IE7/8 uses NT6.x's mandatory access control mechanism to run itself in 'protected mode,' which really just means it's running as a low integrity process with minimal system access. It also uses a different plugin model from Chrome and Firefox, and yes, it tries to run plugins inside the low-integrity sandbox.
The problem is that Sun and Adobe took the shortcut of explicitly breaking the sandbox (from the outside) rather than make Java and Flash work within it.
Full on nuclear war would not wipe out humanity. The sum total of the world's nuclear weapons could destroy an area about the size of New England. Nukes are powerful, but the world is really, really big and there are 6 billion of us. The fallout (both nuclear and political/social) would make life enormously difficult, and likely enormous numbers of people would die. But most would survive... maybe not in North America, but in south-east Asia. People like to say that only cockroaches would survive a nuclear war. Well, humans are tougher than cockroaches. How many cockroaches survive on Antarctica?
As much as/.ers like to dismiss the common man/woman as lazy and useless, the human is the most successful survival machine this planet has ever seen. No species survives (let alone thrives) over so many of this planet's ecosystems.
Commercial space is 90% vaporware? You realize, of course, that almost all launches in the USA are commercial? Huge swaths of NASA's operations are already contracted out to private firms.
I don't know whether commercial is fully up to the challenge of what NASA wants, and maybe there'll have to be some form of technology transfer... but NASA has been running low-earth orbit operations for decades. Maybe it's time to admit that LEO isn't actually that hard, and fully commoditise that traffic. Let NASA refocus its efforts further out.
Despite what Mass Effect 2 tells you, "spooky action at a distance" (i.e., quantum entanglement) carries no information, and cannot be used as a communications medium.
As the commenter below you points out, at that distance a purely unpowered telescope would take millenia to traverse a single orbit. And that's just a single orbital plane. If you want to point this thing at an arbitrary point, and take less than a hundred thousand years to do so, you're talking a level of technology which could take you to another star easily.
I have mixed feelings about that 500AU telescope. Using our own sun as a gravitational lens is very clever... but 500AU... even getting a telescope out that far (within a reasonable amount of time) would be an enormous challenge. By the time we have the technology to build such a thing, and be able to aim it arbitrarily, I'm confident we'll already have sent probes to nearby stars.
That depends entirely on how you define mass. Invariant mass doesn't change. Relativistic mass, (i.e., an object's resistance to deflection in spacetime), does.
But at the macroscopic level invariant mass is a convenient fiction, unless you're dealing with something at absolute zero. If not then guess what: the invariant mass includes the object's heat expressed in kinetic energy.
Plus, with the "Lorentz" transformation, time dilation makes it a lot easier to hit release dates. But there has been some concern over the developers' sudden weight gain.
$400,000 for writing a letter? I like the EFF and I sort of agree that it's not fair they have to eat the costs of defending a fraudulent claim. But it was their choice to send the notice chiseled on a solid gold tablet.
What are you talking about? The IPCC claimed the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035. They based this on an article, based on an article, based on offhand speculation of a single scientist, who admits is was pure speculation with no supporting fact.
This wasn't a typo. It was damningly shoddy work on the part of the IPCC.
Better than the alternative, which is to potentially leave software running with a still vulnerable browser, and a user with a false sense of security because they 'just installed the patch.'
Allowing libraries to be modified on disk while in use is a solution to the upgrade problem which is simple, elegant, and terribly, terribly wrong.
I bet you think liberalism means government regulation economy and gay rights too. Words do not mean what you think they mean.
Corporatism does not mean rule by large companies. The corporations refereed to in 'corporatism' are more along the lines of trade guilds.
In many respects, what you are claiming is fascism is almost exactly the opposite. Fascism is not the rule of government by private business interests. Fascism is the rule of private business interests by government. Unless you think Hitler, Mussolini and their cronies were all big industrialists before getting the world domination bug.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: orbital solar makes no economic sense. You get 4 times the power capacity for a given amount of solar panel surface area, compared to building in a desert somewhere, at a mere thousand times the cost! Maybe someday it will make sense, but not any time soon.
Now there is an exception to this: if you've got an efficient system for sending power down to a ground station then there is potential for power distribution to remote sites. The US military would love this, as it would eliminate much of the insatiable thirst for diesel in places like Afghanistan and simplify their logistics enormously. But even for this why would you want to build a big heavy satellite with huge solar panels? Just build a satellite that picks up power from a base station and beams it back down. Simpler, cheaper and more reliable.
The thing to remember about/. is it has a certain minority population who are practically luddites. At least, remarkably unimaginative. Any new computer form factor is inevitably met with scorn and derision, because it's not exactly the same as the computers they're using today, and god forbid you have to learn a new way of interacting with technology once every twenty years.
Usually whenever this sentiment is expressed, it is met with a reply along the lines of 'but the way things are now is BETTER,' followed by a host of flawed reasons why the given technology is stupid. Because, as we all know, a wearable computer is useless without the ability to read PDFs on it.
Now I'm not saying every new innovation is ultimately good and worthwhile. But there are sadly a lot of so-called geeks who are willing to dismiss new ideas without even giving them a fair chance.
Yes, in the past governments just used the much safer practice of billy sticks, rubber bullets and blunt force trauma. As we all know, nobody ever died from being beaten by a metal stick, and 'cracking skulls' is simply a jocular expression.
I'm not saying these things are terribly safe, but it seems that when talking about 'less-than lethal' weapons, most people lose all sense of perspective.
If the Natal device can detect head position (which it presumably can) then head-tracking as presented by Johnny Lee doesn't have to be explicitly supported by Natal. Devs just need to read the head position from Natal and use it to update the viewpoint when rendering the scene.
Unfortunately things went wonky. When they first introduced gmail, they didn't ignore dots so firstname.lastname@gmail.com and firstnamelastname@gmail.com were different. After a couple of years they changed the policy and the oldest account got to keep both.
I had myfirstname.mylastname@gmail.com, and unfortunately somebody else had myfirstnamemylastname@gmail.com. To this day that account is useless because of all the fucking misaddressed junk.
Slashdot Mirror
IE7/8 uses NT6.x's mandatory access control mechanism to run itself in 'protected mode,' which really just means it's running as a low integrity process with minimal system access. It also uses a different plugin model from Chrome and Firefox, and yes, it tries to run plugins inside the low-integrity sandbox.
The problem is that Sun and Adobe took the shortcut of explicitly breaking the sandbox (from the outside) rather than make Java and Flash work within it.
Full on nuclear war would not wipe out humanity. The sum total of the world's nuclear weapons could destroy an area about the size of New England. Nukes are powerful, but the world is really, really big and there are 6 billion of us. The fallout (both nuclear and political/social) would make life enormously difficult, and likely enormous numbers of people would die. But most would survive... maybe not in North America, but in south-east Asia. People like to say that only cockroaches would survive a nuclear war. Well, humans are tougher than cockroaches. How many cockroaches survive on Antarctica?
As much as /.ers like to dismiss the common man/woman as lazy and useless, the human is the most successful survival machine this planet has ever seen. No species survives (let alone thrives) over so many of this planet's ecosystems.
Commercial space is 90% vaporware? You realize, of course, that almost all launches in the USA are commercial? Huge swaths of NASA's operations are already contracted out to private firms.
I don't know whether commercial is fully up to the challenge of what NASA wants, and maybe there'll have to be some form of technology transfer... but NASA has been running low-earth orbit operations for decades. Maybe it's time to admit that LEO isn't actually that hard, and fully commoditise that traffic. Let NASA refocus its efforts further out.
Despite what Mass Effect 2 tells you, "spooky action at a distance" (i.e., quantum entanglement) carries no information, and cannot be used as a communications medium.
And that's just to view the stars on a single orbital plane.
'And be able to aim it arbitrarily'
As the commenter below you points out, at that distance a purely unpowered telescope would take millenia to traverse a single orbit. And that's just a single orbital plane. If you want to point this thing at an arbitrary point, and take less than a hundred thousand years to do so, you're talking a level of technology which could take you to another star easily.
I have mixed feelings about that 500AU telescope. Using our own sun as a gravitational lens is very clever... but 500AU... even getting a telescope out that far (within a reasonable amount of time) would be an enormous challenge. By the time we have the technology to build such a thing, and be able to aim it arbitrarily, I'm confident we'll already have sent probes to nearby stars.
That depends entirely on how you define mass. Invariant mass doesn't change. Relativistic mass, (i.e., an object's resistance to deflection in spacetime), does.
But at the macroscopic level invariant mass is a convenient fiction, unless you're dealing with something at absolute zero. If not then guess what: the invariant mass includes the object's heat expressed in kinetic energy.
Plus, with the "Lorentz" transformation, time dilation makes it a lot easier to hit release dates. But there has been some concern over the developers' sudden weight gain.
My hat goes off to you, good sir.
$400,000 for writing a letter? I like the EFF and I sort of agree that it's not fair they have to eat the costs of defending a fraudulent claim. But it was their choice to send the notice chiseled on a solid gold tablet.
We don't want your opinion. It's worthless. Sorry.
What are you talking about? The IPCC claimed the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035. They based this on an article, based on an article, based on offhand speculation of a single scientist, who admits is was pure speculation with no supporting fact.
This wasn't a typo. It was damningly shoddy work on the part of the IPCC.
Better than the alternative, which is to potentially leave software running with a still vulnerable browser, and a user with a false sense of security because they 'just installed the patch.'
Allowing libraries to be modified on disk while in use is a solution to the upgrade problem which is simple, elegant, and terribly, terribly wrong.
I bet you think liberalism means government regulation economy and gay rights too. Words do not mean what you think they mean.
Corporatism does not mean rule by large companies. The corporations refereed to in 'corporatism' are more along the lines of trade guilds.
In many respects, what you are claiming is fascism is almost exactly the opposite. Fascism is not the rule of government by private business interests. Fascism is the rule of private business interests by government. Unless you think Hitler, Mussolini and their cronies were all big industrialists before getting the world domination bug.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: orbital solar makes no economic sense. You get 4 times the power capacity for a given amount of solar panel surface area, compared to building in a desert somewhere, at a mere thousand times the cost! Maybe someday it will make sense, but not any time soon.
Now there is an exception to this: if you've got an efficient system for sending power down to a ground station then there is potential for power distribution to remote sites. The US military would love this, as it would eliminate much of the insatiable thirst for diesel in places like Afghanistan and simplify their logistics enormously. But even for this why would you want to build a big heavy satellite with huge solar panels? Just build a satellite that picks up power from a base station and beams it back down. Simpler, cheaper and more reliable.
The thing to remember about /. is it has a certain minority population who are practically luddites. At least, remarkably unimaginative. Any new computer form factor is inevitably met with scorn and derision, because it's not exactly the same as the computers they're using today, and god forbid you have to learn a new way of interacting with technology once every twenty years.
Usually whenever this sentiment is expressed, it is met with a reply along the lines of 'but the way things are now is BETTER,' followed by a host of flawed reasons why the given technology is stupid. Because, as we all know, a wearable computer is useless without the ability to read PDFs on it.
Now I'm not saying every new innovation is ultimately good and worthwhile. But there are sadly a lot of so-called geeks who are willing to dismiss new ideas without even giving them a fair chance.
Yes, in the past governments just used the much safer practice of billy sticks, rubber bullets and blunt force trauma. As we all know, nobody ever died from being beaten by a metal stick, and 'cracking skulls' is simply a jocular expression.
I'm not saying these things are terribly safe, but it seems that when talking about 'less-than lethal' weapons, most people lose all sense of perspective.
Since Windows 98 came out, there have been 4 new versions released. Perhaps you should try using one less than a decade old.
I think the world would be better served by an NGO specializing in personal hygiene.
If the Natal device can detect head position (which it presumably can) then head-tracking as presented by Johnny Lee doesn't have to be explicitly supported by Natal. Devs just need to read the head position from Natal and use it to update the viewpoint when rendering the scene.
Don't underestimate those numbers. 15 third party games at launch would be astounding.
Unfortunately things went wonky. When they first introduced gmail, they didn't ignore dots so firstname.lastname@gmail.com and firstnamelastname@gmail.com were different. After a couple of years they changed the policy and the oldest account got to keep both.
I had myfirstname.mylastname@gmail.com, and unfortunately somebody else had myfirstnamemylastname@gmail.com. To this day that account is useless because of all the fucking misaddressed junk.
Because Google ignores periods in account names, and have been for many years.