[The US Military] already demonstrated to the rest of the world that their toys can knock your toys out of the sky. And that is the unquestioned belief right now which is why China had to run a similar test
For the incident mentioned in the blurb, it was the other way around... China killed a satellite, THEN we shot one down for the first time in years; exactly why, I don't know. The capability wasn't new for the US so I guess it was just a friendly reminder.
But from a security point of view, this is nice, but a major part of security holes don't come from technology, they come from personnel and the ability to trick people.
I think we are getting to the point of over-emphasizing that fact, as if cryptography were unimportant. OK, this might not show up in Outlook Express. But there really ARE important applications for secure wireless transmissions, and there really ARE extremely professional and well-funded researchers on the "other side" who will use every algorithmic trick in the book to crack them. If you look at WWII and the Cold War, cryptography was tremendously important. Even the cryptographic attacks on "everyday" technologies like WiFi and ATMs available to the average script kiddie are quite impressive. So I wouldn't be too blase about cryptography not being the weak link.
Thanks, that is interesting, and the general finding is that federal workers earn significantly more than counterparts in private industry. The story even does a decent job of covering some caveats, which include: the comparison is apparently not adjusted for years of experience; state and local workers show the opposite trend, they make much *less* than in private industry; and even in the federal government, "computer support specialist" is an exception to the rule, averaging $54,875 in private industry and only $45,830 in federal govt.
these days it's global warming and bad genetics. most of the risks of disease are from what you do to yourself, and not your genes.
Wow, your reference to global warming really came out of nowhere. I've never heard anybody blame it for disease or bad choices.
The assertion that people cause their own diseases is an overgeneralization. Birth defects and chilhood cancer are obvious examples. Many cancers are strongly linked to genetics, e.g. there's a mutation that causes almost certain (near 100% risk) colon cancer.
Many more diseases, e.g. skin cancer, are the product of both genetic predisposition, circumstances, and behaviors. An obvious example of disease due to circumstance is the common cold, or the flu; do you honestly believe you could go a lifetime never contracting those diseases just by being responsible?
I'll bite, what's the "cloud mess"? In the olden days, we mocked slashdot story submitters who linked to videos because their ISP account, or university account, could never handle it. There wasn't really a way for an individual to share a video with thousands of people. Now we just upload to youtube, and viola, it works. Scalability issue solved. How many computers does it take to accomplish that? Where are they? Are they all in one place? It's a cloud, most of us don't know and don't care. It's good.
No the USA doesn't have the strongest military. In a straight up fight(no nukes) the USA would lose to china definitely and probably Russia(it's close enough to wonder
Huh? I'm curious of your rationale. Are you talking about what would happen if they invaded us, or we invaded them, or if we took over australia as a venue for a big deathmatch with no home team advantage?
I do wish they'd be less hypocritical about it though. A decent number of politicians are honest enough to admit they've used recreational drugs (and probably a larger number still have used them but refuse to admit it) yet they continue to support the failure known as the War on Drugs.
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.
In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues.
"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."
I'm sorry, but email addiction is just as bad as playing too many games, and in many cases, they are completely oblivious to the fact that they completely ignore the people in front of them for said device.
"Just as bad?" Really? Too much of my job consists of email, and somehow I don't think it fly if I switched all that time over to playing video games. Love him or hate him, but do you honestly think Obama would be President Obama today if all the time he spent on the blackberry he'd instead spent playing XBox? Really now.
I do think Obama's remarks could have just as easily included other time sinks, such as TV. But apparently the Obamas do have an opinion about that too: "Like any family, the Obamas have their TV rules. The kids get to watch only on weekends."
People know when they're wasting time playing too many games and browsing too many blogs. Obama is just encouraging the graduates to do something with their lives instead of frittering them away. For some crazy reason a lot of people in here find that threatening, can't imagine why.
How exactly are web boards more centralized and proprietary than IRC?
I said web boards are displacing usenet. Usenet wasn't controlled by any particular company that could fill it with spam or go out of business, it was (is) just a protocol for synchronizing content between servers
And how is GMail a substitute for email? It's a closed email server, like others exist for at least 15 years.
GMail is a substitute for email because the more people adopt it, the more it becomes a proprietary web-based messaging system, rather than a distributed, peer-to-peer system as email was originally envisioned. Yes, gmail still interoperates with everybody else's email, which is good. But for some significant fraction of emails with both originate and end on gmail, smtp, pop, and the millions of other email servers out there are irrelevant. It's not just the protocols involved that matter, the point is a huge fraction of people are on the same server/cloud/administrative domain.
Another step in the roping in of email was blacklists that blocked the majority of IP addresses on the Internet from originating mail. An even bigger step was the displacing of email by texting on cellphones. Show me the RFC describing how I can make my own texting client for my cellphone.
Of course, there were pretty good reasons for all of this, like spam. Digital anarchy failed. It's sad.
As for Youtube/Hulu, try watching streaming video over bittorrent. It's not even the same type of service.
Of course. Nothing is displaced by something just the same. Normally it is displaced by something better, at least better in some respect. Cars aren't quite the same as horse-drawn sleighs, either, but that's what displaced them.
Centralized, proprietary services are gradually displacing standards on the web - web boards over usenet, twitter over IRC, gmail over email, hulu and youtube over (innumerable generations of filesharing protocols from ftp to bittorrent).
And on a larger scale, we have highly proprietary mobile devices (foremost Apple) displacing PCs altogether.
The reason it worked is because the market has been way up over the last 4 months. Simply doing nothing would have worked too. I know, that's what I did. I won't claim my strategy reflects any more insight than yours, but it's more time efficient, and the transaction costs are lower.
Or you can go the other way: cloud computing. Nobody expects google to publicise every security patch they make to the gmail servers. Instead of admins at every company in the world trying to independently evaluate every patch, you trust google to do it correctly.
That's why they're called lie detectors instead of false belief detectors. If people had the faith in them that you seem to think they do, then they would be trying to "prove" the existence of god by wiring up a devout believer and simply asking them.
You're only allowed one blooper in 1000 by this standard. Nice tech, but it's not there yet.
What you say would be correct if people were being convicted only on the basis of this fMRI lie detector test. In practice, how you get to a 1/1000 error rate is by combining several less reliable sources. For example, convicting somebody on the basis of one witness is crazy, but convicting them on the basis of 10 witnesses is reasonable. (Given certain assertions of statistical independence etc).
it's bypassing the central HTML paradigm in an attempt to allow the designer to force rendering style on the user.
That idea mostly failed, and died. Most content producers do want control over how the content looks, and do a better job of it than client-side auto-layout ever did. The idea of rendering the same content anywhere from a billboard to a wristwatch isn't that useful anyways, since it turns out you general don't consume the same kinds of information due to constraints of different media. E.g. news and sports stories for mobile devices are often shorter, because people want it that way.
I don't think that idea is crazy, except there are other forms of biofuel that accomplish the same thing while releasing waste carbon (e.g. cell bodies) into a pool or the ground, rather than the air. So don't buy too much stock in wood-burning engines just yet:)
And that is manifest by the fact that solar power has dropped in price by about 1/3 (page 10) (pdf warning) in the decade from 1998 to 2008.
So the idea that solar is "always coming and never arrives" is not true. It's getting more affordable all the time and the installed base is growing very rapidly (page 8).
Now if we can just eliminate the other 2/3 of the price solar energy will be free:)
During that same period, oil prices (also in inflation-adjusted dollars) went up by 500%. (Doubtless they have retreated during the recession; it's hilarious how quickly we all stop worrying about it as soon as prices fall at the pump. In a year gas will be sky-high again).
Oh, I still think subdomains makes sense when they capture something meaningful; e.g. putting all states under.us. And.edu is useful too. But.com is so broad it doesn't accomplish anything, and reserving the top-level domain "mcdonalds" serves no purpose. Might as well let McDonalds.com have it.
Oh well, I'm finding this story pretty informative just for the collected wisdom of all the different VNC-over-HTTP solutions described by the replies. It's actually pretty hard to put that kind of information together.
By the same argument, TLD's themselves are simply a waste of 4 characters in every URL. I would rather just open up TLD's for registration by anybody. The domain name for "slashdot" is then "slashdot", not "slashdot.org". The ".org" serves no purpose. My personal domain name is a.net, and I'm not an ISP.
Slashdot Mirror
For the incident mentioned in the blurb, it was the other way around... China killed a satellite, THEN we shot one down for the first time in years; exactly why, I don't know. The capability wasn't new for the US so I guess it was just a friendly reminder.
I think we are getting to the point of over-emphasizing that fact, as if cryptography were unimportant. OK, this might not show up in Outlook Express. But there really ARE important applications for secure wireless transmissions, and there really ARE extremely professional and well-funded researchers on the "other side" who will use every algorithmic trick in the book to crack them. If you look at WWII and the Cold War, cryptography was tremendously important. Even the cryptographic attacks on "everyday" technologies like WiFi and ATMs available to the average script kiddie are quite impressive. So I wouldn't be too blase about cryptography not being the weak link.
Thanks, that is interesting, and the general finding is that federal workers earn significantly more than counterparts in private industry. The story even does a decent job of covering some caveats, which include: the comparison is apparently not adjusted for years of experience; state and local workers show the opposite trend, they make much *less* than in private industry; and even in the federal government, "computer support specialist" is an exception to the rule, averaging $54,875 in private industry and only $45,830 in federal govt.
Cite?
I do hear a lot of complaints about overly generous govt. pensions, but it seems to me those are often offset by sub-par salaries and bonuses.
Wow, your reference to global warming really came out of nowhere. I've never heard anybody blame it for disease or bad choices.
The assertion that people cause their own diseases is an overgeneralization. Birth defects and chilhood cancer are obvious examples. Many cancers are strongly linked to genetics, e.g. there's a mutation that causes almost certain (near 100% risk) colon cancer.
Many more diseases, e.g. skin cancer, are the product of both genetic predisposition, circumstances, and behaviors. An obvious example of disease due to circumstance is the common cold, or the flu; do you honestly believe you could go a lifetime never contracting those diseases just by being responsible?
I'll bite, what's the "cloud mess"? In the olden days, we mocked slashdot story submitters who linked to videos because their ISP account, or university account, could never handle it. There wasn't really a way for an individual to share a video with thousands of people. Now we just upload to youtube, and viola, it works. Scalability issue solved. How many computers does it take to accomplish that? Where are they? Are they all in one place? It's a cloud, most of us don't know and don't care. It's good.
Huh? I'm curious of your rationale. Are you talking about what would happen if they invaded us, or we invaded them, or if we took over australia as a venue for a big deathmatch with no home team advantage?
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.
In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues.
"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."
"Just as bad?" Really? Too much of my job consists of email, and somehow I don't think it fly if I switched all that time over to playing video games. Love him or hate him, but do you honestly think Obama would be President Obama today if all the time he spent on the blackberry he'd instead spent playing XBox? Really now.
I do think Obama's remarks could have just as easily included other time sinks, such as TV. But apparently the Obamas do have an opinion about that too: "Like any family, the Obamas have their TV rules. The kids get to watch only on weekends."
People know when they're wasting time playing too many games and browsing too many blogs. Obama is just encouraging the graduates to do something with their lives instead of frittering them away. For some crazy reason a lot of people in here find that threatening, can't imagine why.
I said web boards are displacing usenet. Usenet wasn't controlled by any particular company that could fill it with spam or go out of business, it was (is) just a protocol for synchronizing content between servers
GMail is a substitute for email because the more people adopt it, the more it becomes a proprietary web-based messaging system, rather than a distributed, peer-to-peer system as email was originally envisioned. Yes, gmail still interoperates with everybody else's email, which is good. But for some significant fraction of emails with both originate and end on gmail, smtp, pop, and the millions of other email servers out there are irrelevant. It's not just the protocols involved that matter, the point is a huge fraction of people are on the same server/cloud/administrative domain.
Another step in the roping in of email was blacklists that blocked the majority of IP addresses on the Internet from originating mail. An even bigger step was the displacing of email by texting on cellphones. Show me the RFC describing how I can make my own texting client for my cellphone.
Of course, there were pretty good reasons for all of this, like spam. Digital anarchy failed. It's sad.
Of course. Nothing is displaced by something just the same. Normally it is displaced by something better, at least better in some respect. Cars aren't quite the same as horse-drawn sleighs, either, but that's what displaced them.
And on a larger scale, we have highly proprietary mobile devices (foremost Apple) displacing PCs altogether.
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's lawsuit against former UVA faculty Michael Mann. In criticising Cuccinelli's lawsuit, I'm not even saying he has to admit or agree with everything or anything that Mann wrote. But political persecution of scientists is bad... like 15th century Vatican bad.
That's what we're quibbling about, 5%? It changes that much all the time due to exchange rate fluctuations.
The reason it worked is because the market has been way up over the last 4 months. Simply doing nothing would have worked too. I know, that's what I did. I won't claim my strategy reflects any more insight than yours, but it's more time efficient, and the transaction costs are lower.
Or you can go the other way: cloud computing. Nobody expects google to publicise every security patch they make to the gmail servers. Instead of admins at every company in the world trying to independently evaluate every patch, you trust google to do it correctly.
That's why they're called lie detectors instead of false belief detectors. If people had the faith in them that you seem to think they do, then they would be trying to "prove" the existence of god by wiring up a devout believer and simply asking them.
What you say would be correct if people were being convicted only on the basis of this fMRI lie detector test. In practice, how you get to a 1/1000 error rate is by combining several less reliable sources. For example, convicting somebody on the basis of one witness is crazy, but convicting them on the basis of 10 witnesses is reasonable. (Given certain assertions of statistical independence etc).
The summary says what the motive is: to make $24 selling the kits.
That idea mostly failed, and died. Most content producers do want control over how the content looks, and do a better job of it than client-side auto-layout ever did. The idea of rendering the same content anywhere from a billboard to a wristwatch isn't that useful anyways, since it turns out you general don't consume the same kinds of information due to constraints of different media. E.g. news and sports stories for mobile devices are often shorter, because people want it that way.
I don't think that idea is crazy, except there are other forms of biofuel that accomplish the same thing while releasing waste carbon (e.g. cell bodies) into a pool or the ground, rather than the air. So don't buy too much stock in wood-burning engines just yet :)
Now if we can just eliminate the other 2/3 of the price solar energy will be free :)
During that same period, oil prices (also in inflation-adjusted dollars) went up by 500%. (Doubtless they have retreated during the recession; it's hilarious how quickly we all stop worrying about it as soon as prices fall at the pump. In a year gas will be sky-high again).
Oh, I still think subdomains makes sense when they capture something meaningful; e.g. putting all states under .us. And .edu is useful too. But .com is so broad it doesn't accomplish anything, and reserving the top-level domain "mcdonalds" serves no purpose. Might as well let McDonalds.com have it.
Oh well, I'm finding this story pretty informative just for the collected wisdom of all the different VNC-over-HTTP solutions described by the replies. It's actually pretty hard to put that kind of information together.
By the same argument, TLD's themselves are simply a waste of 4 characters in every URL. I would rather just open up TLD's for registration by anybody. The domain name for "slashdot" is then "slashdot", not "slashdot.org". The ".org" serves no purpose. My personal domain name is a .net, and I'm not an ISP.