There is a very simple explanation for that: It is Relative speed, not absolute speed that is the problem. If everyone is going 90 MPH, they are safer than almost everyone going 75 and granny going 35.
I live in the mountains, and what really annoys me is people who brake going uphill, slower than the speed limit, on a 2-lane road. Yes, there are curves. Yes, there are rocks everywhere, it is the rocky mountains. That doesn't mean you are going to die if you go the speed limit, or even faster. Especially in summer when it is 90 degrees outside.
When going downhill I usually try to let my engine slow me down when necessary, but I have this incredibly mysterious thing called a manual transmission, which lets me do very cool things to my speed and engine RPM. (Hint, why do you think that on Pikes Peak there are signs "hot brakes fail", and they suggest you use a lower gear instead of standing on the brakes?) Some of this is different in a hybrid with regenerative braking, true.
Just because you have an image of a nude child doesn't mean that the child was molested. Or are children not allowed to be photographed in the nude? Better let this guy know about that. What about the children that posted for the Cherubs in that painting?
Unless there is a very clear reason why something should be illegal, stuff should be legal. Or to you want to start writing the laws that enumerate the legal actions you can do, and anything else is a crime?
If I take a picture of police brutality on the streets, for example, and I don't have a "valid professional reason to possess the pictures", then I would also be a criminal for documenting a criminal act? Since I am not a professional photographer, I wouldn't have any reason to take any pictures of a crime, such as recording the face of someone kidnapping someone else, right?
200 years ago owning slaves was accepted by society, and quite commonplace. If something is legal or illegal doesn't make it right or wrong. Would 200 years ago I have been called an "abolitionist sympathizing person"?
Now society accepts that slave ownership is wrong, but back then they didn't see anything wrong with it, and the laws were on their side. Just because society think something is good or bad doesn't make it so.
Or drug laws: just because something is illegal (marijuana) doesn't mean it is worse than something that is legal (alcohol/tobacco).
Certainly sexually abusing someone should be illegal, but why should the age matter? Why is it that currently society thinks that a person under the age of 18 is completely unable to consent to anything?
One problem with constantly trying shield "children" (actually people under 18) from anything "bad" is that the transition to adult society is greater.
Would it be better for someone under 18 who wants to get porn to be able to get porn from models their own age, instead of older people? Certainly you have to prevent sexual abuse, but that is no different from adult porn.
Certainly my views are very extreme, but if I don't act on my thoughts there is nothing wrong with that, right? Just, now you know that corsec67 is very wacko.
Right, and I am saying that just having the pictures shouldn't be a crime in and of itself. Or should possession of pictures/videos of any crime be a crime too?
"Is that a video of someone speeding? Come with me" "You got a picture of the person breaking into your house? You get to spend the night with him, in jail"
Uh no, solipsism central. The photo development tech cannot be certain that someone did not sneak into the person's house, take their camera, take child porn shots and surreptitiously return it.
There is a crime that was committed there. A full investigation should turn up what actually happened, and the child-pornographer would have burglary added to their crimes.
Emails can be sent anonymously, or are you somehow aware of something that can be used to stop spam?
The people at the photo development place can be very sure that a person under 18 was molested by the person who brought in the roll of film.
The person with under-18 porn on their computer might never have molested a minor
Thus I think that child porn should only be considered as evidence for someone molesting a child, but not a crime in its own right, as that makes it very easy to frame someone just by emailing them some pictures. Or what if the tech in this case planted the pictures on the hard drive? And then if you make having artifically generated pictures or text stories that depict people under 18 having sex illegal, that is just crazy, as no kids were ever harmed there. What about someone under 18 taking a picture of themselves?
Of course, if you like the idea of thought police, where you can be arrested for creating something from your imagination that is evil, then where does it stop?
Which version of.doc? They are fairly incompatable, and not even Office can open all of the versions correctly: 95, 2000, XP, 2003? There is no "doc" standard, it is just the memory dump of the version of Office, which changes with each release, and that is the problem.
TXT would indeed be better, if only because it isn't going to change in the future.
Why does the FCC not do what it is supposed to do, regulating who can use what bands of airwaves, but is quite happy to throw a bunch of unconstitutional fines around for exposing a "forbidden" section of epidermis or saying a "forbidden" word if they don't like the show?
It wouldn't be a problem, but here the teacher was trying to use technology in the classroom. Which it seems like the teacher didn't understand very well.
It was being made technology-related, by the teacher using it in the classroom.
It is a problem when the students know more than the teachers. It isn't clear if this is a "computer class", in which case this is really bad because teachers should know more than the students in the area they are teaching in.
There is much more leeway for an English teacher to not know how to do integrations/derivations, for example. I don't know if this should extend to stuff the teachers use to teach the class, but it probably should. How can you use something effectively to teach if you don't know how it works?
That would be assuming that the time on the computer was correct, and that the time stamp of the file was correct. What if the prosecutor claimed that the time stamp of the file was actually at a different time, when there was a crime committed? Not everyone uses NTP, and time stamps on files can be changed.
Now if only MS could release a version of XP that didn't have the activation stuff. Get rid of all of the DRM that is in Windows now, aid then they would be "customer friendly".
Quit trying to make the software stop working, and concentrate on making it work all of the time.
Of course, if the customer experience is terrible, nobody would bother trying to pirate Windows.
Unless you take into account the diesel and gas used to make the ethanol, and then ethanol is worse than the diesel it took to make the ethanol, in farm equipment.
Why people are falling for this scam is just bizzare.
Biodiesel is much better, and doesn't require changing the engine.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, because the entire point of DRM is to make thing not work. Nobody but the marketing department calls that a "feature".
I wish that was a joke, satire, or even slightly funny, but it is instead quite true. Gah.
There is a very simple explanation for that:
It is Relative speed, not absolute speed that is the problem. If everyone is going 90 MPH, they are safer than almost everyone going 75 and granny going 35.
I live in the mountains, and what really annoys me is people who brake going uphill, slower than the speed limit, on a 2-lane road. Yes, there are curves. Yes, there are rocks everywhere, it is the rocky mountains. That doesn't mean you are going to die if you go the speed limit, or even faster. Especially in summer when it is 90 degrees outside.
When going downhill I usually try to let my engine slow me down when necessary, but I have this incredibly mysterious thing called a manual transmission, which lets me do very cool things to my speed and engine RPM. (Hint, why do you think that on Pikes Peak there are signs "hot brakes fail", and they suggest you use a lower gear instead of standing on the brakes?) Some of this is different in a hybrid with regenerative braking, true.
Just because you have an image of a nude child doesn't mean that the child was molested. Or are children not allowed to be photographed in the nude? Better let this guy know about that. What about the children that posted for the Cherubs in that painting?
Unless there is a very clear reason why something should be illegal, stuff should be legal.
Or to you want to start writing the laws that enumerate the legal actions you can do, and anything else is a crime?
If I take a picture of police brutality on the streets, for example, and I don't have a "valid professional reason to possess the pictures", then I would also be a criminal for documenting a criminal act? Since I am not a professional photographer, I wouldn't have any reason to take any pictures of a crime, such as recording the face of someone kidnapping someone else, right?
My last response as well:
200 years ago owning slaves was accepted by society, and quite commonplace. If something is legal or illegal doesn't make it right or wrong. Would 200 years ago I have been called an "abolitionist sympathizing person"?
Now society accepts that slave ownership is wrong, but back then they didn't see anything wrong with it, and the laws were on their side. Just because society think something is good or bad doesn't make it so.
Or drug laws: just because something is illegal (marijuana) doesn't mean it is worse than something that is legal (alcohol/tobacco).
Certainly sexually abusing someone should be illegal, but why should the age matter? Why is it that currently society thinks that a person under the age of 18 is completely unable to consent to anything?
One problem with constantly trying shield "children" (actually people under 18) from anything "bad" is that the transition to adult society is greater.
Would it be better for someone under 18 who wants to get porn to be able to get porn from models their own age, instead of older people? Certainly you have to prevent sexual abuse, but that is no different from adult porn.
Certainly my views are very extreme, but if I don't act on my thoughts there is nothing wrong with that, right? Just, now you know that corsec67 is very wacko.
Much like a fundamental Muslim would be offended by a picture of a female in a Bikini?
Right, and I am saying that just having the pictures shouldn't be a crime in and of itself. Or should possession of pictures/videos of any crime be a crime too?
"Is that a video of someone speeding? Come with me"
"You got a picture of the person breaking into your house? You get to spend the night with him, in jail"
Uh no, solipsism central. The photo development tech cannot be certain that someone did not sneak into the person's house, take their camera, take child porn shots and surreptitiously return it.
There is a crime that was committed there. A full investigation should turn up what actually happened, and the child-pornographer would have burglary added to their crimes.
Emails can be sent anonymously, or are you somehow aware of something that can be used to stop spam?
One huge difference:
The people at the photo development place can be very sure that a person under 18 was molested by the person who brought in the roll of film.
The person with under-18 porn on their computer might never have molested a minor
Thus I think that child porn should only be considered as evidence for someone molesting a child, but not a crime in its own right, as that makes it very easy to frame someone just by emailing them some pictures. Or what if the tech in this case planted the pictures on the hard drive? And then if you make having artifically generated pictures or text stories that depict people under 18 having sex illegal, that is just crazy, as no kids were ever harmed there. What about someone under 18 taking a picture of themselves?
Of course, if you like the idea of thought police, where you can be arrested for creating something from your imagination that is evil, then where does it stop?
As a single function call, which is why both are taking so long.
Actually UTF-8 is variable length from 1 to 4 bytes. UTF-16 has a minimum of 16 bits.
I think UTF-8 and UTF-16 specify the endian-ness, but you do have to choose an encoding for the "text" document, you are very much correct there.
Which version of .doc?
They are fairly incompatable, and not even Office can open all of the versions correctly:
95, 2000, XP, 2003?
There is no "doc" standard, it is just the memory dump of the version of Office, which changes with each release, and that is the problem.
TXT would indeed be better, if only because it isn't going to change in the future.
Why does the FCC not do what it is supposed to do, regulating who can use what bands of airwaves, but is quite happy to throw a bunch of unconstitutional fines around for exposing a "forbidden" section of epidermis or saying a "forbidden" word if they don't like the show?
What about 24bits/sample, 96K samples/second?
That is also a very popular standard for audio, and is better than CD quality, by quite a bit.
What would be nice is a losslessly compresses 24/96 5.1/7.1 channel audio format to be their choice.
No, the unit for volume is the VW Bug, unless it is REALLY big, and then it is Earths.
Unless you use the fully qualified filename: C:\windows\iexplore.exe, and then don't allow the students to write to C:\windows.
Agreed, using just the filename itself in a allow/disalow list is a bad idea.
Which is why you never enumerate the bad things, and instead enumerate the good things that are allowed. Otherwise you can't secure anything.
It wouldn't be a problem, but here the teacher was trying to use technology in the classroom. Which it seems like the teacher didn't understand very well.
It was being made technology-related, by the teacher using it in the classroom.
It is a problem when the students know more than the teachers.
It isn't clear if this is a "computer class", in which case this is really bad because teachers should know more than the students in the area they are teaching in.
There is much more leeway for an English teacher to not know how to do integrations/derivations, for example. I don't know if this should extend to stuff the teachers use to teach the class, but it probably should. How can you use something effectively to teach if you don't know how it works?
Yeah, or make a level for a FPS, and distribute that. "Download our Quake level here", for example.
Oh, I forgot, games are evil, and corrupt kids...
That would be assuming that the time on the computer was correct, and that the time stamp of the file was correct. What if the prosecutor claimed that the time stamp of the file was actually at a different time, when there was a crime committed? Not everyone uses NTP, and time stamps on files can be changed.
Now if only MS could release a version of XP that didn't have the activation stuff. Get rid of all of the DRM that is in Windows now, aid then they would be "customer friendly".
Quit trying to make the software stop working, and concentrate on making it work all of the time.
Of course, if the customer experience is terrible, nobody would bother trying to pirate Windows.
Unless you take into account the diesel and gas used to make the ethanol, and then ethanol is worse than the diesel it took to make the ethanol, in farm equipment.
Why people are falling for this scam is just bizzare.
Biodiesel is much better, and doesn't require changing the engine.