Sysadmins only need to frantically patch all of their boxes once.
It looks better if there is one bunch of ten patches on one day than if there are ten announcements of one patch each on ten different days. A lot of these bugs were announced earlier, but the releases are all announced now.
The problems people have with genetic modification of plants, animals, and of course, people, fall into two categories:
If I eat this GM orange, will I turn into a fruitfly?
It's morally/ethically wrong to play with genes - that's playing God.
Can anybody tell me (in a semester or less:-) why either of those two problems are different than the results of traditional breeding and cross-pollination?
Before I get shouted down as flamebait, let me hint that it's possible to breed plants that are more poisonous, dogs that are more hostile, etc. From a moral standpoint, the Bible praises those who are expert cultivators and breeders, and I suppose other moral traditions share that viewpoint.
Aside from efficiency, why is doing it in a test tube any different?
I got the sense that the questions were written from a certain perspective, but they were at least orthogonal topically. That means that if you disagree with the perspective of the question you just answer according to your view and everybody's happy.
I think their "bias", if you can call it that, is to determine who you are actually going to vote for, not to change your mind. For instance:
4. Federal funding of "corporate welfare", which has been defined as "special government subsidies or benefits that are targeted to specific industries or businesses":
Rather than state the question as:
4. Federal targeting of benefits to specific industries or businesses to encourage economic growth:
The latter form might get the unsuspecting to consider whether federal funding for specific businesses is a good thing. The "corporate welfare" tag would make almost anyone see it as bad.
The poll worked pretty well for me, lining up with my own ranking fairly well:
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%) 2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (81%) 3. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (64%) 4. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (41%) 5. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (34%) 6. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (32%)
and almost as in beer. He's paying his two cents for the domain name, then saying his piece. Now he even gets a free plug on/., which will even give him a Google bump.
This is no more offensive than a TV ad, since I just press 'mute' if I don't want to hear it. In this case, I can just click away.
There may be some secondary backlash when Floyd supporters or undecideds go to VanHollen2004.org and find Floyd's rhetoric.
It doesn't harm anyone, since "LastName2004.org" is clearly political.
Okay, for those of you who don't have email: what's going to happen when some genius from Sebansk figures out how to send spam VOIP calls?
Oh, I forgot: the Do Not Call list from the FCC will keep all those zombies from dialing up my cell phone. I can hear it now.... "C14L1S - more best than VI@GRA and you save many dollars to buy with us!"
The problem is getting the brain to provide the 3D image.
3D displays using 2D devices rely on getting each eye to see something just a little different. With the old 3D glasses, for instance, one eye sees no blue, the other no red, with each image being slightly different, and the brain gets the blue from one and the red from the other. The brain converts that into a result it can handle. Don't ask me how.
With a rotating screen, each eye would see a slightly different image. Depending on how fast the thing rotates, the brain could interpolate the results into 3D.
Just a guess, but it's a brilliant concept if it works.
For instance, both Newton and Leibinitz incorrectly used infintesimals in their definitions.
And Latin. We now know Latin to be a dead language. What real scientist uses Latin?
And the English system of weights and measures. He didn't even use the Metric system, or bother to convert the values!
How the great learned history critics and scientists of the future will scoff at our inaccurate decimal system, our clunky wire-based infosystems, and our use of BASIC.
We use the tools we have. The best of us modify them to fit our own needs. Every once in a while, someone comes up with a mod that everyone agrees is really cool. On that measure, Isaac Newton is the greatest hacker of all time. OK, maybe Edison was greater, or the woman who invented the stick.
I picking on your fine post (a bit unfairly, to be sure) because if someone comes up with a mod, how does that make everything that went before it "incorrect"?
Anyone who has done this design knows that there is more cost in what happens on the whiteboard than something like this at the component level.
Right. The 8-bit chips have fewer pins to tie down, so there's less that can go wrong. There are fewer registers, a simpler assembler language (for the 5% of the coding that takes 50% of the time:-), and everything is well-known.
But there are applications for a 32-bit computer on a chip. Want an IP-addressible toaster with built-in clock synced to NIST? IP stacks work better with 32 bits. Add a serial port, and your toaster alarm could control your UPS.
Anything where there's already a high level of complexity in the application can benefit from something like this.
But I asked what the President could do, not the government as a whole.
And of all the other stuff you mentioned, only building roads / infrastructure and security are the government's domain. All the rest should be left to the private sector, or to the states. Certainly the President shouldn't be involved.
I know, realistically they just are. People expect the President to "handle the economy".
But it's stupid. The President has no control over the unemployment rate. All he can do is ask Congress to lower taxes or let them raise taxes. Maybe he can give a speech.
The rest is cyclical. From where I'm sitting the economy is doing fine, even though the government still takes too much money out of it.
If I lost my job, I wouldn't blame the President, I'd blame the bum in the mirror.
They really couldn't say that though, because these are just changes in assignment. After all, with the SCO suits winding down, Boies' firm had to do something with their junior attorneys. $31M only goes so far.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [...], D-Calif., said spyware was "quickly becoming one of the biggest threats to consumers on the Internet." She cited estimates that up to 90 percent of computers contain some forms of spyware. Lofgren said her daughter was recently victimized by electronic thieves in a phishing scam, persuading her in a forged e-mail to disclose personal information.
90%, huh? That seems awfully high. People always say 90% of computers are running Windows, too. No, wait -- you don't think those figures could be related, do you?
And I thought the CAN-SPAM Act was supposed to fix all of these email forgery problems.
It's a good thing Congress is on top of it. At least they are when it affects their kids.
The effort to keep debris from falling on people is not a bad idea. It might even be an alternate use for a missile defense system:-). I do think it's of dubious value, since anyone who dropped a hunk of burning metal on, say, Needles, CA, would have to pay their entire fortune in damages when a jury got to hear about it anyway. Shrug, don't really care.
I'm thinking about the future, and the idea of the dirtbound controlling the spaceborn.
In some not-too-distant future time, this will seem a little like the snake on its belly directing the flight of the eagle on its wings.
In the mean time, Congress will regulate space travel in a vain attempt to keep that future from coming about. They don't want to have a space industry get going without their control over it.
And there are those who will think safety before adventure, security before advancement. They'll say things have to be perfect, that no danger should ever exist, that no risks should be taken. "Why can't the government do something to keep these hotheads from taking risks?"
Let's just slither along on our bellies until we learn how to fly.
In the conservative mind, anything that might possibly benefit the Left is evil and hateful and anti-American...
False, and flamebait.
First, conservative and Republican are not synonymous, any more than liberal and Democrat are.
Second, I'm quite conservative, and it's because of that that I dislike the dirty tricks and cynical electioneering of either side. Why don't the two sides devote themselves to convincing people which philosophy of government is best?
It makes me think they don't really believe what they say, and that makes me want to vote Libertarian. I don't agree with the stance of the LP on some issues, but at least you know what their stance is.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe I speak for my fellow prudes everywhere when I say I'm offended.
I haven't seen the movie, mind you, but I did read the review.
Is there no shame left? These are our children who are watching these sorts of things.
Hmm, and "don't weave two kinds of cloth".
You're probably right.
Can anybody tell me (in a semester or less :-) why either of those two problems are different than the results of traditional breeding and cross-pollination?
Before I get shouted down as flamebait, let me hint that it's possible to breed plants that are more poisonous, dogs that are more hostile, etc. From a moral standpoint, the Bible praises those who are expert cultivators and breeders, and I suppose other moral traditions share that viewpoint.
Aside from efficiency, why is doing it in a test tube any different?
>The 80s called, they want "do it for the children" back.
Laugh out loud, realize I'm at work, close office door, oops, too late.
I got the sense that the questions were written from a certain perspective, but they were at least orthogonal topically. That means that if you disagree with the perspective of the question you just answer according to your view and everybody's happy.
I think their "bias", if you can call it that, is to determine who you are actually going to vote for, not to change your mind. For instance:
Rather than state the question as: The latter form might get the unsuspecting to consider whether federal funding for specific businesses is a good thing. The "corporate welfare" tag would make almost anyone see it as bad.The poll worked pretty well for me, lining up with my own ranking fairly well:
>PETA's actions disturb me
Which PETA do you mean?
Maybe you meant "pita"? Not a very lively food, so probably that wasn't it.
Please try to be less confusing.
and almost as in beer. He's paying his two cents for the domain name, then saying his piece. Now he even gets a free plug on /., which will even give him a Google bump.
This is no more offensive than a TV ad, since I just press 'mute' if I don't want to hear it. In this case, I can just click away.
There may be some secondary backlash when Floyd supporters or undecideds go to VanHollen2004.org and find Floyd's rhetoric.
It doesn't harm anyone, since "LastName2004.org" is clearly political.
'Nuff Said.
Okay, for those of you who don't have email: what's going to happen when some genius from Sebansk figures out how to send spam VOIP calls?
Oh, I forgot: the Do Not Call list from the FCC will keep all those zombies from dialing up my cell phone. I can hear it now.... "C14L1S - more best than VI@GRA and you save many dollars to buy with us!"
>did you bother to read the rest of the post...
Yes, and I'm sorry for slighting you for using the word "incorrect". I should have been more Charitable - and on Sunday, no less.
The problem is getting the brain to provide the 3D image.
3D displays using 2D devices rely on getting each eye to see something just a little different. With the old 3D glasses, for instance, one eye sees no blue, the other no red, with each image being slightly different, and the brain gets the blue from one and the red from the other. The brain converts that into a result it can handle. Don't ask me how.
With a rotating screen, each eye would see a slightly different image. Depending on how fast the thing rotates, the brain could interpolate the results into 3D.
Just a guess, but it's a brilliant concept if it works.
And Latin. We now know Latin to be a dead language. What real scientist uses Latin?
And the English system of weights and measures. He didn't even use the Metric system, or bother to convert the values!
How the great learned history critics and scientists of the future will scoff at our inaccurate decimal system, our clunky wire-based infosystems, and our use of BASIC.
We use the tools we have. The best of us modify them to fit our own needs. Every once in a while, someone comes up with a mod that everyone agrees is really cool. On that measure, Isaac Newton is the greatest hacker of all time. OK, maybe Edison was greater, or the woman who invented the stick.
I picking on your fine post (a bit unfairly, to be sure) because if someone comes up with a mod, how does that make everything that went before it "incorrect"?
Right. The 8-bit chips have fewer pins to tie down, so there's less that can go wrong. There are fewer registers, a simpler assembler language (for the 5% of the coding that takes 50% of the time
But there are applications for a 32-bit computer on a chip. Want an IP-addressible toaster with built-in clock synced to NIST? IP stacks work better with 32 bits. Add a serial port, and your toaster alarm could control your UPS.
Anything where there's already a high level of complexity in the application can benefit from something like this.
As a conservative, I felt the opposite. I think hitting each side where the other would do it was the right way to go.
After all, what if they had shown Bush/Cheney as lovers and Kerry/Edwards as pawns of Soros, Heinz, and the ABA?
Not as funny.
Hey, lighten up. It's Friday.
/., working on that third Nobel Prize?
It's not offensive, really.
If you didn't laugh, too bad.
As for wasting your time, what have you been doing on
"How did JibJab ever become so popular? It isn't entertaining. It is actually very derivative. I stopped the video about 45 seconds in."
[How did the parent ever get modded up? It isn't interesting. It's actually fairly predictable. I didn't even read it, really.]
There, see how easy it is to go negative? Not much fun, either.
It's great.
The Republicans are in bed with Big Oil and the Democrats are in bed with everybody else.
Beautiful.
But I asked what the President could do, not the government as a whole. And of all the other stuff you mentioned, only building roads / infrastructure and security are the government's domain. All the rest should be left to the private sector, or to the states. Certainly the President shouldn't be involved.
I know, realistically they just are. People expect the President to "handle the economy".
But it's stupid. The President has no control over the unemployment rate. All he can do is ask Congress to lower taxes or let them raise taxes. Maybe he can give a speech.
The rest is cyclical. From where I'm sitting the economy is doing fine, even though the government still takes too much money out of it.
If I lost my job, I wouldn't blame the President, I'd blame the bum in the mirror.
No, you dirtied the wrong spoon. You do know what spoons are for, don't you? Didn't that mother of yours teach you anything important?
Sorry. I think your stepmother and my ex-wife could have been good little harpy friends.
They really couldn't say that though, because these are just changes in assignment. After all, with the SCO suits winding down, Boies' firm had to do something with their junior attorneys. $31M only goes so far.
90%, huh? That seems awfully high. People always say 90% of computers are running Windows, too. No, wait -- you don't think those figures could be related, do you?
And I thought the CAN-SPAM Act was supposed to fix all of these email forgery problems.
It's a good thing Congress is on top of it. At least they are when it affects their kids.
The effort to keep debris from falling on people is not a bad idea. It might even be an alternate use for a missile defense system :-). I do think it's of dubious value, since anyone who dropped a hunk of burning metal on, say, Needles, CA, would have to pay their entire fortune in damages when a jury got to hear about it anyway. Shrug, don't really care.
I'm thinking about the future, and the idea of the dirtbound controlling the spaceborn.
In some not-too-distant future time, this will seem a little like the snake on its belly directing the flight of the eagle on its wings.
In the mean time, Congress will regulate space travel in a vain attempt to keep that future from coming about. They don't want to have a space industry get going without their control over it.
And there are those who will think safety before adventure, security before advancement. They'll say things have to be perfect, that no danger should ever exist, that no risks should be taken. "Why can't the government do something to keep these hotheads from taking risks?"
Let's just slither along on our bellies until we learn how to fly.
For a partial answer, see my post on an earlier story.
False, and flamebait.
First, conservative and Republican are not synonymous, any more than liberal and Democrat are.
Second, I'm quite conservative, and it's because of that that I dislike the dirty tricks and cynical electioneering of either side. Why don't the two sides devote themselves to convincing people which philosophy of government is best?
It makes me think they don't really believe what they say, and that makes me want to vote Libertarian. I don't agree with the stance of the LP on some issues, but at least you know what their stance is.