I suppose they could have a mobile base that continually moves so as to always stay on the dark side, but wouldn't it make more sense to just put it on the far side and leave it there?
> But if Quantum Mechanics itself was, say, a computer simulation......then the computer on which the simulation is running must exist in a universe. You now have replaced a few hidden variables with an entire hidden universe. Apply Occam's Razor.
> The banking group is urging that commercial bank customers 'carry out all > online banking activity from a standalone, hardened, and locked-down computer > from which e-mail and Web browsing is not possible.
No need to execute them. No need to punish them severely at all. We just need to catch them. Given a 50% risk of being caught a one year prison sentence would provide more than adequate deterrence. Given the present one in 100 million risk of being caught an 18th century hanging would offer no significant deterrence.
The insides of the cheeks are not as sensitive but the available area is larger, binocular vision might be possible, and it might be possible to leave the electrodes in while talking and perhaps even while eating.
Slashdot Mirror
> We are all use to it.
Speak for yourself.
I suppose they could have a mobile base that continually moves so as to always stay on the dark side, but wouldn't it make more sense to just put it on the far side and leave it there?
I don't see why not. It's the past of technology, after all.
...it all makes perfect sense.
> We are describing the universe with mathematics. Mathematics are wholly
> invented by man.
Some believe that math is discovered, not invented.
> But if Quantum Mechanics itself was, say, a computer simulation... ...then the computer on which the simulation is running must exist in a universe. You now have replaced a few hidden variables with an entire hidden universe. Apply Occam's Razor.
Everything "works on quantum processes".
I think that they are more concerned about bombs than BIOS trojans.
> Credit unions make great financial sense but only the largest ones have the
> kind of IT and security resources most of us associate with a bank.
Considering what the banks accomplish with those resources, I'll take the credit unions.
n/t
> They do not work on...
Yet.
> The banking group is urging that commercial bank customers 'carry out all
> online banking activity from a standalone, hardened, and locked-down computer
> from which e-mail and Web browsing is not possible.
My bank still has actual human tellers.
The cracker logs in. The guy who wrote the trojan may qualify as a (evil) hacker but the one using it is a mere cracker.
I think that the guys who write the software qualify as hackers. Evil hackers, but hackers nonetheless.
Anything to avoid a secure OS eh?
No need to execute them. No need to punish them severely at all. We just need to catch them. Given a 50% risk of being caught a one year prison sentence would provide more than adequate deterrence. Given the present one in 100 million risk of being caught an 18th century hanging would offer no significant deterrence.
This applies to crime in general as well.
The insides of the cheeks are not as sensitive but the available area is larger, binocular vision might be possible, and it might be possible to leave the electrodes in while talking and perhaps even while eating.
(My wife's idea, not mine.)
> I'm pretty sure that the problem here is that theory predicts there should be
> some measurable effect and so far, there isn't.
"Standard" theory predicted exactly what they got. Only some of the more exotic theories predicted any results at this stage.
> Google's video of asking people "What is a browser" in New York Square (to
> which people replied "Google" or "Yahoo" etc).
When the correct answer, of course, is "An animal that browses, such as a goat or deer."
> Unless you count copyright violation, in which case everyone is guilty.
Not true. In any case, copyright infringement is rarely a crime, at least in the USA.
So when and where is your paper explaining the flaws in the experiment going to be published?
> I'm sure the odds of 2 consecutive coin flips being the same are less than
> 50%.
The second toss can either come out the same as the first one or different from it. That is exactly two possibilities.
> Which always made me wonder, how do gravity waves escape a black hole?
They don't. While systems involving black holes may emit gravitational waves, the waves don't come from inside the hole.
These results do not represent a failure of existing theory.
> Yes, a lot of observations have fit the theory of gravitational waves, but
> this one in particular went against it.
No it didn't. It set an upper limit on them, but that limit is compatible with current theory.