Not a bad idea, except that the main source of security for a slot machine comes from the fact that it is under 24/7 surveillance. Give someone unsupervised physical access to the machine though, and all "security" is lost.
I think this point is completely missed by most people, and I wish it were talked about more in the news/media. We can't have our cake and eat it too. Either we pay for our own healthcare or we all bow to the tyranny of the majority "for the common good". I prefer the former.
Is this really that bad? Selling a limited resource as "unlimited" is not sustainable. I'd rather have the smaller proportion of folks who use a larger proportion of data pay more for it. So what?
I'm confused as to how a book "lacking in foundational knowledge and often foregoing explanation of research" can present "a comprehensive and well-referenced view of modern evolutionary research".
Don't get me wrong, the book might be terrific, but what an oxymoronic summary (there's some jargon for ya)!
Simply put, if someone is making over $200,000 (or any other amount for that matter) it's nobody's business how they spend their money. Take your silly class warfare elsewhere.
Since the interest alone on the "Economic Stimulus" package is costing the U.S. around $100 million per DAY, I can see how saving 17 days worth of interest will definitely have a major impact.
No, the rake is a percentage of the pot, and thus constant. Stacking the deck will not affect it in any way, nor would "action hands" (whatever that is) or any other playing style or computer cheat. These things may affect gameplay for other players, but not the house rake.
While the argument made here is good from a narrow economic view, do we really want the government to get involved with our personal computers?
Once we start down that road, where does it lead? In the end I think that opening the door for more government controls is far worse than receiving some spam emails or getting a computer virus.
Is it really necessary for every student to have a laptop in order to receive a good education? Couldn't this money be better spent in other areas of education?
My answers to these questions are "yes" and "yes".
Of course your employees should do what is expected of them, they're being paid to do so. And you're right about the ego!
The point, though, is that requiring silly things of your good people is a sure way to see them leave for something better.
Do you think the quality of your company will not suffer if the highest quality employees leave?
Then treat them with the respect they require, and they will return the favor.
Formal status reports, by the way, definitely fall into the "silly" category, as do daily status meetings. If you want to know what someone is doing, then visit them and ask. You'll find that they're probably eager to tell you all about what they're doing.
So while you had a nice rant there, I wouldn't want to work for you under those circumstances.
Why make everyone do status reports? If you're having a problem with a developer, then make him/her do status reports. Don't punish the good developers as well!
And I should have added "... regardless of what software is running on the machine or what security measures said software has implemented." to the end of the previous comment.
The first round of tests focused on the physical security of the Polling Ballot Counter (PBC), which the Red Team researchers were able to circumvent with little effort. "In the physical security testing, the wire- and tamper-proof paper seals were easily removed without damage to the seals using simple household chemicals and tools and could be replaced without detection," the report says. "Once the seals are bypassed, simple tools or easy modifications to simple tools could be used to access the computer and its components. The key lock for the Transfer Device was unlocked using a common office item without the special 'key' and the seal removed."
You can stop reading the article here. Once physical security has been breached it's all over. With the machine open, you now have complete control over it, even to the point of changing out the hardware. This also applies to any machine that handles money, including ATM's.
All the software security measures in the world won't protect you if physical security is breached. So, if the physical security of a voting machine cannot be maintained at least as well as an ATM, or better yet a slot machine in a casino (constant surveillance), then using the voting machine in the first place is NOT secure.
When there are TV episodes available for free on YouTube (whether sanctioned or not), doesn't this make them more available for people to watch? And if more people watch them, and like them, then doesn't that mean more potential viewership during the actual broadcast, with commercials?
Viacom should just say "thank you" to Google and move on.
Well, who could ever use more than 640Kb of memory?
... and when this amount of power is being consumed, shouldn't we be thinking about redundant power systems (or perhaps energy efficiency) instead?
Is there some secret power limit that I am unaware of here? Energy efficiency is certainly good, but just because we've reached the 1kW mark doesn't automagically mean we're using too much power!
Slashdot Mirror
If the rate of radioactive decay can vary, how would this affect things like carbon 14 dating? Very interesting.
Not a bad idea, except that the main source of security for a slot machine comes from the fact that it is under 24/7 surveillance. Give someone unsupervised physical access to the machine though, and all "security" is lost.
I think this point is completely missed by most people, and I wish it were talked about more in the news/media. We can't have our cake and eat it too. Either we pay for our own healthcare or we all bow to the tyranny of the majority "for the common good". I prefer the former.
Is this really that bad? Selling a limited resource as "unlimited" is not sustainable. I'd rather have the smaller proportion of folks who use a larger proportion of data pay more for it. So what?
I'm confused as to how a book "lacking in foundational knowledge and often foregoing explanation of research" can present "a comprehensive and well-referenced view of modern evolutionary research".
Don't get me wrong, the book might be terrific, but what an oxymoronic summary (there's some jargon for ya)!
is that China can hold the rest of the world hostage once they are able to nudge the largest WMD ever either towards or away from the Earth. ;-b
I would counter that water is always wet. Ice is a solid and steam is a gas. Would you ask for extra Frozen-Water-In-A-Solid-Form cubes in your water?
This is actually a good thing. Selling a limited "resource" as unlimited is not a sustainable system. Just ask AT&T...
Simply put, if someone is making over $200,000 (or any other amount for that matter) it's nobody's business how they spend their money. Take your silly class warfare elsewhere.
The govt should not be as involved in price fixing, nor does their insistence upon doing so grant them any extra rights.
... if it weren't for the internet.
Trademarks are not IP. In fact they are essential for consumers to know who made a product and where it came from.
Actually, the problem IS that Apple is making moral decisions about which applications to allow in the App Store.
Is there more than one zip code in Alaska?
Since the interest alone on the "Economic Stimulus" package is costing the U.S. around $100 million per DAY, I can see how saving 17 days worth of interest will definitely have a major impact.
No, the rake is a percentage of the pot, and thus constant. Stacking the deck will not affect it in any way, nor would "action hands" (whatever that is) or any other playing style or computer cheat. These things may affect gameplay for other players, but not the house rake.
While the argument made here is good from a narrow economic view, do we really want the government to get involved with our personal computers?
Once we start down that road, where does it lead? In the end I think that opening the door for more government controls is far worse than receiving some spam emails or getting a computer virus.
Is it really necessary for every student to have a laptop in order to receive a good education? Couldn't this money be better spent in other areas of education?
My answers to these questions are "yes" and "yes".
Of course your employees should do what is expected of them, they're being paid to do so. And you're right about the ego!
The point, though, is that requiring silly things of your good people is a sure way to see them leave for something better.
Do you think the quality of your company will not suffer if the highest quality employees leave?
Then treat them with the respect they require, and they will return the favor.
Formal status reports, by the way, definitely fall into the "silly" category, as do daily status meetings. If you want to know what someone is doing, then visit them and ask. You'll find that they're probably eager to tell you all about what they're doing.
So while you had a nice rant there, I wouldn't want to work for you under those circumstances.
Why make everyone do status reports? If you're having a problem with a developer, then make him/her do status reports. Don't punish the good developers as well!
And I should have added "... regardless of what software is running on the machine or what security measures said software has implemented." to the end of the previous comment.
The first round of tests focused on the physical security of the Polling Ballot Counter (PBC), which the Red Team researchers were able to circumvent with little effort. "In the physical security testing, the wire- and tamper-proof paper seals were easily removed without damage to the seals using simple household chemicals and tools and could be replaced without detection," the report says. "Once the seals are bypassed, simple tools or easy modifications to simple tools could be used to access the computer and its components. The key lock for the Transfer Device was unlocked using a common office item without the special 'key' and the seal removed."
You can stop reading the article here. Once physical security has been breached it's all over. With the machine open, you now have complete control over it, even to the point of changing out the hardware. This also applies to any machine that handles money, including ATM's.
All the software security measures in the world won't protect you if physical security is breached. So, if the physical security of a voting machine cannot be maintained at least as well as an ATM, or better yet a slot machine in a casino (constant surveillance), then using the voting machine in the first place is NOT secure.
When there are TV episodes available for free on YouTube (whether sanctioned or not), doesn't this make them more available for people to watch? And if more people watch them, and like them, then doesn't that mean more potential viewership during the actual broadcast, with commercials?
Viacom should just say "thank you" to Google and move on.
If we've really reached this "tipping point", then can we finally stop worrying about it and get on with our lives?
Interesting point...
Who will actually have a need for this PSU ...
... and when this amount of power is being consumed, shouldn't we be thinking about redundant power systems (or perhaps energy efficiency) instead?
Well, who could ever use more than 640Kb of memory?
Is there some secret power limit that I am unaware of here? Energy efficiency is certainly good, but just because we've reached the 1kW mark doesn't automagically mean we're using too much power!