Would it be that conspiracy theorist to suggest the feds just asked them to turn it on.
It shouldn't even be able to be turned on. Like even if people tried. And it shouldn't let you access clear-net either. If you're going to write a bundle with clear security problems, if people do things wrong, you should not allow those things to be done.
Actually you'd need to turn scripts on in tor, and use it outside of tor too. Two things you are never suppose to do with tor. In fact, it's a security problem that the tor browser pack even allows either of those things to be turned on at all. It ended up serving malware to pretty much nobody, I'd figure. I don't know how stupid the average tor user is.
Generally it's commonly about not thinking you are worth as much or as good as you are or not giving you opportunities.
Misogynists don't tend to hate women, they love women's bodies. They like to take them and lock them up and keep them forever. And there's the problem. The problem is their view of women basically could be replaced with a very sexy looking robot. Feminism is the rather paradoxical notion that women are people. And yeah, even without foaming at the mouth hate, you still have problems when it comes to gender equality and treating people like people.
Generally I'm talking about situations where code sharing is expected. Without a licenses you can't touch that code. But, I've seen plenty of cases where the intent was that the code was suppose to be useful, but wasn't without a license. But, yeah, point taken.
If you release it with no license at all, I don't know what the hell to do with the code. Can I have it for my program? Does your copyright trump everything. Absolutely no license is pretty much all rights reserved by default I'd suppose. No license is as bad as GPL. I don't really know what my obligations or permissions are, so I actually forego using the code. If I don't have legal right to use your code, I do not have legal right to use the code. If you don't expressly say I can, I may not be allowed to.
Using a more liberal license than GPL is great, I always do it. But, TFA says "no license" and that's a piece of crap, upload a BSD code fragment for goodness sakes, or oddly enough you completely own the code and I have no right to it at all.
The problem there is that if they get a plain text password it might be determinable, also there's too much secondary issues.
A better password algorithm is something like preface the passwords with something like #1 (for the alpha numeric requirements) and then invent a word alphabet for the letters like various animals. So say you take the last three digits of the site name. Here DOT, you'd have a password #1DogOstrichTurkey -- It would be unhackable, hard to figure out how you made it, and you'd be able to dodge those alphanumeric and capital lowercase letter issues. Site unique and with enough bits to make take a few hundred years to brute force, and you'd never forget it.
* For those curious, no I don't use a password anything like that don't fucking bother.
Well, if you did that. You'll love this scheme in the above post. You'll have a central site telling you that that login and email is useful somewhere. It's like printing theft gold. You won't even need to try it blind, it'll just flag it and tell you if they gave you a useful username and password.
It's been years in the making but the hopes of just ordering one on Newegg and getting it a couple days later. I'm gonna chalk it up to a very slow rolling April Fools joke.
Heck the other day Megaupload sent me an email saying that a file sextrivia.txt violated their TOS. It apparently had the word sex in it. Even though it was just a list of trivia questions rather than porn or something. I might have been like one of the only people using it for legit purposes, and still got burned.
You still get another could hundred miles on the gasoline engine in a hybrid. But, if you drive to work and back and your round trip is only like 5 miles. You can go pretty much all electric whereas with the conversions your gas costs 1.20 a gallon.
It's a bit like the Vulgate. It's audience is the common people. Caesar's book was meant to be read by the common folks rather than the elite. It was his version of a political book. I'm not saying there's no written Latin, just that most everything that was written was written in Greek, it's what people who could write would write if they wanted it read and understood by diverse parties.
Most of the stuff written during the Roman Empire and by Romans, eg. the stuff we have that you can still read, is written in Greek and not Latin. All the papers about Rome and by Romans are written in Greek. You actually can be a pretty good historian of the Roman Empire and not know Latin. While the common people spoke Latin, they didn't write. And we don't have their writing. Only the elite wrote and they all wrote Greek.
I'd figure your position might overflow at some point and plop you back on the world. Whether it occurs in your lifetime is something that the source code could tell you.
And how is that not processing raw information? It's like saying a camera does preprocessing. After all a camera shows colors into electrical pulses. That's pretty raw information in my book, but so then are is the input from the eyes.
While I'm happy to say Kurzweil's plan is doomed to fail, after all he stole it from Jeff Hawkins and Hawkins never made that work. And it all seems like fundamentally indistinct versions of other AI applications. Kurzweil is basically saying way more data and computer power and that'll solve it. But, really if that were the case then most AI solutions wouldn't plateau even with the computing power they currently have. If the issue were insufficient data or insufficient computing power then really we'd keep plugging along just more slowly. It doesn't work like that so giving it more isn't going to overcome the fundamental issues.
But, the criticism here is just silly. It's not going to work because it's not sensory data but rather alien sense data or just data. Humans do fine developing new and previously unstated senses like sensing magnetic fields by putting magnets in our fingers or the work done by alternative senses even leading to sight devices that apply to the tongue.
You can draw a distinction between experiencing the world and processing raw information, but how big of a line can you draw when I experience the world through the processing of raw information?
Religion so easily uses itself to conduct evil acts. Atheism implies no actions or motivations for actions. And most atheists will scoff at state dogma just as obviously as we scoff at religious dogma. Believing something for which there is no good reason to suppose is true is not desirable. Were there social aspects to the witch trials, sure, people made money hunting witches and got to closely examine the breasts and genitals of young girls, but is there a religious aspect too. Yes. Whereas there's no atheistic reasons to do anything, much less enforce an absurd form of biology on pains of death. You either believe wheat gets coldness power from having their seeds frozen or you go to the gulag, that's not a cry for too much rationality or too much logic. Those are both idiotic dogmas. Dogma is the enemy.
Slashdot Mirror
Would it be that conspiracy theorist to suggest the feds just asked them to turn it on.
It shouldn't even be able to be turned on. Like even if people tried. And it shouldn't let you access clear-net either. If you're going to write a bundle with clear security problems, if people do things wrong, you should not allow those things to be done.
Actually you'd need to turn scripts on in tor, and use it outside of tor too. Two things you are never suppose to do with tor. In fact, it's a security problem that the tor browser pack even allows either of those things to be turned on at all. It ended up serving malware to pretty much nobody, I'd figure. I don't know how stupid the average tor user is.
France should take it as such too!
Surrender in 5...4...3...2...
Maybe there is such a law or court order allowing it and it's just hidden? Do you have security clearance enough to know whether they broke the law?
Really because it sounds pretty easy to make it worse and more overt.
--------- Saturn gives Enceladus a gravitational tugjob causing ejaculations. ---------
The way it's written now, seems far more poetic.
He man woman hater much?
Generally it's commonly about not thinking you are worth as much or as good as you are or not giving you opportunities.
Misogynists don't tend to hate women, they love women's bodies. They like to take them and lock them up and keep them forever. And there's the problem. The problem is their view of women basically could be replaced with a very sexy looking robot. Feminism is the rather paradoxical notion that women are people. And yeah, even without foaming at the mouth hate, you still have problems when it comes to gender equality and treating people like people.
Generally I'm talking about situations where code sharing is expected. Without a licenses you can't touch that code. But, I've seen plenty of cases where the intent was that the code was suppose to be useful, but wasn't without a license. But, yeah, point taken.
If you release it with no license at all, I don't know what the hell to do with the code. Can I have it for my program? Does your copyright trump everything. Absolutely no license is pretty much all rights reserved by default I'd suppose. No license is as bad as GPL. I don't really know what my obligations or permissions are, so I actually forego using the code. If I don't have legal right to use your code, I do not have legal right to use the code. If you don't expressly say I can, I may not be allowed to.
Using a more liberal license than GPL is great, I always do it. But, TFA says "no license" and that's a piece of crap, upload a BSD code fragment for goodness sakes, or oddly enough you completely own the code and I have no right to it at all.
The problem there is that if they get a plain text password it might be determinable, also there's too much secondary issues.
A better password algorithm is something like preface the passwords with something like #1 (for the alpha numeric requirements) and then invent a word alphabet for the letters like various animals. So say you take the last three digits of the site name. Here DOT, you'd have a password #1DogOstrichTurkey -- It would be unhackable, hard to figure out how you made it, and you'd be able to dodge those alphanumeric and capital lowercase letter issues. Site unique and with enough bits to make take a few hundred years to brute force, and you'd never forget it.
* For those curious, no I don't use a password anything like that don't fucking bother.
Well, if you did that. You'll love this scheme in the above post. You'll have a central site telling you that that login and email is useful somewhere. It's like printing theft gold. You won't even need to try it blind, it'll just flag it and tell you if they gave you a useful username and password.
*chaching!*
It's been years in the making but the hopes of just ordering one on Newegg and getting it a couple days later. I'm gonna chalk it up to a very slow rolling April Fools joke.
Heck the other day Megaupload sent me an email saying that a file sextrivia.txt violated their TOS. It apparently had the word sex in it. Even though it was just a list of trivia questions rather than porn or something. I might have been like one of the only people using it for legit purposes, and still got burned.
Because our media keeps telling us that our media is leftwing. Hm. Wait a second....!!?!?!
You still get another could hundred miles on the gasoline engine in a hybrid. But, if you drive to work and back and your round trip is only like 5 miles. You can go pretty much all electric whereas with the conversions your gas costs 1.20 a gallon.
It was the Lingua Franca of much of the ancient world.
It's a bit like the Vulgate. It's audience is the common people. Caesar's book was meant to be read by the common folks rather than the elite. It was his version of a political book. I'm not saying there's no written Latin, just that most everything that was written was written in Greek, it's what people who could write would write if they wanted it read and understood by diverse parties.
Most of the stuff written during the Roman Empire and by Romans, eg. the stuff we have that you can still read, is written in Greek and not Latin. All the papers about Rome and by Romans are written in Greek. You actually can be a pretty good historian of the Roman Empire and not know Latin. While the common people spoke Latin, they didn't write. And we don't have their writing. Only the elite wrote and they all wrote Greek.
Just feed every IP into the six strike system six times.
I'm not sure what that would do but the system is dumb enough to let you do it.
They would be really flat people too.
Really it's 1.6 tall. And it's in meters, which is actually legit.
As XKCD teaches us 1.6 meters is about a CD diameter shorter than Summer Glau and about doorway width longer than a light saber blade.
I'd figure your position might overflow at some point and plop you back on the world. Whether it occurs in your lifetime is something that the source code could tell you.
And how is that not processing raw information? It's like saying a camera does preprocessing. After all a camera shows colors into electrical pulses. That's pretty raw information in my book, but so then are is the input from the eyes.
While I'm happy to say Kurzweil's plan is doomed to fail, after all he stole it from Jeff Hawkins and Hawkins never made that work. And it all seems like fundamentally indistinct versions of other AI applications. Kurzweil is basically saying way more data and computer power and that'll solve it. But, really if that were the case then most AI solutions wouldn't plateau even with the computing power they currently have. If the issue were insufficient data or insufficient computing power then really we'd keep plugging along just more slowly. It doesn't work like that so giving it more isn't going to overcome the fundamental issues.
But, the criticism here is just silly. It's not going to work because it's not sensory data but rather alien sense data or just data. Humans do fine developing new and previously unstated senses like sensing magnetic fields by putting magnets in our fingers or the work done by alternative senses even leading to sight devices that apply to the tongue.
You can draw a distinction between experiencing the world and processing raw information, but how big of a line can you draw when I experience the world through the processing of raw information?
Religion so easily uses itself to conduct evil acts. Atheism implies no actions or motivations for actions. And most atheists will scoff at state dogma just as obviously as we scoff at religious dogma. Believing something for which there is no good reason to suppose is true is not desirable. Were there social aspects to the witch trials, sure, people made money hunting witches and got to closely examine the breasts and genitals of young girls, but is there a religious aspect too. Yes. Whereas there's no atheistic reasons to do anything, much less enforce an absurd form of biology on pains of death. You either believe wheat gets coldness power from having their seeds frozen or you go to the gulag, that's not a cry for too much rationality or too much logic. Those are both idiotic dogmas. Dogma is the enemy.
Apparently if you talk about wanting evidence for beliefs too much, you will inevitably lead to the gulag. No other way around it.