A good browser has more to do with continuous improvement than a one-time "we're compatible with the latest standards right now!"
IE9 betas may be great today, but shortly after its release, it will be almost certainly be behind Chrome. Shortly after that, Firefox and Safari will pass it by.
One reason the flash SAN is so fast is that it doesn't use a SAS or PCIe backbone, but instead has a proprietary interface that offers up 5 to 6Gb/s throughput.
What are they talking about? The violin memory website says the appliances themselves support FC, 10 GbE, and Infiniband connections. Their performance page says that the appliance can be directly connected to a pcie bus, presumably using some sort of pass-through interface card, but what physical connector and media are used?
Internal ipv6 IPs stay constant too, and you should use link-local or site-local addresses for your ipv6 services just as you use RFC1918 addresses for ipv4 services.
I'm not sure what your point is. If you have no need of fixed external IP addresses, you get autoconfig'd global IPv6 addresses from your ipv6-enabled router, which will default to blocking incoming connections (firewall) just like an IPv4 NAT/firewall combo would. No overall difference in security, only a difference in implementation.
With ipv6 you have the advantage that you don't need NAT hacks when you want publicly accessible services. You can have multiple machines running ssh or web servers without screwing around with forwarding different nonstandard ports on the firewall/nat box through to the different internal machines. You can run apps that send ip addresses in the application layer without stupid NAT protocol helper hacks -- hacks which are impossible in the case where the app layer data is encrypted. P2P stuff, FTP, IM clients (including file transfers and any other arbitrary extensions) will simply work; all you have to do is allow incoming connections on the correct ports through your firewall and it will all just work. Today, with IPv4 and NAT, allowing stuff through the firewall/NAT box is only the first step of an often arduous, sometimes impossible, journey to get an app working.
At some point scientific consensus on issues of public concern has to be used to shape public policy, and that's where being "right" becomes important.
The interface between science and public policy is very shifty and dangerous. It is very likely that even when good scientific consensus exists on a subject, that public policy designed to address that issue will end up being corrupted by a) special interests, b) politicians pandering to constituents and ignoring the science, and c) politicians who don't understand the issue and inadvertently render corrective legislation ineffective.
However, I don't think the danger of GMO crops is primarily due to random occasional mutations created in the GM process, like some people here seem to be suggesting. If all they do is change the cellular structure somehow to make the plant resistant to Roundup, and they do some testing of the modified genes to determine that it is very unlikely to be toxic (note particularly that their intent has nothing to do with making the plant toxic), then I don't have a problem with it, although the new proteins might result in new allergies (see next paragraph). Genetic mutations happen all the time in nature, and such changes are incredibly unlikely to present a novel health risk to humans. Like gene splicing experiments in humans (I'm thinking of a "bubble boy" gene therapy experiment that attempted to restore his immune system, only to cause cancer later), splicing genes will sometimes screw up genes that were split because of an imprecise splicing. However, such changes are vastly more likely to cause the organism itself to be unfit, rather than to generate some new toxin that will be harmful to the food chain.
I fully support periodic testing of GMO foods, analyzing all their expressed proteins and looking for anything suspicious; I'm just not too worried about that compared to the other well-known, well-documented effects of GM foods. The anti-GMO community needs to improve its efforts to communicate the precise problems that are likely to occur because of GMO foods. These have all been mentioned above, but I'll outline my concerns:
- There should be explicit differentiation, both by scientists and by the manufacturing companies, between GMOs that are designed to express toxins or other proteins with external effects, vs GMOs that are modified to do other things (like be *resistant* to toxins) where external effects are not intended or desired.
- BT corn is a problem. Willfully introducing a toxin into the food supply, originally from caterpillars (which hardly anyone eats), even if they don't think it affects humans (much), merits a LOT of study, long-term, on health effects in humans. Such studies have not been done. Like cell phones and wifi, they have not been around long enough to accurately predict long-term effects. The standard method of using high doses in rats/animals in place of long-term experiments is not adequate. It simply does not follow that high-dose experiments would have the same results as low-does, long-term experiments, particularly when we know cancer sometimes develop over an extremely long period of time (a decade or more). Hyper-dosing rats with a toxin and noting that they haven't developed cancer in 2 years does not imply that humans eating much lower doses won't develop cancer over 20 years.
- Economic effects: Monsanto's trojan horse tactic mentioned previously. Monsanto wants to make itself sole supplier of seeds for popular crops. Their lawsuits against farmers whose crops have been contaminated, rendering them unable to keep farming without paying a Monsanto tax, are absurd. This is more an indictment of the patent system than on Monsanto, which is behaving predictably to maximize profits.
- Increased use of pesticides: if more crops are pesticide-resistant, even if those modified crops are not inherently bad for us, increased use of pesticides very well might cause large-scale effects on the ecosystem. It might also mean that those "safe" GMO foods will on average be coated with more pesticide by the time they reach markets and grocery stores.
If there were a law that all ideas were owned, and if that became part of someone's ethics, they would make a similar claim to the one you just made -- reading a description of an "owned" idea without reasonable payment (as judged by the "owner") would be an ethics violation.
I bet you don't agree with that system of ethics, where ideas are "owned" and where transfers are subject to rent payments. I sure don't agree with that sort of system.
The difference is that you take a dramatically different view of copyright, while I view it as quite similar.
I disagree. I think ethics violations are transitive to an extent.
If someone is engaged in an activity that they can reasonably foresee will result in someone else committing an ethics violation, the original someone is, I think, committing an ethics violation.
The "reasonably foresee" part is fuzzy, but if you write papers for a company that provides academic papers, I do not think the fact that you're two steps away from the actual ethics violation protects you from being party to an ethics violation yourself.
Before anyone tries to draw a parallel to copyright violations, I don't think they are ethics violations... at least not if the violator is not making money directly from the copying, and if the violator is a natural person (as opposed to an artificial person like a corporation).
Speeding tickets are revenue generation. Speeding, alone, is not a good indicator of driver safety. If it were, you wouldn't see the bulk of traffic going 10-20mph over on highways, and 10-15 over on 3-lanes.
Even if you're talking about the far end of the bell curve, people doing 25+ mph over the speed limit, in all probability they are far better drivers than everyone else on the road, and the reason they get into accidents is -other- people not being properly aware of their surroundings, changing lanes without signaling, braking for no reason, etc.
I've had more near misses with idiot soccermoms on cellphones and old ladies than I've ever had with people speeding excessively. Excessive speeders are predictable. They want to get past you as quickly as possible. If you pay attention, you can predict way in advance which lane they're going to change to. Soccermoms and old people and just plain stupid people are not predictable. They weave. They cut across multiple lanes to turn at an intersection. They ignore traffic signals.
Seriously. "Riddled with bugs"? The implication is that nobody at ISC knows how to write good software. Not really surprising. Bind 4 was a mess. Bind 8 was a mess. Bind 9 was a mess.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Einstein)
They need to start over using sane software design methodology. That probably means hiring competent software engineers.
I find most music by Mozart, Haydn, and Vivaldi nauseating. [/ex-violin-player, with more than passing familiarity with most "standard" classical composers]
I can't think of a good use for this flavor of dnsbl... too little correlation with anything that matters. A lot of privacy-conscious domain owners use private registration, and it has nothing to do with using the domain for spam or other nefarious purposes.
Maybe if you'd use open source software like Drupal or Plone or ANYTHING other than MS Frontpage (according to the meta tags), your website wouldn't suck so much.
xoxo commie scum running linux, openoffice, chromium and firefox...
Most complex software uses some concepts taken from machine learning.
AI this AI that. Die in a fire. AI is a buzzword on par with announcing your application uses red-black trees. YAY. Nobody cares unless there's a performance problem and a particular implementation is under scrutiny.
When I see "AI" in the subject of a slashdot thread, I expect it to have some connection to Artificial General Intelligence, rather than something anyone can code after reading Norvig or Duda & Hart.
I most certainly was not in my mother's ovaries. Only slightly more than half of my nuclear genetic material was there, and since *I* am defined primarily by my consciousness, there is no way *I* could exist anywhere before the 2nd or 3rd trimester; more likely I began existing sometime after birth, probably between ages 1-3. Mere electrical signals in the brain do not equal consciousness.
Although it still seems accepted that a woman's supply of eggs is in most cases fixed at birth, there's some evidence that under certain unusual conditions new eggs might be able to be formed.
Slashdot Mirror
A good browser has more to do with continuous improvement than a one-time "we're compatible with the latest standards right now!" IE9 betas may be great today, but shortly after its release, it will be almost certainly be behind Chrome. Shortly after that, Firefox and Safari will pass it by.
It would be over 9000!
From summary:
What are they talking about? The violin memory website says the appliances themselves support FC, 10 GbE, and Infiniband connections. Their performance page says that the appliance can be directly connected to a pcie bus, presumably using some sort of pass-through interface card, but what physical connector and media are used?
Don't forget ReactOS.
Internal ipv6 IPs stay constant too, and you should use link-local or site-local addresses for your ipv6 services just as you use RFC1918 addresses for ipv4 services.
I'm not sure what your point is. If you have no need of fixed external IP addresses, you get autoconfig'd global IPv6 addresses from your ipv6-enabled router, which will default to blocking incoming connections (firewall) just like an IPv4 NAT/firewall combo would. No overall difference in security, only a difference in implementation.
With ipv6 you have the advantage that you don't need NAT hacks when you want publicly accessible services. You can have multiple machines running ssh or web servers without screwing around with forwarding different nonstandard ports on the firewall/nat box through to the different internal machines. You can run apps that send ip addresses in the application layer without stupid NAT protocol helper hacks -- hacks which are impossible in the case where the app layer data is encrypted. P2P stuff, FTP, IM clients (including file transfers and any other arbitrary extensions) will simply work; all you have to do is allow incoming connections on the correct ports through your firewall and it will all just work. Today, with IPv4 and NAT, allowing stuff through the firewall/NAT box is only the first step of an often arduous, sometimes impossible, journey to get an app working.
They are a harbinger of the apocalypse.
http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/702668/DICE-2010-Video-Design-Outside-The-Box.html
At some point scientific consensus on issues of public concern has to be used to shape public policy, and that's where being "right" becomes important.
The interface between science and public policy is very shifty and dangerous. It is very likely that even when good scientific consensus exists on a subject, that public policy designed to address that issue will end up being corrupted by a) special interests, b) politicians pandering to constituents and ignoring the science, and c) politicians who don't understand the issue and inadvertently render corrective legislation ineffective.
However, I don't think the danger of GMO crops is primarily due to random occasional mutations created in the GM process, like some people here seem to be suggesting. If all they do is change the cellular structure somehow to make the plant resistant to Roundup, and they do some testing of the modified genes to determine that it is very unlikely to be toxic (note particularly that their intent has nothing to do with making the plant toxic), then I don't have a problem with it, although the new proteins might result in new allergies (see next paragraph). Genetic mutations happen all the time in nature, and such changes are incredibly unlikely to present a novel health risk to humans. Like gene splicing experiments in humans (I'm thinking of a "bubble boy" gene therapy experiment that attempted to restore his immune system, only to cause cancer later), splicing genes will sometimes screw up genes that were split because of an imprecise splicing. However, such changes are vastly more likely to cause the organism itself to be unfit, rather than to generate some new toxin that will be harmful to the food chain.
I fully support periodic testing of GMO foods, analyzing all their expressed proteins and looking for anything suspicious; I'm just not too worried about that compared to the other well-known, well-documented effects of GM foods. The anti-GMO community needs to improve its efforts to communicate the precise problems that are likely to occur because of GMO foods. These have all been mentioned above, but I'll outline my concerns:
- There should be explicit differentiation, both by scientists and by the manufacturing companies, between GMOs that are designed to express toxins or other proteins with external effects, vs GMOs that are modified to do other things (like be *resistant* to toxins) where external effects are not intended or desired.
- BT corn is a problem. Willfully introducing a toxin into the food supply, originally from caterpillars (which hardly anyone eats), even if they don't think it affects humans (much), merits a LOT of study, long-term, on health effects in humans. Such studies have not been done. Like cell phones and wifi, they have not been around long enough to accurately predict long-term effects. The standard method of using high doses in rats/animals in place of long-term experiments is not adequate. It simply does not follow that high-dose experiments would have the same results as low-does, long-term experiments, particularly when we know cancer sometimes develop over an extremely long period of time (a decade or more). Hyper-dosing rats with a toxin and noting that they haven't developed cancer in 2 years does not imply that humans eating much lower doses won't develop cancer over 20 years.
- Economic effects: Monsanto's trojan horse tactic mentioned previously. Monsanto wants to make itself sole supplier of seeds for popular crops. Their lawsuits against farmers whose crops have been contaminated, rendering them unable to keep farming without paying a Monsanto tax, are absurd. This is more an indictment of the patent system than on Monsanto, which is behaving predictably to maximize profits.
- Increased use of pesticides: if more crops are pesticide-resistant, even if those modified crops are not inherently bad for us, increased use of pesticides very well might cause large-scale effects on the ecosystem. It might also mean that those "safe" GMO foods will on average be coated with more pesticide by the time they reach markets and grocery stores.
That depends on your ethics.
If there were a law that all ideas were owned, and if that became part of someone's ethics, they would make a similar claim to the one you just made -- reading a description of an "owned" idea without reasonable payment (as judged by the "owner") would be an ethics violation.
I bet you don't agree with that system of ethics, where ideas are "owned" and where transfers are subject to rent payments. I sure don't agree with that sort of system.
The difference is that you take a dramatically different view of copyright, while I view it as quite similar.
I disagree. I think ethics violations are transitive to an extent.
If someone is engaged in an activity that they can reasonably foresee will result in someone else committing an ethics violation, the original someone is, I think, committing an ethics violation.
The "reasonably foresee" part is fuzzy, but if you write papers for a company that provides academic papers, I do not think the fact that you're two steps away from the actual ethics violation protects you from being party to an ethics violation yourself.
Before anyone tries to draw a parallel to copyright violations, I don't think they are ethics violations... at least not if the violator is not making money directly from the copying, and if the violator is a natural person (as opposed to an artificial person like a corporation).
That experiment is bogus. http://blog.stsaint.com/philosophy/2010/05/5-monkeys-experiment/
What is that?
Speeding tickets are revenue generation. Speeding, alone, is not a good indicator of driver safety. If it were, you wouldn't see the bulk of traffic going 10-20mph over on highways, and 10-15 over on 3-lanes.
Even if you're talking about the far end of the bell curve, people doing 25+ mph over the speed limit, in all probability they are far better drivers than everyone else on the road, and the reason they get into accidents is -other- people not being properly aware of their surroundings, changing lanes without signaling, braking for no reason, etc.
I've had more near misses with idiot soccermoms on cellphones and old ladies than I've ever had with people speeding excessively. Excessive speeders are predictable. They want to get past you as quickly as possible. If you pay attention, you can predict way in advance which lane they're going to change to. Soccermoms and old people and just plain stupid people are not predictable. They weave. They cut across multiple lanes to turn at an intersection. They ignore traffic signals.
Corporate constraints?
That's what VMs are for: testing and development without exposing your main desktop and web browser to those vulnerabilities.
All I want to know is: how many electron-volts were generated?
FTLOG, virii is not a word.
Seriously. "Riddled with bugs"? The implication is that nobody at ISC knows how to write good software. Not really surprising. Bind 4 was a mess. Bind 8 was a mess. Bind 9 was a mess.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (Einstein)
They need to start over using sane software design methodology. That probably means hiring competent software engineers.
I find most music by Mozart, Haydn, and Vivaldi nauseating.
[/ex-violin-player, with more than passing familiarity with most "standard" classical composers]
Beethoven went deaf. Mozart could hear fine.
I can't think of a good use for this flavor of dnsbl... too little correlation with anything that matters. A lot of privacy-conscious domain owners use private registration, and it has nothing to do with using the domain for spam or other nefarious purposes.
Dear IIPA,
Maybe if you'd use open source software like Drupal or Plone or ANYTHING other than MS Frontpage (according to the meta tags), your website wouldn't suck so much.
xoxo
commie scum running linux, openoffice, chromium and firefox...
Most complex software uses some concepts taken from machine learning.
AI this AI that. Die in a fire. AI is a buzzword on par with announcing your application uses red-black trees. YAY. Nobody cares unless there's a performance problem and a particular implementation is under scrutiny.
When I see "AI" in the subject of a slashdot thread, I expect it to have some connection to Artificial General Intelligence, rather than something anyone can code after reading Norvig or Duda & Hart.
Secunia PSI
(note: I do not work for Secunia; I just like that tool)
01d2:9:0247::
You mean like the huge demographic area you omitted by forgetting about UTC-5?
I most certainly was not in my mother's ovaries. Only slightly more than half of my nuclear genetic material was there, and since *I* am defined primarily by my consciousness, there is no way *I* could exist anywhere before the 2nd or 3rd trimester; more likely I began existing sometime after birth, probably between ages 1-3. Mere electrical signals in the brain do not equal consciousness.
Although it still seems accepted that a woman's supply of eggs is in most cases fixed at birth, there's some evidence that under certain unusual conditions new eggs might be able to be formed.