Your ignorance can only be matched by your arrogance. Assuming that this is ignorance and not an intentional twisting of the truth, I'll try to help you understand:
The passage in Deuteronomy that you reference is part of what's know as the "old covenant." https://www.gotquestions.org/o...
I see what you're trying to do there with the Matthew reference, and I think you know that you're misleading others. If you really don't know, you can educate yourself here: https://www.gci.org/bible/matt... First thing that pops up in a search - not hard to find.
Sounds like a very long winded case trying to show why the old testament laws do not apply to Ckristians despite Christ him self saying they do in no uncertain terms according to Matthew 5.17-18, I'm still wondering what your point is?
Muslims are generally well-disposed to Sharia as a political system while the other two are not well disposed to religion as a political system.
And Sharia is demonized as evil/bad/wrong in the West to a complete degree. By people with no factual understanding of the particulars. Usually by the same people who want their but their precious Ten Commandments enshrined in law and custom, along with a lot of other Biblical law. That is what tells me it is bogus. When the Roy Moore's of the world are involved.
It doesn't help that many societies in the Mid-East are tribal. That only gives political Islam a guaranteed divide and conquer strategy. With everyone fighting like that, no one notices the deal the central governments have with Islam, i.e., keep'em fighting and keep local politics local so the people do not notice our incompetence.
You mean the same thing that happens in the West? There is a reason why the Trump's and Steve King's of the world are inclined to ranting and raving over others, why California and New York are stigmatized. Watch the screams about Detroit and Chicago.
Show me where the Ten Commandments support the stoning of gays like sharia does.
Show me where the Ten Commandments support the killing of, umm, kafirs like sharia does.
Show me where the Ten Commandments say that the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man, like sharia does.
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Well done! You just rendered all his arguments invalid by the cunning use of mindless profanity.
They have been living in the Netherlands for three generations already. Some were born in the Netherlands, of one or even two parents that were also born in the Netherlands. Of course they still speak Turkish, have a Turkish passport (and a Dutch one), serve in the Turkish military (and the Dutch parliament if they want to), watch Turkish TV, eat Turkish food, and go to Turkish supermarkets and Turkish mosques, where they get indoctrinated by Diyanet - the Turkish ministery of religious affairs. And if their government wishes to speak to them, but the evil white oppressors forbid that, they go out and riot throughout the conquered province in the name of Erdogan and allah.
Yet somehow we are all supposed to pretend they are also Dutch people that are perfectly well integrated into Dutch society. Now tell me why I should NOT vote Wilders (the Dutch Trump).
You could say all the same things about American and Dutch Jews who hold Israeli passports. I'm not trying to dump on Jews, they can speak Hebrew, have an Israeli passport (and an Amercan one), serve in the Israeli military (and run for the US Congress or Dutch parliament if they want to), watch Israeli TV, eat Jewish food, and go to Jewish delicatessen markets and Jewish Synagogues, where they may or may not (depending on their choice of Synagogue) get indoctrinated by Zionist activists supported by the Israeli government. I just wonder why it's OK for Israeli-Americans or Israeli-Netherlanders to do all of these things but not Turkish-Netherlanders?
The real problem is ISALM. That's why so many Muslims want to turn their back on Ataturk's dream of a modern, secular Turkey and make it yet another Sharia hell-hole.
The problem is not Islam by it self, it's what we in the software business call rotten 'legacy code' common to all Abrahamic religions, Islam, Judaism and Christianity. They all have the same problematic common legacy of misogynism, violence, homophobia and intolerance. People talk as if Islam is all hate and Christianity is all hugs, kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits but in reality you don't have to search very long for bible passages like Deuteronomy 22:13-21 to which the bible thumpers usually respond that Christians don't follow such hateful passages in the bible and (my favourite christian snowflake argument) the hateful old testament laws are "only for Jews" (amazing how quickly the followers of the religion of hugs kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits revert to medieval antisemitism) which leads us to Matthew 5:17-18. But I think we've had enough fun with scripture. Let's address your main argument that the problem is Islam. What the hell makes you think that all Christians disregard bronze age laws about stoning or otherwise abusing and suppressing women (just to cite one example) but that all Muslims gleefully embrace such commandments instead of ignoring them like many Christians apparently do because that's what you just insinuated, i.e. that all Muslims religiously (pun not intended) follow passages in the Quaran requiring them to practice barbaric reprisals (similar to ones found in the bible) against people who break religious laws and commandments and just for your information: millions of Muslims don't do that and would, for example, not dream of stoning a woman.
Exactly. Most of the surveillance is gone by tapping one of the endpoints. All your "cloud" data (email, voice, whatever) is unencrypted on the server side and there is API access. On the client side, security is horribly broken because the client side software keeps changing and every change introduces new holes.
No, most of the surveillance was done by tapping the largely unencrypted data being sent over the internet backbone and warehousing it. The resulting database could then be data mined at the NSA/FBI/CIAs leisure. Once your data is encrypted they can't easily do that anymore because it isn't as simple anymore. Previously all they had to do was just sit there, watch a system management console while they warehoused insane amounts of unencrypted data and could implement deep intercepts of somebody's entire unencrypted communications with few mouse clicks in a web interface. With encryption they now have to seek out one or both parties in an encrypted data exchange and hack their computers which is a whole lot more hassle while wholesale warehousing and data mining of internet, voice and video traffic (the wet dream of the NSA/CIA/FBI and the politicians) is out of the question unless they can decrypt the vast majority of encrypted communications on the fly. I've heard figures of up to 20% of some HTTPS traffic being decryptable in bulk by the NSA because of encryption weaknesses but I'm having real trouble believing they'll be able to decrypt 90-100% of all encrypted traffic on the fly and warehouse it any time soon however much they'd like to.
Do we really want (or need) the Netbook back? As I recall, they were a product that did little more than make people wish they had saved the money to buy something that was actually capable of meeting their basic needs. These days everyone has a cellphone which is already infinitely better than the netbook of yesterday.
I used to have an iPad, it was nice and did what I wanted it to do most of the time. However, it had a few serious drawbacks such as the inability to work with several windows at once and the fact that even with an external keyboard the touch screen interface drove me nuts, partly because my fingers gummed up the display and I was constantly cleaning it up. So I switched the iPad out for a 12" MacBook. Same form factor same weight much more flexibility, a larger selection of software and a more powerful UI. Haven't looked back yet, the only thing I miss is the ability to read PDFs in portrait mode.
> He eventually escaped this system of human quality classification
Holy shit. Do they still do this in Germany?
Not sure, haven't lived in Germany since I was a little kid. The way it was explained to me was that at some point during the education process they categorised the kids according what advanced education they were 'capable of' and some kids just got sent to vocational school because some expert decided that being a plumber, carpenter, mason or something was the most they could handle intellectually which is a pretty offensive attitude if you ask me. Just because somebody is a carpenter or something similar does not mean that person is stupid. The whole system sounded like some kind creepy carry-over from the Nazi period. I was told myself by the department head at the local university's engineering department that people from 'my kind of high school' had no business in the engineering department because 'my kind of high school' did not provide students with the kind of maths education needed, The sad thing is he was right, my country has a public school system. However when it is time to cut budgets some public schools feel the full force of the budget cuts while for a select few public schools who train the progeny of the upper strata of society the cuts are so lightly felt they have enough money left in the budget to teach Latin and Classical Greek. Being told my education was crap and that I might as well not bother took the wind out of my sails for years until I went to another Uni (by then a few private ones had appeared who, unlike the public ones, offered catch-up classes in math and physics), got a Master in Comp Sci. and finished with a 90% grade average. Occasionally I get this urge to scan my diploma, write that quote about how I had no business studying engineering over it from corner to corner in red war-banner letters and e-mail it to to that arrogant dick. He is today a big fish in the national University system and spends his days warming a leather chair in a ministry. I suppose that old American proverb is true: 'shit always floats to the top' (I like American proverbs, they are so honest)
You can't fix social mobility with IQ tests. Hell you can't fix ANYTHING with IQ tests.
My cousin was sent to a special needs class which in Germany at the time effectively destroyed any hope you had of ever getting into a University. This was done on the basis of an analysis of his grades and an IQ test. He ended up being sent to a vocational school and graduated as a plumber because the specialists in classifying humans by IQ declared that with his limited intelligence a lowly plumber was the most he could ever hope to aspire to. He eventually escaped this system of human quality classification after he graduated by completing a business degree at a private school. He now owns a big plumbing company and by big I mean the kind of company that bids for substantial contracts like doing the plumbing large office buildings and factories. I have seen enough similar examples for me to conclude that IQ tests are at best an extremely inaccurate instrument and at worst completely useless.
Men tend to initiate sex much more than women do. Men also tend to watch porn much more than women do. So I have a hunch the ease of access to porn has resulted in men getting their gratification alone while watching porn, thus less sex is taking place. Additionally the normal, average woman does not compare to your typical porn star, which may also result in men developing unrealistic standards and thus not having sex with their partner as much due to higher expectations.
Blaming it all on men is a bit unfair. Women also have unrealistic expectations. The regular average man also compares poorly to movie actors, pop stars and professional athletes which may be another contributing factor. People these days have a very unrealistic expectation of what their ideal partner should look like, what they themselves look like, and people generally seem to spend so much time fussing over what what the person they are currently dating looks like that they forget to think about what kind of a person they are. I was told a long time ago by an old coot who had been married to the same woman for over twice as long as I had been alive at that time (c.a. 17-18 years) that it is more important what your partner makes you feel than what they look like and there is some truth to that. Now, I'm not saying you should completely disregard what your perspective partner looks like but you might want to decrease the importance of looks in favour of other traits if you are looking for a stable long term relationship. Of course if you are a promiscuous libertine (nothing wrong with that as long as you break no laws) whose greatest goal in life is adding notches to his/her belt then other rules apply.
At least for my little bubble of it, we're EXPLICITLY banned (we'll get blasted out of the industry) for doing or even mentioning business over personal email.
Like, black mark on your FINRA record, no one should hire you kinda stuff.
I'm sure it happens, but our compliance guys are zealous about that stuff. Why don't politicians have compliance guys?
They do, they are called the Office of Congressional Ethics but it has no power and is widely ignored because it tends to: 'get in the way of doing business'.
Sometimes. I would prefer to enjoy life and be a total ignorant. Yet slashdot remind me that reality is not always good to know. That said, once you learn it, you never forget it! Happy swimming!
At least it's outside your body. Think of what happens when you go to a public bathroom that smells bad: what you're breathing was previously inside someone. I mean, the actual molecules that are entering your nose used to be part of someone else digestive system. Maybe even more than one person.
That's a lot worse than a bucket of piss diluted in a big pool filled with chlorine.
Seriously? In the case cited 75 liters of urine in a pool containing 830.000 liters of water we have an urine percentage of (75/830.000)*100 = 0.009036145% where 95% of that 0.009036145% urine is sterile water assuming they are talking about 75 liters of factory standard piss as it can be obtained from the manufacturer. The average human being accidentally ingests about 1kg of insect parts each year. That's 1 kg of critters, some of which crawled round on, and fed off of, faecal matter and rotting tissue!!! Ever wondered how delicacies like mouldy cheese and escargot were invented? I'll let you in on a secret, your ancestors fed off of things like rotting meat, ergot infested and otherwise spoiled grain, cats, dogs, insects, rats, mice, insects, slugs, soup made of bones dissolved in sour whey, the list goes on... If you two continue on this trajectory you'll both turn into Howard Hughes.
20 Bucks?
The Lightning to 3.5mm-jack Adapter from apple is 9 Dollars.
11 Dollars for Headphones would be extremly cheap and you'd have accordingly bad sound quality.
Currently, EarPods with Lightning Connectors cost 29$, which is already 9$ more than you proposed.
The 3.5mm jack adaptor is included with the iPhone 7. You can get plenty of decent Lightning earbuds from 3rd party vendors on Amazon for $20 which must have OK sound quality (for earbuds) since you can get a pretty decent set of Sennheiser/Jabra/etc. earbuds for c.a. $30. Mind you, if you want, you can shell out anything up to $200 for earbuds that aren't even wireless. I agree about the lousy sound quality of the low end earbuds but you'd be amazed what people settle for in terms of sound quality. I'll never understand why people shell out $500+ on a smartphone and then go to the thrift store and buy a crappy $5 set earbuds.
If this is true (it seems to be just a rumour) then it will be two years in a row that Apple made users' existing headphones obsolete. That would be brave/arrogant/foolish even by Apple's standards.
Honestly the sooner they drop lightning and other proprietary connectors the better. Not many people bought lightning headphones yet so the sooner they switch the less painful it is going to be.
It would be even more arrogant to keep lightning for 4-5 years so that people invest into headphones and accessories* and then switch to USB-C.
*Even tough stupid people buying headphones with a proprietary connector only have themselves to blame.
No, no, no, and no again! They should stick with the Lightning connector for the next 25 years because there are people out there with Lightning headphones who would have to shell out 20 bucks for new headphones or, god forbid, use an adaptor.
That sounds like the name of a gunslinger that just blew into town. Not only can he handle his six shooters, he's also the fastest guy on a Dvorak keyboard in six states and he writes C code faster than a pony express rider with a Comanche war party on his heels... nah, that doesn't sound quite right but still cooler than a dull old state senate bill.
Boeing 787 was around a decade from initial "what can we do" to entry into service - the Airbus A350XWB was a little more at 11 years.
Neither manufacturer has a clean sheet design in the pipeline right now, so we probably wont see a new widebody until at least the 2030s.
According to this Boeing functionary I talked to it is easier to simply upgrade the tail section or the wings (or just parts of the wings and tail) and re-engine an existing aircraft design than to build a new design from scratch because that way you only have to get the new components certified. The fuselage pretty much does as good a job now as it did in the 1960s and 70s so you don't have to get that re-certified/tested/whatever only what you upgrade. That's why they are still building Boeing 737s, a design that first flew in 1967. Over the years they have upgraded various bits and pieces of the 737 until the modern aircraft have fairly little in common with the first 737s. This may seem weird, it did to me, but it's apparently a damn sight cheaper to do these bit by bit upgrades than designing a whole new aircraft to fill the same market slot. Designing building and getting a new design tested/certified/etc. only makes sense if nothing in your current inventory fits the market slot you have in mind or if the new design very significantly improves performance and therefore marketability.
Personally I think the whole Pluto being a planet vs it being a dwarf planet makes about as much sense as arguing about whether American football deserves being called a football because players spend most of their time holding the ball and running around with it. Having said that, Pluto is a fascinating place regardless of it's label and, and since I'm not an astronomer, I am left wondering: Is the fight to make Pluto a planet again (or for that matter the original decision to demote it) based on sound scientific reasoning or is it just an ego driven pissing contest born injured national pride because Pluto is the only planet in the Sol system found by an American?
In Google Earth you could always easily see a shallow landmass around New Zealand, so what's new here?
There are lots of interesting things abut this. For one thing it would be interesting to know exactly how much of this continent was above sea level during the last glacial maximum. The same goes for the Atlantic area. There are several islands in the Atlantic that are now either sunken, smaller than they were then or just reefs now but that would have been much larger during this period and could have served as stop-over points for people on a trans oceanic migration to N-America. There is a little flash App of the area that allows you to drop the sea levels: http://sahultime.monash.edu.au... Seems New Zealand was at least twice as big as it is today about 20k years ago and that it was surrounded by islands that are now sunken. Makes me wish could drop sea levels in Google Earth.
Allow me to present to you a lout and vociferous BULLSHIT!
Do you have dremams about killing 'Murricans, because we're so damn evil? Well here you go, and allow me to show the extent of your bullshit. http://www.it-can.ca/2013/02/0...
Seems like our friendly neighbors to the north, do indeed and in truth, confiscate peoples cell phones, and they do indeed search them, and they do indeed make uses of those search results, and their courts do indeed consider that as an acceptable practice. They even say that they do. Indeed.
One of the strangest things is that so many people have such a white hot seeting hatred of all things American, that they feel that in their just cause, and in the inherent superiority of all other nations, that they can spew hatred and lies about teh evilz 'Murricans doing what everyone does.
But hey, if you hate us that much for made up and non-factual reasons, feel free to stay away. You might learn that most of us are actually nice people - and that would mess with your preconceptions.
Yeesh, calm down will ya. Just be cause I don't want to visit your country due to the protracted, draconian and at times even humiliating process I'd have to subject myself to in order to get a Visa, that does not mean that I hate Americans. I just don't want some dull witted TSA drone rummaging around my laptop and my cell phone, rifling through my social media account and my private data, possibly even copying my personal data and storing it a DHS/NSA database, etc... The reason I'd rather go to Canada is that the Canadians might search my phone but are pretty unlikely to do so. The TSA/DHS on the other hand seems to be on track to making the act of poking it's nose into every nook and cranny of my personal life standard practice.
No, WHOOSH to you!
I don't want it to have to have line of sight to my face. What a fricking step back. I can reach my hand into my pocket and touch the button to unlock. I can unlock in the dark. It is retarded and as someone who has owned every generation of iphones and ipads, I will quit buying them because of that stupid feature.
Your personal preferences are immaterial to this discussion. You tried to make the claim that Apple's 3D facial recognition ID would be every bit as insecure as Googles 2D facial recognition ID and you are wrong. So, one more, time if Apple's implementation of face recognition unlocking includes a 3D laser scanning module it is going to be by many parsecs more secure that Googles 2D implementation was that is a mathematical fact. Do you get it now?... Oh, and you forgot to check the 'Anonymous Coward' box.
Wow you say how good it is and then give an example of how the leading tech company darling royally fucked it up. That doesn't instill confidence. Also I don't want to have to face this thing toward my face to unlock it every time. What about all the times you're not wanting to angle your phone toward toue fully in obscured face? I link that I can do that now with a 100% reliable solution and functionality that I can feel and not look ata a fucking physical button. Trust me this shit will be apples undoimg, just look at the "touchbar" on the new Macs and tell me how this is faster to do anything. It isn't because it takes something that can be accomplished through touch memory with keys and makes you take your eyes off the thing you need to look at to look at a different thing. It's fucking hunt and pecking.
Woosh!... I also explained why Apple's approach with the 3D laser scanner module is betteer and more secure than Googles attempt using only 2D.
So, I have to re-register every time I shave in order to use apple pay? Oh, you are wearing a baseball cap, so you have to take that off to pay? Oh, you want to unlock your phone while walking down the street. Better take off your sunglasses... Apple, why you gotta keep losing desired functionality?!?!
I know that venting your outrage over everything that Apple does is great fun but please do not trash talk facial recognition just because Apple is using it. You are severely underestimating what modern face recognition algorithms can do. If you set out to do it and if this: http://www.webrok.com/news/201... is your taste in sunglasses, you can certainly screw up facial recognition systems but modern facial recognition software has pretty impressive success rates even with subjects wearing headgear, different hair styles, 'normal' sunglasses or regular eye glasses and obscured faces (beards, scarves, veils). engineers@google.com already tried integrating face recognition login into Android and it turned out to be an embarrassing fail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... because the Android camera could not distinguish between an actual 3D face and a 2D picture of one. Hence the mention of 3D laser scanning module for the new iPhones in the article summary because 3D scanning is what you need for pattern recognition based security features that are hard to fool regardless of whether you are talking about face recognition or fingerprint scanning. On an unrelated note a 3D laser scanning module sounds like a pretty awesome addition to a smartphone for all kinds of reasons having nothing to do with facial recognition and a lot to do with a long standing desire on my part (as, I am sure, many others here) to own a fully functional Start Trek tricorder. A 3D laser scanning module built into your phone would be a major step in that direction. Being able to scan an object on my kitchen table with a smartphone and then sending it to a 3D printer after a short stopover on my laptop to clean up the scan would be nothing short of awesome.
I partially blame the Environmental groups involved, because of previous hyperbole used in previous reports. That being said (and being a nearby resident), I can assure you that most of the issue was due to the FAILED Primary Spillway not being maintained. The topover caused by the failed spillway was fully preventable, had the DWR and ACE and the rest done their job the last 7 years.
But, instead, we have more infrastructure projects proceeding even though we can't maintain what we got. After all, we need a High Speed Rail Train between Fresno and Bakersfield ASAP!!!!
Blame this on the environmentalists all you want but the Obama admin. tried to get infrastructure reform done for 8 years and the GOP blocked it for no purpose other than spite and a Machiavellian effort to further the interests of the GOP and make Obama look bad. If anybody is to blame for this it is Mitch McConnell and his predecessors. http://www.dailykos.com/story/...
Slashdot Mirror
Your ignorance can only be matched by your arrogance. Assuming that this is ignorance and not an intentional twisting of the truth, I'll try to help you understand: The passage in Deuteronomy that you reference is part of what's know as the "old covenant." https://www.gotquestions.org/o... I see what you're trying to do there with the Matthew reference, and I think you know that you're misleading others. If you really don't know, you can educate yourself here: https://www.gci.org/bible/matt... First thing that pops up in a search - not hard to find.
Sounds like a very long winded case trying to show why the old testament laws do not apply to Ckristians despite Christ him self saying they do in no uncertain terms according to Matthew 5.17-18, I'm still wondering what your point is?
Muslims are generally well-disposed to Sharia as a political system while the other two are not well disposed to religion as a political system.
And Sharia is demonized as evil/bad/wrong in the West to a complete degree. By people with no factual understanding of the particulars. Usually by the same people who want their but their precious Ten Commandments enshrined in law and custom, along with a lot of other Biblical law. That is what tells me it is bogus. When the Roy Moore's of the world are involved.
It doesn't help that many societies in the Mid-East are tribal. That only gives political Islam a guaranteed divide and conquer strategy. With everyone fighting like that, no one notices the deal the central governments have with Islam, i.e., keep'em fighting and keep local politics local so the people do not notice our incompetence.
You mean the same thing that happens in the West? There is a reason why the Trump's and Steve King's of the world are inclined to ranting and raving over others, why California and New York are stigmatized. Watch the screams about Detroit and Chicago.
Show me where the Ten Commandments support the stoning of gays like sharia does.
Show me where the Ten Commandments support the killing of, umm, kafirs like sharia does.
Show me where the Ten Commandments say that the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man, like sharia does.
GO FUCK YOURSELF
Well done! You just rendered all his arguments invalid by the cunning use of mindless profanity.
They have been living in the Netherlands for three generations already. Some were born in the Netherlands, of one or even two parents that were also born in the Netherlands. Of course they still speak Turkish, have a Turkish passport (and a Dutch one), serve in the Turkish military (and the Dutch parliament if they want to), watch Turkish TV, eat Turkish food, and go to Turkish supermarkets and Turkish mosques, where they get indoctrinated by Diyanet - the Turkish ministery of religious affairs. And if their government wishes to speak to them, but the evil white oppressors forbid that, they go out and riot throughout the conquered province in the name of Erdogan and allah.
Yet somehow we are all supposed to pretend they are also Dutch people that are perfectly well integrated into Dutch society. Now tell me why I should NOT vote Wilders (the Dutch Trump).
You could say all the same things about American and Dutch Jews who hold Israeli passports. I'm not trying to dump on Jews, they can speak Hebrew, have an Israeli passport (and an Amercan one), serve in the Israeli military (and run for the US Congress or Dutch parliament if they want to), watch Israeli TV, eat Jewish food, and go to Jewish delicatessen markets and Jewish Synagogues, where they may or may not (depending on their choice of Synagogue) get indoctrinated by Zionist activists supported by the Israeli government. I just wonder why it's OK for Israeli-Americans or Israeli-Netherlanders to do all of these things but not Turkish-Netherlanders?
The real problem is ISALM. That's why so many Muslims want to turn their back on Ataturk's dream of a modern, secular Turkey and make it yet another Sharia hell-hole.
The problem is not Islam by it self, it's what we in the software business call rotten 'legacy code' common to all Abrahamic religions, Islam, Judaism and Christianity. They all have the same problematic common legacy of misogynism, violence, homophobia and intolerance. People talk as if Islam is all hate and Christianity is all hugs, kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits but in reality you don't have to search very long for bible passages like Deuteronomy 22:13-21 to which the bible thumpers usually respond that Christians don't follow such hateful passages in the bible and (my favourite christian snowflake argument) the hateful old testament laws are "only for Jews" (amazing how quickly the followers of the religion of hugs kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits revert to medieval antisemitism) which leads us to Matthew 5:17-18. But I think we've had enough fun with scripture. Let's address your main argument that the problem is Islam. What the hell makes you think that all Christians disregard bronze age laws about stoning or otherwise abusing and suppressing women (just to cite one example) but that all Muslims gleefully embrace such commandments instead of ignoring them like many Christians apparently do because that's what you just insinuated, i.e. that all Muslims religiously (pun not intended) follow passages in the Quaran requiring them to practice barbaric reprisals (similar to ones found in the bible) against people who break religious laws and commandments and just for your information: millions of Muslims don't do that and would, for example, not dream of stoning a woman.
Exactly. Most of the surveillance is gone by tapping one of the endpoints. All your "cloud" data (email, voice, whatever) is unencrypted on the server side and there is API access. On the client side, security is horribly broken because the client side software keeps changing and every change introduces new holes.
No, most of the surveillance was done by tapping the largely unencrypted data being sent over the internet backbone and warehousing it. The resulting database could then be data mined at the NSA/FBI/CIAs leisure. Once your data is encrypted they can't easily do that anymore because it isn't as simple anymore. Previously all they had to do was just sit there, watch a system management console while they warehoused insane amounts of unencrypted data and could implement deep intercepts of somebody's entire unencrypted communications with few mouse clicks in a web interface. With encryption they now have to seek out one or both parties in an encrypted data exchange and hack their computers which is a whole lot more hassle while wholesale warehousing and data mining of internet, voice and video traffic (the wet dream of the NSA/CIA/FBI and the politicians) is out of the question unless they can decrypt the vast majority of encrypted communications on the fly. I've heard figures of up to 20% of some HTTPS traffic being decryptable in bulk by the NSA because of encryption weaknesses but I'm having real trouble believing they'll be able to decrypt 90-100% of all encrypted traffic on the fly and warehouse it any time soon however much they'd like to.
Do we really want (or need) the Netbook back? As I recall, they were a product that did little more than make people wish they had saved the money to buy something that was actually capable of meeting their basic needs. These days everyone has a cellphone which is already infinitely better than the netbook of yesterday.
I used to have an iPad, it was nice and did what I wanted it to do most of the time. However, it had a few serious drawbacks such as the inability to work with several windows at once and the fact that even with an external keyboard the touch screen interface drove me nuts, partly because my fingers gummed up the display and I was constantly cleaning it up. So I switched the iPad out for a 12" MacBook. Same form factor same weight much more flexibility, a larger selection of software and a more powerful UI. Haven't looked back yet, the only thing I miss is the ability to read PDFs in portrait mode.
> He eventually escaped this system of human quality classification
Holy shit. Do they still do this in Germany?
Not sure, haven't lived in Germany since I was a little kid. The way it was explained to me was that at some point during the education process they categorised the kids according what advanced education they were 'capable of' and some kids just got sent to vocational school because some expert decided that being a plumber, carpenter, mason or something was the most they could handle intellectually which is a pretty offensive attitude if you ask me. Just because somebody is a carpenter or something similar does not mean that person is stupid. The whole system sounded like some kind creepy carry-over from the Nazi period. I was told myself by the department head at the local university's engineering department that people from 'my kind of high school' had no business in the engineering department because 'my kind of high school' did not provide students with the kind of maths education needed, The sad thing is he was right, my country has a public school system. However when it is time to cut budgets some public schools feel the full force of the budget cuts while for a select few public schools who train the progeny of the upper strata of society the cuts are so lightly felt they have enough money left in the budget to teach Latin and Classical Greek. Being told my education was crap and that I might as well not bother took the wind out of my sails for years until I went to another Uni (by then a few private ones had appeared who, unlike the public ones, offered catch-up classes in math and physics), got a Master in Comp Sci. and finished with a 90% grade average. Occasionally I get this urge to scan my diploma, write that quote about how I had no business studying engineering over it from corner to corner in red war-banner letters and e-mail it to to that arrogant dick. He is today a big fish in the national University system and spends his days warming a leather chair in a ministry. I suppose that old American proverb is true: 'shit always floats to the top' (I like American proverbs, they are so honest)
You can't fix social mobility with IQ tests. Hell you can't fix ANYTHING with IQ tests.
My cousin was sent to a special needs class which in Germany at the time effectively destroyed any hope you had of ever getting into a University. This was done on the basis of an analysis of his grades and an IQ test. He ended up being sent to a vocational school and graduated as a plumber because the specialists in classifying humans by IQ declared that with his limited intelligence a lowly plumber was the most he could ever hope to aspire to. He eventually escaped this system of human quality classification after he graduated by completing a business degree at a private school. He now owns a big plumbing company and by big I mean the kind of company that bids for substantial contracts like doing the plumbing large office buildings and factories. I have seen enough similar examples for me to conclude that IQ tests are at best an extremely inaccurate instrument and at worst completely useless.
Men tend to initiate sex much more than women do. Men also tend to watch porn much more than women do. So I have a hunch the ease of access to porn has resulted in men getting their gratification alone while watching porn, thus less sex is taking place. Additionally the normal, average woman does not compare to your typical porn star, which may also result in men developing unrealistic standards and thus not having sex with their partner as much due to higher expectations.
Blaming it all on men is a bit unfair. Women also have unrealistic expectations. The regular average man also compares poorly to movie actors, pop stars and professional athletes which may be another contributing factor. People these days have a very unrealistic expectation of what their ideal partner should look like, what they themselves look like, and people generally seem to spend so much time fussing over what what the person they are currently dating looks like that they forget to think about what kind of a person they are. I was told a long time ago by an old coot who had been married to the same woman for over twice as long as I had been alive at that time (c.a. 17-18 years) that it is more important what your partner makes you feel than what they look like and there is some truth to that. Now, I'm not saying you should completely disregard what your perspective partner looks like but you might want to decrease the importance of looks in favour of other traits if you are looking for a stable long term relationship. Of course if you are a promiscuous libertine (nothing wrong with that as long as you break no laws) whose greatest goal in life is adding notches to his/her belt then other rules apply.
Financial industry here:
At least for my little bubble of it, we're EXPLICITLY banned (we'll get blasted out of the industry) for doing or even mentioning business over personal email. Like, black mark on your FINRA record, no one should hire you kinda stuff.
I'm sure it happens, but our compliance guys are zealous about that stuff. Why don't politicians have compliance guys?
They do, they are called the Office of Congressional Ethics but it has no power and is widely ignored because it tends to: 'get in the way of doing business'.
Sometimes. I would prefer to enjoy life and be a total ignorant. Yet slashdot remind me that reality is not always good to know. That said, once you learn it, you never forget it! Happy swimming!
At least it's outside your body. Think of what happens when you go to a public bathroom that smells bad: what you're breathing was previously inside someone. I mean, the actual molecules that are entering your nose used to be part of someone else digestive system. Maybe even more than one person.
That's a lot worse than a bucket of piss diluted in a big pool filled with chlorine.
Seriously? In the case cited 75 liters of urine in a pool containing 830.000 liters of water we have an urine percentage of (75/830.000)*100 = 0.009036145% where 95% of that 0.009036145% urine is sterile water assuming they are talking about 75 liters of factory standard piss as it can be obtained from the manufacturer. The average human being accidentally ingests about 1kg of insect parts each year. That's 1 kg of critters, some of which crawled round on, and fed off of, faecal matter and rotting tissue!!! Ever wondered how delicacies like mouldy cheese and escargot were invented? I'll let you in on a secret, your ancestors fed off of things like rotting meat, ergot infested and otherwise spoiled grain, cats, dogs, insects, rats, mice, insects, slugs, soup made of bones dissolved in sour whey, the list goes on... If you two continue on this trajectory you'll both turn into Howard Hughes.
20 Bucks? The Lightning to 3.5mm-jack Adapter from apple is 9 Dollars. 11 Dollars for Headphones would be extremly cheap and you'd have accordingly bad sound quality. Currently, EarPods with Lightning Connectors cost 29$, which is already 9$ more than you proposed.
The 3.5mm jack adaptor is included with the iPhone 7. You can get plenty of decent Lightning earbuds from 3rd party vendors on Amazon for $20 which must have OK sound quality (for earbuds) since you can get a pretty decent set of Sennheiser/Jabra/etc. earbuds for c.a. $30. Mind you, if you want, you can shell out anything up to $200 for earbuds that aren't even wireless. I agree about the lousy sound quality of the low end earbuds but you'd be amazed what people settle for in terms of sound quality. I'll never understand why people shell out $500+ on a smartphone and then go to the thrift store and buy a crappy $5 set earbuds.
If this is true (it seems to be just a rumour) then it will be two years in a row that Apple made users' existing headphones obsolete. That would be brave/arrogant/foolish even by Apple's standards.
Honestly the sooner they drop lightning and other proprietary connectors the better. Not many people bought lightning headphones yet so the sooner they switch the less painful it is going to be. It would be even more arrogant to keep lightning for 4-5 years so that people invest into headphones and accessories* and then switch to USB-C.
*Even tough stupid people buying headphones with a proprietary connector only have themselves to blame.
No, no, no, and no again! They should stick with the Lightning connector for the next 25 years because there are people out there with Lightning headphones who would have to shell out 20 bucks for new headphones or, god forbid, use an adaptor.
...and if it had a charging circuit like the C.H.I.P maybe it would be useful for gadget development.
Arizona Bill...
That sounds like the name of a gunslinger that just blew into town. Not only can he handle his six shooters, he's also the fastest guy on a Dvorak keyboard in six states and he writes C code faster than a pony express rider with a Comanche war party on his heels ... nah, that doesn't sound quite right but still cooler than a dull old state senate bill.
Boeing 787 was around a decade from initial "what can we do" to entry into service - the Airbus A350XWB was a little more at 11 years.
Neither manufacturer has a clean sheet design in the pipeline right now, so we probably wont see a new widebody until at least the 2030s.
According to this Boeing functionary I talked to it is easier to simply upgrade the tail section or the wings (or just parts of the wings and tail) and re-engine an existing aircraft design than to build a new design from scratch because that way you only have to get the new components certified. The fuselage pretty much does as good a job now as it did in the 1960s and 70s so you don't have to get that re-certified/tested/whatever only what you upgrade. That's why they are still building Boeing 737s, a design that first flew in 1967. Over the years they have upgraded various bits and pieces of the 737 until the modern aircraft have fairly little in common with the first 737s. This may seem weird, it did to me, but it's apparently a damn sight cheaper to do these bit by bit upgrades than designing a whole new aircraft to fill the same market slot. Designing building and getting a new design tested/certified/etc. only makes sense if nothing in your current inventory fits the market slot you have in mind or if the new design very significantly improves performance and therefore marketability.
Personally I think the whole Pluto being a planet vs it being a dwarf planet makes about as much sense as arguing about whether American football deserves being called a football because players spend most of their time holding the ball and running around with it. Having said that, Pluto is a fascinating place regardless of it's label and, and since I'm not an astronomer, I am left wondering: Is the fight to make Pluto a planet again (or for that matter the original decision to demote it) based on sound scientific reasoning or is it just an ego driven pissing contest born injured national pride because Pluto is the only planet in the Sol system found by an American?
In Google Earth you could always easily see a shallow landmass around New Zealand, so what's new here?
There are lots of interesting things abut this. For one thing it would be interesting to know exactly how much of this continent was above sea level during the last glacial maximum. The same goes for the Atlantic area. There are several islands in the Atlantic that are now either sunken, smaller than they were then or just reefs now but that would have been much larger during this period and could have served as stop-over points for people on a trans oceanic migration to N-America. There is a little flash App of the area that allows you to drop the sea levels: http://sahultime.monash.edu.au... Seems New Zealand was at least twice as big as it is today about 20k years ago and that it was surrounded by islands that are now sunken. Makes me wish could drop sea levels in Google Earth.
This 'invasion' would be way cooler if the bot manifested itself as an army of annoying hecklers that you can shoot.
Simpler way: just don't visit the United States.
Allow me to present to you a lout and vociferous BULLSHIT! Do you have dremams about killing 'Murricans, because we're so damn evil? Well here you go, and allow me to show the extent of your bullshit. http://www.it-can.ca/2013/02/0...
Seems like our friendly neighbors to the north, do indeed and in truth, confiscate peoples cell phones, and they do indeed search them, and they do indeed make uses of those search results, and their courts do indeed consider that as an acceptable practice. They even say that they do. Indeed.
One of the strangest things is that so many people have such a white hot seeting hatred of all things American, that they feel that in their just cause, and in the inherent superiority of all other nations, that they can spew hatred and lies about teh evilz 'Murricans doing what everyone does.
But hey, if you hate us that much for made up and non-factual reasons, feel free to stay away. You might learn that most of us are actually nice people - and that would mess with your preconceptions.
Yeesh, calm down will ya. Just be cause I don't want to visit your country due to the protracted, draconian and at times even humiliating process I'd have to subject myself to in order to get a Visa, that does not mean that I hate Americans. I just don't want some dull witted TSA drone rummaging around my laptop and my cell phone, rifling through my social media account and my private data, possibly even copying my personal data and storing it a DHS/NSA database, etc... The reason I'd rather go to Canada is that the Canadians might search my phone but are pretty unlikely to do so. The TSA/DHS on the other hand seems to be on track to making the act of poking it's nose into every nook and cranny of my personal life standard practice.
No, WHOOSH to you! I don't want it to have to have line of sight to my face. What a fricking step back. I can reach my hand into my pocket and touch the button to unlock. I can unlock in the dark. It is retarded and as someone who has owned every generation of iphones and ipads, I will quit buying them because of that stupid feature.
Your personal preferences are immaterial to this discussion. You tried to make the claim that Apple's 3D facial recognition ID would be every bit as insecure as Googles 2D facial recognition ID and you are wrong. So, one more, time if Apple's implementation of face recognition unlocking includes a 3D laser scanning module it is going to be by many parsecs more secure that Googles 2D implementation was that is a mathematical fact. Do you get it now? ... Oh, and you forgot to check the 'Anonymous Coward' box.
Wow you say how good it is and then give an example of how the leading tech company darling royally fucked it up. That doesn't instill confidence. Also I don't want to have to face this thing toward my face to unlock it every time. What about all the times you're not wanting to angle your phone toward toue fully in obscured face? I link that I can do that now with a 100% reliable solution and functionality that I can feel and not look ata a fucking physical button. Trust me this shit will be apples undoimg, just look at the "touchbar" on the new Macs and tell me how this is faster to do anything. It isn't because it takes something that can be accomplished through touch memory with keys and makes you take your eyes off the thing you need to look at to look at a different thing. It's fucking hunt and pecking.
Woosh!... I also explained why Apple's approach with the 3D laser scanner module is betteer and more secure than Googles attempt using only 2D.
So, I have to re-register every time I shave in order to use apple pay? Oh, you are wearing a baseball cap, so you have to take that off to pay? Oh, you want to unlock your phone while walking down the street. Better take off your sunglasses... Apple, why you gotta keep losing desired functionality?!?!
I know that venting your outrage over everything that Apple does is great fun but please do not trash talk facial recognition just because Apple is using it. You are severely underestimating what modern face recognition algorithms can do. If you set out to do it and if this: http://www.webrok.com/news/201... is your taste in sunglasses, you can certainly screw up facial recognition systems but modern facial recognition software has pretty impressive success rates even with subjects wearing headgear, different hair styles, 'normal' sunglasses or regular eye glasses and obscured faces (beards, scarves, veils). engineers@google.com already tried integrating face recognition login into Android and it turned out to be an embarrassing fail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... because the Android camera could not distinguish between an actual 3D face and a 2D picture of one. Hence the mention of 3D laser scanning module for the new iPhones in the article summary because 3D scanning is what you need for pattern recognition based security features that are hard to fool regardless of whether you are talking about face recognition or fingerprint scanning. On an unrelated note a 3D laser scanning module sounds like a pretty awesome addition to a smartphone for all kinds of reasons having nothing to do with facial recognition and a lot to do with a long standing desire on my part (as, I am sure, many others here) to own a fully functional Start Trek tricorder. A 3D laser scanning module built into your phone would be a major step in that direction. Being able to scan an object on my kitchen table with a smartphone and then sending it to a 3D printer after a short stopover on my laptop to clean up the scan would be nothing short of awesome.
Or produce solar at night.
You don't need nearly as much power at night, and if they go with solar thermal you get quite a bit of storage "for free."
True, Power companies typically have trouble selling excess energy produced during the night.
Or control the weather.
It's Arizona. They basically have two types of weather; Sunny and Night. =Smidge=
Where I come from we have two types of weather, rain and night ... we all hate you.
I partially blame the Environmental groups involved, because of previous hyperbole used in previous reports. That being said (and being a nearby resident), I can assure you that most of the issue was due to the FAILED Primary Spillway not being maintained. The topover caused by the failed spillway was fully preventable, had the DWR and ACE and the rest done their job the last 7 years.
But, instead, we have more infrastructure projects proceeding even though we can't maintain what we got. After all, we need a High Speed Rail Train between Fresno and Bakersfield ASAP!!!!
Blame this on the environmentalists all you want but the Obama admin. tried to get infrastructure reform done for 8 years and the GOP blocked it for no purpose other than spite and a Machiavellian effort to further the interests of the GOP and make Obama look bad. If anybody is to blame for this it is Mitch McConnell and his predecessors. http://www.dailykos.com/story/...