If it was a serious violent crime it might be considered. For something like this I doubt it (at least in Canada). However if during one of those 30+ incidences someone what actually hurt or killed, then that would probably be the argument used. As it is, scary as it is for the victims, and a waste of taxpayer money (I imagine that each of these responses cost money), being tried as an adult is probably an overreaction. However, considering this wasn't just a few instances, if convicted, the kid is likely going to face the maximum of whatever he is eligible to get.
I know my office had a bomb threat last year, likely by someone that was ticked off with us. The funny part was that our emergency procedure was to exit and regroup in a neighboring mall. Which we found out later from the police was where the actual bomb threat was called in from (payphone)! Disclosure of that sort of information might have been useful rather than after the fact. I mean anyone that knows our emergency procedures (which we practice from time to time, so it isn't exactly a secret when hundreds of people are milling about), would do that exact same thing, but plant the bomb in the mall. Anyway as it is, most people that do this are just trying to be a pain in the ass and disruptive, much like the little punk that was part of this story.
I have probably forgotten more about IT than most even know. However, while I think I am competent in what I do, I do not know everything, nor is it really reasonable to do so. That is why specializations exist. Don't talk to the Network guy regarding your DB problems, or your DB guy about your Coding issues... Sure they may have some related experience and overlap, but likely won't be as knowledgeable as someone that does that as their core. Same with Doctors, they will all have a common background, but asking the ass doctor about your shoulder joint issue might get you the answer you need, but then again you might be better served by asking the right person.
I have been in the field long enough both in education and work, and have worked with enough people, to come to a pretty easy conclusion. Whatever you think you know, you don't know as much as you think... People that like above arrogantly attest that they know everything about everything are bullshitting you. Many are good enough to get the broad strokes and then figure out the actual details later, but that isn't quite the same thing.
Anyway this sort of cross arrogance is more about thinking something is easy when it is not, and "how hard can it be? I'm a smart person!". In most cases, sure you can do it, but likely not well. Like I have never done plumbing before. But "How hard can it be?", I could give it a shot, read a book, watch a few youtube videos... What I produce might work, but will it be good? Probably not. It will probably take me much longer to produce something that functions in a non-optimized way, that may or may not violate whatever building standards exist in my local area, which if discovered would have to be ripped out and replaced by a professional anyway. Where a professional would presumably know how to design the best system, do it in a much quicker fashion, and adhere to whatever rules or standards exist that are required. Sound similar?
They get a trendy well established brand name. They get the Dr. Dre. They get the perceived quality (200$ headphones? rly?). They get to reinforce their dominance as a music production company (ipods, iphones).
Is it worth 3+ BILLION? Hell no! However A) Beats is pretty uniquely placed right now. They are at their peak and no one is like them. B) News! Tech company overpays for another company! OMG! When you have a bazillion dollars, you likely have to prove as a CEO you are doing something with it other than polishing your boat with it.
Show your math. Which would also BS. Yes I know some equations exist, but they are also BS making huge assumptions.
Realistically, based on what we actually know the assumptions should be the opposite. If we assume that ANY planet that is earth like will eventually develop life (ours did, why not most). The idea that we are some how special and unique is like when people thought Earth was the center of everything, not the sun, and then not at all. And that all life will eventually develop intelligence (again, our only reference is ourselves, if we did certainly others can).
The actually difficulty in finding life is because of exactly two things.
1) Space is BIG. Even with all earth like planets, and all life being intelligent, there would be a VAST number of civilizations. However they will be separate by immense (I can't even give a word that actually describes the gravity (sry pun) of the situation) distances. So far that actual travel is impractical if not impossible. Even simple detection is a very long shot. Things that might indicate a civilization like radio waves and the like are just not going to work. Hell even if they produced a light source that is detectable (doing so would likely wipe out their existence anyway), even that is pretty much not going to work.
2) Time is LONG. As in the before mentioned part about detection, radio waves would take millions of years to reach us, light would take much less, but it would have to be directional and exact and of huge magnitude for use to even get it, which would require fore knowledge which they nor we would have. However more importantly, even if we assume that all life started *about* the same time, and that all earth like planets were created *about* the same time, that time period is measured in lengths that is barely comprehensible to us, and likely to any living being. The fact is we as animals haven't been around long, as intelligence, even less, as a civilization, far less, and as group even remotely able to go into space or detect objects such a small sliver it is crazy. Now how long will we last? We don't know. However looking at where we are headed, maybe not all that long. Certainly not in the geological sense of time. That is a VERY brief and unlikely window for all those ducks to get in a row. Considering that communication is a two way street, all of that in both arguments would have to happen at more less the exact same time, among neighbors, which is even less likely.
So my response is that I think it is very likely that the universe is full of intelligent life, only they nor us will ever see any of it. Baring Magic of course (FTL blah blah blah).
DOATA2 and League of Legends are were it is at now for competition. Before that Starcraft 2. Before that CS. Team Fortress 2.
Making UT open isn't going to change anything, the world has long since moved on to bigger and better things.
If you want to bring something back that is relevant, bring back Enemy Territory with an open update. Now that would be awesome. Though much of the reason it was great, were features that have since been integrated into all FPS now, such as classes, experience, and abilities. Though few have adopted the objective based team play (with the exception of Brink which apparently sucked for different reasons).
First off, most of the commercial ones like Norton, are barley better than the viruses they claim to protect you from. Except they are more bloated, you pay for them, and usually come pre-installed on your system if you buy retail. Many of the "free" (usually pay for upgrade) options are actually much better. My two favorite are MSE and Spybot. However even they have limitations now. From experience MOST baddies, are not really the viruses of old, but rather adware of some creed. Anyone who had gotten and removed from some of these can tell you about the painful process of trying to go through the complex process to get rid of some of these insidious things. Having a 2nd computer or smart phone is handy in trying to do this so you can take the affected system offline so it doesn't automatically re-infect itself halfway through the process. In many cases it is just easier to wipe the slate clean and install clean again. AV is going to have a very hard time automating some of those complex processes to remove the agent. Hell a good chunk of the malware you are going to get is likely produced with the specific purpose of selling AV software in the first place. Having some AV is a good idea, but it is only a very small piece of the puzzle. Firewalls are more critical. Even more so than that is being critical about what you run, visit or install on your machine. Knowing if you go to a sketchy site you are running a risk. Have install disks. Have a decent backup. That is the world we live in now. I know what the hell I am doing, but every now and again even I get owned. Many of them aren't really infecting your system, so much as vulnerable software, particularly browsers. The last one I had, was easily removed from the "system", but it continued to completely own Chrome, which you would have to go into and manually change all the settings back, or re-install a clean version of Chrome with default settings.
So anyway to summarize, it just isn't all that useful anymore, but like anything you can sell it to people who don't know any better.
I was asked once upon a time which would win HD-DVD or BluRay during the beginning of the disk standard wars. My immediate reaction was "neither". I said it would be about online content. When a friend ask he he should get a BluRay player, I said "No, unless you don't plan to use it much".
Not saying I am a futurist, a technological sage, or anything like that, only it was very obvious many years ago that this was the trend, and that it would easily win out over dead physical media. This was many years ago. Executives finally admitting that their business model that they have been trying to prop up is failing now is humorous. Though I suppose perhaps they thought they could make a quick buck, and stretch it out longer, and are now coming to the understanding that they can't totally control what people want.
"There's no way to produce enough meat for 9 billion people."
Most of the world does not eat a lot of meat. Those that do, make up a very small population of the whole, and likely live in the US or similar.
Stop trying to sound like you are trying to feed the hungry masses of the world, when you are really targeting feeding the rich elite (relatively so in relation to 95% of that 9 billion people).
Our Conservative government did exactly that a few years back. Generally not "environmental" friendly (oil sands), but came up with the "Clean Air Act". Which isn't addressing "Climate Change" but rather pollution.
The problem with pollution is that is is predominantly a "local" connotation. You might have some neighborly pollution crossover, but generally speaking you are addressing a local issue. Climate Change, or Global Warming or whatever is basically saying that certain kinds of pollution are *not* local, and have global consequences.
The difficulty is that politically "pollution" is actually rather easy (relatively speaking) to deal with. Make some standards, come to an agreement with your immediate neighbor. Done. With the climate change, you are taking about coming to an agreement with the entire rest of the world, most of which do not want any part of it to begin with. Coal usage in China for example. This gets into the whole, "well if your not going to do it, then I am not going hurt my economy by doing it either" sort of mentality.
Climate change has never really been an environmental problem. It suggests that certain pollution may have global consequences, which is a political problem as no framework exists to deal with that sort of cooperation.
Had my car vandalized. Know exactly who did it (I accidentally parked in their Condo parking spot, was visiting a friend, another friend who had been there before said it was fine to park there). Knew exactly where they lived (Condo #). It was a secure building, and had video surveillance of them actually keying my car (was not subtle, keyed every panel, including hood and trunk).
Police did nothing. Insurance did nothing, they just wrote it off and paid it out. I told them I was very willing to go to court for them (even if it meant missing time off work), as I was very angry (my car was literately like 2 weeks old).
About the only thing I could do was go after them civilly. However since the insurance paid out, I would only really be able to go after them for the insurance deductible which was 500$, and I would incur more than that myself taking the time off, travel, etc... to do it. So i ate my rage.
Last year I had someone break into my house while I was there. Police took a report. Never heard anything again.
Yet I was drunk and noisy one night and one of my neighbors called the cops on me and one showed up to tell me to turn it down. Which is fine, I was kind of being a jerk in hindsight. However it is very hard for me to think of things like home invasion and thousands of dollars worth of theft or vandalism, not being much of a "priority" but yet they have time to come and chastise me about listening to my music too loud on the weekend.
They were probably just offended about how ugly the watch is.
They should have made it a stylish watch you can wear every day, and have several styles. Where it is an awesome watch that just happens to also unlock your gun.
As it is, it is an ugly watch you only wear when you want to shoot your gun, which mean's 99% of owners will actually store it with their gun.
A) Making it absolutely pointless.
B) Unless they shoot a lot, maybe a dead battery, making it also pretty pointless.
So bling it up already!:) (Seriously I've seen calculator watches from the 90's that looked better than that)
"Rogozin does actually have a point, although his threats carry much less weight than he may hope. Russia is due to get a $457.9 million payment for its services soon and few believe that Russia would actually give it up."
Apparently Russian energy exports (which is what this whole thing is about) is worth about 160 BILLION dollars annually.
I am not event sure that 458 Million dollars is an annual figure, but even if it is:
0.458/160*100 = 0.286 or about 0.3% of the money at stake here.
If you don't think the Russians (Putin) would be willing to eat 0.3% for a chance to very publicly and embarrassingly throw it into Obama's face at a global scale, you may be mistaken...
Nope, not it at all. Also misleading title really.
iPhone has a walled garden. Unless you jail break you *cannot* install anything from outside of that. Android is not. If you only install from "accepted" sources such as say "Google Play" or "Samsung" for example, you are no more exposed than the iPhone.
*However: Android does allow the user the flexibility to install from other (see any) sources as they see fit. In order to do so, they have to disable a default feature that prevents them from doings so, which then displays a warning message that basically says "we advise strongly against this, and you do so at your own risk, do you really want to do this?".
So anyone that gets owned by a virus in this manner has no one to blame but themselves. So it may be factually correct that 99% of viruses are made for the Android OS, it is likely they are only banking on the stupidity of users to actively enable themselves to become infected. Apple just assumes all their users are stupid (probably for good reason) and just doesn't allow for any of that. Personally I like having the flexibility. I have only done it once, it then only from a reputable company (Adobe) to try an old version of Flash that was no longer officially supported. I am comfortable assessing and assuming risk. If you are not, then simply do not do it... or by an iPhone.
Went to the movies recently at the theater on "cheap" night. Went to see the new Captain 'Mercia flick. Cheap night means movies are 5.99 rather than the normal 11.99.
However when I went to get tickets I found this: Of the like 12 show times, all were 3D, with the exception of ONE, which was at 3pm on a weekday (meaning that pretty much no one can watch it unless you are on night shift work or retired). The 3D versions of course all have a 3$ surcharge added to them, making "cheap" night 8.99. Add the 25$ popcorn deal, and its still a 50$ night for two (on cheap night).
So the parallel here of coarse is while they may have a tiered system, who is to say they will all be offered in all instances equally. Maybe the movie you want is only available in the expensive tiers, because they don't want to limit the users experience of course... Anyway if they want to do it to save users their own bandwidth costs, I am fine with that. However if they try the above described bullshit (which they most assuredly will, as it will increase profits), they can go straight to hell.
Maybe. However people seem loath to recall the significant plot holes the original movies had.
Anyway I think people were most fascinated with the *idea* of the universe. Keep those ideals in line, and I will still look forward to it. Actually making really good movies would be a nice change thought. You are right however JJ does have a "style" all his own, that I would call a formula (for money mostly). However there were elements that were done really well, like the first 10 min of Star Trek. They also cast very well. If they concentrate a bit more on some of the major elements of the story or character building and motivations I think it would go a long way, as his do seem to be a bit light in that department.
The major problem is that the viewing audience is a dichotomy. Most of the people he is targeting for the movies he makes (Transformers, Start Trek, Star Wars, etc...) are basically kids movies 12-18. However because all of the above are remakes of classic memorabilia we all grew up with, it ALSO has that audience of 30-45 year olds. Go figure the kids are sated with action and funky camera work, whereas the old guard want something a bit more. Hell 1,2,3 had the same problem with Lucas, selling it to kids and merchandising. Shit the originals did the same, and there was no base back then. Best call it just the Hollywood machine and be done with it.
Maybe they will come out with a new Serenity movie, that is one more aimed at adults.
1) If I am some terminal operator, how comfortable am I that an antipersonnel mine is planted under a panel next to my leg that is 50 years old... 2) If I am an IT technician, do I get a bible as part of my loadout that I pray that technical specifications and documents are way more accurate than everywhere else.
Though this certainly gives a lot of credence why IT professionals (Cyber Engineers?) see "no need" to upgrade it... (ever)
1) If you are spending large amounts of money, picking up a 2-300 netbook or websurfer as a burner PC isn't really a big deal. You only use it for that activity. Bonus is you can lock it down with encryption etc... without interfering with your normal PC. 2) It may be about illegal activities, but not all illegal activities are illegal everywhere. Not all illegal drugs are cocaine or meth. Maybe you want to buy a generic cancer treatment drug from India that costs 200$ rather than 5,000$ dollars, but it is illegal because it is patented in your country of residence...
Rats react to women the same as if their was no observer? Maybe we should she if women can observe things without changing states!
This would explain a lot of male confusion when women say two diametrically opposed things in the same sentence... They can just observe more quantum states than we can and can't understand why we cannot.:)
As someone from the GIS and remote sensing community either their terminology is weird, or whatever specialized focus they have is significantly different.
Remote Sensing as I know it usually revolved around satellite imagery or aerial photography. "Earth" Remote sensing? Isn't it all unless you are looking through a telescope at space:) Seriously could be something to do with seismic or magnetic sensing, but I am pretty sure there are actually terms for both of those things that are not called "Earth" Remote Sensing, but it could be they are trying to dumb it down for a public website.
Nothing too exotic about multispectral imaging. From my experience it is usually used in satellite imagery using false colours to try to illuminate something. Usually like vegetation, lack of vegetation, or water (Or really anything a certain wavelength of detection bounces off of that other wavelengths do not).
Gamma irradiation? Hulk Smash? I know it is used in a passive sense for some astronomy type detectors, though I think usually the idea is to avoid it as interference in the collider sense. irradiation sound active, which doesn't really seem reasonable to me, then again maybe they are just being cute. When I look it up, seems to be used to kill organics, typically to sterilize medical equipment and food.
Radiation Chemistry? Is that a thing? I thought radiation was energy, not an element. Only context I can see is the study of the effect of radiation on chemistry, like radiation sickness. The only likely thing I can think of would be something like carbon dating which relies upon measuring the ambient radiation content and has something to do with when we first introduced radiation in the form of nuclear testing to the world. Perhaps they are just trying to have "fancy" carbon dating. Edit: Also apparently a thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... Not sure how it applies to this situation, but it could be it is just a diverse company that does many things.
NMR spectroscopy? Apparently it is a thing, because I looked it up. The Internets say: http://www2.chemistry.msu.edu/... Which looks awfully complicated.
Proprietary know-how. Which is my personal favorite. Sounds like something you put on a shitty resume. Might as well said "Street Smarts!"
So many things wrong with this article. First of all the entire premise that concrete stood the test of time. Simple stone is probably more durable. Concrete might have been easier to work work, and cheaper.
Anyone who has visited any of these ancient sites or knows any history would tell you that most of these ancient buildings dating back to antiquity have been almost entirely rebuilt and restored in more less modern times. Between the weather, wars, earthquakes (and other natural disasters), looting, etc... there isn't much left regardless of building material of ancient sites. Much of the Colosseum for example was destroyed in wars, earthquake, and building it on an unstable foundation. One of the more sad stories is that much of the ancient ruins were destroyed by the Vatican, as they were pagan, and were an excellent source of Marble and Bronze. I guess concrete might have more survival traits, not because it was strong, but because it wasn't very valuable. Iron at the time was very expensive for example as well, and iron rods were used to peg large stone blocks together in the Colosseum, and of course what happened was people would dig out the rods and sell them, which of course weakened the structure even more, etc... Another non concrete but HUGE structural undertaking near the later years of the Roman empire was of course Hadrian's Wall. A massive wall that spanned Britain. Where is it now? It is too massive to simply disappear... Unless of course the rock was valuable as a building material, and it was looted into non-existence. Anyway if you look at what concrete was used in the construction of the Colosseum, it was used primarily to mortar bricks (which was probably a bigger breakthrough) together and apply marble vernier which of course all got stolen eventually anyway.
So if it could stand the test of time (which it couldn't really), the only thing that saved it was that it couldn't easily be stolen and re-purposed for something else. Unless the author is just talking about what the Roman leadership perceived it to be eternal in which case they are talking about the feelings and insights with probably zero record of anyone ever saying anything like that, so complete fabrication, otherwise known as fiction.
Also the lead idea is silly as well. There were a whole host of reasons why the empire fell, and if lead factored into it at all, it would have played a very insignificant role.
Considering it is Apple, who put more than a little effort into design, I think they should be worried. Perhaps not right away, but eventually when the technology matures. Look at the old style cell phones and trendy flip phones of yore. How long did they last when Apple came out with its shiny new pretty iPhone.
Once they figure out the hurdles of battery and charging issues, and if they focus on the core of the item, and make it look all sleek and pretty, it will be a piece of jewelry, as well as a phone and a watch. If they try to be all things to all people and jam everything and the kitchen sink in there right away before it is ready, and be a big ugly chunk on your wrist, then it isn't going to do well. However if they keep in minimalist, and pretty, then traditional watch makers may be in for a surprise.
Really however Apple just has to make certain it doesn't release anything prior to figuring out some of the shortfalls, as people will sour on the idea. However as to not wanting to charge their watch, how many people wear their watch at night? How many people are now VERY accustom to plugging in their phone device every night anyway? If they can make something that is functional and that looks good, they will do well. However I doubt the watch market is even a threat really only a potential casualty. The real market that will compete will be that of smart phone sales, as you are not really going to ever realistically play games or surf the web, watch youtube, etc... using your watch. Baring some holograph technology, or perhaps in combination with wireless eye ware such as Google Glass. Then again maybe that will be Apple's next step...
Slashdot Mirror
Kuwait is only an ally because of its oil reserves...
Wrap it up however you like, it was a war over the availability of resources, and in this case, oil.
If it was a serious violent crime it might be considered. For something like this I doubt it (at least in Canada). However if during one of those 30+ incidences someone what actually hurt or killed, then that would probably be the argument used. As it is, scary as it is for the victims, and a waste of taxpayer money (I imagine that each of these responses cost money), being tried as an adult is probably an overreaction. However, considering this wasn't just a few instances, if convicted, the kid is likely going to face the maximum of whatever he is eligible to get.
I know my office had a bomb threat last year, likely by someone that was ticked off with us. The funny part was that our emergency procedure was to exit and regroup in a neighboring mall. Which we found out later from the police was where the actual bomb threat was called in from (payphone)! Disclosure of that sort of information might have been useful rather than after the fact. I mean anyone that knows our emergency procedures (which we practice from time to time, so it isn't exactly a secret when hundreds of people are milling about), would do that exact same thing, but plant the bomb in the mall. Anyway as it is, most people that do this are just trying to be a pain in the ass and disruptive, much like the little punk that was part of this story.
I have probably forgotten more about IT than most even know. However, while I think I am competent in what I do, I do not know everything, nor is it really reasonable to do so. That is why specializations exist. Don't talk to the Network guy regarding your DB problems, or your DB guy about your Coding issues... Sure they may have some related experience and overlap, but likely won't be as knowledgeable as someone that does that as their core. Same with Doctors, they will all have a common background, but asking the ass doctor about your shoulder joint issue might get you the answer you need, but then again you might be better served by asking the right person.
I have been in the field long enough both in education and work, and have worked with enough people, to come to a pretty easy conclusion. Whatever you think you know, you don't know as much as you think... People that like above arrogantly attest that they know everything about everything are bullshitting you. Many are good enough to get the broad strokes and then figure out the actual details later, but that isn't quite the same thing.
Anyway this sort of cross arrogance is more about thinking something is easy when it is not, and "how hard can it be? I'm a smart person!". In most cases, sure you can do it, but likely not well. Like I have never done plumbing before. But "How hard can it be?", I could give it a shot, read a book, watch a few youtube videos... What I produce might work, but will it be good? Probably not. It will probably take me much longer to produce something that functions in a non-optimized way, that may or may not violate whatever building standards exist in my local area, which if discovered would have to be ripped out and replaced by a professional anyway. Where a professional would presumably know how to design the best system, do it in a much quicker fashion, and adhere to whatever rules or standards exist that are required. Sound similar?
A good analogy is renting vs buying a house.
Your mortgage payment might be a bit more than your rent, but at least you are making an investment rather than just giving your money away...
In the end you have a house as an asset.
They get a trendy well established brand name. They get the Dr. Dre. They get the perceived quality (200$ headphones? rly?). They get to reinforce their dominance as a music production company (ipods, iphones).
Is it worth 3+ BILLION? Hell no! However A) Beats is pretty uniquely placed right now. They are at their peak and no one is like them. B) News! Tech company overpays for another company! OMG! When you have a bazillion dollars, you likely have to prove as a CEO you are doing something with it other than polishing your boat with it.
Show your math. Which would also BS. Yes I know some equations exist, but they are also BS making huge assumptions.
Realistically, based on what we actually know the assumptions should be the opposite. If we assume that ANY planet that is earth like will eventually develop life (ours did, why not most). The idea that we are some how special and unique is like when people thought Earth was the center of everything, not the sun, and then not at all. And that all life will eventually develop intelligence (again, our only reference is ourselves, if we did certainly others can).
The actually difficulty in finding life is because of exactly two things.
1) Space is BIG. Even with all earth like planets, and all life being intelligent, there would be a VAST number of civilizations. However they will be separate by immense (I can't even give a word that actually describes the gravity (sry pun) of the situation) distances. So far that actual travel is impractical if not impossible. Even simple detection is a very long shot. Things that might indicate a civilization like radio waves and the like are just not going to work. Hell even if they produced a light source that is detectable (doing so would likely wipe out their existence anyway), even that is pretty much not going to work.
2) Time is LONG. As in the before mentioned part about detection, radio waves would take millions of years to reach us, light would take much less, but it would have to be directional and exact and of huge magnitude for use to even get it, which would require fore knowledge which they nor we would have. However more importantly, even if we assume that all life started *about* the same time, and that all earth like planets were created *about* the same time, that time period is measured in lengths that is barely comprehensible to us, and likely to any living being. The fact is we as animals haven't been around long, as intelligence, even less, as a civilization, far less, and as group even remotely able to go into space or detect objects such a small sliver it is crazy. Now how long will we last? We don't know. However looking at where we are headed, maybe not all that long. Certainly not in the geological sense of time. That is a VERY brief and unlikely window for all those ducks to get in a row. Considering that communication is a two way street, all of that in both arguments would have to happen at more less the exact same time, among neighbors, which is even less likely.
So my response is that I think it is very likely that the universe is full of intelligent life, only they nor us will ever see any of it. Baring Magic of course (FTL blah blah blah).
UT ceased to be relevant a very long time ago.
DOATA2 and League of Legends are were it is at now for competition. Before that Starcraft 2. Before that CS. Team Fortress 2.
Making UT open isn't going to change anything, the world has long since moved on to bigger and better things.
If you want to bring something back that is relevant, bring back Enemy Territory with an open update. Now that would be awesome. Though much of the reason it was great, were features that have since been integrated into all FPS now, such as classes, experience, and abilities. Though few have adopted the objective based team play (with the exception of Brink which apparently sucked for different reasons).
First off, most of the commercial ones like Norton, are barley better than the viruses they claim to protect you from. Except they are more bloated, you pay for them, and usually come pre-installed on your system if you buy retail. Many of the "free" (usually pay for upgrade) options are actually much better. My two favorite are MSE and Spybot. However even they have limitations now. From experience MOST baddies, are not really the viruses of old, but rather adware of some creed. Anyone who had gotten and removed from some of these can tell you about the painful process of trying to go through the complex process to get rid of some of these insidious things. Having a 2nd computer or smart phone is handy in trying to do this so you can take the affected system offline so it doesn't automatically re-infect itself halfway through the process. In many cases it is just easier to wipe the slate clean and install clean again. AV is going to have a very hard time automating some of those complex processes to remove the agent. Hell a good chunk of the malware you are going to get is likely produced with the specific purpose of selling AV software in the first place. Having some AV is a good idea, but it is only a very small piece of the puzzle. Firewalls are more critical. Even more so than that is being critical about what you run, visit or install on your machine. Knowing if you go to a sketchy site you are running a risk. Have install disks. Have a decent backup. That is the world we live in now. I know what the hell I am doing, but every now and again even I get owned. Many of them aren't really infecting your system, so much as vulnerable software, particularly browsers. The last one I had, was easily removed from the "system", but it continued to completely own Chrome, which you would have to go into and manually change all the settings back, or re-install a clean version of Chrome with default settings.
So anyway to summarize, it just isn't all that useful anymore, but like anything you can sell it to people who don't know any better.
I was asked once upon a time which would win HD-DVD or BluRay during the beginning of the disk standard wars. My immediate reaction was "neither". I said it would be about online content. When a friend ask he he should get a BluRay player, I said "No, unless you don't plan to use it much".
Not saying I am a futurist, a technological sage, or anything like that, only it was very obvious many years ago that this was the trend, and that it would easily win out over dead physical media. This was many years ago. Executives finally admitting that their business model that they have been trying to prop up is failing now is humorous. Though I suppose perhaps they thought they could make a quick buck, and stretch it out longer, and are now coming to the understanding that they can't totally control what people want.
"There's no way to produce enough meat for 9 billion people."
Most of the world does not eat a lot of meat. Those that do, make up a very small population of the whole, and likely live in the US or similar.
Stop trying to sound like you are trying to feed the hungry masses of the world, when you are really targeting feeding the rich elite (relatively so in relation to 95% of that 9 billion people).
Our Conservative government did exactly that a few years back. Generally not "environmental" friendly (oil sands), but came up with the "Clean Air Act". Which isn't addressing "Climate Change" but rather pollution.
The problem with pollution is that is is predominantly a "local" connotation. You might have some neighborly pollution crossover, but generally speaking you are addressing a local issue. Climate Change, or Global Warming or whatever is basically saying that certain kinds of pollution are *not* local, and have global consequences.
The difficulty is that politically "pollution" is actually rather easy (relatively speaking) to deal with. Make some standards, come to an agreement with your immediate neighbor. Done. With the climate change, you are taking about coming to an agreement with the entire rest of the world, most of which do not want any part of it to begin with. Coal usage in China for example. This gets into the whole, "well if your not going to do it, then I am not going hurt my economy by doing it either" sort of mentality.
Climate change has never really been an environmental problem. It suggests that certain pollution may have global consequences, which is a political problem as no framework exists to deal with that sort of cooperation.
Had a similar situation.
Had my car vandalized. Know exactly who did it (I accidentally parked in their Condo parking spot, was visiting a friend, another friend who had been there before said it was fine to park there). Knew exactly where they lived (Condo #). It was a secure building, and had video surveillance of them actually keying my car (was not subtle, keyed every panel, including hood and trunk).
Police did nothing. Insurance did nothing, they just wrote it off and paid it out. I told them I was very willing to go to court for them (even if it meant missing time off work), as I was very angry (my car was literately like 2 weeks old).
About the only thing I could do was go after them civilly. However since the insurance paid out, I would only really be able to go after them for the insurance deductible which was 500$, and I would incur more than that myself taking the time off, travel, etc... to do it. So i ate my rage.
Last year I had someone break into my house while I was there. Police took a report. Never heard anything again.
Yet I was drunk and noisy one night and one of my neighbors called the cops on me and one showed up to tell me to turn it down. Which is fine, I was kind of being a jerk in hindsight. However it is very hard for me to think of things like home invasion and thousands of dollars worth of theft or vandalism, not being much of a "priority" but yet they have time to come and chastise me about listening to my music too loud on the weekend.
They were probably just offended about how ugly the watch is.
They should have made it a stylish watch you can wear every day, and have several styles. Where it is an awesome watch that just happens to also unlock your gun.
As it is, it is an ugly watch you only wear when you want to shoot your gun, which mean's 99% of owners will actually store it with their gun.
A) Making it absolutely pointless.
B) Unless they shoot a lot, maybe a dead battery, making it also pretty pointless.
So bling it up already! :) (Seriously I've seen calculator watches from the 90's that looked better than that)
What kind of Utopia do you live in? Two choices!
Where I am from you can have either Bell or Rogers. Choose one. Both offer exact same packages.
I know there is a kang and kodos joke in here someplace...
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t...
Even if he does eat the 0.3%, it's not like Putin has to worry about being re-elected...
badda boom ting... I'm here all week, try the veal it's excellent! :)
"Rogozin does actually have a point, although his threats carry much less weight than he may hope. Russia is due to get a $457.9 million payment for its services soon and few believe that Russia would actually give it up."
Apparently Russian energy exports (which is what this whole thing is about) is worth about 160 BILLION dollars annually.
I am not event sure that 458 Million dollars is an annual figure, but even if it is:
0.458/160*100 = 0.286 or about 0.3% of the money at stake here.
If you don't think the Russians (Putin) would be willing to eat 0.3% for a chance to very publicly and embarrassingly throw it into Obama's face at a global scale, you may be mistaken...
Nope, not it at all. Also misleading title really.
iPhone has a walled garden. Unless you jail break you *cannot* install anything from outside of that.
Android is not. If you only install from "accepted" sources such as say "Google Play" or "Samsung" for example, you are no more exposed than the iPhone.
*However: Android does allow the user the flexibility to install from other (see any) sources as they see fit. In order to do so, they have to disable a default feature that prevents them from doings so, which then displays a warning message that basically says "we advise strongly against this, and you do so at your own risk, do you really want to do this?".
So anyone that gets owned by a virus in this manner has no one to blame but themselves. So it may be factually correct that 99% of viruses are made for the Android OS, it is likely they are only banking on the stupidity of users to actively enable themselves to become infected. Apple just assumes all their users are stupid (probably for good reason) and just doesn't allow for any of that. Personally I like having the flexibility. I have only done it once, it then only from a reputable company (Adobe) to try an old version of Flash that was no longer officially supported. I am comfortable assessing and assuming risk. If you are not, then simply do not do it... or by an iPhone.
Went to the movies recently at the theater on "cheap" night. Went to see the new Captain 'Mercia flick.
Cheap night means movies are 5.99 rather than the normal 11.99.
However when I went to get tickets I found this:
Of the like 12 show times, all were 3D, with the exception of ONE, which was at 3pm on a weekday (meaning that pretty much no one can watch it unless you are on night shift work or retired). The 3D versions of course all have a 3$ surcharge added to them, making "cheap" night 8.99. Add the 25$ popcorn deal, and its still a 50$ night for two (on cheap night).
So the parallel here of coarse is while they may have a tiered system, who is to say they will all be offered in all instances equally. Maybe the movie you want is only available in the expensive tiers, because they don't want to limit the users experience of course... Anyway if they want to do it to save users their own bandwidth costs, I am fine with that. However if they try the above described bullshit (which they most assuredly will, as it will increase profits), they can go straight to hell.
Maybe. However people seem loath to recall the significant plot holes the original movies had.
Anyway I think people were most fascinated with the *idea* of the universe. Keep those ideals in line, and I will still look forward to it. Actually making really good movies would be a nice change thought. You are right however JJ does have a "style" all his own, that I would call a formula (for money mostly). However there were elements that were done really well, like the first 10 min of Star Trek. They also cast very well. If they concentrate a bit more on some of the major elements of the story or character building and motivations I think it would go a long way, as his do seem to be a bit light in that department.
The major problem is that the viewing audience is a dichotomy. Most of the people he is targeting for the movies he makes (Transformers, Start Trek, Star Wars, etc...) are basically kids movies 12-18. However because all of the above are remakes of classic memorabilia we all grew up with, it ALSO has that audience of 30-45 year olds. Go figure the kids are sated with action and funky camera work, whereas the old guard want something a bit more. Hell 1,2,3 had the same problem with Lucas, selling it to kids and merchandising. Shit the originals did the same, and there was no base back then. Best call it just the Hollywood machine and be done with it.
Maybe they will come out with a new Serenity movie, that is one more aimed at adults.
Er. ya. My thoughts exactly.
1) If I am some terminal operator, how comfortable am I that an antipersonnel mine is planted under a panel next to my leg that is 50 years old...
2) If I am an IT technician, do I get a bible as part of my loadout that I pray that technical specifications and documents are way more accurate than everywhere else.
Though this certainly gives a lot of credence why IT professionals (Cyber Engineers?) see "no need" to upgrade it... (ever)
Several things:
1) If you are spending large amounts of money, picking up a 2-300 netbook or websurfer as a burner PC isn't really a big deal. You only use it for that activity. Bonus is you can lock it down with encryption etc... without interfering with your normal PC.
2) It may be about illegal activities, but not all illegal activities are illegal everywhere. Not all illegal drugs are cocaine or meth. Maybe you want to buy a generic cancer treatment drug from India that costs 200$ rather than 5,000$ dollars, but it is illegal because it is patented in your country of residence...
Rats react to women the same as if their was no observer?
Maybe we should she if women can observe things without changing states!
This would explain a lot of male confusion when women say two diametrically opposed things in the same sentence... They can just observe more quantum states than we can and can't understand why we cannot. :)
As someone from the GIS and remote sensing community either their terminology is weird, or whatever specialized focus they have is significantly different.
Remote Sensing as I know it usually revolved around satellite imagery or aerial photography. "Earth" Remote sensing? Isn't it all unless you are looking through a telescope at space :) Seriously could be something to do with seismic or magnetic sensing, but I am pretty sure there are actually terms for both of those things that are not called "Earth" Remote Sensing, but it could be they are trying to dumb it down for a public website.
Nothing too exotic about multispectral imaging. From my experience it is usually used in satellite imagery using false colours to try to illuminate something. Usually like vegetation, lack of vegetation, or water (Or really anything a certain wavelength of detection bounces off of that other wavelengths do not).
Gamma irradiation? Hulk Smash? I know it is used in a passive sense for some astronomy type detectors, though I think usually the idea is to avoid it as interference in the collider sense. irradiation sound active, which doesn't really seem reasonable to me, then again maybe they are just being cute. When I look it up, seems to be used to kill organics, typically to sterilize medical equipment and food.
Radiation Chemistry? Is that a thing? I thought radiation was energy, not an element. Only context I can see is the study of the effect of radiation on chemistry, like radiation sickness. The only likely thing I can think of would be something like carbon dating which relies upon measuring the ambient radiation content and has something to do with when we first introduced radiation in the form of nuclear testing to the world. Perhaps they are just trying to have "fancy" carbon dating.
Edit: Also apparently a thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Not sure how it applies to this situation, but it could be it is just a diverse company that does many things.
NMR spectroscopy? Apparently it is a thing, because I looked it up. The Internets say:
http://www2.chemistry.msu.edu/...
Which looks awfully complicated.
Proprietary know-how. Which is my personal favorite. Sounds like something you put on a shitty resume. Might as well said "Street Smarts!"
So many things wrong with this article. First of all the entire premise that concrete stood the test of time. Simple stone is probably more durable. Concrete might have been easier to work work, and cheaper.
Anyone who has visited any of these ancient sites or knows any history would tell you that most of these ancient buildings dating back to antiquity have been almost entirely rebuilt and restored in more less modern times. Between the weather, wars, earthquakes (and other natural disasters), looting, etc... there isn't much left regardless of building material of ancient sites. Much of the Colosseum for example was destroyed in wars, earthquake, and building it on an unstable foundation. One of the more sad stories is that much of the ancient ruins were destroyed by the Vatican, as they were pagan, and were an excellent source of Marble and Bronze. I guess concrete might have more survival traits, not because it was strong, but because it wasn't very valuable. Iron at the time was very expensive for example as well, and iron rods were used to peg large stone blocks together in the Colosseum, and of course what happened was people would dig out the rods and sell them, which of course weakened the structure even more, etc... Another non concrete but HUGE structural undertaking near the later years of the Roman empire was of course Hadrian's Wall. A massive wall that spanned Britain. Where is it now? It is too massive to simply disappear... Unless of course the rock was valuable as a building material, and it was looted into non-existence. Anyway if you look at what concrete was used in the construction of the Colosseum, it was used primarily to mortar bricks (which was probably a bigger breakthrough) together and apply marble vernier which of course all got stolen eventually anyway.
So if it could stand the test of time (which it couldn't really), the only thing that saved it was that it couldn't easily be stolen and re-purposed for something else. Unless the author is just talking about what the Roman leadership perceived it to be eternal in which case they are talking about the feelings and insights with probably zero record of anyone ever saying anything like that, so complete fabrication, otherwise known as fiction.
Also the lead idea is silly as well. There were a whole host of reasons why the empire fell, and if lead factored into it at all, it would have played a very insignificant role.
Considering it is Apple, who put more than a little effort into design, I think they should be worried. Perhaps not right away, but eventually when the technology matures. Look at the old style cell phones and trendy flip phones of yore. How long did they last when Apple came out with its shiny new pretty iPhone.
Once they figure out the hurdles of battery and charging issues, and if they focus on the core of the item, and make it look all sleek and pretty, it will be a piece of jewelry, as well as a phone and a watch. If they try to be all things to all people and jam everything and the kitchen sink in there right away before it is ready, and be a big ugly chunk on your wrist, then it isn't going to do well. However if they keep in minimalist, and pretty, then traditional watch makers may be in for a surprise.
Really however Apple just has to make certain it doesn't release anything prior to figuring out some of the shortfalls, as people will sour on the idea. However as to not wanting to charge their watch, how many people wear their watch at night? How many people are now VERY accustom to plugging in their phone device every night anyway? If they can make something that is functional and that looks good, they will do well. However I doubt the watch market is even a threat really only a potential casualty. The real market that will compete will be that of smart phone sales, as you are not really going to ever realistically play games or surf the web, watch youtube, etc... using your watch. Baring some holograph technology, or perhaps in combination with wireless eye ware such as Google Glass. Then again maybe that will be Apple's next step...