Now, if you're a strongly Christian family, you would probably want that "guidance" to be towards Christianity, however one day when I have the great joy of becoming a parent, I will "guide" my children towards science, logic and reason. I will go so far even as to point out my views on religion and if they get it in to their heads that there's a great mystical man in the sky, I'll happily debate with them to change their minds (as I will with ANYONE who brings it up and is open to discussion, whether they're related to me or not).
I'm glad to finally hear someone say what I believe. My daughter is only two and half, and one day before lunch she says "Daddy, pray." My wife, who is Christian, smiled and said "Oh, that's so cut. I'm proud of here." I refused to fold my hands and pray, even with my daughter, because I believe it is wrong to play along with religious indoctrination (which she got from my wife's parents). My mom told me I should "respect Bailey's choices". It infuriated me inside (I was outwardly calm). My daughter is two years old. She doesn't know what she is doing, she is doing what she is told. Just imagine what my Christian mother would have said if my daughter had said "Praise to Allah" or a Muslim baby-sitter indoctrinated her in Islam; there wouldn't have been anything said about respecting "her choices". She did not "choose God", she did what kids are known to do, copy those around them. I tell my daughter "I don't believe in God" when she asks me to pray, which earns me sneers and shocked looks from other adults. I have started saying "There isn't a God" because saying "I don't believe in God" implies that there is a rational debate as to whether or not there is a God; there is not.
Now a radical Win7 architecture would be virtualization. Let the kernel run VMs for everything. Inter-Vm communication would be monitored, and viruses that infected one VM could be handled by killing the VM and restarting. Possibly we could see an Office 2k9 that supported this, and certainly a browser that could restart when it got pwned. Notice I say *when*. Not an inconsequential effort, but hey, it's theory for me. Microsoft is researching a new kernel called Singularity with Software Isolated Processes that looks like an excellent new paradigm. The SIP's are isolated and can only communicate to each other over channels, memory for all SIP's is locked, and on SIP cannot manipulate another, only communicate. Microsoft might be to slow and large of a behemoth to get it done for Windows 7, but even as a Linux geek I like what I read here http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/ Read "Singularity: Rethinking the Software Stack"
Read The F*#k!ng article. Google deploys Google Apps, the biggest advice is to get everything possible off of the end-point machines and onto the servers that way you don't have to worry about the above. Also there is tools to insure security suites are installed, etc.
Wanna know how much Microsoft has reformed this sort of thing?
[Microsoft Internal Document] I have mentioned before the "stacked panel". Panel discussions naturally favor alliances of relatively weak partners - our usual opposition. For example, an "unbiased" panel on OLE vs. OpenDoc would contain representatives of the backers of OLE (Microsoft) and the backers of OpenDoc (Apple, IBM, Novell, WordPerfect, OMG, etc.). Thus we find ourselves outnumbered in almost every "naturally occurring" panel debate.
A stacked panel, on the other hand, is like a stacked deck: it is packed with people who, on the face of things, should be neutral, but who are in fact strong supporters of our technology. The key to stacking a panel is being able to choose the moderator. Most conference organizers allow the moderator to select the panel, so if you can pick the moderator, you win. Since you can't expect representatives of our competitors to speak on your behalf, you have to get the moderator to agree to having only "independent ISVs" on the panel. No one from Microsoft or any other formal backer of the competing technologies would be allowed - just ISVs who have to use this stuff in the "real world." Sounds marvelously independent doesn't it? In fact, it allows us to stack the panel with ISVs that back our cause. Thus, the "independent" panel ends up telling the audience that our technology beats the others hands down. Get the press to cover this panel, and you've got a major win on your hands.
Why do scientists think they need to communicate science to the general populace? Most of the audience doesn't care, and won't understand. We have to live in society with the general public, and I'd rather have a general public that understood science and set policies that benefited me, and allow us to take advantage of new scientific methods and discoveries (stem cells, screening human embryos for genetic defects, etc).
Sounds like the college I'm attending. For one lesson the teacher instructed us to go to a geocities webpage, download QBasic, and install it on our machines. I would have called her insane, but I just installed it on XP under Qemu. She teaches several IT courses that do cover security. So far all of the IT staff and teachers are so entrenched in Windows that they can't even imagine a world without proprietary apps. The same teacher can' understand why I won't take advantage of Microsoft's "ultimate steal" and buy the full Microsoft Office for $65 as offered by the school. I told her quite simply: OpenOffice works, and uses an ISO standard. Why would I want to pay to lose compatibility?
Don't even get me started on the bullshit of Visual Studio, and how much easier it is to develop C++ apps using Vim/GCC.
The real news is that Google just dropped an almost perfect machine translation of an Italian article and nobody noticed. I surfed all over the articles website amazed buy one article after another, not by their content, but by the translation. Hasn't anybody else noticed? Perhaps it is a fruition of Google scanning and comparing those thousands of U.N. Documents they said they would use a year or two ago.
Yet another reason to encrypt your entire hard-drive with Linux in addition to hardware based encryption. Wish I knew enough to tell if it was working, though. Sure without the keys my hard-drives seems unreadable, but I am not a crypto expert.
Is the CIA willing to raise their right hand and swear that they haven't tried to steal any secrets from other countries? If we are going to do these sorts of things, it's a little hypocritical to go off the deep end when another country does the same.
Without anarchy states are the only sovereign entities left making them the only possible true participants in a laissez-faire state on state market battle. Us stealing from China and China not being able to steal from us benefits me, and we damn well should push for it. We're all hypocrites, to the core, sometimes we need to accept it and forge ahead.
... or about 67% of the energy content of gasoline. So you could compare it to a claim of $1.50/gallon gasoline.
Pure ethanol can offset the smaller BTU with more efficient combustion. An alcohol engine be ran safely at 12-14 to 1 compression raising efficiency whereas gasoline's upper limit is 10 to 1 in a production vehicle that has to be warrantied.
> 2.5 gallons of fuel produced per plant, per day? It's nice that it might scrub pollutants but it seems the solar energy could be more profitably used to directly produce electricity.
I'd have to think so also, but the only requirement for this technology is to heat the cobalt-ferrite rings to 2600 degrees so couldn't we find another way to do that? What about concentrating the heat from nuclear reactor coolant (if it isn't hot enough we can collect and concentrate it), earth's natural heat production processes (volcanoes do have some impracticalities), or something else obvious I'm missing.
I once had a very similar experience after drinking a bottle of Robitussin.
I really hope that truely was a joke, but next time turn off your Ron Paul sig. I'm an avid supporter of Ron Paul, but 75% of the public would see your post and think "See, I told you the Paulists are idiots." The humour wouldn't even occur to them.
In Ron Paul's system of philosophy the federal government has no authority over education so he is no threat to the acceptance of Evolution. He also believes that abortion should be decided by the states because he rightly states that the federal government does not have the authority. He will do nothing to stop abortion, all he will do is follow the the tenth amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.").
If you believe the federal government should be involved in abortion law and education then amend the Constitution.
Also, on the separation of church and state, read the first amendment, it addresses congress. My state Constitution has provisions for separation of church and state, and a state violation should be dealt with at the state level. If I wanted the federal government to have the authority to address a state level violation of separation of church and state I would, and if you wanted you should, ask for an amendment to the Constitution to allow such.
I think your sitting on the divide. According to Wikipedia the Generation Y bottom cut was 1981, but could be as early as 1976. I'd say your in X, but the popular media plops whatever labels they want where ever they want. The media did drag on the Generation X thing to long, I was initially labeled an X'er until someone was smart enough to figure out that I was only seven in 1990, a different generation.
I don't feel like people my age quite belong with those born 1985-6 and later. I didn't have the internet, nor did my school, in junior high. In high school we finally got it, but my classmates and I did not participate in the huge popularity of instant messaging (maybe 10% used it). Two grades down though and suddenly 90% of the class used instant messaging on a daily basis.
It was probably a Freudian slip. People do have a herd mentality when it comes to computers, and the herd thinks that computers are better for everything. They can be great for voting, but we need a paper trail if computers are used. In Kansas they have elected to create a system where all electronic votes are centrally tabulated in Topeka, the state capital. [anything else I say after that sentence would be obvious]
Thanks a ton. I'll look into all of it. I'm especially interested in OpenWRT,I didn't even know there was such a thing. Just to show you that ignorance isn't bliss, it's lacking of knowledge to have bliss.
During this last college semester I expressed my disappointment that IPv6 wasn't being implemented as widely as I thought it should be. I also subtly hinted at my disappoint that IPv6 wasn't covered at all (except one half a page of 405). My teacher said "I think it will take a new generation of Network Tech to implement IPv6". How in the hell are we going to have a new generation implementing it when it isn't even taught? I just took that joke of a Network+ test and now I'm certified, and I don't know diddly-squat about IPv6. Thankfully Wikipedia is there to explain a little bit of it to me.
Most likely they would just figure out a way to reduce the number of calculations needed to break a key.
As far as public key (asymmetric) security goes I have my doubts as to its "security" (the work needed to break it), but ironically I do somewhat trust the AES cipher (symmetric). I figure if the government has approved it for encryption of TOP SECRET, not just SECRET, documents then I can fairly trust it. But for me people like myself who's highest level of math education is Calculus I doubt I will really ever know.
Drinking the Kool-Aid was never bad. The Acid Test gave us the fire in the Valley. I suggest you have some. You'll come out with a much more balanced view in life.
I was concerned about the novelty waning, but now I see they've go a killer-app. European lesbian sex videos overlayed on reality, oh wait, that's my other tab . . .
Us freedom loving libertarians ought to be ecstatic about such a debate. Ron Paul would be the most knowledgeable candidate at the debate. His education and his ability to study and form policies as he encounters information, along with his excellent moral framework of interpreting things through the constitution and limited government, would enable him to give the best answers. Yes, he does believe in God, but I have never seen him let that interfere with his views on administration of government. I'm an atheist and I support him. He understands the need for protection of freedom of speech on the street and the internet (net neutrality included).
Ask any of the other candidates about biology and you'd get a "huh?", but Ron Paul would definitive answers with excellent understanding of the subject matter and he would actually formulate his own conclusions. Not "my advisor/campaign manager told me that global warming is [blank] because [blank] number of Americans actually care enough or know enough about it."
From Article - "Running a Web site and a search engine is one thing," said Mr. Weide of IDC. "But developing a phone is a whole different game. It will not be easy for them."
They claim that Google will have hard time because it doesn't have the experience dealing with complex hardware. Sure, maintaining what is probably the world's largest search engine isn't complex. And as far as the handset hardware goes they won't be the first to port the kernel to a mobile platform, and someone else may have already done the work for them. Communication is Google's business, and they have spent a ton of R&D time and money to prepare and launch their product. I bet they are further along than IDC thinks.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, if you're a strongly Christian family, you would probably want that "guidance" to be towards Christianity, however one day when I have the great joy of becoming a parent, I will "guide" my children towards science, logic and reason. I will go so far even as to point out my views on religion and if they get it in to their heads that there's a great mystical man in the sky, I'll happily debate with them to change their minds (as I will with ANYONE who brings it up and is open to discussion, whether they're related to me or not).
I'm glad to finally hear someone say what I believe. My daughter is only two and half, and one day before lunch she says "Daddy, pray." My wife, who is Christian, smiled and said "Oh, that's so cut. I'm proud of here." I refused to fold my hands and pray, even with my daughter, because I believe it is wrong to play along with religious indoctrination (which she got from my wife's parents). My mom told me I should "respect Bailey's choices". It infuriated me inside (I was outwardly calm). My daughter is two years old. She doesn't know what she is doing, she is doing what she is told. Just imagine what my Christian mother would have said if my daughter had said "Praise to Allah" or a Muslim baby-sitter indoctrinated her in Islam; there wouldn't have been anything said about respecting "her choices". She did not "choose God", she did what kids are known to do, copy those around them. I tell my daughter "I don't believe in God" when she asks me to pray, which earns me sneers and shocked looks from other adults. I have started saying "There isn't a God" because saying "I don't believe in God" implies that there is a rational debate as to whether or not there is a God; there is not.
I just order the book "Life on Earth: The Story of Evolution". It is aimed at six to ten year olds. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618164766/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance
Read The F*#k!ng article. Google deploys Google Apps, the biggest advice is to get everything possible off of the end-point machines and onto the servers that way you don't have to worry about the above. Also there is tools to insure security suites are installed, etc.
Wanna know how much Microsoft has reformed this sort of thing?
You can get it all here http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958Sounds like the college I'm attending. For one lesson the teacher instructed us to go to a geocities webpage, download QBasic, and install it on our machines. I would have called her insane, but I just installed it on XP under Qemu. She teaches several IT courses that do cover security. So far all of the IT staff and teachers are so entrenched in Windows that they can't even imagine a world without proprietary apps. The same teacher can' understand why I won't take advantage of Microsoft's "ultimate steal" and buy the full Microsoft Office for $65 as offered by the school. I told her quite simply: OpenOffice works, and uses an ISO standard. Why would I want to pay to lose compatibility? Don't even get me started on the bullshit of Visual Studio, and how much easier it is to develop C++ apps using Vim/GCC.
The real news is that Google just dropped an almost perfect machine translation of an Italian article and nobody noticed. I surfed all over the articles website amazed buy one article after another, not by their content, but by the translation. Hasn't anybody else noticed? Perhaps it is a fruition of Google scanning and comparing those thousands of U.N. Documents they said they would use a year or two ago.
Yet another reason to encrypt your entire hard-drive with Linux in addition to hardware based encryption. Wish I knew enough to tell if it was working, though. Sure without the keys my hard-drives seems unreadable, but I am not a crypto expert.
Without anarchy states are the only sovereign entities left making them the only possible true participants in a laissez-faire state on state market battle. Us stealing from China and China not being able to steal from us benefits me, and we damn well should push for it. We're all hypocrites, to the core, sometimes we need to accept it and forge ahead.
From wikipedia...
Gasoline - 125000 BTU/gal
Ethanol - 84600 BTU/gal
... or about 67% of the energy content of gasoline. So you could compare it to a claim of $1.50/gallon gasoline.
Pure ethanol can offset the smaller BTU with more efficient combustion. An alcohol engine be ran safely at 12-14 to 1 compression raising efficiency whereas gasoline's upper limit is 10 to 1 in a production vehicle that has to be warrantied.> 2.5 gallons of fuel produced per plant, per day? It's nice that it might scrub pollutants but it seems the solar energy could be more profitably used to directly produce electricity.
I'd have to think so also, but the only requirement for this technology is to heat the cobalt-ferrite rings to 2600 degrees so couldn't we find another way to do that? What about concentrating the heat from nuclear reactor coolant (if it isn't hot enough we can collect and concentrate it), earth's natural heat production processes (volcanoes do have some impracticalities), or something else obvious I'm missing.
I really hope that truely was a joke, but next time turn off your Ron Paul sig. I'm an avid supporter of Ron Paul, but 75% of the public would see your post and think "See, I told you the Paulists are idiots." The humour wouldn't even occur to them.
In Ron Paul's system of philosophy the federal government has no authority over education so he is no threat to the acceptance of Evolution. He also believes that abortion should be decided by the states because he rightly states that the federal government does not have the authority. He will do nothing to stop abortion, all he will do is follow the the tenth amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.").
If you believe the federal government should be involved in abortion law and education then amend the Constitution.
Also, on the separation of church and state, read the first amendment, it addresses congress. My state Constitution has provisions for separation of church and state, and a state violation should be dealt with at the state level. If I wanted the federal government to have the authority to address a state level violation of separation of church and state I would, and if you wanted you should, ask for an amendment to the Constitution to allow such.
P.S.--I'm an atheist.
I think your sitting on the divide. According to Wikipedia the Generation Y bottom cut was 1981, but could be as early as 1976. I'd say your in X, but the popular media plops whatever labels they want where ever they want. The media did drag on the Generation X thing to long, I was initially labeled an X'er until someone was smart enough to figure out that I was only seven in 1990, a different generation.
I don't feel like people my age quite belong with those born 1985-6 and later. I didn't have the internet, nor did my school, in junior high. In high school we finally got it, but my classmates and I did not participate in the huge popularity of instant messaging (maybe 10% used it). Two grades down though and suddenly 90% of the class used instant messaging on a daily basis.
...Acid's for the plebes. You want the high done right, you hit the mushrooms. Cleaner, smoother trip.You've never had ALD-52.
http://leda.lycaeum.org/?ID=3516
It was probably a Freudian slip. People do have a herd mentality when it comes to computers, and the herd thinks that computers are better for everything. They can be great for voting, but we need a paper trail if computers are used. In Kansas they have elected to create a system where all electronic votes are centrally tabulated in Topeka, the state capital. [anything else I say after that sentence would be obvious]
Thanks a ton. I'll look into all of it. I'm especially interested in OpenWRT,I didn't even know there was such a thing. Just to show you that ignorance isn't bliss, it's lacking of knowledge to have bliss.
During this last college semester I expressed my disappointment that IPv6 wasn't being implemented as widely as I thought it should be. I also subtly hinted at my disappoint that IPv6 wasn't covered at all (except one half a page of 405). My teacher said "I think it will take a new generation of Network Tech to implement IPv6". How in the hell are we going to have a new generation implementing it when it isn't even taught? I just took that joke of a Network+ test and now I'm certified, and I don't know diddly-squat about IPv6. Thankfully Wikipedia is there to explain a little bit of it to me.
tomz16,
Most likely they would just figure out a way to reduce the number of calculations needed to break a key.
As far as public key (asymmetric) security goes I have my doubts as to its "security" (the work needed to break it), but ironically I do somewhat trust the AES cipher (symmetric). I figure if the government has approved it for encryption of TOP SECRET, not just SECRET, documents then I can fairly trust it. But for me people like myself who's highest level of math education is Calculus I doubt I will really ever know.
Drinking the Kool-Aid was never bad. The Acid Test gave us the fire in the Valley. I suggest you have some. You'll come out with a much more balanced view in life.
I was concerned about the novelty waning, but now I see they've go a killer-app. European lesbian sex videos overlayed on reality, oh wait, that's my other tab . . .
Us freedom loving libertarians ought to be ecstatic about such a debate. Ron Paul would be the most knowledgeable candidate at the debate. His education and his ability to study and form policies as he encounters information, along with his excellent moral framework of interpreting things through the constitution and limited government, would enable him to give the best answers. Yes, he does believe in God, but I have never seen him let that interfere with his views on administration of government. I'm an atheist and I support him. He understands the need for protection of freedom of speech on the street and the internet (net neutrality included).
Ask any of the other candidates about biology and you'd get a "huh?", but Ron Paul would definitive answers with excellent understanding of the subject matter and he would actually formulate his own conclusions. Not "my advisor/campaign manager told me that global warming is [blank] because [blank] number of Americans actually care enough or know enough about it."
I was being sarcastic when I said maintaining the world's largest search engine isn't complex.
From Article - "Running a Web site and a search engine is one thing," said Mr. Weide of IDC. "But developing a phone is a whole different game. It will not be easy for them."
They claim that Google will have hard time because it doesn't have the experience dealing with complex hardware. Sure, maintaining what is probably the world's largest search engine isn't complex. And as far as the handset hardware goes they won't be the first to port the kernel to a mobile platform, and someone else may have already done the work for them. Communication is Google's business, and they have spent a ton of R&D time and money to prepare and launch their product. I bet they are further along than IDC thinks.