Unless you're a spamm hunter, gathering spam for comparison to legitimate email and training your Bayesian filters. Unfortunately, it can be a bit awkward to allow that one spamhunter's email through and block it for everyone else.
For such a bad idea, they're pretty effective at containing a lot of spam attacks and worms. The difference, in my experience, 2 years ago, was a 50% drop in spam getting through and a huge drop in SMTP server load when I was permitted to install DNS blacklist features. It meant I didn't have to buy and maintain another front-end mail server, just to do raw spam filtering.
It's better than doing it later, unannounced, when a domain squatter gets the name and turns it into a pop-up ad and spam service. Maintaining a DNS record takes money, and it adds up for a hobbyist rather than a commercial enterprise.
That said, if we want more effective DNS based filtering, I've found SPF to be fairly useful. It's under the control of the companies in whose name the email is sent, rather than a third party, and it's handy to provide a ranking for SpamAssassin and other filtering tools even if it's not used to block email completely.
Well, yes. You certainly can't optimize *everything* to its theoretical maximum. But a bit of attention to making the Traveling Salesman's bag lighter, getting through airport security faster, and being able to phone ahead to change his reservations can go a long way towards improving the profitability of his trip.
Another reason could be that we're old programmers: we know better than to stick our fingers into the moving lawnmower blades of multi-processor technologies.
Good luck with that approach. Unless your folks studied entirely different fields, they've got a few decades of experience that might help them with that. (My dad helped me study for several of my college exams: decades of experience counts for a lot.)
Seriously, presidents and all leaders have to make choices of available resources: more taxes, or fewer emergency rooms? Get elected, or refuse money from oil companies? Keep the nation united, or allow the South to secede as the Constitution allows? Make drug approval easier and risk another Thalidomide and creating another hyper-resistant bug, or control anti-biotic prescriptions and have drugs cost more?
These are hard decisions, and there simply is no one "best for the American people". If life were so simple, then the fairy Clinkerbell could also gather all the troll teeth to pay the national debt. (Terry Pratchett reference.)
Murder is primarily a _legal_ classificaton of killing, not a moral one. And nations that have signed various UN treaties have a legal obligation to enforce the agreements. So I was not talking about the legal authority of treaties signed by the member nations, including those where such violation of religious freedoms may occur.
In every member of the UN, it's considered a "crime against humanity" to kill someone for their religious beliefs. Even in countries that hold murder to be a crime enforced by individual states, or by member groups, there's usually a federal law of some kind enforcing it.
So unless the state is entirely religiously ruled, and hasn't signed basic UN treaties, it's murder.
Bless you. It's the day after Easter, the celebration of the resurrection of a revered religious prophet, and you seem to have *actually read what was written about him*. You must be one of those rare few on slashdot who actually Read The Fine Article!
Mind you, just because a prophet said it doesn't make it sane or sensible. But I find Jesus's teachings to be fascinating. "Who is my neighbor" is often ignored.
Hardly. The number of Iraqi casualties in Iraq from guerrilla attacks far outnumbers US or coalition casualties. And the last 30 years or so of Iran and Iraq conflicts outnumbers that even further.
So former Muslims who convert to, say, Buddhism or Christianity or Wicca are to be slaughtered if they don't repent and turn back to this particular religion?
It's not unusual as policy for a lot of religions in history, because heretics are often considered even worse than non-believers. And it's not like Christianity doesn't have the Inquisition to live down. But it's still murder to follow that policy.
Well, there's the KKK in America and abortion clinic bombings. And historically, there's the Holocaust and the Crusades. So please be aware that art mocking political and religious leaders has gotten people slaughtered throughout history, including by Christians of various types.
Interesting: are you being swamped by Eastern European students at the public universities, as each nation joins the EU? Are Oxford and Cambridge private institutions like Cal-Tech and MIT, the kind of endowment based funding they rely on?
The US universities have quite a few foreign scholars on tuition covered by their governments, especially in critical courses like nuclear research and civil engineering.
Have you looked at the freshman, and graduate classes, of the top US universities? They have a huge number of foreign students, and those students are welcomed just that way.
Would you care to bet on that? An MIT, Harvard, Cal-Tech, Stanford, RPI, or other leading school helps you get contacts in your field, alumni who can help you get work, and access to leading edge projects to write your thesis about to help land that job. And yes, a degree from a world-class school does help your resume get noticed.
Also note, different schools teach different approaches. I watched a presentation on Microsoft's "Trusted Computing" a few years ago. The folks there from the legal profession were fascinated by the repercussions, and liked the idea of protecting their client's intellectual property. They were also courteous to the presenter, lauding the presenter's previous work and qualifications. The MIT person there (also an FSF member, as it turned out) rose up on his hind legs and went down the list of legally protected fair use applications that would be blocked, and how it would interfere with common uses that the presenter had utterly ignored.
No, it doesn't work well for the arm, either. The problem is that the electrical signals on the skin are very, very noisy, and filtering it enough to get a readable signal introduces a phase delay of at least 100 msec. There are still no good implantable electrodes to tap the nerves directly, and without that, you may as well control it with physical muscle movements.
Well, yes. That's right. This is why you use a resonant oscillation, so that the energy involved can be pumped efficiently in and back out. Looking it up and reminding myself, you don't need a core, only coils. Cores make it more efficient in terms of space involved and resistive losses by reducing the number of coil wraps needed. But with superconductors, those aren't the issue. Keeping the magnetic fields low enough to keep from breaking the superconductivity, that's an issue!
I thought superconductors didn't have hysteresis losses, all the energy embedded comes back out except for radiative losses. Or am I misunderstanding something?
Where have you been driving? I've done quite a bit of cross country driving, and had quite pleasant experiences. Mind you, I haven't done as much such driving in the last 10 years: there may have been a change.
Around New Jersey, they're pretty scary. But when you get out towards Illinois, or Denver, they're lifesavers after several hours of driving when you're on an overnight trip carrying time sensitive cargo. (Emergency repair equipment, a significant other who needs to be at their folk's house for the weekend, etc.)
That's why you make the transformer out of superconductors. It would probably have to be larger than the typical existing transformer, and there are power losses associated with making and maintaining high pressure vessels. But it could be interesting indeed.
But as long as they're shielded from sunlight, and your heat radiation surface is large enough, that radiative cooling is amazingly effective. I don't see this as such a large problem: the solar shielding and cooling vanes can be quite thin, and cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you're a spamm hunter, gathering spam for comparison to legitimate email and training your Bayesian filters. Unfortunately, it can be a bit awkward to allow that one spamhunter's email through and block it for everyone else.
For such a bad idea, they're pretty effective at containing a lot of spam attacks and worms. The difference, in my experience, 2 years ago, was a 50% drop in spam getting through and a huge drop in SMTP server load when I was permitted to install DNS blacklist features. It meant I didn't have to buy and maintain another front-end mail server, just to do raw spam filtering.
It's better than doing it later, unannounced, when a domain squatter gets the name and turns it into a pop-up ad and spam service. Maintaining a DNS record takes money, and it adds up for a hobbyist rather than a commercial enterprise.
That said, if we want more effective DNS based filtering, I've found SPF to be fairly useful. It's under the control of the companies in whose name the email is sent, rather than a third party, and it's handy to provide a ranking for SpamAssassin and other filtering tools even if it's not used to block email completely.
Well, yes. You certainly can't optimize *everything* to its theoretical maximum. But a bit of attention to making the Traveling Salesman's bag lighter, getting through airport security faster, and being able to phone ahead to change his reservations can go a long way towards improving the profitability of his trip.
Another reason could be that we're old programmers: we know better than to stick our fingers into the moving lawnmower blades of multi-processor technologies.
> Painting is Closest /. Reader Will Get to a Woman Programmer
Here, I fixed that for you.
Good luck with that approach. Unless your folks studied entirely different fields, they've got a few decades of experience that might help them with that. (My dad helped me study for several of my college exams: decades of experience counts for a lot.)
Seriously, presidents and all leaders have to make choices of available resources: more taxes, or fewer emergency rooms? Get elected, or refuse money from oil companies? Keep the nation united, or allow the South to secede as the Constitution allows? Make drug approval easier and risk another Thalidomide and creating another hyper-resistant bug, or control anti-biotic prescriptions and have drugs cost more?
These are hard decisions, and there simply is no one "best for the American people". If life were so simple, then the fairy Clinkerbell could also gather all the troll teeth to pay the national debt. (Terry Pratchett reference.)
Murder is primarily a _legal_ classificaton of killing, not a moral one. And nations that have signed various UN treaties have a legal obligation to enforce the agreements. So I was not talking about the legal authority of treaties signed by the member nations, including those where such violation of religious freedoms may occur.
In every member of the UN, it's considered a "crime against humanity" to kill someone for their religious beliefs. Even in countries that hold murder to be a crime enforced by individual states, or by member groups, there's usually a federal law of some kind enforcing it.
So unless the state is entirely religiously ruled, and hasn't signed basic UN treaties, it's murder.
Bless you. It's the day after Easter, the celebration of the resurrection of a revered religious prophet, and you seem to have *actually read what was written about him*. You must be one of those rare few on slashdot who actually Read The Fine Article! Mind you, just because a prophet said it doesn't make it sane or sensible. But I find Jesus's teachings to be fascinating. "Who is my neighbor" is often ignored.
Hardly. The number of Iraqi casualties in Iraq from guerrilla attacks far outnumbers US or coalition casualties. And the last 30 years or so of Iran and Iraq conflicts outnumbers that even further.
So former Muslims who convert to, say, Buddhism or Christianity or Wicca are to be slaughtered if they don't repent and turn back to this particular religion?
It's not unusual as policy for a lot of religions in history, because heretics are often considered even worse than non-believers. And it's not like Christianity doesn't have the Inquisition to live down. But it's still murder to follow that policy.
Well, there's the KKK in America and abortion clinic bombings. And historically, there's the Holocaust and the Crusades. So please be aware that art mocking political and religious leaders has gotten people slaughtered throughout history, including by Christians of various types.
Interesting: are you being swamped by Eastern European students at the public universities, as each nation joins the EU? Are Oxford and Cambridge private institutions like Cal-Tech and MIT, the kind of endowment based funding they rely on?
The US universities have quite a few foreign scholars on tuition covered by their governments, especially in critical courses like nuclear research and civil engineering.
Have you looked at the freshman, and graduate classes, of the top US universities? They have a huge number of foreign students, and those students are welcomed just that way.
Would you care to bet on that? An MIT, Harvard, Cal-Tech, Stanford, RPI, or other leading school helps you get contacts in your field, alumni who can help you get work, and access to leading edge projects to write your thesis about to help land that job. And yes, a degree from a world-class school does help your resume get noticed.
Also note, different schools teach different approaches. I watched a presentation on Microsoft's "Trusted Computing" a few years ago. The folks there from the legal profession were fascinated by the repercussions, and liked the idea of protecting their client's intellectual property. They were also courteous to the presenter, lauding the presenter's previous work and qualifications. The MIT person there (also an FSF member, as it turned out) rose up on his hind legs and went down the list of legally protected fair use applications that would be blocked, and how it would interfere with common uses that the presenter had utterly ignored.
It was funny to watch.
Perhaps the owner of "donotreply.com" should publish SPF records to restrict valid mail from his domain to his servers?
No, it doesn't work well for the arm, either. The problem is that the electrical signals on the skin are very, very noisy, and filtering it enough to get a readable signal introduces a phase delay of at least 100 msec. There are still no good implantable electrodes to tap the nerves directly, and without that, you may as well control it with physical muscle movements.
Well, yes. That's right. This is why you use a resonant oscillation, so that the energy involved can be pumped efficiently in and back out. Looking it up and reminding myself, you don't need a core, only coils. Cores make it more efficient in terms of space involved and resistive losses by reducing the number of coil wraps needed. But with superconductors, those aren't the issue. Keeping the magnetic fields low enough to keep from breaking the superconductivity, that's an issue!
I thought superconductors didn't have hysteresis losses, all the energy embedded comes back out except for radiative losses. Or am I misunderstanding something?
Where have you been driving? I've done quite a bit of cross country driving, and had quite pleasant experiences. Mind you, I haven't done as much such driving in the last 10 years: there may have been a change.
Around New Jersey, they're pretty scary. But when you get out towards Illinois, or Denver, they're lifesavers after several hours of driving when you're on an overnight trip carrying time sensitive cargo. (Emergency repair equipment, a significant other who needs to be at their folk's house for the weekend, etc.)
You've never slept in your car on a long trip? Those rest stops on highways are handy, at least for a half-hour catnap when you're feeling drowsy.
That's why you make the transformer out of superconductors. It would probably have to be larger than the typical existing transformer, and there are power losses associated with making and maintaining high pressure vessels. But it could be interesting indeed.
But as long as they're shielded from sunlight, and your heat radiation surface is large enough, that radiative cooling is amazingly effective. I don't see this as such a large problem: the solar shielding and cooling vanes can be quite thin, and cheap.