Instead I think it is vastly more likely that people will be traveling with a combination of public transport and bicycle in a few years from now. Much healthier for everyone.
Yeah, the people at NASA could easily be outdone at their own job by a crowd of slashdot reading armchair-rocket-scientists, right? This armchair-rocket you speak of seems like an interesting concept. Could you tell me more about it?
2012... They are *$(*#ed and you WIN! All Internet is now encrypted and unbreakable and everyone has multi-terabyte hard drives and multi-hundred Megabit or gigabit speeds to home. Uhh.. we'll die in 2012, haven't you heard?
http://survive2012.com/
According to their calendar, the Maya believed that their world would end on Dec 21, 2012. Of all the dates put forth by prophets and cultures for a doomsday, this is one with an authentic almost eerie feel to it. But what will happen? A global cataclysm is one possibility. Presented here is enough information to help you decide - be you an expert or a beginner. That was only a misinterpretation, because their prophets had no clue about modern technology. Due to all data being encrypted after 2012, they seemed not to get any meaningful data from after that time, so they incorrectly concluded that there's no meaningful data after that time, because the world ended.
Since the opposition currently only consists of the small parties (both large parties are forming a coalition right now), it's extremely improbable that there will be a government any time soon which doesn't include one of the parties currently in power.
Do they only require the saving of email headers, or also of protocol data? You know, the actual mail headers are mostly irrelevant for the mail transport, so you could send a mail to anyone with
From: Undisclosed Sender To: Undisclosed Recipients
and still have the mail delivered correctly as long as the correct commands are sent on the SMTP server.
On Slashdot, they first moderated down troll posts, and I didn't speak up because I didn't want to troll. Then they moderated down redundant posts, and I didn't speak up because it would have been redundant. Then they moderated down offtopic posts, and I didn't speak up because it would have been offtopic. Then they moderated down flamebait posts, and I didn't speak up because that would have been flamebait. Then they moderated down my posts as overrated, but at that time there was no one with mod points left to correct it.
Since it's the robots which fetch the items, the workers don't need to know where they are. The robots should have no problems finding the items, provided the programmers have done their job right.
Of course you don't want your content to be tampered with, but that doesn't mean that the use of encryption is for that goal. The fact that you encrypt something doesn't mean that you can't use other measures to prevent tampering with it.
Well, I'm not a native English speaker, so I might miss some other meaning of the words, but I'd consider the simple (but utterly useless) explicit algorithm I described both as fixed (you can run it as-is on every program you want; you'll just get no useful answer in almost all cases) and systematic (the system is quite simple - just two comparisons -, but there's nothing random about it).
No. What's impossible is to write an algorithm which can tell for every algorithm if it will halt. It's definitively possible to write an algorithm which can tell for some algorithms whether they can halt (a very simple example would be an algorithm which returns "yes" for "int main() {}", "no" for "int main() { while(true); }" and "maybe" otherwise). Now given that humans cannot tell for every given algorithm as well (a human can only handle a certain amount of complexity), the crucial question is if algorithms can be better than humans in doing so. Existing algorithms obviously are not, but AFAIK there's no known reason why it should be impossible in principle.
How much will be saved on subscription costs for libraries? Maybe the reduced library cost offsets the increased cost of publishing? Especially since for external funding, also the publication cost will likely be covered by the funding, and thus not payed by the tax payer.
I've read of a similar case from some time back in the US. What happened was a shooting murder in which one of them (I've forgotten which) was in California, and the other was in Nevada. The lawyers discovered that in the shooter's state, the law stated that prosecution had to happen in the state where the death occurred, while in the victim's state, the prosecution had to be in the killer's state. So neither state had jurisdiction.
Needless to say, both states quickly revised their laws so this couldn't happen again.
So now the shooter's state's law says the prosecution has to happen in the shooter's state, while the victim's state's law now says the prosecution has to happen in the victim's state?
Slashdot Mirror
A bus where the passengers have to pedal?
http://survive2012.com/ According to their calendar, the Maya believed that their world would end on Dec 21, 2012. Of all the dates put forth by prophets and cultures for a doomsday, this is one with an authentic almost eerie feel to it. But what will happen? A global cataclysm is one possibility. Presented here is enough information to help you decide - be you an expert or a beginner. That was only a misinterpretation, because their prophets had no clue about modern technology. Due to all data being encrypted after 2012, they seemed not to get any meaningful data from after that time, so they incorrectly concluded that there's no meaningful data after that time, because the world ended.
Since the opposition currently only consists of the small parties (both large parties are forming a coalition right now), it's extremely improbable that there will be a government any time soon which doesn't include one of the parties currently in power.
Or store it encrypted. "Oh yes, here's the data. It's encrypted, so no unauthorized reading is possible. Unfortunately we lost the decryption key ..."
You know, the actual mail headers are mostly irrelevant for the mail transport, so you could send a mail to anyone with and still have the mail delivered correctly as long as the correct commands are sent on the SMTP server.
Well, you know, if your left foot is damaged, you have to move your weight to the right in order to relieve your left foot.
From the linked page:
"Therefore the developers have asked the user community not to mention the software in high publicity websites like Slashdot."
On Slashdot, they first moderated down troll posts, and I didn't speak up because I didn't want to troll.
Then they moderated down redundant posts, and I didn't speak up because it would have been redundant.
Then they moderated down offtopic posts, and I didn't speak up because it would have been offtopic.
Then they moderated down flamebait posts, and I didn't speak up because that would have been flamebait.
Then they moderated down my posts as overrated, but at that time there was no one with mod points left to correct it.
Digital signature.
PGP can do more than encryption.
Since it's the robots which fetch the items, the workers don't need to know where they are. The robots should have no problems finding the items, provided the programmers have done their job right.
Of course you don't want your content to be tampered with, but that doesn't mean that the use of encryption is for that goal. The fact that you encrypt something doesn't mean that you can't use other measures to prevent tampering with it.
Well, I'm not a native English speaker, so I might miss some other meaning of the words, but I'd consider the simple (but utterly useless) explicit algorithm I described both as fixed (you can run it as-is on every program you want; you'll just get no useful answer in almost all cases) and systematic (the system is quite simple - just two comparisons -, but there's nothing random about it).
No. What's impossible is to write an algorithm which can tell for every algorithm if it will halt. It's definitively possible to write an algorithm which can tell for some algorithms whether they can halt (a very simple example would be an algorithm which returns "yes" for "int main() {}", "no" for "int main() { while(true); }" and "maybe" otherwise). Now given that humans cannot tell for every given algorithm as well (a human can only handle a certain amount of complexity), the crucial question is if algorithms can be better than humans in doing so. Existing algorithms obviously are not, but AFAIK there's no known reason why it should be impossible in principle.
I think you have a redundant a.
Because they want the content to be unknown to third parties.
In that case, you really should try this.
Your sentence gets transformed to:
I can translate a phrase of the program in both felt between the languages.
Or including Chinese, Japanese and Korean:
Esteem report/ratio, that one that the situation turns, those between the language and the restoration nonupdated in the front part.
Well, in that case you should really try it out. You'll not get a single bad translation from Hebrew to Dutch
Its superficial lower whole number is belongs to us.
(No, I didn't make that up, it's the result of passing it through lost in translation)
How much will be saved on subscription costs for libraries? Maybe the reduced library cost offsets the increased cost of publishing? Especially since for external funding, also the publication cost will likely be covered by the funding, and thus not payed by the tax payer.
I think in Space, it would be more like "Two men leave, one man enters" ...
So now the shooter's state's law says the prosecution has to happen in the shooter's state, while the victim's state's law now says the prosecution has to happen in the victim's state?
Do the astronauts have that little space up there that they may not even lie?