You can never have it all with these guys, its al a carte and they take you to the bank.
I suspect you don't mean à la carte, since that implies that there's a menu that you can pick what you want off. Sounds like that's not what you get with mobile provision in the US (due to your regulatory shambles...)
Lots of insurance companies would beg to differ. It's just that most companies push the long term considerations out to the insurance companies, assuming that this is a reasonable approach as insurance payouts will fix difficulties. This is usually right, especially as it is hard to spot ahead of time which will be the expensive problems to fix.
No, miles-per-hour are exactly the same for an observer moving at relativistic speeds as for a stationary observer. This is not intuitive, but it is true nonetheless. It's just that the stationary observer's miles-per-hour are not the same as the relativistic observer's, which you can regard as being the results of Lorentz contraction on the spatial dimension parallel to the direction of travel and corresponding time dilation so that things still do not look different to those on the inside.
(I think I got that right; long time since I did SR...)
Re:Opposite way of thinking?
on
PHP 5 in Practice
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Which is more important, knowing advanced algorithms and data structures, or knowing the intricate details of a programming language so you can optimize that much more.
Knowing about algorithms and data structures is more important than knowing the detailed specifics of any particular language, since they illustrate more different ways to tackle a problem and seem to be harder to learn (well, for many people). It's also good to know lots of different languages, again because it effectively gives you more tools for your mental box of tricks. After all, you wouldn't want to go round being seen as the person who uses a 12 pound hammer to drive in screws or saw intricate holes in a piece of wood...
If you have 10 years experience in anything in computing, then 90% of what you have learned in that 10 years is out of date or obsolete.
Only if you've been messing about focussing on learning computing as if it is all a series of magic incantations. If you've spent 10 years thinking hard about how things really work while getting that experience, you'll instead be someone who has a wealth of experience that can be applied productively to almost any computing topic. But 10 years of coasting does not count for a hill of beans.
Good luck to the Citizendium guys on managing to get enough editors to get a number of pages to blessed state of even 5% of Wikipedia's estimated 1.6 million (in English).
As a side note, there are some topic that are so controversial that you'll probably never manage to find someone in the field who can give an unbiased summary.
If the patented invention is done with tax dollars it should be considered a "work for hire" [...]
I'd agree, except what about the case where the tax dollars only pay for part of the costs of the creation of the invention? This is going to be the case quite often, since a Full Economic Costing model results in inventions becoming much more costly in practice (since it is vital that the contract for the research include such money as is required to pay for things like the building insurance for the facility where the research is carried out, etc.) If a non-FEC model is followed, you have the case where the government/people must be regarded as only partial owners of the invention by default. What happens in that situation? Are you proposing that the government should be forced to buy out the other owners? Or are you proposing that the government should have to sell out its stake?
Maybe you guys looked like you needed cheering up after having a bunch of articles dumping on the iPhone? (OK, perhaps it would have been better marked as a "Laugh, it's funny"...)
That doesn't work; you can't put arbitrary binary data in an XML file because some characters are forbidden (e.g. U+0000). The standard XML way of dealing with this is to base-64 encode the binary data. On the plus side, this does mean that you don't need to fiddle around with CDATA stuff.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"> <microsoft_word_document encoding="base-64"> [blob of nastiness, err, word document, suitably bloated by the encoding scheme] </microsoft_word_document>
Oh, I would adore getting hold of SMAC2. I fear I'd be in danger of losing several years of sleep if I did, but it would be worth every nervous breakdown coming from it!
But you're advocating a technical solution to a clearly non-technical problem, and that's always going to be difficult/impossible. After all, DRM itself is a technical solution to a non-technical problem, and look how ineffective and offensive it is...
It would make more sense to have no "accept this certificate popup at all" and to create a new "encrypted but not authenticated" icon to replace the lock.
So now you can rest safe in the knowledge that you are either communicating directly with your bank or directly with some scummy phisher? That's such a useful thing to know! (It was said earlier, but it bears repeating: SSL encryption without authentication is useless, and this is because attackers are not always just passive eavesdroppers.)
It's also worth pointing out that the authentication that SSL (and HTTPS) uses by no means guarantees that the other party is who they say they are. Yes, they have a key which was signed by a party which your software vendor trusts...but mistakes can be made an are made.
You're obviously ignorant of many important aspects of how a practical PKI works. Two of the key things that a CA does are to publish a list of certificates that have been withdrawn before their scheduled expiry, and to add a URL to each certificate they issue that describes how software should verify that the certificate is not in the list (it's part of the data in the certificate that can't be changed without invalidating the certificate completely, though I don't remember its name or OID.)
Personally, I don't trust VeriSign.
So remove their certificates from your browser's list of trust roots. (For high-integrity work, we use SSL systems that are founded on PKIs with none of the big CAs trusted; sensible paranoia is a Good Thing sometimes.)
I can recommend using a BSCW to replace sending loads of documents round by email, especially once the documents start to get really large. By just sending around a link to the right place in the BSCW server's document hierarchy, you can let people know where to pick up the document without forcing everyone to deal with it (great for mailing lists!) Other nice features: it can give you a report of who read (or updated) that important file you uploaded, and it can support versioning of documents (useful for where people are working on a document together).
I'm sure other similar (or more capable) systems exist too; maybe even OSS collaboration servers, but I'm not sure of any that are of sufficient quality to really enhance a collaboration the way that the best non-open tools do. I'd be interested to find out that I'm missing out on something good though.:-)
Note that it is only in English that the measure of distance is spelt "metre". Other languages (e.g. German, French) use "meter" for it (Italian and Spanish use "metro" for both). I have no idea why this letter switch happened in English.
Slashdot Mirror
No, miles-per-hour are exactly the same for an observer moving at relativistic speeds as for a stationary observer. This is not intuitive, but it is true nonetheless. It's just that the stationary observer's miles-per-hour are not the same as the relativistic observer's, which you can regard as being the results of Lorentz contraction on the spatial dimension parallel to the direction of travel and corresponding time dilation so that things still do not look different to those on the inside.
(I think I got that right; long time since I did SR...)
Is it going to be guarded by sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads?
(Gotta watch out for those Norveegians and their doomsday lairs!)
Only if you've been messing about focussing on learning computing as if it is all a series of magic incantations. If you've spent 10 years thinking hard about how things really work while getting that experience, you'll instead be someone who has a wealth of experience that can be applied productively to almost any computing topic. But 10 years of coasting does not count for a hill of beans.
Good luck to the Citizendium guys on managing to get enough editors to get a number of pages to blessed state of even 5% of Wikipedia's estimated 1.6 million (in English).
As a side note, there are some topic that are so controversial that you'll probably never manage to find someone in the field who can give an unbiased summary.
Maybe you guys looked like you needed cheering up after having a bunch of articles dumping on the iPhone? (OK, perhaps it would have been better marked as a "Laugh, it's funny"...)
That doesn't work; you can't put arbitrary binary data in an XML file because some characters are forbidden (e.g. U+0000). The standard XML way of dealing with this is to base-64 encode the binary data. On the plus side, this does mean that you don't need to fiddle around with CDATA stuff.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8">
<microsoft_word_document encoding="base-64">
[blob of nastiness, err, word document, suitably bloated by the encoding scheme]
</microsoft_word_document>
Oh, I would adore getting hold of SMAC2. I fear I'd be in danger of losing several years of sleep if I did, but it would be worth every nervous breakdown coming from it!
But you're advocating a technical solution to a clearly non-technical problem, and that's always going to be difficult/impossible. After all, DRM itself is a technical solution to a non-technical problem, and look how ineffective and offensive it is...
Somebody modded the parent as Informative, even with the rutabaga.
Sir (or madam), you are one sneaky twisted soul with a subtle and disfunctional sense of humor. I salute you!
My GUI MUA automatically detects URLs and makes them clickable anyway, even in plain text.
I can recommend using a BSCW to replace sending loads of documents round by email, especially once the documents start to get really large. By just sending around a link to the right place in the BSCW server's document hierarchy, you can let people know where to pick up the document without forcing everyone to deal with it (great for mailing lists!) Other nice features: it can give you a report of who read (or updated) that important file you uploaded, and it can support versioning of documents (useful for where people are working on a document together).
:-)
I'm sure other similar (or more capable) systems exist too; maybe even OSS collaboration servers, but I'm not sure of any that are of sufficient quality to really enhance a collaboration the way that the best non-open tools do. I'd be interested to find out that I'm missing out on something good though.
Note that it is only in English that the measure of distance is spelt "metre". Other languages (e.g. German, French) use "meter" for it (Italian and Spanish use "metro" for both). I have no idea why this letter switch happened in English.
Hmm... "Cheese don't belong in hot dogs, and neither does Al Gore (except in Nebraska)"? That could work.
That's what Australia is for.
That's (part of) why Quantum Gravity is a hard and unsolved problem...