I will say this slowly for you politicians. The Internet sees censorship as damage, it will route around you.
There's nothing very unique about the Internet in this regard.
Anything that the population might want: internet packets, illegal drugs, tax-free cigarettes, Bibles, Prohibition-era gin, unlicensed DVDs, etc. will get routed around the government's attempts to block it.
Maybe all that really changes is how many people get hurt in the process.
It bothers me when people talk about our energy "needs", as though without some particular number of number of Watts, the world ends.
Are they better considered our energy "wants at a given price point"?
When I hear "need", but don't hear a "for what" part soon after, I get suspicious. Was the term "energy needs" a rhetorical device introduced by governments or energy suppliers to distract from the fact that we can live on varying amounts of energy consumption.
Let's face it Programming is what the majority of computer science graduated end up doing after they get their degree. I have been handed people with fresh BS and MS degrees who seem to have zero concept of even the most fundamental aspects of software design and development.
Things like:
What is a god-class and why don't we write them?
I've been programming professionally for 17 years, most of it in C++, and even I haven't heard of a god class. I can make a guess, but it would just be a guess.
Have you considered that you may be mistaken regarding how commonly used that term is?
this is for GOVERNMENT work. I think you just described the ideal government civil-service worker!
maybe there's more thought to this than it appears.
Sorry, I'm calling BS on this. I've worked as a U.S. federal civil servant, in the private sector, and in academia.
Sure there are the occasional hosers, but most of the civil servants with whom I've worked are just as intelligent (often more so, actually) and hard-working as their private/university counterparts.
No, that's an Ad Hominem. The important thing to ask is, "Is the research scientifically sound?"
You're right, my reply was kind of ad hominem-ish.
But I think the notion of ad hominem is overly simplistic. I agree that the correctness of an argument is generally independent of who advances it. But most of us have limited time to consider a given issue, and we need to use our best judgment to decide whose arguments to consider, simply due to time constraints.
When given two arguments, one presented by a research team from a respected univeristy, and another from a guy who admits that he might be mis-remembering his high school chemistry, I'm going to invest much more time in the latter, because it's more likely to be a good use of my time.
If the government sees the gravity of the situation, the industry might get a boost.
The problem is that the analysts make it sounds like industry is shooting for the moon, and that makes financiers look at the private industry folks like they're from Mars.
Heaven forbid that multiple governments are needed to fund a private endeavor. It could force the executives into shuttle diplomacy.
Does anyone know why forum administrators even bother keeping around enough information to reveal the identity of an anonymous poster?
I mean, I can see keeping around the web server logs for a day or two, to help debug problems. And if you do analytics, keeping the logs around long enough for the analytics software to compute aggregate data.
But why keep any data longer than that; especially data that's detailed enough to tie an IP# to a posted message?
Slashdot Mirror
Lunix is the crappiest OS since the days of Dos 6.2
Little Johnny: Mommy! Mommy! Can I feed the troll? Pleassssse???
Mom: No dear, he'd just keep on coming back for more. Come on, sweetheart, get into the car.
That's when you go back to the old Mom question of "If all the other countries were jumping off a bridge, would you jump too?"
Or perhaps, "If all the other countries are following the USA into Iraq..."
I will say this slowly for you politicians. The Internet sees censorship as damage, it will route around you.
There's nothing very unique about the Internet in this regard.
Anything that the population might want: internet packets, illegal drugs, tax-free cigarettes, Bibles, Prohibition-era gin, unlicensed DVDs, etc. will get routed around the government's attempts to block it.
Maybe all that really changes is how many people get hurt in the process.
It's all worth it though. Since we know that if little Johnny sees one pair of tits, his head will explode
Oh crap... how are they going to protect nursing babies???
Unless one of Noah's sons was black, one was white, and one was east-asian, this is pretty much not possible.
So you're saying we probably all come from the Village People?
Is it just me, or does it seem like the U.S. is being foolish about over-concentrating its forces?
The NSA, FBI, CIA, Pentagon, and Pres/VP are all in/near D.C.
It seems like just one or two nukes could make the U.S. nearly incapable of defending itself against a serious attack.
Is the "Panasonic camera battery" market considered a market, in terms of antitrust law? If so, are they setting themselves up for antitrust action?
What about asking to put your USB drive into her port? Remember to ask whether it'll be 1.1 or 2.0 style.
I miss the old, kinky days of Daisy chaining.
I'm pretty sure hispeed data transfer from male end to the female port would be bad in this case.
Only if it's part of a SQL injection attack.
A word of caution. In the U.S., asking for sugar on your stick is only legal in Nevada and Rhode Island.
Do Windows users even have anything like this, aside from Active Directory?
It bothers me when people talk about our energy "needs", as though without some particular number of number of Watts, the world ends.
Are they better considered our energy "wants at a given price point"?
When I hear "need", but don't hear a "for what" part soon after, I get suspicious. Was the term "energy needs" a rhetorical device introduced by governments or energy suppliers to distract from the fact that we can live on varying amounts of energy consumption.
Isn't resonant vibration the way tons of energy transfers occur, including plain old radio communication?
What makes this so novel?
Let's face it Programming is what the majority of computer science graduated end up doing after they get their degree. I have been handed people with fresh BS and MS degrees who seem to have zero concept of even the most fundamental aspects of software design and development.
Things like:
I've been programming professionally for 17 years, most of it in C++, and even I haven't heard of a god class. I can make a guess, but it would just be a guess.
Have you considered that you may be mistaken regarding how commonly used that term is?
It the MPAA/RIAA have a legitimate point of view, then I can barely comprehend what illegitimate is.
They have paid for legislation and administration policy. To want your paid-for laws to be enforced is not a "legitimate point of view".
Speaking as a Brit, I have to ask...
What the hell happened to that former colony ours that fought for freedom and began a war of independence over unfair taxation?
It's easier to rally against the outside oppressor, than the enemy within.
Only on a good day. Please consider the DMCA.
this is for GOVERNMENT work. I think you just described the ideal government civil-service worker!
maybe there's more thought to this than it appears.
Sorry, I'm calling BS on this. I've worked as a U.S. federal civil servant, in the private sector, and in academia.
Sure there are the occasional hosers, but most of the civil servants with whom I've worked are just as intelligent (often more so, actually) and hard-working as their private/university counterparts.
No, that's an Ad Hominem. The important thing to ask is, "Is the research scientifically sound?"
You're right, my reply was kind of ad hominem-ish.
But I think the notion of ad hominem is overly simplistic. I agree that the correctness of an argument is generally independent of who advances it. But most of us have limited time to consider a given issue, and we need to use our best judgment to decide whose arguments to consider, simply due to time constraints.
When given two arguments, one presented by a research team from a respected univeristy, and another from a guy who admits that he might be mis-remembering his high school chemistry, I'm going to invest much more time in the latter, because it's more likely to be a good use of my time.
the ocean is a sort of buffer solution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_solution
what is major component of this buffer? us. living critters and how they react to an increase in CO2
http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/SeaWiFS/TEACHERS/CHEMISTRY/
which means the oceans will maintain their pH over a wide range of abuse and this notion of ocean acidification is hysteria
You're probably right. I'm sure what you remember from high school is a good reason to dismiss the Carnegie Melon research team's results.
Well done, but you left out "astronomical costs"
Stellar observation.
Gang Bangers and Mash.
Having fun: The methodical way.
Translated from the original German.
If the government sees the gravity of the situation, the industry might get a boost.
The problem is that the analysts make it sounds like industry is shooting for the moon, and that makes financiers look at the private industry folks like they're from Mars.
Heaven forbid that multiple governments are needed to fund a private endeavor. It could force the executives into shuttle diplomacy.
Does anyone know why forum administrators even bother keeping around enough information to reveal the identity of an anonymous poster?
I mean, I can see keeping around the web server logs for a day or two, to help debug problems. And if you do analytics, keeping the logs around long enough for the analytics software to compute aggregate data.
But why keep any data longer than that; especially data that's detailed enough to tie an IP# to a posted message?