Translation: 4chan accused everybody with a black backpack of being the bomber. Especially if they were caught looking at a girl's ass instead of the shitty view of the marathon.
Yes. And they didn't take into account whether there's any way a pressure cooker would fit inside said backpack, probably because they have never seen a pressure cooker.
Don't they know that exploiting tragedy for profit is the job of the mainstream media? (as is handwringing over doing just that)
Seriously, if you're in the news business, whether a blogger or a regular media member, exploiting tragedies is part and parcel of your business. "If it bleeds, it leads", right?
Li-ion batteries suck. Their lifespans are considerably reduced if they are either fully charged or fully discharged; ideally they should be kept in the 40%-60% range. Since no charger does that, they are pretty much doomed.
They have their problems, but for charge efficiency and energy density, they're way ahead of the rest. They also don't self-discharge to any great extent. They're doing well on power density now too.
Your alternatives are a memory-laden NiMH battery which wastes 30% of its charge and has lousy power and energy density, not to mention a ridiculously high self-discharge rate (except LSD cells which have worse energy density). Or a NiCd which is about the same as NiMH except with better power density and more toxic waste. Let's not even get into lead-acid.
Yes, Li-Ion cells suck, But they're the best we've got.
I'll take a powerful electric motor, attach it to two half-meter-long carbon fiber blades, and spin them at 2500 RPM. No safety cage; heck, the toy won't even be attached to anything to prevent it from moving around. Still perfectly legal.
I guess the CPSC figures that hazard is obvious enough even for a dimwitted child, but that's only true for now.
A contract programmer pulled a fast one on a marketing company to get their product to spam people. Yes, absolutely, I can believe that. So can my friend the Easter Bunny.
I don't understand why there is this glut of lawyers. Why even after law school can't people become lawyers? All the lawyers I've seen seem overworked and charge $200+ an hour. Can't they just pass the bar and open up shop? Why has the middle class been locked out of this profession?
A good lawyer is priceless, a mediocre lawyer is worthless, and a poor lawyer is disastrous. And the prices paid by clients go accordingly.
Sorry to pop bubbles, but lets be realistic. The only college major that one can end up with a profession and not a job as a barista as the pinnacle of one's life is going to be either accounting or law.
Pretty cool considering that not too long ago these used to comprise of multiple separate physical devices (gyrometer x3, accellerometer x3, magnetometer), but have been getting progressively smaller over the years.
It's hardly something DARPA needs to be involved with. We who are better at buying crap for our R/C helicopters than flying the things have been able to purchase the equivalent commercially for some time now.
The reason we've had the "France surrenders" and "Freedom Fries" memes spread around by the US press since 2002 or so is that France didn't support Bush's war on Iraq
Nonsense; we've been sneering at the French (and they sneering right back) since at least WWII. "Cheese-eating surrender monkeys" goes back to 1995.
I believe this is what Verizon FIOS does with their routers--there's a sticker on the side with a (looks like random) WPA key and admin password. I assumed that it would be fine to just leave it as is--is there a downside to not changing the info?
Not sure about current routers, but older FIOS routers had a "random" password easily derived from the broadcast MAC address.
I've seen badly parked cars with hundreds of plastered-on tickets. Clearly people can behave mindlessly in exactly the same way.
With parking tickets, generally a new violation can be issued after a certain amount of time. For instance, typically a new violation of a 2-hour parking zone can be issued every two hours. If you leave a car illegally parked for days you can collect a lot of tickets that way.... but nothing like one every minute.
Because no one is going to waste bandwidth downloading some direct-to-video turd on purpose, and it's hard to believe 371 downloaded it by accident while looking for something good.
Either that or they were even cleverer than the article suggests and distributed malware that would download the movie.
The practical challenge seems to be that formal detailed requirements and specifications for algorithms are about as hard to write as the algorithms themselves.
Yes; it's intuitively obvious that this must be the case, but I think someone managed to prove it a few years back. However, there's some doubt if the proof is valid...
Real hackers don't even break into other computer systems.
Bah. The old time hackers bypassed security and broke into computer systems all the time. You know the story of the Fortran version of Zork? One DEC hacker broke the security on the source directory, then brute-force decrypted the source code, and another DEC hacker translated the source into Fortran.
No. The judge isn't allowed to consider those other pieces of legislation and non-legislation that you provided. The judge is only allowed to look at the relevant law, and decide whether a given set of circumstances meets that or not.
What? Of course the judge is allowed to look at related statutes to interpret the statute in question.
As the ruling stands, it's legal to use a iPod Touch to check maps, but not an iPhone. In fact, it's legal to use the iPhone to check maps, as long as you're on a speakerphone call at the same time ("unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.")
This is an absurd result, and while I don't think it's "legislating from the bench" to interpret it that way, it's a bad ruling. It would not be inconsistent with the statute to rule that "using a wireless telephone" applies only to telephony functions of a multi-function device, and it would make for a less-absurd result.
Of course, the legislature should correct this by amending the statute so even the dimmest judge can figure out what is meant.
Answer: A good start. If I never see another framework which makes you write the same thing three different times in three different ways, and claims it's making things "easier" by doing so, it'll be 15 years too late.
Betteridge is probably right. The messages are likely technically interceptable but not through the means the DEA tried; they didn't ask the right people the right questions.
Nice. Now here's an idea: impersonate a Palestinian terrorist type in order to get close to a good-looking Israeli secret agent. One of the few times being a neckbearded basement-dweller with poor personal hygiene should actually work in a slashdotter's favor. Of course the end game is waking up in a small cell with electrodes on your genitals, and then not waking up at all, but if you play your cards right maybe you can get something more before that.
I just started looking into Hadoop, but from what I've read, I thought that the HDFS was open source. It certainly looks that way when I perused Apache Hadoop yesterday.
What did I miss?
Only a decade or two of rampant "intellectual property" abuse, and impotent raging about it on Slashdot.
Everything's patented, usually several times over. It doesn't matter if it's open source; open source only provides you with rights that the original author had the authority to license; a third-party patent doesn't fit into that category.
The earlier patent Rackspace fought off patented the steps of loading a floating point value into a register, rounding it, performing an operation on it, and storing it back into memory. Even aside from being unpatentable subject matter, it's been done billions of times before (rounding before or after; both have been done); it's both obvious and non-novel. But the USPTO accepted it, so some troll had something to sue over.
however, engineered pathogens are not subject to such restrictions, modify a rhinovirus so that it also craps all over p53 and now you have a cancer causing cold.
Subtle, and possibly quite effective at cleansing the earth of its two-legged parasites, but I prefer the more direct and messy approach of using the Ebola glycoprotein.
There are no "poor salaries" for competent developers. It's an extremely well paid profession - especially in tech centers such as the San Francisco Bay Area.
There's lots of poor salaries for competent developers. If the recruiting and hiring processes at many firms were better than what they are, that might not be the case, but they are. The biggest difficulty for getting into the big tech firms is just getting them to notice you to get an interview in the first place; they get millions of resumes and applications and most of them probably go straight to the circular file based on keywords, without a human so much as reviewing them. Then they're filtered by tech recruiters, who probably aren't better than chance for distinguishing resumes of good people from bad ones.
It just so happens -- and you can make this a conspiracy or not -- that some of those early filters favor foreign applicants. My personal favorite is the Masters degree requirement. It turns out that two of the best ways for getting your foot in the door in the US if you're a foreign national are getting a foreign masters degree (which gets you into higher-priority visa pools), or getting a student visa and then getting a US masters degree (which puts you on track for OPT, then an H-1B).
So these foreign nationals have very strong incentives to get a masters degree. US nationals do not have that same strong incentive to get a masters degree, and there are good economic reasons not to. So if you require (or "prefer") a masters degree for your software development job, you'll see a talent pool heavily weight towards foreign nationals. This does not mean that the pool of actually qualified candidates is similarly weighted, it means that a masters degree is a proxy for something other than (or, charitably, in addition to) competence.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor #2 (if he's innocent); that photo is from an angle that makes it impossible to tell if he still has the backpack.
Yes. And they didn't take into account whether there's any way a pressure cooker would fit inside said backpack, probably because they have never seen a pressure cooker.
Don't they know that exploiting tragedy for profit is the job of the mainstream media?
(as is handwringing over doing just that)
Seriously, if you're in the news business, whether a blogger or a regular media member, exploiting tragedies is part and parcel of your business. "If it bleeds, it leads", right?
They have their problems, but for charge efficiency and energy density, they're way ahead of the rest. They also don't self-discharge to any great extent. They're doing well on power density now too.
Your alternatives are a memory-laden NiMH battery which wastes 30% of its charge and has lousy power and energy density, not to mention a ridiculously high self-discharge rate (except LSD cells which have worse energy density). Or a NiCd which is about the same as NiMH except with better power density and more toxic waste. Let's not even get into lead-acid.
Yes, Li-Ion cells suck, But they're the best we've got.
The only way to block out bad Betty White images is with good Betty White images.
I'll take a powerful electric motor, attach it to two half-meter-long carbon fiber blades, and spin them at 2500 RPM. No safety cage; heck, the toy won't even be attached to anything to prevent it from moving around. Still perfectly legal. I guess the CPSC figures that hazard is obvious enough even for a dimwitted child, but that's only true for now.
A contract programmer pulled a fast one on a marketing company to get their product to spam people. Yes, absolutely, I can believe that. So can my friend the Easter Bunny.
A good lawyer is priceless, a mediocre lawyer is worthless, and a poor lawyer is disastrous. And the prices paid by clients go accordingly.
It's not law. There's a glut of lawyers too.
It's hardly something DARPA needs to be involved with. We who are better at buying crap for our R/C helicopters than flying the things have been able to purchase the equivalent commercially for some time now.
Nonsense; we've been sneering at the French (and they sneering right back) since at least WWII. "Cheese-eating surrender monkeys" goes back to 1995.
Not sure about current routers, but older FIOS routers had a "random" password easily derived from the broadcast MAC address.
With parking tickets, generally a new violation can be issued after a certain amount of time. For instance, typically a new violation of a 2-hour parking zone can be issued every two hours. If you leave a car illegally parked for days you can collect a lot of tickets that way.... but nothing like one every minute.
Because no one is going to waste bandwidth downloading some direct-to-video turd on purpose, and it's hard to believe 371 downloaded it by accident while looking for something good.
Either that or they were even cleverer than the article suggests and distributed malware that would download the movie.
Yes; it's intuitively obvious that this must be the case, but I think someone managed to prove it a few years back. However, there's some doubt if the proof is valid...
Bah. The old time hackers bypassed security and broke into computer systems all the time. You know the story of the Fortran version of Zork? One DEC hacker broke the security on the source directory, then brute-force decrypted the source code, and another DEC hacker translated the source into Fortran.
It ain't the reading the map that's so hard... it's UNFOLDING it. (thank you, ADC street atlas)
What? Of course the judge is allowed to look at related statutes to interpret the statute in question.
As the ruling stands, it's legal to use a iPod Touch to check maps, but not an iPhone. In fact, it's legal to use the iPhone to check maps, as long as you're on a speakerphone call at the same time ("unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in
that manner while driving.")
This is an absurd result, and while I don't think it's "legislating from the bench" to interpret it that way, it's a bad ruling. It would not be inconsistent with the statute to rule that "using a wireless telephone" applies only to telephony functions of a multi-function device, and it would make for a less-absurd result.
Of course, the legislature should correct this by amending the statute so even the dimmest judge can figure out what is meant.
Answer: A good start. If I never see another framework which makes you write the same thing three different times in three different ways, and claims it's making things "easier" by doing so, it'll be 15 years too late.
One's a scourge on the nation taking dirty money to do terrible, terrible things. The other just kills people for money.
Betteridge is probably right. The messages are likely technically interceptable but not through the means the DEA tried; they didn't ask the right people the right questions.
Nice. Now here's an idea: impersonate a Palestinian terrorist type in order to get close to a good-looking Israeli secret agent. One of the few times being a neckbearded basement-dweller with poor personal hygiene should actually work in a slashdotter's favor. Of course the end game is waking up in a small cell with electrodes on your genitals, and then not waking up at all, but if you play your cards right maybe you can get something more before that.
Only a decade or two of rampant "intellectual property" abuse, and impotent raging about it on Slashdot.
Everything's patented, usually several times over. It doesn't matter if it's open source; open source only provides you with rights that the original author had the authority to license; a third-party patent doesn't fit into that category.
The earlier patent Rackspace fought off patented the steps of loading a floating point value into a register, rounding it, performing an operation on it, and storing it back into memory. Even aside from being unpatentable subject matter, it's been done billions of times before (rounding before or after; both have been done); it's both obvious and non-novel. But the USPTO accepted it, so some troll had something to sue over.
Subtle, and possibly quite effective at cleansing the earth of its two-legged parasites, but I prefer the more direct and messy approach of using the Ebola glycoprotein.
There's lots of poor salaries for competent developers. If the recruiting and hiring processes at many firms were better than what they are, that might not be the case, but they are. The biggest difficulty for getting into the big tech firms is just getting them to notice you to get an interview in the first place; they get millions of resumes and applications and most of them probably go straight to the circular file based on keywords, without a human so much as reviewing them. Then they're filtered by tech recruiters, who probably aren't better than chance for distinguishing resumes of good people from bad ones.
It just so happens -- and you can make this a conspiracy or not -- that some of those early filters favor foreign applicants. My personal favorite is the Masters degree requirement. It turns out that two of the best ways for getting your foot in the door in the US if you're a foreign national are getting a foreign masters degree (which gets you into higher-priority visa pools), or getting a student visa and then getting a US masters degree (which puts you on track for OPT, then an H-1B).
So these foreign nationals have very strong incentives to get a masters degree. US nationals do not have that same strong incentive to get a masters degree, and there are good economic reasons not to. So if you require (or "prefer") a masters degree for your software development job, you'll see a talent pool heavily weight towards foreign nationals. This does not mean that the pool of actually qualified candidates is similarly weighted, it means that a masters degree is a proxy for something other than (or, charitably, in addition to) competence.