I get passwords and 2-factor codes all the time, but they are valid only for one top a few minutes. Who would be stupid enough to send long-term passwords by such an insecure medium as SMS? It is barely better than email. Maybe worse, as it is easier to hijack someones phone number than their domain or email address.
If this leak has exposed them to public scrutiny, perhaps it is a good thing!
Unless you are able to see the text messages in realtime, no harm done.
Going vertically is just much harder than horizontally,
Actually, while orbital launch rockets start off vertical, they put most of their effort into horizontal velocity.
Vertical is not the problem. We could easily and cheaply fly hundreds of km up if the air did not go away! The bigger problem though is not the height in a vacuum, but the velocity needed to not fall down again, and that velocity is parallel to the earth's surface.
So while lack of air in space makes getting up a bit harder (rockets not jets), it makes the far bigger task of achieving orbital velocity possible. And once you are in orbit, climbing higher becomes in theory a lot easier. You can use slower but far more efficient ion-drives.
Much of the US is familiar to foreigners, but aside from Family Guy being set on the island, we know nothing of it. Can't you use something more famous like Grand Canyons?
Is Paris a unit of area now? Are we talking the 105 km^2 inside the old city walls (plus east and west parks?), or the 17,174 km^2 of present-day Paris?
You know what has actually run out since 1971. Not a god damn thing. Not once, not ever.
You sound like one of those people who think peak oil means no oil. In 1971, my drinking water came from rainwater collected in dams. Now it is mostly from ocean desalination and underground sources. House prices have risen dramatically with population growth so much that the majority of young people cannot afford to bu a home with back yard, except on the distant fringes.
Wild ocean fish has become a luxury item. But chicken is cheap, or farmed fish from Asia.
There is an easier way. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to send a nuclear-thermal rocket to Mars, and then you only need to load propellant, not fuel?
Melt some ground and suck up the water from a bore. The water could be used directly as propellant, or extract the hydrogen for a faster trip home. (Much less needed than for a chemical rocket)
You, on the other hand, are making me wonder if you're any better.
Don't stoop to ad hominem. It should be clear I was playing devils advocate, and replying to the more reasonable (if shrill) poster. (you) The "zero immigration" is too extreme to deserve a direct reply, but there is room for debate on numbers and source of immigrants.
If you just want to help the unfortunate, developed countries can help far more people for the same cost in foreign aid than in taking refugees. Currently, a fortune is being spent (at least in Europe) on housing and caring for "refugees", and a relative pittance on genuine non-military foreign aid to countries closer to the refugee source.
or lived anywhere where violent criminal organizations threaten your life on a daily basis, or try to kidnap your children to turn into prostitutes or slaves or suicide bombers.
Yes, and he would like to keep it that way, thankyou. If I'm in an overcrowded lifeboat, in freezing North Atlantic waters, I should pull more people on board until it capsizes? Describing foreigners that way is really not helping your argument, just scaring him more.
There is not question that these pesticides can be harmful. And that rural workers in some places are being exposed to excessive amounts. The question is whether an outright ban is better than enforcing existing safer regulations for rural workers. And how does the harm compare to the benefits, vs the harm and benefits of alternative methods of pest control. These need to be quantified.
The misuse and over-use of pesticides is common in China and other third world countries. It is hard to enforce rules in rural China, but education is improving.
The footnote for the Dutch study was interesting, but comes down to "the reasons merit further study."
It is acceptable to ban particular organophosphates when safer ones are available, even though the magnitude of the risk is not known. But to ban a whole class of pesticides, without a clear alternative, needs greater evidence that significant harm is really being done, and cannot otherwise be sufficiently mitigated.
Ahh, but it screwed you up to the point that you can't spell "straight"....;-p
It happens all time: I say the words in my head, and my hands type homonyms. Often hear/here their/they're . A lot of people do it. Would be interesting to see if correlated to any environmental exposure:-)
Yes, of course it is toxic. The question is if and how commercial use causes harm that exceeds the benefits, compared to alternatives.
There certainly does not appear to be harm to the general public in developed countries.
It may differ in countries where directions and regulations are not followed as well. And there is a question of harm to agricultural workers in the Unites States, where many are employed illegally in 3rd world conditions. Is the solution really a complete ban?
just because we all grew up riding around in the back of a pickup truck doesn't mean it was safe.
The anecdote is just to express scepticism and call for real evidence.
When seat-belts were introduced, there was overwhelming evidence very quickly. They have saved millions of lives. Banning motorbikes would probably be a lot more effective than banning pesticides. And we'd miss them less.
What is the magnitude of risk here? Is it an observable epidemiological effect like lead in petroleum, and iodine deficiency? Or is it more like the recent hysteria over glyphosate?
And why should it be totally banned instead of just kept away from pregnant women? I don't believe there is any residual pesticide in fresh food when regulations are followed. I rubbed this stuff (malathion) into my kids heads to kill headlice when they were little. They still get strait As. Would not have dreamed of using it on a pregnant Mrs.
I'd like to see the costs quantified, because a lot more people in 3rd world countries are going to experience famine, without these pesticides.
And I mean screws visible from the outside, no glue, easy to disassemble.
Generally speaking, they are easy to disassemble. You need the right tools, but they are cheap and easily obtained online. The "glue" is easily released with a little heat. They do not use resin.
The BIG exception to this is the way glass screens are bonded to the LCD/LED display. So when you crack the screen, instead of just paying $10 to $20 for a new digitiser & glass, you have to replace one of the most expensive components of the phone. I blame a large fruit-themed company for starting this, in order to reduce "thinness" a fraction of a mm.
Even some tablets and touch-enabled laptops now have this problem.
Finland is a Nordic country, not usually considered Scandinavian.
That's being a bit pedantic. Yes, Scandinavian is properly speaking a linguistic term, and Finnish is unrelated. But the word is commonly used in a cultural sense. Also, Swedish *is* an official language in Finland (making it much easier for foreigners to read road signs), and "Finland" itself is a Scandinavian word.
American nerd: "Mauro, did you see that funny xkcd cartoon? By the way, I have a bone to pick. "
Finnish nerd: "Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP! "It's a bug alright -- in the kernel. How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the first rule of kernel maintenance?
"Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously." "Fix your fucking 'compliance tool,' because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming."
Slashdot Mirror
I get passwords and 2-factor codes all the time, but they are valid only for one top a few minutes.
Who would be stupid enough to send long-term passwords by such an insecure medium as SMS? It is barely better than email.
Maybe worse, as it is easier to hijack someones phone number than their domain or email address.
If this leak has exposed them to public scrutiny, perhaps it is a good thing!
Unless you are able to see the text messages in realtime, no harm done.
Going vertically is just much harder than horizontally,
Actually, while orbital launch rockets start off vertical, they put most of their effort into horizontal velocity.
Vertical is not the problem. We could easily and cheaply fly hundreds of km up if the air did not go away!
The bigger problem though is not the height in a vacuum, but the velocity needed to not fall down again, and that velocity is parallel to the earth's surface.
So while lack of air in space makes getting up a bit harder (rockets not jets), it makes the far bigger task of achieving orbital velocity possible. And once you are in orbit, climbing higher becomes in theory a lot easier. You can use slower but far more efficient ion-drives.
At 25cm diameter, we can't really go calling it a Dyson Sphere.
Area is always measured in Rhode Islands,
Much of the US is familiar to foreigners, but aside from Family Guy being set on the island, we know nothing of it.
Can't you use something more famous like Grand Canyons?
Is Paris a unit of area now?
Are we talking the 105 km^2 inside the old city walls (plus east and west parks?),
or the 17,174 km^2 of present-day Paris?
Real scientists use Kelvins, not C. But I can't be bothered doing the conversion right now.
You know what has actually run out since 1971. Not a god damn thing. Not once, not ever.
You sound like one of those people who think peak oil means no oil.
In 1971, my drinking water came from rainwater collected in dams. Now it is mostly from ocean desalination and underground sources.
House prices have risen dramatically with population growth so much that the majority of young people cannot afford to bu a home with back yard, except on the distant fringes.
Wild ocean fish has become a luxury item. But chicken is cheap, or farmed fish from Asia.
There is an easier way.
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to send a nuclear-thermal rocket to Mars, and then you only need to load propellant, not fuel?
Melt some ground and suck up the water from a bore.
The water could be used directly as propellant, or extract the hydrogen for a faster trip home. (Much less needed than for a chemical rocket)
Also.... it's literally just named Thirty Meter Telescope?
That is a translation. The original name in Americanese sounded better: "Hundred Foot Telescope".
Also 120 liters of liquid Helium is NOT 90,000 cubic meters of gas. It is about 90 cubic meters.
Obvious litre / cubic-metre error to anybody who could half-remember their high-school-level chemistry.
You, on the other hand, are making me wonder if you're any better.
Don't stoop to ad hominem.
It should be clear I was playing devils advocate, and replying to the more reasonable (if shrill) poster. (you)
The "zero immigration" is too extreme to deserve a direct reply, but there is room for debate on numbers and source of immigrants.
If you just want to help the unfortunate, developed countries can help far more people for the same cost in foreign aid than in taking refugees.
Currently, a fortune is being spent (at least in Europe) on housing and caring for "refugees", and a relative pittance on genuine non-military foreign aid to countries closer to the refugee source.
or lived anywhere where violent criminal organizations threaten your life on a daily basis, or try to kidnap your children to turn into prostitutes or slaves or suicide bombers.
Yes, and he would like to keep it that way, thankyou.
If I'm in an overcrowded lifeboat, in freezing North Atlantic waters, I should pull more people on board until it capsizes? Describing foreigners that way is really not helping your argument, just scaring him more.
well, to Apple, $7b *is* nothing. They could probably raise it by looking under the cushions at Apple Park.
It does not necessarily mean they blame Gab for the shooting.
Could just be the publicity has made people aware of the nasty shit going on there, the hatred tolerated.
Sorry, let me try to be clearer.
There is not question that these pesticides can be harmful. And that rural workers in some places are being exposed to excessive amounts.
The question is whether an outright ban is better than enforcing existing safer regulations for rural workers.
And how does the harm compare to the benefits, vs the harm and benefits of alternative methods of pest control. These need to be quantified.
The misuse and over-use of pesticides is common in China and other third world countries. It is hard to enforce rules in rural China, but education is improving.
The footnote for the Dutch study was interesting, but comes down to "the reasons merit further study."
It is acceptable to ban particular organophosphates when safer ones are available, even though the magnitude of the risk is not known.
But to ban a whole class of pesticides, without a clear alternative, needs greater evidence that significant harm is really being done, and cannot otherwise be sufficiently mitigated.
Ahh, but it screwed you up to the point that you can't spell "straight"....;-p
It happens all time: I say the words in my head, and my hands type homonyms. Often hear/here their/they're . :-)
A lot of people do it. Would be interesting to see if correlated to any environmental exposure
Yes, of course it is toxic.
The question is if and how commercial use causes harm that exceeds the benefits, compared to alternatives.
There certainly does not appear to be harm to the general public in developed countries.
It may differ in countries where directions and regulations are not followed as well.
And there is a question of harm to agricultural workers in the Unites States, where many are employed illegally in 3rd world conditions.
Is the solution really a complete ban?
> strait As
Suspicious spelling.
Damn those homonyms. I need a smarter spellchecker. :)
In my defence, I was using an American idiom, not my native language
just because we all grew up riding around in the back of a pickup truck doesn't mean it was safe.
The anecdote is just to express scepticism and call for real evidence.
When seat-belts were introduced, there was overwhelming evidence very quickly. They have saved millions of lives.
Banning motorbikes would probably be a lot more effective than banning pesticides. And we'd miss them less.
What is the magnitude of risk here? Is it an observable epidemiological effect like lead in petroleum, and iodine deficiency?
Or is it more like the recent hysteria over glyphosate?
And why should it be totally banned instead of just kept away from pregnant women? I don't believe there is any residual pesticide in fresh food when regulations are followed.
I rubbed this stuff (malathion) into my kids heads to kill headlice when they were little. They still get strait As. Would not have dreamed of using it on a pregnant Mrs.
I'd like to see the costs quantified, because a lot more people in 3rd world countries are going to experience famine, without these pesticides.
Computers used to be very good at that kind of thing.
I tried to paste "Meriday in the Morning" by Mike Jittlov , but got:
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.
This will have to do: ,-,__, /__\ /| 0} 0} \
|
|
| { /
| { `}'- -/
| {_}/\ o/
| __} {__
| / " \
|/
/ / \`~' `"/\ \
Part minimalist, part cubist. What am I offered?
And I mean screws visible from the outside, no glue, easy to disassemble.
Generally speaking, they are easy to disassemble. You need the right tools, but they are cheap and easily obtained online.
The "glue" is easily released with a little heat. They do not use resin.
The BIG exception to this is the way glass screens are bonded to the LCD/LED display. So when you crack the screen, instead of just paying $10 to $20 for a new digitiser & glass, you have to replace one of the most expensive components of the phone. I blame a large fruit-themed company for starting this, in order to reduce "thinness" a fraction of a mm.
Even some tablets and touch-enabled laptops now have this problem.
Finland is a Nordic country, not usually considered Scandinavian.
That's being a bit pedantic. Yes, Scandinavian is properly speaking a linguistic term, and Finnish is unrelated.
But the word is commonly used in a cultural sense. Also, Swedish *is* an official language in Finland (making it much easier for foreigners to read road signs), and "Finland" itself is a Scandinavian word.
This explains a bit.
American nerd:
"Mauro, did you see that funny xkcd cartoon? By the way, I have a bone to pick. "
Finnish nerd:
"Mauro, SHUT THE FUCK UP!
"It's a bug alright -- in the kernel. How long have you been a maintainer? And you *still* haven't learnt the first rule of kernel maintenance?
"Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously."
"Fix your fucking 'compliance tool,' because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming."