Isn't the whole world moving away from point releases?
Not really. I would say that atrocities such as Semver have made point releases more popular than ever. You aren't wrong about rolling releases with whole numbers being popular too though.
Traffic slowed by your ISP, and traffic slowed further down the chain - for instance by poor peering - are indistinguishable. With some help from hops further along like Netflix (or within the ISP) you may be able to pinpoint the exact problem. However, given that so many providers are capable of routing Netflix at acceptable speeds it also doesn't matter, it's obviously your ISP's responsibility.
Why on earth would you build dykes across the entire shoreline in the US? I'm certainly not suggesting it. Perhaps do the areas that are actually vulnerable and have (non-trivial amounts of) people living there - like you know, the bay area. For less populated areas with risk, in many cases relocating a couple miles down the road should be fairly feasible. The US has a lot of elevation, the areas where you cannot do that (along the coast) are pretty limited.
As for you believing that an extra 10% water differential for the base level during storms being an insurmountable issue, it just tells me you know nothing about the issue. Yes it's cumulative, so what? You can easily predict it, just factor it in. Netherlands factored in 70cm sea rise level per century... they factored it in in 1953.
Either way, the point is you will need a lot more margin than 10% for predicting what kind of storms to protect for. If the area you live cannot handle a severe storm surge realistic for your area plus another meter and has no plans to improve water barriers, I would suggest moving out before you get unlucky with a storm, which could happen this year. Sea level rise or not.
It's a drop in the bucket. Yeah that drop might cause your bucket to overflow a little bit earlier, but the main problem is something else, and it's a drop you can see coming miles down the road.
You are missing the whole point of my post. Sea level rise is maybe 40cm by 2100. A strong storm can have a 400cm surge. A strong storm can easily cause an extra meter or two of storm surge over that which makes the sea level rise irrelevant. The storms will kill people well before the sea level rise will if better barriers aren't built or people don't leave the area. I also mentioned sea level rise doesn't happen overnight. You have plenty of time (think decades) to evacuate a couple of miles down the road on a bit higher ground - people don't tend to die moving a couple of miles. Storms do happen overnight.
Also, you don't need concrete to build dykes and if the Netherlands could do it with 17th century tech I'm sure most countries can manage either that or relocating people to slightly higher ground. It doesn't matter though because if you cannot handle a meter of sea level rise you could get wiped out tomorrow by a mid size storm.
Yeah sorry, I liked your contrarian point so I thought It'd be a good thread to post another contrarian comment. It wasn't really targeted at your comment in particular even though it hooks into the things you mention. I was rather just trying to target conventional wisdom.
How will rising sea levels kill millions? These changes don't happen overnight and can be countered with dykes and pumps. However, increased temperatures increase storm frequency and intensity and these may lead to much larger storm surges. This is what may kill millions. Rising sea level change is just a drop in the bucket in comparison.
Also, how will you 'solve' climate change? Do you really think reducing CO2 output will be enough? I live in the Netherlands, we have been building massive fortifications against storm surges for the past 50 years. I suggest other countries that are at risk will do the same. Betting on magically solving climate change (which may or may not be possible) might work, but increased water barriers will definitely work.
Lots of countries have revenue taxes. You should price your products so that you can afford to pay it. To answer your question, if you cannot pay your debts you go bankrupt.
The reality is that your company would have never hired any of them without their technical skills. And yet the 'autistic' ones are still there despite their lack of communication skills. Which again just comes to show that communication skills may be 'valued' but not as much as other factors.
The article quite literally makes that claim: "Of the energy output of fuel in a car engine, 33% is spent in exhaust, 29% in cooling and 38% in mechanical energy, of which friction losses account for 33% and air resistance for 5%." I made no claim that aerodynamic drag is insignificant, I just wanted to point out that the numbers above may be wrong. The 'only' was in respect to the calculations by the parent post, not a qualitative assessment.
According to this article air resistance only accounts for 5% of energy output of a car. So if the mirror accounts for 7% of air resistance, that's 7% of 5%. So that means it's only 0.35% of fuel economy.
I didn't say you claimed that. Are *you* making things up? I just asked two questions, where your page contradicts my statement, and which part of GDPR forbids WHOIS. You answered neither question (your quote certainly doesn't point it out).
You misunderstand data access if you think I didn't cover it. As far as portability is concerned, that's the whole point of WHOIS, they have that covered.
This is total nonsense. GDRP is about disclosing how you handle data and giving people handles when they want to be removed from your system. In no way does it stop you from creating a phone book for domains holders.
Ah right, yes I agree completely. I have some personal doubts about the story in the part about how the details were leaked to the media, but I don't really doubt the story about the hack itself.
There is a referendum upcoming in the Netherlands about massively expanding what the intelligence agencies are allowed to do. Any information about Dutch intelligence in the coming months should be viewed in that light. The government is trying to paint them in as positive light as possible. Given that nothing they say can be verified, be careful what you believe.
A properly setup VPN is better, yes. However, in the real world many people either can't or won't use a VPN. For those cases this would be a massive security improvement.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. I would say that atrocities such as Semver have made point releases more popular than ever. You aren't wrong about rolling releases with whole numbers being popular too though.
They say it's available free forever in bold on the homepage. So in human years that's at least 12 months.
Traffic slowed by your ISP, and traffic slowed further down the chain - for instance by poor peering - are indistinguishable. With some help from hops further along like Netflix (or within the ISP) you may be able to pinpoint the exact problem. However, given that so many providers are capable of routing Netflix at acceptable speeds it also doesn't matter, it's obviously your ISP's responsibility.
Why on earth would you build dykes across the entire shoreline in the US? I'm certainly not suggesting it. Perhaps do the areas that are actually vulnerable and have (non-trivial amounts of) people living there - like you know, the bay area. For less populated areas with risk, in many cases relocating a couple miles down the road should be fairly feasible. The US has a lot of elevation, the areas where you cannot do that (along the coast) are pretty limited.
As for you believing that an extra 10% water differential for the base level during storms being an insurmountable issue, it just tells me you know nothing about the issue. Yes it's cumulative, so what? You can easily predict it, just factor it in. Netherlands factored in 70cm sea rise level per century... they factored it in in 1953.
Either way, the point is you will need a lot more margin than 10% for predicting what kind of storms to protect for. If the area you live cannot handle a severe storm surge realistic for your area plus another meter and has no plans to improve water barriers, I would suggest moving out before you get unlucky with a storm, which could happen this year. Sea level rise or not.
It's a drop in the bucket. Yeah that drop might cause your bucket to overflow a little bit earlier, but the main problem is something else, and it's a drop you can see coming miles down the road.
You are missing the whole point of my post. Sea level rise is maybe 40cm by 2100. A strong storm can have a 400cm surge. A strong storm can easily cause an extra meter or two of storm surge over that which makes the sea level rise irrelevant. The storms will kill people well before the sea level rise will if better barriers aren't built or people don't leave the area. I also mentioned sea level rise doesn't happen overnight. You have plenty of time (think decades) to evacuate a couple of miles down the road on a bit higher ground - people don't tend to die moving a couple of miles. Storms do happen overnight.
Also, you don't need concrete to build dykes and if the Netherlands could do it with 17th century tech I'm sure most countries can manage either that or relocating people to slightly higher ground. It doesn't matter though because if you cannot handle a meter of sea level rise you could get wiped out tomorrow by a mid size storm.
Yeah sorry, I liked your contrarian point so I thought It'd be a good thread to post another contrarian comment. It wasn't really targeted at your comment in particular even though it hooks into the things you mention. I was rather just trying to target conventional wisdom.
How will rising sea levels kill millions? These changes don't happen overnight and can be countered with dykes and pumps. However, increased temperatures increase storm frequency and intensity and these may lead to much larger storm surges. This is what may kill millions. Rising sea level change is just a drop in the bucket in comparison.
Also, how will you 'solve' climate change? Do you really think reducing CO2 output will be enough? I live in the Netherlands, we have been building massive fortifications against storm surges for the past 50 years. I suggest other countries that are at risk will do the same. Betting on magically solving climate change (which may or may not be possible) might work, but increased water barriers will definitely work.
As a European, I have no idea what you are talking about. Why could you not lead a normal life while unemployed?
Lots of countries have revenue taxes. You should price your products so that you can afford to pay it. To answer your question, if you cannot pay your debts you go bankrupt.
The two most expensive ones? The union workers?
The reality is that your company would have never hired any of them without their technical skills. And yet the 'autistic' ones are still there despite their lack of communication skills. Which again just comes to show that communication skills may be 'valued' but not as much as other factors.
The article quite literally makes that claim:
"Of the energy output of fuel in a car engine, 33% is spent in exhaust, 29% in cooling and 38% in mechanical energy, of which friction losses account for 33% and air resistance for 5%."
I made no claim that aerodynamic drag is insignificant, I just wanted to point out that the numbers above may be wrong. The 'only' was in respect to the calculations by the parent post, not a qualitative assessment.
According to this article air resistance only accounts for 5% of energy output of a car. So if the mirror accounts for 7% of air resistance, that's 7% of 5%. So that means it's only 0.35% of fuel economy.
I didn't say you claimed that. Are *you* making things up? I just asked two questions, where your page contradicts my statement, and which part of GDPR forbids WHOIS. You answered neither question (your quote certainly doesn't point it out).
You misunderstand data access if you think I didn't cover it. As far as portability is concerned, that's the whole point of WHOIS, they have that covered.
Nothing here contradicts what I said. Which part would ban WHOIS?
This is total nonsense. GDRP is about disclosing how you handle data and giving people handles when they want to be removed from your system. In no way does it stop you from creating a phone book for domains holders.
You are telling me Jimmy James was in the CIA?
Ah right, yes I agree completely. I have some personal doubts about the story in the part about how the details were leaked to the media, but I don't really doubt the story about the hack itself.
You responded to me, are you saying I'm a Trump supporter or Russian troll?
There is a referendum upcoming in the Netherlands about massively expanding what the intelligence agencies are allowed to do. Any information about Dutch intelligence in the coming months should be viewed in that light. The government is trying to paint them in as positive light as possible. Given that nothing they say can be verified, be careful what you believe.
This sounds very unhealthy, why is he putting boundaries on a kid that is not even his?
Yeah we know, it was posted here yesterday...
https://entertainment.slashdot...
Very little is known about WPA3, so it's hard to say if it will do anything about SSID spoofing.
A properly setup VPN is better, yes. However, in the real world many people either can't or won't use a VPN. For those cases this would be a massive security improvement.