IE and Firefox both say, in essence, "WARNING! WARNING! MAY NOT REALLY BE SECURE!" when you enter that site. That's not going to work for any commercial site.
What if the nurse has gloves on/a cut/some liquid on their finger?
Given how few nurses are using a computer while doing a sterile procedure on a patient, I doubt gloves would be an issue. Cuts aren't a problem, as you just use another finger, and they make this nifty invention called a "paper towel" for liquids.
Those search results were based in its then new and unique Pagerank algorithm -- ranking pages based on the weight of other pages linking to them, essentially finding an efficient way of turning the inter-connectedness of web pages into a defacto recommendation system.
But my experience with Desktop Search has be much different. Since no one is reading and then linking to files on my hard drive (although I run Windows XP, so who knows...) there is no oppotunity for a PageRank-type algorithm to do its work, and my feeling is that Desktop Search search results really suffer for it.
Seems like using the Modified By date might suffice...
In the subject of the Red Cross, the LOAC explicitly prohibits perfidy, or treacherous actions, including misuse of the Red Cross or Red Crescent. The laws of warfare can probably stand alone without the support of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Certainly, but if the symbol is misused when not in wartime, it'll make distinguishing between real and misused versions of it a lot harder when the next war starts. Hence, the symbol needs to be protected even during times of peace.
The third rule of the shadow internet is, if you talk about the shadow internet, a 14 year old pimply faced nerd threatens you with a supposed 350 pound hitman with a glock.
Given that the two machine counts disagreed with each other about as much as the hand count disagreed with the machine counts, I'd say it seems as accurate as they are, despite the OP's implication that results from a hand recount would wildly differ from a machine count.
If your definition of an accurate counting method in this case is one that results in the same result every time, that's an unreasonable standard (especially considering part of the discrepancies seem to have been new ballots included in the count by the courts).
child porn isn't necessarily forced so I wouldn't call it rape
Children can not, by definition, consent, and thus it's rape.
Romans didn't force the kids to join in, but they still did, you don't hear much about how the Romans were all traumatised because they practised incest and let the kids join in.
Sure, but the Romans a) eventually collapsed and b) were pretty barbaric (slavery, crucifixion, etc.) by modern standards. Just because they did one thing doesn't make it acceptable, especially with a two thousand year time gap.
Gary Schare, Microsoft's director of product management for Windows, has been assigned the unenviable task of explaining how Microsoft plans to respond to the Firefox challenge with a product whose features were last updated three years ago. He has said that current users of Internet Explorer will stick with it once they take into account "all the factors that led them to choose I.E. in the first place."
In other words, MS's response to losing market share is "nuh uh, we're not!"
As I understand it, "freeping" a site means intentionally manipulating something like a poll so it swings in your political favor. For example, sites on both sides were encouraging their users to "freep" the CNN/MSNBC/etc. polls after the Presidential debates this year.
The Slashdot effect is more mindless.
Re:everything you type in is directly send to goog
on
Google Suggest Dissected
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
So beware of type in your passwords by accident. They read everything (and turn it to statistics).
Somehow, I doubt someone at Google sees the search term "vZ820aa3q" and thinks "oh, that's mrmorgana's Slashdot password"...
Yeah, but in the case of Congress, the "bank manager" is giving the billion dollars to his boss (who'll spend it less reasonably than you will) to ensure he keeps his own job.
It's too much of a risk. $10 million for X-Prize is fine because that's doable for a corporation, but $100 million - $1 billion + is just way too far out there.
Microsoft is sitting on $40 billion in cash. I'm sure there are a number of companies with visionaries at the helm who'd love to throw cash at the problem - Richard Bransom of Virgin, for example.
They'd do it because they'd only pay for delivered results - no more paying for billion dollar Lockheed projects to have them go "oops, we messed up and you'll have to pay us another four billion to get it working..."
Slashdot Mirror
IE and Firefox both say, in essence, "WARNING! WARNING! MAY NOT REALLY BE SECURE!" when you enter that site. That's not going to work for any commercial site.
I've encountered the occasional paranoid thinking I'm someone naughty pretending to be the real me.
Plus, for small businesses, having it come from the real deal helps with your credibility.
I don't really consider my Slashdot account to be "sensitive," yet it has a password. That's what this is for.
In the same vein, you wouldn't store the Hope Diamond in a padlocked box at home, but it works just fine for the title to your car.
What if the nurse has gloves on/a cut/some liquid on their finger?
Given how few nurses are using a computer while doing a sterile procedure on a patient, I doubt gloves would be an issue. Cuts aren't a problem, as you just use another finger, and they make this nifty invention called a "paper towel" for liquids.
good timing
Those search results were based in its then new and unique Pagerank algorithm -- ranking pages based on the weight of other pages linking to them, essentially finding an efficient way of turning the inter-connectedness of web pages into a defacto recommendation system.
But my experience with Desktop Search has be much different. Since no one is reading and then linking to files on my hard drive (although I run Windows XP, so who knows...) there is no oppotunity for a PageRank-type algorithm to do its work, and my feeling is that Desktop Search search results really suffer for it.
Seems like using the Modified By date might suffice...
Exactly.
I wish I had mod points right now.
In the subject of the Red Cross, the LOAC explicitly prohibits perfidy, or treacherous actions, including misuse of the Red Cross or Red Crescent. The laws of warfare can probably stand alone without the support of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Certainly, but if the symbol is misused when not in wartime, it'll make distinguishing between real and misused versions of it a lot harder when the next war starts. Hence, the symbol needs to be protected even during times of peace.
The Red Cross has a patent on that logo, and they aggressively defend it, even against other philanthropic, non-profit, and medical organizations.
And rightly so... if it were to become diluted, you'd get situations like hospital ships being fair game in combat.
Didn't you hear? The Slashdot editors don't have to act like responsible journalists until next week...
Given their success, it would seem their hiring process works, regardless of your opinion of it.
The third rule of the shadow internet is, if you talk about the shadow internet, a 14 year old pimply faced nerd threatens you with a supposed 350 pound hitman with a glock.
Given that the two machine counts disagreed with each other about as much as the hand count disagreed with the machine counts, I'd say it seems as accurate as they are, despite the OP's implication that results from a hand recount would wildly differ from a machine count.
If your definition of an accurate counting method in this case is one that results in the same result every time, that's an unreasonable standard (especially considering part of the discrepancies seem to have been new ballots included in the count by the courts).
The two methods of counting agree to within 0.015%
Most pollsters, scientists, etc. would kill for that kind of margin of error.
don't you still have public executions in the US?
Uh, no?
Hand recounts are not accurate.
The hand recount differed from the initial machine count by around 0.015% (and less for the second machine count). How's that not accurate?
child porn isn't necessarily forced so I wouldn't call it rape
Children can not, by definition, consent, and thus it's rape.
Romans didn't force the kids to join in, but they still did, you don't hear much about how the Romans were all traumatised because they practised incest and let the kids join in.
Sure, but the Romans a) eventually collapsed and b) were pretty barbaric (slavery, crucifixion, etc.) by modern standards. Just because they did one thing doesn't make it acceptable, especially with a two thousand year time gap.
Sounds a lot like one of those urban legends along the lines of "An undercover cop has to tell you he's a cop if you ask him, 'Are you a cop?'"
:-p
I'd bet my life savings that one was started by undercover cops.
I love the quote it's in response to...
Gary Schare, Microsoft's director of product management for Windows, has been assigned the unenviable task of explaining how Microsoft plans to respond to the Firefox challenge with a product whose features were last updated three years ago. He has said that current users of Internet Explorer will stick with it once they take into account "all the factors that led them to choose I.E. in the first place."
In other words, MS's response to losing market share is "nuh uh, we're not!"
As I understand it, "freeping" a site means intentionally manipulating something like a poll so it swings in your political favor. For example, sites on both sides were encouraging their users to "freep" the CNN/MSNBC/etc. polls after the Presidential debates this year.
The Slashdot effect is more mindless.
So beware of type in your passwords by accident. They read everything (and turn it to statistics).
Somehow, I doubt someone at Google sees the search term "vZ820aa3q" and thinks "oh, that's mrmorgana's Slashdot password"...
Yeah, but in the case of Congress, the "bank manager" is giving the billion dollars to his boss (who'll spend it less reasonably than you will) to ensure he keeps his own job.
It's too much of a risk. $10 million for X-Prize is fine because that's doable for a corporation, but $100 million - $1 billion + is just way too far out there.
Microsoft is sitting on $40 billion in cash. I'm sure there are a number of companies with visionaries at the helm who'd love to throw cash at the problem - Richard Bransom of Virgin, for example.
You wouldn't know it from the pork in the latest appropriations bill...
Fund a couple fewer Cow Manure Institutes in the red states, get to Mars! Sounds like a win/win situation to me.
RTFA... hell, read the bloody summary!
They'd do it because they'd only pay for delivered results - no more paying for billion dollar Lockheed projects to have them go "oops, we messed up and you'll have to pay us another four billion to get it working..."