I am pretty sure I would be afraid of roaches crawling all over me. What I am unsure about is why that is a problem and why I would want to change that?
Not to mention its an ignorant statement. Many modern nuclear warheads have very little fallout. Disbursed in a body of water that large that material would likely be no more harmful than the left overs for an conventional explosive. If they can find and place an appropriate device it would be an excellent solution. Its own consequence being some sea life becomes a bit hard of hearing; which is a lot less of an issue than oil is currently.
You might not have CC info. One of things I like about Nintendo's store is they don't need to have anything other than your Wii Number and your IP. They don't even need to know your name. You can go over to Target or Wallmart and buy a Wii points card with cash. They might have some additional info attatched to those numbers like geographic region, year issued, but nothing that personally identifies you. If you want with Nintendo you really can be just a number.
You are operating under the assumption that you did not put more energy and resources into the manufacture of the new equipment or that it was going to be done anyway. Now if you really needed a new computer to do something you could not do before that holds up. You should always use the newer more energy efficent model. On the otherhand if that P4 was doing everything you needed it to do the truely green thing would probably have been to never create a market for that new computer and therefore avoid its constuction in the first place.
There is more to greeness than just carbon emmissions; people seem to have forgotten this! Losts of really awful chemicals get used to manufacture chips; computers are full plastics that don't biodegrade and are made from limited petrol resources. Oh and on the carbon front manufacture of the thing probably consumed quite a lot of engergy all told; possibly years worth of the delta between the efficencies of the two units; and released lots of carbon.
People whine and cry about efficent this but really most of it is feel good nonsense so people can create an excuse to make and have new toys. The disposability of our society is doing more harm to our enviornment than anything else. Which is not to say that when we do make new things we should not make them as efficent as can be. Its also true that old things which can be retrofited to improve them possibly should not be. Adding more insulation to an existing house probably makes all kinds of sense. Replacing something like an old boiler where almost everything can be recycled might be good too. Retering a perfectly servicable computer or automobile probably not so much.
Obama probably does not want to be the first President to detonate a nuclear explosion since Truman. Sadly he seems like the kind of person who is more concerned with image than practical results.
You can look at my posting history and see I am not Obama fan but lets stick to some facts shall we. We did plenty of testing thoughtout the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Obama would hardly be the first president to use a nuclear device since Truman. In fact if he does not do so he will be in the minority.
Hes definition of species was incomplete. Its the inability to mate outside a genetic group and produce fertile offspring. A mule is not fertile so horses and donkeys remain separate species.
I get really tired of your argument because it gets used a great deal by liberals and its plain wrong. They are not sustainable because they can't manufacture many of the goods they recycle today; nor can they purchase them in the world market place, because they don't produce sufficient surpluses of anything to trade for them. They only reason they have the infrastructure they do is because in the fifties and sixties a rival world power using proven unsustainable economic policies wanted politically friendly nation a stones throw from their greatest rivals shore. Their economy continues to be viable today in a large part because of all the goods and monetary wealth ex-patriots send to their families back there. If Cuba had had to survive today as closed system or even a system where their output had to have a equivalent economic value to what they receive; quality of life there would decline rapidly.
I guess it made us safer in the same way y2k made our software date handling better. It prompted us to finally close some of the biggest holes We certainly are still getting it wrong much of the time though and in many instances the best cure we have managed to implement is much worse than the disease.
So the argument being offered by or worthless President and his cohorts of blowhards on Capitol Hill appears to be something to the effect of:
The market should not move that fast because it means people are speculating on various herb behaviors and looking to turn quick profits by being on one side or the other of a brief out sized move; rather than speculating that a company has better ideas, management, and more desirable products then others and is more worthy of investment.
I have problems with this. Firstly nobody should have money in equities they can't afford to lose ever! Equities even by the definition Obama and friends seem to like are for growth; and growth almost always implies risk. Money you can't afford to lose belongs on deposit at an insured bank. The rest in dept instruments like bonds, which offer varying degrees of growth and risk and its usually possible to quantify the downside unless the government steps in and gives you a screw job. Remember the real criminals, the ones truly breaking the rules on Wall Street are in Washington. Equity investing is a gamble always has been and was always supposed to be.
Automated trading does not do anything humans did not do on paper before; going all the way back to when traders shouted at each other on soap boxed from the street corner swapping the certificates right there on the spot. It just does it much faster. People did program these rules you know the computers are just following them. The rules also make sense. If stock you own is tanking in way that it appears its headed for zero you very well might want to unload it while you can. This happened in the old days too; there are plenty of wood cuts depicting the frenzy on the corner of Wall Street.
The market can shed eight or ten percent and gain it all back in the course of a few weeks; most don't complain when that happens.
You probably only need to keep the house key and the car key one your person; in addition to the corresponding activity key.
You might for instance keep the keys to the girlfriends place in the glove box of your car along with the keys to the office. Put them on separate light weight rings you can quickly join to the main ring that holds your house and car key. When you return the car remove the office or girlfriend keys and return them to the glove box. Make sure you stay in the habit of always doing this right away so you never forget and those keys are always where they should be.
The mailbox key could be hung next to the front door of your place (on the inside duh), so you just grab it when you step out to get the mail,same with the bike keys.
Probably because that other source of engergy is going to have problems as well.
*What will all those offshore windmills do to migrant birds? *What imact will vast arrays of dark solar panels of large areas of desert to the plants total reflected heat? *What will do with all the radio active material we decided not to reprocess? *What will all those hydro-electric installations do to fish, what about errorsion and silt?
We are going to have to do something which poses risks. Unless we want to drastically recude our population and go back to a life of hunting and gatehering and even that turned out to be not so good if you happend to be a Mamoth or whale.
Yes there are plenty of tools that use the reflector; which is thwarted by the obfuscator. Even if you can reflect the code you get from stripped libs wont have the original symbols so its pretty hard to work with.
Kinda like when you generate assembly from machine code. Oh sure you get the code but you are going have to go over it line by line to understand anything.
I think the supporters of offshore drilling, at least the intelligent ones, and I am not saying the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd was knew there would be serious accident eventually. Its just a common sense no matter what precautions you take if you engage in a fundamentally dangerous activity often enough eventually the odds will catch up with. Skiers break bones, drivers have accidents, nuclear reactors melt down or leak, coal mines collapse, drillers have spills, these things happen.
We should do our best to learn what went wrong and our best to avoid it in the future but we must accept that this is a consequence of the life style we enjoy the rest of the time. Experience with other major spills shows us the environment will recover eventually. This is a tragedy and its going to impact some of us more than others. I bet though for every Gulf Coast fisherman or tour operator that gets put out of business there was AT LEAST one who was/is making a comfortable living in oil and gas. I think you also have to consider all the good in terms of quality of life cheap petroleum and energy in general has done our nation as whole and will no doubt continue to do. When you look at this in broad objective terms its hard for me to conclude it was not worth it. Maybe when all the consequences are known I will change my mind but for now lets be sensible and keep in mind the old saying "no pain no gain."
I am sorry but those "academics" allowed themselves to become political and the consequences are they now get treated like politicians.
No matter if you think the climate change theories have merit or if you are a "denier" you must admit there has been a great deal of poor scientific practices and fraud where climate change research has been concerned. Its provable that lots of data is coming from stations to close to man made radiators by standards set and then ignored by the same researchers. Some of the climate-gate allegations were true; even though most of the worst were not; and the hockey stick theory was shown to be total bunk and the people who put it forward knew it.
The scientists and academics allowed themselves to become political; and now the existing body politic no longer sees them as off limits and will subject them to their rules. Welcome to the dark ages 2.0 regardless of who brought it on.
I agree it remains to be seen as to what degree this will or will not be enforceable. This is a sort of reverse tivoization though if it works. Sure we sold you the hardware and you have the right to do anything you want with it; never mind we control the software and the hardware is worse than useless with out it. I think if we are going to preserve the concepts of first sale, property ownership in general, and a host of other things we commonly understand copyright and patent protection for at the very least certain classes of software are going to have to go..
Or you know maybe they were trying to say that as those technologies become REALLY efficient you could do a great deal of driving on very LITTLE input energy, and they assumed you were sophisticated enough to understand perpetual motion was hyperbole.
just like best buy doesn't make any money on the stuff they sell
Are you kidding? I work at a computer products reseller so I know what cost is on quite a bit of catalog overlap with Best Buy. They get MUST be getting 8% plus margin on a cost plus basis for the items they mark up the least; on certain things like netbooks they are getting 100%. Now what is left of that after shrink and distribution I don't know but they make money on strait sales.
I take issue with your assertion that there needs to exist a direct path to monetize an idea or people won't bother thinking them up. If an idea is so good than it must be useful in some way and the person who thought up such a clever idea should also be clever enough to put it work. Patents as originally conceived might have allowed a new level of specialization. It might have freed some people to be "idea (wo)men" freeing them from also having to be business people or even engineers. It has not worked out that way though. Most patents end up transferred to some corporate entity which does something evolutionary rather than revolutionary with them. They make a very minimal effort to assert the IP rights just they can retain them, even while they know they are being infringed so they can be used to essential blackmail their competitors down the line rather than enjoy a temporary monopoly up front as was the original concept.
Oh and that specialization has not worked out either, if you do come up with a really good idea you absolutely have to put as much effort into marketing it effectively as it took to come up with it. So while patents might have been a good idea on paper so to speak in practice I think they pretty much fail.
I am not sure you can just make that statement. You are going to have a few million gallons of putrefying bacteria in that same environment when the food runs out. That could be plenty unpleasant. When its all said and done that bacteria may or may not have turned the oil into something more easily metabolized by other flora and fonna that was already there. You will then have subsequent explosions in some populations and declines in others. The entire ecology could be way out of balance for a very long time. The oil we know will kill a great deal of the things we care about; but past spills tell us enough will survive that eventually there will be recovery. The bacteria might do any number of things.
CISCO PIX devices running 6.3 and prior with DNS inspect on will have this issue. Most people by now have turned it off because plenty of other DNS queries already execed that limit.
The language doesn't matter a ton; intro CS should really be about basic algorithms with the language really just being a vehicle for that.
No intro to Software design should be about basic algorithms CS should be about computer architecture and really basic algorithms like binary addition.
It does not make that distinction because it does not have to do so. The document its a larger part of already does. The Constitution is established to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. Those would have been citizens of the United States at the time under the Articles of Confederation. I highly doubt ourselves would have been understood by the framers to include people in other countries, or visitors; especially undocumented uninvited ones.
To what degree the Forth Amendment places restrictions on the government from acting those are still enforce because its still the government but where it says things like The right of the people should not be applicable because the people are understood to be citizens in the larger context.
Personally I feel the issue here is the Federal law. I don't want to live in a society where I might get stopped at every turn and asked for papers. The law is bad. The state is simply tasking its agents with enforcing the existing Federal law. Much as I don't like the law its worse if its selectively enforced. Selective enfocement means bad laws stay on the books and are used to hassel people at the governments whim rather than to ensure society functions in an orderly way; selective enforcement is how tryanny starts.
Once inside this county everyone should be premitted to move about as freely as possible without government hinderence and inspection. What should be done is prevent undesireables from getting into the US in the first place. The Constitution tasks the Federal government with providing for the common defense. Rather than goosestepping around *astan perhaps our vast military resources could be put into defending our boards from anyone and I mean anyone common field hands and terrorists alike who decide to walk North from Mexico. The Legal requirements background check delays to move or even visit here should be greater as well. If you keep the threats out in the first place you don't try invasive and usually unsuccessful dragnet type operations.
Slashdot Mirror
I am pretty sure I would be afraid of roaches crawling all over me. What I am unsure about is why that is a problem and why I would want to change that?
Not to mention its an ignorant statement. Many modern nuclear warheads have very little fallout. Disbursed in a body of water that large that material would likely be no more harmful than the left overs for an conventional explosive. If they can find and place an appropriate device it would be an excellent solution. Its own consequence being some sea life becomes a bit hard of hearing; which is a lot less of an issue than oil is currently.
You might not have CC info. One of things I like about Nintendo's store is they don't need to have anything other than your Wii Number and your IP. They don't even need to know your name. You can go over to Target or Wallmart and buy a Wii points card with cash. They might have some additional info attatched to those numbers like geographic region, year issued, but nothing that personally identifies you. If you want with Nintendo you really can be just a number.
You are operating under the assumption that you did not put more energy and resources into the manufacture of the new equipment or that it was going to be done anyway. Now if you really needed a new computer to do something you could not do before that holds up. You should always use the newer more energy efficent model. On the otherhand if that P4 was doing everything you needed it to do the truely green thing would probably have been to never create a market for that new computer and therefore avoid its constuction in the first place.
There is more to greeness than just carbon emmissions; people seem to have forgotten this! Losts of really awful chemicals get used to manufacture chips; computers are full plastics that don't biodegrade and are made from limited petrol resources. Oh and on the carbon front manufacture of the thing probably consumed quite a lot of engergy all told; possibly years worth of the delta between the efficencies of the two units; and released lots of carbon.
People whine and cry about efficent this but really most of it is feel good nonsense so people can create an excuse to make and have new toys. The disposability of our society is doing more harm to our enviornment than anything else. Which is not to say that when we do make new things we should not make them as efficent as can be. Its also true that old things which can be retrofited to improve them possibly should not be. Adding more insulation to an existing house probably makes all kinds of sense. Replacing something like an old boiler where almost everything can be recycled might be good too. Retering a perfectly servicable computer or automobile probably not so much.
Obama probably does not want to be the first President to detonate a nuclear explosion since Truman. Sadly he seems like the kind of person who is more concerned with image than practical results.
You can look at my posting history and see I am not Obama fan but lets stick to some facts shall we. We did plenty of testing thoughtout the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Obama would hardly be the first president to use a nuclear device since Truman. In fact if he does not do so he will be in the minority.
I thought he was Mr."I gotta have my Black Berry".
Seriously this guy can't even avoid hypocracy and double talk on the most basic subjects. You just can't take anything he says seriously.
Hes definition of species was incomplete. Its the inability to mate outside a genetic group and produce fertile offspring. A mule is not fertile so horses and donkeys remain separate species.
I get really tired of your argument because it gets used a great deal by liberals and its plain wrong. They are not sustainable because they can't manufacture many of the goods they recycle today; nor can they purchase them in the world market place, because they don't produce sufficient surpluses of anything to trade for them. They only reason they have the infrastructure they do is because in the fifties and sixties a rival world power using proven unsustainable economic policies wanted politically friendly nation a stones throw from their greatest rivals shore.
Their economy continues to be viable today in a large part because of all the goods and monetary wealth ex-patriots send to their families back there. If Cuba had had to survive today as closed system or even a system where their output had to have a equivalent economic value to what they receive; quality of life there would decline rapidly.
I guess it made us safer in the same way y2k made our software date handling better. It prompted us to finally close some of the biggest holes We certainly are still getting it wrong much of the time though and in many instances the best cure we have managed to implement is much worse than the disease.
So the argument being offered by or worthless President and his cohorts of blowhards on Capitol Hill appears to be something to the effect of:
The market should not move that fast because it means people are speculating on various herb behaviors and looking to turn quick profits by being on one side or the other of a brief out sized move; rather than speculating that a company has better ideas, management, and more desirable products then others and is more worthy of investment.
I have problems with this. Firstly nobody should have money in equities they can't afford to lose ever! Equities even by the definition Obama and friends seem to like are for growth; and growth almost always implies risk. Money you can't afford to lose belongs on deposit at an insured bank. The rest in dept instruments like bonds, which offer varying degrees of growth and risk and its usually possible to quantify the downside unless the government steps in and gives you a screw job. Remember the real criminals, the ones truly breaking the rules on Wall Street are in Washington. Equity investing is a gamble always has been and was always supposed to be.
Automated trading does not do anything humans did not do on paper before; going all the way back to when traders shouted at each other on soap boxed from the street corner swapping the certificates right there on the spot. It just does it much faster. People did program these rules you know the computers are just following them. The rules also make sense. If stock you own is tanking in way that it appears its headed for zero you very well might want to unload it while you can. This happened in the old days too; there are plenty of wood cuts depicting the frenzy on the corner of Wall Street.
The market can shed eight or ten percent and gain it all back in the course of a few weeks; most don't complain when that happens.
You probably only need to keep the house key and the car key one your person; in addition to the corresponding activity key.
You might for instance keep the keys to the girlfriends place in the glove box of your car along with the keys to the office. Put them on separate light weight rings you can quickly join to the main ring that holds your house and car key. When you return the car remove the office or girlfriend keys and return them to the glove box. Make sure you stay in the habit of always doing this right away so you never forget and those keys are always where they should be.
The mailbox key could be hung next to the front door of your place (on the inside duh), so you just grab it when you step out to get the mail,same with the bike keys.
Probably because that other source of engergy is going to have problems as well.
*What will all those offshore windmills do to migrant birds?
*What imact will vast arrays of dark solar panels of large areas of desert to the plants total reflected heat?
*What will do with all the radio active material we decided not to reprocess?
*What will all those hydro-electric installations do to fish, what about errorsion and silt?
We are going to have to do something which poses risks. Unless we want to drastically recude our population and go back to a life of hunting and gatehering and even that turned out to be not so good if you happend to be a Mamoth or whale.
Yes there are plenty of tools that use the reflector; which is thwarted by the obfuscator. Even if you can reflect the code you get from stripped libs wont have the original symbols so its pretty hard to work with.
Kinda like when you generate assembly from machine code. Oh sure you get the code but you are going have to go over it line by line to understand anything.
I think the supporters of offshore drilling, at least the intelligent ones, and I am not saying the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd was knew there would be serious accident eventually. Its just a common sense no matter what precautions you take if you engage in a fundamentally dangerous activity often enough eventually the odds will catch up with. Skiers break bones, drivers have accidents, nuclear reactors melt down or leak, coal mines collapse, drillers have spills, these things happen.
We should do our best to learn what went wrong and our best to avoid it in the future but we must accept that this is a consequence of the life style we enjoy the rest of the time. Experience with other major spills shows us the environment will recover eventually. This is a tragedy and its going to impact some of us more than others. I bet though for every Gulf Coast fisherman or tour operator that gets put out of business there was AT LEAST one who was/is making a comfortable living in oil and gas. I think you also have to consider all the good in terms of quality of life cheap petroleum and energy in general has done our nation as whole and will no doubt continue to do. When you look at this in broad objective terms its hard for me to conclude it was not worth it. Maybe when all the consequences are known I will change my mind but for now lets be sensible and keep in mind the old saying "no pain no gain."
I am sorry but those "academics" allowed themselves to become political and the consequences are they now get treated like politicians.
No matter if you think the climate change theories have merit or if you are a "denier" you must admit there has been a great deal of poor scientific practices and fraud where climate change research has been concerned. Its provable that lots of data is coming from stations to close to man made radiators by standards set and then ignored by the same researchers. Some of the climate-gate allegations were true; even though most of the worst were not; and the hockey stick theory was shown to be total bunk and the people who put it forward knew it.
The scientists and academics allowed themselves to become political; and now the existing body politic no longer sees them as off limits and will subject them to their rules. Welcome to the dark ages 2.0 regardless of who brought it on.
I agree it remains to be seen as to what degree this will or will not be enforceable. This is a sort of reverse tivoization though if it works. Sure we sold you the hardware and you have the right to do anything you want with it; never mind we control the software and the hardware is worse than useless with out it. I think if we are going to preserve the concepts of first sale, property ownership in general, and a host of other things we commonly understand copyright and patent protection for at the very least certain classes of software are going to have to go..
Or you know maybe they were trying to say that as those technologies become REALLY efficient you could do a great deal of driving on very LITTLE input energy, and they assumed you were sophisticated enough to understand perpetual motion was hyperbole.
just like best buy doesn't make any money on the stuff they sell
Are you kidding? I work at a computer products reseller so I know what cost is on quite a bit of catalog overlap with Best Buy. They get MUST be getting 8% plus margin on a cost plus basis for the items they mark up the least; on certain things like netbooks they are getting 100%. Now what is left of that after shrink and distribution I don't know but they make money on strait sales.
I take issue with your assertion that there needs to exist a direct path to monetize an idea or people won't bother thinking them up. If an idea is so good than it must be useful in some way and the person who thought up such a clever idea should also be clever enough to put it work. Patents as originally conceived might have allowed a new level of specialization. It might have freed some people to be "idea (wo)men" freeing them from also having to be business people or even engineers. It has not worked out that way though. Most patents end up transferred to some corporate entity which does something evolutionary rather than revolutionary with them. They make a very minimal effort to assert the IP rights just they can retain them, even while they know they are being infringed so they can be used to essential blackmail their competitors down the line rather than enjoy a temporary monopoly up front as was the original concept.
Oh and that specialization has not worked out either, if you do come up with a really good idea you absolutely have to put as much effort into marketing it effectively as it took to come up with it. So while patents might have been a good idea on paper so to speak in practice I think they pretty much fail.
I am not sure you can just make that statement. You are going to have a few million gallons of putrefying bacteria in that same environment when the food runs out. That could be plenty unpleasant. When its all said and done that bacteria may or may not have turned the oil into something more easily metabolized by other flora and fonna that was already there. You will then have subsequent explosions in some populations and declines in others. The entire ecology could be way out of balance for a very long time. The oil we know will kill a great deal of the things we care about; but past spills tell us enough will survive that eventually there will be recovery. The bacteria might do any number of things.
CISCO PIX devices running 6.3 and prior with DNS inspect on will have this issue. Most people by now have turned it off because plenty of other DNS queries already execed that limit.
The language doesn't matter a ton; intro CS should really be about basic algorithms with the language really just being a vehicle for that.
No intro to Software design should be about basic algorithms CS should be about computer architecture and really basic algorithms like binary addition.
Pre WWW history sure but GOPHER was a protocol for use on the internet.
It does not make that distinction because it does not have to do so. The document its a larger part of already does. The Constitution is established to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity . Those would have been citizens of the United States at the time under the Articles of Confederation. I highly doubt ourselves would have been understood by the framers to include people in other countries, or visitors; especially undocumented uninvited ones.
To what degree the Forth Amendment places restrictions on the government from acting those are still enforce because its still the government but where it says things like The right of the people should not be applicable because the people are understood to be citizens in the larger context.
Personally I feel the issue here is the Federal law. I don't want to live in a society where I might get stopped at every turn and asked for papers. The law is bad. The state is simply tasking its agents with enforcing the existing Federal law. Much as I don't like the law its worse if its selectively enforced. Selective enfocement means bad laws stay on the books and are used to hassel people at the governments whim rather than to ensure society functions in an orderly way; selective enforcement is how tryanny starts.
Once inside this county everyone should be premitted to move about as freely as possible without government hinderence and inspection. What should be done is prevent undesireables from getting into the US in the first place. The Constitution tasks the Federal government with providing for the common defense. Rather than goosestepping around *astan perhaps our vast military resources could be put into defending our boards from anyone and I mean anyone common field hands and terrorists alike who decide to walk North from Mexico. The Legal requirements background check delays to move or even visit here should be greater as well. If you keep the threats out in the first place you don't try invasive and usually unsuccessful dragnet type operations.