Did you know that if you leave a hot iron on your crotch and press the steam button, it's bad for your fertility?
So THAT'S what I'm doing wrong!
I ironed my nipple once -- nothing kinky, I was in a hurry trying to get ready for work. It was an amazing experience for several reasons. One, it was a truly profound kind of pain. I've felt things that hurt worse, but this hurt right down to the soles of my feet.
Two, and I am not kidding here, my nipple was really flat for a long time afterwards. My friends used to ask to see it once in a while so they could marvel and mock.
It also led immediately to one of the more frustrating experiences of my life. I had just burned myself. Like a good little scout, I immediately tried to run cold water on it. I ran over to the sink, turned on the water, and stood there stupidly, thinking, "How the hell am I going to get my nipple under that faucet!" At that point, my wife, who had heard me yelling and cursing, asked what was wrong, and I told her I had burned myself. She called in helpfully, "Run it under cold water."
She really didn't deserve being cursed out like that. I don't know what the experience did to my fertility, but I know what it did to my ability to mate.
I can't believe I forgot to bash Microsoft. Okay, here it goes: Vulnerability is inevitable. As the sophistication of your defence grows, so does its complexity (generally) and therefore (generally) it creates new opportunities for attack.
But that level of vulnerability is in this case completely swamped by the utterly inexcusable inattention that MS has paid to basic security at the design and feature packaging phase.
To extend the analogy, it didn't take HIV to jeopardize the health of those who share needles or who have numerous, unprotected, anonymous, sexual contacts. Nonetheless, HIV like the spam-sending trojan anti-spam screensaver.
It's VERY wide. If it is in fact as far away as it appears in the photo, the object (if there was one) must have been rather large. If it were a smoke trail from an object, it would have persisted. If it were a meteor it would have appeared as a LIGHT streak, rather than a dark one.
tFA doesn't say how long the exposure was. If it was long, the possibility of a popping bulb at the same moment that a bug flew past the camera begins to seem more plausible.
for any sort of natural phenomenon. It suggests a photographic artifact of some sort. Is the flash definitely related? It certainly appears to be coming from the end of what the APoD caption identifies as a light pole, which is not working. Could it have failed with a sudden flash? Could it coincidentally have occurred at the same time as the streak artifact?
Sorry, I should have included it. Try any of these, and search for "mastur".
I don't know how I ended up on pages of these quotations by Einstein, Fuller, T.H. Huxley, etc. But there I am. That part of the file goes Konrad Lorenz . . . Thomas Paine . . . Isaac Asimov . . . Richard Lederer . . . ME! . ..Clarence Darrow... I know I'll never get into such company again.
Sadly, my daughter's friends don't think I'm cool for hanging out with the Big Boys, but for publicly using the word, "masturbation."
Hell, Google will do a damn good job of that. Hundreds of USENET posts and forum posts and website things, you can find most of my life out there on big ol' web.....
Actual conversation:
"Dad, did you write something about masturbation on the web a long time ago?"
"What? No! Waitaminute, yes. Not on the web, on a newsgroup. But it was just a metaphor! It was about intellectual masturbation."
"My friends think you're so cool!"
Who knew when we were writing that stuff 15 years ago that it would be around FOREVER?
P.S. How did I know what she was talking about so fast? A former student of mine tracked me down one day. The first thing he said was, "Hey, I read that thing of yours about masturbation." I had no recollection of it so I went and looked it up.
If you have a 1/1,000 chance of dying in any given year, your chance of reaching 1,000 is a little better than 1/3 (that is, 0.999^1000). You have a 50/50 chance of reaching the sprightly young age of 692.
At least, assuming there's no bug in my floating point unit...
There are so many different ways to die, some of which are there in opposition to others. For instance, cell senescence sucks, but if you don't do something to limit cell reproduction you're leaving yourself vulnerable to cancer.
Cancer is the real limiting factor here. Your cells are evolving. Once a zygote has divided into two cells, those two cells are in competition for reproductive success. Now, the body is an environment that's tailored to make "selfish" behavior (like consuming lots of resources and reproducing as fast as possible) less beneficial than it might otherwise be. And the cells start out with lots of mechanisms that make them poor competitors.
But evolution works wonders. DNA replication is imperfect, and mutations arise. Eventually, some combination of mutations will increase the reproductive success of some cell line, and you're on your way down a road to cancer.
We can make the environment less hospitable to such cells with chemotherapy, we can ameliorate some of the more common precancerous mutations with drugs or perhaps even fix them with gene therapy.
But I have a lot of faith in the ingenuity of life, and its ability to find ways around these fixes. Give a trillion cells a thousand years, and one of them is going to figure out a way to take advantage of the incredibly friendly environment inside a body and start building a little empire somewhere inside your pancreas.
Why did you try so called "every possible" crypto key? If you are not a complete moron, you should already know the correct coordinates. And everything other (keys, software) must be on the disk already
Because not being a complete moron, the designer of the device would not take the plaintext coordinates and use that as the cryptographic key. The designer would create a hardware black box that has an integrated GPS. The device spits out a key. If you're in the right location, it's a valid key. If you're not, it's an invalid key. Standard crypto software then uses that key to decrypt the contents of the drive
However, you're correct that it's unlikely that you'd need to try every single possible key. On average you'd only have to try about half of them, leaving you plenty of time to use the data before the heat death of the universe.:-)
You're missing the point. If the GPS doesn't report that the laptop is in an approved location, the thieves can't access the data. The data (actually, the secrecy of the data) might be orders of magnitude more valuable than the hardware.
Lojack works EXTREMELY well. And it's also socially beneficial. If I put an alarm on my car, thieves will go steal your car. If 5% of the people in an area have Lojack, becoming a professional car thief becomes significantly more difficult. By installing Lojack, you're benefiting all car owners in your area.
These days, thieves will typically do things like park cars out on the street somewhere for a day or two to see if the police come and recover it before they bring it to their chop shop. This means there's a better chance of their getting caught even by normal means on cars that DON'T have Lojack.
If I were a police officer, every once in a while I'd see if I could convince someone to leave their stolen and located car right where the thieves left it, so I could follow them when they pick it up.
Imagine a people who found it so important to know the reliability of information given to them, that they created two past tenses to be able to tell the difference...
Actually, English does have some markers for information we know first hand ("Somebody peed here."), information we have surmised ("Someone must have peed here."), and information we have gotten from others ("I understand someone peed here."). The difference is that the markers aren't obligatory. But it is interesting that we have developed such a shorthand.
I must admit I'm rooting for the Chinese faction. I want a digital standard that's NOT written by the content owners. If they can make a next-gen DVD that's cheap and recordable, and it gets into enough homes, then maybe it will be to the studios' advantage to release content for it, even if they can't have complete control over it.
We don't need a $220,000 car that goes 0-60 in 3.7 sec. We need a $22,000 car that goes 0-60 in 8 seconds.
And economies of scale won't help much. We already make lots of laptop batteries. Maybe they could create (much) larger automotive Li-ion batteries -- fewer batteries, fewer chargers, less complex wiring.
But while it's an exciting car, I don't know if it's an important car.
He lies, shills, and shucks
for MS, gets attacked, and learns from this:
1. Linux zealots are like terrorists -- presumably in that he doesn't like
either.
2. Linux zealots do the same thing as the bad elements of Microsoft --
presumably that's something like "supporting a product," as opposed to
something like "trying to exterminate healthy competition by leveraging your
already illegal monopoly to the detriment of the industry, the economy, the
country, and the world."
3. There are three kinds of people in the world who don't hate Linux: people
who don't care, ideologues who have no facts to back them up, and
terrorists.
Still wrong! While complete biodegredation would release the C from the shells anyway, that's not what happens to them. Some of the C from the shells was getting buried in landfills, running off into rivers and thence to the ocean, etc. Growing the nuts used to cause a net C loss from the atmosphere. Now it's neutral. So the power plant represents a net gain of atmospheric C.
Finally, I have to wonder whether those shells burn as clean as, say, natural gas.
Re:Irrelevant - it's a contract suit, not trademar
on
Beatles Bite Apple
·
· Score: 1
Apple Computer was this wierd little company producing expensive little 8-bit computers that most people couldn't figure a use for
Hah! You've forgotten about the killer apps that drove home computer sales. There were any number of recipe databases, for example. And there were other things, too. Did I mention recipe databases?
This whole situation is bullshit, Nobody on earth is going to confuse Apple Computer Inc. with Apple Corps Ltd. So the trademark point should be moot.
Yeah, that's the way it should be. There's not much chance of brand confusion here. But there's this new thing called brand dilution which basically means that someone owns the name and nobody can use it if they can argue that it decreases the value of the trademark. Personally, I think it's horrible, but some judge allowed it.
It's because of limitations on what we can detect. These will inevitably influence the grading. Style checkers will ding people for every use of the passive voice -- not because every use of the passive voice is bad, but because it's so easy to detect.
They will flag every dependent clause, punish people for using long words or unusual vocabulary. They will warn teachers when students use long sentences, complex language, long paragraphs. They'll give a Fog index, an understandibility rating, a grade-level requirement.
Teachers are busy, underpaid, and often bored (like when grading 120 essays). As someone who taught for seven years, I can guarantee that having teachers use this tool will influence the grading. "Yep, that's passive voice, all right. Ding!"
The ability to write something so that anyone with a third-grade reading level can understand it is important. The inability to write anything that a third grader can't read is a liability.
Submitting to the tyranny of these systems will punish students who express complex thoughts, students who use creative, counterintuitive language, and students who write in anything other than a series of simple declarative sentences.
I imagine there's an art to sculling well with an oar, but if you're on a small sailboat and you move the tiller from one extreme side to the other you will propell yourself forward. And you're doing what the waterstriders do, by creating vortices in the water.
If you've seen Spirited Away, you may recall a brief scene with a woman sculling a tub.
Slashdot Mirror
So THAT'S what I'm doing wrong!
I ironed my nipple once -- nothing kinky, I was in a hurry trying to get ready for work. It was an amazing experience for several reasons. One, it was a truly profound kind of pain. I've felt things that hurt worse, but this hurt right down to the soles of my feet.
Two, and I am not kidding here, my nipple was really flat for a long time afterwards. My friends used to ask to see it once in a while so they could marvel and mock.
It also led immediately to one of the more frustrating experiences of my life. I had just burned myself. Like a good little scout, I immediately tried to run cold water on it. I ran over to the sink, turned on the water, and stood there stupidly, thinking, "How the hell am I going to get my nipple under that faucet!" At that point, my wife, who had heard me yelling and cursing, asked what was wrong, and I told her I had burned myself. She called in helpfully, "Run it under cold water."
She really didn't deserve being cursed out like that. I don't know what the experience did to my fertility, but I know what it did to my ability to mate.
But that level of vulnerability is in this case completely swamped by the utterly inexcusable inattention that MS has paid to basic security at the design and feature packaging phase.
To extend the analogy, it didn't take HIV to jeopardize the health of those who share needles or who have numerous, unprotected, anonymous, sexual contacts. Nonetheless, HIV like the spam-sending trojan anti-spam screensaver.
Of course, that doesn't make formal systems, immune systems, or anti-spam screen savers useless.
tFA doesn't say how long the exposure was. If it was long, the possibility of a popping bulb at the same moment that a bug flew past the camera begins to seem more plausible.
I wouldn't know, but in tFA it says that the post was inspected and the light was found not working, but undamanged.
for any sort of natural phenomenon. It suggests a photographic artifact of some sort. Is the flash definitely related? It certainly appears to be coming from the end of what the APoD caption identifies as a light pole, which is not working. Could it have failed with a sudden flash? Could it coincidentally have occurred at the same time as the streak artifact?
"IBM."
Sorry, I should have included it. Try any of these, and search for "mastur".
I don't know how I ended up on pages of these quotations by Einstein, Fuller, T.H. Huxley, etc. But there I am. That part of the file goes Konrad Lorenz . . . Thomas Paine . . . Isaac Asimov . . . Richard Lederer . . . ME! . . .Clarence Darrow... I know I'll never get into such company again.
Sadly, my daughter's friends don't think I'm cool for hanging out with the Big Boys, but for publicly using the word, "masturbation."
Actual conversation:
"Dad, did you write something about masturbation on the web a long time ago?"
"What? No! Waitaminute, yes. Not on the web, on a newsgroup. But it was just a metaphor! It was about intellectual masturbation."
"My friends think you're so cool!"
Who knew when we were writing that stuff 15 years ago that it would be around FOREVER?
P.S. How did I know what she was talking about so fast? A former student of mine tracked me down one day. The first thing he said was, "Hey, I read that thing of yours about masturbation." I had no recollection of it so I went and looked it up.
At least, assuming there's no bug in my floating point unit...
Cancer is the real limiting factor here. Your cells are evolving. Once a zygote has divided into two cells, those two cells are in competition for reproductive success. Now, the body is an environment that's tailored to make "selfish" behavior (like consuming lots of resources and reproducing as fast as possible) less beneficial than it might otherwise be. And the cells start out with lots of mechanisms that make them poor competitors.
But evolution works wonders. DNA replication is imperfect, and mutations arise. Eventually, some combination of mutations will increase the reproductive success of some cell line, and you're on your way down a road to cancer.
We can make the environment less hospitable to such cells with chemotherapy, we can ameliorate some of the more common precancerous mutations with drugs or perhaps even fix them with gene therapy.
But I have a lot of faith in the ingenuity of life, and its ability to find ways around these fixes. Give a trillion cells a thousand years, and one of them is going to figure out a way to take advantage of the incredibly friendly environment inside a body and start building a little empire somewhere inside your pancreas.
Because not being a complete moron, the designer of the device would not take the plaintext coordinates and use that as the cryptographic key. The designer would create a hardware black box that has an integrated GPS. The device spits out a key. If you're in the right location, it's a valid key. If you're not, it's an invalid key. Standard crypto software then uses that key to decrypt the contents of the drive
However, you're correct that it's unlikely that you'd need to try every single possible key. On average you'd only have to try about half of them, leaving you plenty of time to use the data before the heat death of the universe. :-)
4. ?
5. Profit!
You're missing the point. If the GPS doesn't report that the laptop is in an approved location, the thieves can't access the data. The data (actually, the secrecy of the data) might be orders of magnitude more valuable than the hardware.
These days, thieves will typically do things like park cars out on the street somewhere for a day or two to see if the police come and recover it before they bring it to their chop shop. This means there's a better chance of their getting caught even by normal means on cars that DON'T have Lojack.
If I were a police officer, every once in a while I'd see if I could convince someone to leave their stolen and located car right where the thieves left it, so I could follow them when they pick it up.
Actually, English does have some markers for information we know first hand ("Somebody peed here."), information we have surmised ("Someone must have peed here."), and information we have gotten from others ("I understand someone peed here."). The difference is that the markers aren't obligatory. But it is interesting that we have developed such a shorthand.
I must admit I'm rooting for the Chinese faction. I want a digital standard that's NOT written by the content owners. If they can make a next-gen DVD that's cheap and recordable, and it gets into enough homes, then maybe it will be to the studios' advantage to release content for it, even if they can't have complete control over it.
And economies of scale won't help much. We already make lots of laptop batteries. Maybe they could create (much) larger automotive Li-ion batteries -- fewer batteries, fewer chargers, less complex wiring.
But while it's an exciting car, I don't know if it's an important car.
1. Linux zealots are like terrorists -- presumably in that he doesn't like either.
2. Linux zealots do the same thing as the bad elements of Microsoft -- presumably that's something like "supporting a product," as opposed to something like "trying to exterminate healthy competition by leveraging your already illegal monopoly to the detriment of the industry, the economy, the country, and the world."
3. There are three kinds of people in the world who don't hate Linux: people who don't care, ideologues who have no facts to back them up, and terrorists.
How long have you been reading /.?
Finally, I have to wonder whether those shells burn as clean as, say, natural gas.
Hah! You've forgotten about the killer apps that drove home computer sales. There were any number of recipe databases, for example. And there were other things, too. Did I mention recipe databases?
Yeah, that's the way it should be. There's not much chance of brand confusion here. But there's this new thing called brand dilution which basically means that someone owns the name and nobody can use it if they can argue that it decreases the value of the trademark. Personally, I think it's horrible, but some judge allowed it.
It's because of limitations on what we can detect. These will inevitably influence the grading. Style checkers will ding people for every use of the passive voice -- not because every use of the passive voice is bad, but because it's so easy to detect.
They will flag every dependent clause, punish people for using long words or unusual vocabulary. They will warn teachers when students use long sentences, complex language, long paragraphs. They'll give a Fog index, an understandibility rating, a grade-level requirement.
Teachers are busy, underpaid, and often bored (like when grading 120 essays). As someone who taught for seven years, I can guarantee that having teachers use this tool will influence the grading. "Yep, that's passive voice, all right. Ding!"
The ability to write something so that anyone with a third-grade reading level can understand it is important. The inability to write anything that a third grader can't read is a liability.
Submitting to the tyranny of these systems will punish students who express complex thoughts, students who use creative, counterintuitive language, and students who write in anything other than a series of simple declarative sentences.
If you've seen Spirited Away, you may recall a brief scene with a woman sculling a tub.