That's one of the most well-articulated statements as to why Bennett's posts are worthless. Thanks!
I feel I should point out I was being ironic in my original post. In the comments for previous essays by Bennett, he has attempted to defend himself by challenging everyone to find any incorrect statement. Of course the lack of incorrectness is ludicrously insufficient to justify his posts, as you point out.
The scientific method deals with models. There are no truths, there are best explanations. Only religion deals with truths and for that you do need faith.
That's pretty much what I said. Why do you call me an idiot?
We have countless lungs to study. We have one (1) universe, and one (1) atmosphere. There is no repetability of the grand narratives, because there's a sample size of one, and we're in the middle of the "experiment". Completely different from studies on lungs.
The article conflates two very different types of science. One is experimental: cigarettes cause cancer. That's a testable, provable (and proven) hypothesis. The scientific method can be used. Alternate explanations can be systematically disproven.
Then there's the science that says, "because X and Y are true, it makes sense that Z is true". Note that it does NOT say "therefore Z MUST be true", which is what the article is implying. Z is something like the story of the universe from Big Bang through inflation up to today, or the story of manmade global warming. "Science" can project itself in those directions and come up with some answers, but there is no scientific method on a narrative. There are no controlled experiments. Every alternate hypothesis cannot be evaluated. They are at best projections, models. They're not "truth" without faith.
Agreed, but what should that mechanism be? My business runs on open-source software. Pretty much everything is behind our reverse proxy, Pound. One of the numerous libraries which Pound relies on is OpenSSL.
To whom do I give money? Debian? The applications I use like Apache and Pound? Do I enumerate all the libraries that all the applications use and give each of those hundreds of projects a few pennies?
No. The linked article doesn't say. I did click on a link to the company's blog from the linked article and found it. Such critical information should have been both in the page that/. linked to and in the/. summary!
tl;dr: This took place AFTER the public disclosure, but not by much: it seems it was April 8th.
"It is clear from the product vision that GIMP eventually needs to support CMYK, but it is impossible to say when someone finds the free time and motivation to add it."
So they're not anti-CMYK, it just hasn't been done yet.
If you have such a system, you also have a system that could trivially just hand the voter a ballot, since you have already satisfied anonymity, uniqueness, resistance to plural voting, etc. No need for the crypto at all.
Except that later, each voter can log in from home, and verify that his vote was recorded for his candidate. Still not perfect, but not bad!
Slashdot Mirror
That's one of the most well-articulated statements as to why Bennett's posts are worthless. Thanks!
I feel I should point out I was being ironic in my original post. In the comments for previous essays by Bennett, he has attempted to defend himself by challenging everyone to find any incorrect statement. Of course the lack of incorrectness is ludicrously insufficient to justify his posts, as you point out.
Can you find any statement that is incorrect?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=solar+pan...
The scientific method deals with models. There are no truths, there are best explanations. Only religion deals with truths and for that you do need faith.
That's pretty much what I said. Why do you call me an idiot?
We have countless lungs to study. We have one (1) universe, and one (1) atmosphere. There is no repetability of the grand narratives, because there's a sample size of one, and we're in the middle of the "experiment". Completely different from studies on lungs.
The article conflates two very different types of science. One is experimental: cigarettes cause cancer. That's a testable, provable (and proven) hypothesis. The scientific method can be used. Alternate explanations can be systematically disproven.
Then there's the science that says, "because X and Y are true, it makes sense that Z is true". Note that it does NOT say "therefore Z MUST be true", which is what the article is implying. Z is something like the story of the universe from Big Bang through inflation up to today, or the story of manmade global warming. "Science" can project itself in those directions and come up with some answers, but there is no scientific method on a narrative. There are no controlled experiments. Every alternate hypothesis cannot be evaluated. They are at best projections, models. They're not "truth" without faith.
Agreed, but what should that mechanism be? My business runs on open-source software. Pretty much everything is behind our reverse proxy, Pound. One of the numerous libraries which Pound relies on is OpenSSL.
To whom do I give money? Debian? The applications I use like Apache and Pound? Do I enumerate all the libraries that all the applications use and give each of those hundreds of projects a few pennies?
They still have it.
https://www.mysql.com/why-mysq...
I'm not following that. He describes in great detail how there's no way his private key was compromised. Why does he need to re-key?
No. The linked article doesn't say. I did click on a link to the company's blog from the linked article and found it. Such critical information should have been both in the page that /. linked to and in the /. summary!
tl;dr: This took place AFTER the public disclosure, but not by much: it seems it was April 8th.
Was this before the public disclosure, or after?
Who the flip is Bennet Haselton and why is he allowed to have verbal diarrhea on Slashdot?
Does this go all the way back to the 100W bulbs that were banned a while back? Or only the recent banning of >40W?
<sarcasm>The entire thing must be wrong as everyone knows everything apple does is perfect</sarcasm>
Wait, so you mean this is the second guy to "step in and fix it" since October? That would seem to indicate this is truly an enormous disaster.
Can't you do that on Ubuntu too? I thought the different distros really were just installation defaults.
Oh my that was a terrible episode.
This summary had such potential, too.
#!/usr/bin/perl
use version;
my ($small, $large) = (version->parse('1.4.5'), version->parse('8.7.8'));
print "larger\n" if $small > $large;
print "smaller\n" if $small < $large;
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9941891/perl-compare-operators-and-stringified-numbers
According to their FAQ:
http://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#cmyk
"It is clear from the product vision that GIMP eventually needs to support CMYK, but it is impossible to say when someone finds the free time and motivation to add it."
So they're not anti-CMYK, it just hasn't been done yet.
How much does ObamaCare cost the economy?
If you have such a system, you also have a system that could trivially just hand the voter a ballot, since you have already satisfied anonymity, uniqueness, resistance to plural voting, etc. No need for the crypto at all.
Except that later, each voter can log in from home, and verify that his vote was recorded for his candidate. Still not perfect, but not bad!
Greek psi:
Résumé
The thing's gotta have a tailpipe.