Such a thing could have happened 100 years ago in Sibera (exit hole, entrance on the other side of Earth was still too small to notice).
In addition to what the other posters have said: there were eyewitnesses of the Tunguska event. They saw a brilliant trail of blue-white fire come across the sky and strike the forest. It therefore could not have been an exit hole, and its velocity was too low and its energy too high to be the entrance (from a cosmic ray).
If DRM was back in the USERS hands, everyone would be singing the praises of DRM.
Huh?
The point of DRM, as far as I know, is to grant some entity (a user, a program or whatever) only limited access rights on a piece of data. That means that the user can, say, view it on the screen, but not print it or email it.
Now, because the user can do some operation that requires full access to (something equivalent to) the data in question, he surely can't have full control over his machine. Otherwise, he could take screenshots, memory dumps or whatever, recover the data in unrestricted form, and thereby extend his rights.
So how can DRM be put into the users' hands? If you mean that anyone should be able to create DRMed documents, well, anyone can, at least with the appropriate (commercial) tools. Business users of Windows can do this in Office (and Outlook, too, I think), and anyone can do this with Acrobat.
If you mean that it should be more open, well, this is impossible without hardware support. Actually, it's pretty close to impossible even with hardware support...
How long was Vista feature-frozen? Years. Probably since before it was even called that. Now, it seems kind of unlikely that the windows design team were working exclusively on Vista for all those years.
They started on this a long time ago, and they certainly want to avoid another multi-year delay.
So why is everyone so surprised that it's slated for 2009? They have almost 3 years to push it out the door. Every other major OS is on a faster release cycle than that.
The terrorists used one action to set in motion their real goal. The US has been destabilized for almost 6 years.
I don't think that's true. I mean, sure, the US overreacted badly to that one attack, but "destabilized" is a bit strong. Anyway, their real goal is surely more ambitious than, say, 10 years of bad leadership and paranoia. Like, maybe, the complete destruction of the "great Satan" (in case you're not familiar with 30-year-old Islamist nutjob propaganda, that's the US). Or the destruction of Israel, facilitated by isolationist policy changes in their strongest ally (hm, that's also the US).
Neither of those happened, and neither looks likely in the near future. What happened instead was rampant paranoia in the States, the destruction of the Taleban, the ouster of Saddam, a huge fucking mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the ascendancy of Iran. Some of these are helpful to Al Qaeda, and some harmful, but in any case, they did not win.
I'm not going to start raving about "OMFG teh terrists gonna kill us all!"; in fact, I think that terrorism is a very minor risk, and that Boston's reaction here was ridiculous. But you should remember that terror is only a subgoal, and that the terrorists haven't "won" merely by making us paranoid.
I guess I see the problem though. There is a strong Christian following in our administration. This is a running theme in Christianity. Something bad happened 2,000 years ago, and (theoretically) we know he's coming back for more. I'm not all that into christian mythology, but I think it's Revelations, or something of that sort? I guess if we follow in the current trend, we'll be playing this game for a long, long time.
I don't think there's any Christian "mythology" behind the current war in Iraq (except in that religious people are sometimes xenophobic), and it's certainly not related to Revelations. Conventional contingency planning for the apocalypse would be sort of pointless anyway: to the extent that the battle at the end of the world is to be taken literally, it seems unlikely that good will triumph over evil by standard military force.
The Christian following in the administration does lead to (attempts at) right-wing policies on abortion, gay marriage, education and so on. But that's a different issue.
You mention the damage WWII caused through Europe, and to those of foreign descent in the US. There are wrongs that go back a lot farther. [several examples]
He's talking about paranoia and xenophobia causing the persecution of our own citizens, not about empire-building. The empire-building part is probably nastier though.
I usually refer to "Thanksgiving" as "the celebration of the white man's conquest of the Indian lands".
Yeah, the same way that Easter is really a celebration of the Crusades. Er, wait...
What's the taxpayer expense here? I mean, it more or less amounts to littering, I suppose, so it might cost them all of a hundred bucks to get some guy to spend five minutes taking each sign down and throwing it out. And then, well, if you ticket them for littering, you've recouped your hundred bucks, and then some. The only reason it cost Boston any significant amount of money is because they called the bomb squad.
To those who think we should call the bomb squad every time someone puts a small box of blinkenlights by an overpass, think again. If we treat boxes of blinkenlights like litter, then the terrorists don't gain anything over making their bomb look like litter.
Now, those highly trained eyes may be looking at the open source code, or they may not. All I'm saying is that the quote "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" is not particularly accurate.
Yes. There are experienced eyes on it, though, and that's security researchers. One of the most common types of papers in systems security research is automated bug finders, and one of the standard metrics of bug-finding is "how many bugs can you find in the Linux kernel?"
Of course, in many cases, proprietary developers adapt these bug-finders to work on their software, and so they benefit too. Microsoft has an in-house bug-finding system which is pretty effective at eliminating buffer overflows and similar attacks. But despite all this, high-profile open-source projects get the most attention.
Pretty much any time you watch porn (OK, I can't speak for you, but when I watch porn), the main purpose it is to ogle the body/s of the wom[ae]n involved, and to get aroused. Being looked at in this way is demeaning because it objectifies the person being looked at: imagine looking at someone like that in real life.
What's more, the action in a lot of pornos (not all of them, mind you, but a significant fraction) is demeaning. The woman in a lot of pornos is just an object of the man's pleasure, and the man is just a proxy for the viewer (particularly given the camera angles and positions commonly chosen in bad porn).
Looking at people in this way is not healthy, nor is offering yourself to be looked at in this way. That's why most religions and many societies require that sex occur in the context of a committed relationship (marriage, usually).
This may be true in a very technical, pedantic sense. However, often one side or the other can't do anything while the latent operation is pending: for instance, a disk can't read or write data while it's seeking. If it spends most of its time in a "latent" state (seeking, waiting for data from RAM, fiddling with DMA protocols, whatever), and this decreases throughput, then I would say that latency is a bottleneck.
In a nutshell: the eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix.
To pick a technical nit, they are actually interested in the dominant eigenvector of what is more or less a sparse, weighted adjacency matrix (it's not exactly this, because there is a very small multiple of the uniform matrix added in, and some fudging for pages with no links on them). It's a Markov model, so the largest eigenvalue is 1 and, due to their uniform fudge factor, the other eigenvalues are all less than 1 in absolute value.
You set it up on port 587 which is specifically intended for this purpose. If your mail submission server isn't running on port 587 then you get what you deserve. If you are purely an end-user and don't have control over the server then bitch to your IT guy and tell him to fix his shit.
Hmm, you learn something new every day. My university doesn't run MSA, and I'll still have to route mail through port 25, but now my own server has it set up.
Or you can simply block all outbound port 25 except to very specific mail servers. Cox does this. At first I was a little miffed but then I realized it makes sense. You can still send mail to anywhere you just need to go through their mail server. So if you are running your own SMTP you simply set (for example) smtp.east.cox.net as your smart host and be done with it.
Here's the wrinkle: if I'm at a friend's house, using his wireless, then I can't send email without reconfiguring my mail client. Nor vice-versa, because smtp.east.cox.net won't accept email from outside the Cox network. Similarly, anyone who brings their laptop to work/school/library/cybercafe from a place using Cox cable, or vice versa, will have to dick around with SMTP settings in order to get their mail to work in both places.
You could, of course, set up an authenticated relay on some high port on a server halfway across the net, but this requires technical skills, a server halfway across the net, and double the bandwidth usage.
I haven't looked too carefully at the guts of Apple's Spotlight technology. However, my impression is that it works something like inotify (you can ask the system to tell you when files in certain locations change), and if this is true, it should be possible to make Finder refresh instantly.
I'm writing (off and on) a toolkit for applications that refresh automatically in this way, with a minimum amount of user code. It doesn't support OS X yet, though...
Ta da! Read it. "Plug and Play" now if it didn't re-examine the machine it couldn't be "plug and play" now could it? If this is what you want, disable "plug and play".
Well, let's see. It could quickly check that the old PnP stuff is still there, then scan for new stuff in the background. For hotpluggable devices, you wouldn't even need to change any code to allow this.
So which one is more valuable to be selling? The big clunky HDTVs that take up shelf space but sell poorly overall, or the DVDs which make up most of the revenue and take very little shelf space?
Of course, to make the profit margins what you said they were, you have to sell about 200 times as many DVDs as HDTVs. Many of them will be copies of the same few hits, but still, you may find yourself needing a lot of shelf space.
Now, a calculator older than 5 years is a historical curiosity
The TI-30 series is still popular, and hasn't received any upgrades that I know of. I don't know how long ago that was released, but I had one about 10 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Such a thing could have happened 100 years ago in Sibera (exit hole, entrance on the other side of Earth was still too small to notice).
In addition to what the other posters have said: there were eyewitnesses of the Tunguska event. They saw a brilliant trail of blue-white fire come across the sky and strike the forest. It therefore could not have been an exit hole, and its velocity was too low and its energy too high to be the entrance (from a cosmic ray).
What about mother's mlk? Jeez, if that stuff has lactose in it, how did there get to be 1.3B of them.
Lactose intolerance is an adult condition: the gene that helps people to digest milk turns off in most Chinese toddlers.
Well, we knew from the beginning that the iPod was Apple's killer app.
If DRM was back in the USERS hands, everyone would be singing the praises of DRM.
Huh?
The point of DRM, as far as I know, is to grant some entity (a user, a program or whatever) only limited access rights on a piece of data. That means that the user can, say, view it on the screen, but not print it or email it.
Now, because the user can do some operation that requires full access to (something equivalent to) the data in question, he surely can't have full control over his machine. Otherwise, he could take screenshots, memory dumps or whatever, recover the data in unrestricted form, and thereby extend his rights.
So how can DRM be put into the users' hands? If you mean that anyone should be able to create DRMed documents, well, anyone can, at least with the appropriate (commercial) tools. Business users of Windows can do this in Office (and Outlook, too, I think), and anyone can do this with Acrobat.
If you mean that it should be more open, well, this is impossible without hardware support. Actually, it's pretty close to impossible even with hardware support...
How long was Vista feature-frozen? Years. Probably since before it was even called that. Now, it seems kind of unlikely that the windows design team were working exclusively on Vista for all those years.
They started on this a long time ago, and they certainly want to avoid another multi-year delay.
So why is everyone so surprised that it's slated for 2009? They have almost 3 years to push it out the door. Every other major OS is on a faster release cycle than that.
I don't think that's true. I mean, sure, the US overreacted badly to that one attack, but "destabilized" is a bit strong. Anyway, their real goal is surely more ambitious than, say, 10 years of bad leadership and paranoia. Like, maybe, the complete destruction of the "great Satan" (in case you're not familiar with 30-year-old Islamist nutjob propaganda, that's the US). Or the destruction of Israel, facilitated by isolationist policy changes in their strongest ally (hm, that's also the US).
Neither of those happened, and neither looks likely in the near future. What happened instead was rampant paranoia in the States, the destruction of the Taleban, the ouster of Saddam, a huge fucking mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the ascendancy of Iran. Some of these are helpful to Al Qaeda, and some harmful, but in any case, they did not win.
I'm not going to start raving about "OMFG teh terrists gonna kill us all!"; in fact, I think that terrorism is a very minor risk, and that Boston's reaction here was ridiculous. But you should remember that terror is only a subgoal, and that the terrorists haven't "won" merely by making us paranoid.
I don't think there's any Christian "mythology" behind the current war in Iraq (except in that religious people are sometimes xenophobic), and it's certainly not related to Revelations. Conventional contingency planning for the apocalypse would be sort of pointless anyway: to the extent that the battle at the end of the world is to be taken literally, it seems unlikely that good will triumph over evil by standard military force.
The Christian following in the administration does lead to (attempts at) right-wing policies on abortion, gay marriage, education and so on. But that's a different issue.
He's talking about paranoia and xenophobia causing the persecution of our own citizens, not about empire-building. The empire-building part is probably nastier though.
Yeah, the same way that Easter is really a celebration of the Crusades. Er, wait...
I still don't understand.
What's the taxpayer expense here? I mean, it more or less amounts to littering, I suppose, so it might cost them all of a hundred bucks to get some guy to spend five minutes taking each sign down and throwing it out.
And then, well, if you ticket them for littering, you've recouped your hundred bucks, and then some. The only reason it cost Boston any significant amount of money is because they called the bomb squad.
To those who think we should call the bomb squad every time someone puts a small box of blinkenlights by an overpass, think again. If we treat boxes of blinkenlights like litter, then the terrorists don't gain anything over making their bomb look like litter.
Of course, in many cases, proprietary developers adapt these bug-finders to work on their software, and so they benefit too. Microsoft has an in-house bug-finding system which is pretty effective at eliminating buffer overflows and similar attacks. But despite all this, high-profile open-source projects get the most attention.
It's "I", not "i". It's "Nazis" not "Nazi's".
In American English, closing quotes always go after commas and periods.
Am I the only one who thought "Nam-shub of Enki" when I read this?
Yes.
Pretty much any time you watch porn (OK, I can't speak for you, but when I watch porn), the main purpose it is to ogle the body/s of the wom[ae]n involved, and to get aroused. Being looked at in this way is demeaning because it objectifies the person being looked at: imagine looking at someone like that in real life.
What's more, the action in a lot of pornos (not all of them, mind you, but a significant fraction) is demeaning. The woman in a lot of pornos is just an object of the man's pleasure, and the man is just a proxy for the viewer (particularly given the camera angles and positions commonly chosen in bad porn).
Looking at people in this way is not healthy, nor is offering yourself to be looked at in this way. That's why most religions and many societies require that sex occur in the context of a committed relationship (marriage, usually).
Currently Lockheed Martin is developing an anti-anti-anti-missile-missile missile to counter this new threat.
Nah, everyone known that to counter an anti-anti-missile-missile missile, you need an anti-anti-anti-missile-missile-missile laser.
No, the thing is, you divide the cake into two equal parts. Then you eat both the parts.
It's not that hard to halve your cake and eat it, too.
This may be true in a very technical, pedantic sense. However, often one side or the other can't do anything while the latent operation is pending: for instance, a disk can't read or write data while it's seeking. If it spends most of its time in a "latent" state (seeking, waiting for data from RAM, fiddling with DMA protocols, whatever), and this decreases throughput, then I would say that latency is a bottleneck.
Does anyone else find it amusing that Wikipedia's page on soft links is a redirect?
In a nutshell: the eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix.
To pick a technical nit, they are actually interested in the dominant eigenvector of what is more or less a sparse, weighted adjacency matrix (it's not exactly this, because there is a very small multiple of the uniform matrix added in, and some fudging for pages with no links on them). It's a Markov model, so the largest eigenvalue is 1 and, due to their uniform fudge factor, the other eigenvalues are all less than 1 in absolute value.
You set it up on port 587 which is specifically intended for this purpose. If your mail submission server isn't running on port 587 then you get what you deserve. If you are purely an end-user and don't have control over the server then bitch to your IT guy and tell him to fix his shit.
Hmm, you learn something new every day. My university doesn't run MSA, and I'll still have to route mail through port 25, but now my own server has it set up.
Or you can simply block all outbound port 25 except to very specific mail servers. Cox does this. At first I was a little miffed but then I realized it makes sense. You can still send mail to anywhere you just need to go through their mail server. So if you are running your own SMTP you simply set (for example) smtp.east.cox.net as your smart host and be done with it.
Here's the wrinkle: if I'm at a friend's house, using his wireless, then I can't send email without reconfiguring my mail client. Nor vice-versa, because smtp.east.cox.net won't accept email from outside the Cox network. Similarly, anyone who brings their laptop to work/school/library/cybercafe from a place using Cox cable, or vice versa, will have to dick around with SMTP settings in order to get their mail to work in both places.
You could, of course, set up an authenticated relay on some high port on a server halfway across the net, but this requires technical skills, a server halfway across the net, and double the bandwidth usage.
I haven't looked too carefully at the guts of Apple's Spotlight technology. However, my impression is that it works something like inotify (you can ask the system to tell you when files in certain locations change), and if this is true, it should be possible to make Finder refresh instantly.
I'm writing (off and on) a toolkit for applications that refresh automatically in this way, with a minimum amount of user code. It doesn't support OS X yet, though...
I'd have to collapse this wave function that describes your cat.
Is that what they're calling it these days?
Ta da! Read it. "Plug and Play" now if it didn't re-examine the machine it couldn't be "plug and play" now could it? If this is what you want, disable "plug and play".
Well, let's see. It could quickly check that the old PnP stuff is still there, then scan for new stuff in the background. For hotpluggable devices, you wouldn't even need to change any code to allow this.
So which one is more valuable to be selling? The big clunky HDTVs that take up shelf space but sell poorly overall, or the DVDs which make up most of the revenue and take very little shelf space?
Of course, to make the profit margins what you said they were, you have to sell about 200 times as many DVDs as HDTVs. Many of them will be copies of the same few hits, but still, you may find yourself needing a lot of shelf space.
Now, a calculator older than 5 years is a historical curiosity
The TI-30 series is still popular, and hasn't received any upgrades that I know of. I don't know how long ago that was released, but I had one about 10 years ago.
Why do people persist in the "nuke" and microwave myth?
Because "nuke" is 3 times shorter than "microwave," and approximately 5 times more fun to say.
A more accurate analogy would be that the user manuals for a chimp and a human are 99% similar.
Or that the memory images for cat and rm are 99% similar, because they each have a few megabytes of libc.