Global Warming (whether caused by human activity or natural cycles or whatever) is by no means an existential threat to humanity. If worst case scenarios come true it will have a massive socio-political impact as large areas of attractive coastal areas may be threatened and fertile vs un-fertile land (deserts etc) will move around, but that's rather an inconvenience compared to a large meteor impact or some of the other scenarios mentioned in the article.
That's not to say that nobody should be concerned about global warming, but it's not what the Lifeboat Foundation is.
If you're late on your cell phone bill can the cell phone company robo-call you repeatedly and rack up a higher bill. Now that's a smart business plan!!
Because their P/E is about 60% higher than the average in their industry? And because they are sing increased competition in their core business areas. I wouldn't buy their stock at this price. That said, their net results are extremely impressive so I don't think they are "extremely" inflated.
As for online music sales... Apple has sold 50 million tracks, and the online music industry is growing logarithmically. It may be hard to convince them that their product is not "reasonably priced."
If they're only growing logarithmically then they really should worry. I'm guessing you meant exponentially:-)
Anyone got any suggestions for something similar for the modern PC? I think sourceforge might be a little intimidating, but I'd like to have her thinking about how she can program the computer to write software for herself rather than just using existing apps all the time or surfing the web.
Take a look at http://www.colobot.com/. It's a game, but allows you to write and run your own code via a simple editor and interpreter to control the gadgets in the game.
You'd almost think so... And it's even more annoying given the fact that the Discovery successfully touced down almost an hour ago. You'd think that's stuff that matters but somehow Slashdot is the only online news outlet outside the great firewall of China that missed it.
On the contrary IMHO. What has been getting tedious is that/. has lately become a mirror of major online news sites (CNN etc). If all the other news outlets carried the story of Discovery why on Earth (pun intended) should/. carry it too?
/. is (was?) "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters", not "News for Everyone, Stuff that Just Happened".
Let's keep the tech-related news that don't get mainstream coverage here on/. but let the major outlets handle the news of the moment.
Bush has never endorsed the teaching of Intelligent Design as a science rather than religion. That's simply a fabrication intended to karma bait the Bush haters. Congratulations on your success -- but you are still a troll.
I'll just post these two links. If you bothered you could find many more yourself:
'd love to try this, but I can't seem to find a complete version of the recipe. Can anyone who speaks Danish tell me if a more complete recipe is availble on the site? Cheers!
No, the Danish recipe is as lacking in detail as the English one. I'm guessing that it would be about 10 ltr of water since you are supposed to end up with 10 ltr of malt-mixture and you actually filter out all the barley itself.
No, the bank uses your username to get you the image and your own personal sitekey text. You only enter the password once you're happy with the sitekey. If your machine is recognized (cookie) you only need to enter your username to get the sitekey. If not, you are asked to answer the 3 personal questions.
For a phisher to break this he would either need to know the 3 questions or he would have to read your BofA-site-only cookies (don't know if such an exploit is possible) and use your username and cookie to retrieve the sitekey from BofA.
Hmm... So the attacker merely has to get your cookies to get identified as a "safe" machine? This does not inspire me with a great deal of confidence...
Theoretically, if the phishing site could use an exploit to read cookies it was not authorized to read (is there such an exploit currently?), then it may be able to use your username (that you entered on the fake site) and your cookies, to transact with the real BofA site to get your sitekey, which it could then download and present on a dynamic page.
Still, this is a much more complex setup than just a logon screen and it depends on a vulnerability that may not exist.
I guess I must be in a test-area (Atlanta, GA) because I got the option to set this up a couple of weeks ago.
It works like this
When you activate it you select a personal image (from hundreds offered) and a text (that you enter) to be your personal sitekey.
When entering the BofA site you enter your username as usual, then click the "Log in via sitekey".
Based on your username they check if they recognize the computer you're on. If they do, they display your personal sitekey (image and test), if not then you will have to answer the 2 or 3 personal questions in order to see your sitekey. You have the option to state whether this computer should be "remembered" (probably a cookie) in the future.
If you recognize your sitekey then you enter your password and log on.
Really works great and I don't see any way a phisher can get around it. Of course they could try a "sorry, our site key authentication system is down at the moment, do you want to log in without sitekey" and some may fall for this, but you can only protect people so much.
But the "average Joe" wouldn't walk in and steal your stuff. Keeping an honest person honest is like keeping a tall person tall.
But the world isn't black and white like that with honest people and thieves and nothing in between.
Especially with electronic material such as software and content where "stealing" doesn't "feel" so wrong as pocketing something in a store (I mean it's just bits right).
If Adobe allowed you to download a full non-expiring version of PhotoShop and just put a notice on there "Remember to send us $499 if you keep using this product after 30 days to keep your copy legal" don't you think the number of illegal copies would be much higher than it is today?
So what they're doing is making it sufficiently cumbersome for the average Joe to get around the DRM that they just decide to spend the $1 on the song or the $20 on the DVD or whatever instead.
Based on your style you should probably use some self-control yourself maybe?
Yeah! Screw self-control and moderation!
Don't think I ever said anything like that.
People should be able to do whatever they want at any age!
Don't think I ever said anything like that. However teens are what they are and you cannot control them 100% of the time so encouraging safe behaviour is still a common-sense approach. There's nothing wrong with suggesting or even recommending abstinence, but don't think that guarantees anything
Condoms are 100% effective against pregnancy and STDs!
Very close to, yes, if used properly, and definitely about 99.9% more effective than not using them.
14-17 year olds are all emotionally ready for sex!
Don't think I ever said anything like that. Some are, most are not. But most of them will experiment with it one way or another regardless. So again, even if you tell them "don't" at least let them know how to be safe instead of turning the blind eye
You're a fucking idiot.
Oh well in that case I guess you must be right. Such a convincing argument.
Just because something hapens to be in line with a relgious belief doesn't make it a bad idea. The problem is only telling children (yes, they are children) to abstain, and not explaining sexuality and sex to them and the pros and cons of each method in addition to promoting abstinence as the best method.
Ah - some common sense. Yes, I mostly agree. Present all the options and the pros and cons. Abstinence is certainly ultimately the safest option ("best", well that depends on age and circumstances I think and not some "wait until your married" dogma).
Frankly I've always found people who couldn't control their own behavior and blame it on hormones to be rather pathetic.
When I said "hormones" I referred to typical teenage behaviour and curiosity in general.
Well, maybe next time you don't have to post as an AC and that may help you to moderate your style a bit.
To be fair, there is a good deal more teen pregnancy going on than teen toasting-cops-with flamethrowersancy...
Because teens will be teens and this whole push to preach abstinence instead of safe sex will never work. The religious right driven push to make teen/pre-marital sex a sin and punish parents who try to make their kids safe (the lawsuit against the mother who provided condoms for her son) is backfiring greatly and will lead to many more teen pregnancies and STDs.
Talk to your kids, make them behave responsibly as much as you can but don't expect the majority of 14-17 year olds to not want to explore sexuality once their hormones start pumping.
So the "This is America, violence is OK but sex is not" statement simply isn't true when it comes to most parents. It's used by politicians who are trying to appeal to a specific demographic.
I disagree. True, there are still a lot of commonsense parents luckily, but as a "trend" or "national average" the US is much more body-phobic and violence-accepting than European nations (I've lived 28 years in Europe and 10 in the US).
Couple of examples:
The amount of violence accepted in common TV shows vs. the outrage over Janet Jacksons exposed nipple
An image on CNN.com of naked abused iraqi prisoners leashed and piled up with their butts blurred so as not to offend! Apparently the behaviour displayed is not so bad as a bit of nudity.
It's not a matter of parents directly stating that violence is ok and nudity/sex/the body is bad but that is the signal being sent by what is accepted and what is not.
...keep inappropriate content out of the hands of young people...
Let's see:
* Killing pedestrians by running them over: Appropriate for children.
* Shooting people in the head: No problem, kids are ok with that
* Toasting cops with flamethrowers: Hey, that's cool, go on my little angel dear.
* Nudity and pornographical images: What is this, I'll call my congress[wo]man immediately. They need to stop this filth from getting to innocent kids.
Somebody really need to get their priorities right! Not to mention it already has an M-rating as someone already mentioned in another post.
Yes - anywhere in the Titusville area should be a good choice.
Also, I agree with the other poster that KSC isn't that much of an attraction anymore (unless they have changed rules again). I went there several years ago and it was neat: got to go to the launchpad area, Saturn-V display and the building where they are building parts for the ISS. Then I went again post-9/11 and now the only stop was the Saturn-V area. Instead of the two cancelled stops they threw in an Imax movie:-(
In their defence, I assume English is not this person's first language.)
Oh that's hilarious. Putting someone down for making spelling mistakes and then making your very own ones with "defence" and using plural "their" with singular "person".
Btw - I really did think the OP had an interesting viewpoint. May not be true, but it certainly could be.
Slashdot Mirror
Blasphemy - Earth going around the Sun. It's the other way around you heretic. Earth is the Center afterall!
Global Warming (whether caused by human activity or natural cycles or whatever) is by no means an existential threat to humanity. If worst case scenarios come true it will have a massive socio-political impact as large areas of attractive coastal areas may be threatened and fertile vs un-fertile land (deserts etc) will move around, but that's rather an inconvenience compared to a large meteor impact or some of the other scenarios mentioned in the article. That's not to say that nobody should be concerned about global warming, but it's not what the Lifeboat Foundation is.
Another interesting one. Looks like a structure of 15 mile salt water pools or something: http://maps.google.com/maps?&hl=en&ll=40.431269,90.784149&spn=0.87493,1.370544&sll=40.452172,90.788269&sspn=0.437332,0.685272&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=11
If you're late on your cell phone bill can the cell phone company robo-call you repeatedly and rack up a higher bill. Now that's a smart business plan!!
Umm, because they are adding 4x30 minutes = 2 hours. They are cutting away a full day ~= 6 hours for a net loss of about 4 hours or ~13%.
6. Profit ???
Because their P/E is about 60% higher than the average in their industry? And because they are sing increased competition in their core business areas. I wouldn't buy their stock at this price. That said, their net results are extremely impressive so I don't think they are "extremely" inflated.
Of course if it was me you cheated, I'd send Guido over to break your knee caps making the legality of your cheating a moot point :-)
Some people just can't recognize a joke when they see one ...
If they're only growing logarithmically then they really should worry. I'm guessing you meant exponentially :-)
Take a look at http://www.colobot.com/. It's a game, but allows you to write and run your own code via a simple editor and interpreter to control the gadgets in the game.
On the contrary IMHO. What has been getting tedious is that /. has lately become a mirror of major online news sites (CNN etc). If all the other news outlets carried the story of Discovery why on Earth (pun intended) should /. carry it too?
/. is (was?) "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters", not "News for Everyone, Stuff that Just Happened".
Let's keep the tech-related news that don't get mainstream coverage here on /. but let the major outlets handle the news of the moment.
I'll just post these two links. If you bothered you could find many more yourself:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2005/08/02/AR2005080201686.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/politics/03bush. html
Guess you missed the humor in the parent post :-(
No, the Danish recipe is as lacking in detail as the English one. I'm guessing that it would be about 10 ltr of water since you are supposed to end up with 10 ltr of malt-mixture and you actually filter out all the barley itself.
For a phisher to break this he would either need to know the 3 questions or he would have to read your BofA-site-only cookies (don't know if such an exploit is possible) and use your username and cookie to retrieve the sitekey from BofA.
Theoretically, if the phishing site could use an exploit to read cookies it was not authorized to read (is there such an exploit currently?), then it may be able to use your username (that you entered on the fake site) and your cookies, to transact with the real BofA site to get your sitekey, which it could then download and present on a dynamic page.
Still, this is a much more complex setup than just a logon screen and it depends on a vulnerability that may not exist.
It works like this
Really works great and I don't see any way a phisher can get around it. Of course they could try a "sorry, our site key authentication system is down at the moment, do you want to log in without sitekey" and some may fall for this, but you can only protect people so much.
But the world isn't black and white like that with honest people and thieves and nothing in between.
Especially with electronic material such as software and content where "stealing" doesn't "feel" so wrong as pocketing something in a store (I mean it's just bits right).
If Adobe allowed you to download a full non-expiring version of PhotoShop and just put a notice on there "Remember to send us $499 if you keep using this product after 30 days to keep your copy legal" don't you think the number of illegal copies would be much higher than it is today?
So what they're doing is making it sufficiently cumbersome for the average Joe to get around the DRM that they just decide to spend the $1 on the song or the $20 on the DVD or whatever instead.
Yeah! Screw self-control and moderation!
Don't think I ever said anything like that.
People should be able to do whatever they want at any age!
Don't think I ever said anything like that. However teens are what they are and you cannot control them 100% of the time so encouraging safe behaviour is still a common-sense approach. There's nothing wrong with suggesting or even recommending abstinence, but don't think that guarantees anything
Condoms are 100% effective against pregnancy and STDs!
Very close to, yes, if used properly, and definitely about 99.9% more effective than not using them.
14-17 year olds are all emotionally ready for sex!
Don't think I ever said anything like that. Some are, most are not. But most of them will experiment with it one way or another regardless. So again, even if you tell them "don't" at least let them know how to be safe instead of turning the blind eye
You're a fucking idiot.
Oh well in that case I guess you must be right. Such a convincing argument.
Just because something hapens to be in line with a relgious belief doesn't make it a bad idea. The problem is only telling children (yes, they are children) to abstain, and not explaining sexuality and sex to them and the pros and cons of each method in addition to promoting abstinence as the best method.
Ah - some common sense. Yes, I mostly agree. Present all the options and the pros and cons. Abstinence is certainly ultimately the safest option ("best", well that depends on age and circumstances I think and not some "wait until your married" dogma).
Frankly I've always found people who couldn't control their own behavior and blame it on hormones to be rather pathetic.
When I said "hormones" I referred to typical teenage behaviour and curiosity in general.
Well, maybe next time you don't have to post as an AC and that may help you to moderate your style a bit.
Because teens will be teens and this whole push to preach abstinence instead of safe sex will never work. The religious right driven push to make teen/pre-marital sex a sin and punish parents who try to make their kids safe (the lawsuit against the mother who provided condoms for her son) is backfiring greatly and will lead to many more teen pregnancies and STDs.
Talk to your kids, make them behave responsibly as much as you can but don't expect the majority of 14-17 year olds to not want to explore sexuality once their hormones start pumping.
I disagree. True, there are still a lot of commonsense parents luckily, but as a "trend" or "national average" the US is much more body-phobic and violence-accepting than European nations (I've lived 28 years in Europe and 10 in the US).
Couple of examples:
It's not a matter of parents directly stating that violence is ok and nudity/sex/the body is bad but that is the signal being sent by what is accepted and what is not.
Let's see:
* Killing pedestrians by running them over: Appropriate for children.
* Shooting people in the head: No problem, kids are ok with that
* Toasting cops with flamethrowers: Hey, that's cool, go on my little angel dear.
* Nudity and pornographical images: What is this, I'll call my congress[wo]man immediately. They need to stop this filth from getting to innocent kids.
Somebody really need to get their priorities right! Not to mention it already has an M-rating as someone already mentioned in another post.
Also, I agree with the other poster that KSC isn't that much of an attraction anymore (unless they have changed rules again). I went there several years ago and it was neat: got to go to the launchpad area, Saturn-V display and the building where they are building parts for the ISS. Then I went again post-9/11 and now the only stop was the Saturn-V area. Instead of the two cancelled stops they threw in an Imax movie :-(
Oh that's hilarious. Putting someone down for making spelling mistakes and then making your very own ones with "defence" and using plural "their" with singular "person".
Btw - I really did think the OP had an interesting viewpoint. May not be true, but it certainly could be.