Not only did you get the word wrong, but you capitalized the "F" when the GP did not.
As far as getting the word wrong, all I can say is mea culpa. I was looking at what I quoted, but not paying attention. I capitalized it because there's a chance that the site's checking for that. (Not capitalized is presumed not to be a name.) As far as using Judy Garland for your city, I just picked the first thing that came to mind. Why Judy Garland came to mind right then I can't say, but it did. The point is, the answers don't have to match the questions as long as you know what they are. And, as far as your problem with answering the "dream job" question, any question who's answer is likely to change with time probably isn't a good one to use. Yes, I know you didn't pick it, but whoever did picked a bad one.
I used to work for an ISP doing tech support. Much of our work required us to be logged into several webpages on our local intranet; not only were they behind our firewall, you couldn't even reach the login pages unless you were physically on-site. Then, somebody in IT got a bug up their ass about security and passwords. Not only did they require 10 character passwords, they had to be mixed case with a number and a punctuation mark. (Of course, requiring all that just lowered the search space for a brute-force attack.) And, of course, they had to be changed every 60 days and couldn't repeat. It was a royal PITA, and not just for me, for everybody, and all for nothing because nobody who wasn't authorized to use those sites could have reached them, let alone log in. Then, once you'd logged in, you'd get about half a dozen messages about outdated certificates, because nobody in IT could be arsed to get new ones, and the computers were so heavily locked down that we couldn't tell them to ignore the certificates and have it survive a reboot. (Just to put a cherry on top, we were using a version of NT 4 that was so unstable that most of us were rebooting several times a day.)
At my bank, they ask what was the drill instructors name if I was in the military... how the hell do I know, all I remember is 'fuckhead'
So use that as the question and Fuckwit as the answer. No problem. It's not as though anybody is going to check to see if the answer is a proper name or anything.
Actually, now that I think about it, there's no reason that there has to be any logical or rational connection between the question and answer, just as long as you remember what it is. I mean, is anybody at your bank going to complain if your answer to the question, "What city did you grow up in?" is, "Judy Garland," and if so, why?
So they could be both very rare, and yet still very likely to happen.
As phrased, you're contradicting yourself. More accurate would be to say that even if they're rare, there are so many stars out there that even if only a tiny fraction of a percent of them harbor civilizations, that tiny fraction adds up to a fairly large number.
I'm not sure, but I had the impression that the "wobble" consisted of the star moving back and forth, slightly, as it revolved around the system's center of mass. If so, it's the same as how close binary stars are located (Sirius' companion is the classic example.) with a much smaller displacement. Of course, ICBW, and if so, I'm sure (this being Slashdot) that at least one poster will correct me.
Once you learn to smoke meat you can keep it a much longer time.
I can't find a cite for it, but I do remember hearing not long ago that one of the original reasons to smoke food was that the aroma repelled flies. Don't know if it's true, but I did find verification that smoke has anti-microbial benefits.
I'm not saying this report is wrong, because I don't know enough to have an opinion. However, I can see what one of its results is going to be: teenagers claiming it's not their fault that they did the same dumb thing for the fourth time, it's the fault of their genetics and hence, their parent's fault. Just what we need: another way for kids to avoid taking responsibility.
No, only one: that most of the people who think those single-player games should be free are cheap bastards who want to leach on other people's creativity without paying for it. I have no quarrel with people who decide to put their work in the Public Domain; it's their choice, after all. And, if they want to say that everybody should do the same, I'll respect their opinion, even though I have no intention of doing that with the three novels I've finished, or the one I'm working on.
More to the point, they usually come from people who have never put the work in to create a game themselves, have no idea how hard it is and just want to benefit from your hard work for free.
Personally, I think that copyright is a good idea, and if implemented properly can be very beneficial for the public. The problem is that the current laws are written to follow the whims of authors, and generally ignore the greater public benefit.
Actually, they're written to conform to the whims of one, long dead author: Victor Hugo. That's because he's the one who got the Berne Convention written to include copyright lasting for the author's lifetime plus fifty years, and US law had to be changed to conform to it when we signed on to it. If you want to blame any single person for this mess, blame him.
It could serve as an interesting basis for security, i.e. gesturing and opening the correct doors in a maze.
I like that idea, especially if whoever sets up the gestures has a bit of imagination and a sense of humor. I'd love to be able to open a door just by walking up to it, holding my left hand up at shoulder level and snapping my fingers. Clapping my hands three times at waist level would be another neat idea. Set it up right, and it would feel like you were in a magician's lair, and that there were demons who would get you if you make the wrong move, or the right move at the wrong time. Neat!
Ask why we saw silhouetted shots of helicopters and long views of nighttime explosions instead of what was really happening on the ground.
There are two possible reasons: first, they may not be allowed close enough to the action to get shots of what's happening on the ground and second, those long shots of nighttime explosions make dramatic footage. Remember, like it or not, TV news is a form of entertainment, and they have to pick footage that will get the viewer's attention and keep them watching. It's not always that they don't want to show more detail, it's just that they have to pick and choose, and they'll generally choose the shots that will keep people from turning to another station.
I expect that there will be shots from the ground, later, in the newspapers and news magazines because they're looking for a different audience, and don't have to be showmen to keep people's attention.
that may be the way things are now; I wouldn't know. I do know, however, that for decades, both advertising and travel agencies did work by getting a discounted rate, charging the full rate and taking the difference as their commission. In those days, the only people who would have used a travel agency who charged extra would be rich folk who'd figure that the time saved was worth it. As far as advertising agencies, you got the benefit of their experience and skill, while paying the same price as if you'd done all the work yourself.
Travel agents don't charge you more than going directly to the airline. If they did, nobody in their right mind would use them. They make a profit on the transaction because the airline charges them 15% less because the agency's do so much business with them in the long run and because if they didn't the agencies wouldn't handle their business. (it's the same, BTW, as it is with advertising agencies; the newspapers, magazines, TV stations and so-on give them a discount because of the volume, and that's how they stay in business.)
They are refunding the WEBSITES directly and making it their problem to get the money back to the customer who bought the ticket.
Actually, it didn't occur to me that the websites would charge the customer and pass it on to the airline. And, of course, the extra costs of returning the money to the customers means that the websites are losing money because the airline won't honor the sales.
The way I see it, they have two choices. First, they can simply refuse to honor tickets bought through third-party sites. If so, they're asking for a great big class action suit by all the people who's money they accepted. Second, they can refund the money and simply refuse to do business through these sites. If that's the way they go (most likely) they're just asking for a revolt by the people who own their stock (and through that, of course, the business itself) for chasing away customers. I predict either a rapid backpedal on this or a change of manglement in short order.
Tufts would have to prove that MAC spoofing is common knowledge and a common skill to mount that defense for their students, and that just isn't going to fly in court.
Well, in that case, I know what I'd do if I were still in college and there were any chance of something like this coming up. I'd organize meetings all over campus teaching other students what a MAC address is, how to spoof one and why you'd want to. That way, by the time the RIAA and its goons come knocking, it really would be common knowledge on campus.
But of course. I can't quite imagine Ballmer with a white cat on his lap, anyway.
It doesn't matter. If Balmer picks up the cat, Balmer will become Blofeld. Please note that in each Bond film that he appears in, he looks different, but the cat's always there, and it's the same cat. Clearly, the cat itself is Blofeld and its spirit possesses whoever picks it up. Now, consider: do you really want Balmer turning into Blofeld?
If thats the O'Reilly book I'm thinking of (The Definitive Guide by Eric Meyer?), that's because it was a reference book not a beginners tutorial book.
I honestly don't remember. It was almost ten years ago when I read it, but I do remember that it had fish on the cover and even with all the redundant examples it was fairly thin. That might be the name, but it really doesn't sound right.
The primary difference between the drug and MP3 analogy is that the act of an authorized agent of the copyright holder requesting distribution of the MP3 constitutes permission to distribute, and that's legal. It would likely be entrapment, otherwise.
IANAL, but as I see it, having the investigators download copies would be evidence of infringement if and only if the RIAA's "making available" theory were valid. In that case, they could argue that even though they'd authorized the downloading of this copy, they hadn't authorized the person making it available to do so, and therefore infringement had occurred. Of course, that idea went down in flames, so the whole idea of using their own investigators to "prove" piracy by their own actions is right out.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux already has full support for the ntfs file system. All you need to do is install ntfs-3g, and specify that as the partition's file system.
The answer, of course would be:
As far as getting the word wrong, all I can say is mea culpa. I was looking at what I quoted, but not paying attention. I capitalized it because there's a chance that the site's checking for that. (Not capitalized is presumed not to be a name.) As far as using Judy Garland for your city, I just picked the first thing that came to mind. Why Judy Garland came to mind right then I can't say, but it did. The point is, the answers don't have to match the questions as long as you know what they are. And, as far as your problem with answering the "dream job" question, any question who's answer is likely to change with time probably isn't a good one to use. Yes, I know you didn't pick it, but whoever did picked a bad one.
I used to work for an ISP doing tech support. Much of our work required us to be logged into several webpages on our local intranet; not only were they behind our firewall, you couldn't even reach the login pages unless you were physically on-site. Then, somebody in IT got a bug up their ass about security and passwords. Not only did they require 10 character passwords, they had to be mixed case with a number and a punctuation mark. (Of course, requiring all that just lowered the search space for a brute-force attack.) And, of course, they had to be changed every 60 days and couldn't repeat. It was a royal PITA, and not just for me, for everybody, and all for nothing because nobody who wasn't authorized to use those sites could have reached them, let alone log in. Then, once you'd logged in, you'd get about half a dozen messages about outdated certificates, because nobody in IT could be arsed to get new ones, and the computers were so heavily locked down that we couldn't tell them to ignore the certificates and have it survive a reboot. (Just to put a cherry on top, we were using a version of NT 4 that was so unstable that most of us were rebooting several times a day.)
So use that as the question and Fuckwit as the answer. No problem. It's not as though anybody is going to check to see if the answer is a proper name or anything.
Actually, now that I think about it, there's no reason that there has to be any logical or rational connection between the question and answer, just as long as you remember what it is. I mean, is anybody at your bank going to complain if your answer to the question, "What city did you grow up in?" is, "Judy Garland," and if so, why?
As phrased, you're contradicting yourself. More accurate would be to say that even if they're rare, there are so many stars out there that even if only a tiny fraction of a percent of them harbor civilizations, that tiny fraction adds up to a fairly large number.
I'm not sure, but I had the impression that the "wobble" consisted of the star moving back and forth, slightly, as it revolved around the system's center of mass. If so, it's the same as how close binary stars are located (Sirius' companion is the classic example.) with a much smaller displacement. Of course, ICBW, and if so, I'm sure (this being Slashdot) that at least one poster will correct me.
No. It shows that the submitter thought bash had been around for much longer than it has. Nothing more.
I can't find a cite for it, but I do remember hearing not long ago that one of the original reasons to smoke food was that the aroma repelled flies. Don't know if it's true, but I did find verification that smoke has anti-microbial benefits.
So I'm not allowed to expand on what I said? Since when, and why not?
I'm not saying this report is wrong, because I don't know enough to have an opinion. However, I can see what one of its results is going to be: teenagers claiming it's not their fault that they did the same dumb thing for the fourth time, it's the fault of their genetics and hence, their parent's fault. Just what we need: another way for kids to avoid taking responsibility.
No, only one: that most of the people who think those single-player games should be free are cheap bastards who want to leach on other people's creativity without paying for it. I have no quarrel with people who decide to put their work in the Public Domain; it's their choice, after all. And, if they want to say that everybody should do the same, I'll respect their opinion, even though I have no intention of doing that with the three novels I've finished, or the one I'm working on.
More to the point, they usually come from people who have never put the work in to create a game themselves, have no idea how hard it is and just want to benefit from your hard work for free.
Actually, they're written to conform to the whims of one, long dead author: Victor Hugo. That's because he's the one who got the Berne Convention written to include copyright lasting for the author's lifetime plus fifty years, and US law had to be changed to conform to it when we signed on to it. If you want to blame any single person for this mess, blame him.
I like that idea, especially if whoever sets up the gestures has a bit of imagination and a sense of humor. I'd love to be able to open a door just by walking up to it, holding my left hand up at shoulder level and snapping my fingers. Clapping my hands three times at waist level would be another neat idea. Set it up right, and it would feel like you were in a magician's lair, and that there were demons who would get you if you make the wrong move, or the right move at the wrong time. Neat!
There are two possible reasons: first, they may not be allowed close enough to the action to get shots of what's happening on the ground and second, those long shots of nighttime explosions make dramatic footage. Remember, like it or not, TV news is a form of entertainment, and they have to pick footage that will get the viewer's attention and keep them watching. It's not always that they don't want to show more detail, it's just that they have to pick and choose, and they'll generally choose the shots that will keep people from turning to another station.
I expect that there will be shots from the ground, later, in the newspapers and news magazines because they're looking for a different audience, and don't have to be showmen to keep people's attention.
that may be the way things are now; I wouldn't know. I do know, however, that for decades, both advertising and travel agencies did work by getting a discounted rate, charging the full rate and taking the difference as their commission. In those days, the only people who would have used a travel agency who charged extra would be rich folk who'd figure that the time saved was worth it. As far as advertising agencies, you got the benefit of their experience and skill, while paying the same price as if you'd done all the work yourself.
Travel agents don't charge you more than going directly to the airline. If they did, nobody in their right mind would use them. They make a profit on the transaction because the airline charges them 15% less because the agency's do so much business with them in the long run and because if they didn't the agencies wouldn't handle their business. (it's the same, BTW, as it is with advertising agencies; the newspapers, magazines, TV stations and so-on give them a discount because of the volume, and that's how they stay in business.)
Actually, it didn't occur to me that the websites would charge the customer and pass it on to the airline. And, of course, the extra costs of returning the money to the customers means that the websites are losing money because the airline won't honor the sales.
The way I see it, they have two choices. First, they can simply refuse to honor tickets bought through third-party sites. If so, they're asking for a great big class action suit by all the people who's money they accepted. Second, they can refund the money and simply refuse to do business through these sites. If that's the way they go (most likely) they're just asking for a revolt by the people who own their stock (and through that, of course, the business itself) for chasing away customers. I predict either a rapid backpedal on this or a change of manglement in short order.
Well, in that case, I know what I'd do if I were still in college and there were any chance of something like this coming up. I'd organize meetings all over campus teaching other students what a MAC address is, how to spoof one and why you'd want to. That way, by the time the RIAA and its goons come knocking, it really would be common knowledge on campus.
It doesn't matter. If Balmer picks up the cat, Balmer will become Blofeld. Please note that in each Bond film that he appears in, he looks different, but the cat's always there, and it's the same cat. Clearly, the cat itself is Blofeld and its spirit possesses whoever picks it up. Now, consider: do you really want Balmer turning into Blofeld?
I honestly don't remember. It was almost ten years ago when I read it, but I do remember that it had fish on the cover and even with all the redundant examples it was fairly thin. That might be the name, but it really doesn't sound right.
I didn't know Bill Clinton was still in office.
IANAL, but as I see it, having the investigators download copies would be evidence of infringement if and only if the RIAA's "making available" theory were valid. In that case, they could argue that even though they'd authorized the downloading of this copy, they hadn't authorized the person making it available to do so, and therefore infringement had occurred. Of course, that idea went down in flames, so the whole idea of using their own investigators to "prove" piracy by their own actions is right out.