find it interesting that the US ambassador, and the national secuirty adviser are so quickly working to get this guy released.
Reminiscent of the Union Carbide accident in Bhopal, in 1984, which killed about 20,000 people. The CEO, Warren Anderson, came over to see the aftermath and was arrested on homicide charges by the local police chief. A few days later, after heavy pressure from the US govt, he was released, immediately departed India, and though India has been pressing for his extradition ever sence, he remains free and very rich.
Meanwhile hundreds, or thousands, of Westerners rot in jail in Asia on minor and quite often trumped-up drug chrges, and their embassies turn a blind eye. Using drugs is much worse than killing a few thousand third-worlders after all.
still find it mind blowing that nobody has ever thought of a lunar calendar, what with month/moon relationship of words in many languages I know. And it's mathematically much more perfect: 13 months of 28 days (364) plus a single "New Year's Day" every year. Add in your 2 days of new year celebration every 4 years. I'm baffled because I figured this out when I was something like 12. You're trolling or an idiot. 1) There are plenty of Lunar calendars in use now. The traditional Chinese, Muslim and Jewish ones for a start, all used at least for religious observances, even if the Gregorian calendar is used for business. 2) A lunar month is 29.5 days. Not 28. I knew that when I was 12.
>>They can brute force it if they really wanted to. They have the computing power to do it.
>Um, No.
What if they use rubber-hose-style brute force? In TFA they mention that using encryption in itself is a red flag. The idea is not to send uncrackable messages, but to send messages without anyone noticing. Once you've been flagged they will break in and install a key logger, bug your telephone, bank account, etc. Or put you in Camp X-Ray till you give it up.
You'd be surprized to know what technology the government really has. My guess is they probably had that capability for about 10-15 years now.
And they had all the pieces of 9/11 weeks and months beforehand; but couldn't put it together to do anything about it before it happened. Human analysis is still a limit.
You know, it's stuff like this that the terrorists want. They want us to lose our freedoms to overzealous anti-terrorism laws, they want us to live in fear. Suggestions like this article must make Bin Laden smile.
Really, bin Laden could care less if you live in fear or spend all day high. All you infidels are going to hell anyway. What he wants is to affect American foreign policy. (Which is going to plan.)
In my limited experience, Gmail sends incoming e-mail that has a similar-appearing but nonexistent address into your box. Let's say there's an cyburbia at gmail d0t com. You may get mail for cyburban, cyburb or syburbia at gmail d0t com, even when those addresses don't exist.
No, what's happening is that one message was sent to dozens or hundreds of addresses, but all except one were on the BCC line and so not part of the message as delivered. The name on the "To:" line may have been the first in that slice of the spammer's address list.
And on this note I'd never use my GMail account for any private stuff as, fer fecks sake, they're a SEARCH company. How long do you think it'll be before their new corporate shareholder overlords start doing some real intensive data mining on all your GMails ?
I really doubt they'd do that. However; I do think there is an excellent chance that Homeland Security will get a backdoor, say after the next mainland USA bombing.
Google has done the next best thing by attempting to match a mistyped (or otherwise invalid) email address to the next closest valid address, that way the recipient still has a chance to receive their mail.
NO, you're completely wrong. I get lots of spam addressed to names close alphabetically to mine at my ISP, which is not GMail.
There may be one name in the "To:" header, and hundreds of similar ones were in the "BCC:" header, which is not transmitted along with the message. However each of the "BCC" addresses generates a new message at the mail server which has the name attached to the "envelope" of the message, which is dropped when it's delivered to your mailbox.
But I don't get dictionary attack spam on a major ISP domain that has the same e-mail address as my Google address. (Part before the @ is the same). Why do I get so many on Google but not on my other domain? What is Google doing different?
According to TFA, the spam that does reach him via presumably dictionary shotgun spamming appears to be from the same source. So maybe he'll get to your ISP later.
It's been around for years, I had such mechanisms on my first racing bike in the 80s.
QR wheels were invented in the 1920's by Tullio Campagnolo, when he got a flat while racing over the Croce d'Aune pass in the Italian Alps. His frozen fingers were unable to loosen the wing nuts that held his wheels in place, so he decided to work out a better mechanism. Later he also had a lot to do with the invention of the derailleur (gear changing mechanism).
It's a "mod" if you do it to YOUR OWN PROPERTY, not if you steal and break into other people's.
First they stole a bike (one that wasn't locked properly), dismantled it to reverse engineer the mechanism, (in the process depriving the owners of several months' rent the bike might have earned) then went around and opened up over 100 other bikes to reprogram them with their backdoor, and justified this by saying that they thought the work they'd done was worth the cost of several bikes.
Would this get the same "cool hack", "fun" kind of rating if they'd done it to a similar scheme with cars? Somehow stealing bikes isn't really stealing; I've noticed this in movies where the hero appropriates a parked bike when in a hurry, dumping it on the street when he arrives without a second thought. Cyclists' blood boils when this kind of thing is done to their property; again if you tried it with cars you could easily be killed, and the owner would get a slap on the wrist.
The name of eBay is easy to parse: "e-" meaning electronic (as in e-mail), "bay" meaning auction venue. Xerox is short for "xerography", a process used in photocopiers and laser printers.
I suppose this is ironic. In case it isn't;
How does "bay" mean an auction venue? A bay is a geographic feature; and 7 other meanings in my dictionary, none of them related to auctions though.
xeros is Greek for "dry; graphos is "writing". Which is clear enough (as opposed to "wet [ink] writing"), but "Xerox" just derives from "dry", which isn't very informative.
With so much money changing hands in the game industry, why is it that the programmers who actually MAKE the games have to accept far- below-industry-standard pay and have to work in excess of 50 hours a week standard (more in crunch time, of course, which is most of the time)?
You've never worked as a movie extra, have you? Lousy pay, horrific hours, and work on a day-to-day basis. Only consolation is if it's a big movie the food is good.
I usually don't bother replying to ACs, but just this once: this from my CDROM Oxford. But it should be in any reasonably comprehensive dictionary, even American ones. Or maybe try Onelook.
Because they don't make Firefox for MacOS9. (They don't update Moz either, but there is a 1.3 version.)
Re:TROLL: how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 1
The more ancient rule is that the tactic of the Big Lie works best when lazy people stop bothering to deny it.
We're not talking about the real world. We're talking about Slashdot. And again, the way to deal with these trolls (and I don't care if you don't like the word) is to ignore them, and here it became such a problem that the moderation system was evolved, imperfect as it is.
Here, as on usenet, there are any number of monomaniacs who try to intrude their hobbyhorses into every discussion. Then people, like you apparently, feel compelled to contradict them. The original subject of discussion is soon lost and everyone else gives up. Who benefits from this? Those interested in the original subject find nothing. The trolls can enjoy the warm feeling of having started another flame war. Those who think they are "fighting the big lie" also have a warm feeling; but if they were honest they'd know their impassioned arguments have achieved nothing except for their own catharsis. None of those involved ever changes their opinions. No one else reads them. Whenever someone manages to get a subject like "creationism" or "gun control" going, I page down. If these subjects actually interest you, go to the places where it is on topic (news://alt.talk.origins, news://talk.politics.guns for example) and go at each other and leave the rest of us out of it.
Re:TROLL: how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 1
drift naturally in the same manner they would in a normal face-to-face conversation.
So if you were talking with some acquaintances and someone butted in and said "Gays should be allowed to marry/Hitler had the right idea/Microsoft makes great software/whatever" you'd just respond to him and forget about what you were talking about before? Because that's what's happened here.
That's the way trolls play their game; they drop hot button issues in threads it has no relevance, then watch as all those who feel compelled to contradict him takeover the thread.
If your philosophy was adhered to, then people could get away with lying so long as they do it in an off-topic way (because then nobody would be allowed to respond about the lie)/
Well, if "my philosophy" was adhered to, the "lie" would become invisible to most readers, being modded down to -1 instead of +5 as it was the last time I looked. And you must know that in issues like this, there is no debate, just the opposing zealots repeating the same lines as they do every time the subject is raised. It's an entirely sterile predictable performance that goes on till those with the most time to waste have posted more than their opponents.
Point, but the fact remains....after all the years of books being butchered by Hollywood, I can't beleive she didn't have any clue what-so-ever that this could happen. If she didn't, she should have had the foresight to negotiate some kind of "final-say" clause. It's her intellectual property, it's up to her (and her alone) to aultimately protect it.
Of course she knew; it's bee the way the studios do business for 100 years. Nothing she could do about it. The fact is that authors hardly ever get any say over what is made. If they want the money, what they're selling is control. In the worst case, the movie sucks, but the author walks away with $10,000 to a million. Their books may get reprinted, and bad movies quickly disappear.
what about all the people insisting on teaching creationism
How about modding this "troll" rather than "insightful"? It has succeeded in totally derailing the discussion, as it was no doubt designed to. The next several hundred posts are in response to this off-topic remark and ignoring the FA, which is from a British newspaper where this isn't an issue at all.
Her "rainbow people" utopia was a pretty common motif in 1940s sci fi, and everyone from Isaac Asimov to Roger Zelazny had brown- skinned characters (even real black African from real Earth) in their stories before her.
In one of Asimov's stories is an amusing scene where one character tries to bond with another; he being deep black, the other being lily white he thinks they have something in common as the vast majority are then an almost homgeneous brown. The white guy just stares at him as at this time it's about as important as eye-colour.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but how likely is it otherwsie that someone charged with the death of seveal thousand people be given bail and be allowed to leave the country?
Reminiscent of the Union Carbide accident in Bhopal, in 1984, which killed about 20,000 people. The CEO, Warren Anderson, came over to see the aftermath and was arrested on homicide charges by the local police chief. A few days later, after heavy pressure from the US govt, he was released, immediately departed India, and though India has been pressing for his extradition ever sence, he remains free and very rich.
Meanwhile hundreds, or thousands, of Westerners rot in jail in Asia on minor and quite often trumped-up drug chrges, and their embassies turn a blind eye. Using drugs is much worse than killing a few thousand third-worlders after all.
Basically how an abacus works, IIRC.
still find it mind blowing that nobody has ever thought of a lunar calendar, what with month/moon relationship of words in many languages I know.
And it's mathematically much more perfect:
13 months of 28 days (364) plus a single "New Year's Day" every year. Add in your 2 days of new year celebration every 4 years.
I'm baffled because I figured this out when I was something like 12.
You're trolling or an idiot.
1) There are plenty of Lunar calendars in use now. The traditional Chinese, Muslim and Jewish ones for a start, all used at least for religious observances, even if the Gregorian calendar is used for business.
2) A lunar month is 29.5 days. Not 28. I knew that when I was 12.
How about the Laps?
They're not worried about stealing, but about outdated or incorrect information being disseminated.
>Um, No.
What if they use rubber-hose-style brute force? In TFA they mention that using encryption in itself is a red flag. The idea is not to send uncrackable messages, but to send messages without anyone noticing. Once you've been flagged they will break in and install a key logger, bug your telephone, bank account, etc. Or put you in Camp X-Ray till you give it up.
And they had all the pieces of 9/11 weeks and months beforehand; but couldn't put it together to do anything about it before it happened. Human analysis is still a limit.
Really, bin Laden could care less if you live in fear or spend all day high. All you infidels are going to hell anyway. What he wants is to affect American foreign policy. (Which is going to plan.)
No, what's happening is that one message was sent to dozens or hundreds of addresses, but all except one were on the BCC line and so not part of the message as delivered. The name on the "To:" line may have been the first in that slice of the spammer's address list.
I really doubt they'd do that. However; I do think there is an excellent chance that Homeland Security will get a backdoor, say after the next mainland USA bombing.
NO, you're completely wrong. I get lots of spam addressed to names close alphabetically to mine at my ISP, which is not GMail.
There may be one name in the "To:" header, and hundreds of similar ones were in the "BCC:" header, which is not transmitted along with the message. However each of the "BCC" addresses generates a new message at the mail server which has the name attached to the "envelope" of the message, which is dropped when it's delivered to your mailbox.
According to TFA, the spam that does reach him via presumably dictionary shotgun spamming appears to be from the same source. So maybe he'll get to your ISP later.
QR wheels were invented in the 1920's by Tullio Campagnolo, when he got a flat while racing over the Croce d'Aune pass in the Italian Alps. His frozen fingers were unable to loosen the wing nuts that held his wheels in place, so he decided to work out a better mechanism. Later he also had a lot to do with the invention of the derailleur (gear changing mechanism).
First they stole a bike (one that wasn't locked properly), dismantled it to reverse engineer the mechanism, (in the process depriving the owners of several months' rent the bike might have earned) then went around and opened up over 100 other bikes to reprogram them with their backdoor, and justified this by saying that they thought the work they'd done was worth the cost of several bikes.
Would this get the same "cool hack", "fun" kind of rating if they'd done it to a similar scheme with cars? Somehow stealing bikes isn't really stealing; I've noticed this in movies where the hero appropriates a parked bike when in a hurry, dumping it on the street when he arrives without a second thought. Cyclists' blood boils when this kind of thing is done to their property; again if you tried it with cars you could easily be killed, and the owner would get a slap on the wrist.
I suppose this is ironic. In case it isn't;
You've never worked as a movie extra, have you? Lousy pay, horrific hours, and work on a day-to-day basis. Only consolation is if it's a big movie the food is good.
I usually don't bother replying to ACs, but just this once: this from my CDROM Oxford. But it should be in any reasonably comprehensive dictionary, even American ones. Or maybe try Onelook.
Because they don't make Firefox for MacOS9. (They don't update Moz either, but there is a 1.3 version.)
We're not talking about the real world. We're talking about Slashdot. And again, the way to deal with these trolls (and I don't care if you don't like the word) is to ignore them, and here it became such a problem that the moderation system was evolved, imperfect as it is.
Here, as on usenet, there are any number of monomaniacs who try to intrude their hobbyhorses into every discussion. Then people, like you apparently, feel compelled to contradict them. The original subject of discussion is soon lost and everyone else gives up. Who benefits from this? Those interested in the original subject find nothing. The trolls can enjoy the warm feeling of having started another flame war. Those who think they are "fighting the big lie" also have a warm feeling; but if they were honest they'd know their impassioned arguments have achieved nothing except for their own catharsis. None of those involved ever changes their opinions. No one else reads them. Whenever someone manages to get a subject like "creationism" or "gun control" going, I page down. If these subjects actually interest you, go to the places where it is on topic (news://alt.talk.origins, news://talk.politics.guns for example) and go at each other and leave the rest of us out of it.
So if you were talking with some acquaintances and someone butted in and said "Gays should be allowed to marry/Hitler had the right idea/Microsoft makes great software/whatever" you'd just respond to him and forget about what you were talking about before? Because that's what's happened here.
That's the way trolls play their game; they drop hot button issues in threads it has no relevance, then watch as all those who feel compelled to contradict him takeover the thread.
If your philosophy was adhered to, then people could get away with lying so long as they do it in an off-topic way (because then nobody would be allowed to respond about the lie)/
Well, if "my philosophy" was adhered to, the "lie" would become invisible to most readers, being modded down to -1 instead of +5 as it was the last time I looked. And you must know that in issues like this, there is no debate, just the opposing zealots repeating the same lines as they do every time the subject is raised. It's an entirely sterile predictable performance that goes on till those with the most time to waste have posted more than their opponents.
The ancient rule is: Don't feed the trolls.
Of course she knew; it's bee the way the studios do business for 100 years. Nothing she could do about it. The fact is that authors hardly ever get any say over what is made. If they want the money, what they're selling is control. In the worst case, the movie sucks, but the author walks away with $10,000 to a million. Their books may get reprinted, and bad movies quickly disappear.
How about modding this "troll" rather than "insightful"? It has succeeded in totally derailing the discussion, as it was no doubt designed to. The next several hundred posts are in response to this off-topic remark and ignoring the FA, which is from a British newspaper where this isn't an issue at all.
I'm not convinced skepticism is on the decline.
Oxford Dictionary: /skeptk/ n. & a. Also (arch. & N. Amer.) sk-
sceptic
In one of Asimov's stories is an amusing scene where one character tries to bond with another; he being deep black, the other being lily white he thinks they have something in common as the vast majority are then an almost homgeneous brown. The white guy just stares at him as at this time it's about as important as eye-colour.