So to see a site that is run by Mann and others he agrees with supporting him, well that doesn't really say much, does it?
What you are suggesting is essentially the same as if someone were accused of a crime, he should not be heard. Innocent until proven guilty, anyone? Why not listen to what Mann has to say and then decide?
It really seems to me that all that the denialists have one ten-year old email which uses the word "trick" and a handful of scientists, most of whom have proven links to oil, gas and coal industry. On the other side, there is almost 200 years' worth of science, and I believe even at this very moment over 10000 scientists who are basically saying "the evidence is clear, there is really not much debate left". I'd love to be wrong, but I'm afraid I'm not.
An accountant should be able to quickly determine if the pirate bay is telling the truth. it won't take much unless the TPB leaders have done some clever book keeping to hide money. If they are doing the later then they should pay up. If however if the majority of their revenue is going to servers, and bandwidth then they are telling the truth that they really aren't in it for the money.
Beging profitable isn't really required to be commercial. If they are selling ad space, they are doing business regardless of where the money is going.
They are neutral carriers of information and therefore should, in law, be held harmless.
You could say that about anything! Try starting a library of child pornography and see if the justice system thinks you are a neutral carrier of information...
There are huge differences between the Google and TPB, and it's unbelievable how people keep spouting "They are essentially the same" when the only similarity is they both store information about other information! People who think what kind of information it is (info on web pages vs torrents to pirated software etc), how it's gathered (spider vs uploading), how it's intended to be used (duh), how it's displayed, the ratio of legal to illegal content or use etc don't matter are fooling themselves. It's being überpedantic about one small detail while ignoring the blatantly obvious.
Besides, the only reason why there are links to links to illegal torrents in Google is beacuse it indexes sites such as TPB. If the torrent sites were to be taken offline, the problem with Google would get fixed, too.
Aggression is part of what made mankind the apex predator, and to pretend that the docile defenseless sheep of today are the best man has to offer is to basically say that not only does mankind deserve oblivion, but is actively grooming itself for it.
That kind of thinking is simplistic.
People aren't where they are because of aggression and violence, but because we once upon a time learned to work in groups, and have since evolved into forming huge, complex societies. Granted, there are always some people who have difficulty finding their place in life, but for the most part, societies work best when everyone plays their part in cooperation with the others, and let law enforcement and military take care of any distortion.
This reminds me of one of the recent school shootings. At least in one of the manifestos, the idiot talked about "devolution" and other similar rubbish, and decided that due to his 'superiority' he was entitled to kill a handful of people who had never harmed anyone. In the end he was taken down by the police, so the society which he labeled so weak won again.
As an aside, in any given situation, one should always choose the lesser of two evils. In a lot of cases giving up is better than fighting. For example, it's better to get mugged and battered than to get mugged and die. It's just an intelligent decision (aka common sense) not to put up a fight if you are unlikely to win.
Irrelevant to Roulette, maybe. But not irrelevant to the guy I just made a bet with on the side. Suppose I bet you $100 that the next 13 rolls will all be black. Pretty easy money, right? What if I bet that it would come up 8 red 5 black? You might be somewhat less inclined to take that bet.
I'd take that bet anytime, assuming it's even money.
Yes you do. You dont want people on the internet access your intranet. I guess you could setup all the intranet to work over the internet with extra security and such but it would be much easier to put a firewall up.
What access are you afraid of? You shouldn't really be running any public services which you do not wish to be public even in the intranet space. Otherwise, your security is compromised as soon as someone brings in a laptop.
But if you really think you need to isolate your intranet from the Internet, IP masquerading is much more effective than packet filtering.
Most businesses probably don't want to let people run things like FTP servers or P2P on their workstations. Otherwise, they are pretty much snake oil. Blocking inbound traffic to ports where there aren't any services running accomplishes more or less nothing (unless you have a really, really outdated, buggy OS). If you have any services running, you allow traffic to those ports so the firewall carries on doing nothing.
Firewalls can also be detrimental to security when they prevent things like using automatic software updates over the Internet. I maintain a couple of Linux/Apache based web servers which are a pain in the ass to keep up-to-date, because they have all outbound traffic blocked. So I need to download all the rpm files to my own computer first, and then use ssh to copy them to the servers and install them manually, slowly working out any dependency issues. If the IT people at the company weren't brain dead, I could use yum to install them automatically in 5 minutes instead of what takes hours now.
Fine calculations, but...
If you have an average of 175 of users listening all the time, wouldn't it mean you have probably thousands of listeners altogether? 2k doesn't sound that much if there are, say, 3000+ regular subscribers. Get a sponsor and you've pretty much made the money.
"And as another poster put forth....if you have a helmet on...you will likely survive and be a cripple for life, that cost MUCH more in the long run, than if you died."
This gets repeated a lot and it simply isn't true.
You can take a pretty big impact almost anywhere in your body, and you'd still heal perfectly, at least most of the time. The skull is much more fragile. If it fractures, you're pretty much fscked. And, even worse, you could get partial brain damage or maybe a hair fracture, which could go unnoticed for years before killing you all of a sudden.
Not sure what the 2 different setups = 2 different results comment was about, though I would still say in all fairness to the scientific method, the tester shouldn't have bother metioning it.
It tells nothing about how Vista affects 3dMark results, for starters. He had an AMD setup running Vista and a faster Pentium setup running XP. Well, guess what, the Pentium one got better results. What did we learn? Nothing.
Even if it were possible, surely there are better mobo choices, it's memory is DDR 400 for goodness sakes.
I believe you can also only use DDR2 memory with AM2 processors.
Also, from TFA: >>In fact, performance is really quite impressive. Our 3DMark06 score at default settings was 8052, where we score 8830 in our original GeForce 8800 GTS review. That system used a Core 2 Extreme-based test system that, all other things being equal, should outperform the Athlon 64 FX-60 we're testing Vista with here.>>
In other words, they ran 3dMark06 on two completely different setups and got different results. Geez.
> No, Baileys in coffee is not a real Irish coffee. But most places in the world, that's what is sold as Irish coffee.
This hasn't been my experience at all. Irish Coffee is one of my favorite drinks, and no matter where I've ordered it, I've always been served Irish whisky, coffee and sugar with whipped cream on top.
They forgot to mention the other reason for low sales, being that popular music, for the most part, sucks. If they improved the quality of the crap they play on the radio's maybe they'd make some more sales.
When exactly has there been a time that popular music didn't suck? I've been hearing this since the 70's, and it has probably gone on even longer, I just wasn't there to hear it. Corporate rock, anyone?
Invented? Hardly. It's just a packet switched network, a concept which was old by the time the first RFC was written. If you really think about it, what made the Internet popular was the world wide web, which was invented in the UK.
By European standards, this letter might seem harsh. By American standards, it's pretty mild.
I don't think it's harsh even by European standards. To me it reads like "we've always controlled the Internet, everything has worked fine, let's not try to fix something that isn't broken." It simply makes sense, and everyone agreed.
I don't know what Al-Jazeera is, as I don't read arabic, but I've heard it's a political rap-sheet, and widely read. (You could say the same thing about the National Enquirer...I'm not implying any quality.)
FWIW, I think they probably meant the TV channel headquarters.. I've watched it a couple of times, and it seemed pretty much like any news channel to me. I don't remember it being that political nor extremist. I don't understand Arabic, or course, but they also broadcast news in English.
Actually, it does. Your examples still imply causality, which it doesn't.:-)
For example, you say:
Large % of those in love owned cars (implying cars cause love)
In this case, you'd have two groups - one which has cars and another which doesn't. If the percantage of people in love within the "has cars" group is significantly higher than in the "doesn't have cars" group, then you can say that "having a car may help find love." If the difference is small, however, you can say it probably has little effect.
The diagnostic box has to provide power to get the data out of the firmware, right?
Sure. But it's trivial to design the machine so that it's logic circuits aren't working even if the roms are powered.
There's nothing stopping the machine manufacturer from making sure their hardware provides fake results just for that scenario - heck, it would probably be easier for them to make the fake firmware show up whenever the overall machine didn't have any power, and use the real firmware when the machine was fully powered.
Where do you store the program if not on the roms which are being checked? Don't forget, that the original firmware has to be in the possession of whomever does the inspection. A strong enough (and proprietary) checksum calculator would make it impossible to change the programming afterwards. And in case you are wondering, extra roms would be very difficult to hide. They'd have to be camourflaged or the circuit board altered, and a huge risk to whomever put them there. And in case you are wondering, they can't be simply swapped, because you don't know in advance when the inspectors are coming.
Geez, what a useless check. How does the gaming commission discover if the slot machine manufacturer has programmed their diagnostics interface to spoof the checksum they gave to the commission, regardless of what the firmware actually is?
The machine is switched off! The contents of the roms are read directly, and the circuit board is inspected for any tampering. It's not rocket surgery.
Slashdot Mirror
So to see a site that is run by Mann and others he agrees with supporting him, well that doesn't really say much, does it?
What you are suggesting is essentially the same as if someone were accused of a crime, he should not be heard. Innocent until proven guilty, anyone? Why not listen to what Mann has to say and then decide?
It really seems to me that all that the denialists have one ten-year old email which uses the word "trick" and a handful of scientists, most of whom have proven links to oil, gas and coal industry. On the other side, there is almost 200 years' worth of science, and I believe even at this very moment over 10000 scientists who are basically saying "the evidence is clear, there is really not much debate left". I'd love to be wrong, but I'm afraid I'm not.
If I choose to walk to work then I threaten Fords model. If I choose to go the Gym instead of buying a wii-fit I'm hurting Nintendo.
Not really the same thing. In the Bookabooka scenario it's always the exact same product, not an alternative.
A better car analogy would be buying a car at a big discount due to an agreement which forbids its rental, and then renting it anyway.
An accountant should be able to quickly determine if the pirate bay is telling the truth. it won't take much unless the TPB leaders have done some clever book keeping to hide money. If they are doing the later then they should pay up. If however if the majority of their revenue is going to servers, and bandwidth then they are telling the truth that they really aren't in it for the money.
Beging profitable isn't really required to be commercial. If they are selling ad space, they are doing business regardless of where the money is going.
They are neutral carriers of information and therefore should, in law, be held harmless.
You could say that about anything! Try starting a library of child pornography and see if the justice system thinks you are a neutral carrier of information...
There are huge differences between the Google and TPB, and it's unbelievable how people keep spouting "They are essentially the same" when the only similarity is they both store information about other information! People who think what kind of information it is (info on web pages vs torrents to pirated software etc), how it's gathered (spider vs uploading), how it's intended to be used (duh), how it's displayed, the ratio of legal to illegal content or use etc don't matter are fooling themselves. It's being überpedantic about one small detail while ignoring the blatantly obvious.
Besides, the only reason why there are links to links to illegal torrents in Google is beacuse it indexes sites such as TPB. If the torrent sites were to be taken offline, the problem with Google would get fixed, too.
Megyn Kelly, Domenica Davis and Ainsley Earhardt as a couple of examples....
[x] (fake) blonde
[x] permanent smile
[x] tons of makeup
[x] truckload of hair products
[ ] beautiful features
[ ] hot
But lately my choice to not buy anything at all has been more about the quality of music than anything else. Musicians these days just suck.
Or maybe you just got old.
Lots of good music is still made. It's just not so easy to find.
Aggression is part of what made mankind the apex predator, and to pretend that the docile defenseless sheep of today are the best man has to offer is to basically say that not only does mankind deserve oblivion, but is actively grooming itself for it.
That kind of thinking is simplistic.
People aren't where they are because of aggression and violence, but because we once upon a time learned to work in groups, and have since evolved into forming huge, complex societies. Granted, there are always some people who have difficulty finding their place in life, but for the most part, societies work best when everyone plays their part in cooperation with the others, and let law enforcement and military take care of any distortion.
This reminds me of one of the recent school shootings. At least in one of the manifestos, the idiot talked about "devolution" and other similar rubbish, and decided that due to his 'superiority' he was entitled to kill a handful of people who had never harmed anyone. In the end he was taken down by the police, so the society which he labeled so weak won again.
As an aside, in any given situation, one should always choose the lesser of two evils. In a lot of cases giving up is better than fighting. For example, it's better to get mugged and battered than to get mugged and die. It's just an intelligent decision (aka common sense) not to put up a fight if you are unlikely to win.
Irrelevant to Roulette, maybe. But not irrelevant to the guy I just made a bet with on the side. Suppose I bet you $100 that the next 13 rolls will all be black. Pretty easy money, right? What if I bet that it would come up 8 red 5 black? You might be somewhat less inclined to take that bet.
I'd take that bet anytime, assuming it's even money.
Yes you do. You dont want people on the internet access your intranet. I guess you could setup all the intranet to work over the internet with extra security and such but it would be much easier to put a firewall up.
What access are you afraid of? You shouldn't really be running any public services which you do not wish to be public even in the intranet space. Otherwise, your security is compromised as soon as someone brings in a laptop.
But if you really think you need to isolate your intranet from the Internet, IP masquerading is much more effective than packet filtering.
Do we really need firewalls?
Most businesses probably don't want to let people run things like FTP servers or P2P on their workstations. Otherwise, they are pretty much snake oil. Blocking inbound traffic to ports where there aren't any services running accomplishes more or less nothing (unless you have a really, really outdated, buggy OS). If you have any services running, you allow traffic to those ports so the firewall carries on doing nothing.
Firewalls can also be detrimental to security when they prevent things like using automatic software updates over the Internet. I maintain a couple of Linux/Apache based web servers which are a pain in the ass to keep up-to-date, because they have all outbound traffic blocked. So I need to download all the rpm files to my own computer first, and then use ssh to copy them to the servers and install them manually, slowly working out any dependency issues. If the IT people at the company weren't brain dead, I could use yum to install them automatically in 5 minutes instead of what takes hours now.
Fine calculations, but... If you have an average of 175 of users listening all the time, wouldn't it mean you have probably thousands of listeners altogether? 2k doesn't sound that much if there are, say, 3000+ regular subscribers. Get a sponsor and you've pretty much made the money.
"And as another poster put forth....if you have a helmet on...you will likely survive and be a cripple for life, that cost MUCH more in the long run, than if you died."
This gets repeated a lot and it simply isn't true.
You can take a pretty big impact almost anywhere in your body, and you'd still heal perfectly, at least most of the time. The skull is much more fragile. If it fractures, you're pretty much fscked. And, even worse, you could get partial brain damage or maybe a hair fracture, which could go unnoticed for years before killing you all of a sudden.
Not sure what the 2 different setups = 2 different results comment was about, though I would still say in all fairness to the scientific method, the tester shouldn't have bother metioning it.
It tells nothing about how Vista affects 3dMark results, for starters. He had an AMD setup running Vista and a faster Pentium setup running XP. Well, guess what, the Pentium one got better results. What did we learn? Nothing.
Even if it were possible, surely there are better mobo choices, it's memory is DDR 400 for goodness sakes.
I believe you can also only use DDR2 memory with AM2 processors.
Also, from TFA: >>In fact, performance is really quite impressive. Our 3DMark06 score at default settings was 8052, where we score 8830 in our original GeForce 8800 GTS review. That system used a Core 2 Extreme-based test system that, all other things being equal, should outperform the Athlon 64 FX-60 we're testing Vista with here.>>
In other words, they ran 3dMark06 on two completely different setups and got different results. Geez.
> No, Baileys in coffee is not a real Irish coffee. But most places in the world, that's what is sold as Irish coffee.
This hasn't been my experience at all. Irish Coffee is one of my favorite drinks, and no matter where I've ordered it, I've always been served Irish whisky, coffee and sugar with whipped cream on top.
And in Russia, they drink their vodka instead of water.
And of course, Russia is a part of Scandinavia since..?
When exactly has there been a time that popular music didn't suck? I've been hearing this since the 70's, and it has probably gone on even longer, I just wasn't there to hear it. Corporate rock, anyone?
You're correct, Matt. That's exactly what I meant. I seem to have chosen my words somewhat poorly.
Invented? Hardly. It's just a packet switched network, a concept which was old by the time the first RFC was written. If you really think about it, what made the Internet popular was the world wide web, which was invented in the UK.
I don't think it's harsh even by European standards. To me it reads like "we've always controlled the Internet, everything has worked fine, let's not try to fix something that isn't broken." It simply makes sense, and everyone agreed.
FWIW, I think they probably meant the TV channel headquarters.. I've watched it a couple of times, and it seemed pretty much like any news channel to me. I don't remember it being that political nor extremist. I don't understand Arabic, or course, but they also broadcast news in English.
They 've got a home page, too.
Actually, it does. Your examples still imply causality, which it doesn't. :-)
For example, you say: Large % of those in love owned cars (implying cars cause love)
In this case, you'd have two groups - one which has cars and another which doesn't. If the percantage of people in love within the "has cars" group is significantly higher than in the "doesn't have cars" group, then you can say that "having a car may help find love." If the difference is small, however, you can say it probably has little effect.
It does imply probability, though.
Sure. But it's trivial to design the machine so that it's logic circuits aren't working even if the roms are powered.
There's nothing stopping the machine manufacturer from making sure their hardware provides fake results just for that scenario - heck, it would probably be easier for them to make the fake firmware show up whenever the overall machine didn't have any power, and use the real firmware when the machine was fully powered.Where do you store the program if not on the roms which are being checked? Don't forget, that the original firmware has to be in the possession of whomever does the inspection. A strong enough (and proprietary) checksum calculator would make it impossible to change the programming afterwards. And in case you are wondering, extra roms would be very difficult to hide. They'd have to be camourflaged or the circuit board altered, and a huge risk to whomever put them there. And in case you are wondering, they can't be simply swapped, because you don't know in advance when the inspectors are coming.
The machine is switched off! The contents of the roms are read directly, and the circuit board is inspected for any tampering. It's not rocket surgery.