So let me get this straight... Every machine on the planet practically has a list of infected IP addresses broadcasted to them, with a new one arriving every minute or so (up to 663 XXX's here in the past two hours).
So that means any loser with this list of infected IPs and some knowledge of perl literally has a small army of computers at their command?
I think we might be seeing some rather impressive DDoS attacks by this evening.
Hmm.. 3 more XXX's in the time it took me to write this... frequency's increasing...
Ahh, they're just craking down on the launch point of the Code Red Worm...
Think about it. In theory, the launch point of the worm should be traceable. The first version of the worm generated IP addresses with a single seed number... Therefore you should be able to determine the first 100 adresses on that list. The worm also makes no attempts to hide itself in the logs, so on those first 100 machines, you SHOULD be able to see an IP address before all the others that ISN'T in that list. It's traceable by IP.
So where would you launch this from? An internet cafe seems like a good choice... Wander in and sit down, insert a CD and start your own little mini web server, then remotely access a site with the known flaw and infect it.
It may take a few links in the chain, but you should be able to track down where the worm started from. I'm sure this is being done right now.
Of course, that's assuming the worm actually CAME from China, as it claimed to...:)
You guys to realize that the term "Slash" also refers to homosexual erotic fan fiction...
From the article above:
"Slash" is fan fiction that focuses on a romantic and/or sexual relationship between two characters of the same sex.
The majority of slash is male/male stories written by women with other women as the intended audience.
Well, it's what I read when I saw "Censored Slash Sites".. There's a HUGE slash community out there online. There's been a fair bit of slash site censoring going on in that area as well...
So lets all stand up together and defend those censored slash sites!!!! Hail the power of slashdot!
As a sidenote, my wife once noticed a post with an aggrivated poster making the comment: "I thought of a really great name for a slash site, but 'slashdot' is already taken by some stupid geek site!":)
I'm not overly familir with freenet, but what would prevent two different authors from publishing the same site (i.e. http://www.linuxis.free/). If they both refreshed, wouldn't they keep overwriting each other's sites?
Does anyone know if there are alternatives for LiveConnect out there that give greater cross-browser compatability? Javascript is OK to get done what you want to, but it's singlethreaded. LiveConnect allows me to tap into the JavaVM and have a multithreded codebase. We're presently using Liveconnect to connect the browser to XML-RPC on the clients JavaVM, and making multiple simultanous asyncronous calls...
We're planning on coming up with an alternative, cause JavaVm is slow to load, hard to configure on the client.
Does anyone know of a JavaScript only implementation of RPC server calls that works asynchronously (multithreaded) on both NS and IE?
Even a "synchonized" block in Javascript would be helpful. (You could use the multiple frames of a browser and use the *browser* to make the calls as a POST request and let JavaScript wait for the server to give a response, but it's hard to synchronize the JavaScript to control the frames....
Just checked my JamTV listings. The Daily Show is not available in Canada on cable.:(
I'll just have to be happy with This hour has 22 minutes. Also, this weekend is Rick Mercer's one hour special Talking to Americans Sunday at 9, keeping alive the grand Canadian tradition of mocking their neighbours to the south.
I've heard comparisons between This Hour and The Daily show. Anyone who's seen both have any comments about either?
The founders of the United States realized that in a normal, everyday world, police will behave in a manner that to them seems just. Laws will be enough to keep everyone, including the police, in line. The problem comes in times of chaos. These times can be long, like the LA riots after the Rodney King beating, or short, like the beating itself.
It is times like this, when police are either the problem themselves, or cannot help each citizen, that the citizens must be able to help themselves.
So Rodney King would have been better off if he had a gun? Be able to "defend himself from the man?". No, Rodney would be DEAD. The only way Rodney could have held power over his own government was with a portable nuclear device...
As much as this "arming the citizenry to defend against the government" gets quoted, it's not like it's been tested much as a theory. The thing is, is it really needed? Democracy ALONE seems to work well at correcting itself once it's stable, and you don't need to arm your citizenry to the teeth to defend it.
An aside here... There are more unstable fledgling democracies, Africa and Eastern Europe come to mind. Eastern Europe, though going through a hard time, seems to be coming along fine. Some states in Africa had had real problems starting democracy, but that appears to be because their citizenry is armed. It's more of an external force. Feel free to pick me apart on this item...
If government sucks VOTE THEM OUT. I know for you it's 4 years, and that's too long. Maybe think about changing your system so that if something is VERY wrong you can kick out your government. Most parlimentary democracies (sorry, my only frame of reference) can allow you to ditch a government in a single non-confidence vote. Sure, you can have more frequent elections, but in a near 50-50 split like your last election, the government would be so unstable it would either have to co-operate (or more likely) collapse after several months.
I'm disturbed how Americans defend their right to self government with guns, and then so few of them actually vote when the time comes. And when they do vote, they don't take enough care of their voting system to be able to handle exceptional situations (like vote count accuracy within, say, 50,000 votes!!!). Democracy is something to be cherished an nurtured.
Sorry, I don't mean to flame the whole country. The US has done some amazing things, and is damn high on the list of places to live in the world. And Canada has its fair share of problems too, they just generally don't involve things blowing up or killing people. It's just every once in a while we see things up from up here that scare us. Perhaps America needs to be able to take a little constructive criticism instead of telling everyone else to bugger off.
I'm not advocating the link, just posting it... Plus "sub-urban" or "rural" practically describes most of Canada, so our perspective is different.
And I agree, focusing on one segment of the population as the "solution" (as opposed to the problem) won't work. This is actually why I found the Kindergarten Anger Management class more interesting. I have no clue how well it will work, but it's more along the lines of the solutions discussed here. It will be interesting if this is implemented at several schools and see what the result is about 10 years from now.
There's been a lot of talk in this thread how guns are used for useful purposes: self defense, to defend against the governmet, etc.
Can you imagine if these same arguments were used by students in real schools???
"Everyone knows that it's dangerous to go to school these days, who knows what sort of whacko's are out there. I'm going to arm myself in self defense."
So why not train and arm all the students in a school just in case one person comes along and decides to start shooting people. If gun control doesn't work, why have gun control in the schools?
The analogy is the same, except for the "children are not the same as adults" argument. There is a point here. Adults generally have more social maturity to handle situations like this better. So it's a matter of scale... 99.9% of adults are responsible with guns, lets say high school children would be about 80-90% responsible in the same environment.
But in this argument, even with the change of scale, wouldn't the arguments be the same? I get the feeling that people here advocating gun posession would still possess their guns even if the odds of violent crimes occuring were a thousand times less. I ask these people:
By the same logic, why not advocate arming school children as well?
More people are being killed in Isreal and Palistine per capita in a week than in a year in my country. Just because a homicide is comitted between two people of different ethnicity, doesn't mean it's not a crime. They've just elevated from guns to heavy explosives...
Two groups of people killing each other in a rage over who claims ownership over a few scaps of land. As I said in another post in my thread, there's no way I'd let my children live in a society with such an environment of hate and violence.
Dammit, now I'm picking on the Isrealites and the Palenstineans. But I'm sorry. I'm about to do a George Carlin... IT'S FUCKING LAND!!! IT'S NOT WORTH YOUR CHILDREN'S LIVES, OR EVEN PROVING WHICH RELIGION HAS THE BIGGEST DICK. A plague on both your houses! (not Jews or Muslims, but vehement Isrealite and Palistinean nationalists. And I'm not Christian either, so don't pick on them just because I'm a slashdot poster)
Turn the damn country into a UNESCO heritage preseve and move everyone out for 100 years until they can cool off... Same goes for Northern Ireland, South Africa, etc. And yea, I know it's not feasable...:(
Now I've done it. Dammit. I should stop posting to this thread.
One of the reason why the average urban citazen still needs a gun these days is for the potential to protect ourselves from the government.
Then later...
That or else I'll be moving to Canada which has slightly saner laws on freedom to my understanding.
Dude, we (more specifically, the British) WERE your government!!!! You down in the south decided to rebel and cast off the evil government oppressors. You even went to war with us in 1812 to try to get us off the continent. Then you make a claim that Canada has more sane government?!?
I wonder if you would have been better off if you didn't have your revolution!
;) (smilies galore, must stop the flames somewhere...)
OK, I hoped I wouldn't have to dive into a resulting flamewar, but this deserves a response.
The answer is I wouldn't even consider living within an urban area where this was even a realistic possibility within my lifetime.
How could you consider even living in a city with your children if there was even the slimmest chance of this happening?!? Who cares if you know how to operate the gun. What about your kids walking home from school, staying at a friends house, etc. I don't want to lock my kids in a steel cage to protect them.
Not to say this never happens up in Canada, but practically, it just doesn't happen. I'm 26, and I can say I've never personally seen or heard a gun fired on the street in the city or near my home in my lifetime.
So I watch the statistics and if things are too probable for comfort, I MOVE. The probablilities of someone coming into my home are way less than say, my kids finding the gun+ammunition (even if they're stored seperately) than someone bursting into my home.
Let's try to dig up some Vancouver stats to justify my argument...
So about 6 homicides per 100,000. Count my family, chances about 24 per 100,000, extended family, lets' say 1 in a thousand per year. That's for all weapons, not just guns.
More stats here. Last year there were about 1,000 firearms deaths in Canada, about 85% of those being SUICIDE. So 150 gun homicides total per year in a country of roughly 30 million. That's about 2 per 100,000.
Maybe I'm just being naive because I haven't been shot yet. I'll let you know when I am.
If guns are the problem, why hasn't this always been a problem throughout history?
Density?
Let's face it, if the number of bears in the forest surrounding your log cabin outnumber the number of children in your family, then having a good supply of ammunition and weapons in your house is a good thing.
Oh crap, I feel a flamebait rant coming on... Oh well, I've got karma to burn...
Maybe I'm stupid and Canadian, but in an urban population with a decent sized police force, there should be no good reason for people to have to carry around weapons. I mean, Jesus, I remember driving in LA on vacation and seeing a cop in her squad car with the shotgun holster mounted right in the front seat. I mean, holy shit, that thing's loaded. I try not to think about how many loaded weapons there must be if I enter into a family restaraunt in the states with my kids.
Can't you see how this makes you all look like freaks to the rest of the world?!?
Go ahead, mod me down. I don't care. But this is one of the reasons the rest of the first worls looks upon America with bafflement and disbelief.
I've been amazed in Canada how bullying has taken the forefront of the local, provincial, and national news in the last year, and specifically in the last few months. After several teen suicides, a few key surveys of school age kids, and a rather well done documentary on bullying on CBC's evening news show "The National" that provoked an enormous outpouring of phone calls and emails to the station that the next night they had to do a follow up the following night, to the commercials on TV and the radio "bullying is dead serious", Canada seems to have taken the hint. Bullying => teen violence, and bullying is the root source of the problem. BC's government seems to have gone off on this weird tanget for rating video games, but that story is eclipsed here by what's now perceived to be a epedemic problem across the province and the country.
Last night on the news I saw a segment on an elementary school talking about anger management and bullying to 5 year olds. Things are starting to *happen* here. I've got more confidence that my own kids (the oldest now three) will be able to go to a school where the consequences of bullying are recognized as severe.
All I can suggest: Write your local media. Find a good set of journalists who can do a *good* job of getting down to the school level and investigate what kids are actually saying. We had one of our (two) major networks do a huge story on bullying and the whole thing started to snowball once the general public had a chance to react.
OK, let's do a search... Aha! www.nima.mil. The site seems relatively sparse of information, but not surprising for a site that claims it is 'representing a fundamental step toward achieving the Department of Defense vision of "dominant battle space awareness." ':)
You have to think that while there are several experts in the world who can probably spot this kid of thing from a photograph using the human eye, a lot of what they do is computer based. I wonder if "working in their spare time for fun" involved putting the highres files through their supercomputers during some spare CPU cycles...
I'm not surprised that most of the people at JPL are going "Yeah, right". I'm assuming the image analysis people at NASA are mostly geologists. Picking out small objects in that kind of picture is a completely different skillset. It's going to take a while for NIMA to convince JPL of what they may have found.
In blogan's favor though. This the textbook proof that the set of primes are infinite...
Here's the REAL trick though. People have been talking about countable mersienne (sp!!!) primes, etc.
Now we just need the set of "illegal primes"! Since they're a subset of primes, they're countable. Are they infinite?
Or perhaps there's some way to, in a STRICT MATHEMATICAL sense, create a corollary to this that is this specific prime is illegal, then all natural numbers N are illegal. Something a bit more formal than "If N is 'illegal' than 1 is illegal, qed".
Obviously the number of illegal numbers is infinite, since we can just take compounds of that prime. I don't think you could make an argument that a factor of an illegal number was illegal.
Can anyone come up with a smaller "illegal" number? Not actually post it, but methods to derive it? If it was fairly small, then all compounds of that number would be illegal
Slashdot Mirror
So let me get this straight... Every machine on the planet practically has a list of infected IP addresses broadcasted to them, with a new one arriving every minute or so (up to 663 XXX's here in the past two hours).
So that means any loser with this list of infected IPs and some knowledge of perl literally has a small army of computers at their command?
I think we might be seeing some rather impressive DDoS attacks by this evening.
Hmm.. 3 more XXX's in the time it took me to write this... frequency's increasing...
Ahh, they're just craking down on the launch point of the Code Red Worm...
:)
Think about it. In theory, the launch point of the worm should be traceable. The first version of the worm generated IP addresses with a single seed number... Therefore you should be able to determine the first 100 adresses on that list. The worm also makes no attempts to hide itself in the logs, so on those first 100 machines, you SHOULD be able to see an IP address before all the others that ISN'T in that list. It's traceable by IP.
So where would you launch this from? An internet cafe seems like a good choice... Wander in and sit down, insert a CD and start your own little mini web server, then remotely access a site with the known flaw and infect it.
It may take a few links in the chain, but you should be able to track down where the worm started from. I'm sure this is being done right now.
Of course, that's assuming the worm actually CAME from China, as it claimed to...
Umm...
:)
You guys to realize that the term "Slash" also refers to homosexual erotic fan fiction...
From the article above:
"Slash" is fan fiction that focuses on a romantic and/or sexual relationship between two characters of the same sex.
The majority of slash is male/male stories written by women with other women as the intended audience.
Well, it's what I read when I saw "Censored Slash Sites".. There's a HUGE slash community out there online. There's been a fair bit of slash site censoring going on in that area as well...
So lets all stand up together and defend those censored slash sites!!!! Hail the power of slashdot!
As a sidenote, my wife once noticed a post with an aggrivated poster making the comment: "I thought of a really great name for a slash site, but 'slashdot' is already taken by some stupid geek site!"
Additionally, the farther you are from the equator, the harder it is to launch into orbit.
:)
We could build our own launch vehicle, but it would have to be:
1) Not launched from Canada
or
2) Really Really Big.
Easier to piggyback for now... At least for the first mission...
Why do you think those Russian Proton rockets are so big?
Are PQA files only for Palm VII's or can I use them from my Visor/Handspring? I could never seem to find an app for using the PQA's.
I'm not overly familir with freenet, but what would prevent two different authors from publishing the same site (i.e. http://www.linuxis.free/). If they both refreshed, wouldn't they keep overwriting each other's sites?
A very different kind of domain rush...
Does anyone know if there are alternatives for LiveConnect out there that give greater cross-browser compatability? Javascript is OK to get done what you want to, but it's singlethreaded. LiveConnect allows me to tap into the JavaVM and have a multithreded codebase. We're presently using Liveconnect to connect the browser to XML-RPC on the clients JavaVM, and making multiple simultanous asyncronous calls...
We're planning on coming up with an alternative, cause JavaVm is slow to load, hard to configure on the client.
Does anyone know of a JavaScript only implementation of RPC server calls that works asynchronously (multithreaded) on both NS and IE?
Even a "synchonized" block in Javascript would be helpful. (You could use the multiple frames of a browser and use the *browser* to make the calls as a POST request and let JavaScript wait for the server to give a response, but it's hard to synchronize the JavaScript to control the frames....
At least wait until it's April 1st! It's still 10pm over here on the west coast!
LZIP Advanced File Compression Utility
Posted by michael on Saturday March 31, @10:10PM
See?
Harumph...
Just checked my JamTV listings. The Daily Show is not available in Canada on cable. :(
I'll just have to be happy with This hour has 22 minutes. Also, this weekend is Rick Mercer's one hour special Talking to Americans Sunday at 9, keeping alive the grand Canadian tradition of mocking their neighbours to the south.
I've heard comparisons between This Hour and The Daily show. Anyone who's seen both have any comments about either?
The founders of the United States realized that in a normal, everyday world, police will behave in a manner that to them seems just. Laws will be enough to keep everyone, including the police, in line. The problem comes in times of chaos. These times can be long, like the LA riots after the Rodney King beating, or short, like the beating itself.
It is times like this, when police are either the problem themselves, or cannot help each citizen, that the citizens must be able to help themselves.
So Rodney King would have been better off if he had a gun? Be able to "defend himself from the man?". No, Rodney would be DEAD. The only way Rodney could have held power over his own government was with a portable nuclear device...
As much as this "arming the citizenry to defend against the government" gets quoted, it's not like it's been tested much as a theory. The thing is, is it really needed? Democracy ALONE seems to work well at correcting itself once it's stable, and you don't need to arm your citizenry to the teeth to defend it.
An aside here... There are more unstable fledgling democracies, Africa and Eastern Europe come to mind. Eastern Europe, though going through a hard time, seems to be coming along fine. Some states in Africa had had real problems starting democracy, but that appears to be because their citizenry is armed. It's more of an external force. Feel free to pick me apart on this item...
If government sucks VOTE THEM OUT. I know for you it's 4 years, and that's too long. Maybe think about changing your system so that if something is VERY wrong you can kick out your government. Most parlimentary democracies (sorry, my only frame of reference) can allow you to ditch a government in a single non-confidence vote. Sure, you can have more frequent elections, but in a near 50-50 split like your last election, the government would be so unstable it would either have to co-operate (or more likely) collapse after several months.
I'm disturbed how Americans defend their right to self government with guns, and then so few of them actually vote when the time comes. And when they do vote, they don't take enough care of their voting system to be able to handle exceptional situations (like vote count accuracy within, say, 50,000 votes!!!). Democracy is something to be cherished an nurtured.
Sorry, I don't mean to flame the whole country. The US has done some amazing things, and is damn high on the list of places to live in the world. And Canada has its fair share of problems too, they just generally don't involve things blowing up or killing people. It's just every once in a while we see things up from up here that scare us. Perhaps America needs to be able to take a little constructive criticism instead of telling everyone else to bugger off.
I'm not advocating the link, just posting it... Plus "sub-urban" or "rural" practically describes most of Canada, so our perspective is different.
And I agree, focusing on one segment of the population as the "solution" (as opposed to the problem) won't work. This is actually why I found the Kindergarten Anger Management class more interesting. I have no clue how well it will work, but it's more along the lines of the solutions discussed here. It will be interesting if this is implemented at several schools and see what the result is about 10 years from now.
OK, getting back to the original subject.
:)
There's been a lot of talk in this thread how guns are used for useful purposes: self defense, to defend against the governmet, etc.
Can you imagine if these same arguments were used by students in real schools???
"Everyone knows that it's dangerous to go to school these days, who knows what sort of whacko's are out there. I'm going to arm myself in self defense."
So why not train and arm all the students in a school just in case one person comes along and decides to start shooting people. If gun control doesn't work, why have gun control in the schools?
The analogy is the same, except for the "children are not the same as adults" argument. There is a point here. Adults generally have more social maturity to handle situations like this better. So it's a matter of scale... 99.9% of adults are responsible with guns, lets say high school children would be about 80-90% responsible in the same environment.
But in this argument, even with the change of scale, wouldn't the arguments be the same? I get the feeling that people here advocating gun posession would still possess their guns even if the odds of violent crimes occuring were a thousand times less. I ask these people:
By the same logic, why not advocate arming school children as well?
Reductio ad adsurdum. Perhaps not quite QED..
Israel doesn't suffer from huge crime waves
:(
Um... are you joking?
More people are being killed in Isreal and Palistine per capita in a week than in a year in my country. Just because a homicide is comitted between two people of different ethnicity, doesn't mean it's not a crime. They've just elevated from guns to heavy explosives...
Two groups of people killing each other in a rage over who claims ownership over a few scaps of land. As I said in another post in my thread, there's no way I'd let my children live in a society with such an environment of hate and violence.
Dammit, now I'm picking on the Isrealites and the Palenstineans. But I'm sorry. I'm about to do a George Carlin... IT'S FUCKING LAND!!! IT'S NOT WORTH YOUR CHILDREN'S LIVES, OR EVEN PROVING WHICH RELIGION HAS THE BIGGEST DICK. A plague on both your houses! (not Jews or Muslims, but vehement Isrealite and Palistinean nationalists. And I'm not Christian either, so don't pick on them just because I'm a slashdot poster)
Turn the damn country into a UNESCO heritage preseve and move everyone out for 100 years until they can cool off... Same goes for Northern Ireland, South Africa, etc. And yea, I know it's not feasable...
Now I've done it. Dammit. I should stop posting to this thread.
One of the reason why the average urban citazen still needs a gun these days is for the potential to protect ourselves from the government.
Then later...
That or else I'll be moving to Canada which has slightly saner laws on freedom to my understanding.
Dude, we (more specifically, the British) WERE your government!!!! You down in the south decided to rebel and cast off the evil government oppressors. You even went to war with us in 1812 to try to get us off the continent. Then you make a claim that Canada has more sane government?!?
I wonder if you would have been better off if you didn't have your revolution!
;) (smilies galore, must stop the flames somewhere...)
I plan to do just that.
However, the "Pround parent of an Honour Roll Student" bumper stickers just make my stomach turn.
It's called sarcasm.
To make other people think about the bumper stickers they've just put on their vehicle. And a reminder to me to beware the wall at every turn...
OK, I hoped I wouldn't have to dive into a resulting flamewar, but this deserves a response.
v ancouver.html
The answer is I wouldn't even consider living within an urban area where this was even a realistic possibility within my lifetime.
How could you consider even living in a city with your children if there was even the slimmest chance of this happening?!? Who cares if you know how to operate the gun. What about your kids walking home from school, staying at a friends house, etc. I don't want to lock my kids in a steel cage to protect them.
Not to say this never happens up in Canada, but practically, it just doesn't happen. I'm 26, and I can say I've never personally seen or heard a gun fired on the street in the city or near my home in my lifetime.
So I watch the statistics and if things are too probable for comfort, I MOVE. The probablilities of someone coming into my home are way less than say, my kids finding the gun+ammunition (even if they're stored seperately) than someone bursting into my home.
Let's try to dig up some Vancouver stats to justify my argument...
OK: http://king.thestar.com/thestar/homicides/graphs/
So about 6 homicides per 100,000. Count my family, chances about 24 per 100,000, extended family, lets' say 1 in a thousand per year. That's for all weapons, not just guns.
More stats here. Last year there were about 1,000 firearms deaths in Canada, about 85% of those being SUICIDE. So 150 gun homicides total per year in a country of roughly 30 million. That's about 2 per 100,000.
Maybe I'm just being naive because I haven't been shot yet. I'll let you know when I am.
Oh well, there goes my karma...
Ignoring the tastelessness of the first post...
:)
Now that I have kids, I want to make a "Proud Parent of Another Brick in the Wall" bumper sticker, with two walking red hammers to one side.
If anyone knows where to find one ready made, let me know...
At the risk of being a flame, I've been to Winnepeg. I was last there when I was 15 year old for a week on a band trip.
:) The whole it seemed to close down at 9pm. Adults looked at you strangely if you were out late at night.
I understand the Fire Chief comments..
If guns are the problem, why hasn't this always been a problem throughout history?
Density?
Let's face it, if the number of bears in the forest surrounding your log cabin outnumber the number of children in your family, then having a good supply of ammunition and weapons in your house is a good thing.
Oh crap, I feel a flamebait rant coming on... Oh well, I've got karma to burn...
Maybe I'm stupid and Canadian, but in an urban population with a decent sized police force, there should be no good reason for people to have to carry around weapons. I mean, Jesus, I remember driving in LA on vacation and seeing a cop in her squad car with the shotgun holster mounted right in the front seat. I mean, holy shit, that thing's loaded. I try not to think about how many loaded weapons there must be if I enter into a family restaraunt in the states with my kids.
Can't you see how this makes you all look like freaks to the rest of the world?!?
Go ahead, mod me down. I don't care. But this is one of the reasons the rest of the first worls looks upon America with bafflement and disbelief.
Guns don't kill people, gun culture kills people.
Drat: I finally found the link after I posted. Here's the link to CBC National's special on bullying
I've been amazed in Canada how bullying has taken the forefront of the local, provincial, and national news in the last year, and specifically in the last few months. After several teen suicides, a few key surveys of school age kids, and a rather well done documentary on bullying on CBC's evening news show "The National" that provoked an enormous outpouring of phone calls and emails to the station that the next night they had to do a follow up the following night, to the commercials on TV and the radio "bullying is dead serious", Canada seems to have taken the hint. Bullying => teen violence, and bullying is the root source of the problem. BC's government seems to have gone off on this weird tanget for rating video games, but that story is eclipsed here by what's now perceived to be a epedemic problem across the province and the country.
Last night on the news I saw a segment on an elementary school talking about anger management and bullying to 5 year olds. Things are starting to *happen* here. I've got more confidence that my own kids (the oldest now three) will be able to go to a school where the consequences of bullying are recognized as severe.
All I can suggest: Write your local media. Find a good set of journalists who can do a *good* job of getting down to the school level and investigate what kids are actually saying. We had one of our (two) major networks do a huge story on bullying and the whole thing started to snowball once the general public had a chance to react.
Geez, I hope this guy's house doesn't light on fire due to the slashdot effect...
"Luuuucy.. You got some 'splainin' to do...."
OK, let's do a search... Aha! www.nima.mil. The site seems relatively sparse of information, but not surprising for a site that claims it is 'representing a fundamental step toward achieving the Department of Defense vision of "dominant battle space awareness." ' :)
You have to think that while there are several experts in the world who can probably spot this kid of thing from a photograph using the human eye, a lot of what they do is computer based. I wonder if "working in their spare time for fun" involved putting the highres files through their supercomputers during some spare CPU cycles...
I'm not surprised that most of the people at JPL are going "Yeah, right". I'm assuming the image analysis people at NASA are mostly geologists. Picking out small objects in that kind of picture is a completely different skillset. It's going to take a while for NIMA to convince JPL of what they may have found.
In blogan's favor though. This the textbook proof that the set of primes are infinite...
Here's the REAL trick though. People have been talking about countable mersienne (sp!!!) primes, etc.
Now we just need the set of "illegal primes"! Since they're a subset of primes, they're countable. Are they infinite?
Or perhaps there's some way to, in a STRICT MATHEMATICAL sense, create a corollary to this that is this specific prime is illegal, then all natural numbers N are illegal. Something a bit more formal than "If N is 'illegal' than 1 is illegal, qed".
Obviously the number of illegal numbers is infinite, since we can just take compounds of that prime. I don't think you could make an argument that a factor of an illegal number was illegal.
Can anyone come up with a smaller "illegal" number? Not actually post it, but methods to derive it? If it was fairly small, then all compounds of that number would be illegal