Re:One of the reasons I think people hated Wesley:
on
Dancing Barefoot
·
· Score: 0
I used to joke that the three things EVERYONE hated were Barney, Wesley Crusher, and GE Smith from SNL. It's almost a truism.
At the very least, everyone despises one of these three. For me, it's GE Smith. I used to feel like vomitting when he would make those faces while he played his guitar. I used to hate barney, till I found out it would give me a half hour break from the kids screaming.
I was considering naming my next offspring 'projectionist', or 'ticket-taker', in the hopes they would one day become famous R&B artist and send some money their old man's way.
Why don't the students at some of these Universities start a grass roots campaign to inform the rest of the student body about this. Make a flyer and post it EVERYWHERE! Especially on the coke machines, entry control devices, etc. that use this system. Let the students know how the law is being abused for so called 'security' reasons, and how it will ultimately worsen security. Otherwise, it will quietly die, and nobody will notice on campus. Does the law prevent someone from saying that the system is insecure as long as you don't give details on how to exploit the insecurity?
That's not what the previous poster was talking about, I think. I remember seeing on Beyond 2000, several years ago a programmer that claimed he was doing this. They would model the shape of the nasal cavity and the mouth, etc. Then they would simulate the sound waves bouncing around in the pseudo-head to generate the voice. This was kind of neat, because they could generate voices of people who were dead, but had never been recorded. They claimed that one sound they played was what Abraham Lincoln's voice would have sounded like. However, it couldn't have been all that accurate, since I'm sure there have never been any X-rays or other scans of Lincoln's skull (let alone detailed measurments of his actual skull, and I don't think they're going to dig him up for this.) Furthermore, the personality, regional dialect, etc of the human voice is extremely dynamic, as evidenced by our ability to imitate people, such as celebrities.
Hell, I would kill for feet. I have to put the foot-pedal on my desk and hit it with my forehead. Unfortunately, I can't see what I typed until I lift my head back up, and the dizziness goes away.
All of this discussion is irrelevant, since this technique can be easily circumvented. All a virus writer needs to do to not be vulnerable to rehacking is make sure the hole that it orignally used is closed.
Of course, the defensive rehacker could attempt to use other exploits than the one attempting to be used, but that doesn't seem likely. The worm could close as many exploits as it could to prevent this.
The interesting thing is that a worm could end up have the effect of making your computer more secure by protecting itself from counterattacks.
This leads one to consider a similar idea of worm like updates. I'm sure it's been thought of before, but what if, for example, a Windows exploit was found, and so a worm was released that looked for the exploit, infected, repaired the hole, and then tried to propogate. After a time, the worm could simply expire with the only damage being done that it fixed a security hole. In this way, the good worms would compete with the bad worms, which should at least cut down the damage done by any one exploit by 50%. Kind of reminds me of the good bacteria and bad bacteria that live in the human body. Simply the fact that something "infects" a host, doesn't mean it is bad!
I think DNA can work without the error-checking, just with more mistakes, so at first it didn't have it, then a gene mutated making a protein that did this kind of checking, and it was so successful that it preserved itself (probably less cancer and failure diseases was the selection force).
Maybe the first disk-drives didn't have any kind of error checking, some one wrote a CRC or something like that and put that in the drive controlling software, and then from then on, the CRC protected the data on the disk, but it came about before the media itself used it, and was probably originally stored on the disk itself before it was actually implemented.
A lot of material that I might find objectionable is gratuitous. Sometimes it is a good movie, but I don't want my kids to see people getting it on or enjoying violence.
I guess fast-forwarding through objectionable parts is out too. Except for commercials, though, right? Oh wait, they want you to have to watch those too.
What the hell do you do with that much pr0n? I guess it's all video. If it was just pictures, you'd have to beat it off like 1000 times a day to use it all!
Of course this was stolen from the quote where the word "Computers" is replaced by "Guns." Of course it doesn't matter what you kill someone with, it's still bad.
Another thing I don't understand, is why Attempted Murder doesn't have exactly the same penalty as actual Murder. Just because you aren't very good at it, doesn't mean you shouldn't be held as responsible.
That would be one bit, even though each book has hundreds of thousands of characters. This is because one bit is all you need to fully recover the message at the receiving end.
Assuming that you have at least a copy of the particular book that you wish to send already on Mars with you, which means it would have had to been transferred already, probably through printed paper. You don't even have the title, unless you've already transmitted that information as well, perhaps in the astronaut's brain. So, it's still more than 1 bit, as I see it.
You can't distinguish between sitting in an elevator that is in free-fall and an elevator that is floating in space, or between an elevator that is sitting still in the earth's gravity and one that is accelerating upward while in space.
Not even if I open the doors and stick out my head?;-)
In the time I was away, my school had switched from C and C++ to Java. Originally I was excited because Java is popular and modern. But once I got into the coursework, I became appalled.
Thinking like yours is why in 1999, (and probably still today,) I had to use FORTRAN 77 in my numerical methods course. We spent a couple of weeks learning the tricks and bugs of the FORTRAN compiler, and how to use the VAX system which was pretty much only around to run the FORTRAN compiler on. As I brought my 132 column printouts of my source and output to class to turn in, I would think to myself, boy, I'm glad I didn't do this in C++, I'm sure it would have been much less efficient on the CS dept's new Sun workstations. And if I had to electronically submit it, I wouldn't have all this large paper for my little boy to draw on.
Not sure about the Gulf War, but this technique was used by the Allies to bluff the location of the D-Day invasion. Inflatable tanks were used to fool the Axis into thinking that the invasion would happen elsewhere.
I've seen film footage of the soldiers picking them up and moving them about. Recon aircraft would see a build-up of equipment in an area of Britain, and assume that the invasion would happen in a certain area of France that was dictated by the start position.
I don't know what they would have thought if the could tell that the tanks were being moved about by people. This probably would not be obvious from still photographs. The Allies used other methods besides this one to misinform the location of the invasion.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to joke that the three things EVERYONE hated were Barney, Wesley Crusher, and GE Smith from SNL. It's almost a truism.
At the very least, everyone despises one of these three. For me, it's GE Smith. I used to feel like vomitting when he would make those faces while he played his guitar. I used to hate barney, till I found out it would give me a half hour break from the kids screaming.
I was considering naming my next offspring 'projectionist', or 'ticket-taker', in the hopes they would one day become famous R&B artist and send some money their old man's way.
Is a Chromosome a considered a single molecule? If so, is it the most complex/largest one there is?
Sure, until the plane takes off, and then none of it is grounded.
Why don't the students at some of these Universities start a grass roots campaign to inform the rest of the student body about this. Make a flyer and post it EVERYWHERE! Especially on the coke machines, entry control devices, etc. that use this system. Let the students know how the law is being abused for so called 'security' reasons, and how it will ultimately worsen security. Otherwise, it will quietly die, and nobody will notice on campus. Does the law prevent someone from saying that the system is insecure as long as you don't give details on how to exploit the insecurity?
That's not what the previous poster was talking about, I think. I remember seeing on Beyond 2000, several years ago a programmer that claimed he was doing this. They would model the shape of the nasal cavity and the mouth, etc. Then they would simulate the sound waves bouncing around in the pseudo-head to generate the voice. This was kind of neat, because they could generate voices of people who were dead, but had never been recorded. They claimed that one sound they played was what Abraham Lincoln's voice would have sounded like. However, it couldn't have been all that accurate, since I'm sure there have never been any X-rays or other scans of Lincoln's skull (let alone detailed measurments of his actual skull, and I don't think they're going to dig him up for this.) Furthermore, the personality, regional dialect, etc of the human voice is extremely dynamic, as evidenced by our ability to imitate people, such as celebrities.
Hell, I would kill for feet. I have to put the foot-pedal on my desk and hit it with my forehead. Unfortunately, I can't see what I typed until I lift my head back up, and the dizziness goes away.
People will simply "plug in" using a more direct neural interface
Yeah, but do we get to eat ground up dead people intravenously?
Do, vi estis la homo kun la malodora fisxo! Via skemo ne povas esti sukcesa.
All of this discussion is irrelevant, since this technique can be easily circumvented. All a virus writer needs to do to not be vulnerable to rehacking is make sure the hole that it orignally used is closed.
Of course, the defensive rehacker could attempt to use other exploits than the one attempting to be used, but that doesn't seem likely. The worm could close as many exploits as it could to prevent this.
The interesting thing is that a worm could end up have the effect of making your computer more secure by protecting itself from counterattacks.
This leads one to consider a similar idea of worm like updates. I'm sure it's been thought of before, but what if, for example, a Windows exploit was found, and so a worm was released that looked for the exploit, infected, repaired the hole, and then tried to propogate. After a time, the worm could simply expire with the only damage being done that it fixed a security hole. In this way, the good worms would compete with the bad worms, which should at least cut down the damage done by any one exploit by 50%. Kind of reminds me of the good bacteria and bad bacteria that live in the human body. Simply the fact that something "infects" a host, doesn't mean it is bad!
I think DNA can work without the error-checking, just with more mistakes, so at first it didn't have it, then a gene mutated making a protein that did this kind of checking, and it was so successful that it preserved itself (probably less cancer and failure diseases was the selection force).
Maybe the first disk-drives didn't have any kind of error checking, some one wrote a CRC or something like that and put that in the drive controlling software, and then from then on, the CRC protected the data on the disk, but it came about before the media itself used it, and was probably originally stored on the disk itself before it was actually implemented.
A lot of material that I might find objectionable is gratuitous. Sometimes it is a good movie, but I don't want my kids to see people getting it on or enjoying violence.
I guess fast-forwarding through objectionable parts is out too. Except for commercials, though, right? Oh wait, they want you to have to watch those too.
Hmmmm....
What the hell do you do with that much pr0n? I guess it's all video. If it was just pictures, you'd have to beat it off like 1000 times a day to use it all!
Haven't you heard? That's futile!
Remember how heavy keyboards used to be. You could easily kill someone with those.
Of course this was stolen from the quote where the word "Computers" is replaced by "Guns." Of course it doesn't matter what you kill someone with, it's still bad.
Another thing I don't understand, is why Attempted Murder doesn't have exactly the same penalty as actual Murder. Just because you aren't very good at it, doesn't mean you shouldn't be held as responsible.
Sounds painfull...
Assuming that you have at least a copy of the particular book that you wish to send already on Mars with you, which means it would have had to been transferred already, probably through printed paper. You don't even have the title, unless you've already transmitted that information as well, perhaps in the astronaut's brain. So, it's still more than 1 bit, as I see it.
Not even if I open the doors and stick out my head? ;-)
So should 640K of RAM.
Mmmmmmm.... Liquified Dead - Homer Simpson
Thinking like yours is why in 1999, (and probably still today,) I had to use FORTRAN 77 in my numerical methods course. We spent a couple of weeks learning the tricks and bugs of the FORTRAN compiler, and how to use the VAX system which was pretty much only around to run the FORTRAN compiler on. As I brought my 132 column printouts of my source and output to class to turn in, I would think to myself, boy, I'm glad I didn't do this in C++, I'm sure it would have been much less efficient on the CS dept's new Sun workstations. And if I had to electronically submit it, I wouldn't have all this large paper for my little boy to draw on.
I've seen film footage of the soldiers picking them up and moving them about. Recon aircraft would see a build-up of equipment in an area of Britain, and assume that the invasion would happen in a certain area of France that was dictated by the start position.
I don't know what they would have thought if the could tell that the tanks were being moved about by people. This probably would not be obvious from still photographs. The Allies used other methods besides this one to misinform the location of the invasion.