I don't know what you consider "northern", but the two times I've spent a week on Isle Royale (48N) in July, I switched pretty quickly and easily to sleeping on a natural day/night schedule.
We're already past the level where I can benefit from higher resolution on phones. I'm over 40 and already have reading glasses, but I'd need to get special phone-only glasses to see any more detail or smaller type.
Sounds like a sad day for anyone who doesn't play stupid games on Facebook, and just wants to use it for communicating with friends/family. More games means more annoying invites to block.
Part of the "problem" here is that the article itself doesn't explain anything. It shows two unlabeled maps side by side without explaining what either of them is, apparently assuming (with the same head-up-the-ass solipsism that it ridicules) that everyone is familiar with them. (I'm guessing that the one on the left is published by the MTA, but the fact that it doesn't show any subway routes makes me wonder.)
Being suspicious of a security system because their encryption model is unclear to you is reasonable.
Being suspicious because their narrator has a "foreign accent" or you see "something that looks like Chinese"... is just plain stupid.
Boxcryptor is based in Germany. If that's a deal-breaker, so be it, but you didn't learn that by hearing their narrator speaking with an English accent. Being based in Europe, it's perfectly natural that they'd hire someone from England (or fluent in British English) rather than an American to record their English-language promo. Or maybe someone in the company is a British ex-pat. Or the marketing guy just loves English accents. It means nothing.
As for the "Chinese", it appears that part of their encryption method involves using an alternate character set for the generated names of encrypted files, probably as a clever way of ensuring that there are no filename collisions. They could have used Hebrew, or Cyrillic, or whatever; they chose one of the Chinese character sets, probably because it's huge. It also means nothing... except that there are other forms of writing in the world, and their character sets are supported on modern computers.
The fact that you're alarmed by the existence of "foreign" things makes you xenophobic, and the fact that you apparently would be less suspicious if they presented an America-only image makes you an idiot.
This is so wrong-headed and over-the-top that I can't help wondering if it's a negotiating tactic: propose blocking a bunch of extra stuff, wait for the public outcry, then "back down" and just block the porn and hate sites. "See? We aren't censoring!"
Justin Amash doesn't represent me, but he was elected by the voters of my district. He's a dogmatic ideologue mostly interested in libertarian theater, and most of the time I consider him useless-to-harmful. This is not one of those times.
A huge part of the problem is that copyright terms have ballooned in the last two centuries from the US's 14 years (with a 14-year extension if the creator was still alive), to a minimum of 50 years after the creator dies – longer in most countries – and well over a century if the material is produced by a corporation. Instead of a fairly brief window for a creator to profit from the work while creating new works, it's become either a hereditary legacy for the creator's descendants to live on, or an effectively permanent monopoly for for a corporation to license. The purpose of copyright and patents as outlined in the US Constitution ("to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries") is no longer being served.
Would should happen in both the above is to stop the activity at SOURCE so there just isn't this sort of stuff around.
The activity in question here is sex. Not just child abuse, rape, and other already-illegal acts. This legislation would – by default – block access to porn. All of it. Are you seriously suggesting that the solution to children accessing porn on the internet is to somehow stop all porn from being made?
The folks promoting this are talking about how this will protect against "child porn", which is already very illegal in the UK. If they had the technological means to block that without shutting down the internet (and anyone reading this site should know that's impossible) they'd be doing it already, and no one (even advocates of free expression) would object to that.
That's a meaningless distinction. While this project might take lessons learned from AI research to solve the problem more effectively, it's still the application of computational technology to solve a computational problem, which isn't exactly the human brain's strongest suit. Drop me a line when a computer is better than humans at something human brains are actually good at.
Stealing an election at my college (back in the day) would've been a lot easier than this. I should know: I was in charge of running them one year, and I could've simply picked who I wanted to win (but I didn't).
"why were they using invalid domains in the first place?"
Because they could. Because it was an easy solution. Because no one could imagine that ICANN would someday be so broken that.local or.office or.internal could ever possibly be a valid TLD.
The silos at Microsoft were built in part as a way to get the DOJ to leave them alone, to at least make it look like the Office division didn't have an unfair advantage over Lotus or WordPerfect Corp in developing Windows applications. Getting rid of the silos is a test to see if they can get away with it (again). They probably can, but only because the DOJ settlement worked, and Microsoft is no longer the 800-pound gorilla of the industry, but just another 300-pound gorilla facing serious competition from Apple and Google.
Ender’s Game is set more than a century in the future and has nothing to do with
The controversy is not – and never has been – about the content of the story. It's been about the author's political activities, which have been funded in part by the money he received for this film, and which will continue to be funded by additional income which he'll get if it's a big hit (e.g. a sequel).
political issues that did not exist when the book was written in 1984.
Legal recognition of lesbian/gay marriage was already an issue in 1984. Couples had sued for the right to a civil marriage as early as 1971. Not that this is relevant, but it just shows that Card is either lying or doesn't know the history.
With the recent Supreme Court ruling, the gay marriage issue becomes moot.
No it hasn't, and as a National Organization for [sic] Marriage board member, he knows this well. He unquestionably intends to keep fighting it. After the movie comes out.
The Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution will, sooner or later, give legal force in every state to any marriage contract recognized by any other state.
This is probably correct; it depends on the Supreme Court. A bit baffling that this hasn't already happened, but that's the legal system dragging its feet, waiting for society to catch up.
Now it will be interesting to see whether the victorious proponents of gay marriage will show tolerance toward those who disagreed with them when the issue was still in dispute.
Don't worry, Orson. No one is going to force you to get gay-married. This is part of the Christian right's persecution complex, in which they view their declining dominance over American culture as an indication that they are about to become (and the more delusional among them thinking they already have been) a persecuted minority. Begging for "tolerance" of their intolerance is a tacit admission (whether they admit it or not) that they expect others to do to them as they've done to others.
As much as I love Star Trek, Vulcan would be a poor name for either of these objects: too cold. Kerberos and Styx are excellent choices to accompany Pluto.
Slashdot Mirror
Get a better tent, with proper ventilation.
I don't know what you consider "northern", but the two times I've spent a week on Isle Royale (48N) in July, I switched pretty quickly and easily to sleeping on a natural day/night schedule.
I doubt it offers a fully-functional simulation of a crash landing, either.
"so that your eye can be closer and closer "
That's kinda the problem.
We're already past the level where I can benefit from higher resolution on phones. I'm over 40 and already have reading glasses, but I'd need to get special phone-only glasses to see any more detail or smaller type.
This is a bit like asking which is more important: the left side of the brain, or the right side of the brain?
Sounds like a sad day for anyone who doesn't play stupid games on Facebook, and just wants to use it for communicating with friends/family. More games means more annoying invites to block.
Part of the "problem" here is that the article itself doesn't explain anything. It shows two unlabeled maps side by side without explaining what either of them is, apparently assuming (with the same head-up-the-ass solipsism that it ridicules) that everyone is familiar with them. (I'm guessing that the one on the left is published by the MTA, but the fact that it doesn't show any subway routes makes me wonder.)
Being suspicious of a security system because their encryption model is unclear to you is reasonable.
Being suspicious because their narrator has a "foreign accent" or you see "something that looks like Chinese"... is just plain stupid.
Boxcryptor is based in Germany. If that's a deal-breaker, so be it, but you didn't learn that by hearing their narrator speaking with an English accent. Being based in Europe, it's perfectly natural that they'd hire someone from England (or fluent in British English) rather than an American to record their English-language promo. Or maybe someone in the company is a British ex-pat. Or the marketing guy just loves English accents. It means nothing.
As for the "Chinese", it appears that part of their encryption method involves using an alternate character set for the generated names of encrypted files, probably as a clever way of ensuring that there are no filename collisions. They could have used Hebrew, or Cyrillic, or whatever; they chose one of the Chinese character sets, probably because it's huge. It also means nothing... except that there are other forms of writing in the world, and their character sets are supported on modern computers.
The fact that you're alarmed by the existence of "foreign" things makes you xenophobic, and the fact that you apparently would be less suspicious if they presented an America-only image makes you an idiot.
This is so wrong-headed and over-the-top that I can't help wondering if it's a negotiating tactic: propose blocking a bunch of extra stuff, wait for the public outcry, then "back down" and just block the porn and hate sites. "See? We aren't censoring!"
Justin Amash doesn't represent me, but he was elected by the voters of my district. He's a dogmatic ideologue mostly interested in libertarian theater, and most of the time I consider him useless-to-harmful. This is not one of those times.
A huge part of the problem is that copyright terms have ballooned in the last two centuries from the US's 14 years (with a 14-year extension if the creator was still alive), to a minimum of 50 years after the creator dies – longer in most countries – and well over a century if the material is produced by a corporation. Instead of a fairly brief window for a creator to profit from the work while creating new works, it's become either a hereditary legacy for the creator's descendants to live on, or an effectively permanent monopoly for for a corporation to license. The purpose of copyright and patents as outlined in the US Constitution ("to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries") is no longer being served.
The activity in question here is sex. Not just child abuse, rape, and other already-illegal acts. This legislation would – by default – block access to porn. All of it. Are you seriously suggesting that the solution to children accessing porn on the internet is to somehow stop all porn from being made?
The folks promoting this are talking about how this will protect against "child porn", which is already very illegal in the UK. If they had the technological means to block that without shutting down the internet (and anyone reading this site should know that's impossible) they'd be doing it already, and no one (even advocates of free expression) would object to that.
The camo suit looks remarkably like the costume that the late Neal Pozner designed for Aquaman back in the 80s.
That's a meaningless distinction. While this project might take lessons learned from AI research to solve the problem more effectively, it's still the application of computational technology to solve a computational problem, which isn't exactly the human brain's strongest suit. Drop me a line when a computer is better than humans at something human brains are actually good at.
Stealing an election at my college (back in the day) would've been a lot easier than this. I should know: I was in charge of running them one year, and I could've simply picked who I wanted to win (but I didn't).
No, it is not going to be called "Vulcan".
All sites that you can expect random casual users to visit do serve ads.
"why were they using invalid domains in the first place?"
.local or .office or .internal could ever possibly be a valid TLD.
Because they could. Because it was an easy solution. Because no one could imagine that ICANN would someday be so broken that
The silos at Microsoft were built in part as a way to get the DOJ to leave them alone, to at least make it look like the Office division didn't have an unfair advantage over Lotus or WordPerfect Corp in developing Windows applications. Getting rid of the silos is a test to see if they can get away with it (again). They probably can, but only because the DOJ settlement worked, and Microsoft is no longer the 800-pound gorilla of the industry, but just another 300-pound gorilla facing serious competition from Apple and Google.
One little-noticed aspect of this is that Steve Ballmer is changing his last name to "Jobs".
Seriously, it sounds like he's trying to change Microsoft into Apple.
Christians didn't invent marriage.
The controversy is not – and never has been – about the content of the story. It's been about the author's political activities, which have been funded in part by the money he received for this film, and which will continue to be funded by additional income which he'll get if it's a big hit (e.g. a sequel).
Legal recognition of lesbian/gay marriage was already an issue in 1984. Couples had sued for the right to a civil marriage as early as 1971. Not that this is relevant, but it just shows that Card is either lying or doesn't know the history.
No it hasn't, and as a National Organization for [sic] Marriage board member, he knows this well. He unquestionably intends to keep fighting it. After the movie comes out.
This is probably correct; it depends on the Supreme Court. A bit baffling that this hasn't already happened, but that's the legal system dragging its feet, waiting for society to catch up.
Don't worry, Orson. No one is going to force you to get gay-married.
This is part of the Christian right's persecution complex, in which they view their declining dominance over American culture as an indication that they are about to become (and the more delusional among them thinking they already have been) a persecuted minority. Begging for "tolerance" of their intolerance is a tacit admission (whether they admit it or not) that they expect others to do to them as they've done to others.
As much as I love Star Trek, Vulcan would be a poor name for either of these objects: too cold. Kerberos and Styx are excellent choices to accompany Pluto.