Yes. According to theory the experiments should agree. They don't. This means that either the theory is wrong (indicating exciting new physics) or that somebody is making a mistake ("systematic error"). In either case they can't tell which experiment is correct until the discrepancy is resolved.
How do they determine the mass of their 1Kg reference? Is it simply by measuring the force it exerts when influenced by a gravitational force of 1G?
Each national bureau of standards carts its standard kilogram over to France and compares it directly to the international standard kilogram with a balance. G is not involved.
Unfortunately, each time they do this they get slightly different results. The difference between the international standard and the average of the national standards is increasing.
How can a few thousand pieces of spam which affected.01% of all Facebook users actually be worth almost as much as all the cash FB has ever raised in auctions?
Statutory damages, like those for copyright infringement. The law specifies the amount to be awarded for each violation without regard to actual damage.
I'm amazed that anyone in the justice department thought Facebook was damaged for $360million...
The "justice department" had nothing to do with it. A Federal judge made the award on the basis of a law enacted by Congress which specifies statutory damages.
> 360million is a meaningless number which accomplishes nothing.
It bankrupts the spammer.
> $8,000 would actually have an impact.
That might not bankrupt him.
> I'm with the Republicans on this one, tort reform is long overdue.
Aside from the fact that "tort reform" is an insurance industry con, this has nothing to do with it. The suit was brought under a Federal statute which fixes the damages. "Tort reform" is about product liability and malpractice torts.
>...the spammer can essentially laugh off a civil monetary award.
Nonsense. The ruling empowers Facebook to forceably seize any of his property they can lay hands on, get liens on real estate, and get court orders requiring banks to transfer his accounts to them. He will be forced to file a petition for bankruptcy.
> All this does is prevent him from inheriting anything from his parents.
I don't understand what the incentive is to stop using IRC for command and control.
Getting through firewalls, I should imagine. Companies are likely to block IRC but they dare not block Twits-R-us and FaceSpace. Traffic there also seems less likely to trigger IDSs.
> Um, the reason they are using telnet is because it's trivial to hack,
No, it is trivial to intercept telnet passwords (which are sent in the clear) if you have access to a channel over which someone is logging in via telnet. A telnet deamon just sitting there unused creates a vulnerability only to the extent that it is a channel for attacking bad passwords (which is surely what these kids are doing).
However, there is no good reason to run a telnet daemon these days, especially on the public Internet.
Slashdot Mirror
> Clearly I'm missing something here.
Yes. According to theory the experiments should agree. They don't. This means that either the theory is wrong (indicating exciting new physics) or that somebody is making a mistake ("systematic error"). In either case they can't tell which experiment is correct until the discrepancy is resolved.
Each national bureau of standards carts its standard kilogram over to France and compares it directly to the international standard kilogram with a balance. G is not involved.
Unfortunately, each time they do this they get slightly different results. The difference between the international standard and the average of the national standards is increasing.
...has moved for dismissal.
Amazing. I'm sure glad you told us this. I certainly never would have guessed that the defendant in a lawsuit would move for dismissal.
...why would you want it handed over to the government?
Nothing different.
And who decides who the experts are? The experts, of course, because they are the ... experts.
Statutory damages, like those for copyright infringement. The law specifies the amount to be awarded for each violation without regard to actual damage.
The "justice department" had nothing to do with it. A Federal judge made the award on the basis of a law enacted by Congress which specifies statutory damages.
> 360million is a meaningless number which accomplishes nothing.
It bankrupts the spammer.
> $8,000 would actually have an impact.
That might not bankrupt him.
> I'm with the Republicans on this one, tort reform is long overdue.
Aside from the fact that "tort reform" is an insurance industry con, this has nothing to do with it. The suit was brought under a Federal statute which fixes the damages. "Tort reform" is about product liability and malpractice torts.
> ...the spammer can essentially laugh off a civil monetary award.
Nonsense. The ruling empowers Facebook to forceably seize any of his property they can lay hands on, get liens on real estate, and get court orders requiring banks to transfer his accounts to them. He will be forced to file a petition for bankruptcy.
> All this does is prevent him from inheriting anything from his parents.
Where did you get that idea?
That doesn't answer the question (assuming we are talking about "professional" admins here).
Getting through firewalls, I should imagine. Companies are likely to block IRC but they dare not block Twits-R-us and FaceSpace. Traffic there also seems less likely to trigger IDSs.
> ...overlook its presence on their servers.
Why are there any services running on their servers that they did not explicitly configure to run?
> Um, the reason they are using telnet is because it's trivial to hack,
No, it is trivial to intercept telnet passwords (which are sent in the clear) if you have access to a channel over which someone is logging in via telnet. A telnet deamon just sitting there unused creates a vulnerability only to the extent that it is a channel for attacking bad passwords (which is surely what these kids are doing).
However, there is no good reason to run a telnet daemon these days, especially on the public Internet.
If telnet reminds you of when you were young you aren't old.
I'm wearing glasses. With them I am able to comfortably read 16 point type on my monitor.
That's damning with faint praise.
The easiest way for them to improve the new design would be to go back to the previous version.
In other words, it doesn't work.
> ...it looks like the sidebar issue has been fixed...
No it hasn't.
It isn't.
It isn't. X knows the size and resolution of my monitor.
> I tell em to get off the lawn and wave my cane at em
Wimp. I whup 'em upside the head with mine (it's made of steel pipe with five pounds of lead in the end).
Preview has never been reliable.
> I've toyed with the idea of a slashdot - nntp interface.
I'd love that. Gnus once had a Slashdot mode but it's broken.
My user name does not appear anywhere on the left. It's just the usual font size bug present on at least half of all Web sites.