All reviewers should do that. They should all give at least -20% "Horribly buggy, if your connection lags for more than 1 second, the game kills your character and restarts you from the last save". Same with all new EA games. "Would have been a great game with multiplayer support. (It costs $20 extra, so even though they currently throw in a free coupon for the multiplayer expansion pack, it's not part of the game).
No, I've watched Star Trek. All aliens have one race spanning religion (if any), and each and every race is defined by one, perhaps two personality traits, that all members of the race have, with near zero deviation.
Read TFA. They didn't trial and error 3,727 times. Somebody e-mailed them a link, and they followed it. 3,727 is the total number of HTML requests that the "secret" and "confidential" public web server received. As the above reply notes, it's like calling ONE phone number that somebody told you to call, and having an automated system there tell you everything you wanted to know.
Who gave you permission to access Slashdot? Seems by your reasoning, you decided to just walk through the unlocked door, which you claim is wrong. Please stop hacking Slashdot!
You're making the mistake of believing the Slashdot summary, instead of reading TFA. There was no trial and error involved. They were given a tip that a public government website had information they might find useful. The 3,727 "attempts" that Slashdot reports are 3,727 "hits on the firewall" according to TFA. All of those "hits" were allowed through. They didn't do a dictionary attack on an existing website hoping to find secret subdirectories that weren't linked to. They just followed links inside the main page, to various subpages. The government asserts that typing in a URL was a hack attempt, and each time they clicked a link it was also a hack attempt, some of which led to "classified" information. To repeat, it wasn't 3,726 404 errors, followed by "YES, VALID URL!" it was 3727 total scrips html pages images and css files as they browsed through a link somebody emailed them.
No, Ubisoft is trying to kill PC gaming on purpose. They actually had a fairly similar DRM system in Assassin's Creed 1, only it wasn't as obtrusive, and if you disabled your network connection, it played flawlessly. When I bought it, it was unplayable, it kept freezing solid because the connection was lagging out. Then they claimed AC1 sold so poorly due to piracy, and said PC gaming is dead and they'll never make another PC game. But, they were told to anyways, so now they're pissed, and hope they if they get high scores on the PS3 version, and 0/10 on the PC version, and sell 5 copies total, maybe they won't be allowed to make PC games anymore, just like they wanted after AC1.
You don't need a specialized parser lol. Just strip out variable names, comments, and whitespace, then just use zip. zip A, zip B, zip AB. Compare sizes. If the size of zipping A and zipping B are both pretty close, and also pretty close to the size of zipping AB, then odds are, cheating, so look at it manually. Zip is already a specialized tool for finding patterns in text;) It doesn't work every time, but it's way better than any other technique, by far. Obviously, the threshold would vary depending on how much variation you're likely to see in independent answers.
But that notwithstanding, obfuscation is the easiest thing in the world to catch your attention. I've seen a student do "x = x;" once. The question was so simple, we couldn't do cheating detection since there would only be a few answers. But still, circled "trying to obfuscate something?";)
Whenever you use the downloader, it goes to their website to display a "Download Started" page, and passes the URL you downloaded as a parameter. Do they have logs enabled on their webserver? I dunno. Better safe than sorry though. Just use FlashGot, the GPL plugin they stole all their code from.
This is the USA, son. Committing copyright violation and selling a million illegal copies of somebody else's software is good for the economy! Pirating even one thing is you refusing your duty as a consumer! Easily 1000x as serious.
Google's policy defines it as anything inciting or advocating violence, or making insulting stereotypes or generalizations about any group. Anyways, YouTube only has this policy due to constant harassment by Lieberman demanding they censors Muslim videos. But yeah, you can't use THEIR OWN PERSONAL SITE to spew various retarded stereotypes about Mexicans (Look out Mencia!), it's the end of the world. Free speech means the government can't interfere (Like in Australia) it doesn't mean Google has a legal obligation to carry your hate speech. Oh yeah, in the announcement where Google added this to their policy, they said "We don't expect you to treat everybody like nuns, the elderly, or brain surgeons." Amazingly, some catholic nutbars started posting about down with Google the great satan, for picking on nuns like that, saying Google's announcement itself was hatespeech! The nerve, implying nuns should be treated with respect, how dare they!
And what the fuck are you talking about, guilty? Google doesn't make laws, you're not guilty of any crime. They delete your video because they find it tasteless. Did you scream with such rage when Kramer got shitcanned for screaming racial slurs over and over and over and over? Clubs stopped hiring him so basically he was found guilty of hate speech and banned, just like youtube does! OH NO SLIPPERY SLOPE. You can say how you hate black people and gays all you want. You can't force Google to say it for you.
If you're referring to countries like Canada that actually DO have hate speech laws, it's a lot more rigidly defined than Google (Except Manitoba, but even their own courts throw all those cases out as unconstitutional, and make (unheeded) demands that the provincial government fix them). As in, to be hate speech, your speech has to be speech that will cause violence or hatred of the group you are targetting. And judges have interpreted that quite narrowly. As in, if you say "GOD HATES FAGS, BURN IN HELL HOMOS" that has time and again been affirmed as not hate-speech, as nobody hearing that would start hating gays if they didn't already, and nobody would read it and go beat up a gay person if they weren't going to already. It's also been held as allowed because the hate speech law has exemptions for anything that is true, or said in good faith. A preacher believes what he says, and so it's protected speech. If he actually calls for violence though, that's a different beast, and it doesn't matter if he believes beating gays to death is God's will or not.
As for the Australian law, the Australians have passed a law banning porn that features cartoons (because you can't tell how old a cartoon is so basically its all child porn), female ejaculation (because it's obscene) and women with small breasts (As underage teens also have smaller breasts, and so seeing women with less than a D cup may cause people to turn into pedophiles). There is currently no word on if they eventually plan to ban having actual consensual sex with adults with small breasts, or if you will be OK as long as you don't film it.
Did you see the bit about "through violence or other illegal means?" Oh,/. cut of off with "..." even though it's only a few extra words, so it seems less reasonable!;)
You're only allowing for one iteration! I put $100 in bank A, the bank loans out $80 to you. What do you do with it? Burn it? Probably not. Probably you spend it. Wherever you spend it, it ends up in a bank account. Now bank B (or maybe bank A) has $80, and so at 20% reserve, they can loan out $64 more. That $64 end up in bank A, B, or C, and they can lend out 80% of that, too. sum (i = 1.. infinity) ($100 x 80%^i) = $400. The "wrong" number of $900 is what happens to the sum if the reserve rate is 10% not 20%. $400 or $900, the banks are still creating many times more fictional money than they actually have. Now, some money does get lost, some money gets spent buying things that goes to employees that goes to cash that maybe doesn't all end up in a bank. But it's pretty damn close. In fact, in the link you said doesn't support the $900 number, they cite a bank operating on a ratio of about 11.5%. Meaning that just every $100 in an account that was cash, there is $850 that is fictional.
Man, sounds like you must not own a car. Way more than one in 100,000 people are killed by a car, every year! If you own one, you're basically a murderer. Tell the families of all those dead people that they aren't significant. Oh yeah, plus, bricks or granite emit way more radiation than the water in TFA. Go get a Geiger counter, you'll find that the radiation in TFA isn't IS insignificant compared to normal fluctuations in background radiation. You'll find that, if your counter is accurate enough to measure it out, you'll probably have hotspots that spike way hotter than the water in TFA, which I'll note is not drinking water, it was water sampled from near the plant to try and pinpoint the leak. Actual drinking water contamination is still well below the (highly conservative) safe limit. Plus, there are plenty of places that have naturally radioactive ground water that's way hotter than this, and not only do they not have higher rates of cancer...they have lower rates of cancer, and live longer. The "1 in 100,000" derrives from the linear, no-threshold model of radiation exposure. It says, expose rats to a shit load of radiation, look at their cancer rates. There, now you have two data points, background radiation and baseline rates, shitload of radiation and elevated rates. Bam, done, draw a line, and call it a day. It's quite wrong, and there is lots of evidence that halving the radiation drops the cancer rates by more than one half. And there certainly must be a threshold. Plenty of evidence that, even if high radiation elevation = more cancer, slightly heightened levels = no change / less. But scientists are incredibly terrified of ever saying so. When scientists make the observation that people fed food with 0 lithium always go insane, and places with higher lithium salt levels in their drinking water have substantially lower rates of suicide, Slashdot and the rest of the world exploded with RAGE at their "poor science": "Everybody knows that's medicine, high doses = dangerous, so all doses = dangerous, there's no such thing as safe limits of anything that's ever possibly bad at all ever!" and "OK so you're saying the government should medicate us all with powerful mood stabilizers? WAS THIS STUDY DONE IN GERMANAY????????????"
Yeah, you missed something somewhere. You missed order of operations. What's the area of a circle? "Pi r squared", squared only squares r, not the entire thing. 240 square mm is 240 mm^2. Acceleration due to gravity is "9.8 meters per second squared", which means, "9.8 m/s/s", not "96.04 m*m/s/s". Nobody ever says it the way you seem to think is the only correct way, "9.8 meters per square second"
My Laptop came with Vista, and I upgraded to Windows 7 when I could. A few weeks later the numlock light burnt out. I have tried rolling back to Vista, and even XP, and the issue remains!
See, when you hit accel on your cruise control, you're telling it to increase the current target speed by 2.5 mph or whatever the increment is. You have two options. Option one, is to always go by the current speed, so hitting accel twice in a row has zero effect, you have to wait until the car reaches the new target before hitting accel again. Nobody does it that way, because it's obnoxious. Option two is that hitting accel twice bumps up the target twice. But here's the thing about cars, and you may be shocked, The Woz sure was. Cars aren't magical. They take time to accelerate. And they have gears, so if it needs to change gears, you'll do no accelerating, maybe even decelerate a little, before you start accelerating. If you just hammer like a fiend when it doesn't respond instantly to the first press, then you're bumping the target speed ever higher, so when it gets back in gear, you're going to take off with no end in sight! Same thing happens if you hammer "accel" on a hill, where your poor car is already giving it all she's got, captain. When you crest, you're going to launch like a bat out of hell. Oh yeah, and while it's not likely to be the issue at the speeds described here, the Prius is a hybrid. So, even longer than a shift delay, I imagine, would be a "Starting the engine" delay. RTFM.
In summary, I agree with Toyota, sounds like it's working as designed. Maybe it's not a great design to not have a readout of the current setting, but it's exactly like every cruise control in every car ever made. And, 80 is already 10 over the limit in California, and at least 5 over in all but a few states! And if a PRIUS makes it, as he says, from 80 to 97 before he can react and hit the brakes, I'm not sure he should be driving at all, let alone going 10 or more over the speed limit!
I don't think it's nearly as absurd as RIAA shenanigans. It really boils down to the argument over whether or not a game of football can be copyrighted. Certainly, the commentary should be, but that's the network's, not the NFLs. The game itself? I don't think so, but I'm not an expert. If you allow that the game footage is the copyright of the NFL, then their behavior (in this instance) is reasonable, or at least, follows a reasonable interpretation of existing laws (even if you might view said laws themselves as unreasonable). Copyright has a concept of "public performances", which are the exclusive right of the copyright holder. Historically, this has been quite important. Say you're a playwright. You mail out your play to producers, hoping one of them picks it up. Now, without the exclusive right to public performances, that producer could take the four copies you mailed him, and the dozen you slipped under his door and into his mail box and under his windshield wipers, hand them out to actors, and put the play on without paying the author a dime. In terms of encouraging playwrights to write, this is quite the undesirable outcome!
On the other hand, perhaps interpreting showing a TV program or movie as a "public performance" in the same sense that putting on a play is, is taking it too far. I suppose just putting a DVD in a machine is easier than putting together a play from a script, so it may make sense to treat it as at least as bad. But alternately, the purpose of the manuscript is to be put on, and earn the writer money from that performance. The purpose of a DVD is to be sold and watched, and it was sold and now you and some other people are watching it, so perhaps it's not really the same thing at all. After all, if it's legal to buy a DVD, then rent it to 10 people for $1 each, it should be equally legal to show it to 10 people in your living room for $1 each. And yes, though the studios want it changed very badly, rental is explicitly allowed under the doctrine of first sale, being a temporary change of possession, not a public performance.
The only way to fix this perceived imbalance, without breaking other things, would be to do away with public performance rights as a special case. I think writers would still be just as protected, as long as you establish concretely that any movie/play/whatever based on a script is categorically a derivative work, and therefore a copyright violation if not properly licensed. But on the other hand, if you own a DVD, you can play it, period. This, however, requires new laws. Without new laws, the NFL's policy is in line with the law. They're even somewhat fair about it, in the sense that sports bars do not have to pay to have TVs in them, unless they are so large as to be considered the primary attraction of the bar, rather than simply a bonus.
Either way, TFA is just FUD. If you aren't a public performance, you can't run afoul of copyright law. No matter how many buddies you invite over, and no matter that you charge them for your beer, it's not a public performance, because it's a private showing still. The nonsense about "you can't call it a Super Bowl party because that's trademarked" is quite stupid, but no more stupid than any other corporation going overboard defending their trademarks. Intel suing prison programs because they use "inside" to refer to those in prison, and Intel owns "Noun Inside"? I'd say the Super Bowl BS is demonstrably less retarded, as at least these parties are actually using the trademarked term, even if using a trademark to refer to the actual trademarked item is supposed to be allowed!
I mess those up all of the time. Not because I don't know the difference, but because of how I type. I don't know if I'm weird, but I type phonetically. I hear the word spoken in my head, and my fingers do it. And they'll often chose the wrong word, if I'm typing in a hurry. For this reason, I also get bizarre typos that are completely the wrong word, but are pronounced in a similar way. It's also why I occasionally get the so-called Parmesan commas. My fingers throw a comma in when my brain-narration pauses, and if I happen to naturally pause somewhere that I shouldn't be, I get an invalid comma. I guess my point is, it's perhaps not a case of poor English skills, so much as it's a case of poor proofreading habits. If I don't go back and read what I write, I wind up with extra commas, the wrong its/their/too/through etc, and even more bizarre things.
What traditional culture? I see your culture, with a long and storied tradition, follows in the footsteps of those who set up elaborate rules to keep Chinese and Indians out, and when they actually managed to jump through all the hoops we set up, said "I still prefer not" and deported them anyways, illegally. The culture that burns down Chinese stores and beats their owners to death. Frankly, the most clear and eloquent speakers I know are all Asian. Chinese, Korean, Indian, they can all speak English just fine. They're all second generation, probably. And that's just it. Hate the evil immigrants all you want, and cry about the decline of our great white nation, but the immigrants send their children to school, and try hard to teach them English, in addition to their own native language. Now, I'm a TA at UW from TFA. In class, who knows, they all seem to speak just fine. When marking, I can't really say who's who, since don't even look at the names. But, most of them are writing just fine. Yes, 30% are failing the entrance exam, and those that do, take English courses to bring them up to par before they're allowed in the real courses. Because we teach in English, and if you don't speak it, we can't help you. And that's how it should work, that's why we have the literacy entrance exams, and I don't understand why most universities don't! I'd say that almost no assignments I mark have real English issues, even though most of them are written by exchange students. During my exams, lots of students raise their hands because they just can't understand the wording of the question, even with an example showing the function's input and output. Most of them aren't exchange students. Some of the native English speakers can't even articulate what part of the question they don't understand! "Ummm, the question, I just don't get it" "What part?" "Just...ummmm....the question, I don't get it" "Sorry, read the question and look at the examples. If you come up with a specific question I'll answer it for you." Exchange students might have more questions about vocabulary, but once they know what the words mean, they can answer the question. And, again, these aren't immigrants, they're exchange students. They came here to learn English by immersion. Finally, if you're going to complain about how the damn foreigners should learn God damn English, perhaps you should learn some yourself. Your grammar and punctuation are atrocious.
i no rite lang iz evolvin an if u can undastand den wats the prob huh? lang is 2 comoonikate ideaz n if u git wat im sayin den its dun its job an who cares wat a dikshunary sez, ppl who r all "oh, rite proper lol" r just stuck up tards dey tink dey smart cus they can memirize sum words in a book, but der just nerds wit no life, dey wuldnt stand 5 min in da reel wurld.
No. I'm a TA at the very university in question in TFA. It's not just that they can't spell, and have no sense of grammar. They can't communicate ideas. When some of these students submit assignments, the spelling can even be correct, but I have absolutely no idea what they mean, it's gibberish. Some of the ones with problems are foreign exchange students. On the one hand, it's not their fault, they're still learning. On the other hand, we give them ESL exams to make sure they're able to keep up with courses taught in English, so they better be able to! But most of the people with English problems are the locals. They just can't communicate an idea to save their life. So, I say again, no, it's not just that their grammar and spelling suck, it's that they can't communicate an idea. Evolution or not, if you cant' communicate an idea, you need better language skills. Some of them also seem equally unable to understand English, either. They read questions and they just can't follow what they mean. So, fuck you for saying we should be writing our exams in SMS because we've made them inaccessible to changing society.
As penance, go read the comments on icanhascheezburger.com, and realize exactly WHAT you are chastising us for not accepting as FORMAL ESSAYS.
Spellcheck means stopping typing in order to right click and correct it. At least, if you fix them as soon as you finish the sentence. So, long term, you condition yourself to learn how to spell things correctly, or you'll slow your own typing down! Oh, well, in Elementary school I had a fine motor problem that meant I couldn't really write legibly (still can't but people stop caring after elementary) so I had a word processor device. It had a spellcheck, but of course, it couldn't underline things in red, since it's just black-on-green LCD like a TI graphing calculator. So, when you hit space after an incorrectly spelled word? Bzzzt. Not even a nice clean beep, a buzzer, or at least as close as you can come with what was basically the same as a PC's internal speaker. Talk about negative reinforcement!
Slashdot Mirror
All reviewers should do that. They should all give at least -20% "Horribly buggy, if your connection lags for more than 1 second, the game kills your character and restarts you from the last save". Same with all new EA games. "Would have been a great game with multiplayer support. (It costs $20 extra, so even though they currently throw in a free coupon for the multiplayer expansion pack, it's not part of the game).
No, I've watched Star Trek. All aliens have one race spanning religion (if any), and each and every race is defined by one, perhaps two personality traits, that all members of the race have, with near zero deviation.
3,727 is the total number of lines in the firewall log that involve outside IP addresses.
Read TFA. They didn't trial and error 3,727 times. Somebody e-mailed them a link, and they followed it. 3,727 is the total number of HTML requests that the "secret" and "confidential" public web server received. As the above reply notes, it's like calling ONE phone number that somebody told you to call, and having an automated system there tell you everything you wanted to know.
Who gave you permission to access Slashdot? Seems by your reasoning, you decided to just walk through the unlocked door, which you claim is wrong. Please stop hacking Slashdot!
You're making the mistake of believing the Slashdot summary, instead of reading TFA. There was no trial and error involved. They were given a tip that a public government website had information they might find useful. The 3,727 "attempts" that Slashdot reports are 3,727 "hits on the firewall" according to TFA. All of those "hits" were allowed through. They didn't do a dictionary attack on an existing website hoping to find secret subdirectories that weren't linked to. They just followed links inside the main page, to various subpages. The government asserts that typing in a URL was a hack attempt, and each time they clicked a link it was also a hack attempt, some of which led to "classified" information. To repeat, it wasn't 3,726 404 errors, followed by "YES, VALID URL!" it was 3727 total scrips html pages images and css files as they browsed through a link somebody emailed them.
4chan is not your personal army.
No, Ubisoft is trying to kill PC gaming on purpose. They actually had a fairly similar DRM system in Assassin's Creed 1, only it wasn't as obtrusive, and if you disabled your network connection, it played flawlessly. When I bought it, it was unplayable, it kept freezing solid because the connection was lagging out. Then they claimed AC1 sold so poorly due to piracy, and said PC gaming is dead and they'll never make another PC game. But, they were told to anyways, so now they're pissed, and hope they if they get high scores on the PS3 version, and 0/10 on the PC version, and sell 5 copies total, maybe they won't be allowed to make PC games anymore, just like they wanted after AC1.
You don't need a specialized parser lol. Just strip out variable names, comments, and whitespace, then just use zip. zip A, zip B, zip AB. Compare sizes. If the size of zipping A and zipping B are both pretty close, and also pretty close to the size of zipping AB, then odds are, cheating, so look at it manually. Zip is already a specialized tool for finding patterns in text ;) It doesn't work every time, but it's way better than any other technique, by far. Obviously, the threshold would vary depending on how much variation you're likely to see in independent answers.
But that notwithstanding, obfuscation is the easiest thing in the world to catch your attention. I've seen a student do "x = x;" once. The question was so simple, we couldn't do cheating detection since there would only be a few answers. But still, circled "trying to obfuscate something?" ;)
Whenever you use the downloader, it goes to their website to display a "Download Started" page, and passes the URL you downloaded as a parameter. Do they have logs enabled on their webserver? I dunno. Better safe than sorry though. Just use FlashGot, the GPL plugin they stole all their code from.
This is the USA, son. Committing copyright violation and selling a million illegal copies of somebody else's software is good for the economy! Pirating even one thing is you refusing your duty as a consumer! Easily 1000x as serious.
Google's policy defines it as anything inciting or advocating violence, or making insulting stereotypes or generalizations about any group. Anyways, YouTube only has this policy due to constant harassment by Lieberman demanding they censors Muslim videos. But yeah, you can't use THEIR OWN PERSONAL SITE to spew various retarded stereotypes about Mexicans (Look out Mencia!), it's the end of the world. Free speech means the government can't interfere (Like in Australia) it doesn't mean Google has a legal obligation to carry your hate speech. Oh yeah, in the announcement where Google added this to their policy, they said "We don't expect you to treat everybody like nuns, the elderly, or brain surgeons." Amazingly, some catholic nutbars started posting about down with Google the great satan, for picking on nuns like that, saying Google's announcement itself was hatespeech! The nerve, implying nuns should be treated with respect, how dare they!
And what the fuck are you talking about, guilty? Google doesn't make laws, you're not guilty of any crime. They delete your video because they find it tasteless. Did you scream with such rage when Kramer got shitcanned for screaming racial slurs over and over and over and over? Clubs stopped hiring him so basically he was found guilty of hate speech and banned, just like youtube does! OH NO SLIPPERY SLOPE. You can say how you hate black people and gays all you want. You can't force Google to say it for you.
If you're referring to countries like Canada that actually DO have hate speech laws, it's a lot more rigidly defined than Google (Except Manitoba, but even their own courts throw all those cases out as unconstitutional, and make (unheeded) demands that the provincial government fix them). As in, to be hate speech, your speech has to be speech that will cause violence or hatred of the group you are targetting. And judges have interpreted that quite narrowly. As in, if you say "GOD HATES FAGS, BURN IN HELL HOMOS" that has time and again been affirmed as not hate-speech, as nobody hearing that would start hating gays if they didn't already, and nobody would read it and go beat up a gay person if they weren't going to already. It's also been held as allowed because the hate speech law has exemptions for anything that is true, or said in good faith. A preacher believes what he says, and so it's protected speech. If he actually calls for violence though, that's a different beast, and it doesn't matter if he believes beating gays to death is God's will or not.
As for the Australian law, the Australians have passed a law banning porn that features cartoons (because you can't tell how old a cartoon is so basically its all child porn), female ejaculation (because it's obscene) and women with small breasts (As underage teens also have smaller breasts, and so seeing women with less than a D cup may cause people to turn into pedophiles). There is currently no word on if they eventually plan to ban having actual consensual sex with adults with small breasts, or if you will be OK as long as you don't film it.
Did you see the bit about "through violence or other illegal means?" Oh, /. cut of off with "..." even though it's only a few extra words, so it seems less reasonable! ;)
Because if you force everybody to use iranmail instead of gmail, you can read everything they email?
You're only allowing for one iteration! I put $100 in bank A, the bank loans out $80 to you. What do you do with it? Burn it? Probably not. Probably you spend it. Wherever you spend it, it ends up in a bank account. Now bank B (or maybe bank A) has $80, and so at 20% reserve, they can loan out $64 more. That $64 end up in bank A, B, or C, and they can lend out 80% of that, too. sum (i = 1 .. infinity) ($100 x 80%^i) = $400. The "wrong" number of $900 is what happens to the sum if the reserve rate is 10% not 20%. $400 or $900, the banks are still creating many times more fictional money than they actually have. Now, some money does get lost, some money gets spent buying things that goes to employees that goes to cash that maybe doesn't all end up in a bank. But it's pretty damn close. In fact, in the link you said doesn't support the $900 number, they cite a bank operating on a ratio of about 11.5%. Meaning that just every $100 in an account that was cash, there is $850 that is fictional.
Man, sounds like you must not own a car. Way more than one in 100,000 people are killed by a car, every year! If you own one, you're basically a murderer. Tell the families of all those dead people that they aren't significant. Oh yeah, plus, bricks or granite emit way more radiation than the water in TFA. Go get a Geiger counter, you'll find that the radiation in TFA isn't IS insignificant compared to normal fluctuations in background radiation. You'll find that, if your counter is accurate enough to measure it out, you'll probably have hotspots that spike way hotter than the water in TFA, which I'll note is not drinking water, it was water sampled from near the plant to try and pinpoint the leak. Actual drinking water contamination is still well below the (highly conservative) safe limit. Plus, there are plenty of places that have naturally radioactive ground water that's way hotter than this, and not only do they not have higher rates of cancer...they have lower rates of cancer, and live longer. The "1 in 100,000" derrives from the linear, no-threshold model of radiation exposure. It says, expose rats to a shit load of radiation, look at their cancer rates. There, now you have two data points, background radiation and baseline rates, shitload of radiation and elevated rates. Bam, done, draw a line, and call it a day. It's quite wrong, and there is lots of evidence that halving the radiation drops the cancer rates by more than one half. And there certainly must be a threshold. Plenty of evidence that, even if high radiation elevation = more cancer, slightly heightened levels = no change / less. But scientists are incredibly terrified of ever saying so. When scientists make the observation that people fed food with 0 lithium always go insane, and places with higher lithium salt levels in their drinking water have substantially lower rates of suicide, Slashdot and the rest of the world exploded with RAGE at their "poor science": "Everybody knows that's medicine, high doses = dangerous, so all doses = dangerous, there's no such thing as safe limits of anything that's ever possibly bad at all ever!" and "OK so you're saying the government should medicate us all with powerful mood stabilizers? WAS THIS STUDY DONE IN GERMANAY????????????"
Yeah, you missed something somewhere. You missed order of operations. What's the area of a circle? "Pi r squared", squared only squares r, not the entire thing. 240 square mm is 240 mm^2. Acceleration due to gravity is "9.8 meters per second squared", which means, "9.8 m/s/s", not "96.04 m*m/s/s". Nobody ever says it the way you seem to think is the only correct way, "9.8 meters per square second"
What is living, but a prolonged outbreak of survival? ;)
My Laptop came with Vista, and I upgraded to Windows 7 when I could. A few weeks later the numlock light burnt out. I have tried rolling back to Vista, and even XP, and the issue remains!
See, when you hit accel on your cruise control, you're telling it to increase the current target speed by 2.5 mph or whatever the increment is. You have two options. Option one, is to always go by the current speed, so hitting accel twice in a row has zero effect, you have to wait until the car reaches the new target before hitting accel again. Nobody does it that way, because it's obnoxious. Option two is that hitting accel twice bumps up the target twice. But here's the thing about cars, and you may be shocked, The Woz sure was. Cars aren't magical. They take time to accelerate. And they have gears, so if it needs to change gears, you'll do no accelerating, maybe even decelerate a little, before you start accelerating. If you just hammer like a fiend when it doesn't respond instantly to the first press, then you're bumping the target speed ever higher, so when it gets back in gear, you're going to take off with no end in sight! Same thing happens if you hammer "accel" on a hill, where your poor car is already giving it all she's got, captain. When you crest, you're going to launch like a bat out of hell. Oh yeah, and while it's not likely to be the issue at the speeds described here, the Prius is a hybrid. So, even longer than a shift delay, I imagine, would be a "Starting the engine" delay. RTFM.
In summary, I agree with Toyota, sounds like it's working as designed. Maybe it's not a great design to not have a readout of the current setting, but it's exactly like every cruise control in every car ever made. And, 80 is already 10 over the limit in California, and at least 5 over in all but a few states! And if a PRIUS makes it, as he says, from 80 to 97 before he can react and hit the brakes, I'm not sure he should be driving at all, let alone going 10 or more over the speed limit!
I don't think it's nearly as absurd as RIAA shenanigans. It really boils down to the argument over whether or not a game of football can be copyrighted. Certainly, the commentary should be, but that's the network's, not the NFLs. The game itself? I don't think so, but I'm not an expert. If you allow that the game footage is the copyright of the NFL, then their behavior (in this instance) is reasonable, or at least, follows a reasonable interpretation of existing laws (even if you might view said laws themselves as unreasonable). Copyright has a concept of "public performances", which are the exclusive right of the copyright holder. Historically, this has been quite important. Say you're a playwright. You mail out your play to producers, hoping one of them picks it up. Now, without the exclusive right to public performances, that producer could take the four copies you mailed him, and the dozen you slipped under his door and into his mail box and under his windshield wipers, hand them out to actors, and put the play on without paying the author a dime. In terms of encouraging playwrights to write, this is quite the undesirable outcome!
On the other hand, perhaps interpreting showing a TV program or movie as a "public performance" in the same sense that putting on a play is, is taking it too far. I suppose just putting a DVD in a machine is easier than putting together a play from a script, so it may make sense to treat it as at least as bad. But alternately, the purpose of the manuscript is to be put on, and earn the writer money from that performance. The purpose of a DVD is to be sold and watched, and it was sold and now you and some other people are watching it, so perhaps it's not really the same thing at all. After all, if it's legal to buy a DVD, then rent it to 10 people for $1 each, it should be equally legal to show it to 10 people in your living room for $1 each. And yes, though the studios want it changed very badly, rental is explicitly allowed under the doctrine of first sale, being a temporary change of possession, not a public performance.
The only way to fix this perceived imbalance, without breaking other things, would be to do away with public performance rights as a special case. I think writers would still be just as protected, as long as you establish concretely that any movie/play/whatever based on a script is categorically a derivative work, and therefore a copyright violation if not properly licensed. But on the other hand, if you own a DVD, you can play it, period. This, however, requires new laws. Without new laws, the NFL's policy is in line with the law. They're even somewhat fair about it, in the sense that sports bars do not have to pay to have TVs in them, unless they are so large as to be considered the primary attraction of the bar, rather than simply a bonus.
Either way, TFA is just FUD. If you aren't a public performance, you can't run afoul of copyright law. No matter how many buddies you invite over, and no matter that you charge them for your beer, it's not a public performance, because it's a private showing still. The nonsense about "you can't call it a Super Bowl party because that's trademarked" is quite stupid, but no more stupid than any other corporation going overboard defending their trademarks. Intel suing prison programs because they use "inside" to refer to those in prison, and Intel owns "Noun Inside"? I'd say the Super Bowl BS is demonstrably less retarded, as at least these parties are actually using the trademarked term, even if using a trademark to refer to the actual trademarked item is supposed to be allowed!
I mess those up all of the time. Not because I don't know the difference, but because of how I type. I don't know if I'm weird, but I type phonetically. I hear the word spoken in my head, and my fingers do it. And they'll often chose the wrong word, if I'm typing in a hurry. For this reason, I also get bizarre typos that are completely the wrong word, but are pronounced in a similar way. It's also why I occasionally get the so-called Parmesan commas. My fingers throw a comma in when my brain-narration pauses, and if I happen to naturally pause somewhere that I shouldn't be, I get an invalid comma. I guess my point is, it's perhaps not a case of poor English skills, so much as it's a case of poor proofreading habits. If I don't go back and read what I write, I wind up with extra commas, the wrong its/their/too/through etc, and even more bizarre things.
What traditional culture? I see your culture, with a long and storied tradition, follows in the footsteps of those who set up elaborate rules to keep Chinese and Indians out, and when they actually managed to jump through all the hoops we set up, said "I still prefer not" and deported them anyways, illegally. The culture that burns down Chinese stores and beats their owners to death. Frankly, the most clear and eloquent speakers I know are all Asian. Chinese, Korean, Indian, they can all speak English just fine. They're all second generation, probably. And that's just it. Hate the evil immigrants all you want, and cry about the decline of our great white nation, but the immigrants send their children to school, and try hard to teach them English, in addition to their own native language. Now, I'm a TA at UW from TFA. In class, who knows, they all seem to speak just fine. When marking, I can't really say who's who, since don't even look at the names. But, most of them are writing just fine. Yes, 30% are failing the entrance exam, and those that do, take English courses to bring them up to par before they're allowed in the real courses. Because we teach in English, and if you don't speak it, we can't help you. And that's how it should work, that's why we have the literacy entrance exams, and I don't understand why most universities don't! I'd say that almost no assignments I mark have real English issues, even though most of them are written by exchange students. During my exams, lots of students raise their hands because they just can't understand the wording of the question, even with an example showing the function's input and output. Most of them aren't exchange students. Some of the native English speakers can't even articulate what part of the question they don't understand! "Ummm, the question, I just don't get it" "What part?" "Just...ummmm....the question, I don't get it" "Sorry, read the question and look at the examples. If you come up with a specific question I'll answer it for you." Exchange students might have more questions about vocabulary, but once they know what the words mean, they can answer the question. And, again, these aren't immigrants, they're exchange students. They came here to learn English by immersion. Finally, if you're going to complain about how the damn foreigners should learn God damn English, perhaps you should learn some yourself. Your grammar and punctuation are atrocious.
i no rite lang iz evolvin an if u can undastand den wats the prob huh? lang is 2 comoonikate ideaz n if u git wat im sayin den its dun its job an who cares wat a dikshunary sez, ppl who r all "oh, rite proper lol" r just stuck up tards dey tink dey smart cus they can memirize sum words in a book, but der just nerds wit no life, dey wuldnt stand 5 min in da reel wurld.
No. I'm a TA at the very university in question in TFA. It's not just that they can't spell, and have no sense of grammar. They can't communicate ideas. When some of these students submit assignments, the spelling can even be correct, but I have absolutely no idea what they mean, it's gibberish. Some of the ones with problems are foreign exchange students. On the one hand, it's not their fault, they're still learning. On the other hand, we give them ESL exams to make sure they're able to keep up with courses taught in English, so they better be able to! But most of the people with English problems are the locals. They just can't communicate an idea to save their life. So, I say again, no, it's not just that their grammar and spelling suck, it's that they can't communicate an idea. Evolution or not, if you cant' communicate an idea, you need better language skills. Some of them also seem equally unable to understand English, either. They read questions and they just can't follow what they mean. So, fuck you for saying we should be writing our exams in SMS because we've made them inaccessible to changing society.
As penance, go read the comments on icanhascheezburger.com, and realize exactly WHAT you are chastising us for not accepting as FORMAL ESSAYS.
Spellcheck means stopping typing in order to right click and correct it. At least, if you fix them as soon as you finish the sentence. So, long term, you condition yourself to learn how to spell things correctly, or you'll slow your own typing down! Oh, well, in Elementary school I had a fine motor problem that meant I couldn't really write legibly (still can't but people stop caring after elementary) so I had a word processor device. It had a spellcheck, but of course, it couldn't underline things in red, since it's just black-on-green LCD like a TI graphing calculator. So, when you hit space after an incorrectly spelled word? Bzzzt. Not even a nice clean beep, a buzzer, or at least as close as you can come with what was basically the same as a PC's internal speaker. Talk about negative reinforcement!