I wonder if this can be used to grow certain bodyparts that transexuals for a very obvious reason are missing.. Not entirely sure whether you can mess around enough to be able to do that, but it would be very interesting to see if it's possible.
It's a bit sad that this discussion always seems to fall back to 'But evolution contradicts god' and similar bla bla.
The point most people miss, is that the person that actually wrote down a lot of his observations, which lead to the idea of evolution, was trying to show how marvelous God created this universe. That a God could make something so complex and self sustaining as evolution amazed him endlessly.
His point was more along the lines that 'Intelligent Design' created all the basework for the great replication and diversion of what came to be known as 'Evolution'.
As I said, a shame a lot of people seem to completely miss that point.
My first thought when I read this was 'Whiskey Tango Foxtrot'. (Well. Not exactly, it was actually the terms that those letters stand for, but hey).
This is really sad, because I just know he's serious about this, and he really does think this 'saves the children'. And he's giving the exact proof why people with no knowledge about these sort of technical things, should not be allowed to even propose a law about it.
You're not going to let a truck driver design your house. You're not letting a CEO have root access to your core machines. You don't accept financial advice from a bum. You can't accept truth from a politician. Uhm. Well. You get my point.
Why the hell would we accept a senator to make laws about something he simply doesn't have the knowledge about? Why on earth do these people even think they can make sensible comments about this?
It's so intensely sad that in a wat it gets funny, if I didn't realize that they're dead serious, and we're going to be stuck with the bullshit.
Can't we forcibly 'retire' these sort of politicians from their position... Bleh.
A good one here would probably be to add a catchall that redirects everything to 'fuckoffnetworksolutions.yourdomain.whatever' where they can put all the advertisements they want..
Just let that one give a 404, and then NetSol takes over from there.
If this gets used a lot, at least Microsoft can blame all their problems on 'race track memory things crashing'.
This is brilliant for them!
Seriously, though. The idea of storing bits on top of each other instead of alongside each other does give a much smaller footprint, and from what I understand from what I've read some 3 years ago, also a much better speed vs thermal efficiency.
Two thought to be unique two-star systems discovered that are uniquely tying together two stars previously thought to be unique for certain value of uniqueness.
Although I guess that's somewhat overkill for a headline:) However. The article does explain it. They found a unique set of stars in a (at that moment) unique configuration. Then in their search they found another one that had been documented way earlier but wrongly classified. Thus the (admittedly rather borked) headline.
There should be *NO* passwords in documents. Period. What you should do is make personalized user accounts in the database for all users that actually require access to this data, then have that username automatically filled in from the logged on user, then prompt the user to type in their own password.
This provides a solid authentication model, will deny all users who have nothing to do with this data to access it, and will also create a personal audit trail.
A global police force already exists pretty much in the shape of Interpol. So really no need to go and invent one. Any sort of crime that goes beyond a country's borders pretty much ends up at Interpol, and through them at the police forces in the countries affected by the crime.
Global lawmaking however is going to be extremely hard, or even impossible, considering the many different ideas people have about freedom, censorship, crime in general (is marihuana legal yes/no), etc, etc.
So. If I understand this correctly, the newest addition to the curriculum of the police school will be:
Intahwebs Hacking 101: How to break into networked computers for dummies.
I don't quite get this bill, to be honest. There is almost never a fully open continuous connection between networked computers to begin with, and I seriously doubt that any sort of crime syndicate would be so stupid as to share directories over the internet or something equally dumb.
So the only thing I can possibly think of is them trying to hack into machines that have been/are connected to the machine they have physical access to, and I'm sure that'll be protested by every privacy and civil liberty organisation in existance.
This is what you get if you let people with absolutely 0 knowledge about how things work (other than from a buzzbingo chart) make laws and or decisions about technology.
Obviously you've never heard Nine Inch Nails live, or on CD for that matter. Trent doesn't need to artificially 'noise himself', really. He does that well enough on his own (with the help of his ever changing band, of course)
I'd say go and download his music, and you'll see what I mean.
Its all the people driving SLOWLY that makes us aggressive people cut them off!
Making them slow down even more, and consequentially making everyone behind them slow down even more, shockwaving to a total standstill some miles down the road.
Yeah.. So actually cutting someone off makes sure you won't have anyone behind you for a while. Hmm... There might be merit to that idea:)
I think if I was a law student, I'd be very very happy doing this sort of work.
Actual cases with a lot of what every defence lawyer is looking for: Suspense, Lying, Cheating, Inexpert Witnesses, Corporate Greed, Perjury, Farfetched application of laws...
This would be great. You could probably make a TV series out of it even!
(Okay okay.. Some of this is tongue in cheeck, but the basic premise is obvious: This is great material for law students to study and participate in. They get a real life example of how screwed up and convoluted cases can get)
And maybe, just maybe this'll breed a generation of lawyers not hellbent on making Escheresque pictures out of the law.
So just maybe it is not as hard or complex a problem as you state. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for your post:) I pretty much agree on your points, and I wasn't trying to make a statement it would be too hard. I only tried to list a couple of things that could/should be taken into account with these sort of things.
In the original mission briefing the reduced power output of the solar panels due to dust buildup were actually mentioned, but it wasn't actually considered a serious problem, since it would only start to really influence the mission after roughly 8 to 9 months.
There was also a recent post about a type of nanotech windshield that was wiper less and only required a power source.
I read that as well, and I agree that this would, if plausible, be a perfect solution (I love my commas).
As for the power requirements, is it feasible to just reserve a small percentage of the incoming power to keep the air canisters pressurized at all times? I realize that it must use some of the same power it is attempting to protect, but air canisters can remain pressurized for extended periods of time. The amount of power that would be necessary to run pumps to "top off" the air canister should be minimal when spread over such a large duration of time.
This sounds very logical, but I think you're forgetting one rather important thing: The air density on Mars is insanely low in comparison to earth, so actually getting these canisters pressurized is either going to take proportionately more power or time (or both). Taking pressurized air containers (generally quite heavy in comparison to their effective payload) then seems the only solution, which I can imagine to be prohibitively expensive/heavy/etc.
All in all, though, the engineers have learned a ton from building and deploying these 2 bots, and I'm sure a next generation Mars robots will be hugely different, and will incorporate a lot of ideas and realizations that came out of these.
- More Moving Parts - Weight - Dust too fine to be brushed off easilly - Chance to actually reduce power generation on failure by blocking the solar panels - Needs power itself
And all this aside from the fact that asking someone to make a solar panel wiper for Mars is going to be an enormously expensive and involved operation. Windspeeds, airpressure, particle count, gravity, temperature all play a part in this. And anyone using windshield wipers on their car knows how unreliable they are to begin with.
Being very socially inept and/or being a genius can be related or unrelated. However this guy went to university aged 14. That's generally considered a sign of being a genius, despite any other characterizations he might get.
A coulpe of points that you should look into (including the fine print):
- Is there a data limit on the connection you're looking at (X GB/week, month, anything?). - Is there an issue with encrypted traffic (some ISPs/Telcos will throttle or cut encrypted traffic to fight P2P, which will also impede your VPN) - Will you have the coverage that you need, and will the coverage also extend to all the rooms in your house? - How important is connectivity to you? (For me personally, I need to have at least one place where I can be 100% certain to be able to login through my VPN to my job) Does the roaming wireless fail often, or not? (This also relates to point 3) - Assuming you're looking into this for work also, are you allowed to use relatively open wireless networks (I know that I'm not, since I work in the financial world)
I personally would keep the static line, despite the extra cost, just to have a 'base' to go to when things don't work elsewhere. This also gives me the possibility to log onto my home server and retrieve/store important data through my own VPN.
Lots of things to think about:)
On a totally unrelated note: Why do I have 10 (and not 5) moderator points??
Hey! There's nothing wrong with Essex! Well. Maybe aside from the fact is has Stansted airport. And there's this girl from Essex.. And well. Oh bugger...
Most vocal Slashdot'ers, including myself, feel that in the balance between (ineffective counter-terrorism) and (personal freedom, open government), Bush and Congress err far too much in the (ineffective counter-terrorism) direction.
2 different questions here with 2 different answers.
First: When you try to enter the US, you're actually not (yet) under the US jurisdiction, and cannot in any way use the US constitution as protection. You can refuse them anything they want, and they can refuse you entry into the country, and you'll go right back on the first plane out.
Second: If you try and enter the US with encrypted data, you can not use an encryption stronger than 54-bit DES (IIRC), which is regulated under the US ammunitions law. This however will only apply *after* you've already entered the country. So they might let you in, but they'd also be in their right to then arrest you for breaking said ammunitions law and importing/exporting using an illegal crypt.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if this can be used to grow certain bodyparts that transexuals for a very obvious reason are missing.. Not entirely sure whether you can mess around enough to be able to do that, but it would be very interesting to see if it's possible.
It's a bit sad that this discussion always seems to fall back to 'But evolution contradicts god' and similar bla bla.
The point most people miss, is that the person that actually wrote down a lot of his observations, which lead to the idea of evolution, was trying to show how marvelous God created this universe. That a God could make something so complex and self sustaining as evolution amazed him endlessly.
His point was more along the lines that 'Intelligent Design' created all the basework for the great replication and diversion of what came to be known as 'Evolution'.
As I said, a shame a lot of people seem to completely miss that point.
My first thought when I read this was 'Whiskey Tango Foxtrot'. (Well. Not exactly, it was actually the terms that those letters stand for, but hey).
This is really sad, because I just know he's serious about this, and he really does think this 'saves the children'. And he's giving the exact proof why people with no knowledge about these sort of technical things, should not be allowed to even propose a law about it.
You're not going to let a truck driver design your house. You're not letting a CEO have root access to your core machines. You don't accept financial advice from a bum. You can't accept truth from a politician. Uhm. Well. You get my point.
Why the hell would we accept a senator to make laws about something he simply doesn't have the knowledge about? Why on earth do these people even think they can make sensible comments about this?
It's so intensely sad that in a wat it gets funny, if I didn't realize that they're dead serious, and we're going to be stuck with the bullshit.
Can't we forcibly 'retire' these sort of politicians from their position... Bleh.
A good one here would probably be to add a catchall that redirects everything to 'fuckoffnetworksolutions.yourdomain.whatever' where they can put all the advertisements they want..
Just let that one give a 404, and then NetSol takes over from there.
Has anyone tried something along these lines yet?
If this gets used a lot, at least Microsoft can blame all their problems on 'race track memory things crashing'.
This is brilliant for them!
Seriously, though. The idea of storing bits on top of each other instead of alongside each other does give a much smaller footprint, and from what I understand from what I've read some 3 years ago, also a much better speed vs thermal efficiency.
Two thought to be unique two-star systems discovered that are uniquely tying together two stars previously thought to be unique for certain value of uniqueness.
:) However. The article does explain it. They found a unique set of stars in a (at that moment) unique configuration. Then in their search they found another one that had been documented way earlier but wrongly classified. Thus the (admittedly rather borked) headline.
Although I guess that's somewhat overkill for a headline
Not to disappoint you, but that's actually standard procedure for the english.
You're missing the point, really..
:)
There should be *NO* passwords in documents. Period. What you should do is make personalized user accounts in the database for all users that actually require access to this data, then have that username automatically filled in from the logged on user, then prompt the user to type in their own password.
This provides a solid authentication model, will deny all users who have nothing to do with this data to access it, and will also create a personal audit trail.
ps. This is my 256th post! Weeh!
You've got to be trusted,
by the people that you lie to,
so that when they turn their backs on you,
you can stab the knife in.
A global police force already exists pretty much in the shape of Interpol. So really no need to go and invent one. Any sort of crime that goes beyond a country's borders pretty much ends up at Interpol, and through them at the police forces in the countries affected by the crime.
Global lawmaking however is going to be extremely hard, or even impossible, considering the many different ideas people have about freedom, censorship, crime in general (is marihuana legal yes/no), etc, etc.
So. If I understand this correctly, the newest addition to the curriculum of the police school will be:
Intahwebs Hacking 101: How to break into networked computers for dummies.
I don't quite get this bill, to be honest. There is almost never a fully open continuous connection between networked computers to begin with, and I seriously doubt that any sort of crime syndicate would be so stupid as to share directories over the internet or something equally dumb.
So the only thing I can possibly think of is them trying to hack into machines that have been/are connected to the machine they have physical access to, and I'm sure that'll be protested by every privacy and civil liberty organisation in existance.
This is what you get if you let people with absolutely 0 knowledge about how things work (other than from a buzzbingo chart) make laws and or decisions about technology.
Sad, really...
d. Making someone pretty, 1 million
e. Fixing someone who got hit with a stick, 20k/yr
f. 3 year treatment for burnout, 120k/yr
Obviously you've never heard Nine Inch Nails live, or on CD for that matter. Trent doesn't need to artificially 'noise himself', really. He does that well enough on his own (with the help of his ever changing band, of course)
I'd say go and download his music, and you'll see what I mean.
Making them slow down even more, and consequentially making everyone behind them slow down even more, shockwaving to a total standstill some miles down the road.
Yeah.. So actually cutting someone off makes sure you won't have anyone behind you for a while. Hmm... There might be merit to that idea
They're getting sick and tired of these slow things and finally got out and started pushing.
;)
Must be it.
Or possibly dark matter...
I think if I was a law student, I'd be very very happy doing this sort of work.
Actual cases with a lot of what every defence lawyer is looking for: Suspense, Lying, Cheating, Inexpert Witnesses, Corporate Greed, Perjury, Farfetched application of laws...
This would be great. You could probably make a TV series out of it even!
(Okay okay.. Some of this is tongue in cheeck, but the basic premise is obvious: This is great material for law students to study and participate in. They get a real life example of how screwed up and convoluted cases can get)
And maybe, just maybe this'll breed a generation of lawyers not hellbent on making Escheresque pictures out of the law.
That reminds me of Michael Jackson. Born a black man, will die a white woman.
Thanks for your post
In the original mission briefing the reduced power output of the solar panels due to dust buildup were actually mentioned, but it wasn't actually considered a serious problem, since it would only start to really influence the mission after roughly 8 to 9 months.
I read that as well, and I agree that this would, if plausible, be a perfect solution (I love my commas).
This sounds very logical, but I think you're forgetting one rather important thing: The air density on Mars is insanely low in comparison to earth, so actually getting these canisters pressurized is either going to take proportionately more power or time (or both). Taking pressurized air containers (generally quite heavy in comparison to their effective payload) then seems the only solution, which I can imagine to be prohibitively expensive/heavy/etc.
All in all, though, the engineers have learned a ton from building and deploying these 2 bots, and I'm sure a next generation Mars robots will be hugely different, and will incorporate a lot of ideas and realizations that came out of these.
Go Buggies
- More Moving Parts
- Weight
- Dust too fine to be brushed off easilly
- Chance to actually reduce power generation on failure by blocking the solar panels
- Needs power itself
And all this aside from the fact that asking someone to make a solar panel wiper for Mars is going to be an enormously expensive and involved operation. Windspeeds, airpressure, particle count, gravity, temperature all play a part in this. And anyone using windshield wipers on their car knows how unreliable they are to begin with.
Being very socially inept and/or being a genius can be related or unrelated. However this guy went to university aged 14. That's generally considered a sign of being a genius, despite any other characterizations he might get.
A coulpe of points that you should look into (including the fine print):
:)
- Is there a data limit on the connection you're looking at (X GB/week, month, anything?).
- Is there an issue with encrypted traffic (some ISPs/Telcos will throttle or cut encrypted traffic to fight P2P, which will also impede your VPN)
- Will you have the coverage that you need, and will the coverage also extend to all the rooms in your house?
- How important is connectivity to you? (For me personally, I need to have at least one place where I can be 100% certain to be able to login through my VPN to my job) Does the roaming wireless fail often, or not? (This also relates to point 3)
- Assuming you're looking into this for work also, are you allowed to use relatively open wireless networks (I know that I'm not, since I work in the financial world)
I personally would keep the static line, despite the extra cost, just to have a 'base' to go to when things don't work elsewhere. This also gives me the possibility to log onto my home server and retrieve/store important data through my own VPN.
Lots of things to think about
On a totally unrelated note: Why do I have 10 (and not 5) moderator points??
Hey! There's nothing wrong with Essex! Well. Maybe aside from the fact is has Stansted airport. And there's this girl from Essex.. And well. Oh bugger...
There. Fixed that for you.
Thanks for clearing that up. My memory wasn't quite up to date on that one obviously :)
2 different questions here with 2 different answers.
First: When you try to enter the US, you're actually not (yet) under the US jurisdiction, and cannot in any way use the US constitution as protection. You can refuse them anything they want, and they can refuse you entry into the country, and you'll go right back on the first plane out.
Second: If you try and enter the US with encrypted data, you can not use an encryption stronger than 54-bit DES (IIRC), which is regulated under the US ammunitions law. This however will only apply *after* you've already entered the country. So they might let you in, but they'd also be in their right to then arrest you for breaking said ammunitions law and importing/exporting using an illegal crypt.