If you're blaming capitalism for their student loan issues, you're barking up the wrong tree. The major issue with student loans is that they're guaranteed by the federal government. This is a tried and true way to increase the price of something, massively, and that's exactly what we've seen with rising tuition costs. Government loan guarantees have nothing to do with capitalism - they're central economic planning.
Blaming capitalism for student loan debt is like blaming Iraq for 9/11 - a classic case of "someone hit me, I'm gonna hit somebody by god!"
They need to select a few featured daily modes and offer some reward for doing those. Rotate all the modes through this, changing the list on a regular basis. That will concentrate the player base while still allowing people to experience variety.
No, the regular expressions are not worse than any other implementation.
This is a real head-scratcher. Perl's regular expressions have been the gold standard for a long, long time, being borrowed by many other languages. How on earth did someone get the impression they were bad?
Although I share your distaste for JavaScript, the string concatenation example is exactly what I'd expect. You process the operators from left to right, coercing the right-hand argument to the type of the left.
It's fairly simple. If you are being interrupted, ask people to stop, or to do so only at particular times. If they won't, then bring it up with management. If management won't support you, you need to find another job, because that's the only way you can get a positive working environment. One programmer will find it exceedingly difficult to change the culture of a company that doesn't value focused work.
The issue with Microsoft, Facebook, and increasingly, Google, is that they have no intention of respecting their users. People feel locked in to Windows and Office, and would gladly jump ship due to Microsoft's abusive attitude, if only they could. Network effects keep a lot of customers stuck there. If people felt good about Microsoft, they'd use Bing and be happy.
The same goes for Facebook. They could have treated their users (note I don't say "customers") well, and they wouldn't face such a challenge from upstarts like Snapchat. But if Snapchat offers any way to reduce dependence on Facebook, people will jump for it.
Google is increasingly alienating its users in the same way, with the attempt to force Google+ down our throats being only the most egregious recent example.
I hope the next big innovator will be a company that learns how to treat people with respect. They will wipe the floor with these jerks, and good riddance.
A good night's sleep, frequent breaks, and rest periods. Whenever I switch to a new task, I methodically clean up after the last one - close terminals, browser tabs, diagnostic programs, everything. Sometimes interruptions are avoidable, and I have to open a ticket for something, but I make the quickest note possible so I can get back to my task right away.
Rather annoying that it's called a "first amendment" right. It has nothing to do with the first amendment. If anything, the ninth amendment is a better justification. The very best justification is that there is no law against it.
I was going to be irritated by the one-sidedness of the summary, but after reading the article, it's apparent that the submitter is spot on. Blount's rant is one of the most ignorant tirades I've ever read, and the "Luddite" title fits him like a glove. He wants job protection for no other reason than some jobs are threatened:
- There is no copyright violation - There is no patent violation - There is no contractual violation - There is no theft
There is basically no violation of the law or any ethical guideline.
To enact his suggestion would prevent a large number of people from benefiting from this technology. He would make readers into leeches at the expense of the public. He is an embarrassment.
An extensive survey of the two groups showed that the exclusion of violence didn't diminish players' enjoyment of the game.
I hope they did more then just ask them how much they enjoyed themselves. People can be unreliable when asked such questions, for any number of reasons, such as not wanting to appear like bloodthirsty savages when questioned by authority figures.
Please read more of the article before posting. The activity being described is a brute-force SSH login attack that is distributed across a botnet.
(Yes, the title of the article is misleading, as botnets are by definition distributed; the interesting bit is that SSH brute-force attacks against a specific host don't seem to have been distributed before.)
Here's the relevant bit:
See for example the attempts to log on as the alias user, 14 attempts are made from 13 different hosts, with only 70-46-140-187.orl.fdn.com trying more than once. Then thirteen attempts are made for the amanda user, from 13 other hosts.
Obama and Biden will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. They will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world...
The first sentence is contradicted by the second. When you insist on extra conditions as prerequisites to trade agreements, such as good labor and environmental standards, you necessarily increase the cost of trade to whomever you're negotiating with. Thus, the likelihood of trade is decreased. Decreasing trade is the opposite of opening up foreign markets.
This is independent of the question of whether insisting on labor and environmental standards is good.
It all depends on your objective, I suppose. If you don't want them to find the data, the best strategy is not to have the data. I agree with your objection that it would be easier to inspect. So you'd be better off wiping everything you don't want found, and forget about having a second hard drive, or flash drive, or other storage device.
But above all, don't try to bring data back with you in the hope that it won't be found. Luckily for submitter, that doesn't appear to be a necessity.
Make a spare hard drive that you can boot from, and contains totally innocuous data. Take both drives with you on vacation. Then mail the first hard drive back to yourself. Return to the U.S. with the spare hard drive in the laptop.
The point of this is not to draw suspicion to yourself, and to reduce the DHS's incentives to confiscate your laptop. If they want to see what's on it, you can show them everything - because nothing will be there. If they take your drive and image it, they won't find anything.
You don't want to use encryption, because that will draw attention to you and possibly get you put on a list. You certainly don't want to assert your fourth amendment rights - not only because it won't matter to the DHS while you're physically trying to cross the border, but also because the courts are unlikely to uphold them nowadays.
If you don't want to use a spare drive, then treat the data itself as disposable. Keep track of everything you consider private, and then wipe it from the drive before returning.
Looks like it's time to start clicking on "metamoderate" again.
The word "steal" has a perfectly workable definition that does not cover copyright infringement. Folks who try to muddy the situation, like those who downmodded the parent, make me angry. I hope I can slap a couple of you in metamod.
Repeat after me: copyright infringement is not stealing. It is the taking of another's property so that you have it and they don't. Stop trying to mislead people.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're blaming capitalism for their student loan issues, you're barking up the wrong tree. The major issue with student loans is that they're guaranteed by the federal government. This is a tried and true way to increase the price of something, massively, and that's exactly what we've seen with rising tuition costs. Government loan guarantees have nothing to do with capitalism - they're central economic planning.
Blaming capitalism for student loan debt is like blaming Iraq for 9/11 - a classic case of "someone hit me, I'm gonna hit somebody by god!"
They need to select a few featured daily modes and offer some reward for doing those. Rotate all the modes through this, changing the list on a regular basis. That will concentrate the player base while still allowing people to experience variety.
I don't know if using GMail is up this guy's alley, but if you click the "Spam" button on these, they will disappear quickly.
No, the regular expressions are not worse than any other implementation.
This is a real head-scratcher. Perl's regular expressions have been the gold standard for a long, long time, being borrowed by many other languages. How on earth did someone get the impression they were bad?
Although I share your distaste for JavaScript, the string concatenation example is exactly what I'd expect. You process the operators from left to right, coercing the right-hand argument to the type of the left.
It's fairly simple. If you are being interrupted, ask people to stop, or to do so only at particular times. If they won't, then bring it up with management. If management won't support you, you need to find another job, because that's the only way you can get a positive working environment. One programmer will find it exceedingly difficult to change the culture of a company that doesn't value focused work.
The issue with Microsoft, Facebook, and increasingly, Google, is that they have no intention of respecting their users. People feel locked in to Windows and Office, and would gladly jump ship due to Microsoft's abusive attitude, if only they could. Network effects keep a lot of customers stuck there. If people felt good about Microsoft, they'd use Bing and be happy.
The same goes for Facebook. They could have treated their users (note I don't say "customers") well, and they wouldn't face such a challenge from upstarts like Snapchat. But if Snapchat offers any way to reduce dependence on Facebook, people will jump for it.
Google is increasingly alienating its users in the same way, with the attempt to force Google+ down our throats being only the most egregious recent example.
I hope the next big innovator will be a company that learns how to treat people with respect. They will wipe the floor with these jerks, and good riddance.
Just don't advocate that solution on Ars Technica - they'll tar and feather you.
This is because the cars are still in the testing phase. Nobody is allowing cars to operate autonomously on public roads yet.
A good night's sleep, frequent breaks, and rest periods. Whenever I switch to a new task, I methodically clean up after the last one - close terminals, browser tabs, diagnostic programs, everything. Sometimes interruptions are avoidable, and I have to open a ticket for something, but I make the quickest note possible so I can get back to my task right away.
IMHO, a removed line should count for 10 times as much as an added line.
Rather annoying that it's called a "first amendment" right. It has nothing to do with the first amendment. If anything, the ninth amendment is a better justification. The very best justification is that there is no law against it.
> Isn't this the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl?
Yes. As the submitter said.
> Should the summary read a bit more like 'averting a worse nuclear disaster than Chernobyl'?
No. Basically, all their efforts failed, so it was as bad as it could have been. And it was still much less severe than Chernobyl.
"One thing I hadn't realized was just how close workers came to averting the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl."
It was the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl.
Yes, and that is what the anonymous submitter said. I don't think you parsed the sentence correctly.
A better title for this post would be "US Supreme Court Upholds Extrajudicial Confinement".
I was going to be irritated by the one-sidedness of the summary, but after reading the article, it's apparent that the submitter is spot on. Blount's rant is one of the most ignorant tirades I've ever read, and the "Luddite" title fits him like a glove. He wants job protection for no other reason than some jobs are threatened:
- There is no copyright violation
- There is no patent violation
- There is no contractual violation
- There is no theft
There is basically no violation of the law or any ethical guideline.
To enact his suggestion would prevent a large number of people from benefiting from this technology. He would make readers into leeches at the expense of the public. He is an embarrassment.
An extensive survey of the two groups showed that the exclusion of violence didn't diminish players' enjoyment of the game.
I hope they did more then just ask them how much they enjoyed themselves. People can be unreliable when asked such questions, for any number of reasons, such as not wanting to appear like bloodthirsty savages when questioned by authority figures.
Strange - it almost seems like you interpreted everything on that page as a criticism.
Apparently, you have pre-existing stability problems with this box. The fact that it crashed yet again yesterday should come as no great surprise.
Please read more of the article before posting. The activity being described is a brute-force SSH login attack that is distributed across a botnet.
(Yes, the title of the article is misleading, as botnets are by definition distributed; the interesting bit is that SSH brute-force attacks against a specific host don't seem to have been distributed before.)
Here's the relevant bit:
fail2ban is not effective against this.
I dunno, this seems like double-talk to me:
The first sentence is contradicted by the second. When you insist on extra conditions as prerequisites to trade agreements, such as good labor and environmental standards, you necessarily increase the cost of trade to whomever you're negotiating with. Thus, the likelihood of trade is decreased. Decreasing trade is the opposite of opening up foreign markets.
This is independent of the question of whether insisting on labor and environmental standards is good.
It all depends on your objective, I suppose. If you don't want them to find the data, the best strategy is not to have the data. I agree with your objection that it would be easier to inspect. So you'd be better off wiping everything you don't want found, and forget about having a second hard drive, or flash drive, or other storage device.
But above all, don't try to bring data back with you in the hope that it won't be found. Luckily for submitter, that doesn't appear to be a necessity.
Make a spare hard drive that you can boot from, and contains totally innocuous data. Take both drives with you on vacation. Then mail the first hard drive back to yourself. Return to the U.S. with the spare hard drive in the laptop.
The point of this is not to draw suspicion to yourself, and to reduce the DHS's incentives to confiscate your laptop. If they want to see what's on it, you can show them everything - because nothing will be there. If they take your drive and image it, they won't find anything.
You don't want to use encryption, because that will draw attention to you and possibly get you put on a list. You certainly don't want to assert your fourth amendment rights - not only because it won't matter to the DHS while you're physically trying to cross the border, but also because the courts are unlikely to uphold them nowadays.
If you don't want to use a spare drive, then treat the data itself as disposable. Keep track of everything you consider private, and then wipe it from the drive before returning.
Looks like it's time to start clicking on "metamoderate" again.
The word "steal" has a perfectly workable definition that does not cover copyright infringement. Folks who try to muddy the situation, like those who downmodded the parent, make me angry. I hope I can slap a couple of you in metamod.
Repeat after me: copyright infringement is not stealing. It is the taking of another's property so that you have it and they don't. Stop trying to mislead people.
Joke n. that thing going whoosh over your head!
I kid!