It would seem that Krugman is basing his entire article on incorrect information. The dollar will not become insolvent. The stock markets may crash, but that would only be due to canceled government contracts and 800 000 people out of governmental work.
"Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately! "Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. It should never be left on an electric burner for longer than 15 minutes because it will begin to develop a burned taste. If the coffee is not to be served immediately after brewing, it should be poured into a warmed, insulated thermos and used within the next 45 minutes."
Sounds like McDonalds was doing it right. I guess the woman that burned herself was unfit to experience coffee. Are you?
Note first, I am _not_ saying to replace your call to grep with a call to perl. Perl _is_ fast on assembling strings into a great matching system, but it still takes a _very_ long time to parse, say, 65000 separate strings.
So combine them all into one. Use Regexp::Assemble. With a little bit of fidgetting, it works with GNU grep, as well. Here's an example script, that I've named regex-opt:
!BEGIN regex-opt.pl! #!/usr/bin/perl use strict; use Regexp::Assemble;
my $gnu = 0; if ((defined $ARGV[0]) && $ARGV[0] eq '-gnu') {
shift;
$gnu = 1; }
my $ra = Regexp::Assemble->new; while () {
$ra->add($_); }
So, you have a file with your tens of thousands of lines of patterns to match. Ok,./regex-opt < patterns.txt > matchpattern.re. This may work with egrep, but it's perl regex syntax, so maybe not completely -- procmail | egrep -f matchpattern.re
With 65000 lines, GNU grep takes about half an hour for the tasks I give it. After assembling all 65000 lines into one expression, even when that expression is _megabytes_ in size, it loads quickly and has the speed of a decision tree.
So, as you accumulate new patterns, output them to a file. Also, _always_ keep your list of separate match patterns -- I'm not sure how well this package can handle reparsing a regex back into itself. Do matches like so: egrep -f <(cat matchpattern.re newpatterns.txt)
and once a week, cat allpatterns.txt newpatterns.txt | regex-opt > matchpattern.re; sort -u allpatterns.txt newpatterns.txt > temp.txt && mv temp.txt allpatterns.txt && rm newpatterns.txt
So what? Concern where concern is due. Do you really think that Google is going to be fetching your phone backups, hoping for a wireless password, then driving to your house and connecting to your wifi so that they can... sniff your traffic? Impersonate you on the internet?
How does this in any way matter? even if the password _were_ encrypted, it's reverseable encryption -- it _has_ to be. So they could just decrypt it, anyway. This is the same as on Windows: you can get a wireless key viewer that gives you the password of every network that Windows has memorized. Further, your computer is probably a great deal more accessible to anyone, especially those who are interested in your wireless network, than Google's phone backups.
As for those who are going to say, "Let the user encrypt it with a password!"... most don't do that. Most people won't put one in, many will forget it if they do, you can't link it to a phone identifier because part of the purpose is in case the phone is lost, and part of the functionality is syncing to Google services -- so it has to be decrypted anyway. Wake me up again when Google syncs all the pictures you've taken with your camera to Picasa and posts them on your auto-created Google+. That'll be a fun day.
Interesting. You've provoked a response from me, a theoretical hobbyist.:-)
Matter reaching a black hole: by the laws of relativity, which I only know in a casual sense, the matter should become ever close to the event horizon, where all the disassembly and modification will occur. As the matter hits the speed of light, either while orbiting or sinking through the event horizon, the relativistic effects mean that the matter will require an infinite amount of time to change _internally_ -- but externally, from our view, it reaches the speed of light and proceeds into the block hole.
So basically, whatever particle that's entered the event horizon or met the speed of light just before it will not change after it's inside the black hole. But at that point it's pure energy, anyway -- what happens at this matter -> energy conversion stage, who knows. (Does the energy contain a complete snapshot to be able to return to exactly the same state of matter should it be slowed down?) The more interesting result here, I think, is that a black hole is made of dense _energy_, not matter. At least, it was converted to energy at the event horizon and perhaps mashed back to matter at the singularity. Probably a quasi big bang soup-like-state, if anything.
Second, gravitons escaping: I came across an article recently, which I can't find now. It went over subatomic particles, how they interact, what they interact with, etc. Photons are force-carriers that do not interact with other photons. But photons _do_ interact with electrons and other subatomic particles and force carriers. Gravity interacts with basically everything, including the Higgs and photons. It's probable that gravitons do not interact with gravitons, and so there is nothing restricting gravity from exiting a black hole.
More interestingly, if gravitons interact with everything _except_ gravitons, then how are gravitons not blocked after they interact with _one_ thing, such as how we can put up basically anything as a wall against photons? The denser the item, the more photons are blocked. I believe this would apply to anything -- like with neutrinos, put a denser block, and you capture more of them. Except with gravity. It seems to hit the object, interact, and keep on going. (Maybe they just interact far more weakly than any known neutrino, and so many, many, MANY interact, and many magnitudes of order more make it through the object. Perhaps we _could_ place a wall against gravitons. I fear the resultant energy exerted on such a wall.)
SINCE gravitons interact with the matter _and_ energy in the black hole, it would seem the gravity, too, should never be able to escape -- but it does. But then, it feels like the gravity holding a planet together should interact with the planet, and never escape. But it does. Something feels wrong with the graviton.
My personal conundrums: the LHC creators said that any black holes created by the LHC would instantly evaporate. How? If nothing can escape a black hole, then the only energy that can be emitted from a block hole is the gravitons. But how can you get so many gravitons from even a small black hole that it will dissipate in a short time? It sems like even for infintessimally small black holes, it would remain around long enough to interact with _something_ -- and if it interacts with _anything_, then it has that much longer to achieve what it already has -- interaction with something else. Clearly this did not happen, which to me would suggest that there are no black holes. But how can they say that the black holes would evaporate?
The whole article is worded as though written by an advertiser. This is nothing but Slashdot Market Research. Either it will be a hit business article, "What Not to Try and Virtualize, Straight from the Engineers" or research into how segments of the industry can convince you to virtualize that anyway.
Must be nice, buy one website and you end up with a corralled group of wise and experienced IT gurus. Then slaughter them like sheep. This post was nothing but Market Research. Move along.
This happened to me. Around October last year, I logged in, checked e-mail, and left the tab to do something else. About 20 minutes later, I went back to the tab, clicked Inbox, and... nothing happened. Clicked a few more things, nothing expected was happening. Hit refresh, was redirected to the login page. This is _not_ typical.
When I logged in again, I had 30 bounceback e-mails. I checked sent items, I had 50 new sent e-mails, about 5 addresses each, to my entire contact list with a slew of bad URLs. A couple people contacted me about it. I checked the sent e-mail headers, and the sending IP had an address from Russia, China or some such.
Compromised password? Not likely -- the password on my e-mail is completely unique, had never been used anywhere else, greater than 10 characters, computer-generated. I never type it on public machines, and hadn't used Hotmail on anything but my work machine, home machine (Gentoo) and Ubuntu box in... a long, long time. They would've needed a keylogger to get it. I scanned my work machine for viruses. Nothing. Perhaps there's an Ubuntu bug that somehow got exploited on me, but that box has never connected directly to the internet.
I did some research, and the best that I could come up with is a 2011 attack where if an attacker sent you a bad URL, and you opened the e-mail, they could get your session cookie, log in and act like you. That is the _only_ thing that I found. But it was supposed to be fixed earlier in the year, and I don't recall opening any odd e-mails -- clearing the junk folder, seeing the subject, but not opening them. A few from expected sources, sure, but nothing that struck me as odd.
So I changed my password and immediately stopped using the Hotmail web interface. The problem has not recurred, so suggests it's not an Ubuntu bug. This suggests, then, that there is still a session-hijacking bug in Hotmail somewhere that persists to today.
Don't always assume it's user error if you can't figure out the flaw.
[The "rapid" BSE test in question] can detect abnormal prions only if they exist in a relatively high concentration, and abnormal prions typically reach detectable concentrations only two to three months before an animal exhibits observable symptoms. The incubation period for BSE (i.e., from infection to observable symptoms) is two to eight yearsâ"the average being five yearsâ"and cattle younger than thirty months are rarely symptomatic. Because most cattle for slaughter in the United States go to market before they are twenty-four months old,...
Asked what scientific evidence he could give to reassure the public that a negative BSE test result was not a "false negative," Schimmel replied: "Nobody can do that." The report said it is usual for all biochemical tests used in medicine or animal welfare to be assessed against hundreds or even thousands of different samples to test how sensitive they are at detecting "true" negatives, and how specific they are at determining "true" positives.
However, this has not been done with any of the Commission-approved BSE tests, used in the context of assessing whether an apparently healthy animal is incubating the disease.
So long as all law is made solely to restrict people and _never_to recagnize rights or prevent abuses such as this, it will just be attempt after attempt until a given law passes. It is absolutely inevitable.
Congress must enact law that supercedes any prior or later law indicating that personal communications CANNOT be intercepted with anything short of a court order. This, for the various things that are trying to be passed now. Only when they have to fight for the revokation of these protective laws before they can bribe their desired laws into affect will we be in any way safe.
I'm seriously looking for jobs outside this country (anyone in Sweden need an IT worker that can fill just about any role but Senior?), but this one, in particular, strikes me as "SO WHAT?"
Seriously. Is your manly body so private that another man cannot lay eyes upon it? Is your womanly body so special that a female officer must not gaze upon you? As you're in the process of being thrown into a cell?
What the hell is all this nonsense about nudity? It's a damn body. The person examining you has one just like it. Get the hell over it.
Move on with ACTUAL rights violations, like being arrested without being charged.
They should allow the in-store tryout and purchase of the cheap *-Network-only games. Those are games people don't see anywhere else, can't rent, and they're cheap enough to be impulse buys. Tack a dollar or two on, specify login name as a "Buy For" option, all the payment goes through Microsoft/Sony/whatever, and ends up on the user's machine at home when they turn it on.
It's a whole area that isn't available to any retailers that they should be clamoring for the ability to sell to. Provide all of them as playable demos on the special demo boxes, or with store credentials. The people can play for 5 minutes or something before a game over or level end, maybe. Instantly switchable between games, with no downloads required in-store -- it can already be there.
Yes. Though I'm not the OP. I've been using Linux as my primary desktop OS since 2002, have experience in everything from writing shell scripts to mirroring websites ("intelligent" processing, in bash, for a standard page format, not just wget -r) to setting up multiple RAID5's and restoring them when multiple drives fail (think cabling issue, then power outtage, ugh) -- something that is _not_ well documented, and can happen in miraculous ways. Still, for that last one, if you know the data's valid, it can be recovered.
Programming languages include C (favorite), perl, bash (most-used), java, php (hate it), SQL, and as with any decent programmer I can pick up whatever you want me to learn fairly quickly. The goal, of course, is to make computers do things. My life's goal is to automate the whole world out of required work. One step at a time..
I lack enterprise experience, but that's primarily because it's difficult to set up an enterprise in a small apartment -- or at least, to justify its use. Give me the tools, and I'll learn it. That last part -- learning -- it's my favorite thing to do:-)
If you're interested, please contact for a resume: suse jobs dot 10 dot drkshadow at spamgourmet.com
The cambridge location is especially appealing, but I wouldn't consider that exclusive.
Forgive me for the attention-seeking headline, but I've read very interesting things about Antarctica and its ice sheets.
Primarily, there were maps made in the 1500's that closely resemble an ice-free Antarctica. They document mountains we've detected in the 1900's by sonar, and reflect the Antarctic coastline closely.
If these maps are correct, and there was no ice in the 1500's... how were these ice cores found?
If the ice cores were found, and they date back to 1000 AD, how were these maps made with knowledge of Antarctica having no ice?
This will bring up a profile window, and you can choose which profile you want to use. Only browser sessions after the first must use --no-remote, but it must be there on all but the first.
I find it very convenient to run two firefox sessions -- one on my local computer, one on a USB key...
At 9:45 last night, the Secret Service showed up on my mother's front door to talk to me about what I said about the President, as what I said could apparently be misconstrued as a threat to his life. (link given)
8.12 = 8 + 0/2 + 0/4 + 0/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 +... the list goes on. The problem exists because 0.12 cannot be represented as a sum of 1/2^i for i = 0 to 32 (or probably 64, or probably at all).
Further, this is why A GOOD ASSEMBLY COURSE should still be required in college. If you knew bitwise representations.. you'd know why you are NEVER supposed to take approx values and assume they're equal. As one person mentioned, rounding would give you the answer you wanted, but it's generally considered that two numbers are equal if the subtraction between them is 0.000000001 or so. After that, who cares?
As an interesting assignment, take values nearly 32 bits in size (start with 4 294 967 295 or so) and multiply them by numbers very close to zero -- 0.0000000001, for example. I'm sure you won't get anything very near zero.
And stop using int like that. You got rid of the 0.9999999999998234 extra that was attached to the number. Alternatively, knowing that 8 decimals is good-enough precision, another trick: int(double + 0.0000000001) should yield the true number.
Your argument has already been shot down. Dr. Dino uses the terms "micro evolution" and "macro evolution". Macro evolution is when a single-celled organism evolves into a mouse. Micro evolution describes the minute changes within an existing organism that vary its sense of smell, appendage length, scalieness of skin, whatever.
I can't say I've heard anyone argue against micro evolution. Macro evolution, on the other hand, I have never seen shown to be true. As far as I know, even fossil records don't ever show a clear transition from one species to another. Thus, no one has ever provided much evidence for evolution. (I suppose it could be explained by one article I read that mutations are "stored up" and expressed all at once -- many smaller changes would be unworkable and the resultant creature being unable to survive or breed with either its own species or another mutated creature -- and when a great many of them all mutate drastically, then you may get a few that can survive. A leap, but I'd say it's better than magic. That, and the fact that even mass deaths (think black plague) don't show markedly..)... where was I? huh. Well anyway, I just wish the damn ID people would stop taking lack of _proof_ of one theory as _evidence for_ another, completely unjustifiable theory (magic).
My former employer once said to me, "Evolution is like throwing pieces of a watch into a drier, turning it on, and getting a watch out again. It's nonsense." I'd contend that if you gave it 15 billion years, not only would you get a fully functional watch out, but if you put in enough random matter and gave it enough energy, you would not only get _one_ watch, but you'd end up with an entire _industry_ of watches with different styles, qualities,...
Even if they trace macs, record users, verify with username and password, etc etc, the only way to secure it would be to run everything through a VPN that they sign on to when they connect to the wireless net.
At my University, they certainly have you use your university username and password to sign on to the wireless network. At that time, it associates your IP address with your user ID and password, and probably your mac, and lets the IP address access the internet.
As the IP address is nothing special (not changed upon login) but just associated with "Yes, they're allowed out," it would be entirely possible for someone to watch wireless connections in the area, remember IP's and associated macs, and "notice" when traffic stops going to/from them. This wouldn't be difficult with Kismet in a light/moderately used area. Still, I give them a B+ for effort -- there aren't all _that_ many knowledgeable people around.
Once an associated user disappears from the network, just "borrow" the rest of their session as that user by cloning the MAC, IP addresss and... you're already logged in, so you're allowed out. The university has everything: MAC address, IP address, and a fully authenticated username/password.
The only way around it is to have the user apply for a VPN login/password and encrypt the entire connection... Anything less, and you've got real issues verifying who is using what. (For the dorms of three universities I stayed at, simple hubs (10Mbit for 300 people.. ergh! arp spoofing works well against torrent users) or switches were used to direct wired data, and considering you can't then record which actual port a given packet comes from, you hit the same problem -- anyone in the dorm can be sending/receiving the data.)
Judging by that, it may be concealed, but it's still able to be seen if you look in the right places.
On the other hand, there was another survey conducted where they would invite in two "applicants," one male one female, and have them wait together in a room. It was observed that the women would put out _the_same_ sexual cues _regardless of interest_.
Sadly, I can't find it for the life of me, but it would seem to indicate the summary/title/article is completely wrong -- there's nothing to misinterpret, as the information is the same in both cases. I suppose that'd explain the 60/40 getting sexual interest right -- it's pretty much a toss-up.
As far as I'm aware, forums have had moderators vs posters for a very long time. Sysadmin vs smtp user; IRC chatter vs IRC op; etc. How the hell can they patent one user having multiple roles in a system? IRC, at least, has been around since the 80's, so it's already an expired patent, at worst.
I took a 12 hour flight from Seattle to Japan. In 12 hours, everyone aboard the plane will piss at least once, probably more than twice. My ticket was 1200$. Given that, they would be losing _significant_ amounts of money (probably costing them 2-4 times what people pay for tickets) if one flush cost 500$.
There's one method in which turning off _portions_ of a processor has been used in modern processors. I think all modern processors use such features, but I'm not entirely sure about that.
Also, one thing you seem completely unaware of is that transistors only use current while _switching_. (Except for maybe a small leak current.) The significance here is that if you're not _actively_ flipping bits back and forth, you're _not_ using as much power. Also, I know that the Windows idle thread (and I know there's an equivelent in Linux, but I never get to see it) instructs the processor to do something that will pause certain computer functions for a short time -- this may relate to the clock gating; I'm not sure. Still, NT machines do use less power than 9x machines, which is when the idler was introduced.
It's times like this when there was a -1, Wrong mod -- it'd be much better than "Overrated". I'm sure everyone will say "post a comment correcting things!" but when there are already 10 such comments.. the _incorrect_ comment just needs to be removed from the system.
Slashdot Mirror
"Beyond that, failure to raise the ceiling would mean missed payments on existing U.S. government debt. And that might have terrifying consequences."
According to what I was told yesterday, this is unconstitutional. Debt payments _will_not_ be missed. http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2011/06/28/default-not-an-option-under-u-s-constitution/
It would seem that Krugman is basing his entire article on incorrect information. The dollar will not become insolvent. The stock markets may crash, but that would only be due to canceled government contracts and 800 000 people out of governmental work.
For opt-out cookies as a Firefox add-on, allowing cookies that never go away, check here:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/beef-taco-targeted-advertising/
http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
"Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!
"Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. It should never be left on an electric burner for longer than 15 minutes because it will begin to develop a burned taste. If the coffee is not to be served immediately after brewing, it should be poured into a warmed, insulated thermos and used within the next 45 minutes."
Sounds like McDonalds was doing it right. I guess the woman that burned herself was unfit to experience coffee. Are you?
Note first, I am _not_ saying to replace your call to grep with a call to perl. Perl _is_ fast on assembling strings into a great matching system, but it still takes a _very_ long time to parse, say, 65000 separate strings.
So combine them all into one. Use Regexp::Assemble. With a little bit of fidgetting, it works with GNU grep, as well. Here's an example script, that I've named regex-opt:
!BEGIN regex-opt.pl!
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use Regexp::Assemble;
my $gnu = 0;
if ((defined $ARGV[0]) && $ARGV[0] eq '-gnu') {
shift;
$gnu = 1;
}
my $ra = Regexp::Assemble->new;
while () {
$ra->add($_);
}
my $string = $ra->as_string();
if ($gnu) {
$string =~ s/\\d/[0-9]/g;
$string =~ s/\(\?:/\(/g;
$string =~ s/([()?|]{})/\\$1/g;
}
print $string;
!END!
So, you have a file with your tens of thousands of lines of patterns to match. Ok, ./regex-opt < patterns.txt > matchpattern.re. This may work with egrep, but it's perl regex syntax, so maybe not completely -- procmail | egrep -f matchpattern.re
With 65000 lines, GNU grep takes about half an hour for the tasks I give it. After assembling all 65000 lines into one expression, even when that expression is _megabytes_ in size, it loads quickly and has the speed of a decision tree.
So, as you accumulate new patterns, output them to a file. Also, _always_ keep your list of separate match patterns -- I'm not sure how well this package can handle reparsing a regex back into itself. Do matches like so:
egrep -f <(cat matchpattern.re newpatterns.txt)
and once a week,
cat allpatterns.txt newpatterns.txt | regex-opt > matchpattern.re; sort -u allpatterns.txt newpatterns.txt > temp.txt && mv temp.txt allpatterns.txt && rm newpatterns.txt
So what? Concern where concern is due. Do you really think that Google is going to be fetching your phone backups, hoping for a wireless password, then driving to your house and connecting to your wifi so that they can... sniff your traffic? Impersonate you on the internet?
How does this in any way matter? even if the password _were_ encrypted, it's reverseable encryption -- it _has_ to be. So they could just decrypt it, anyway. This is the same as on Windows: you can get a wireless key viewer that gives you the password of every network that Windows has memorized. Further, your computer is probably a great deal more accessible to anyone, especially those who are interested in your wireless network, than Google's phone backups.
As for those who are going to say, "Let the user encrypt it with a password!" ... most don't do that. Most people won't put one in, many will forget it if they do, you can't link it to a phone identifier because part of the purpose is in case the phone is lost, and part of the functionality is syncing to Google services -- so it has to be decrypted anyway. Wake me up again when Google syncs all the pictures you've taken with your camera to Picasa and posts them on your auto-created Google+. That'll be a fun day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP0cUBi4hwE
Interesting. You've provoked a response from me, a theoretical hobbyist. :-)
Matter reaching a black hole: by the laws of relativity, which I only know in a casual sense, the matter should become ever close to the event horizon, where all the disassembly and modification will occur. As the matter hits the speed of light, either while orbiting or sinking through the event horizon, the relativistic effects mean that the matter will require an infinite amount of time to change _internally_ -- but externally, from our view, it reaches the speed of light and proceeds into the block hole.
So basically, whatever particle that's entered the event horizon or met the speed of light just before it will not change after it's inside the black hole. But at that point it's pure energy, anyway -- what happens at this matter -> energy conversion stage, who knows. (Does the energy contain a complete snapshot to be able to return to exactly the same state of matter should it be slowed down?) The more interesting result here, I think, is that a black hole is made of dense _energy_, not matter. At least, it was converted to energy at the event horizon and perhaps mashed back to matter at the singularity. Probably a quasi big bang soup-like-state, if anything.
Second, gravitons escaping: I came across an article recently, which I can't find now. It went over subatomic particles, how they interact, what they interact with, etc. Photons are force-carriers that do not interact with other photons. But photons _do_ interact with electrons and other subatomic particles and force carriers. Gravity interacts with basically everything, including the Higgs and photons. It's probable that gravitons do not interact with gravitons, and so there is nothing restricting gravity from exiting a black hole.
More interestingly, if gravitons interact with everything _except_ gravitons, then how are gravitons not blocked after they interact with _one_ thing, such as how we can put up basically anything as a wall against photons? The denser the item, the more photons are blocked. I believe this would apply to anything -- like with neutrinos, put a denser block, and you capture more of them. Except with gravity. It seems to hit the object, interact, and keep on going. (Maybe they just interact far more weakly than any known neutrino, and so many, many, MANY interact, and many magnitudes of order more make it through the object. Perhaps we _could_ place a wall against gravitons. I fear the resultant energy exerted on such a wall.)
SINCE gravitons interact with the matter _and_ energy in the black hole, it would seem the gravity, too, should never be able to escape -- but it does. But then, it feels like the gravity holding a planet together should interact with the planet, and never escape. But it does. Something feels wrong with the graviton.
My personal conundrums: the LHC creators said that any black holes created by the LHC would instantly evaporate. How? If nothing can escape a black hole, then the only energy that can be emitted from a block hole is the gravitons. But how can you get so many gravitons from even a small black hole that it will dissipate in a short time? It sems like even for infintessimally small black holes, it would remain around long enough to interact with _something_ -- and if it interacts with _anything_, then it has that much longer to achieve what it already has -- interaction with something else. Clearly this did not happen, which to me would suggest that there are no black holes. But how can they say that the black holes would evaporate?
The whole article is worded as though written by an advertiser. This is nothing but Slashdot Market Research. Either it will be a hit business article, "What Not to Try and Virtualize, Straight from the Engineers" or research into how segments of the industry can convince you to virtualize that anyway.
Must be nice, buy one website and you end up with a corralled group of wise and experienced IT gurus. Then slaughter them like sheep. This post was nothing but Market Research. Move along.
This happened to me. Around October last year, I logged in, checked e-mail, and left the tab to do something else. About 20 minutes later, I went back to the tab, clicked Inbox, and... nothing happened. Clicked a few more things, nothing expected was happening. Hit refresh, was redirected to the login page. This is _not_ typical.
When I logged in again, I had 30 bounceback e-mails. I checked sent items, I had 50 new sent e-mails, about 5 addresses each, to my entire contact list with a slew of bad URLs. A couple people contacted me about it. I checked the sent e-mail headers, and the sending IP had an address from Russia, China or some such.
Compromised password? Not likely -- the password on my e-mail is completely unique, had never been used anywhere else, greater than 10 characters, computer-generated. I never type it on public machines, and hadn't used Hotmail on anything but my work machine, home machine (Gentoo) and Ubuntu box in... a long, long time. They would've needed a keylogger to get it. I scanned my work machine for viruses. Nothing. Perhaps there's an Ubuntu bug that somehow got exploited on me, but that box has never connected directly to the internet.
I did some research, and the best that I could come up with is a 2011 attack where if an attacker sent you a bad URL, and you opened the e-mail, they could get your session cookie, log in and act like you. That is the _only_ thing that I found. But it was supposed to be fixed earlier in the year, and I don't recall opening any odd e-mails -- clearing the junk folder, seeing the subject, but not opening them. A few from expected sources, sure, but nothing that struck me as odd.
So I changed my password and immediately stopped using the Hotmail web interface. The problem has not recurred, so suggests it's not an Ubuntu bug. This suggests, then, that there is still a session-hijacking bug in Hotmail somewhere that persists to today.
Don't always assume it's user error if you can't figure out the flaw.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=949053&cid=24814727:
http://www.mad-cow.org/00/dec00_mid2_news.html:
"This is SOPA being passed in smaller chunks."
So long as all law is made solely to restrict people and _never_to recagnize rights or prevent abuses such as this, it will just be attempt after attempt until a given law passes. It is absolutely inevitable.
Congress must enact law that supercedes any prior or later law indicating that personal communications CANNOT be intercepted with anything short of a court order. This, for the various things that are trying to be passed now. Only when they have to fight for the revokation of these protective laws before they can bribe their desired laws into affect will we be in any way safe.
But it'll never happen.
I'm seriously looking for jobs outside this country (anyone in Sweden need an IT worker that can fill just about any role but Senior?), but this one, in particular, strikes me as "SO WHAT?"
Seriously. Is your manly body so private that another man cannot lay eyes upon it? Is your womanly body so special that a female officer must not gaze upon you? As you're in the process of being thrown into a cell?
What the hell is all this nonsense about nudity? It's a damn body. The person examining you has one just like it. Get the hell over it.
Move on with ACTUAL rights violations, like being arrested without being charged.
They should allow the in-store tryout and purchase of the cheap *-Network-only games. Those are games people don't see anywhere else, can't rent, and they're cheap enough to be impulse buys. Tack a dollar or two on, specify login name as a "Buy For" option, all the payment goes through Microsoft/Sony/whatever, and ends up on the user's machine at home when they turn it on.
It's a whole area that isn't available to any retailers that they should be clamoring for the ability to sell to. Provide all of them as playable demos on the special demo boxes, or with store credentials. The people can play for 5 minutes or something before a game over or level end, maybe. Instantly switchable between games, with no downloads required in-store -- it can already be there.
Life: something which defies the apparent path of least resistance (which would be to sit down and do nothing/die.)
Conciousness, of course, is much more involved.
Yes. Though I'm not the OP. I've been using Linux as my primary desktop OS since 2002, have experience in everything from writing shell scripts to mirroring websites ("intelligent" processing, in bash, for a standard page format, not just wget -r) to setting up multiple RAID5's and restoring them when multiple drives fail (think cabling issue, then power outtage, ugh) -- something that is _not_ well documented, and can happen in miraculous ways. Still, for that last one, if you know the data's valid, it can be recovered.
Programming languages include C (favorite), perl, bash (most-used), java, php (hate it), SQL, and as with any decent programmer I can pick up whatever you want me to learn fairly quickly. The goal, of course, is to make computers do things. My life's goal is to automate the whole world out of required work. One step at a time..
I lack enterprise experience, but that's primarily because it's difficult to set up an enterprise in a small apartment -- or at least, to justify its use. Give me the tools, and I'll learn it. That last part -- learning -- it's my favorite thing to do :-)
If you're interested, please contact for a resume: suse jobs dot 10 dot drkshadow at spamgourmet.com
The cambridge location is especially appealing, but I wouldn't consider that exclusive.
Forgive me for the attention-seeking headline, but I've read very interesting things about Antarctica and its ice sheets.
Primarily, there were maps made in the 1500's that closely resemble an ice-free Antarctica. They document mountains we've detected in the 1900's by sonar, and reflect the Antarctic coastline closely.
If these maps are correct, and there was no ice in the 1500's... how were these ice cores found?
If the ice cores were found, and they date back to 1000 AD, how were these maps made with knowledge of Antarctica having no ice?
I'm very curious. One good article I found is here:
http://www.diegocuoghi.it/Piri_Reis/PiriReis_Hoye-Lunde.htm
Quite plausibly, it seems that the maps are, in fact, not maps of Antarctica. I wonder how that affects the arguments given... thoughts?
Console:
firefox -ProfileManager --no-remote
This will bring up a profile window, and you can choose which profile you want to use. Only browser sessions after the first must use --no-remote, but it must be there on all but the first.
I find it very convenient to run two firefox sessions -- one on my local computer, one on a USB key...
-DrkShadow
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2004/10/29/livejournal-blo.php
*sigh* Please learn to understand computers. See this page: http://docs.python.org/tut/node16.html -- it seemed pretty good for explaining the basics.
... the list goes on. The problem exists because 0.12 cannot be represented as a sum of 1/2^i for i = 0 to 32 (or probably 64, or probably at all).
;-)
8.12 = 8 + 0/2 + 0/4 + 0/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 +
Further, this is why A GOOD ASSEMBLY COURSE should still be required in college. If you knew bitwise representations.. you'd know why you are NEVER supposed to take approx values and assume they're equal. As one person mentioned, rounding would give you the answer you wanted, but it's generally considered that two numbers are equal if the subtraction between them is 0.000000001 or so. After that, who cares?
As an interesting assignment, take values nearly 32 bits in size (start with 4 294 967 295 or so) and multiply them by numbers very close to zero -- 0.0000000001, for example. I'm sure you won't get anything very near zero.
And stop using int like that. You got rid of the 0.9999999999998234 extra that was attached to the number. Alternatively, knowing that 8 decimals is good-enough precision, another trick: int(double + 0.0000000001) should yield the true number.
perl -e 'print ((8.12 * 100) / 100);'
8.12
perl -e 'print (int(8.12 * 100 + 0.0000000001) / 100);'
8.12
perl -e 'print ( (8.12 * 100) - (int(8.12 * 100) + 1));'
-1.13686837721616e-13
Huh. accurate to 12 decimals. That's good enough for me, I guess. I suspect Java is no different. Basic math... for anything else, use Mathematica
-DrkShadow
*sigh*
... where was I? huh. Well anyway, I just wish the damn ID people would stop taking lack of _proof_ of one theory as _evidence for_ another, completely unjustifiable theory (magic).
...
Your argument has already been shot down. Dr. Dino uses the terms "micro evolution" and "macro evolution". Macro evolution is when a single-celled organism evolves into a mouse. Micro evolution describes the minute changes within an existing organism that vary its sense of smell, appendage length, scalieness of skin, whatever.
I can't say I've heard anyone argue against micro evolution. Macro evolution, on the other hand, I have never seen shown to be true. As far as I know, even fossil records don't ever show a clear transition from one species to another. Thus, no one has ever provided much evidence for evolution. (I suppose it could be explained by one article I read that mutations are "stored up" and expressed all at once -- many smaller changes would be unworkable and the resultant creature being unable to survive or breed with either its own species or another mutated creature -- and when a great many of them all mutate drastically, then you may get a few that can survive. A leap, but I'd say it's better than magic. That, and the fact that even mass deaths (think black plague) don't show markedly..)
My former employer once said to me, "Evolution is like throwing pieces of a watch into a drier, turning it on, and getting a watch out again. It's nonsense." I'd contend that if you gave it 15 billion years, not only would you get a fully functional watch out, but if you put in enough random matter and gave it enough energy, you would not only get _one_ watch, but you'd end up with an entire _industry_ of watches with different styles, qualities,
So.. yeah.
-DrkShadow
Even if they trace macs, record users, verify with username and password, etc etc, the only way to secure it would be to run everything through a VPN that they sign on to when they connect to the wireless net.
At my University, they certainly have you use your university username and password to sign on to the wireless network. At that time, it associates your IP address with your user ID and password, and probably your mac, and lets the IP address access the internet.
As the IP address is nothing special (not changed upon login) but just associated with "Yes, they're allowed out," it would be entirely possible for someone to watch wireless connections in the area, remember IP's and associated macs, and "notice" when traffic stops going to/from them. This wouldn't be difficult with Kismet in a light/moderately used area. Still, I give them a B+ for effort -- there aren't all _that_ many knowledgeable people around.
Once an associated user disappears from the network, just "borrow" the rest of their session as that user by cloning the MAC, IP addresss and... you're already logged in, so you're allowed out. The university has everything: MAC address, IP address, and a fully authenticated username/password.
The only way around it is to have the user apply for a VPN login/password and encrypt the entire connection... Anything less, and you've got real issues verifying who is using what. (For the dorms of three universities I stayed at, simple hubs (10Mbit for 300 people.. ergh! arp spoofing works well against torrent users) or switches were used to direct wired data, and considering you can't then record which actual port a given packet comes from, you hit the same problem -- anyone in the dorm can be sending/receiving the data.)
-DrkShadow
Women "Advertise" Fertility
Judging by that, it may be concealed, but it's still able to be seen if you look in the right places.
On the other hand, there was another survey conducted where they would invite in two "applicants," one male one female, and have them wait together in a room. It was observed that the women would put out _the_same_ sexual cues _regardless of interest_.
Sadly, I can't find it for the life of me, but it would seem to indicate the summary/title/article is completely wrong -- there's nothing to misinterpret, as the information is the same in both cases. I suppose that'd explain the 60/40 getting sexual interest right -- it's pretty much a toss-up.
-DrkShadow
As far as I'm aware, forums have had moderators vs posters for a very long time. Sysadmin vs smtp user; IRC chatter vs IRC op; etc. How the hell can they patent one user having multiple roles in a system? IRC, at least, has been around since the 80's, so it's already an expired patent, at worst.
-DrkShadow
Bullshit.
Maybe 50$. Maybe.
I took a 12 hour flight from Seattle to Japan. In 12 hours, everyone aboard the plane will piss at least once, probably more than twice. My ticket was 1200$. Given that, they would be losing _significant_ amounts of money (probably costing them 2-4 times what people pay for tickets) if one flush cost 500$.
-DrkShadow
*sigh*
http://techreport.com/articles.x/7927/2 -- read the brief part about Dynamic Clock Gating. It's also briefly mentioned here.
There's one method in which turning off _portions_ of a processor has been used in modern processors. I think all modern processors use such features, but I'm not entirely sure about that.
Also, one thing you seem completely unaware of is that transistors only use current while _switching_. (Except for maybe a small leak current.) The significance here is that if you're not _actively_ flipping bits back and forth, you're _not_ using as much power. Also, I know that the Windows idle thread (and I know there's an equivelent in Linux, but I never get to see it) instructs the processor to do something that will pause certain computer functions for a short time -- this may relate to the clock gating; I'm not sure. Still, NT machines do use less power than 9x machines, which is when the idler was introduced.
It's times like this when there was a -1, Wrong mod -- it'd be much better than "Overrated". I'm sure everyone will say "post a comment correcting things!" but when there are already 10 such comments.. the _incorrect_ comment just needs to be removed from the system.