A sympathetic article on Forbes is meaningless. Everyone reading Forbes just wants anyother bunch of quick money. What this article actually does is calling the lawyers into looking at the current junk fax/spam issues, and see if they can exploit some profit from this mess.
You need some kind of reality distortion device to see the 2003 one.
Re: It is just a simple minded and naive solution
on
The Future of Security
·
· Score: 2
I wouldn't put it under beautiful terms like "at the expense of principle", the solution the article suggested is just simple minded and naive.
[Flamebait mode on]
The final part of the article is just a long winded version of "shut you computer up and you're safe"... The author is obviously over-generalizing the issues here. How to keep the bad guys off the Internet? "Human lockdown!" says the article. Yeah that is possible when you're talking about keeping bin Laden and his evil minions from entering USA. But the Internet? How can you even identify who is the bad guy on the Internet? Do you assume that I am a terrorist by looking up my personal data and know I know enough to break into systems? Is that infected computer somewhere on Earth leaving Nimda and Code Red marks daily into my Apache log a terrorist? How can you even define what (let alone who) is a terrorist/bad guy/whatever bs term the media has cooked up, on the Internet? We can't even effectively deal with viruses on the Internet, now you're talking about identifying individual users and lock them down one by one? Turn the Internet up-side-down and make it a closed system? Requiring everyone going to the Internet to autheticate against some kinda global security database? Prosecute me becoz my Outlook Express is sending I love you? LMAOROFL!!! That is just dream talking! I can see some silly US senators proposing this thing soon, only to realise there're other countries on planet Earth besides the US of A, who just won't give a damn to your new fangled Internet Security laws. Only to realise the Internet is nothing like the physical world where you can easily seal areas off, identify criminals, destroy your enemies with brute force, etc.
"the integration of applications becomes unethical as well as physically impossible" I have no idea what the hell this mad man is talkig about! The whole Internet is "an integration of applications" itself, from my Mozilla to Slashdot.org's web browser that's an integration. From my Mozilla to Windows XP or the Linux kernel that is another integration. From KDE to XFree86 that is an integration. From a simple Hello World in Linux to glibc there's an integration. The whole world of computers existed becoz we could build it piece by piece with INTEGRATION! The author doesn't seem to have any idea what sort of "integration" he's talking about. Really, delete "integration", and we're going back to the good old abascus. And yeah, an abascus is pretty secure, I think.
[Flamebait mode off]
Yeah, my comments may not be very logical and very emotional. But what? Common sense told me the last part of the article is bullshit. A simple and naive "solution" to a whole different set of circumstances. Like what a child would react to seeing a war cartoon, "yeah, kill all the bad man and the world will come to peace, forever!!!!!!1111oneone". But kid, do you really know who is who in a real war?
Agreed, whenever I know it's a dream, I can most often change everything I feel like in my dream, so long as I don't wake up.
I recall I could switch identities (i.e. when a dream monster chased after me, I could sometimes switch to it and kill my "shell"), I could turn the scene into an FPS game (e.g. I've played Postal 2 in a dream a few days ago, sadly towards the end I was killed and woke up by a monster coz my grenades I threw did not explode for no reason...), I could even make a nuclear bomb/ion beam fall out of the sky when I'm flying.
But yeah... the more I've altered my dream, the more likely I'd wake up from it. So I'm usually conservative at using my power in my dreams, now I prefer not to use it unless something really bad happens, even tho I know perfectly that I'm dreaming.
I have been a lucid dreamer for some years, I didn't even know there's such a term before reading this article. I don't always control my dreams except when something unfavorable happens. e.g. a dream monster appears, or I'm going to fail an exam, etc. Then I can often make the undesirable events go away (e.g. make the dream monster disappear, make everyone else fail the exam, make my teacher give 100 marks to me)
I have a very easy way to determine whether I'm dreaming or not - say something to yourself. I noticed that my own voice I feel in reality and in dream is a little bit different. I'm not sure how it's really different but personally I think it becoz I can't simulate my voice coming in both directions in a dream (i.e. propagated from the air, and propagated from my skull bone) When you say something in reality, besides the voice you hear coming from outside (probably echoed from the walls around you, from the computer case next to you, etc.), you can also feel your voice coming from your skull. In a dream, however, your voice becomes very "monotonous" - you can only feel it as if all of it comes from the air (or skull? anyway you can feel there's only one source). You don't have to recit an essay to notice the difference, you just need to utter a word or a tone, and it will be very clear whether you're dreaming or not. Once you notice you're dreaming, you can do whatever bizarre thing you like. Like, pretend to be Agent Smith in M3, fly up, 'This is my world! MY WORLD!', grab a girl, and... hehe
> Tickets cost 75 RMB (~$9) a pop, this in a country where 800 RMB a month is considered a decent wage.
Not sure about Shanghai, I live in Hong Kong.
The salaries of workers in different areas in China vary greatly, if you get $800 monthly (or even annually) in rural areas you're already pretty "rich" there. But the same can't be said for the cities, especially for Shanghai, which is a highly developed one.
I have no idea how any mods could mod this +3 Interesting. It takes only an elementary chemistry student to tell you that H2O has a higher oxidation state than H2, so it's less likely to be oxidized further. If someone could burn H2O with oxygen and create something even more stable I figure he'd get a Nobel Prize.
You've got it wrong, what they're counting is the amount of carbon dioxide emitted at the plane engines, when the scientists are flying to the conference.
Carbon dioxide from respiration is not counted simply becoz there's little/no difference between the CO2 emission from a scientist at lab and at conference. If you want to reduce the respiratory CO2 emission there are two ways to do it:
1. sit in front of the computer and read Slashdot all day, DO NOT MASTERBATE in front of your computer no matter what you see
2. kill yourself and have someone bury your body in Antarctica
Most users do not know what is happening, and it makes perfect business sense to exploit that... I suspect
Re:FLOATING space junk?
on
ISS Fender Bender
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
There are two extreme cases, and a lot of intermediates.
The orbital radius determines the tangential velocity of an orbiting object, but it doesn't determine its direction. You have to take the angle between the two velocity vectors into account in calculating the relative velocity.
In this case, assume r is the same. If both velocities have the same direction, then relative velocity is zero. If they're on the opposite direction, then the relative velocity is twice the original. For any other cases you'll need to grab a calculator and prey to the cos() or sin() functions.
I think there should be alternatives, space is a lot different from ground (e.g. you don't need to care a lot about friction) you don't need to dispatch a janitor-craft to clean the mess.
For example, considering the small size of most space junks, it should be possible to vapourize a number of them with a strong laser beam. It may even be possible to kick them away with good old Newtonian mechanics, as space debris' orbitals are pretty easily predictable, why not shoot them out of orbit with a projectile?
Re:30,000 km/s can do a lot of damage
on
ISS Fender Bender
·
· Score: 1
You're right at the damage that a space debris hitting you might cause. But I'm very sure that space debris aboce Earth can't hit a space station at 30 million meters per second - even if the two objects were orbiting the earth at exactly opposite directions, it isn't possible to be THAT high (3*10^7 ms-1 = 1/10 light speed!!).
But, yes, even if a space debris hits you at 5 to 10km/s, that is gonna cause a lot of damage.
In case you don't know, the early Han rulers in Chinese history used Taoist philosophy in ruling the country. They were highly successful. It was until the third or the fourth emperor of the Han dynasty who changed to Confusianism(??), then Han peaked and started to fall apart.
The gas giants in a solar system play a major role in stabilizing/destabilizing the system. If you move Jupiter out of its orbit, chances are, Earth flys out of the solar system, or it falls into the sun. Definitey not "fsck things arround a *tiny* bit".
Slashdot Mirror
A sympathetic article on Forbes is meaningless. Everyone reading Forbes just wants anyother bunch of quick money. What this article actually does is calling the lawyers into looking at the current junk fax/spam issues, and see if they can exploit some profit from this mess.
It will be the "2004 Duke Nukem Awards"
You need some kind of reality distortion device to see the 2003 one.
I wouldn't put it under beautiful terms like "at the expense of principle", the solution the article suggested is just simple minded and naive.
[Flamebait mode on]
The final part of the article is just a long winded version of "shut you computer up and you're safe"... The author is obviously over-generalizing the issues here. How to keep the bad guys off the Internet? "Human lockdown!" says the article. Yeah that is possible when you're talking about keeping bin Laden and his evil minions from entering USA. But the Internet? How can you even identify who is the bad guy on the Internet? Do you assume that I am a terrorist by looking up my personal data and know I know enough to break into systems? Is that infected computer somewhere on Earth leaving Nimda and Code Red marks daily into my Apache log a terrorist? How can you even define what (let alone who) is a terrorist/bad guy/whatever bs term the media has cooked up, on the Internet? We can't even effectively deal with viruses on the Internet, now you're talking about identifying individual users and lock them down one by one? Turn the Internet up-side-down and make it a closed system? Requiring everyone going to the Internet to autheticate against some kinda global security database? Prosecute me becoz my Outlook Express is sending I love you? LMAOROFL!!! That is just dream talking! I can see some silly US senators proposing this thing soon, only to realise there're other countries on planet Earth besides the US of A, who just won't give a damn to your new fangled Internet Security laws. Only to realise the Internet is nothing like the physical world where you can easily seal areas off, identify criminals, destroy your enemies with brute force, etc.
"the integration of applications becomes unethical as well as physically impossible" I have no idea what the hell this mad man is talkig about! The whole Internet is "an integration of applications" itself, from my Mozilla to Slashdot.org's web browser that's an integration. From my Mozilla to Windows XP or the Linux kernel that is another integration. From KDE to XFree86 that is an integration. From a simple Hello World in Linux to glibc there's an integration. The whole world of computers existed becoz we could build it piece by piece with INTEGRATION! The author doesn't seem to have any idea what sort of "integration" he's talking about. Really, delete "integration", and we're going back to the good old abascus. And yeah, an abascus is pretty secure, I think.
[Flamebait mode off]
Yeah, my comments may not be very logical and very emotional. But what? Common sense told me the last part of the article is bullshit. A simple and naive "solution" to a whole different set of circumstances. Like what a child would react to seeing a war cartoon, "yeah, kill all the bad man and the world will come to peace, forever!!!!!!1111oneone". But kid, do you really know who is who in a real war?
Agreed, whenever I know it's a dream, I can most often change everything I feel like in my dream, so long as I don't wake up.
I recall I could switch identities (i.e. when a dream monster chased after me, I could sometimes switch to it and kill my "shell"), I could turn the scene into an FPS game (e.g. I've played Postal 2 in a dream a few days ago, sadly towards the end I was killed and woke up by a monster coz my grenades I threw did not explode for no reason...), I could even make a nuclear bomb/ion beam fall out of the sky when I'm flying.
But yeah... the more I've altered my dream, the more likely I'd wake up from it. So I'm usually conservative at using my power in my dreams, now I prefer not to use it unless something really bad happens, even tho I know perfectly that I'm dreaming.
I have been a lucid dreamer for some years, I didn't even know there's such a term before reading this article. I don't always control my dreams except when something unfavorable happens. e.g. a dream monster appears, or I'm going to fail an exam, etc. Then I can often make the undesirable events go away (e.g. make the dream monster disappear, make everyone else fail the exam, make my teacher give 100 marks to me)
I have a very easy way to determine whether I'm dreaming or not - say something to yourself. I noticed that my own voice I feel in reality and in dream is a little bit different. I'm not sure how it's really different but personally I think it becoz I can't simulate my voice coming in both directions in a dream (i.e. propagated from the air, and propagated from my skull bone) When you say something in reality, besides the voice you hear coming from outside (probably echoed from the walls around you, from the computer case next to you, etc.), you can also feel your voice coming from your skull. In a dream, however, your voice becomes very "monotonous" - you can only feel it as if all of it comes from the air (or skull? anyway you can feel there's only one source). You don't have to recit an essay to notice the difference, you just need to utter a word or a tone, and it will be very clear whether you're dreaming or not. Once you notice you're dreaming, you can do whatever bizarre thing you like. Like, pretend to be Agent Smith in M3, fly up, 'This is my world! MY WORLD!', grab a girl, and... hehe
> Tickets cost 75 RMB (~$9) a pop, this in a country where 800 RMB a month is considered a decent wage.
Not sure about Shanghai, I live in Hong Kong.
The salaries of workers in different areas in China vary greatly, if you get $800 monthly (or even annually) in rural areas you're already pretty "rich" there. But the same can't be said for the cities, especially for Shanghai, which is a highly developed one.
I have no idea how any mods could mod this +3 Interesting. It takes only an elementary chemistry student to tell you that H2O has a higher oxidation state than H2, so it's less likely to be oxidized further. If someone could burn H2O with oxygen and create something even more stable I figure he'd get a Nobel Prize.
> Myself 1: Lost Tech Job
Is there a Myself 2?
> AMD dominates Intel so much now eh... It is year 2004, right?
William Henry Gates III, president of Microsoft Corporation, will be sent to Mars to press the reset button.
I thought The Matrix Reloaded has done that? That was disgusting
You've got it wrong, what they're counting is the amount of carbon dioxide emitted at the plane engines, when the scientists are flying to the conference.
Carbon dioxide from respiration is not counted simply becoz there's little/no difference between the CO2 emission from a scientist at lab and at conference. If you want to reduce the respiratory CO2 emission there are two ways to do it:
1. sit in front of the computer and read Slashdot all day, DO NOT MASTERBATE in front of your computer no matter what you see
2. kill yourself and have someone bury your body in Antarctica
Most users do not know what is happening, and it makes perfect business sense to exploit that... I suspect
There are two extreme cases, and a lot of intermediates.
The orbital radius determines the tangential velocity of an orbiting object, but it doesn't determine its direction. You have to take the angle between the two velocity vectors into account in calculating the relative velocity.
In this case, assume r is the same. If both velocities have the same direction, then relative velocity is zero. If they're on the opposite direction, then the relative velocity is twice the original. For any other cases you'll need to grab a calculator and prey to the cos() or sin() functions.
Quite the opposite, if we've put up an IIS in space the Martians must have infiltrated into our governments.
I think there should be alternatives, space is a lot different from ground (e.g. you don't need to care a lot about friction) you don't need to dispatch a janitor-craft to clean the mess.
For example, considering the small size of most space junks, it should be possible to vapourize a number of them with a strong laser beam. It may even be possible to kick them away with good old Newtonian mechanics, as space debris' orbitals are pretty easily predictable, why not shoot them out of orbit with a projectile?
You're right at the damage that a space debris hitting you might cause. But I'm very sure that space debris aboce Earth can't hit a space station at 30 million meters per second - even if the two objects were orbiting the earth at exactly opposite directions, it isn't possible to be THAT high (3*10^7 ms-1 = 1/10 light speed!!). But, yes, even if a space debris hits you at 5 to 10km/s, that is gonna cause a lot of damage.
So, he must be a terrorist, and he must know the whereabouts of bin Laden!
Oh I thought it belongs to Al Quaeda? j/k
Next step, SCO patents the universe and owns everything
In case you don't know, the early Han rulers in Chinese history used Taoist philosophy in ruling the country. They were highly successful. It was until the third or the fourth emperor of the Han dynasty who changed to Confusianism(??), then Han peaked and started to fall apart.
The gas giants in a solar system play a major role in stabilizing/destabilizing the system. If you move Jupiter out of its orbit, chances are, Earth flys out of the solar system, or it falls into the sun. Definitey not "fsck things arround a *tiny* bit".
Thus... "Everything that has a beginning... has an end"
It's rather rare to see actual facts on America vs China type of discussion here in Slashdot.
You already have it, remember our beloved RIAA?