Recent research strongly suggests that homosexuality is caused by damage that occurs before birth. The mechanism is unknown, but the mother's immune system is suspected.
I'm sure that pisses off both sides.:-)
Being an injury, it can't be a moral failure or choice. It also can't be normal, natural, or good. (well, not any more than any other injury to the unborn) Perhaps we can enlist the March of Dimes in the fight against this birth defect.
Many people are not satisfied unless they are better off than those around them. It is not enough to have all the toys that other people have, even if everyone has lots of toys. These people want to be better than their neighbors.
This explains much of the cruelty and waste.
Especially in men, it is explained by an evolution-driven need to be the most impressive. Status requires conspicuous consumption.
To split, there would need to be isolation between two groups. Even then a split is unlikely unless the conditions are different and at least one of the populations gets really small.
How it could happen: we manage to get a self-sustaining Mars colony, then we lose contact as Earth goes through World War III.
GM means weird changes. (good ones, if you trust the corporation...)
Cloning means NO changes.
But as you say, there are other issues: grass-fed (yummy) or corn-fed (gaaa... all my food tastes like corn, from salmon to soda!), free-range (lean) or feedlot (greasy), etc. BTW, you can buy nice beef and unusual meat over the net. It's shipped in dry ice.
We need to go beyond cloning. The solution is a matter replicator.
On your monitor, you can't possibly distinguish between C0 Y0 M0 K100 and C100 Y0 M0 K100. Thus, painting in CMYK is a total mess. I mean geez, it's like trying to paint RGB on a greyscale display. Actually it's worse, because human eyes can't tell the difference unless you picked a crummy blackpoint that allows for blacker-than-black nonsense. On paper, I might sometimes be able to tell the difference, but there is no need to worry because a proper RGB-to-CMYK output driver will use extra non-black colors according to the settings. (those settings being: save or waste ink, long or short drying time, speckle reduction or not, moire-related stuff, etc.)
Your "using your monitor's colour profile" comment is missing something critical. You need your press or printer profile too, for the CMYK. You need YOUR SPECIFIC press or printer profile, including inks and paper. After you are done, your work is tied to that specific process. You can't change your mind, deciding later to use a different process. Running your job on a different output device will give you mismatched colors.
The GIMP just needs to get away from 8-bit channels and confused gamma handling, both of which are REAL problems that you seem unaware of.
For prepress work, the GIMP's real limitations are:
1. only 8-bit channels 2. most code is ignorant of gamma
CMYK as an editing format is normally very wrong. If you use spot colors, then maybe WITH DEVICE PROFILES it is reasonable to do some work using the color channels individually. Don't ever get the idea of painting in CMYK, which is as defective as saving your temporary work files in highly-compressed JPEG.
The other thing you need for prepress work is a proper RGB-to-CMYK output conversion. This is specific to your press, ink, paper, and other conditions. You should expect your vendors to provide you with a decent conversion. For an excellent conversion, you will need to measure the expected press/ink/paper setup yourself.
Note: if you worked in CMYK, you'd need a CMYK-to-CMYK conversion! Your press output will vary based on the ink and paper you use. It may vary with other factors, such as the humidity at which you stored the paper. So don't imagine that CMYK would let you get away without conversion. It just makes things worse.
It's really the 8-bit channels and gamma fuckups that make the GIMP unacceptable, but you made things much worse by falling for the CMYK myth.
CYMK is a device-specific color space. Normally, it should be produced by your printer driver. You certainly don't have a CYMK monitor for editing. CYMK is also ambiguous; there are multiple ways to represent a color. There are two legit ways to deal with CYMK:
Method one is RGB. Don't whine about the gamut, because there is wide-gamut RGB. Probably the nicest way to deal with this is an RGB consisting of the sRGB primaries as linear floating-point values. Things that would normally be out-of-gamut for sRGB can be represented by numbers outside of the normal 0 to 1 range. For normal editing, this method is superior.
Method two is spot colors. You edit the color channels individually. You see them in greyscale unless you supply a profile for CMYK-to-RBG conversion. Editing tools know nothing of the color; they ONLY operate on individual channels. This method is normally lame, but it does let you use weird stuff like a gold-green sparkly ink for your money-making operations.
Context matters of course. At an extreme, I could say IQ is a function of air. Without air, your IQ goes to zero.:-) In any given environment, some people will do better than others. Environmental effects that affect everybody are rather uninteresting.
We currently have a sort of "absolute IQ". It's rather hard to formulate a "relative IQ" which takes into account the environment, being thus based entirely on genetics. Perhaps we will someday create this, scoring people based on statistical analysis of their DNA.
It's sour grapes, political correctness, and anti-science. We damn well do know that people with high IQ are usually more successful than those with low IQ. This is especially true if you compare an IQ 80 person to an IQ 115 person. (rather than 140 and 170, where social problems can make things interesting)
IQ is unpopular because it is mostly in-born, inheritable, and unevenly distributed. There is a sort of unfairness that goes against Western ideals. The idea that anybody can pull themself up out of poverty, that every child has a chance to succeed intellectually, is threatened by this. Part of the reaction is to deny IQ, and part of the reaction is to de-emphasize scientific endeavors and thinking.
Funny, we have no problem with the advantages which athletic and beautiful people have. These are somewhat related to IQ though, via general health, helping us to remain in denial of IQ.
Only signed drivers can install, but I can add my own keys.
Perhaps like this:
1. copy a file with the key into a specific directory 2. press alt-ctrl-del 3. select "prepare key for installation" 4. enter password 5. key is moved to a protected directory 6. you verify that you want the key 7. reboot, then press alt-ctrl-k early in the boot 8. enter your password, select the kay, and confirm that it is the one you want
That will do. A business can install their own keys. An anti-virus program could ask you to install a key, but couldn't perform the operation itself. (probably the key install would be considered to difficult, which is good) There could even be a key granted to experimental and malware use, just in case you want to install signed malware drivers. You could make your own key.
misleading "1/2 divorce" stat
on
IT and Divorce?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Some people fail at 2, 3, or more marriages. They drive up the numbers.
The chance of any 1 person being divorce-free is much better than 50%.
Tip: divorce runs in families. Be wary of this when you choose.
I was primarily thinking of BSD systems. These systems combine "soft updates" or weak journalling with a low-quality fsck program.
With ext3, you get a high-quality fsck and 3 different journalling choices. (4 choices if you count ext2) By default you get the mid-level journalling option. You can enable full data journalling if you wish; this is usually slower but can be the fastest for fsync-heavy workloads like email servers.
When you say "solaris", my first thought is "hardware that isn't remotely similar to a $400 PC". That counts for a lot. You probably get better UPS hardware too.
In any case, it's a minor difference. The ufs/ufs2 structure is very similar to the ext2/ext3 structure, and moderately similar to the ext4 structure. The main differences are fsck quality and log/journal/ordering behavior. All these filesystems have a fairly simple and static layout.
The forced fsck is because hardware and unrelated software can make errors. (failing disk, bad RAM, loose cable, buggy controller, an unrelated buggy driver like audio, electrical noise from the power supply, overheating CPU, a cosmic ray, an alpha particle emmission...)
If you totally trust the journal, eventually your filesystem will be trashed.
Very few filesystems are more durable than ext3. We will expect the same of ext4. Of the non-journalling filesystems, ext2 was relatively durable. This is a design team that knows their shit.
Much less durable: reiserfs, reiser4, jfs, xfs, hfsplus, ntfs Slightly less durable: ufs, ufs2 Possibly more durable: zfs
With ext2/ext3/ext4 you get data structures in fixed locations on the disk. This makes them much harder to trash. With most filesystems, the loss of a single critical bit (in a pointer to the root of a tree) will wipe out the whole filesystem. The odd beast here is zfs, using replication to protect an otherwise-fragile tree structure.
Normally I will have a dozen Firefox windows (each with a dozen tabs, so don't bother suggesting tabs) and three dozen xterms. Often I will also have several PDFs open, a couple spreadsheets, and an image editor.
So, how usable is your taskbar with 60 apps running?
You're not going to get the details, obviously. That would certainly be a classified investigation. I'm sure the people who tracked this back to China would love to tell you how.
To bomb Iraq/Afganistan, we sometimes fly an around-the-world trip from the base in the US. The flight is about 46 hours, with one stop for a crew change at an island in the Indian Ocean.
Hacking novels are designed to have fascinating twists. Life isn't a hacking novel.
500 is not workable. Anybody who has ever used a connection through several computers will laugh at this. Even 50 is too painful to contemplate. Heck, a mere 5 hops is usually VERY miserable. (No, not like traceroute. You ssh from one box to the next, then to the next... and find that the damn connection sucks so bad that you say "screw it" and give up.)
People don't cover their tracks as well as they think they do. People get lax, lazy, rushed, frustrated, careless...
For those in the know, discovering that rootkit isn't all that hard. At the very least, it is possible to tell that something is amiss. Timing data is damn hard to fake.
More importantly, these people have LITTLE REASON TO CARE. The government openly admits to such activities. The government supports these people. At worst it might look mildly bad on a salary review if word got back to your boss that the enemy noticed. Getting the info is more important than such concerns. Getting lots of good info probably earns a promotion, even if there are a few exposures.
Chairman Mao died. The moment he did, the Chinese began switching to a relatively free-market economy and getting back the educated middle class. It's taken some time of course, but they did it.
A worker needs access to some sort of database. They also need email.
That could be two computers on their desk, connected to two separate networks, with separate user accounts and so on. Besides the hardware expense, there would be no ability to do a cut-and-paste between the two. The worker would be constantly reading stuff from one computer to type into the adjacent computer. This would be horribly wasteful.
Slashdot Mirror
Recent research strongly suggests that homosexuality is caused by damage that occurs before birth. The mechanism is unknown, but the mother's immune system is suspected.
:-)
I'm sure that pisses off both sides.
Being an injury, it can't be a moral failure or choice. It also can't be normal, natural, or good. (well, not any more than any other injury to the unborn) Perhaps we can enlist the March of Dimes in the fight against this birth defect.
Many people are not satisfied unless they are better off than those around them. It is not enough to have all the toys that other people have, even if everyone has lots of toys. These people want to be better than their neighbors.
This explains much of the cruelty and waste.
Especially in men, it is explained by an evolution-driven need to be the most impressive. Status requires conspicuous consumption.
To split, there would need to be isolation between two groups. Even then a split is unlikely unless the conditions are different and at least one of the populations gets really small.
How it could happen: we manage to get a self-sustaining Mars colony, then we lose contact as Earth goes through World War III.
GM means weird changes. (good ones, if you trust the corporation...)
Cloning means NO changes.
But as you say, there are other issues: grass-fed (yummy) or corn-fed (gaaa... all my food tastes like corn, from salmon to soda!), free-range (lean) or feedlot (greasy), etc. BTW, you can buy nice beef and unusual meat over the net. It's shipped in dry ice.
We need to go beyond cloning. The solution is a matter replicator.
On your monitor, you can't possibly distinguish between C0 Y0 M0 K100 and C100 Y0 M0 K100. Thus, painting in CMYK is a total mess. I mean geez, it's like trying to paint RGB on a greyscale display. Actually it's worse, because human eyes can't tell the difference unless you picked a crummy blackpoint that allows for blacker-than-black nonsense. On paper, I might sometimes be able to tell the difference, but there is no need to worry because a proper RGB-to-CMYK output driver will use extra non-black colors according to the settings. (those settings being: save or waste ink, long or short drying time, speckle reduction or not, moire-related stuff, etc.)
Your "using your monitor's colour profile" comment is missing something critical. You need your press or printer profile too, for the CMYK. You need YOUR SPECIFIC press or printer profile, including inks and paper. After you are done, your work is tied to that specific process. You can't change your mind, deciding later to use a different process. Running your job on a different output device will give you mismatched colors.
The GIMP just needs to get away from 8-bit channels and confused gamma handling, both of which are REAL problems that you seem unaware of.
For prepress work, the GIMP's real limitations are:
1. only 8-bit channels
2. most code is ignorant of gamma
CMYK as an editing format is normally very wrong. If you use spot colors, then maybe WITH DEVICE PROFILES it is reasonable to do some work using the color channels individually. Don't ever get the idea of painting in CMYK, which is as defective as saving your temporary work files in highly-compressed JPEG.
The other thing you need for prepress work is a proper RGB-to-CMYK output conversion. This is specific to your press, ink, paper, and other conditions. You should expect your vendors to provide you with a decent conversion. For an excellent conversion, you will need to measure the expected press/ink/paper setup yourself.
Note: if you worked in CMYK, you'd need a CMYK-to-CMYK conversion! Your press output will vary based on the ink and paper you use. It may vary with other factors, such as the humidity at which you stored the paper. So don't imagine that CMYK would let you get away without conversion. It just makes things worse.
It's really the 8-bit channels and gamma fuckups that make the GIMP unacceptable, but you made things much worse by falling for the CMYK myth.
CYMK is a device-specific color space. Normally, it should be produced by your printer driver. You certainly don't have a CYMK monitor for editing. CYMK is also ambiguous; there are multiple ways to represent a color. There are two legit ways to deal with CYMK:
Method one is RGB. Don't whine about the gamut, because there is wide-gamut RGB. Probably the nicest way to deal with this is an RGB consisting of the sRGB primaries as linear floating-point values. Things that would normally be out-of-gamut for sRGB can be represented by numbers outside of the normal 0 to 1 range. For normal editing, this method is superior.
Method two is spot colors. You edit the color channels individually. You see them in greyscale unless you supply a profile for CMYK-to-RBG conversion. Editing tools know nothing of the color; they ONLY operate on individual channels. This method is normally lame, but it does let you use weird stuff like a gold-green sparkly ink for your money-making operations.
the word "mostly"
:-) In any given environment, some people will do better than others. Environmental effects that affect everybody are rather uninteresting.
Context matters of course. At an extreme, I could say IQ is a function of air. Without air, your IQ goes to zero.
We currently have a sort of "absolute IQ". It's rather hard to formulate a "relative IQ" which takes into account the environment, being thus based entirely on genetics. Perhaps we will someday create this, scoring people based on statistical analysis of their DNA.
Even if not, the comment is idiotic.
It's sour grapes, political correctness, and anti-science. We damn well do know that people with high IQ are usually more successful than those with low IQ. This is especially true if you compare an IQ 80 person to an IQ 115 person. (rather than 140 and 170, where social problems can make things interesting)
IQ is unpopular because it is mostly in-born, inheritable, and unevenly distributed. There is a sort of unfairness that goes against Western ideals. The idea that anybody can pull themself up out of poverty, that every child has a chance to succeed intellectually, is threatened by this. Part of the reaction is to deny IQ, and part of the reaction is to de-emphasize scientific endeavors and thinking.
Funny, we have no problem with the advantages which athletic and beautiful people have. These are somewhat related to IQ though, via general health, helping us to remain in denial of IQ.
It's set with 100 being the average IN SOME PARTICULAR YEAR.
Yuck, if you want to compare somebody against the average. It's nice though if you want to see how the population is changing.
I'm fairly sure this is:
1. futexes (locking for app code) with priority inheritance
2. high-resolution timers
God damn PDF pop-up shit! Everything should always display within the browser without exception ever.
(well, everything except the goatse.cx guy, which I don't want displayed in my browser -- though it's not really a pop-up thing either)
Only signed drivers can install, but I can add my own keys.
Perhaps like this:
1. copy a file with the key into a specific directory
2. press alt-ctrl-del
3. select "prepare key for installation"
4. enter password
5. key is moved to a protected directory
6. you verify that you want the key
7. reboot, then press alt-ctrl-k early in the boot
8. enter your password, select the kay, and confirm that it is the one you want
That will do. A business can install their own keys. An anti-virus program could ask you to install a key, but couldn't perform the operation itself. (probably the key install would be considered to difficult, which is good) There could even be a key granted to experimental and malware use, just in case you want to install signed malware drivers. You could make your own key.
Some people fail at 2, 3, or more marriages. They drive up the numbers.
The chance of any 1 person being divorce-free is much better than 50%.
Tip: divorce runs in families. Be wary of this when you choose.
I was primarily thinking of BSD systems. These systems combine "soft updates" or weak journalling with a low-quality fsck program.
With ext3, you get a high-quality fsck and 3 different journalling choices. (4 choices if you count ext2) By default you get the mid-level journalling option. You can enable full data journalling if you wish; this is usually slower but can be the fastest for fsync-heavy workloads like email servers.
When you say "solaris", my first thought is "hardware that isn't remotely similar to a $400 PC". That counts for a lot. You probably get better UPS hardware too.
In any case, it's a minor difference. The ufs/ufs2 structure is very similar to the ext2/ext3 structure, and moderately similar to the ext4 structure. The main differences are fsck quality and log/journal/ordering behavior. All these filesystems have a fairly simple and static layout.
The forced fsck is because hardware and unrelated software can make errors. (failing disk, bad RAM, loose cable, buggy controller, an unrelated buggy driver like audio, electrical noise from the power supply, overheating CPU, a cosmic ray, an alpha particle emmission...)
If you totally trust the journal, eventually your filesystem will be trashed.
Very few filesystems are more durable than ext3. We will expect the same of ext4. Of the non-journalling filesystems, ext2 was relatively durable. This is a design team that knows their shit.
Much less durable: reiserfs, reiser4, jfs, xfs, hfsplus, ntfs
Slightly less durable: ufs, ufs2
Possibly more durable: zfs
With ext2/ext3/ext4 you get data structures in fixed locations on the disk. This makes them much harder to trash. With most filesystems, the loss of a single critical bit (in a pointer to the root of a tree) will wipe out the whole filesystem. The odd beast here is zfs, using replication to protect an otherwise-fragile tree structure.
Normally I will have a dozen Firefox windows (each with a dozen tabs, so don't bother suggesting tabs) and three dozen xterms. Often I will also have several PDFs open, a couple spreadsheets, and an image editor.
So, how usable is your taskbar with 60 apps running?
You're not going to get the details, obviously. That would certainly be a classified investigation. I'm sure the people who tracked this back to China would love to tell you how.
We have bombers.
:-)
To bomb Iraq/Afganistan, we sometimes fly an around-the-world trip from the base in the US. The flight is about 46 hours, with one stop for a crew change at an island in the Indian Ocean.
I think we can reach North Korea.
Hacking novels are designed to have fascinating twists. Life isn't a hacking novel.
500 is not workable. Anybody who has ever used a connection through several computers will laugh at this. Even 50 is too painful to contemplate. Heck, a mere 5 hops is usually VERY miserable. (No, not like traceroute. You ssh from one box to the next, then to the next... and find that the damn connection sucks so bad that you say "screw it" and give up.)
People don't cover their tracks as well as they think they do. People get lax, lazy, rushed, frustrated, careless...
For those in the know, discovering that rootkit isn't all that hard. At the very least, it is possible to tell that something is amiss. Timing data is damn hard to fake.
More importantly, these people have LITTLE REASON TO CARE. The government openly admits to such activities. The government supports these people. At worst it might look mildly bad on a salary review if word got back to your boss that the enemy noticed. Getting the info is more important than such concerns. Getting lots of good info probably earns a promotion, even if there are a few exposures.
I'm sure China does "actually hire hackers to do it right so that this is going to be hard to trace and hard to counterhack."
We don't catch those people, generally, though they will have a bad day every now and then.
Primarily, we catch the lamers. (the lamers probably still get paid standard army wages, so they won't mind much)
One should wonder: for every lamer we catch, how many non-lamers go uncaught?
CO2 for soda comes from coal plants.
Chairman Mao died. The moment he did, the Chinese began switching to a relatively free-market economy and getting back the educated middle class. It's taken some time of course, but they did it.
A worker needs access to some sort of database. They also need email.
That could be two computers on their desk, connected to two separate networks, with separate user accounts and so on. Besides the hardware expense, there would be no ability to do a cut-and-paste between the two. The worker would be constantly reading stuff from one computer to type into the adjacent computer. This would be horribly wasteful.