The Streisand effect was particularly strong. In the last two days, his Wikipedia article has been translated into 10 new languages. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] That's hard to achieve without doing something really stupid.
RC planes are cheaper than helicopters, and simpler too. You get to play with servos and RF, and once you get the thing up in the air, you learn about control surfaces and stalling real quick. Plus, they've got the power-to-weight to do things helicopters can't do (if you have enough time to practice).
Nobody is posting tech-support or homework style questions. It's just generally educational material. It's true you could get more/better information from the relevant O'Reilly book, but sometimes it's good to see the treadworn solutions from the hoi polloi as well.
There's several hundred megahertz of open spectrum in between the TV channels. Wireless mikes have had sole use of that empty space for a long time, and they're complaining because things are changing. In some cases, they may have to buy more equipment, but the idea that they should continue to get sole use of this huge amount of spectrum is ridiculous.
What's needed is a way for wireless mics and the new whitespace devices to properly share the spectrum. The reason this is difficult is that wireless mics are manufactured many different ways, and don't have a standard transmission pattern. The "cognitive radios" will be able to detect digital TV stations automatically, but won't be able to sense the presence of wireless mics. So one possible solution is for wireless microphones to have an extra box that transmits a beacon that indicates to whitespace devices that "hey, there's a wireless mic here". That's an extra expense for each existing installation, but again, wireless mics shouldn't get sole use of this extra space.
It took 5 years, but they finally trained operatives to intercept and understand modulated farting communications from terrorists. But then the terrorists starting using Navajo modulated farting, and well... their farts are just too smelly.
"Unlicensed" doesn't mean "unregulated". Licensed spectrum means that only one organization is in control of the spectrum, but even that doesn't prevent someone from setting up a jammer. I believe the FCC controls what radios can be sold on the market (i.e. the equipment must use this new-fangled "cognitive radio" scheme, and must hook into the FCC database of known incumbent signals), and as well, the FCC can try to locate someone who is persistently jamming.
If something denser, like a star were to fall in, I doubt that the radiation pressure would push it away.
It's not just that it pushes gas away, it also gets to the point where it prevents star formation in its vicinity:
Furthermore, it appears that black holes can keep the gas too hot to settle in large quantities back to the galaxy's nucleus or to form stars through most of the galaxy's bulk.... "So galaxies reach the point where you don't make stars."
But stars can still form elsewhere and be pulled in, yes. These black holes would be ~one tenth the mass of our galaxy, so they should be able to capture other galaxies that orbit it and eventually fall in.
So a dedicated scraper would change IPs, write some code to detect and avoid the potholes, and then resume scraping.
There are lots of decent ways to detect scrapers or hotlinkers. But I haven't seen any idea yet from either side (web admins, or scrapers/hotlinkers) that can't be bypassed with enough work. It really seems like it's something of an arms race.
But the arms race hasn't progressed very far, even for attractive targets with some amount of money (porn sites), because it's just a lot of work for both sides.
I really agree with this. If someone is already going to the effort of writing a lot of scraping code, it's already worth it to them to buy one of those $10-15/month shell accounts online that have SSH access. SSH gives them the ability to forward local TCP requests to that remote IP, their scraping app just has to have the ability to use a SOCKS proxy. This means scrapers have a proxy IP that 1) doesn't show up on any of the open-proxy DNSBLs, and 2) is fast and reliable enough for them to get real work done. And if you block them, they just pay another $10-15 to get another reliable IP.
The thing is, you can get away with a lot more low-level scraping than you think. If it's something where you don't need to load significantly more pages than an average surfer (you just need to repeat it several times a day), it isn't necessarily going to stick out in the logs that much. And a lot of admins just don't have the time to analyze their logs (Wikipedia allows hotlinking of their images, for instance... combined with the fact that anyone can upload any picture, this is rife for abuse. But there are better things for them to spend their time on). Also, some admins don't have the tools/skills to drill down and hilight the entries that would make it clear someone is scraping.
If you're relying on data for commercial use, putting yourself in a position where you need that data is a risky thing...
Now that I agree with. Scraping is a gamble. It's possible that an admin could spot you on your very first run, because on close inspection, your requests do look different (you don't immediately load images or CSS/JS subpages like a browser does, for one).
Since you have no idea if the site will block you on the very first fetch, or the billionth, it's not something you should rely on for business.
For personal use though, it can be very educational. There's a lot of data out there, and if you can find a novel way of analyzing it, it can be very rewarding intellectually.
"Terrorists may or may not be using voice-changing software but it should be of open source interest that online terrorist and/or terrorist enthusiasts are discussing it."
So there are terrorist fanbois online now too? By definition, a terrorist is someone engaged in asymmetric warfare, i.e. one of their main advantages is stealth/secrecy, so it's hard to see how someone would be an enthusiastic promoter of it in public. "Terrorist enthusiast" is such an odd turn of phrase that almost all hits are for this article itself.
Missing are: 81, 90, 93, 103,... 476, 477, 478, 479 (180 different numbers missing total). The fact that it can measure all distances from 1 to 25 doesn't make it perfect, it has to measure all distances up to its length (480).
Sort all.DOCs by mod-time, most recent first. Half the tech world hasn't really thought about why sorting by time is so useful, and the other half uses it as the default sort for everything.
I second that. My sister works at the one on N Milwaukee, and the place is a real hoot. Just be prepared to spend two hours there if you've never been there before. If you go looking for one specific part, you won't necessarily find it (since it's a surplus place), but sometimes they have 2+-feet-tall capacitors or other gems that make it worth visiting just in case. And if you don't know what to buy somebody for Christmas, they have a ton of geeky/silly/cheap stuff that are better than the old standbys anyway. (rare earth magnets, instruction books for making trebuchets, latex tubing for massive slingshots, and other borderline dangerous stuff that more mainstream companies would never want to see put in an excited child's hands)
but there is a problem... many publications don't do any fact checking at all
That's why multiple sources are the best. Whenever sources disagree, the more reliable sources are trusted over less reliable sources.
Verifiability is really an appeal to authority--not the authority of truth, but the authority of other publications. Any other publication, really.
That's just not true. Many talk pages are filled with disputes over "my source X is more reliable than your source Y because...". That's ultimately a very healthy discussion. And WP:RSdoes say that some sources aren't reliable enough to be worth including at all.
If you have to swerve to avoid something, you're going fast enough that power steering doesn't make a difference. (there are a few exceptions, like being at the heart of a very large city, when things can jump out with little warning)
And yeah, if there's ice out, it's just a good idea in general to focus all your attention on the road and cut out any extra mental overhead of any sort.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're only using your left four fingers. If you include your thumb in the fun, you can type every word (demo, a free version)
There's so many wonderful gay 90's memories.
Oh, those 90's? They're making fun of the 90's like we make fun of the 70's now. But there was nothing gay about the 90's.
The Streisand effect was particularly strong. In the last two days, his Wikipedia article has been translated into 10 new languages. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] That's hard to achieve without doing something really stupid.
The immortal words of Nelson spring to mind.
RC planes are cheaper than helicopters, and simpler too. You get to play with servos and RF, and once you get the thing up in the air, you learn about control surfaces and stalling real quick. Plus, they've got the power-to-weight to do things helicopters can't do (if you have enough time to practice).
Nobody is posting tech-support or homework style questions. It's just generally educational material. It's true you could get more/better information from the relevant O'Reilly book, but sometimes it's good to see the treadworn solutions from the hoi polloi as well.
There's a bug in the advanced search form. After you do the advanced search and it gives you the did not match any documents, just click on the "search" button on that second page. (alternately, removing the lr=selected parameter makes it work also)
There's several hundred megahertz of open spectrum in between the TV channels. Wireless mikes have had sole use of that empty space for a long time, and they're complaining because things are changing. In some cases, they may have to buy more equipment, but the idea that they should continue to get sole use of this huge amount of spectrum is ridiculous.
What's needed is a way for wireless mics and the new whitespace devices to properly share the spectrum. The reason this is difficult is that wireless mics are manufactured many different ways, and don't have a standard transmission pattern. The "cognitive radios" will be able to detect digital TV stations automatically, but won't be able to sense the presence of wireless mics. So one possible solution is for wireless microphones to have an extra box that transmits a beacon that indicates to whitespace devices that "hey, there's a wireless mic here". That's an extra expense for each existing installation, but again, wireless mics shouldn't get sole use of this extra space.
TV whitespace devices work in unused digital TV spectrum. Digital TV tends to use similar frequencies around the world.
It took 5 years, but they finally trained operatives to intercept and understand modulated farting communications from terrorists. But then the terrorists starting using Navajo modulated farting, and well... their farts are just too smelly.
"Unlicensed" doesn't mean "unregulated". Licensed spectrum means that only one organization is in control of the spectrum, but even that doesn't prevent someone from setting up a jammer. I believe the FCC controls what radios can be sold on the market (i.e. the equipment must use this new-fangled "cognitive radio" scheme, and must hook into the FCC database of known incumbent signals), and as well, the FCC can try to locate someone who is persistently jamming.
It's not just that it pushes gas away, it also gets to the point where it prevents star formation in its vicinity:
But stars can still form elsewhere and be pulled in, yes. These black holes would be ~one tenth the mass of our galaxy, so they should be able to capture other galaxies that orbit it and eventually fall in.
So a dedicated scraper would change IPs, write some code to detect and avoid the potholes, and then resume scraping.
There are lots of decent ways to detect scrapers or hotlinkers. But I haven't seen any idea yet from either side (web admins, or scrapers/hotlinkers) that can't be bypassed with enough work. It really seems like it's something of an arms race.
But the arms race hasn't progressed very far, even for attractive targets with some amount of money (porn sites), because it's just a lot of work for both sides.
I really agree with this. If someone is already going to the effort of writing a lot of scraping code, it's already worth it to them to buy one of those $10-15/month shell accounts online that have SSH access. SSH gives them the ability to forward local TCP requests to that remote IP, their scraping app just has to have the ability to use a SOCKS proxy. This means scrapers have a proxy IP that 1) doesn't show up on any of the open-proxy DNSBLs, and 2) is fast and reliable enough for them to get real work done. And if you block them, they just pay another $10-15 to get another reliable IP.
The thing is, you can get away with a lot more low-level scraping than you think. If it's something where you don't need to load significantly more pages than an average surfer (you just need to repeat it several times a day), it isn't necessarily going to stick out in the logs that much. And a lot of admins just don't have the time to analyze their logs (Wikipedia allows hotlinking of their images, for instance... combined with the fact that anyone can upload any picture, this is rife for abuse. But there are better things for them to spend their time on). Also, some admins don't have the tools/skills to drill down and hilight the entries that would make it clear someone is scraping.
Now that I agree with. Scraping is a gamble. It's possible that an admin could spot you on your very first run, because on close inspection, your requests do look different (you don't immediately load images or CSS/JS subpages like a browser does, for one).
Since you have no idea if the site will block you on the very first fetch, or the billionth, it's not something you should rely on for business.
For personal use though, it can be very educational. There's a lot of data out there, and if you can find a novel way of analyzing it, it can be very rewarding intellectually.
So there are terrorist fanbois online now too? By definition, a terrorist is someone engaged in asymmetric warfare, i.e. one of their main advantages is stealth/secrecy, so it's hard to see how someone would be an enthusiastic promoter of it in public. "Terrorist enthusiast" is such an odd turn of phrase that almost all hits are for this article itself.
They've been mesmerized by the porn since 1993. "Wait, you mean you can communicate over the internet too? Wow, cool!"
Missing are: 81, 90, 93, 103, ... 476, 477, 478, 479 (180 different numbers missing total). The fact that it can measure all distances from 1 to 25 doesn't make it perfect, it has to measure all distances up to its length (480).
Sort all .DOCs by mod-time, most recent first. Half the tech world hasn't really thought about why sorting by time is so useful, and the other half uses it as the default sort for everything.
I second that. My sister works at the one on N Milwaukee, and the place is a real hoot. Just be prepared to spend two hours there if you've never been there before. If you go looking for one specific part, you won't necessarily find it (since it's a surplus place), but sometimes they have 2+-feet-tall capacitors or other gems that make it worth visiting just in case. And if you don't know what to buy somebody for Christmas, they have a ton of geeky/silly/cheap stuff that are better than the old standbys anyway. (rare earth magnets, instruction books for making trebuchets, latex tubing for massive slingshots, and other borderline dangerous stuff that more mainstream companies would never want to see put in an excited child's hands)
2) You don't have to carry an entire trip's worth of fuel with you.
That's why multiple sources are the best. Whenever sources disagree, the more reliable sources are trusted over less reliable sources.
That's just not true. Many talk pages are filled with disputes over "my source X is more reliable than your source Y because ...". That's ultimately a very healthy discussion. And WP:RS does say that some sources aren't reliable enough to be worth including at all.
You're implying the marketing department actually has some real work to do?
If you have to swerve to avoid something, you're going fast enough that power steering doesn't make a difference. (there are a few exceptions, like being at the heart of a very large city, when things can jump out with little warning)
And yeah, if there's ice out, it's just a good idea in general to focus all your attention on the road and cut out any extra mental overhead of any sort.