simplest, earliest life forms) would have to produce a life form that is capable of reproducing both sexually and asexually. This intermediate step is necessary unless you believe both male and female life forms evolved simultaneously.
So this organism can now reproduce sexually, but it has no mate. So it reproduces asexually again.
Wait a sec, time out.
The only argument that I have heard for the evolution of sexual reproduction says that sexual reproduction came about so that different combinations of genes would made. The genes of the stronger of the resulting organisms would be the genes that survive, while the weaker ones would pass into extinction.
Back to the question.
This organism has only one set of genes because it has nobody with which to reproduce sexually. So it replicates asexually. The sexual organs are useless, so why would they survive for the millions of years necessary for evolution to take the next step and produce a similar organism that has a different set of genes and that can also reproduce sexually?
Please enlighten me, seriously. I'm not just trying to fuel a flame war.
It's well known that Matthew quote-mined the OT and took passages out of context to spin them as prophecies.
Is it? News to me. Would you be kind enough to show me evidence of that?
But don't fool yourself into thinking there is actually any evidence for it.
Pot, meet kettle. Show me your evidence instead of saying "It's people who offer foolish arguments to justify ignoring the facts who I have little patience with" and not giving facts to back it up.
Ebert began by explaining why he felt a game (particularly the shoot-shoot, point-scoring kind) was not an experience equivalent to that of reading a great novel like, say, "The Great Gatsby," because games don't delve very deeply into what it means to be human.
Who says art has to be deep? If my niece draws me a picture of a very lopsided horse, is that not considered art? What if the horse is perfectly proportioned and exquisitely detailed? It still doesn't "delve very deeply into what it means to be human."
I say art is simply an expression of human emotion onto a medium of some sort. Games are definitely an expression of the designers/artists/programmers, intended to communicate "fun".
Since I don't believe in karma anyway, I don't mind losing it for posting an unpopular view: Perhaps this discovery gives credence to the accuracy of the Bible.
The serpent in the Biblical account of Genesis 3 was apparently a very different creature from modern day snakes. Besides the fact that the serpent spoke aloud (Genesis 3:1 - generally accepted to be Satan speaking through the serpent), it must have had some other means of locomotion besides crawling. The curse upon the serpent is recorded in Genesis 3:14 as such:
And the Lord God said unto the serpent, "Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon your belly shall you go, and dust shall you eat all the days of your life."
"Eating dust" is generally accepted to mean that the serpent is cursed to have its face on the ground, not that its diet would actually consist of dirt.
The excellence of your coworkers and boss in particular makes me inclined to say that you should stay.
It is all about the people. Having good people that understand and support you can make a mundane job enjoyable. If you're in good standing with your boss, talk to him/her about expanding your job duties or shifting them in a different direction to make your work more interesting. It's far better to do boring work with great people than great work with a bunch of monkeys and donkeys' rear ends.
"The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence."
begins the day after RotJ ends. Then you have The Courtship of Princess Leia. Plenty of opportunities for good movies in other books too. As mentioned by many others, Zahn's trilogy would be great material. However, my understanding was that Lucas had broken his story into 9 episodes from the very beginning, so his VII - IX would now conflict with the current Star Wars universe. I don't wish to see it fragment the way the Star Trek universe has. Leave it at 6 episodes please.
Exactly. It is highly unlikely that the Linux kernel will ever fully be licensed under the GPL v3. At least, not until all the old code under v2 is replaced by newer code.
The majority of the article, however, is talking about the forking of individual software projects. Some developers might prefer the new license and submit code that is only GPL v3. Some might prefer the old license and continue to use GPL v2. This is where the forking could occur.
The funny thing is that the reason to switch exclusively to the newer license would be to limit freedom. You can continue to license your code under "version 2 or later" of the GPL and that way people can choose whether or not they like the new changes. By using "version 3 or later" instead, you would be forcing people to accept the licensing changes.
I don't want to start a flame war, but this kinda makes the BSD-style license a bit more attractive, eh?;)
Yes, the GPL could be changed in the future this way. No, it wouldn't effectively "sell the rights to close the sources" as you can still choose to use the earlier version of the license. You are not forced into using a later version - it is left as an option.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
Let me give a summary of something I learned while studying cultural anthropology. People in this world, by and large, base their actions on what they value. They base their values on their personal beliefs regarding the questions, "Who am I? Why am I here? Where am I going?".
If you want to change behaviour, you must change the underlying values. To change values, you must change the underlying belief system. Feel free to disprove this theory, but please do so in a constructive manner.:)
This relates to the election this way: People voted according to moral issues because they understand that you have to apply change to the root of the issues if you want the change to last. In general, those that have more experience in life will understand this better, so it is the younger generation that is left confused. Please note that I said "in general" as there are always exceptions.
Therefore, the "shortsightedness of US voters" actually lies in those that look >only to the other issues, and believe that moral issues have nothing to do with the direction our economy takes. Critical thinking is very important, and when taken all the way to its conclusion will always direct you to fight problems at the source, and not worry as much about the symptoms.
Actually, that story is one of the urban legends of the Final Fantasy fanbase. It was once "disproved", by the fact that Squaresoft wasn't actually in any kind of financial trouble at the time. Then again, my sources probably aren't any better than yours. Wikipedia backs up your story at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy, but then again there aren't any sources available.
Yes, after all, we all know that closed architecture hardware will always be cheap and affordable. Who needs choices? Who needs to know that the firmware/BIOS/driver they're using will always be open and available for improvements, even once the vendor is dead and gone? After all, nVidia and ATI are going to be around forever. We all know that. And IF they should ever find themselves out of business, we know that there will be plenty of other closed architecture vendors to step in and pick up the slack. Nobody uses hardware that's more than a couple years old anyway, so we'll just replace our closed, outdated video card with a closed, cutting-edge one when the time comes. Businesses do this all the time. You'll never find old hardware relics running legacy apps that can't be upgraded to WhizBang CoolThing v2.0 (TM). No trouble here officer, just moving along...
Seems that most people here didn't bother to read the article. (Big surprise.)
This is a 2D only card. He would not try to compete with BigBadVideoCardVendor. He knows that development of a competitive 3D card is out of the question for now. But you have to start somewhere.
Unlike an opensource software project, an "opensource" hardware project can't "show me the code" in order to gain legitimacy and gather developer attention. He's looking to see if there is real interest so that he can make a case to his boss. He seems to understand the risks involved, and I hope he can make it work.
If the speed of light changes, what does this mean for using the speed of light as a measuring rod for interstellar distances? Sounds to me like we'd better rethink the size of our universe. Feel free to correct me (as if I need to say that on/.), but if the universe is truly expanding, doesn't that mean the interstellar gasses and debris have also been "thinning"? How can we be sure that this expansion hasn't affected the speed of light?
Because we need a standard way to interface with hardware from the OS, and hardware vendors keep adding and improving features (darn them!).
The BIOS is what allows motherboard manufacturers to have different chipsets with different memory, disk, etc, controllers. The BIOS translates basic data requests from the operating system into the specific instructions that each chip requires.
I'm all for open standards on hardware, but the fact is that every time a new feature is introduced or an old feature is upgraded, you need a backwards compatible method of accessing it. Thus the BIOS layer.
The whole point of a "Basic Input/Output System" is for, well, basic I/O. It was meant to be a thin layer between the OS and the hardware.
While I agree that the technology can be improved upon, I don't think this is the proper direction to take.
I much prefer the route that Gigabyte has taken with their DualBIOS. If there is serious enough trouble with the OS, just boot to a CD with recovery tools on it. If there's a problem in the BIOS, you now have a spare. I don't see the necessity of a TCP/IP stack in the BIOS.
I'd have to argue that tic-tac-toe is actually the beginners level, as it is quite easy to write an unbeatable game.
I do agree that Go is possibly the most complex of traditional games that have been computerized, but I wouldn't exactly call it _the_ Holy Grail. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that any game with a limited amount of moves is theoretically solvable, and Go has a limited amount of moves (although many more than chess).
Chess, like many sports, isn't enjoyable to watch if you don't know what's going on. Sure, you might have a basic understanding of the rules of the game, but if you don't know about strategy, tactics, etc, you won't see the genius behind the moves made. Sometimes you won't "get it" until a few moves later, since most of us can't see as far ahead as Kasparov or Deep Junior.
Don't be so quick to judge something as "trite and dull" unless you're talking about yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
The data is the contents of the transmission. The metadata is the data describing the transmission. So yes, the phone number, date/time, etc, are metadata of the actual communication.
The AC above is correct actually. I am a Marine who has spent most of his time in joint-service environments and I know of those in each service who have gotten waivers for various "disqualifying" issues. You may join if you are gay, but not openly. "Don't ask, don't tell" is still in effect, although perhaps not for long. Asthma is not automatically disqualifying, as the AC mentioned, if it is mild enough that you can still fulfill the physical requirements. Credit issues are looked at on a case-by-case basis, and again as the AC mentioned, there is help available within the military community itself. Yes, poor vision can disqualify you, but it depends on the service you plan to join and the job requirements for the work you will do.
You are absolutely correct in saying that the military has to recruit from a smaller pool than other organizations, but it is not as severe as you make it seem. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience and that you were not given the opportunity to serve our country in the fashion that you desired, but please don't let it cloud your judgement. We work with many civilian contractors as well, and they are paid quite well to work with us and to be the resident experts on various topics.
"The best, most talented" is subjective, of course, but the military is actually producing highly skilled and capable workers in the cyber security field. Most of the budget is not spent on equipment, but on training. There are many servicemen and servicewomen who go through NSA training and work closely with their civilian counterparts. If they decide not to continue a career in the armed forces, they will often make the smooth transition to one of our three-letter civilian intelligence agencies. Of course, there are some who also turn to the corporate market and are paid a pretty penny for their skills and security clearances there.
Also, without divulging anything classified, I can only say that our military HAS to stay on the cutting edge of technologies and skills to maintain our military superiority in this day and age. I am often amazed at our capabilities and they continue to expand every day. The history of computing has been tied to military interests from very early on and the military continues to push the envelope. What better place to learn about emerging technologies than the place that requires them?
Ever see the address for Theo's personal website?
http://www.theos.com/
Was supposedly contrived from "Theo's dot com", but I'm sure he realized that "Theos" is greek for "God."
The difference is that you are comparing history with prophecy. History, as recorded in the Bible, should generally be accepted literally. Prophecy often has both a literal part and a metaphorical part. If you're interested in examples, just ask.
The children of Adam and Eve intermarried. This includes Cain and Seth, and perhaps Abel before he was murdered. The Bible doesn't specifically mention it, but we can extrapolate it because there were no other humans on the earth at the time besides their parents. I see no problem with this.
I have a question for the evolutionists though. How on earth did sexual reproduction ever evolve? Besides the jokes about recreation versus procreation (grow up), can anyone explain it to me?
A life form that reproduces asexually (as is believed about the simplest, earliest life forms) would have to produce a life form that is capable of reproducing both sexually and asexually. This intermediate step is necessary unless you believe both male and female life forms evolved simultaneously.
So this organism can now reproduce sexually, but it has no mate. So it reproduces asexually again.
Wait a sec, time out.
The only argument that I have heard for the evolution of sexual reproduction says that sexual reproduction came about so that different combinations of genes would made. The genes of the stronger of the resulting organisms would be the genes that survive, while the weaker ones would pass into extinction.
Back to the question.
This organism has only one set of genes because it has nobody with which to reproduce sexually. So it replicates asexually. The sexual organs are useless, so why would they survive for the millions of years necessary for evolution to take the next step and produce a similar organism that has a different set of genes and that can also reproduce sexually?
Please enlighten me, seriously. I'm not just trying to fuel a flame war.
It's well known that Matthew quote-mined the OT and took passages out of context to spin them as prophecies.
Is it? News to me. Would you be kind enough to show me evidence of that?
But don't fool yourself into thinking there is actually any evidence for it.
Pot, meet kettle. Show me your evidence instead of saying "It's people who offer foolish arguments to justify ignoring the facts who I have little patience with" and not giving facts to back it up.
From the article:
Ebert began by explaining why he felt a game (particularly the shoot-shoot, point-scoring kind) was not an experience equivalent to that of reading a great novel like, say, "The Great Gatsby," because games don't delve very deeply into what it means to be human.
Who says art has to be deep? If my niece draws me a picture of a very lopsided horse, is that not considered art? What if the horse is perfectly proportioned and exquisitely detailed? It still doesn't "delve very deeply into what it means to be human."
I say art is simply an expression of human emotion onto a medium of some sort. Games are definitely an expression of the designers/artists/programmers, intended to communicate "fun".
but since this snake couldn't actually walk
Exactly. The serpent could no longer walk after it was cursed.
I should qualify "generally accepted" as meaning "generally accepted by Christians that hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible."
Since I don't believe in karma anyway, I don't mind losing it for posting an unpopular view: Perhaps this discovery gives credence to the accuracy of the Bible.
:)
The serpent in the Biblical account of Genesis 3 was apparently a very different creature from modern day snakes. Besides the fact that the serpent spoke aloud (Genesis 3:1 - generally accepted to be Satan speaking through the serpent), it must have had some other means of locomotion besides crawling. The curse upon the serpent is recorded in Genesis 3:14 as such:
And the Lord God said unto the serpent, "Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon your belly shall you go, and dust shall you eat all the days of your life."
"Eating dust" is generally accepted to mean that the serpent is cursed to have its face on the ground, not that its diet would actually consist of dirt.
Go ahead, mod me down and flame me.
-azmaveth
The excellence of your coworkers and boss in particular makes me inclined to say that you should stay.
It is all about the people. Having good people that understand and support you can make a mundane job enjoyable. If you're in good standing with your boss, talk to him/her about expanding your job duties or shifting them in a different direction to make your work more interesting. It's far better to do boring work with great people than great work with a bunch of monkeys and donkeys' rear ends.
"The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence."
begins the day after RotJ ends. Then you have The Courtship of Princess Leia. Plenty of opportunities for good movies in other books too. As mentioned by many others, Zahn's trilogy would be great material. However, my understanding was that Lucas had broken his story into 9 episodes from the very beginning, so his VII - IX would now conflict with the current Star Wars universe. I don't wish to see it fragment the way the Star Trek universe has. Leave it at 6 episodes please.
Exactly. It is highly unlikely that the Linux kernel will ever fully be licensed under the GPL v3. At least, not until all the old code under v2 is replaced by newer code.
;)
The majority of the article, however, is talking about the forking of individual software projects. Some developers might prefer the new license and submit code that is only GPL v3. Some might prefer the old license and continue to use GPL v2. This is where the forking could occur.
The funny thing is that the reason to switch exclusively to the newer license would be to limit freedom. You can continue to license your code under "version 2 or later" of the GPL and that way people can choose whether or not they like the new changes. By using "version 3 or later" instead, you would be forcing people to accept the licensing changes.
I don't want to start a flame war, but this kinda makes the BSD-style license a bit more attractive, eh?
Yes, the GPL could be changed in the future this way. No, it wouldn't effectively "sell the rights to close the sources" as you can still choose to use the earlier version of the license. You are not forced into using a later version - it is left as an option.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
Let me give a summary of something I learned while studying cultural anthropology. People in this world, by and large, base their actions on what they value. They base their values on their personal beliefs regarding the questions, "Who am I? Why am I here? Where am I going?".
:)
:P
If you want to change behaviour, you must change the underlying values. To change values, you must change the underlying belief system. Feel free to disprove this theory, but please do so in a constructive manner.
This relates to the election this way: People voted according to moral issues because they understand that you have to apply change to the root of the issues if you want the change to last. In general, those that have more experience in life will understand this better, so it is the younger generation that is left confused. Please note that I said "in general" as there are always exceptions.
Therefore, the "shortsightedness of US voters" actually lies in those that look >only to the other issues, and believe that moral issues have nothing to do with the direction our economy takes. Critical thinking is very important, and when taken all the way to its conclusion will always direct you to fight problems at the source, and not worry as much about the symptoms.
My $0.02, with a +/- 100% margin of error.
Actually, that story is one of the urban legends of the Final Fantasy fanbase. It was once "disproved", by the fact that Squaresoft wasn't actually in any kind of financial trouble at the time. Then again, my sources probably aren't any better than yours. Wikipedia backs up your story at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy, but then again there aren't any sources available.
Yes, after all, we all know that closed architecture hardware will always be cheap and affordable. Who needs choices? Who needs to know that the firmware/BIOS/driver they're using will always be open and available for improvements, even once the vendor is dead and gone? After all, nVidia and ATI are going to be around forever. We all know that. And IF they should ever find themselves out of business, we know that there will be plenty of other closed architecture vendors to step in and pick up the slack. Nobody uses hardware that's more than a couple years old anyway, so we'll just replace our closed, outdated video card with a closed, cutting-edge one when the time comes. Businesses do this all the time. You'll never find old hardware relics running legacy apps that can't be upgraded to WhizBang CoolThing v2.0 (TM). No trouble here officer, just moving along...
Seems that most people here didn't bother to read the article. (Big surprise.)
This is a 2D only card. He would not try to compete with BigBadVideoCardVendor. He knows that development of a competitive 3D card is out of the question for now. But you have to start somewhere.
Unlike an opensource software project, an "opensource" hardware project can't "show me the code" in order to gain legitimacy and gather developer attention. He's looking to see if there is real interest so that he can make a case to his boss. He seems to understand the risks involved, and I hope he can make it work.
If the speed of light changes, what does this mean for using the speed of light as a measuring rod for interstellar distances? Sounds to me like we'd better rethink the size of our universe. Feel free to correct me (as if I need to say that on /.), but if the universe is truly expanding, doesn't that mean the interstellar gasses and debris have also been "thinning"? How can we be sure that this expansion hasn't affected the speed of light?
I am aware of a system atop Haleakala (the 10,000 ft high volcano on the island of Maui) that tracks space debris. Anyone know of others?
-azmaveth
Because we need a standard way to interface with hardware from the OS, and hardware vendors keep adding and improving features (darn them!).
The BIOS is what allows motherboard manufacturers to have different chipsets with different memory, disk, etc, controllers. The BIOS translates basic data requests from the operating system into the specific instructions that each chip requires.
I'm all for open standards on hardware, but the fact is that every time a new feature is introduced or an old feature is upgraded, you need a backwards compatible method of accessing it. Thus the BIOS layer.
My $0.02.
-azmaveth
I agree.
The whole point of a "Basic Input/Output System" is for, well, basic I/O. It was meant to be a thin layer between the OS and the hardware.
While I agree that the technology can be improved upon, I don't think this is the proper direction to take.
I much prefer the route that Gigabyte has taken with their DualBIOS. If there is serious enough trouble with the OS, just boot to a CD with recovery tools on it. If there's a problem in the BIOS, you now have a spare. I don't see the necessity of a TCP/IP stack in the BIOS.
My $0.02.
-azmaveth
I'd have to argue that tic-tac-toe is actually the beginners level, as it is quite easy to write an unbeatable game.
I do agree that Go is possibly the most complex of traditional games that have been computerized, but I wouldn't exactly call it _the_ Holy Grail. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that any game with a limited amount of moves is theoretically solvable, and Go has a limited amount of moves (although many more than chess).
-azmaveth
Chess, like many sports, isn't enjoyable to watch if you don't know what's going on. Sure, you might have a basic understanding of the rules of the game, but if you don't know about strategy, tactics, etc, you won't see the genius behind the moves made. Sometimes you won't "get it" until a few moves later, since most of us can't see as far ahead as Kasparov or Deep Junior.
Don't be so quick to judge something as "trite and dull" unless you're talking about yourself.
-azmaveth