Where I work (a government department) they have automatic filters which flag emails containing certain words or phrases, eg obscenity. When a message is flagged a copy gets sent to your line manager with an explanation of what the problem is.
Obviously you can't control the content of incoming messages but you'd get a bollocking for sending anything dodgy, keep at it long enough and eventually you'd get sacked. Personally I don't have a problem with the system - seems pretty reasonable to me.
They also log websites visited. You get one warning for visiting porn sites (and such) the second time you're looking for a new job. Once again I don't have a problem with this - only a moron would be looking at porn sites from work. I use the web from work for personal stuff occasionally and it's never been mentioned, I don't abuse it though.
So in conclusion - sometimes they do read your email.
No? From an outsiders perspective - we see US politicians complaining about how gambling is evil and foreign companies must not be allowed to corrupt US citizens. Then we think "hang on what about Las Vegas and Atlantic City where any US citizen can be corrupted to his hearts content". It begins to look like the problem is not gambling per se but the big business interests who think US gambling belongs to them alone.
So it's not a dishonest attempt to push an anti-american agenda - it's an entirely reasonable conclusion from looking at the facts.
I'd have thought it would be a good idea for each voter to be able to check their vote was correct but nobody elses.
You could take the name and DOB of the voter, plus a password entered at the time and do an md5 hash then publish the hashes on the web alongside the candidate voted for (in the clear). Anybody wanting to check would simply have to hash their name, DOB and password and could then look up the hash in the list and check the vote was recorded correctly.
Because the candidate voted for is in the clear the election results could be easily checked as you could total up the number of votes for each candidate yourself.
If large numbers of people started claiming their votes had been incorrectly registered they could give out their passwords so others could check that the votes weren't recorded the way they claim they voted.
So how does MS pay you? Is it per post or are you on a salary, maybe some kind of retainer? Do you get a deduction for a particularly obvious piece of astroturfing or does MS not care about quality. I guess if you can make a living out of it anybody can, how do I apply?
Photons do have mass, by virtue of the fact that they have energy and energy *is* mass. You'll often hear people saying that photons have no "rest" mass which is theoretically true but misleading since photons cannot exist at "rest".
It's far from clear exactly what Hahn built - various neutron guns certainly, but his final creation involving Americium, Thorium, Radium, Uranium and Aluminium and which was (apparently) giving off more and more radiation every day, could very well have met the dictionary definition of a "nuclear reactor".
And beside that; the dictionary definition of "nuclear reactor" is out of date and is based on the science of the Thirties. A neutron gun capable of creating nuclear reactions might very well be described as a "nuclear reactor" by a more reasonable definition. Words do change their meaning over time often by changes in usage but also by changes in context.
I too find it hard to believe in some global conspiracy, however I don't find it hard to believe that global warming happens (by chance) to advance the agendas of a wide variety of disparate organisations and whilst they may not be deliberately coordinating their actions this alignment of interest has much the same effect.
This is commonplace for road safety campaigners to lie and decieve in this way - I presume they justify it to themselves on the grounds that they're doing it for the greater good or some such bullshit.
The implication is that these accidents are all drunk drivers mowing down pedestrians or crashing into station wagons full of children but in reality that's not the case at all. The statistics include *any* accident in which *anybody* involved had *any* blood alcohol (even if under the limit).
Obviously that will include many accidents where no normal (honest) preson would consider alcohol a contributary factor.
I use PDF for files that are just being passed on and not modified.
It's amazing how many people think pdf files can't be modified. I once corrected some errors in a document a colleague sent me and returned it. He came to see me, and appeared genuinely shocked that a PDF could be altered. He was horrified when I showed him how easily it was done.
Rough quote: "We'll that's the only reason I use PDFs instead of doc files!" . . . I'd assumed he was using PDFs because it's a proper exchange format. Silly assumption, it was so he could be "sure" it wouldn't be altered.
I tried to explain about MD5's and RSA signatures but his eyes glazed over, ho hum.
Couldn't agree more, trying to stir up trouble on your way out is childish and unprofessional, it shouldn't be about your ego. .
Never burn your bridges, if things go the way you expect you may get a phone call 12 months down the line offering a load of money to go back as a consultant and sort out the pile of shit they're in.
If the company goes under all your ex co-workers are going to be spreading out into other companies in the industry. It only takes one to see you being interviewed at some new company and say to their manager "Was that John Doe? I used to work with him at Universal Widgets, he was a bit of an asshole", word of mouth carries more weight than almost anything and you can kiss the new job goodbye.
If management is that bad start applying for other jobs and when you get one, work your notice, say a polite goodbye, and leave them to their fate. Whispering "so long suckers!" under your breath, as you walk out the door is just about OK. You've got no investment in that company anymore so why get involved when you've got nothing to gain and can only lose.
Windows came with my laptop so I paid for it but I didn't want it and never use it. I guess if you want it and use it but didn't pay for it - then all in all MS has nothing to complain about do they.
I live near Newquay in Cornwall, it's pretty rural here.
I don't quite understand why someone would think it's "no better than lamping", that's a very odd statement, each has it's adavantages and disadvantages but in general lamping is more efficient at controlling the fox population than hunting and (depending on the proficiency of the individual) not much more likely to leave foxes injured. Personally I think (skilled) lamping is a more sensible solution although hunting is slightly more humane (if less effective) - unskilled lamping I am opposed to, but (as I say) it depends on the individual and is thus very difficult to regulate.
As far as the "archaic excuse to ponce about on horses" - yes, most of the people at a hunt are poncing about on horses (and in my personal opinion, mostly pratts). I may be wrong but I get the impression you don't actually know that much about hunting (I assume you've never actually been hunting), so just for your information: as a general rule, at most hunts, only two or three people are actually hunting (the Master and one or two Whips) the rest are (generally) a load of dentist and stockbrokers who've got nothing better to do than ride along.
I suspect I move in much more diverse circles than you do. Perhaps you're only likely to come into contact with people of similar background to you and that is why people you consider "normal" tend to agree with you. I have good reason to believe my circle of acquaintances is more socially diverse than most other people's but I don't really want to go into the details of my personal life so you can either accept my word on that or not.
Anyway I'm tired of this discussion - I think I'm extremely unlikely to change your opinion (based I suspect, mostly on Disney films) so feel free to reply as you please, I won't respond further.
The EU certainly could have taken on Serbia alone - they just didn't want to, the UK defeated Argentina by themselves without too much trouble (from half way round the world).
Quite frankly the idea that the US could simply kick the ass of the combined militaries of the European nations without difficulty is rediculous.
You also fail to take into account the difference in character - there are nations in Europe you don't want to back into a corner. The Finns are a good example - look up some of their history and consider that even though you might win in the end it's going to make Vietnam look like a walk in the park.
And on top of all this (as I pointed out) the UK and France are nuclear. Your suggestion that the US would "win" a nuclear conflict is disturbing, I don't believe that in aftermath which side nominally "won" would have any relevance.
Sadly this is probably true. All my maths teachers (after infant school) automatically used radians and rarely mentioned degrees. But that was back when we had O'levels instead of GCSEs and A'levels were difficult. I assume it's all been dumbed down now and that's why you think radians is degree level maths. You can't do calculus using degrees.
As far as division goes, it's no more difficult to subdivide radians than anything else 1 degree is pi/180 radians after all, 90 degrees is pi/2, 60 degrees is pi/3 and so on - it's trivially easy to convert but why bother?
I didn't download all the pictures but how would you know if some of these were child porn without downloading every one. It seemed a normal enough list probably with a fair bit of ordinary porn - so one of them said "Young Teen" but that's common enough and doesn't usually indicate underage kids.
Slashdot Mirror
No they're NOT reading your damn mail.
Where I work (a government department) they have automatic filters which flag emails containing certain words or phrases, eg obscenity. When a message is flagged a copy gets sent to your line manager with an explanation of what the problem is.
Obviously you can't control the content of incoming messages but you'd get a bollocking for sending anything dodgy, keep at it long enough and eventually you'd get sacked. Personally I don't have a problem with the system - seems pretty reasonable to me.
They also log websites visited. You get one warning for visiting porn sites (and such) the second time you're looking for a new job. Once again I don't have a problem with this - only a moron would be looking at porn sites from work. I use the web from work for personal stuff occasionally and it's never been mentioned, I don't abuse it though.
So in conclusion - sometimes they do read your email.
No? From an outsiders perspective - we see US politicians complaining about how gambling is evil and foreign companies must not be allowed to corrupt US citizens. Then we think "hang on what about Las Vegas and Atlantic City where any US citizen can be corrupted to his hearts content". It begins to look like the problem is not gambling per se but the big business interests who think US gambling belongs to them alone.
So it's not a dishonest attempt to push an anti-american agenda - it's an entirely reasonable conclusion from looking at the facts.
I'd have thought it would be a good idea for each voter to be able to check their vote was correct but nobody elses.
You could take the name and DOB of the voter, plus a password entered at the time and do an md5 hash then publish the hashes on the web alongside the candidate voted for (in the clear). Anybody wanting to check would simply have to hash their name, DOB and password and could then look up the hash in the list and check the vote was recorded correctly.
Because the candidate voted for is in the clear the election results could be easily checked as you could total up the number of votes for each candidate yourself.
If large numbers of people started claiming their votes had been incorrectly registered they could give out their passwords so others could check that the votes weren't recorded the way they claim they voted.
So how does MS pay you? Is it per post or are you on a salary, maybe some kind of retainer? Do you get a deduction for a particularly obvious piece of astroturfing or does MS not care about quality. I guess if you can make a living out of it anybody can, how do I apply?
Cherenkov radiation happens where a particle, not a photon exceeds the speed of light (in some medium).
Photons do have mass, by virtue of the fact that they have energy and energy *is* mass. You'll often hear people saying that photons have no "rest" mass which is theoretically true but misleading since photons cannot exist at "rest".
It's far from clear exactly what Hahn built - various neutron guns certainly, but his final creation involving Americium, Thorium, Radium, Uranium and Aluminium and which was (apparently) giving off more and more radiation every day, could very well have met the dictionary definition of a "nuclear reactor".
And beside that; the dictionary definition of "nuclear reactor" is out of date and is based on the science of the Thirties. A neutron gun capable of creating nuclear reactions might very well be described as a "nuclear reactor" by a more reasonable definition. Words do change their meaning over time often by changes in usage but also by changes in context.
I too find it hard to believe in some global conspiracy, however I don't find it hard to believe that global warming happens (by chance) to advance the agendas of a wide variety of disparate organisations and whilst they may not be deliberately coordinating their actions this alignment of interest has much the same effect.
Fraudulent statistics!
This is commonplace for road safety campaigners to lie and decieve in this way - I presume they justify it to themselves on the grounds that they're doing it for the greater good or some such bullshit.
The implication is that these accidents are all drunk drivers mowing down pedestrians or crashing into station wagons full of children but in reality that's not the case at all. The statistics include *any* accident in which *anybody* involved had *any* blood alcohol (even if under the limit).
Obviously that will include many accidents where no normal (honest) preson would consider alcohol a contributary factor.
Those who can do, those who can't teach.
I use PDF for files that are just being passed on and not modified.
It's amazing how many people think pdf files can't be modified. I once corrected some errors in a document a colleague sent me and returned it. He came to see me, and appeared genuinely shocked that a PDF could be altered. He was horrified when I showed him how easily it was done.
Rough quote: "We'll that's the only reason I use PDFs instead of doc files!" . . . I'd assumed he was using PDFs because it's a proper exchange format. Silly assumption, it was so he could be "sure" it wouldn't be altered.
I tried to explain about MD5's and RSA signatures but his eyes glazed over, ho hum.
Couldn't agree more, trying to stir up trouble on your way out is childish and unprofessional, it shouldn't be about your ego. .
Never burn your bridges, if things go the way you expect you may get a phone call 12 months down the line offering a load of money to go back as a consultant and sort out the pile of shit they're in.
If the company goes under all your ex co-workers are going to be spreading out into other companies in the industry. It only takes one to see you being interviewed at some new company and say to their manager "Was that John Doe? I used to work with him at Universal Widgets, he was a bit of an asshole", word of mouth carries more weight than almost anything and you can kiss the new job goodbye.
If management is that bad start applying for other jobs and when you get one, work your notice, say a polite goodbye, and leave them to their fate. Whispering "so long suckers!" under your breath, as you walk out the door is just about OK. You've got no investment in that company anymore so why get involved when you've got nothing to gain and can only lose.
Windows came with my laptop so I paid for it but I didn't want it and never use it. I guess if you want it and use it but didn't pay for it - then all in all MS has nothing to complain about do they.
I live near Newquay in Cornwall, it's pretty rural here.
I don't quite understand why someone would think it's "no better than lamping", that's a very odd statement, each has it's adavantages and disadvantages but in general lamping is more efficient at controlling the fox population than hunting and (depending on the proficiency of the individual) not much more likely to leave foxes injured. Personally I think (skilled) lamping is a more sensible solution although hunting is slightly more humane (if less effective) - unskilled lamping I am opposed to, but (as I say) it depends on the individual and is thus very difficult to regulate.
As far as the "archaic excuse to ponce about on horses" - yes, most of the people at a hunt are poncing about on horses (and in my personal opinion, mostly pratts). I may be wrong but I get the impression you don't actually know that much about hunting (I assume you've never actually been hunting), so just for your information: as a general rule, at most hunts, only two or three people are actually hunting (the Master and one or two Whips) the rest are (generally) a load of dentist and stockbrokers who've got nothing better to do than ride along.
I suspect I move in much more diverse circles than you do. Perhaps you're only likely to come into contact with people of similar background to you and that is why people you consider "normal" tend to agree with you. I have good reason to believe my circle of acquaintances is more socially diverse than most other people's but I don't really want to go into the details of my personal life so you can either accept my word on that or not.
Anyway I'm tired of this discussion - I think I'm extremely unlikely to change your opinion (based I suspect, mostly on Disney films) so feel free to reply as you please, I won't respond further.
Not "all" obviously, but "most" definitely.
Total bollocks - support for hunting has nothing to do with class, it's much more of a town v country divide.
Some laws are good and some laws are bad. Sometimes the law is applied properly and sometimes it's not. Some judges are honest and some are corrupt.
For once an honest judge applied a good law properly - so today we're for the law, that's the righteous way.
The EU certainly could have taken on Serbia alone - they just didn't want to, the UK defeated Argentina by themselves without too much trouble (from half way round the world).
Quite frankly the idea that the US could simply kick the ass of the combined militaries of the European nations without difficulty is rediculous.
You also fail to take into account the difference in character - there are nations in Europe you don't want to back into a corner. The Finns are a good example - look up some of their history and consider that even though you might win in the end it's going to make Vietnam look like a walk in the park.
And on top of all this (as I pointed out) the UK and France are nuclear. Your suggestion that the US would "win" a nuclear conflict is disturbing, I don't believe that in aftermath which side nominally "won" would have any relevance.
Sorry, I thought Italy was one but apparently not.
There are three nuclear powers in Europe.
Sadly this is probably true. All my maths teachers (after infant school) automatically used radians and rarely mentioned degrees. But that was back when we had O'levels instead of GCSEs and A'levels were difficult. I assume it's all been dumbed down now and that's why you think radians is degree level maths. You can't do calculus using degrees.
As far as division goes, it's no more difficult to subdivide radians than anything else 1 degree is pi/180 radians after all, 90 degrees is pi/2, 60 degrees is pi/3 and so on - it's trivially easy to convert but why bother?
180 degrees is pi radians you dumb shit.
PGP didn't have to give the attacker a copy of the cyphertext and a copy of the key. A more retarded system is hard to imagine.
Go to browse torrents > other > pictures
I didn't download all the pictures but how would you know if some of these were child porn without downloading every one. It seemed a normal enough list probably with a fair bit of ordinary porn - so one of them said "Young Teen" but that's common enough and doesn't usually indicate underage kids.
I didnt even touch the subject of the "fully clothed kids"
That's true - and if I'd been replying to your post you might have a point. However to quote the post to which I did reply:
These are essentially images of kids with clothes on . . . but the postures provocative.
So I didn't bring this up (but why let the facts get in the way).