I don't think parked domains are considered "active servers." The Netcraft stats show that IIS is gaining ground against Apache even faster among active servers than nonactive servers (see this graph). Godaddy switching to IIS would not explain that.
Or am I misunderstanding what "active servers" are?
"A radar scatterometer is designed to determine the normalized radar cross section (sigma-0) of the surface. Scatterometers operate by transmitting a pulse of microwave energy towards the Earth's surface and measuring the reflected energy. A separate measurement of the noise-only power is made and subtracted from the signal+noise measurement to determine the backscatter signal power. Sigma-0 is computed from the signal power measurement using the distributed target radar equation.
"The primary application of spaceborne scatterometry has been measurements near-surface winds over the ocean. By combining sigma-0 measurements from different azimuth angles, the near-surface wind vector over the ocean's surface can be determined using a geophysical model function (GMF) which relates wind and backscatter. Scatterometer wind measurements are partiularly useful for monitoring hurricanes. Scatterometer data is being applied to the study of tropical vegetation, soil moisture, polar ice, and global change."
The full John Adams quote (from "Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials"):
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.
Can someone who knows about hurricane prediction please answer a quick question for me? I heard countless predictions on the media that global warming was going to cause the 2006 hurricane season to be catastrophically intense and large. Obviously it wasn't.
Where were the media's predictions coming from? Did the hurricane forcasters in the scientific community screw up (i.e. were the scientists really predicting a large hurricane season)? Or did the media just present a one-sided view when really many hurricane forcasters were not predicting anything unusual?
Because if the hurricane forcasting is so off as to generate such predictions as we were heard about 2006, then a decrease in accuracy of 16% probably isn't that serious, is it (they're so far off anyways)?
We're getting a little off topic, but I'll bite anyway.
First, to avoid ambiguity, let me precisely define the phrase that I will use. When I speak of a win-win situation, I mean a situation in which all human parties affected subjectively determine that they have benefited from it.
Assume a closed system (take the Earth for example...), implement a "free market" economic system (arguments about whether or not it is truly free are irrelevant). This closed system is owned in this economic system (that is, there are no parts that are not owned by somebody or some organisation, who might be a government).
Now you say that a person can win simply by being a part? The more likely outcome is that through bad decisions, bad laws or whatever else, that the majority of people will lose, and a few will win. That's why you see a lot more poor people then rich, because in a closed system, when someone else wins, someone else will lose.
No one is positing that capitalism allows people to magically increase the amount of energy/matter in the universe. You state that if one person or group wins, another must lose. However, this is not necessarily true. Going from the premise of a closed system in which the 2nd law of thermodynamics operates to the conclusion that no win-win situations are possible is a non sequitur. The second law of thermodynamics says nothing about the possibility of win-win situations--it doesn't imply that win-win situations are impossible or even that they are less likely than win-lose or lose-lose situations.
For example: suppose two people live together on a planet in an otherwise uninhabited universe. Each person owns a fishing pond. Working alone, each of the two people can catch an average of, say, 2 fish per day from their ponds. How can these two people interact with each other? What will be the outcomes of their possible interactions? How will they subjectively value those outcomes? Suppose we are given the facts that their universe is closed and that the 2nd law of thermodynamics operates within their universe. Knowing this and only this, can we arrive at any answers to those three questions? Without more information, it is impossible to answer any of the three questions completely. We can only place a limit on the answers to the first two questions as follows: their interactions cannot increase the amount of usable energy in their universe. The third question is unanswerable given only those two premises. Thus, we cannot conclude that win-win situations are more likely or less likely than lose-lose situations or win-lose situations, and we certainly cannot conclude that win-win is impossible.
I can imagine the two people interacting in ways that create win-win situations, win-lose situations, and lose-lose situations. Suppose that the two people value the satisfaction they derive from the consumption of fish more highly than the satisfaction they derive from any other action. One of the two people may then acquire Ninja skills and use those skills to steal one of the other person's recently caught fish. This would be an example of a win-lose situation. Alternately, suppose that the other person was a pirate and that both of them became involved in a fierce fight over the fish. If neither side won the battle, but if both were greatly wounded so as to be unable to catch but one fish per day (instead of the usual two), this would be an example of a lose-lose situation. Finally, suppose instead that both people decided to work together and equally share the profit from the operation of a fishing net whose fish-catching capacity was 10 fish per day. Both person's daily fish consumption would then increase by 250% if they ate the fish they caught. This would be a win-win situation.
Of course, someone is going to think, "but what about the USA, aren't they winning?", well they might well be, but only because people in third world nations are losing...
There is no logically-deduced reason to believe that the poverty in the third world is directly and completely caused by our prosperity.
If the only issue was that some players were friendly with the developers, then I doubt anyone would be complaining. However, it has been proven that in the past at least one developer was cheating and giving himself some of the most valuable items in the game. If he and his corporation had not acquired those items by cheating, the balance of power in-game might be completely different today.
The damage was done but CCP assured people that this one a one-time incident and that it wouldn't happen again. However, if the allegations presented in TFA are true, then the corruption is still going on and may be widespread.
In conclusion, this isn't just some losers complaining that the older players are more powerful--people are complaining because they think that the developers are breaking the rules to benefit their in-game characters and corporations.
Or better yet, imagine if Ghengis Khan, Hitler, etc. had imaginary wargames like this to play with. Would they leave their basements either?
Apparently, yes, they would have eventually emerged from their basements. And they would have emerged mightier than before! From Wikipedia:
"The stunning Prussian victory over the Second French Empire in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) is sometimes partly credited to the training of Prussian officers with the game Kriegspiel, which was invented around 1811 and gained popularity with many officers in the Prussian army.
Useful Historical Fact of the Day: If Hitler had played C&C, we would all by typing in German by now.
Basically it goes like this: there are three allegations. (1) Someone who works for CCP (the company that makes Eve) used his developer powers to spy on an in-game corporation. (2) Players have supposedly had the ability to mold the Eve storyline through in-game events. However, it is alleged that some (or all) of these in-game events were actually rigged. In other words, the players who spent months participating in the events, thinking they were making a different in the Eve world, wasted their time and were merely puppets in the hands of the devs. (3) The players of a certain alliance (Band of Brothers) have special connections with the developers and allegedly succeeded causing certain people who displeased them to be banned.
Of course that's the whole point of the game, it's not supposed to be fair.
How do you define fair? To me, fairness means everyone is judged by the same standards and plays by the same set of rules. Fairness should not mean that everyone should have the same outcome. I doubt that any new Eve player expected to be instantly given the "right" to as much in-game power as those people who have been playing longer and have more knowledge about the game. All we expected was that the rules of the game would be the same for everyone. However, when developers use the power that they have acquired outside of the game (by virtue of their being devs) to bend the rules in their favor, that upsets the rest of the player base--and rightly so.
A statement from the CEO of Darkstar 1, the corp which owns the POS in question (taken from his in-game bio):
"for the record, Darkstar1 has 3 pos in game only and they have always worked fine and have never been petitioned by anyone in the corp for not working, the statement given by CCP is incorrect and simply not true as far as i can tell.
I am certain that the developer joining our corp is above board and no malice intended but frankly the manner in which he did it in these times of little trust and confidence in certain parties leads to a high level of suspision and drama.
Too much of the actions are clouded and fogged, all it would of taken was an explanation via a mail or something to say he was going to do what he did.
This incident shows clearly that there is still a lack of trust when it comes to the developers of this game acting in a trustworthy unbaised manner, i remind you all that the ISD bias and events issues are still unaccounted for......"
This is silly. Copyrights are not necessary. All you need is respect for contracts. Example: a programmer writes code. Then he gives the code to his friend after asking his friend to contract that he will agree to release all his modifications to the source code (or whatever) and that the friend will require anyone he gives the code to to agree to the same contract. Viola. Open source without copyright law.
TFA says that his operation cost the real VOIP guys about $300,000. He received $1,000,000 in revenue. If he had just done the same thing, but legitimately, there would have been $600,000 profit. If he had only does things the right way....
Crime can pay--for a short while. But real innovation and hard work can *really* pay, and you don't have to be looking over your back the whole time.
If mutation is such a negligible factor, then how do two members of a species vary to the point at which they can no longer interbreed and become members of two different species?
Simple answer: the parent you are replying to is way off base. Quote from Wikipedia's Mutation page:
"Mutations are considered the driving force of evolution"
I don't think that is it because the contact info on the fish site doesnt list the Google address. It lists another address (where no business is located). If Yahoo had used the data provided by the fish site, as you are suggesting, then it would have placed the business at 1600 Middlefield Rd, Mountain View, CA, no?
IMHO, TFA is correct, this is a prank by a Yahoo employee.
should anyone be able to sell information about you at all?
Answer: it depends.
If someone is going to sell information about you, they should ask your permission first. If you grant them that permission, then they should be allowed to do it. If you do not, then they should not be allowed to do it.
One laptop per child which will help their education. Which will make them smarter and more able to handle life. Which will make them get better jobs and help them to be able to create innovative new stuff. Which will greatly improve their economic situations. Which will mean that their children will always have full stomachs.
Another question: how fast is it? "12Mbps" you say? No, that's not how fast it is. That's how "big" the pipe is. What I want to know is: how much latency?
If this is anything like satelite, I wouldnt go near it even if it did come to the US.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think parked domains are considered "active servers." The Netcraft stats show that IIS is gaining ground against Apache even faster among active servers than nonactive servers (see this graph). Godaddy switching to IIS would not explain that.
Or am I misunderstanding what "active servers" are?
Scatterometer:
"A radar scatterometer is designed to determine the normalized radar cross section (sigma-0) of the surface. Scatterometers operate by transmitting a pulse of microwave energy towards the Earth's surface and measuring the reflected energy. A separate measurement of the noise-only power is made and subtracted from the signal+noise measurement to determine the backscatter signal power. Sigma-0 is computed from the signal power measurement using the distributed target radar equation.
"The primary application of spaceborne scatterometry has been measurements near-surface winds over the ocean. By combining sigma-0 measurements from different azimuth angles, the near-surface wind vector over the ocean's surface can be determined using a geophysical model function (GMF) which relates wind and backscatter. Scatterometer wind measurements are partiularly useful for monitoring hurricanes. Scatterometer data is being applied to the study of tropical vegetation, soil moisture, polar ice, and global change."
The full John Adams quote (from "Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials"):
The Founding Fathers wisdom FTW!
Can someone who knows about hurricane prediction please answer a quick question for me? I heard countless predictions on the media that global warming was going to cause the 2006 hurricane season to be catastrophically intense and large. Obviously it wasn't.
Where were the media's predictions coming from? Did the hurricane forcasters in the scientific community screw up (i.e. were the scientists really predicting a large hurricane season)? Or did the media just present a one-sided view when really many hurricane forcasters were not predicting anything unusual?
Because if the hurricane forcasting is so off as to generate such predictions as we were heard about 2006, then a decrease in accuracy of 16% probably isn't that serious, is it (they're so far off anyways)?
I'm writing as a layman here.
Poor lonely Pluto;
No one loves you now but me.
You actually aren't alone. These guys were so moved with affection for Pluto that they created a music video. Rock on, Pluto!
We're getting a little off topic, but I'll bite anyway.
First, to avoid ambiguity, let me precisely define the phrase that I will use. When I speak of a win-win situation, I mean a situation in which all human parties affected subjectively determine that they have benefited from it.
Assume a closed system (take the Earth for example...), implement a "free market" economic system (arguments about whether or not it is truly free are irrelevant). This closed system is owned in this economic system (that is, there are no parts that are not owned by somebody or some organisation, who might be a government).
Now you say that a person can win simply by being a part? The more likely outcome is that through bad decisions, bad laws or whatever else, that the majority of people will lose, and a few will win. That's why you see a lot more poor people then rich, because in a closed system, when someone else wins, someone else will lose.
No one is positing that capitalism allows people to magically increase the amount of energy/matter in the universe. You state that if one person or group wins, another must lose. However, this is not necessarily true. Going from the premise of a closed system in which the 2nd law of thermodynamics operates to the conclusion that no win-win situations are possible is a non sequitur. The second law of thermodynamics says nothing about the possibility of win-win situations--it doesn't imply that win-win situations are impossible or even that they are less likely than win-lose or lose-lose situations.
For example: suppose two people live together on a planet in an otherwise uninhabited universe. Each person owns a fishing pond. Working alone, each of the two people can catch an average of, say, 2 fish per day from their ponds. How can these two people interact with each other? What will be the outcomes of their possible interactions? How will they subjectively value those outcomes? Suppose we are given the facts that their universe is closed and that the 2nd law of thermodynamics operates within their universe. Knowing this and only this, can we arrive at any answers to those three questions? Without more information, it is impossible to answer any of the three questions completely. We can only place a limit on the answers to the first two questions as follows: their interactions cannot increase the amount of usable energy in their universe. The third question is unanswerable given only those two premises. Thus, we cannot conclude that win-win situations are more likely or less likely than lose-lose situations or win-lose situations, and we certainly cannot conclude that win-win is impossible.
I can imagine the two people interacting in ways that create win-win situations, win-lose situations, and lose-lose situations. Suppose that the two people value the satisfaction they derive from the consumption of fish more highly than the satisfaction they derive from any other action. One of the two people may then acquire Ninja skills and use those skills to steal one of the other person's recently caught fish. This would be an example of a win-lose situation. Alternately, suppose that the other person was a pirate and that both of them became involved in a fierce fight over the fish. If neither side won the battle, but if both were greatly wounded so as to be unable to catch but one fish per day (instead of the usual two), this would be an example of a lose-lose situation. Finally, suppose instead that both people decided to work together and equally share the profit from the operation of a fishing net whose fish-catching capacity was 10 fish per day. Both person's daily fish consumption would then increase by 250% if they ate the fish they caught. This would be a win-win situation.
Of course, someone is going to think, "but what about the USA, aren't they winning?", well they might well be, but only because people in third world nations are losing...
There is no logically-deduced reason to believe that the poverty in the third world is directly and completely caused by our prosperity.
If the only issue was that some players were friendly with the developers, then I doubt anyone would be complaining. However, it has been proven that in the past at least one developer was cheating and giving himself some of the most valuable items in the game. If he and his corporation had not acquired those items by cheating, the balance of power in-game might be completely different today.
The damage was done but CCP assured people that this one a one-time incident and that it wouldn't happen again. However, if the allegations presented in TFA are true, then the corruption is still going on and may be widespread.
In conclusion, this isn't just some losers complaining that the older players are more powerful--people are complaining because they think that the developers are breaking the rules to benefit their in-game characters and corporations.
Or better yet, imagine if Ghengis Khan, Hitler, etc. had imaginary wargames like this to play with. Would they leave their basements either?
Apparently, yes, they would have eventually emerged from their basements. And they would have emerged mightier than before! From Wikipedia:
"The stunning Prussian victory over the Second French Empire in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) is sometimes partly credited to the training of Prussian officers with the game Kriegspiel, which was invented around 1811 and gained popularity with many officers in the Prussian army.
Useful Historical Fact of the Day: If Hitler had played C&C, we would all by typing in German by now.
Basically it goes like this: there are three allegations. (1) Someone who works for CCP (the company that makes Eve) used his developer powers to spy on an in-game corporation. (2) Players have supposedly had the ability to mold the Eve storyline through in-game events. However, it is alleged that some (or all) of these in-game events were actually rigged. In other words, the players who spent months participating in the events, thinking they were making a different in the Eve world, wasted their time and were merely puppets in the hands of the devs. (3) The players of a certain alliance (Band of Brothers) have special connections with the developers and allegedly succeeded causing certain people who displeased them to be banned.
Of course that's the whole point of the game, it's not supposed to be fair.
How do you define fair? To me, fairness means everyone is judged by the same standards and plays by the same set of rules. Fairness should not mean that everyone should have the same outcome. I doubt that any new Eve player expected to be instantly given the "right" to as much in-game power as those people who have been playing longer and have more knowledge about the game. All we expected was that the rules of the game would be the same for everyone. However, when developers use the power that they have acquired outside of the game (by virtue of their being devs) to bend the rules in their favor, that upsets the rest of the player base--and rightly so.
Sharkbait story has no merit.
A statement from the CEO of Darkstar 1, the corp which owns the POS in question (taken from his in-game bio):
"for the record, Darkstar1 has 3 pos in game only and they have always worked fine and have never been petitioned by anyone in the corp for not working, the statement given by CCP is incorrect and simply not true as far as i can tell. I am certain that the developer joining our corp is above board and no malice intended but frankly the manner in which he did it in these times of little trust and confidence in certain parties leads to a high level of suspision and drama. Too much of the actions are clouded and fogged, all it would of taken was an explanation via a mail or something to say he was going to do what he did.
This incident shows clearly that there is still a lack of trust when it comes to the developers of this game acting in a trustworthy unbaised manner, i remind you all that the ISD bias and events issues are still unaccounted for......"
This is silly. Copyrights are not necessary. All you need is respect for contracts. Example: a programmer writes code. Then he gives the code to his friend after asking his friend to contract that he will agree to release all his modifications to the source code (or whatever) and that the friend will require anyone he gives the code to to agree to the same contract. Viola. Open source without copyright law.
TFA says that his operation cost the real VOIP guys about $300,000. He received $1,000,000 in revenue. If he had just done the same thing, but legitimately, there would have been $600,000 profit. If he had only does things the right way....
Crime can pay--for a short while. But real innovation and hard work can *really* pay, and you don't have to be looking over your back the whole time.
I think a vulnerability can be reported anonymously quite safely
And you can even get paid for doing it! Remember the Zero Day Initiative that was on the news a while back? They guarantee anonymity.
...but only $10 million? They spend way more than that on saving owls and stuff.
Anyhow, it is unfortunate, and hopefully it will be fixed shortly.
"Beta" still means "beta" over at Apple. This is making frontpage news?
How dare they decide what they will be selling in their own stores!
If mutation is such a negligible factor, then how do two members of a species vary to the point at which they can no longer interbreed and become members of two different species?
Simple answer: the parent you are replying to is way off base. Quote from Wikipedia's Mutation page:
I don't think that is it because the contact info on the fish site doesnt list the Google address. It lists another address (where no business is located). If Yahoo had used the data provided by the fish site, as you are suggesting, then it would have placed the business at 1600 Middlefield Rd, Mountain View, CA, no?
IMHO, TFA is correct, this is a prank by a Yahoo employee.
should anyone be able to sell information about you at all?
Answer: it depends.
If someone is going to sell information about you, they should ask your permission first. If you grant them that permission, then they should be allowed to do it. If you do not, then they should not be allowed to do it.
I don't see how this is hard to understand.
why Netscape? Bundling Firefox or Opera I might understand, but I dont have a clue why they would bundle Netscape. What advantages does Netscape have?
Oh, my emachine that I bought several years ago came with Netscape, so HP is not the first to do this.
One full stomach per child.
vs.
One laptop per child which will help their education. Which will make them smarter and more able to handle life. Which will make them get better jobs and help them to be able to create innovative new stuff. Which will greatly improve their economic situations. Which will mean that their children will always have full stomachs.
I vote for the second option.
the appointing of three new officers
Adding more bureaucracy doesnt help anything, especially in an organization already totally overbloated.
Since when does a few pictures of naked hippies become news for nerds and stuff that matters?!?
Another question: how fast is it? "12Mbps" you say? No, that's not how fast it is. That's how "big" the pipe is. What I want to know is: how much latency?
If this is anything like satelite, I wouldnt go near it even if it did come to the US.