How about asking every nth person successfully logging in to generate a question? Apply a lameness filter and then perhaps ask another randomly chosen user to verify that the question is reasonable. Reject duplicates and questions that too many people can't answer.
Remember how us old-timers used to walk to school ten miles, up hill both ways? Since it's up hill both ways to the school it must be down hill both ways from the school. Find that school, buy, it, and make it your home. You'll never buy gas again (as long as you never go anywhere except to the house I grew up in).
> Overall, consumers do not realise why it is important to enable AT LEAST WEP.
They don't know. They went to Best Buy, they bought the box, they took it home, they plugged it in, and it worked. It hasn't occurred to them that there any more to do.
The manufacturers are partly at fault. They could at least make the serial number the default password and enable WEP, but they're terrified of the sales they'll lose when the consumer plugs the box in, finds that it "doesn't work", and returns it to WalMart.
> I am not sure how people treat their wireless in a place like NYC (I imagine there are > many more informed people on security than in the 'sticks' neighbourhoods like mine).
I hope you are not implying that you think a larger fraction understand security in NYC.
>...and it's not as though SiOnyx will be a paying proposition if the tech doesn't work...
It has already been a paying proposition for ten years for its employees, agents, consultants, lawyers, etc. This announcement could suck in enough new funding to stretch that another decade.
Note: I'm not saying that they don't have anything real: just that these things are often profitable for someone even when they don't pan out (and most don't). Look particularly at the venture capital types who get hefty fees for arranging for investing other people's money (not percentages of net profit: fees).
AI-> Artificial Insemination, not Artificial Intelligence. As to who is to revive it, the colonists. I just wanted to point out that the effective gene pool of a colony can be much larger than that provided by the colonists on the ship.
> It's harder than that. I assume by "see" you mean two-dimensional visible or > near-visible light images. To produce images like that you have to be able to move each > telescope in your interferometer (or have lots of them), in two dimensions.
You can produce useful "images" that are not free of ambiguity, though. For example, you might be able to show that features in a certain size range (i.e., continents or clouds) exist without being able to produce pictures of them.
> The other problem with crazy long baseline interferometry is that you need to transmit > the received signal (including phase) between the individual elements. For radio that's > not too bad because you can actually detect and record the phase, for low enough > frequencies.
Perhaps. More likely, though, the information taken was stuff that could be (and probably was) used for insider trading when it was fresh but is quite boring and useless now.
> Exactly how would this work when Hubble's main mirror was 2.3 microns off, which in turn > caused the Hubble to become useless until the mirror was replaced?
They replaced the correcting plate, not the mirror.
> Can you actually spin a liquid so precisely that you get a product that is worth the expense?
> The story would be more believable if they did not get certain basic facts wrong. > Mercury has a very low vapor pressure, it's not going to evaporate very quickly.
Quickly enough. The astronomers are capable of doing the math.
> That's why you don't see mercury fog inside a mercury switch or thermometer.
Fog consists of fine droplets of liquid suspended in gas. Their absence tells you nothing about vapor pressure. The head space in the thermometer is filled with mercury vapor. The head space in the switch also contains mercury vapor though it may be filled with air or inert gas as well.
> The cost and weight of the mercury are inconsequential compared to the cost of the > rocket to lift the telescope up there.
The plan is to build the telescope on site using local materials where possible. Your mercury would significantly increase the mass that would need to be lifted up there. It would have to be replenished frequently due to evaporation, adding to support costs. It would also have to be heated to keep it liquid. This would also add to support costs and prevent the mirror from getting as cold as the ionic liquid ones can.
IIRC the spinning mercury telescopes here on Earth use a plastic film to prevent air currents from disturbing the surface of the mercury. Perhaps such a film could be used on the moon to reduce evaporation.
Slashdot Mirror
> ...the chance of the attack succeeding drops to 10%.
10% is good enough for the spammers.
How about asking every nth person successfully logging in to generate a question? Apply a lameness filter and then perhaps ask another randomly chosen user to verify that the question is reasonable. Reject duplicates and questions that too many people can't answer.
Learn ASL .
> The earbuds aren't designed to seal the ear canal so people have to run the volume so
> high on them to get above the noise level.
No they don't. In fact, they don't have to use the things at all. They _choose_ to do so.
Remember how us old-timers used to walk to school ten miles, up hill both ways? Since it's up hill both ways to the school it must be down hill both ways from the school. Find that school, buy, it, and make it your home. You'll never buy gas again (as long as you never go anywhere except to the house I grew up in).
Are you relying on some sort of in-car display or are you actually measuring miles dirven and gallons consumed?
> Overall, consumers do not realise why it is important to enable AT LEAST WEP.
They don't know. They went to Best Buy, they bought the box, they took it home, they plugged it in, and it worked. It hasn't occurred to them that there any more to do.
The manufacturers are partly at fault. They could at least make the serial number the default password and enable WEP, but they're terrified of the sales they'll lose when the consumer plugs the box in, finds that it "doesn't work", and returns it to WalMart.
> I am not sure how people treat their wireless in a place like NYC (I imagine there are
> many more informed people on security than in the 'sticks' neighbourhoods like mine).
I hope you are not implying that you think a larger fraction understand security in NYC.
> ...and it's not as though SiOnyx will be a paying proposition if the tech doesn't work...
It has already been a paying proposition for ten years for its employees, agents, consultants, lawyers, etc. This announcement could suck in enough new funding to stretch that another decade.
Note: I'm not saying that they don't have anything real: just that these things are often profitable for someone even when they don't pan out (and most don't). Look particularly at the venture capital types who get hefty fees for arranging for investing other people's money (not percentages of net profit: fees).
Yes, but did he take along any parts for the toilet?
AI-> Artificial Insemination, not Artificial Intelligence. As to who is to revive it, the colonists. I just wanted to point out that the effective gene pool of a colony can be much larger than that provided by the colonists on the ship.
> Still, why is it assumed that life has to develop on a planet by current definitions?
I don't believe it is so assumed, but planets are easier to find than satellites of gas giants.
Why such a low upper limit on gravity? Lichen don't care what they weigh.
> ...support a significant enough portion of the human population to allow for a decent
> level of diversity in reproduction...
Eggs and sperm can be frozen and revived. AI works.
> It's harder than that. I assume by "see" you mean two-dimensional visible or
> near-visible light images. To produce images like that you have to be able to move each
> telescope in your interferometer (or have lots of them), in two dimensions.
You can produce useful "images" that are not free of ambiguity, though. For example, you might be able to show that features in a certain size range (i.e., continents or clouds) exist without being able to produce pictures of them.
> The other problem with crazy long baseline interferometry is that you need to transmit
> the received signal (including phase) between the individual elements. For radio that's
> not too bad because you can actually detect and record the phase, for low enough
> frequencies.
Radio frequency images are possible and useful.
> I would be sure to ask what the process is to migrate your existing email infrastructure
> over the new vendors' respective systems.
Sure, but it's much more important to ask what the process is to migrate away from the new vendors' systems.
Perhaps. More likely, though, the information taken was stuff that could be (and probably was) used for insider trading when it was fresh but is quite boring and useless now.
> Exactly how would this work when Hubble's main mirror was 2.3 microns off, which in turn
> caused the Hubble to become useless until the mirror was replaced?
They replaced the correcting plate, not the mirror.
> Can you actually spin a liquid so precisely that you get a product that is worth the expense?
It's been done.
Doesn't happen that often.
> I've always wondered why they don't just spin liquid glass or metal and then let it harden.
Because the change in volume that accompanies the phase change distorts the shape. That's why metal castings have to be machined.
> The story would be more believable if they did not get certain basic facts wrong.
> Mercury has a very low vapor pressure, it's not going to evaporate very quickly.
Quickly enough. The astronomers are capable of doing the math.
> That's why you don't see mercury fog inside a mercury switch or thermometer.
Fog consists of fine droplets of liquid suspended in gas. Their absence tells you nothing about vapor pressure.
The head space in the thermometer is filled with mercury vapor. The head space in the switch also contains mercury vapor though it may be filled with air or inert gas as well.
> The cost and weight of the mercury are inconsequential compared to the cost of the
> rocket to lift the telescope up there.
The plan is to build the telescope on site using local materials where possible. Your mercury would significantly increase the mass that would need to be lifted up there. It would have to be replenished frequently due to evaporation, adding to support costs.
It would also have to be heated to keep it liquid. This would also add to support costs and prevent the mirror from getting as cold as the ionic liquid ones can.
IIRC the spinning mercury telescopes here on Earth use a plastic film to prevent air currents from disturbing the surface of the mercury. Perhaps such a film could be used on the moon to reduce evaporation.
The change in volume when the liquid froze would make the surface too uneven.
You might want to read up on how fast that happens.
Perhaps you hadn't noticed that the moon swivels itself?
One hopes they have better things to do. Do you Slashdotters even read articles?
Some people who actually know what they are doing tried it and it did work.
BTW the first working laboratory LMT was built in 1872.
> It's news because it was the first one that has been tracked, predicted to hit, and then hit.
It's news because it was the first one that has been tracked.