You're telling me that the Lords infallibly divine what is in the best interest of the Kingdom, and do that, instead of serving their own interests, which may or may not be in the best interest of the Kingdom?
No, I'm not saying that, and you're not crazy. What I was saying is that because the Lords don't have to worry about re-election, they can vote for what they think is in the country's best interest. Naturally, being human, they also take their own interests into consideration, but they don't have to worry about pleasing either the voters or the campaign contributors.
The US Senate wasn't elected for about 150 years. In theory it allowed Senators to be immune from political pressures and the public passions of the moment. In practice, as political parties in the US got more powerful the Senators became pawns of the state parties.
More accurately, they weren't directly elected. Senators were elected by the state legislators, and were (to some extent) expected to serve the interests of the entire state, rather than a smaller constituency as the Representatives were. This gave each state's legislature a voice of its own in Congress, something they badly lack now.
Impartial? Nonsense. They're only accountable to their own interests.
Well, yes, of course. However, as they don't have to worry about being re-elected, they can say what they think and vote for what they really think is in the nation's best interest instead of pandering to lobbyists and campaign contributors. In that sense, at least, they're more likely to be impartial than an elected official.
It's the same idea as the Romans used in having members of their Senate (Their "conscript fathers" as they were sometimes called.) serve for life. By taking away the need to curry favor for re-election, they were expected to be able to put themselves above the special interest groups and work only for the good of the state. To some extent, it worked, because the senators took their responsibilities seriously.
So, you feel that if they can ignore personal responsibility it's OK for you to be irresponsible as well. Hypocrit! Unless and until you start acting responsible on your own, you have no right to complain that others act just as badly as you do, and using their conduct as an excuse for yours is reprehensible.
I tell ya what. I will take personal responsibility when Bush and Cheney do OK?
And do you feel it's OK for you to be irresponisble because they are? If you don't like them not taking responsibility for their own actions, how about setting a good example by taking responsibility for what you do? Right now, I hear you saying, "Don't do what I do, do what I say."
Currently, I'm running RedHat 9 as a secondary system. I'd heard about using yum -update to go right to the current FC. Is it a good idea? If not, what do you reccomend?
No. I used that because my preferred handle was already in use. This one refers to my standard hall costume at SF conventions, and that will tell you which of the three I mentioned I am.
Anybody trying that on me is in for a big surprise. They'd find out that I'm an SF fan in LA, a minor editor for the NYT and a graphics designer in Chicago. Which one is the real me? Enquiring minds want to know!
Perscription or non-perscription? It makes a big difference. Right now, I'm taking four perscription pharmaceuticals each morning, and two of them in the evening as well. For three years, I was also taking Zoloft to help manage stress, also by perscription. Unless you make an execption for that, there's a lot of people you're discriminating against for no good reason.
She actually got canned a few years ago when she refused her then-employer's orders to take down the web site.
Considering that this was an unwarranted invasion of her private life, I hope she sued their asses off for unlawful termination, or whatever it happens to be called where she lives.
Titan has a pretty thick atmosphere, although it is based on conditions that may not exist near Jupiter.
I considered that. However, not only is Titan considerably larger than Europa, it's much colder, making it easier for it to maintain an atmosphere. You'd expect moons farther out to have one as well, but as far as I know, Titan is the only moon with more than a trace of atmosphere. If our moon were that far out, it'd probably have one as well, but it's just too near the Sun as it is.
What if Europa had an atmosphere early in it's life? Was it always relatively airless?
It's very unlikely that Europa ever had more than a trace-atmosphere at any time. You need a certain amount of mass to generate enough gravity to hold one, although the colder it is, the less you need. I don't have the physics to calulate if Europa's mass is enough, but if it ever did have one, it probably still would.
The rocks being ejected from our atmosphere are going to be heated red-hot or more on the way out. How likely is it that bacteria that can survive that can also survive the cold on Titan? It seems like it's asking a bit much for them to be resistant to both red-hot heat and freezing cold. Does anybody know how likely that is?
Talking of indecency, why don't the authorities shut down the Jerry Springer Show?
Because people aren't complaining to the FCC about it. If enough people did, they'd get slapped with fines too. It's the squeeky wheel syndrome: the FCC isn't going to do anything on its own, becuause if they're not receiving complaints, viewers must think it's OK.
One way or another, we both agree that something needs to be done about buffer overflows and that if it's done right, a sandbox isn't needed. (I think we agree on that last.) As far as the programmer carelessly going past the end of buffer, that's just as true now, and not (as far as I know) a vector for malicious code. It's also something much more likely to be caught during testing, rather than in production. I wonder how much all this trouble comes from "we've always done it this way" being more important than "let's find the best way to do it."
How hard would it be for MicroSith to have somebody write a function that accepts input and returns it in a buffer, properly sized? How hard would it be for MicroSith to include a spec that each buffer so allocated is released when not needed? How hard would it be for everybody to use that function? BANG! Buffer overflows go away. No need for everybody to write perfect code, just everybody using the same, well-tested function instead of rolling their own and getting it wrong time after time. Buffer overflows are easy to avoid, if you do it right. Clearly, MicroSith code monkeys do it the easy way, not the right way, so let's make it easy for them to get it right!
What nonsense! "What if" thinking leads you to find ways people can misuse your code, either with malice or from simple error, and helps you protect it. Refusual to do this is the "in a perfect world..." syndrome that refuses to check for errors because people shouldn't be making them. Properly written code validates input, including length, if you're accepting a string, and avoids foolish things like buffer overflows.
Not all programmers are top notch, and sooner or later everybody slips up. VM's enable you to be sloppy and cleans up messes quite nicely.
So, it's better to put everything possible in a sandbox, so that code monkeys can be lazy and sloppy? That's OK during development, because you expect problems. Properly written production code shouldn't need that. Yes, errors will slip by at times, but things like buffer overflows are so easy to prevent that there's no excuse for them.
Writing unexploitable code is great, but it needs to be executed perfectly by every single developer, writing every single line of code, forever.
Writing code that's not vulnerable to buffer overflows is trivial. Either you check the input size before allocating your buffer, or you have a fixed buffer, and throw away anything that doesn't fit. Hard-coding the buffer size in, especially after it's been proven time and again to be bad coding is just plain stupid.
The planet might be 13 times the mass but if the density is the same as Earth then g is only 2.35 times that of Earth (cube root of 13).
That would be true if the radius were the same. It's probably, using your own figures, about 2.35 times the radius of the Earth. I'll let somebody else figure out the probable surface g.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm not saying that, and you're not crazy. What I was saying is that because the Lords don't have to worry about re-election, they can vote for what they think is in the country's best interest. Naturally, being human, they also take their own interests into consideration, but they don't have to worry about pleasing either the voters or the campaign contributors.
More accurately, they weren't directly elected. Senators were elected by the state legislators, and were (to some extent) expected to serve the interests of the entire state, rather than a smaller constituency as the Representatives were. This gave each state's legislature a voice of its own in Congress, something they badly lack now.
Well, yes, of course. However, as they don't have to worry about being re-elected, they can say what they think and vote for what they really think is in the nation's best interest instead of pandering to lobbyists and campaign contributors. In that sense, at least, they're more likely to be impartial than an elected official.
It's the same idea as the Romans used in having members of their Senate (Their "conscript fathers" as they were sometimes called.) serve for life. By taking away the need to curry favor for re-election, they were expected to be able to put themselves above the special interest groups and work only for the good of the state. To some extent, it worked, because the senators took their responsibilities seriously.
So, you feel that if they can ignore personal responsibility it's OK for you to be irresponsible as well. Hypocrit! Unless and until you start acting responsible on your own, you have no right to complain that others act just as badly as you do, and using their conduct as an excuse for yours is reprehensible.
And do you feel it's OK for you to be irresponisble because they are? If you don't like them not taking responsibility for their own actions, how about setting a good example by taking responsibility for what you do? Right now, I hear you saying, "Don't do what I do, do what I say."
No, no, no, no, no! That's, "Advanced Fedora may be, but fixed, I hope, their installer they have." Yoda-speak right can you do not?
Currently, I'm running RedHat 9 as a secondary system. I'd heard about using yum -update to go right to the current FC. Is it a good idea? If not, what do you reccomend?
You don't read the National Enquirer, do you?
Got it in one. Have you read it?
No. I used that because my preferred handle was already in use. This one refers to my standard hall costume at SF conventions, and that will tell you which of the three I mentioned I am.
Anybody trying that on me is in for a big surprise. They'd find out that I'm an SF fan in LA, a minor editor for the NYT and a graphics designer in Chicago. Which one is the real me? Enquiring minds want to know!
Perscription or non-perscription? It makes a big difference. Right now, I'm taking four perscription pharmaceuticals each morning, and two of them in the evening as well. For three years, I was also taking Zoloft to help manage stress, also by perscription. Unless you make an execption for that, there's a lot of people you're discriminating against for no good reason.
Considering that this was an unwarranted invasion of her private life, I hope she sued their asses off for unlawful termination, or whatever it happens to be called where she lives.
I considered that. However, not only is Titan considerably larger than Europa, it's much colder, making it easier for it to maintain an atmosphere. You'd expect moons farther out to have one as well, but as far as I know, Titan is the only moon with more than a trace of atmosphere. If our moon were that far out, it'd probably have one as well, but it's just too near the Sun as it is.
It's very unlikely that Europa ever had more than a trace-atmosphere at any time. You need a certain amount of mass to generate enough gravity to hold one, although the colder it is, the less you need. I don't have the physics to calulate if Europa's mass is enough, but if it ever did have one, it probably still would.
The rocks being ejected from our atmosphere are going to be heated red-hot or more on the way out. How likely is it that bacteria that can survive that can also survive the cold on Titan? It seems like it's asking a bit much for them to be resistant to both red-hot heat and freezing cold. Does anybody know how likely that is?
Because people aren't complaining to the FCC about it. If enough people did, they'd get slapped with fines too. It's the squeeky wheel syndrome: the FCC isn't going to do anything on its own, becuause if they're not receiving complaints, viewers must think it's OK.
One way or another, we both agree that something needs to be done about buffer overflows and that if it's done right, a sandbox isn't needed. (I think we agree on that last.) As far as the programmer carelessly going past the end of buffer, that's just as true now, and not (as far as I know) a vector for malicious code. It's also something much more likely to be caught during testing, rather than in production. I wonder how much all this trouble comes from "we've always done it this way" being more important than "let's find the best way to do it."
How hard would it be for MicroSith to have somebody write a function that accepts input and returns it in a buffer, properly sized? How hard would it be for MicroSith to include a spec that each buffer so allocated is released when not needed? How hard would it be for everybody to use that function? BANG! Buffer overflows go away. No need for everybody to write perfect code, just everybody using the same, well-tested function instead of rolling their own and getting it wrong time after time. Buffer overflows are easy to avoid, if you do it right. Clearly, MicroSith code monkeys do it the easy way, not the right way, so let's make it easy for them to get it right!
What nonsense! "What if" thinking leads you to find ways people can misuse your code, either with malice or from simple error, and helps you protect it. Refusual to do this is the "in a perfect world..." syndrome that refuses to check for errors because people shouldn't be making them. Properly written code validates input, including length, if you're accepting a string, and avoids foolish things like buffer overflows.
So, it's better to put everything possible in a sandbox, so that code monkeys can be lazy and sloppy? That's OK during development, because you expect problems. Properly written production code shouldn't need that. Yes, errors will slip by at times, but things like buffer overflows are so easy to prevent that there's no excuse for them.
Writing code that's not vulnerable to buffer overflows is trivial. Either you check the input size before allocating your buffer, or you have a fixed buffer, and throw away anything that doesn't fit. Hard-coding the buffer size in, especially after it's been proven time and again to be bad coding is just plain stupid.
Why is it important? It's a nit, and deserved picking. Thanx for expanding.
That would be true if the radius were the same. It's probably, using your own figures, about 2.35 times the radius of the Earth. I'll let somebody else figure out the probable surface g.
No, it's 80 light years across. I don't expect anybody here to RTFA, but at least you could read the summary!