That Windows still allows un-sandboxed executables to be run just by clicking on a link. Yes, this is technically responsibility of Skype, but it probably just uses a stock COM control to handle to URL.
Sure, you can also let people open a browser-based VNC session to whatever server OS. This will at least give them instant responsiveness and rich user interface rather than whatever can be cobbled together in Javascript. The question is, who guarantees security and backups of your data? What happens if the company goes belly up? What if you don't like the latest upgrade of their web app and would rather use the previous version? What if they start to charge for the "webOS" access or increase the existing subscription rates to something you can not afford.
Web applications give you less performance, less functionality, less security and less peace of mind for less installation difficulty, easier roaming on guest machines and sometimes cheaper prices. Weather it's a right trade off is up to you, but generally home users with slowly changing needs are at a disadvantage because of forced upgrades and associated learning curve and loss of access or security of their data at random times.
Hey, I grew up in the Soviet Union. In school we would have regular donation drives to support "freedom fighters in south and central america". History classes were all about world revolution and "international war heroes" helping to make it happen. Does that sound to you like a country willing to respect sovereignty and self-determination of other nations? Do you really think all East European countries joined the soviet block voluntarily?
I have no doubt that, left unopposed, Soviet Union would eventually decide to support a revolution in Hawaii or take back "unfairly purchased" Alaska. And that World War II would be prevented if US and Europe mounted a united, strong military intervention when Hitler annexed Rhineland. You can not expect the world to turn into a favorable direction for you if you sit down and do nothing.
So what about the fundamentalists Christians who want to impose their religion on the rest of the world?
They should be likewise contained. Fortunately, if there are US christians who openly advocated violence against other countries in order to convert their population, they are not in positions of power. I understand that things were different during crusades.
As for Koran, it advocates killing people who commit adultery weather or not they want to follow Islam. While I also consider the Bible to be a work of fiction, any reasonable reading implies that since coming of Jesus killing is questionable even as a self defense. Bush and any proponents of death penalty or abortion doctor killing should be immediately expelled from their Church. From a civilian standpoint though, war, even a strategic war rather than straightforward self-defense, is sometimes necessary to prevent a greater evil.
Perhaps those later wars would be more popular - in US and abroad - if people remembered that prior to WWII americans didn't want any part of world politics or being a global policeman. It's too bad that Japanese attacked Perl Harbor and Hitler had stupidity to declare unnecessary for him war on US. After the war it became apparent that Stalin's regime was as bad as Hitler's. Thus the cold war to deny any turf to the Soviet block.
Now we are attacked again - this time by muslims rather than soviets (let's separate communism as an economic decision possibly made democratically from totalitarian government and military aggression). Perhaps american support of Israel was foolhardy, but becoming neutral in respect to Israel vs Palestine will not stop all terrorists attacks now. And Muslims clearly believe in imposing their Sharia law on the rest of the world by force. Well, not everyone who calls himself a muslim, but the more "devote" one is, the more he is likely to advocate violence. To preserve ourselves, we have to fight another cold war aimed to sabotage existing muslim governments and prevent emergence of new ones.
Obviously Bush is an idiot. Saddam Hussein was preventing Iraq from being a Muslim state. Now it's an insanity to support a government based on Islamic laws. But all the same, the new cold war needs to be fought. The last one involved many unethical actions such as atomic bomb tests that harmed many civilians. At the same time, it protected freedom of many countries, including ones that hate US now, to determine their own future. It's naive to expect that the new war will be bloodless.
Even fully conscious humans should be permitted to end their lives with dignity if they have no prospects of meaningful, enjoyable existence. This doesn't justify creating terminally ill or brain dead humans intentionally. While the later case is perhaps not a murder, is it ethical/tasteful enough to fund such research with tax money or allow people doing it to keep their medical license?
Lymbic system allows you to get a hardon. Who is to say that it's not enjoyable on some primitive, animal level?
The first thing you learn after actually having children is that a lot of parents' characteristics are blended. But if the offspring is healthy but has 50% chance to have a brainless baby or is viable but has severe mental retardation, is it really much better?
It will not be acephalic. You need hypothalamus and limbic system just to allow the body to survive until it has adult-sized organs. Basic motor control is probably necessary to prevent atrophy of almost everything because of 18 years of inactivity. Once you get to this level of functioning a) you could claim that there is elementary continuousness and b) some morons will have sex with those bodies and create half-brainless children.
Anything after the first paragraph is only available to subscribers. Shouldn't all slashdot users have an option to TFA, as rare as such a desire might be.
How is pumping affected by lack of gravity besides lowering power requirements on the pump to overcome the same? If the fuel is a gas you don't actually need any pumps - pressure will equalize itself. If it's liquid, you will already need some way to get rid of empty space in the tank, otherwise you would have hard time getting globules floating around to the reaction chamber.
Well, you are against it but shouldn't the decision be left to each individual? Maybe your friend concluded that he would rather help others than do "other stuff" with his remaining time. Someone about to die would probably puke a lot anyway.
I am not prepared to intentionally create mutilated human bodies. Lets wait until we can grow individual organs. A kidney floating in nutrient solution doesn't seem too human.
Who launches a multimillion satellite to space without making sure that it fully uses resources left onboard before retiring? Even if four separate fuel tanks are necessary, they can be just connected by small pipes and fuel can be redistributed with a pump powered by satellite's solar cells. It's not a rocket science!
Indicating that we need an informed human volunteer program. We ask people to risk their lives at war in another country, surely taking some risks to help millions in your own country is not out of the question? I would think risky experiments would be limited to those who stand to benefit from them or terminally ill who want to end their life on a meaningful note.
Do we have to actually load the nuke on the wings of a bomber in order to transport them? I would feel much safer if they were loaded as cargo on an aircraft designed for ultimate reliability rather than warfare. A Boeing with a military escort would do nicely. I would feel even safer if nuclear warheads are only transported intentionally rather than being accidently left in place on missiles that were supposed to be retired.
Shouldn't you be asking for traffic light schematics instead of camera's firmware then? As for doctored photos, you should have some evidence to raise this accusation. TFA is talking about a more likely case of unintentional errors.
If you rush through when you see the light just turn green, you should get a ticket instead of the guy who overshoots the line by a foot. You were either stopped at the red light, or should have slowed down when you saw that a nearby light is red. If you end up in an accident who should be blamed - a guy who was wrong by a split second or the driver who had ample chance to exercise caution?
There are valid reasons to slightly overshoot a line. Perhaps you are driving a rental that has very different braking characteristics from your regular car. Maybe the car behind you was going to hit you and hurt your passengers if you braked hard.
Bottom line is, either yellow light duration should be ample for a decent driver and standardized nationwide or we should rely on drivers to make sure cross traffic stopped when the light turns green.
Nothing that would demand inspection of camera's software here though.
Your iPhone is so good that it can not do what PalmPilot could 10 years ago - run a simple custom application or game. There are many valid criticisms of Treo, but Apple should also have learned more in those 8 years.
What programming bug would you use to explain a picture with you in the middle of an intersection, red light clearly shown on the photo and drivers on the cross road edging forward after seeing a green light?
Either explain your unlikely statement (do they have some quantum wireless connection traversing miles to another government installation?) or crawl back into your mothers basement. I bet you are half my age.
If we have 10 people cooperating to work on one problem, they can still introduce some independence and redundancy in a design process. And they can still decide to implement 2 solutions with radically different designs to maximize probability of success. They would just be able to ask each other questions when lacking individual expertise on a particular issue.
Europeans were sure not ready to go to America. They ended up exterminating the existing sentient spieces at their new home, in a significant part by accidentally or knowingly spreading diseases to which the native's immune system was not prepared. We don't need any more of this kind of "exploration". Do you really want to turn Mars into an overheated parking lot with a few Walmarts? We might need to live there someday you know.
I might future suggest that we refrain from radically altering composition of the atmosphere or releasing large amounts of unnatural compounds into our air, water and soil. Then perhaps spacefaring technology can be put to better purposes than recording the damage we have down to our home.
Forget the unsolved problems - global warming, ozone holes, overpopulation, nuclear threat - here on Earth that should probably get US and Russian tax dollars before programs that probably will not deliver much practical benefits. Suppose a moonbase is really in the interest of humanity. Do we really need to build a dozen because US, Russia, China, India, Europe, Japan can not agree to invest a billion dollar-equivalents each instead of spending 10 times more money for separate bases? It appears to me that someone truly interested in human space exploration should become an expert in international politics and direct his/her talents in that direction before committing to reinventing the wheel many times over.
Where do cables go once they leave the ceiling tiles directly above the closed area? Is there enough security stuff to monitor my office and restroom to make sure I am not drilling through pipes encapsulating "classified" cables and installing some vampire clamps.
Are you really comfortable with letting untrusted individuals freely roam the floor where your classified information is accessed? Why not make them go through background check or else have a separate building for unclassified work?
Slashdot Mirror
That Windows still allows un-sandboxed executables to be run just by clicking on a link. Yes, this is technically responsibility of Skype, but it probably just uses a stock COM control to handle to URL.
Sure, you can also let people open a browser-based VNC session to whatever server OS. This will at least give them instant responsiveness and rich user interface rather than whatever can be cobbled together in Javascript. The question is, who guarantees security and backups of your data? What happens if the company goes belly up? What if you don't like the latest upgrade of their web app and would rather use the previous version? What if they start to charge for the "webOS" access or increase the existing subscription rates to something you can not afford.
Web applications give you less performance, less functionality, less security and less peace of mind for less installation difficulty, easier roaming on guest machines and sometimes cheaper prices. Weather it's a right trade off is up to you, but generally home users with slowly changing needs are at a disadvantage because of forced upgrades and associated learning curve and loss of access or security of their data at random times.
Hey, I grew up in the Soviet Union. In school we would have regular donation drives to support "freedom fighters in south and central america". History classes were all about world revolution and "international war heroes" helping to make it happen. Does that sound to you like a country willing to respect sovereignty and self-determination of other nations? Do you really think all East European countries joined the soviet block voluntarily?
I have no doubt that, left unopposed, Soviet Union would eventually decide to support a revolution in Hawaii or take back "unfairly purchased" Alaska. And that World War II would be prevented if US and Europe mounted a united, strong military intervention when Hitler annexed Rhineland. You can not expect the world to turn into a favorable direction for you if you sit down and do nothing.
So what about the fundamentalists Christians who want to impose their religion on the rest of the world?
They should be likewise contained. Fortunately, if there are US christians who openly advocated violence against other countries in order to convert their population, they are not in positions of power. I understand that things were different during crusades.
As for Koran, it advocates killing people who commit adultery weather or not they want to follow Islam. While I also consider the Bible to be a work of fiction, any reasonable reading implies that since coming of Jesus killing is questionable even as a self defense. Bush and any proponents of death penalty or abortion doctor killing should be immediately expelled from their Church. From a civilian standpoint though, war, even a strategic war rather than straightforward self-defense, is sometimes necessary to prevent a greater evil.
Perhaps those later wars would be more popular - in US and abroad - if people remembered that prior to WWII americans didn't want any part of world politics or being a global policeman. It's too bad that Japanese attacked Perl Harbor and Hitler had stupidity to declare unnecessary for him war on US. After the war it became apparent that Stalin's regime was as bad as Hitler's. Thus the cold war to deny any turf to the Soviet block.
Now we are attacked again - this time by muslims rather than soviets (let's separate communism as an economic decision possibly made democratically from totalitarian government and military aggression). Perhaps american support of Israel was foolhardy, but becoming neutral in respect to Israel vs Palestine will not stop all terrorists attacks now. And Muslims clearly believe in imposing their Sharia law on the rest of the world by force. Well, not everyone who calls himself a muslim, but the more "devote" one is, the more he is likely to advocate violence. To preserve ourselves, we have to fight another cold war aimed to sabotage existing muslim governments and prevent emergence of new ones.
Obviously Bush is an idiot. Saddam Hussein was preventing Iraq from being a Muslim state. Now it's an insanity to support a government based on Islamic laws. But all the same, the new cold war needs to be fought. The last one involved many unethical actions such as atomic bomb tests that harmed many civilians. At the same time, it protected freedom of many countries, including ones that hate US now, to determine their own future. It's naive to expect that the new war will be bloodless.
Even fully conscious humans should be permitted to end their lives with dignity if they have no prospects of meaningful, enjoyable existence. This doesn't justify creating terminally ill or brain dead humans intentionally. While the later case is perhaps not a murder, is it ethical/tasteful enough to fund such research with tax money or allow people doing it to keep their medical license?
Lymbic system allows you to get a hardon. Who is to say that it's not enjoyable on some primitive, animal level?
The first thing you learn after actually having children is that a lot of parents' characteristics are blended. But if the offspring is healthy but has 50% chance to have a brainless baby or is viable but has severe mental retardation, is it really much better?
It will not be acephalic. You need hypothalamus and limbic system just to allow the body to survive until it has adult-sized organs. Basic motor control is probably necessary to prevent atrophy of almost everything because of 18 years of inactivity. Once you get to this level of functioning a) you could claim that there is elementary continuousness and b) some morons will have sex with those bodies and create half-brainless children.
Anything after the first paragraph is only available to subscribers. Shouldn't all slashdot users have an option to TFA, as rare as such a desire might be.
How is pumping affected by lack of gravity besides lowering power requirements on the pump to overcome the same? If the fuel is a gas you don't actually need any pumps - pressure will equalize itself. If it's liquid, you will already need some way to get rid of empty space in the tank, otherwise you would have hard time getting globules floating around to the reaction chamber.
If a failure happens, we are no worse off than the current situation. So what's the catch?
Well, you are against it but shouldn't the decision be left to each individual? Maybe your friend concluded that he would rather help others than do "other stuff" with his remaining time. Someone about to die would probably puke a lot anyway.
I am not prepared to intentionally create mutilated human bodies. Lets wait until we can grow individual organs. A kidney floating in nutrient solution doesn't seem too human.
Who launches a multimillion satellite to space without making sure that it fully uses resources left onboard before retiring? Even if four separate fuel tanks are necessary, they can be just connected by small pipes and fuel can be redistributed with a pump powered by satellite's solar cells. It's not a rocket science!
Indicating that we need an informed human volunteer program. We ask people to risk their lives at war in another country, surely taking some risks to help millions in your own country is not out of the question? I would think risky experiments would be limited to those who stand to benefit from them or terminally ill who want to end their life on a meaningful note.
Do we have to actually load the nuke on the wings of a bomber in order to transport them? I would feel much safer if they were loaded as cargo on an aircraft designed for ultimate reliability rather than warfare. A Boeing with a military escort would do nicely. I would feel even safer if nuclear warheads are only transported intentionally rather than being accidently left in place on missiles that were supposed to be retired.
Shouldn't you be asking for traffic light schematics instead of camera's firmware then? As for doctored photos, you should have some evidence to raise this accusation. TFA is talking about a more likely case of unintentional errors.
If you rush through when you see the light just turn green, you should get a ticket instead of the guy who overshoots the line by a foot. You were either stopped at the red light, or should have slowed down when you saw that a nearby light is red. If you end up in an accident who should be blamed - a guy who was wrong by a split second or the driver who had ample chance to exercise caution?
There are valid reasons to slightly overshoot a line. Perhaps you are driving a rental that has very different braking characteristics from your regular car. Maybe the car behind you was going to hit you and hurt your passengers if you braked hard.
Bottom line is, either yellow light duration should be ample for a decent driver and standardized nationwide or we should rely on drivers to make sure cross traffic stopped when the light turns green.
Nothing that would demand inspection of camera's software here though.
Your iPhone is so good that it can not do what PalmPilot could 10 years ago - run a simple custom application or game. There are many valid criticisms of Treo, but Apple should also have learned more in those 8 years.
What programming bug would you use to explain a picture with you in the middle of an intersection, red light clearly shown on the photo and drivers on the cross road edging forward after seeing a green light?
Either explain your unlikely statement (do they have some quantum wireless connection traversing miles to another government installation?) or crawl back into your mothers basement. I bet you are half my age.
If we have 10 people cooperating to work on one problem, they can still introduce some independence and redundancy in a design process. And they can still decide to implement 2 solutions with radically different designs to maximize probability of success. They would just be able to ask each other questions when lacking individual expertise on a particular issue.
Europeans were sure not ready to go to America. They ended up exterminating the existing sentient spieces at their new home, in a significant part by accidentally or knowingly spreading diseases to which the native's immune system was not prepared. We don't need any more of this kind of "exploration". Do you really want to turn Mars into an overheated parking lot with a few Walmarts? We might need to live there someday you know.
I might future suggest that we refrain from radically altering composition of the atmosphere or releasing large amounts of unnatural compounds into our air, water and soil. Then perhaps spacefaring technology can be put to better purposes than recording the damage we have down to our home.
Forget the unsolved problems - global warming, ozone holes, overpopulation, nuclear threat - here on Earth that should probably get US and Russian tax dollars before programs that probably will not deliver much practical benefits. Suppose a moonbase is really in the interest of humanity. Do we really need to build a dozen because US, Russia, China, India, Europe, Japan can not agree to invest a billion dollar-equivalents each instead of spending 10 times more money for separate bases? It appears to me that someone truly interested in human space exploration should become an expert in international politics and direct his/her talents in that direction before committing to reinventing the wheel many times over.
If your a guy like Noreaga, bin Laden, or Hussein life can become difficult.
Certainly our record is not great at apprehending such people, especially on timely basis.
Where do cables go once they leave the ceiling tiles directly above the closed area? Is there enough security stuff to monitor my office and restroom to make sure I am not drilling through pipes encapsulating "classified" cables and installing some vampire clamps.
Are you really comfortable with letting untrusted individuals freely roam the floor where your classified information is accessed? Why not make them go through background check or else have a separate building for unclassified work?