I wrote a paper about how some of this stuff is impacting the environment not to long ago. I thought I had an idea, ends up the actual numbers are WAY higher than I ever would have thought.
Argh! Talk about naive!
THEY DO NOT THROW THESE CAMERAS AWAY!
You buy them. You use them. You give it back to the store. They give you picetures. They sell someone else the camera.
I'm a Business MIS/Comp Sci student, so like all students in the class, you orient the paper towards your field.
Then you should know better than to think they actually throw these things out.
They put Linux in the same category as D&D, Star Trek conventions and X-files slash fanfiction. It is a hard pill to swallow but like it or not many people think this way about Linux.
Sure, and they're the same assholes who think that any man involved in theatre is a "fag".
Should EVERYONE start changing their behavior so suit these morons, or should we perhaps realize that no matter what you do, there always some jerk out there who wants to pigeonhole you?
What you're suggesting is like trying to suggest that members of the theatre, as a collective, try to aviod doing anything "faggy" to improve their image. It's stupid. It's like asking black people not to act to "black" so that you can get some rednecks to listen to rap.
What happens when two waves meet, and cross? When the peaks cross you get a wave with a height that is the sum of the waves. When the troughs cross you get a trough with a depth that is the sum. When the peak of one crosses the trough of the other they cancel out temporarily.
BUT IF THE WAVES ARE 180 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE IN THE SAME DIRECTION THEY CANCEL COMPLETELY FOR ALL ETERNITY.
If you can create an opposite wave going in the SAME direction, the wave will essentially disappear.
The point is that is not necessarily impossible to "destroy" the wave with a missle, provided you actually timed things right and fired in the right place. There would be issues with the wave created by a single missle being circular, but I'm sure the military has plenty of missles lying around so you can make a decent approximation of a line.
So you explode a missile in the path of the big wave? All you have done is add a second big wave to worry about. That doesn't sound like such a good idea to me.
Well, even under the method I describe there would end up being a counter-wave heading back towards the original source, but at this point it's worth noting that waves DO loose energy as they travel across the ocean. And the counter-wave is going to loose energy again.
So a 40' wave may end up being a 20' wave which when reversed may end up being a >10' wave by the time it hits a coast.
Sorry, wrong. It's just a simple reailty.
You can't just walk into a coffee shop and find someone to talk to about digital FIR filters, for example. There just aren't people like that everywhere.
It's not that I won't talk to normal people about normal things, but when you want to talk find out about adjusting your sway bar end-links for zero preload, most people just nod and smile.
One of the great things about the internet is to make it easy to find people to talk to about these things. Maybe there are only 100 people who know much about the ECU in an Mazda RX-7, but chances are, you be able to find some of them online and have a real, meaningful conversation on the subject, rather than some idiot going "Wow! That's like in 2F2F!"
It's not elitist, to not want to waste your time and someone else's time having a one-sided discussion they won't understand. Some people just aren't that interesting to certain other people. That's just the way it is. It not because the other person considers them to be a less person, IT'S BECAUSE THE HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON, NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT.
Anyway, how would something like this hold up in a spam blocking function?
That's the first thing I though when I read this too.
This would be a GREAT antispam tool.
The implementation would take a little thought
I bet if you were to combine a tool like this with a bayesian filter, one could an order of magnitude reduction in the spam that make it past the filter.
Some of the detail though would require a weighting mechanism for "people". This would be necessary to deal with people smart enough to use major ISP's newsletter address to spam with.
Probably the best solution would add PGP encryption/signing to the hashing. This would prevent me from claiming to be a good buddy or a major internet newsletter, for example.
Of course the downside of all of this is that it requres action on the part of the sender, not the receiver. That could make it pretty tough to reach any sort of critical mass.
No, it's not hypocritical. Just because software patents are wrong does not preclude you from saying that it is wrong for an entity to violate what currently is the law. Until software patents are outlawed, only outlaws will violate software patents.
You could have said the same thing about slavery.
The reality is that sometimes the government does things that are just wrong and it's better to work outside the system. Whether this is one of those cases is up for debate but pretending that one should ALWAYS follow the law is asinine.
This raises another good point, where if you're properly controlling the methods to access whatever it is you're protecting, you can cut off someone that's trying to brute force (ie, wrong password 3 times in a row). Then your length isn't going to matter as much.
That's the key here folks.
Passwords should only be used in circumstances where you can control the number of attempts.
If you CANNOT cut off access after N failed attempts, you should be using a full-fledged lots-of-bits crypto key. An example would be using PGP on an email.
A lot of people are looking at the situation in terms of Moore's law. Moore's law should have no effect on how many logins per minute you allow me to attempt. That is a config option.
In sort, it doesn't matter how fast your computer is. If ebay only lets you try 3 logins per minute, that's all you get.
If you're letting people try 1,000+ password per minute on your system, THAT's the problem, not that some guy only had a 6 character random password as opposed to 8.
So to sum up:
Passwords should not be used in case where somebody else is going to have >100 attempts to break it. At that point you should be using >1KB crypto keys.
This is not a password policy problem, it's human somewhere not understanding what passwords are good for.
I've heard of these non-standard power supply pinouts from Dell often enough that I don't doubt it's true, but I am curious when and for how long they were doing it. In my experience, it certainly is not a widespread problem.
I can't give you a full history of the problem but a quick search on "nonstandard dell power supply" will confirm that it is indeed a real concern.
Dell has used "ATX" connectors with non-standard pinouts. To the naked eye, they look exactly like a normal power supply. Plug in a standard ATX power supply and you're going to have problems.
Anyone who claims they 'need' much higher resolutions is full of it.
Of course that person who's "full of it" will be able to see you from further away due to his better resolution. But hey, your death will look really nice on your screen with all the quality setting cranked.
I imagine there are gamers out there who would play in black and white if they could get double the resolution.
Actually, if one of the certificates says "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science" (the part you "..."ed out), then it is precisely a computer science degree.
Actually no it's not. Unless that paper comes from and accredited institution you may as well write "Computer Science Degree" on a piece of newspaper with some big fat kiddie-crayons.
By your criteria, I could make myself a frickin M.D. in about 15 seconds. Know what would happen if I tried to pass myself off as one? I'd go to jail.
I'll grant that there are some non-accredited instituions who's "degrees" carry some weight, but that's the exception which proves the rule. Those places take a big risk by not being accredited and have to work very hard to be taken seriously.
Please define "code monkey". I am not a programmer, I am a sysadmin, so I guess I'm already an IT monkey, but what separates a programmer from a code monkey? The ability to generate fractals?
I'll pick this up.
A "code monkey" is a guy who can use the tools, but doesn't know the theory.
It's like the difference between an electrician and an electrical engineer.
If you're in a REAL computer science program there is a LOT of math and theory involved. Take a look at the CS program at my alma mater for example. LINK
You don't need vector calculus to write an operating system.
Maybe, but you'll need all kinds of discrete math, set theory, etc if you actually want to write a GOOD operating system.
It's kind of like how you don't need to know the simplex method to deliever newpapers, but if you're going to call yourself a "resource allocation exert" you should.
See the problem here is that this lawyer can file total bullshit suits like this with no fear of reprisal.
This waste the other party's time AND the government's time costing us all money.
What should happen here is that the first judge to see that paperwork should call him a "stupid crybaby" and fine him several thousand dollars.
It a shame we can't deal with baseless legal threats the same way we deal with threats of physical violence. These types of threats really do hurt people, and the system should take that into account.
Unfortunately, it doesn't. This is why we have bullshit lawsuits about this like "one click" shopping and the fucking ALT key.
The end result is that both parties spend a bunch of money on litigation. We as taxpayers spend our money as well, and a couple lawyers who knew full well the suit was bullshit get rich.
It's bad for everyone but the fucking lawyers. FUCK LAWYERS.
Are you a "good" lawyer? Then do something about it! Purge the assholes from your ranks!
Do you think doctors would tolerate this type of behavior within THEIR ranks? You're supposed to be fricking professionals.
If convergence was the end-all and be-all of technology, we all be driving/living in motorhomes.
See the trouble is, a motor home is both a shitty house, AND a shitty car. Same thing with those car boats. Same thing with cellphone cameras.
The ipod is successful because it does one thing and does it well.
For yet another example, how about my TV that DOES NOT have a VCR or DVD player built into it. Yes, they're availible in one unit, but I'd have have multiple units that don't suck and WON"T BREAK SIMULTANEOUSLY.
Heck, I just bought a DV camera. That thing probably has all the hardware necessary to run something like PalmOS. Do I want it to? No.
Voting anything other than the current two parties on the presidential election means absolutely nothing, because if you loose, you've wasted your vote.
No, it doesn't.
What you've just shown it that you know knothing about the way our electoral system works. We have this little thing called the electoral college.
The existence of the electoral college makes it a waste of a vote to vote for the republicrats in ANY non-swing state.
Voting for Kerry in NYS has less effect than voting for Nader in NYS for example.
It's only necessary to vote for the lesser of two evils if you live in a swing state.
Only in the same sense that passwords are security through obscurity.
Right combination of keystrokes, right combination of ports to knock, these sound very similar to me.
Except that anyone else on the net can't insert characters into the middle of your password while you type it.
If I know your ip address, and what host to knock on, I can send out forged "knocks" and you'll never be able to enter the right sequence.
Contrast this to a password, where
YRO now extends to driving around while not watching the road?
No, the right that was violated he was the other person's right not to be killed by some idiot watching "road trip".
Road trip!!!!!!??????
Yeesh! I hope whoever kills me at least has some taste.
Yeah, that works so well for drunk drivers. There's two perfectly innocent people who are no longer here as a result of this DVD-watching guy's actions. The punishment should fit the crime.
What they should do with drunk drivers is take away their regular liscense and give them a motorcycle-only liscense.
Either they'll quit driving drunk in a hurry, or they'll fix the problem themselves while causing MUCH less damage to their surroundings.
To win the contest, he needs to establish a 2 way link. He can't win by blasting a one way signal.
Well duh!
He needs to blast TWO signals!
So as long as he can dig up another 20kW transmitter, he should be set.
Yes, he will probably fry everybody else's equipment, but more importantly he will probably be able to establish a link whose distance is limited by the earth's curvature or his ability to put a laptop into space.
I think we can all agree that either would be pretty sweet.
The hack is to record the IR pulses as sound files and play them back with an IR LED connected to the iPod's headphone port. It's a really smart and cool idea but I guess you guys wouldn't know one of those if it bit you on your collective ass.
It was a cool and novel idea WHEN OTHER PEOPLE HAD IT BEFORE THEM.
THE WHOLE AUDIO to IR THING IS WHAT'S ALREADY BEING DONE WITH THE POCKET PC.
This "hack" is just plain lame. Griffin's stuff is doing all the work. The ipod is doing NOTHING useful in the equation. All the conversion is being done on the pocket pc. The "IR" signal is ALREADY coming out of the pocket pc's AUDIO port.
This cool "hack" consists of nothing more than a guy going:
"Hey I can record whatever's coming out of the audio port on my pocket pc with my ipod and play it back later!"
To me, and I would bet a great many others, this is painfully obvious.
I would much rather read something interesting, like how to replicate the frequency doubler inside the Griffin transmitter.
You are espousing the American standard of punctuation, while the poster about whom you are complaining has used the English standard. You should make certain that said poster is not actually conforming to the grammar rules of English as taught in his home country before flaming.
Not just that, but I, as an American, frequently use the English standard because it makes more sense.
For example:
Why did Joe come into my room and yell, "Holy shit!", Steve?
For me, the LOGICAL way to do things is to have punctuation inside quotes relate ONLY to the text inside the quotes. I think quoting should be treated the same way nested loops are treated in programming languages. If you have a sentance quoted inside a sentence, it makes sense to have punctuation inside the quotes and punctuation outside that quotes. It's nice to have the quote function as a clear delineation between them, as it would in computer language. It also functions more gracefully if you were to have a quote of a quoted quote.
American quoting standard:Reverse Polish Notation::English quoting standard:infix
Most of the limits in California apply to things like lowering cars below a certain level, exceeding noise or pollution limits, or blatant safety violations. So far as I know, there are few, if any, that require any kind of review before they can be used on the road.
Actually, the restricions in california are no less than fucking ridiculous. Pretty much EVERY mod must carry a CARB exemption number of it is illegal.
Say you design a new intake system for your car that gives you more horsepower and better fuel efficiency.....ILLEGAL. period. Same thing with headers, etc. Everything has to be approved by CARB.
The SANE limitations, like ride height, blatant safety problems, etc are all covered by federal law.
Slashdot Mirror
this is ugly.
I wrote a paper about how some of this stuff is impacting the environment not to long ago. I thought I had an idea, ends up the actual numbers are WAY higher than I ever would have thought.
Argh! Talk about naive!
THEY DO NOT THROW THESE CAMERAS AWAY!
You buy them. You use them. You give it back to the store. They give you picetures. They sell someone else the camera.
I'm a Business MIS/Comp Sci student, so like all students in the class, you orient the paper towards your field.
Then you should know better than to think they actually throw these things out.
They put Linux in the same category as D&D, Star Trek conventions and X-files slash fanfiction. It is a hard pill to swallow but like it or not many people think this way about Linux.
Sure, and they're the same assholes who think that any man involved in theatre is a "fag".
Should EVERYONE start changing their behavior so suit these morons, or should we perhaps realize that no matter what you do, there always some jerk out there who wants to pigeonhole you?
What you're suggesting is like trying to suggest that members of the theatre, as a collective, try to aviod doing anything "faggy" to improve their image. It's stupid. It's like asking black people not to act to "black" so that you can get some rednecks to listen to rap.
What happens when two waves meet, and cross? When the peaks cross you get a wave with a height that is the sum of the waves. When the troughs cross you get a trough with a depth that is the sum. When the peak of one crosses the trough of the other they cancel out temporarily .
BUT IF THE WAVES ARE 180 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE IN THE SAME DIRECTION THEY CANCEL COMPLETELY FOR ALL ETERNITY.
If you can create an opposite wave going in the SAME direction, the wave will essentially disappear.
The point is that is not necessarily impossible to "destroy" the wave with a missle, provided you actually timed things right and fired in the right place. There would be issues with the wave created by a single missle being circular, but I'm sure the military has plenty of missles lying around so you can make a decent approximation of a line.
So you explode a missile in the path of the big wave? All you have done is add a second big wave to worry about. That doesn't sound like such a good idea to me.
Well, even under the method I describe there would end up being a counter-wave heading back towards the original source, but at this point it's worth noting that waves DO loose energy as they travel across the ocean. And the counter-wave is going to loose energy again.
So a 40' wave may end up being a 20' wave which when reversed may end up being a >10' wave by the time it hits a coast.
"Elitist" is the word.
Sorry, wrong. It's just a simple reailty.
You can't just walk into a coffee shop and find someone to talk to about digital FIR filters, for example. There just aren't people like that everywhere.
It's not that I won't talk to normal people about normal things, but when you want to talk find out about adjusting your sway bar end-links for zero preload, most people just nod and smile.
One of the great things about the internet is to make it easy to find people to talk to about these things. Maybe there are only 100 people who know much about the ECU in an Mazda RX-7, but chances are, you be able to find some of them online and have a real, meaningful conversation on the subject, rather than some idiot going "Wow! That's like in 2F2F!"
It's not elitist, to not want to waste your time and someone else's time having a one-sided discussion they won't understand. Some people just aren't that interesting to certain other people. That's just the way it is. It not because the other person considers them to be a less person, IT'S BECAUSE THE HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON, NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT.
Anyway, how would something like this hold up in a spam blocking function?
:)
That's the first thing I though when I read this too.
This would be a GREAT antispam tool.
The implementation would take a little thought I bet if you were to combine a tool like this with a bayesian filter, one could an order of magnitude reduction in the spam that make it past the filter.
Some of the detail though would require a weighting mechanism for "people". This would be necessary to deal with people smart enough to use major ISP's newsletter address to spam with.
Probably the best solution would add PGP encryption/signing to the hashing. This would prevent me from claiming to be a good buddy or a major internet newsletter, for example.
Of course the downside of all of this is that it requres action on the part of the sender, not the receiver. That could make it pretty tough to reach any sort of critical mass.
Nice username BTW
No, it's not hypocritical. Just because software patents are wrong does not preclude you from saying that it is wrong for an entity to violate what currently is the law. Until software patents are outlawed, only outlaws will violate software patents.
You could have said the same thing about slavery.
The reality is that sometimes the government does things that are just wrong and it's better to work outside the system. Whether this is one of those cases is up for debate but pretending that one should ALWAYS follow the law is asinine.
This raises another good point, where if you're properly controlling the methods to access whatever it is you're protecting, you can cut off someone that's trying to brute force (ie, wrong password 3 times in a row). Then your length isn't going to matter as much.
That's the key here folks.
Passwords should only be used in circumstances where you can control the number of attempts.
If you CANNOT cut off access after N failed attempts, you should be using a full-fledged lots-of-bits crypto key. An example would be using PGP on an email.
A lot of people are looking at the situation in terms of Moore's law. Moore's law should have no effect on how many logins per minute you allow me to attempt. That is a config option.
In sort, it doesn't matter how fast your computer is. If ebay only lets you try 3 logins per minute, that's all you get.
If you're letting people try 1,000+ password per minute on your system, THAT's the problem, not that some guy only had a 6 character random password as opposed to 8.
So to sum up:
Passwords should not be used in case where somebody else is going to have >100 attempts to break it. At that point you should be using >1KB crypto keys.
This is not a password policy problem, it's human somewhere not understanding what passwords are good for.
I've heard of these non-standard power supply pinouts from Dell often enough that I don't doubt it's true, but I am curious when and for how long they were doing it. In my experience, it certainly is not a widespread problem.
I can't give you a full history of the problem but a quick search on "nonstandard dell power supply" will confirm that it is indeed a real concern.
Dell has used "ATX" connectors with non-standard pinouts. To the naked eye, they look exactly like a normal power supply. Plug in a standard ATX power supply and you're going to have problems.
That's not true.
Because of cost issues, OEM manufacturers make desktop cases and power supplies small and non-standard.
Actually it's 100% true.
Do some research next time. Dell has used STANDARD ATX CONNECTORS WITH NON-STANDARD PINOUTS!
That doesn't save cost OR space.
Here's one link.
I'm sure google can find you many more.
And this is pertnent in 99% of computer programming jobs, how?
Whoever this is has TOTALLY MISSED THE POINT.
computer programmer:electrician::computer scientist:electrical engineer
or for another example
computer programmer:machinist::computer scientist:mechanical engineer
In many programming jobs, you don't need a computer scientist.
Anyone who claims they 'need' much higher resolutions is full of it.
Of course that person who's "full of it" will be able to see you from further away due to his better resolution. But hey, your death will look really nice on your screen with all the quality setting cranked.
I imagine there are gamers out there who would play in black and white if they could get double the resolution.
Dell can want to sell me a machine all they want, but they won't get my business because:
You left out:
Deliberately breaking standards for no good reason.
Need to replace the power supply in a Dell box?
Better buy it from Dell for a hefty markup or you just might toast your motherboard.
Actually, if one of the certificates says "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science" (the part you "..."ed out), then it is precisely a computer science degree.
Actually no it's not. Unless that paper comes from and accredited institution you may as well write "Computer Science Degree" on a piece of newspaper with some big fat kiddie-crayons.
By your criteria, I could make myself a frickin M.D. in about 15 seconds. Know what would happen if I tried to pass myself off as one? I'd go to jail.
I'll grant that there are some non-accredited instituions who's "degrees" carry some weight, but that's the exception which proves the rule. Those places take a big risk by not being accredited and have to work very hard to be taken seriously.
Please define "code monkey". I am not a programmer, I am a sysadmin, so I guess I'm already an IT monkey, but what separates a programmer from a code monkey? The ability to generate fractals?
I'll pick this up.
A "code monkey" is a guy who can use the tools, but doesn't know the theory.
It's like the difference between an electrician and an electrical engineer.
If you're in a REAL computer science program there is a LOT of math and theory involved. Take a look at the CS program at my alma mater for example.
LINK
You don't need vector calculus to write an operating system.
Maybe, but you'll need all kinds of discrete math, set theory, etc if you actually want to write a GOOD operating system.
It's kind of like how you don't need to know the simplex method to deliever newpapers, but if you're going to call yourself a "resource allocation exert" you should.
At $60,000 for 2 years, it certainly doesn't sound like half the money.
Sounds like you didn't go to an Ivy....
See the problem here is that this lawyer can file total bullshit suits like this with no fear of reprisal.
This waste the other party's time AND the government's time costing us all money.
What should happen here is that the first judge to see that paperwork should call him a "stupid crybaby" and fine him several thousand dollars.
It a shame we can't deal with baseless legal threats the same way we deal with threats of physical violence.
These types of threats really do hurt people, and the system should take that into account.
Unfortunately, it doesn't. This is why we have bullshit lawsuits about this like "one click" shopping and the fucking ALT key.
The end result is that both parties spend a bunch of money on litigation. We as taxpayers spend our money as well, and a couple lawyers who knew full well the suit was bullshit get rich.
It's bad for everyone but the fucking lawyers. FUCK LAWYERS.
Are you a "good" lawyer? Then do something about it! Purge the assholes from your ranks!
Do you think doctors would tolerate this type of behavior within THEIR ranks? You're supposed to be fricking professionals.
Convergence is overrated.
If convergence was the end-all and be-all of technology, we all be driving/living in motorhomes.
See the trouble is, a motor home is both a shitty house, AND a shitty car. Same thing with those car boats. Same thing with cellphone cameras.
The ipod is successful because it does one thing and does it well.
For yet another example, how about my TV that DOES NOT have a VCR or DVD player built into it. Yes, they're availible in one unit, but I'd have have multiple units that don't suck and WON"T BREAK SIMULTANEOUSLY.
Heck, I just bought a DV camera. That thing probably has all the hardware necessary to run something like PalmOS. Do I want it to? No.
Voting anything other than the current two parties on the presidential election means absolutely nothing, because if you loose, you've wasted your vote.
No, it doesn't.
What you've just shown it that you know knothing about the way our electoral system works. We have this little thing called the electoral college.
The existence of the electoral college makes it a waste of a vote to vote for the republicrats in ANY non-swing state.
Voting for Kerry in NYS has less effect than voting for Nader in NYS for example.
It's only necessary to vote for the lesser of two evils if you live in a swing state.
Only in the same sense that passwords are security through obscurity.
Right combination of keystrokes, right combination of ports to knock, these sound very similar to me.
Except that anyone else on the net can't insert characters into the middle of your password while you type it.
If I know your ip address, and what host to knock on, I can send out forged "knocks" and you'll never be able to enter the right sequence.
Contrast this to a password, where
YRO now extends to driving around while not watching the road?
No, the right that was violated he was the other person's right not to be killed by some idiot watching "road trip".
Road trip!!!!!!??????
Yeesh! I hope whoever kills me at least has some taste.
Yeah, that works so well for drunk drivers. There's two perfectly innocent people who are no longer here as a result of this DVD-watching guy's actions. The punishment should fit the crime.
What they should do with drunk drivers is take away their regular liscense and give them a motorcycle-only liscense.
Either they'll quit driving drunk in a hurry, or they'll fix the problem themselves while causing MUCH less damage to their surroundings.
To win the contest, he needs to establish a 2 way link. He can't win by blasting a one way signal.
.
Well duh!
He needs to blast TWO signals!
So as long as he can dig up another 20kW transmitter, he should be set
Yes, he will probably fry everybody else's equipment, but more importantly he will probably be able to establish a link whose distance is limited by the earth's curvature or his ability to put a laptop into space.
I think we can all agree that either would be pretty sweet.
The hack is to record the IR pulses as sound files and play them back with an IR LED connected to the iPod's headphone port. It's a really smart and cool idea but I guess you guys wouldn't know one of those if it bit you on your collective ass.
It was a cool and novel idea WHEN OTHER PEOPLE HAD IT BEFORE THEM.
THE WHOLE AUDIO to IR THING IS WHAT'S ALREADY BEING DONE WITH THE POCKET PC.
This "hack" is just plain lame. Griffin's stuff is doing all the work. The ipod is doing NOTHING useful in the equation. All the conversion is being done on the pocket pc. The "IR" signal is ALREADY coming out of the pocket pc's AUDIO port.
This cool "hack" consists of nothing more than a guy going:
"Hey I can record whatever's coming out of the audio port on my pocket pc with my ipod and play it back later!"
To me, and I would bet a great many others, this is painfully obvious.
I would much rather read something interesting, like how to replicate the frequency doubler inside the Griffin transmitter.
You are espousing the American standard of punctuation, while the poster about whom you are complaining has used the English standard. You should make certain that said poster is not actually conforming to the grammar rules of English as taught in his home country before flaming.
Not just that, but I, as an American, frequently use the English standard because it makes more sense.
For example:
Why did Joe come into my room and yell, "Holy shit!", Steve?
For me, the LOGICAL way to do things is to have punctuation inside quotes relate ONLY to the text inside the quotes. I think quoting should be treated the same way nested loops are treated in programming languages. If you have a sentance quoted inside a sentence, it makes sense to have punctuation inside the quotes and punctuation outside that quotes. It's nice to have the quote function as a clear delineation between them, as it would in computer language. It also functions more gracefully if you were to have a quote of a quoted quote.
American quoting standard:Reverse Polish Notation::English quoting standard:infix
Most of the limits in California apply to things like lowering cars below a certain level, exceeding noise or pollution limits, or blatant safety violations. So far as I know, there are few, if any, that require any kind of review before they can be used on the road.
Actually, the restricions in california are no less than fucking ridiculous. Pretty much EVERY mod must carry a CARB exemption number of it is illegal.
Say you design a new intake system for your car that gives you more horsepower and better fuel efficiency.....ILLEGAL. period. Same thing with headers, etc. Everything has to be approved by CARB.
The SANE limitations, like ride height, blatant safety problems, etc are all covered by federal law.