The much of that I was referring to included the stupid shit like pyramids of naked prisoners and the laughing and pointing at genitalia and the like. If you think anyone higher in the chain of command told those little punkasses to do that, you're wrong.
As far as other things go, my opinions:
Sodomizing: Abuse. Those caught doing this should spend a lifetime in Leavenworth. Of course, U.S. prison guards supposedly do this all the time, but you don't see much outcry here.
Threaten with dogs: Not abuse. Actually letting dogs bite: abuse. (Note: Threatening and actual use of dogs is performed by K9 street cops in the United States on a daily basis. I don't hear anyone complaining.)
Beat with blunt objects: Abuse. (Done by street cops on a daily basis, usually there is only outcry if the recipient of the beating is black or hispanic, whether it was justified or not.)
Hook electrodes and threaten electrocution: Not abuse. Actually electrocuting: Abuse.
Threatening with a gun: Not abuse. (This is also done by street cops on a daily basis, just not back at the station. Where's the outrage?) Pulling the trigger? Abuse.
What, is that new? That already follows from the fact that there are only N possible hashes, and M possible messages, and NM. In other words, if you have an 8-bit hash (256 values) for a, say, 1K message, then you must get a lot of collisions.
Thank you for addressing this early in the postings. I was about to go insane when I read that in the story post.
Come on, it's the basic Pigeonhole Principle. Computers Science students should have learned this in Discrete Mathematics. If you didn't, it says this: If you've got 10 holes and 11 pigeons in them, then one hole has two pigeons.
If it takes only three days or so to find a collision, what does that mean practically? Almost nothing. Because the collision that you would find is most likely meaningless. The modification that you'd like to apply to the message (while sticking with the same, given hash) is likely to be something very specific, for example, change $1000 to $10.000. And that, unfortunately, is not easy. This vulnerability can't be easily exploited at this point.
Precisely. Really, it doesn't matter if it is easy to find a message with the same hash, if the new message is obviously incorrect or unintelligible.
What I don't understand is why nobody has simply suggested using two distict hashes in any particular application. Say, MD5 and SHA-1 together. The ability to find a collision in a few days for either one may exist, but finding a message that causes a collision for both should be very hard.
I am fairly certain that most states have some kind of "Good Samaritan" law that requires you to help
I wouldn't be so sure about that. When speaking of a "Good Samaritan" law in the U.S., you are talking about a law that says that if you try and put the fire out, you can't be sued by him/her or his/her relatives for failure to prevent burns or death of said burning person.
Before such laws were enacted, it was commonplace for a person trying to be a "Good Samaritan" to be sued for failing to help in a way that the victim or victim's family thought was proper. For example, if you performed CPR on someone and accidentally broke a rib while doing chest compressions, you could expect a lawsuit from victim (if he recovered) for breaking his rib, or the family (if he died) for potentially being the final cause of death for performing improper CPR.
Either way, this society is litigious enough that most people would pretend to have not noticed a burning person and not heard the screams, or the most they would do to "help" is to yell "STOP DROP AND ROLL!" at the person on fire.
On the Kerry thing, to call him a war criminal is equally an indictment of most everyone who was serving in Vietnam at that point.
Problem is, I know many 'Nam vets, including my father-in-law, that *never* saw or participated in any atrocities.
If you want to place responsability, it should go to the highest ranking officer aware of such actions at the time
Absolutely, but that doesn't let other people off the hook, necessarily. Of course, circumstance would have to be examined.
You may have served in the Army, but I'll wager it wasn't during a period that ugly.
True. However, we were instructed on what constituted "lawful orders", and the correct procedure for dealing with unlawful orders. ..
"What orders to question," shit, no offence man, but I know 'Nam vets who would come unglued just hearing you say those words.
. ..You question orders *after* you have carried them out (shoot first, ask questions later). Waiting until after the war when it's advantageous to your blossoming political career is unacceptable. Of course, this may be the reason that the chain of command has an open door policy in modern times, it may have been difficult to find the right person, but there are always letters to congress.
Also, our current actions aren't exactly spotless either.
No, they aren't. But if you are specifically thinking about prison abuse, consider this: a lot of what has happened looks a lot like all of the other stupid shit that low-ranking soldiers tend to engage in, combat-related or otherwise. I've seen similar "abuse" committed by soldiers in a drunken barracks party... committed against their own. For instance, one time a guy came to formation with *all* of the hair on his body shaved off (scalp, eyebrows, pubic hair, eyelashes, you get the idea)... he wouldn't say who did it, of course, but it wasn't just anybody. Polaroid photos of passed-out or sleeping soldiers being subject to... certain embarrassments. Anything you can think of that goes on in dorms or fraternities goes on among common soldiers. Much of the "abuse" reports coming from Abu Graib (I believe that I misspelled that... too lazy to check) isn't beyond this. 18-25 year olds do stupid shit.
I'm not trying to make excuses for their actions, but in many of the cases, the likelyhood of them being "ordered" by higher-ups to do that crap is a lot lower than the media would have you believe.
I.... ah whats the use, like I'm gonna suddenly convince you to forsake the Republican party when I can barely get behind the Dems anymore...
Probably not, but you might not understand my political views. As a result of these views, I'm doing my best as an active member of the party organization to change some things about the party.
Bush is a jackass - personal opinion based on countless actions
Agreed, but he's our jackass, unfortunately. I did *not* vote for him in the primaries, and probably wouldn't have if someone better and from our organization had ran against him in the last round. If we had approval voting in the general, I also would have approved Badnarik.
Kerry is SLIGHTLY less of a jackass - although, calling him a war criminal is purely uncalled for. I believe it was decorate war HERO, who went on to (GASP!) protest the war.
I disagree. As much of a jackass. War criminal? Yes. The reason I say this is if he personally witnessed, took part in, or became aware soon after the commission of the atrocities he spoke of, and did nothing during the time, then he was a de facto accomplice at the time of commission. I was in the Army. I know right from wrong, and knew what orders to question. He had a responsibility to notify someone immediately. He never claimed to have done anything about it at the time. He could have tried writing his Senator...
Oregon politics ARE a little fucked - have you been anywhere else? We ain't got the market cornered!
No, but we offer one of the best products in the business!
But back on topic, I'd just LOVE to see them try to get me to accept one of these in my truck! Mudflaps - gone, Cat-converter - gone, large-quantities-of-sheet-metal - gone, oh but lemme put that gps thingamajimmer on here! Lets see how it handles the next swamp I drive through!
Sounds like my 1970 Mustang (351W). Except I have all my sheet metal and don't need the mudflaps. If it gets a GPS, it'll be for theft prevention, not for being taxed.
Just so no one panics, this isn't a daily driver, its a low-road-mileage toy.
Same with my Mustang. My daily driver gets 30+ MPG and has all the latest and greatest efficiency-robbing emissions controls.
(Note to casual readers: Yes, certain emission controls that don't improve the efficiency of fuel combustion tend to hurt efficiency overall [EGR for reduction of NOx emissions]. I don't want to pollute the planet, I just want the car to go uphill without losing speed or drinking excess fuel.)
One could argue that does Bush's drinking doesn't deserve to be brought up, either.
The "does" does not need to be there.
I happen to know a shitload of college students (being one myself) who have gotten DUIs.
Having been involved in politics long enough, I know that unless I state that I HAVE NEVER GOTTEN A DUI, someone will read that sentence as "I happen to be one of a shitload of college students who have gotten DUIs." I repeat: I have never received a DUI, nor have driven drunk.
Furthermore, I really know a shitload of college students who drink, and some of them have gotten DUIs, not most of them. More than too many, however.
I'm just curious how you turned an anti-Bush and anti-political-curruption post into an anti-Kerry post, when the parent didn't even bring up Kerry to begin with?
Exactly as one of the other replies stated.
The story only mentioned California's proposal, and the grandparent post managed to take it and turn it into a rant about Oregon's corrupt government and even further mentioned Bush/Cheney drinking.
Why don't I restate your words, as if you were replying to the grandparent post:
Note the story said nothing about Bush or Cheney, said nothing about government corruption or drinking alcohol, said nothing about the Oregon or federal governments at all, and - in fact - was just mentioning the California proposal. What made you decide to start slinging mud at the President/VP and the Oregon government? Granted, they deserve it, but just as much as any other part of government (and generally all parts of government) deserve it. I'm just curious how you turned an anti-GPS tax and anti-stupidity story into an anti-Bush post, when the story didn't even bring up Bush to begin with?
Let him be. He doesn't deserve to be brought up anymore.
One could argue that does Bush's drinking doesn't deserve to be brought up, either. He maintains that he doesn't drink at all now, (Hey, he recognized his problem and did something about it!), and I happen to know a shitload of college students (being one myself) who have gotten DUIs. I'm not saying excuses should be made for them, but when they've gone through what the system demands of them, and have made an effort to change (and succeeded, perhaps), then it doesn't need to be mentioned, especially when it was decades ago.
This idea came from Oregon, and is entirely wacky.
Yeah, I think my home state of Oregon is f*cked up, too.
Oregon state government has become, in my opinion, very corrupt, so that's where the corrupters try their stupid ideas.
I agree. Including Neil Goldschmidt (it's a good summary, Google for more... try this and this), Oregon's capitol has been occupied by Democrats since Jan 13, 1975. The Secretaries of State have been all Democrats since 1985. The Attorneys General have been all Democracts since 1993. Naturally, heads of many state agencies have also been Democrats.
You're right, they are corrupt, and they have stupid ideas. But they are in power.
Apparently, this has very little to do with "a team at Oregon State University". That's just to give the idea a little credibility. If I remember correctly, the people behind it want to sell the electronics.
OSU was directed to perform a feasability study on behalf of a state government controlled by the above people.
The president is a not-too-smart...
I won't comment on the rest of what you say about President Bush, but you and all the other Bush-haters' thinking that he's "not-too-smart" is precisely the underestimation that put him in office a second time. He may be simple, but he's not stupid.
Of course, the alternative presented by the party of Oregon's corrupt government was a self-admitted war criminal who (with the exception of some tax policy) basically said everything Bush was saying but that it would be somehow better because he was not Bush.
Let us take, for example, the latitude 36 degrees, 1 minute, 30 seconds. (Assume WGS-84 for the entire post.)
If I convert it to 36.025 degrees, is that a new projection?
If I convert it to 3.6025*10^1, is that a new projection?
If I say it in Spanish, or any other non-English language, is it a new projection?
If I write it thirty-six degrees, one minute, thirty seconds, have I made a new projection?
Now let's define a new unit, call it millidegrees. That is, one thousand millidegree = one degree.
If I write it as 36025 millidegrees, have I made a new projection?
Now let's take that number and write it in hexadecimal, 0x8CB9, is that a new projection?
None of these have made a new projection (or projection onto a plane at all), because we are taking the exact same geographic coordinate (forget about not having expressed a longitude for now, the same argument applies) in DEGREES LATITUDE.
In fact, we are still talking about spherical coordinates, are we not?
Now, let's take one of the above numbers, 36025 millidegrees, and convert that to Microsoft's base 30, and we get 1B0T millidegrees in Microsoft base 30 (the set of digits does not use vowels).
1B0T (base 30) millidegress = 36025 (base 10) millidegrees = 36.025 degrees (which is what Microsoft says the original coordinate is expressed in).
If we take both a latitude and longitude, and convert them into Microsoft's representation, then we have not made a new projection because:
(1) We have not changed the model used. (2) We have not performed a transformation on the coordinates other than changing base. Particularly, we are still dealing with (spherical/ellipsoidal/geoidal) geographic coordinates. (3) We have changed the scale, however, by expressing coordinates in millidegrees instead of degrees.
Since a map projection involves also doing (1) and (2) in addition to (3), which we have not done a projection. In particular, we have written geographic coordinates in degrees as geographic coordinates in millidegrees and then converted the number to base 30. This is not a projection.
Suppose you give me a map, how about the Carbury Creek Quadrangle, Oregon, Provisional Edition 1983. Now, if I cross out the scale in kilometers and draw one in in meters, and then cross out all the numbers on the map and write their base 30 (or hexadecimal, binary, or any other base) equivalents, have I changed the map projection into a new one? No, I haven't. The datum used to produce the map is still the same, and nothing I have done requires that the map be redrawn on its plane of projection. Likewise, the method described in Microsoft's patent has also not created a new projection.
Now, prove to me that they have created a new projection. (Since I have effectively disproven it.)
Essentially they have created their own numbering system to accurately take the place of lat/long numbers, to better suit their needs.
Now if any of you know anything at all about GIS, you realize that really they have just created their own map projection system.
No they haven't made any such projection system. They have merely patented the function round((X+360)*10^N) -> convert to base 30, where X is your coordinate in decimal degrees, and N is your desired level of decimal accuracy. Take both latitude and longitude cooordinates, perform this function, pad the results, and tack them together in string representation, and there you go.
Just remember that 1 in any base is still 1.
It's almost exactly the same as converting 3.2 kilometers -> 3200 meters -> any number base besides 10. It still conveys the same measurement and the same base unit and the same scale. Do the steps in reverse and you are right back where you started.
Now why is MS making this patent?... Because of their upcoming location based information server system which shall revolutionize how you search for information, and how information is targetted at you.
Okay, I could have taken more time to do the post, I'm aware that M$ uses a base-30 that omits the vowels in order to not produce a string like "ASSFUCKT" or something, but it's trivial to use their base-30 symbol set
The corrected string, accounting for compactness, is "1LWT513Z".
Furthermore, it really could be represented as "1IRP513U", because I just did the calculation (after about another 30 seconds) and figured out it only takes DA00 base 30 numbers to represent all possible Earth coordinates to 3 decimals of accuracy.
This patent is shit and it's commonplace to use such encodings to save space or better represent numbers with available characters, or make numbers easier to transmit over a medium. Hexadecimal is an example of the former, base-64 encoding an example of the latter.
I know it's in your blood to hate Microsoft, but least take the time to read the patent! What they are seeking to patent is a METHOD of encoding LAT/LONG in a URL in a better way than is currently employed. I think this patent is incredibly valid.
Okay, so you think that doing the following operations on the coordinate 44.035LAT 136.010LON should be patentable... I'll start with do the latitude:
44.035 * 1000 = 44035 ->(base 30) = 01IRP
Now the latitude:
136.010 * 1000 = 136010 ->(base 30) = 0513U
Now tack them together and you get "01IRP0513U".
Reverse the steps and you get your lat/lon back. Ta dah!
Nice patent. I just used it unlicensed after about 30 seconds of reading a few parts and 30 seconds of performing the steps.
Next thing you know, someone will patent a cosine function that returns results in base 30.
Alcohol 120 does a really nice job in Windows of determining the material of your burnable media. I popped a stock CD-R (office depot) disk into my drive and (the silver backing office depot logo ones) they showed up as phthalocyanine.
So do most of mine, but according to a FAQ I once read, these aren't necessarily the truth for off brands that purchase stamps from other companies. It also says nothing of the composition of the reflective layer, only the dye.
You DID buy the silver/gold alloy phthalocyanine CDs, didn't you?
No, I've not ever ran across them, and it's not like they print the reflective layer and dye compositions on the side of the package. Mine are always green-ish.
First of all, never lie. That can come back to bite you. In this case, if they paniced and misread the log, they might cut off our connection and then send the threatening email. This would be very bad.
Well, depends on what you consider a "great disruption" and whether or not you are willing to go through with #4, but I suppose you're right.
The second issue is that these emails did not only go to shaw.They went to whichever ISP claimed responsibility for the offending IP. Sometimes they sent the complaints back to shaw tryin to pin the error on me. It just doesn't work to threaten to stop dealing with someone who you're not dealing with them to begin with.
Ah, well, that makes a big difference. I take back #3 and #4 completely and would reword that opening paragraph.
I hope you saw the points with #1 and #2, though. I've seen people react to something they didn't quite understand right off the bat with a reaction completely opposite from what you expect.
Actually, people quite often misread new law that way. They skip over a word due to the legalese, and suddenly they think the gov't is crashing down on top of their way of life. In reality, they just overreacted to a misunderstanding of what they were reading.
Ah yes. The good old PRC. In FA school we used these. Ah, and do you remember reading crypto keys from punched tape?.. and sending the newbie to get a PRC-E7 from the first sergeant?:)
ok that was in jest. But seriously, how much good is a field manual going to do you when its possible for handheld computers to encrypt data to such a strong degree that it's theoretically impossible to decrypt with any likelihood of success that's indistinguishable from zero in the lifetime of the universe?
Because voice messages and on-the-fly manual encryption still exist. I've only been out of the U.S. Army for a few years, but we all learned (in my field, anyway) manual coding techniques, because your SINCGARS may be broken, your keys out of date due to inability to receive an update, or you are using a radio that belongs to someone else. You might be a POW that needs a secure way to tap messages to other POWs (encrypted POW tap code). Carrying a computer in some situations can be a bitch.
Other armies are using these techniques as well, and some forces simply don't have access to a computer, but have fine math students working for them.
The point is, we learn these techniques, other forces learn these techniques, and should you run across a message in code that was human-generated on the fly, you might be able to decrypt it in the field.
(Note that I left out details due to respect for my clearance and the I NDA signed with the gov't. Don't ask.)
It's a Mac, you'll pay more than $5 for that option if they ever introduced it. (Kudos to Apple for dropping some of the upgrade prices on the Mac Mini... I ended up recommending it to my dad after they did.)
Now, a boat load of people are going to tell you about SideTrack.
The sheer number of people that are recommending it demonstrates something: There is a demand for multiple-buttons, scrollies, and basically enhanced pointer device functionality on Apple laptops.
To the folks saying "just use ctrl-click"... that's all well and good, until you are dinking around with a game on your laptop, and you really want that second mouse button. Or scroll wheel.
The parent post already expressed my opinion on having to carry around a USB mouse everywhere I go.
I'd also like to have the option of using a nipple for pointing instead of a touchpad because it just feels better to me, but that's another discussion...
I read your automatic complaint, and really, you failed to make it verbose enough. Keep in mind that first-level support (and that is sure to include some lackey who is the one opening the mailbox for abuse@whereever) is a minimum-wage phone/e-mail monkey who's job is to decide who to forward the complaint to (or ignore it in some cases), quite often assisted by an expert system.
Your complaint could have been worded in a much better (although more verbose and nontechnical manner) style that would have created much more desired result. Here's a sample:
Dear Support,
My computer system has recently been under attack by viruses! We're just sitting here minding our own business (with our business service), and suddenly the alarm bells started going off. A quick look at the firewall revealed a virus attack!!! This attack has been disrupting our service and it is causing us to reconsider having my internet service with you.
That sure seems to settle it as a virus attack. I hope this information is useful to you!
Sincerely, Me
Your problem is that your attack log that you sent automatically looks like a bunch of mumbo-jumbo to a first-level e-mail monkey.
Key ideas behind my letter: (1) It looks like a human being wrote it. (2) It conveys a human attitude. (3) It implies that it is causing a great disruption. (4) It threatens that you will take your business elsewhere if they don't do anything about it. (5) It still has all the relevant log information, so when it makes it past the first-line monkey, someone who *can* read a log will know what to do.
Ooooo....this reminds me of a Dateline show that I saw, where the father was trying to teach his daughter about patents. Anyways, in the end, the daughter patented the playground "swings."
Slashdot Mirror
I said "much of", not "all of".
The much of that I was referring to included the stupid shit like pyramids of naked prisoners and the laughing and pointing at genitalia and the like. If you think anyone higher in the chain of command told those little punkasses to do that, you're wrong.
As far as other things go, my opinions:
Sodomizing: Abuse. Those caught doing this should spend a lifetime in Leavenworth. Of course, U.S. prison guards supposedly do this all the time, but you don't see much outcry here.
Threaten with dogs: Not abuse. Actually letting dogs bite: abuse. (Note: Threatening and actual use of dogs is performed by K9 street cops in the United States on a daily basis. I don't hear anyone complaining.)
Beat with blunt objects: Abuse. (Done by street cops on a daily basis, usually there is only outcry if the recipient of the beating is black or hispanic, whether it was justified or not.)
Hook electrodes and threaten electrocution: Not abuse. Actually electrocuting: Abuse.
Threatening with a gun: Not abuse. (This is also done by street cops on a daily basis, just not back at the station. Where's the outrage?) Pulling the trigger? Abuse.
What, is that new? That already follows from the fact that there are only N possible hashes, and M possible messages, and NM. In other words, if you have an 8-bit hash (256 values) for a, say, 1K message, then you must get a lot of collisions.
Thank you for addressing this early in the postings. I was about to go insane when I read that in the story post.
Come on, it's the basic Pigeonhole Principle. Computers Science students should have learned this in Discrete Mathematics. If you didn't, it says this: If you've got 10 holes and 11 pigeons in them, then one hole has two pigeons.
If it takes only three days or so to find a collision, what does that mean practically? Almost nothing. Because the collision that you would find is most likely meaningless. The modification that you'd like to apply to the message (while sticking with the same, given hash) is likely to be something very specific, for example, change $1000 to $10.000. And that, unfortunately, is not easy. This vulnerability can't be easily exploited at this point.
Precisely. Really, it doesn't matter if it is easy to find a message with the same hash, if the new message is obviously incorrect or unintelligible.
What I don't understand is why nobody has simply suggested using two distict hashes in any particular application. Say, MD5 and SHA-1 together. The ability to find a collision in a few days for either one may exist, but finding a message that causes a collision for both should be very hard.
I am fairly certain that most states have some kind of "Good Samaritan" law that requires you to help
I wouldn't be so sure about that. When speaking of a "Good Samaritan" law in the U.S., you are talking about a law that says that if you try and put the fire out, you can't be sued by him/her or his/her relatives for failure to prevent burns or death of said burning person.
Before such laws were enacted, it was commonplace for a person trying to be a "Good Samaritan" to be sued for failing to help in a way that the victim or victim's family thought was proper. For example, if you performed CPR on someone and accidentally broke a rib while doing chest compressions, you could expect a lawsuit from victim (if he recovered) for breaking his rib, or the family (if he died) for potentially being the final cause of death for performing improper CPR.
Either way, this society is litigious enough that most people would pretend to have not noticed a burning person and not heard the screams, or the most they would do to "help" is to yell "STOP DROP AND ROLL!" at the person on fire.
On the Kerry thing, to call him a war criminal is equally an indictment of most everyone who was serving in Vietnam at that point.
.
.You question orders *after* you have carried them out (shoot first, ask questions later). Waiting until after the war when it's advantageous to your blossoming political career is unacceptable. Of course, this may be the reason that the chain of command has an open door policy in modern times, it may have been difficult to find the right person, but there are always letters to congress.
Problem is, I know many 'Nam vets, including my father-in-law, that *never* saw or participated in any atrocities.
If you want to place responsability, it should go to the highest ranking officer aware of such actions at the time
Absolutely, but that doesn't let other people off the hook, necessarily. Of course, circumstance would have to be examined.
You may have served in the Army, but I'll wager it wasn't during a period that ugly.
True. However, we were instructed on what constituted "lawful orders", and the correct procedure for dealing with unlawful orders. .
"What orders to question," shit, no offence man, but I know 'Nam vets who would come unglued just hearing you say those words.
. .
Also, our current actions aren't exactly spotless either.
No, they aren't. But if you are specifically thinking about prison abuse, consider this: a lot of what has happened looks a lot like all of the other stupid shit that low-ranking soldiers tend to engage in, combat-related or otherwise. I've seen similar "abuse" committed by soldiers in a drunken barracks party... committed against their own. For instance, one time a guy came to formation with *all* of the hair on his body shaved off (scalp, eyebrows, pubic hair, eyelashes, you get the idea)... he wouldn't say who did it, of course, but it wasn't just anybody. Polaroid photos of passed-out or sleeping soldiers being subject to... certain embarrassments. Anything you can think of that goes on in dorms or fraternities goes on among common soldiers. Much of the "abuse" reports coming from Abu Graib (I believe that I misspelled that... too lazy to check) isn't beyond this. 18-25 year olds do stupid shit.
I'm not trying to make excuses for their actions, but in many of the cases, the likelyhood of them being "ordered" by higher-ups to do that crap is a lot lower than the media would have you believe.
I .... ah whats the use, like I'm gonna suddenly convince you to forsake the Republican party when I can barely get behind the Dems anymore...
Probably not, but you might not understand my political views. As a result of these views, I'm doing my best as an active member of the party organization to change some things about the party.
Bush is a jackass - personal opinion based on countless actions
Agreed, but he's our jackass, unfortunately. I did *not* vote for him in the primaries, and probably wouldn't have if someone better and from our organization had ran against him in the last round. If we had approval voting in the general, I also would have approved Badnarik.
Kerry is SLIGHTLY less of a jackass - although, calling him a war criminal is purely uncalled for. I believe it was decorate war HERO, who went on to (GASP!) protest the war.
I disagree. As much of a jackass. War criminal? Yes. The reason I say this is if he personally witnessed, took part in, or became aware soon after the commission of the atrocities he spoke of, and did nothing during the time, then he was a de facto accomplice at the time of commission. I was in the Army. I know right from wrong, and knew what orders to question. He had a responsibility to notify someone immediately. He never claimed to have done anything about it at the time. He could have tried writing his Senator...
Oregon politics ARE a little fucked - have you been anywhere else? We ain't got the market cornered!
No, but we offer one of the best products in the business!
But back on topic, I'd just LOVE to see them try to get me to accept one of these in my truck! Mudflaps - gone, Cat-converter - gone, large-quantities-of-sheet-metal - gone, oh but lemme put that gps thingamajimmer on here! Lets see how it handles the next swamp I drive through!
Sounds like my 1970 Mustang (351W). Except I have all my sheet metal and don't need the mudflaps. If it gets a GPS, it'll be for theft prevention, not for being taxed.
Just so no one panics, this isn't a daily driver, its a low-road-mileage toy.
Same with my Mustang. My daily driver gets 30+ MPG and has all the latest and greatest efficiency-robbing emissions controls.
(Note to casual readers: Yes, certain emission controls that don't improve the efficiency of fuel combustion tend to hurt efficiency overall [EGR for reduction of NOx emissions]. I don't want to pollute the planet, I just want the car to go uphill without losing speed or drinking excess fuel.)
Let me clarify:
One could argue that does Bush's drinking doesn't deserve to be brought up, either.
The "does" does not need to be there.
I happen to know a shitload of college students (being one myself) who have gotten DUIs.
Having been involved in politics long enough, I know that unless I state that I HAVE NEVER GOTTEN A DUI, someone will read that sentence as "I happen to be one of a shitload of college students who have gotten DUIs." I repeat: I have never received a DUI, nor have driven drunk.
Furthermore, I really know a shitload of college students who drink, and some of them have gotten DUIs, not most of them. More than too many, however.
Exactly as one of the other replies stated.
The story only mentioned California's proposal, and the grandparent post managed to take it and turn it into a rant about Oregon's corrupt government and even further mentioned Bush/Cheney drinking.
Why don't I restate your words, as if you were replying to the grandparent post:
Let him be. He doesn't deserve to be brought up anymore.
One could argue that does Bush's drinking doesn't deserve to be brought up, either. He maintains that he doesn't drink at all now, (Hey, he recognized his problem and did something about it!), and I happen to know a shitload of college students (being one myself) who have gotten DUIs. I'm not saying excuses should be made for them, but when they've gone through what the system demands of them, and have made an effort to change (and succeeded, perhaps), then it doesn't need to be mentioned, especially when it was decades ago.
This idea came from Oregon, and is entirely wacky.
...
Yeah, I think my home state of Oregon is f*cked up, too.
Oregon state government has become, in my opinion, very corrupt, so that's where the corrupters try their stupid ideas.
I agree. Including Neil Goldschmidt (it's a good summary, Google for more... try this and this), Oregon's capitol has been occupied by Democrats since Jan 13, 1975. The Secretaries of State have been all Democrats since 1985. The Attorneys General have been all Democracts since 1993. Naturally, heads of many state agencies have also been Democrats.
You're right, they are corrupt, and they have stupid ideas. But they are in power.
Apparently, this has very little to do with "a team at Oregon State University". That's just to give the idea a little credibility. If I remember correctly, the people behind it want to sell the electronics.
OSU was directed to perform a feasability study on behalf of a state government controlled by the above people.
The president is a not-too-smart
I won't comment on the rest of what you say about President Bush, but you and all the other Bush-haters' thinking that he's "not-too-smart" is precisely the underestimation that put him in office a second time. He may be simple, but he's not stupid.
Of course, the alternative presented by the party of Oregon's corrupt government was a self-admitted war criminal who (with the exception of some tax policy) basically said everything Bush was saying but that it would be somehow better because he was not Bush.
If only someone would sue Microsoft for Clippy, we could finally be rid of the biggest annoyance in Microsoft Office.
Okay, let me ask you some questions:
Let us take, for example, the latitude 36 degrees, 1 minute, 30 seconds. (Assume WGS-84 for the entire post.)
If I convert it to 36.025 degrees, is that a new projection?
If I convert it to 3.6025*10^1, is that a new projection?
If I say it in Spanish, or any other non-English language, is it a new projection?
If I write it thirty-six degrees, one minute, thirty seconds, have I made a new projection?
Now let's define a new unit, call it millidegrees. That is, one thousand millidegree = one degree.
If I write it as 36025 millidegrees, have I made a new projection?
Now let's take that number and write it in hexadecimal, 0x8CB9, is that a new projection?
None of these have made a new projection (or projection onto a plane at all), because we are taking the exact same geographic coordinate (forget about not having expressed a longitude for now, the same argument applies) in DEGREES LATITUDE.
In fact, we are still talking about spherical coordinates, are we not?
Now, let's take one of the above numbers, 36025 millidegrees, and convert that to Microsoft's base 30, and we get 1B0T millidegrees in Microsoft base 30 (the set of digits does not use vowels).
1B0T (base 30) millidegress = 36025 (base 10) millidegrees = 36.025 degrees (which is what Microsoft says the original coordinate is expressed in).
If we take both a latitude and longitude, and convert them into Microsoft's representation, then we have not made a new projection because:
(1) We have not changed the model used.
(2) We have not performed a transformation on the coordinates other than changing base. Particularly, we are still dealing with (spherical/ellipsoidal/geoidal) geographic coordinates.
(3) We have changed the scale, however, by expressing coordinates in millidegrees instead of degrees.
Since a map projection involves also doing (1) and (2) in addition to (3), which we have not done a projection. In particular, we have written geographic coordinates in degrees as geographic coordinates in millidegrees and then converted the number to base 30. This is not a projection.
Suppose you give me a map, how about the Carbury Creek Quadrangle, Oregon, Provisional Edition 1983. Now, if I cross out the scale in kilometers and draw one in in meters, and then cross out all the numbers on the map and write their base 30 (or hexadecimal, binary, or any other base) equivalents, have I changed the map projection into a new one? No, I haven't. The datum used to produce the map is still the same, and nothing I have done requires that the map be redrawn on its plane of projection. Likewise, the method described in Microsoft's patent has also not created a new projection.
Now, prove to me that they have created a new projection. (Since I have effectively disproven it.)
Essentially they have created their own numbering system to accurately take the place of lat/long numbers, to better suit their needs.
... Because of their upcoming location based information server system which shall revolutionize how you search for information, and how information is targetted at you.
Now if any of you know anything at all about GIS, you realize that really they have just created their own map projection system.
No they haven't made any such projection system. They have merely patented the function round((X+360)*10^N) -> convert to base 30, where X is your coordinate in decimal degrees, and N is your desired level of decimal accuracy. Take both latitude and longitude cooordinates, perform this function, pad the results, and tack them together in string representation, and there you go.
Just remember that 1 in any base is still 1.
It's almost exactly the same as converting 3.2 kilometers -> 3200 meters -> any number base besides 10. It still conveys the same measurement and the same base unit and the same scale. Do the steps in reverse and you are right back where you started.
Now why is MS making this patent?
Tool.
Okay, I could have taken more time to do the post, I'm aware that M$ uses a base-30 that omits the vowels in order to not produce a string like "ASSFUCKT" or something, but it's trivial to use their base-30 symbol set
The corrected string, accounting for compactness, is "1LWT513Z".
Furthermore, it really could be represented as "1IRP513U", because I just did the calculation (after about another 30 seconds) and figured out it only takes DA00 base 30 numbers to represent all possible Earth coordinates to 3 decimals of accuracy.
This patent is shit and it's commonplace to use such encodings to save space or better represent numbers with available characters, or make numbers easier to transmit over a medium. Hexadecimal is an example of the former, base-64 encoding an example of the latter.
I know it's in your blood to hate Microsoft, but least take the time to read the patent! What they are seeking to patent is a METHOD of encoding LAT/LONG in a URL in a better way than is currently employed. I think this patent is incredibly valid.
Okay, so you think that doing the following operations on the coordinate 44.035LAT 136.010LON should be patentable... I'll start with do the latitude:
44.035 * 1000 = 44035 ->(base 30) = 01IRP
Now the latitude:
136.010 * 1000 = 136010 ->(base 30) = 0513U
Now tack them together and you get "01IRP0513U".
Reverse the steps and you get your lat/lon back. Ta dah!
Nice patent. I just used it unlicensed after about 30 seconds of reading a few parts and 30 seconds of performing the steps.
Next thing you know, someone will patent a cosine function that returns results in base 30.
Alcohol 120 does a really nice job in Windows of determining the material of your burnable media. I popped a stock CD-R (office depot) disk into my drive and (the silver backing office depot logo ones) they showed up as phthalocyanine.
So do most of mine, but according to a FAQ I once read, these aren't necessarily the truth for off brands that purchase stamps from other companies. It also says nothing of the composition of the reflective layer, only the dye.
Well, it's not like I've gone looking for them, so I had no reason to search them out.
I was just answering the question in the post honestly.
You DID buy the silver/gold alloy phthalocyanine CDs, didn't you?
No, I've not ever ran across them, and it's not like they print the reflective layer and dye compositions on the side of the package. Mine are always green-ish.
(fp?)
That's what I get for not previewing. Everything starting with "Ah, well" and subsequent is my own text, not the parent poster's text.
First of all, never lie. That can come back to bite you. In this case, if they paniced and misread the log, they might cut off our connection and then send the threatening email. This would be very bad.
Well, depends on what you consider a "great disruption" and whether or not you are willing to go through with #4, but I suppose you're right.
The second issue is that these emails did not only go to shaw.They went to whichever ISP claimed responsibility for the offending IP. Sometimes they sent the complaints back to shaw tryin to pin the error on me. It just doesn't work to threaten to stop dealing with someone who you're not dealing with them to begin with.
Ah, well, that makes a big difference. I take back #3 and #4 completely and would reword that opening paragraph.
I hope you saw the points with #1 and #2, though. I've seen people react to something they didn't quite understand right off the bat with a reaction completely opposite from what you expect.
Actually, people quite often misread new law that way. They skip over a word due to the legalese, and suddenly they think the gov't is crashing down on top of their way of life. In reality, they just overreacted to a misunderstanding of what they were reading.
(PRC-77 for those interested)
.. and sending the newbie to get a PRC-E7 from the first sergeant? :)
Ah yes. The good old PRC. In FA school we used these. Ah, and do you remember reading crypto keys from punched tape?
ok that was in jest. But seriously, how much good is a field manual going to do you when its possible for handheld computers to encrypt data to such a strong degree that it's theoretically impossible to decrypt with any likelihood of success that's indistinguishable from zero in the lifetime of the universe?
Because voice messages and on-the-fly manual encryption still exist. I've only been out of the U.S. Army for a few years, but we all learned (in my field, anyway) manual coding techniques, because your SINCGARS may be broken, your keys out of date due to inability to receive an update, or you are using a radio that belongs to someone else. You might be a POW that needs a secure way to tap messages to other POWs (encrypted POW tap code). Carrying a computer in some situations can be a bitch.
Other armies are using these techniques as well, and some forces simply don't have access to a computer, but have fine math students working for them.
The point is, we learn these techniques, other forces learn these techniques, and should you run across a message in code that was human-generated on the fly, you might be able to decrypt it in the field.
(Note that I left out details due to respect for my clearance and the I NDA signed with the gov't. Don't ask.)
which is supposedly going to have a 14-inch color screen and run on Linux...
/. joke... Imagine a beowulf cluster of these. Seriously. A $100 node is pretty cheap. Well, then again, fast nodes are nice.
So the computer runs on linux? That's an interesting twist, because in my over $100 PC, Linux runs on the computer, not the other way around.
Now, to revisit an old
Will it fit in a Mac Mini?
I'd pay the extra $5 for some more buttons.
It's a Mac, you'll pay more than $5 for that option if they ever introduced it. (Kudos to Apple for dropping some of the upgrade prices on the Mac Mini... I ended up recommending it to my dad after they did.)
Now, a boat load of people are going to tell you about SideTrack.
The sheer number of people that are recommending it demonstrates something: There is a demand for multiple-buttons, scrollies, and basically enhanced pointer device functionality on Apple laptops.
To the folks saying "just use ctrl-click"... that's all well and good, until you are dinking around with a game on your laptop, and you really want that second mouse button. Or scroll wheel.
The parent post already expressed my opinion on having to carry around a USB mouse everywhere I go.
I'd also like to have the option of using a nipple for pointing instead of a touchpad because it just feels better to me, but that's another discussion...
Funny, I like feeling nipples, too...
Your complaint could have been worded in a much better (although more verbose and nontechnical manner) style that would have created much more desired result. Here's a sample:
Your problem is that your attack log that you sent automatically looks like a bunch of mumbo-jumbo to a first-level e-mail monkey.
Key ideas behind my letter: (1) It looks like a human being wrote it. (2) It conveys a human attitude. (3) It implies that it is causing a great disruption. (4) It threatens that you will take your business elsewhere if they don't do anything about it. (5) It still has all the relevant log information, so when it makes it past the first-line monkey, someone who *can* read a log will know what to do.
Ooooo....this reminds me of a Dateline show that I saw, where the father was trying to teach his daughter about patents. Anyways, in the end, the daughter patented the playground "swings."
No, it was swinging sideways on a swing. (Covered on Slashdot, even. Sheesh, you must be new.)
Also seen here, here, and here.