Just everyone use GMT (UTC) and get used to it. What is the point of timezones anyway? Oh, you like that it's 12 in the middle of the day and in the middle of the night. So what. Get over it. It's going to happen eventually anyway.
the document you linked to is FMI-07.22 and is called "Counterinsurgency Operations". The document in TFA and on wikileaks is FMI-31-20-3 and is titled "FOREIGN INTERNAL DEFENSE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL FORCES"
I'm still not sure whether the second one is classified though as it's not mentioned. The first one says "This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online www.us.army.mil" and the second one doesn't though.
You are obviously employed by the military to spread disinformation; nice job you have reading slashdot on our tax dollars:)
it is inaccurate to say that downloading copyrighted music is forbidden by law. it is 'unlawful' rather than 'illegal', so the law allows for the possibility of the copyright owner to seek reparations, but does not forbid it whatsoever.
The error inherent to measuring something that is 'unlawful' and often frowned upon is far greater than the difference between 19 and 20 percent. Perhaps everyone has simply got better at concealing their downloading of copyrighted material (mp3 blogs, private trackers, etc) or perhaps the effect of the RIAA's grandma-suing onslaught has been that people lie about their online activity more.
the code is always written in ballpoint pen inside the front cover of the 'how do i save preset stations' radio guide leaflet. which is in the glove compartment.
where i live a lot of people used to steal car radios regardless of whether they were original or aftermarket. presumably to sell to the shops which sell radios to people who've had theirs stolen. this is the business model that hubcap theft (hubcaps only fit specific car models too) was based on.
in summary: Most americans drive automatics, and many would actively avoid having to drive stick Most europeans drive manuals, and many would actively avoid having to drive a manual
Both ways have advantages and disadvantages and it's not quite important enough to have world war III over. Please don't debate this further here
Since he wasn't replying to me, I had no obligation to answer or give a rebuttal. It might have been a very well thought out response, I didn't read it. I also might have agreed with it.
Thank you. I didn't believe you that these words appear in the Qu'ran. While I think your 'translation' is quite far off the mark compared to the other 3, I accept that it is functionally the same as what you said, and that it is meant literally.
Aren't real American values things like equality of opportunity, the Constitution, separation of Church and state, free market capitalism, democracy and minimal goverment, rather than Anglo-Saxon culture and the English language?
Yes, I know those things are being eroded too, but in general I don't think it's by Latino immigrants.
Please reference the above quote "all unbelievers are less than the filthiest of animals" to a chapter (sura) in a common English translation of the Qu'ran.
You can't spell, therefore I have so little faith in the likelihood that you might be an intelligent person that I'm not even going to bother to read what you wrote.
Sorry, but there are a lot of political opinions out there and I can't read them all.
(Everyone is allowed to make 1-2 typos in a piece of writing as long as the one above. I spotted 5, including one in a person's name, and only scanned about half of the text.)
The weakness cuts the cost of brute-forcing down to minutes. There are only 65536 possible values for keys that are generated using this piece of code, and some of that space can be cut down using a little bit of knowledge (the 16 bit seed is the pid of the process, so it's not uniformly distributed.
Pretty much anything that is worth the hassle of using ssh/SSL for is worth 20 minutes of an attacker's computing time (effective cost ~0).
i had a professor who didn't mind that you couldn't divide non-zero numbers by zero, but was quite annoyed that he wasn't allowed to divide zero by zero. i never asked him what he thought the value of 0/0 was supposed to be..
It is not an open question. It is a question to which it has been proved that the answer can be either yes or no. This is as good an answer (for mathematicians) as if it had been found to be yes or no, since noone need try and prove anything about it anymore. It is not unresolved, it is completely resolved.
I've never seen a lecturer try to divide by zero in 5+ years of math classes. There are a few errors that come up quite frequently, but lecturers usually know in advance what they're going to demonstrate on the board. Dividing by zero would mean that you had really gone wrong somewhere, and in fact the real error would probably be that you had put the wrong expression on the bottom of a fraction (one that happened to be equal to zero).
There are about a million people including you who thought that because the equation of Fermat's last theorem looked simple, there was some simple reason why it was true. (Don't worry because this list includes a lot of good mathematicians, including maybe Fermat himself) Some of these people would try and turn the 'feeling' you expressed above into something that looked like a mathematical proof, and then send it to various mathematicians, university departments etc. In fact the department that was responsible for awarding the Wolfskerl had a rota among staff for people to go through these supposed proofs and write back pointing out the flaws. There were always flaws. Like the Four Colour Theorem, the simplicity of the question suggested that there might be a simple solution. Like the Four Colour Theorem, if you study some of the actual proof, and take in to account the fact that lots of serious mathematicians tried to find proofs before, it's not hard to be convinced that there isn't a much simpler proof.
(The proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is something that a good final-year undergraduate in pure math should be able to learn a lot about, missing out lots of details though. But at least to a level to begin to understand what the mathematical machinery that was used relates to. A good starting place is "Algebraic Number Theory and Fermat's Last Theorem" by Ian Stewart and David Tall. If you only have good high school math or high school + 1 college algebra course, it will take a LOT of work and determination to get up to a level to start understanding this stuff, and probably a couple of other books before you're ready for this one. However there's no reason you wouldn't be able to do it if you have some curiosity and mathematical aptitude. Good Luck.)
the archimedes was a beautiful machine. The PC succeeded for a lot of reasons, but what it didn't have was elegance. There's no way you can break down what that means, but when you sat down in front of an Archimedes (or a Beeb) it just made sense in a way that the PC didn't.
IMHO home computing really took off when a lot of people who weren't part of the (ATARI/AMIGA/BBC etc.) home computing scene, and wouldn't have bought a home computer brought their old IBM PC home from the office for the kids to play on / for word processing and realised that it was worth having. So it didn't really matter much who was dominating the home computer market before the PC, the fact that people had already learnt to use it at work, there was a certain amount of shareware and stuff available, and that lots of PCs were obsoleted meant that whatever people had at work was going to take over in the long run. All the other computers had a lot more programmer/hobbyist appeal, but this might have been a factor in putting a lot of untechnical people off, who didn't know they could operate a computer until they had to learn to do so at work.
Slashdot Mirror
Just everyone use GMT (UTC) and get used to it. What is the point of timezones anyway? Oh, you like that it's 12 in the middle of the day and in the middle of the night. So what. Get over it. It's going to happen eventually anyway.
what part of "Gnu's Not Unix" don't you understand?
the document you linked to is FMI-07.22 and is called "Counterinsurgency Operations". The document in TFA and on wikileaks is FMI-31-20-3 and is titled "FOREIGN INTERNAL DEFENSE TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL FORCES"
:)
I'm still not sure whether the second one is classified though as it's not mentioned. The first one says "This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online www.us.army.mil" and the second one doesn't though.
You are obviously employed by the military to spread disinformation; nice job you have reading slashdot on our tax dollars
lol, on that basis Bush should have attacked Ronald Reagan and Zbigniew Brzezinski.
http://www.esquire.com/features/michael-hensley-0708
this guy was really excited about creating democracy in iraq.
it is inaccurate to say that downloading copyrighted music is forbidden by law. it is 'unlawful' rather than 'illegal', so the law allows for the possibility of the copyright owner to seek reparations, but does not forbid it whatsoever.
a complete meaningless statistic.
The error inherent to measuring something that is 'unlawful' and often frowned upon is far greater than the difference between 19 and 20 percent. Perhaps everyone has simply got better at concealing their downloading of copyrighted material (mp3 blogs, private trackers, etc) or perhaps the effect of the RIAA's grandma-suing onslaught has been that people lie about their online activity more.
This post tells you all you need to know about people who know the correct names for parts of guns.
seconded
the code is always written in ballpoint pen inside the front cover of the 'how do i save preset stations' radio guide leaflet. which is in the glove compartment.
and it's usually '4444'.
where i live a lot of people used to steal car radios regardless of whether they were original or aftermarket. presumably to sell to the shops which sell radios to people who've had theirs stolen. this is the business model that hubcap theft (hubcaps only fit specific car models too) was based on.
in summary:
Most americans drive automatics, and many would actively avoid having to drive stick
Most europeans drive manuals, and many would actively avoid having to drive a manual
Both ways have advantages and disadvantages and it's not quite important enough to have world war III over. Please don't debate this further here
Since he wasn't replying to me, I had no obligation to answer or give a rebuttal. It might have been a very well thought out response, I didn't read it. I also might have agreed with it.
Thank you. I didn't believe you that these words appear in the Qu'ran. While I think your 'translation' is quite far off the mark compared to the other 3, I accept that it is functionally the same as what you said, and that it is meant literally.
Aren't real American values things like equality of opportunity, the Constitution, separation of Church and state, free market capitalism, democracy and minimal goverment, rather than Anglo-Saxon culture and the English language?
Yes, I know those things are being eroded too, but in general I don't think it's by Latino immigrants.
Please reference the above quote "all unbelievers are less than the filthiest of animals" to a chapter (sura) in a common English translation of the Qu'ran.
You can't spell, therefore I have so little faith in the likelihood that you might be an intelligent person that I'm not even going to bother to read what you wrote.
Sorry, but there are a lot of political opinions out there and I can't read them all.
(Everyone is allowed to make 1-2 typos in a piece of writing as long as the one above. I spotted 5, including one in a person's name, and only scanned about half of the text.)
The weakness cuts the cost of brute-forcing down to minutes. There are only 65536 possible values for keys that are generated using this piece of code, and some of that space can be cut down using a little bit of knowledge (the 16 bit seed is the pid of the process, so it's not uniformly distributed. Pretty much anything that is worth the hassle of using ssh/SSL for is worth 20 minutes of an attacker's computing time (effective cost ~0).
When I build my own computers (from generic parts) they have a lot lower failure rate than most machines that have been assembled by a COMPANY.
(And they have a lot less thermal compound on them than the MacBook Pro.)i had a professor who didn't mind that you couldn't divide non-zero numbers by zero, but was quite annoyed that he wasn't allowed to divide zero by zero. i never asked him what he thought the value of 0/0 was supposed to be..
It is not an open question. It is a question to which it has been proved that the answer can be either yes or no. This is as good an answer (for mathematicians) as if it had been found to be yes or no, since noone need try and prove anything about it anymore. It is not unresolved, it is completely resolved.
I've never seen a lecturer try to divide by zero in 5+ years of math classes. There are a few errors that come up quite frequently, but lecturers usually know in advance what they're going to demonstrate on the board. Dividing by zero would mean that you had really gone wrong somewhere, and in fact the real error would probably be that you had put the wrong expression on the bottom of a fraction (one that happened to be equal to zero).
There are about a million people including you who thought that because the equation of Fermat's last theorem looked simple, there was some simple reason why it was true. (Don't worry because this list includes a lot of good mathematicians, including maybe Fermat himself) Some of these people would try and turn the 'feeling' you expressed above into something that looked like a mathematical proof, and then send it to various mathematicians, university departments etc. In fact the department that was responsible for awarding the Wolfskerl had a rota among staff for people to go through these supposed proofs and write back pointing out the flaws. There were always flaws. Like the Four Colour Theorem, the simplicity of the question suggested that there might be a simple solution. Like the Four Colour Theorem, if you study some of the actual proof, and take in to account the fact that lots of serious mathematicians tried to find proofs before, it's not hard to be convinced that there isn't a much simpler proof.
(The proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is something that a good final-year undergraduate in pure math should be able to learn a lot about, missing out lots of details though. But at least to a level to begin to understand what the mathematical machinery that was used relates to. A good starting place is "Algebraic Number Theory and Fermat's Last Theorem" by Ian Stewart and David Tall. If you only have good high school math or high school + 1 college algebra course, it will take a LOT of work and determination to get up to a level to start understanding this stuff, and probably a couple of other books before you're ready for this one. However there's no reason you wouldn't be able to do it if you have some curiosity and mathematical aptitude. Good Luck.)
the archimedes was a beautiful machine. The PC succeeded for a lot of reasons, but what it didn't have was elegance. There's no way you can break down what that means, but when you sat down in front of an Archimedes (or a Beeb) it just made sense in a way that the PC didn't.
IMHO home computing really took off when a lot of people who weren't part of the (ATARI/AMIGA/BBC etc.) home computing scene, and wouldn't have bought a home computer brought their old IBM PC home from the office for the kids to play on / for word processing and realised that it was worth having. So it didn't really matter much who was dominating the home computer market before the PC, the fact that people had already learnt to use it at work, there was a certain amount of shareware and stuff available, and that lots of PCs were obsoleted meant that whatever people had at work was going to take over in the long run.
All the other computers had a lot more programmer/hobbyist appeal, but this might have been a factor in putting a lot of untechnical people off, who didn't know they could operate a computer until they had to learn to do so at work.