Didn't Jesus predict the end of the world in less than one generation? That I would call quite a falsifiable prediction. Indeed, it is already falsified.
I guess it makes it easier for the bank if you can't pay any more: Since they already own the house anyway, they probably can just throw you out and re-rent or sell the house.
More real estate in Antarctica and Greenland, maybe. Less real estate on almost all coasts, worldwide, though. We should try to compensate that by leveling some mountains, build new cities up there. Or just go the Dutch way and build amphibious houses.
Patents (fortunately) don't last forever. If you patent something which is unlikely to come during the patent grant period anyway, it's just wasted money. Even worse, for Evil(tm) ideas, you might have given people ideas for afterwards.
Also, patents cost money. Lots of patents cost lots of money. Who has enough money to patent everything?
Well, if it's just god, then he has nothing to fear. After all, god is good and therefore wouldn't do anything bad to you just because of his feelings (because doing so would be evil). Now, being hated by the devil, that must be hell!:-)
But for those storage needs a DL DVD isn't enough either, you need a lot of them either way. And given that the price per gigabyte is more than twice for DL DVD, it's an easy decision.
BTW, I guess many of those files will not change any more, so if you archive them once (or maybe twice, to be sure), you can skip them in future backups (except if your media fails - with two backups, you then can just make a fresh copy of the non-failed media).
That's easy: Just write something along the lines of "You are not the right for this job, but we would like to keep your resume for future jobs we may have to offer." Which also is a partly-positive response for the applicant, because while it tells him that he didn't get the job, it also tells him that it's not his fault, and he might be offered another job later.
But that's exactly because you cannot rely on the responses you get. If you get a response like "You're good, but your profile doesn't fit our requirements well enough", it may well mean "you're bad, but we don't want to tell you." And of course, the more rejections you get, the more likely it seems that that other explanation is true. If you could rely on those replies to be honest, there would not be any reason to think you are bad at that field (unless the replies explicitly say that, of course, but in that case, it's better to know anyway). Even better, of course, would be if you were told why you didn't fit. Because if there are several responses telling the same problem, you know that this specifically is something you should improve on.
Not really, given any sufficiently powerful mathematics system, you can have true statements that are not provable. What people tend to forget is that similar reasoning will yield false statements that are not refutable. So, it is not the case that you can simply prove (or refute) all the properties you need to about any program.
Gerry
You don't need to apply that similar reasoning; you can directly derive the second claim from the first: If A is a true, but unprovable statement, then (not A) is a false but not refutable statement, because refuting (not A) means proving A.
Or simply remember that the Slashdot effect might affect you, not the other way round. Although I could imagine that being affected by the Slashdot effect might effect a Slashdot affect:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't Jesus predict the end of the world in less than one generation?
That I would call quite a falsifiable prediction. Indeed, it is already falsified.
Open Source ad on condom: "With Open Source you wouldn't need extra virus protection!"
I guess it makes it easier for the bank if you can't pay any more: Since they already own the house anyway, they probably can just throw you out and re-rent or sell the house.
Well, that's not really hard; however it doesn't look so nice if you view it from another angle.
Patents (fortunately) don't last forever. If you patent something which is unlikely to come during the patent grant period anyway, it's just wasted money. Even worse, for Evil(tm) ideas, you might have given people ideas for afterwards.
Also, patents cost money. Lots of patents cost lots of money. Who has enough money to patent everything?
You just violated my patent on nose milking. Please pay me $1,000,000 licensing fee. Thanks.
But then, how do they prevent recording the signal directly from the visual cortex?
No memory access allowed during playing? As in, the rest of the computer simply stops working while you watch a movie? Good luck with that!
Yes, I've heared about it. Apparently you are sent to jail for making your own money. :-)
Of course, the question is: The size of which dog? After all, there's a huge size difference between dogs and dogs!
No. But after having seen the film, North Korea decided that thrown rabbits are an even better weapon than nuclear bombs.
If it's already there, the last thing you want to do is to publically say that it's already there.
Well, if it's just god, then he has nothing to fear. After all, god is good and therefore wouldn't do anything bad to you just because of his feelings (because doing so would be evil). Now, being hated by the devil, that must be hell! :-)
Online activity can be tracked. Tracking offline activity is much harder.
Didn't you get the memo? Anyone with money and/or power is above the law... ;-)
HmmmYou mean they should rather do it as in the old times, by violently entering ships and taking everything valuable with them?
But for those storage needs a DL DVD isn't enough either, you need a lot of them either way. And given that the price per gigabyte is more than twice for DL DVD, it's an easy decision.
BTW, I guess many of those files will not change any more, so if you archive them once (or maybe twice, to be sure), you can skip them in future backups (except if your media fails - with two backups, you then can just make a fresh copy of the non-failed media).
That's easy: Just write something along the lines of "You are not the right for this job, but we would like to keep your resume for future jobs we may have to offer." Which also is a partly-positive response for the applicant, because while it tells him that he didn't get the job, it also tells him that it's not his fault, and he might be offered another job later.
But that's exactly because you cannot rely on the responses you get. If you get a response like "You're good, but your profile doesn't fit our requirements well enough", it may well mean "you're bad, but we don't want to tell you." And of course, the more rejections you get, the more likely it seems that that other explanation is true.
If you could rely on those replies to be honest, there would not be any reason to think you are bad at that field (unless the replies explicitly say that, of course, but in that case, it's better to know anyway). Even better, of course, would be if you were told why you didn't fit. Because if there are several responses telling the same problem, you know that this specifically is something you should improve on.
Gerry
You don't need to apply that similar reasoning; you can directly derive the second claim from the first: If A is a true, but unprovable statement, then (not A) is a false but not refutable statement, because refuting (not A) means proving A.
Scripting languages are no more secure than C or C++! Ever heared of code injection attacks?
Or simply remember that the Slashdot effect might affect you, not the other way round. :-)
Although I could imagine that being affected by the Slashdot effect might effect a Slashdot affect
I guess they'll register an .xxx while still keeping their .com domain.