We had 3 people die on our SAP software project plus multiple heart attacks and divorces.
From my experience that software is so named because it will sap the life out of you before, during, and after implementation. Three deaths and some divorces for a major rollout is mild in that market.
Is this some kind of meta-humor where you answer his post ironically by responding with a superior attitude to his comment about assholes exhibiting a superior attitude, or were you one of the people that interviewed him in his story?
It's what Sonya Sotomayor said in 60 Minutes this week,.. Until she was working as a prosecutor she didn't really grasp what evil was , that some people were just evil. She had to quit after some years lest she begin to lose a part of her humanity, her faith in the future and in other people.
This is a occupational hazard for cops also.
"Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster; and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you."
-Friedrich Nietzsche
And if it turns out that he just blew what might have prevented several 9/11 level attacks?
It would be worth a hundred 9/11 level attacks to preserve our liberties and defend the rights and principles this country was founded on. And one hundred such attacks would *still* be less than two-thirds of the brave American men who gave their lives defending that liberty during World War Two. Man up Nancy.
Imagine we had this: an accused, who has a safe made from unobtanium (which needless to say, is as hard as Minecraft bedrock) with an unpickable lock. Can the accused be ordered to turn over the key if a search warrant to search the safe is properly executed? If this is the case, then why can't someone be ordered to turn over encryption keys in the case of encrypted data where there is a properly issued search warrant?
I lost the key a long time ago (I think it was destroyed in lava) and I forgot what was in there.
I forgot the password I used, it's been so long now. I don't remember what I put on there anymore.
The first question is the only one that matters, and you don't even have to ask it: If you're being held/detained, then they have to read you your rights (unless you're a terrorist apparently).
Not quite. If you're arrested they have to read you your rights. If you're being detained (which they can do without transporting you while investigating if they do in fact need to arrest you) then you still have the right to remain silent, but they have no obligation at that point to inform you of that right. This is entirely separate from a consensual encounter in which you are free to go, though they'll usually game those so that you are free to go by the letter of the law but you get the distinct impression that you are not.
In the instant discussion however a traffic stop is technically an arrest with immediate release on promise to appear (for which they also do not need to Mirandize you). You are not free to go if you are pulled over, and leaving without the officer telling you that you can go is resisting arrest, a vastly more serious offense than a traffic violation. Also signing the ticket is not an admission of guilt, it is a promise to appear only. In all cases though you are better off not engaging the officer in conversation, and only providing the information you are required by law to provide. Though again for traffic violations it's usually a fine and maybe traffic school/points on the license - an inconvenience really, not something serious like potential jail time. Just whatever you do do not consent to a search of your car.
Regardless of your opinion on the matter, possession of child pornography is against the law in this country. The idea being that possession of it is contributory in nature to the furtherance of production - mostly on the theory that you or someone else down the line paid for it. It's treated in a similar fashion to possession of controlled substances. The important thing here is the preservation of constitutional rights. If they can convict him without violating that then I'm perfectly okay with him going to prison. I'm not okay with them landing a conviction after violating his rights. Because a violation of one person's rights is a violation of all of ours.
Laws vary across jurisdictions, but detention is usually a safety first kind of thing designed to be temporary while the officers defuse a situation and assess whether there is cause to charge you with something or if you might reasonably be a suspect in whatever they detained you for in the first place, or possibly even to take your statement if you were a witness.
Being detained does not (generally) allow the officer to transport you against your will, doesn't go on your record, doesn't require you to be charged with anything and doesn't last very long (exact amount of time depends on jurisdiction).
Now, if an officer is detaining you and you leave without him telling you that you are free to go, then they can *easily* arrest you for disobeying a lawful order (or similar statute, again depending on jurisdiction) so don't be stupid if you are being detained, and make sure that you are told that you are free to go before making any move to leave.
In the book "Godel, Escher, Bach" my faint recollection is that the author claimed any programmable machine can be fed a program that can make it "halt". One example given was that of a simple record player; when a specially crafted record was played the precisely made vibrations was such that the turntable shook itself apart (halted). Maybe all intelligent creatures carry this same flaw and as our science and technology we are coming closer and closer to finding it.
Of course we have this "halting" flaw. We see it all the time already. One pop-culture method of exploiting it involves a specially programmed 1/3 ounce piece of lead delivered to the central processing unit at speed.
I took two combinatorics classes as electives in grad school working on my CS Masters degree. I have to say that learning about set theory and permutations has had a non-obvious but very present impact on my ability to craft and understand SQL queries. One of the many cases where you never know when or why it will be useful.
You want an AppleTV on the corporate network (most likely for the purpose of easily projecting things onto a conference room television instead of physically connecting a video cable between the PC and the TV)? Great! Why the hell NOT allow it? It's pretty much the same guts inside as an iPod touch, except with a locked-down version of iOS. Not exactly anything I'd be concerned about. (If your main objection is something along the lines of not liking the fact it lets people stream TV shows or music when that's not what they're hired to do? Guess what! It's not YOUR job or problem to concern yourself with that! Like the telephone on someone's desk, it's a TOOL. In I.T. you're paid to provide it and make sure it functions well. It's not YOUR problem to try to stop them from making personal calls instead of work-oriented ones. The person's direct supervisor can be concerned with all of that.)
You have to restrict streaming in some fashion because otherwise everyone's internet slows to a crawl because guess what - no budget for a faster pipe. The rules that need to be in place the most are the ones protecting users from themselves. Now this should be coupled with a good communications plan explaining that you're not doing it to be a douche, but limiting streaming is *exactly* something you should be concerned about as a network admin. Any one person doing something? No big deal. 1,000 users doing something? You need to limit it or ration it out somehow so that you make effective use of the resources available.
b) The thought they were important enough for a well regulated militia.
Why you people can't read the whole god damn sentence is beyond me.
Hint: is was becasue we couldn't afford a standing army. EOL.
It's very clear in all the letters and writing. If we could have afforded a standing army, that bit wouldn't be there.
So...the people that settled the western wilderness would have killed bears, wolves, and bobcats with...knives? Or would the standing army have been responsible for that? I'm just curious how militant your anti-gun stance gets. Maybe an all-expense paid trip to the middle of nowhere Alaska would be in order. I'm sure your sense of self-righteousness would ward off the wolf packs.
It's like blowing your optimization budget on the initialization loop of your program. You make that ~2% really fast/efficient/whatever and you feel all warm and fuzzy while the 98% that's left is still a slow steaming worthless pile of crap.
Smart guns address a problem that affects ~2% of the problem with guns, is going to be ungodly expensive, slow to be adopted, practically impossible to enforce, and the first 10 or so generations of it aren't going to work as advertised anyway. And on top of that 90% of the problems that it would solve (kid getting his hands on daddy's gun) would also be solved by a $25 locking gun case and properly securing your firearm in the first place.
Hmm - $$$ millions in research and development to add ~$100-$200 to the individual price of a gun or cheap $25 gun cases and responsible ownership. This idea is a total non-starter.
I've used a QuickLaunch bar since at least Windows 2000. It's still hackable into Win8 with standard user permissions. And typing is not faster than searching if you haven't used the app in a while and can't recall the exact name of it. Bottom line people should be allowed to access it however they prefer and not have the choice foisted mindlessly upon them by unthinking marketing.
Having North at the top of the map is an international standard (to my knowledge). This has nothing to do with North being good (and therefore S being bad?)
Just so long as you remember that the enemy gate is down.
If Moore's law holds, it means NP-complete problems can be solved in polynomial time. The number of steps is exponential, but the growth of processing power is exponential, too, so one step takes less and less time when time is increased. (This observation abuses the usage of word "time" instead of "steps")
You are conflating complexity with run time. Complexity is orthogonal to actual run time. If the number of steps is exponential then the NP-complete problem is running in exponential time. No amount of handwaving about increases in processor speed will change that fundamental tenant. Now if we ever get quantum computers off of the ground then yeah, maybe you can solve an NP-complete problem in polynomial time, but that would only be because you then have built what is essentially a real-world non-deterministic finite state automaton. Even quantum computing wouldn't answer the deeply interesting question of P ?= NP.
Bear in mind to that even proving P != NP would be huge (I believe it's a million dollar reward for proving either way). The difficulty is we just don't know for sure.
If you don't notice that your snazzy Best Buy 3D printer is churning along for two full days and printing out a gun that junior sent to it, then you fail as a parent.
Honestly that has a lot less to do with religion than people being dicks to each other. Your math hating mullah for example was just a dick protecting his own power from the perceived threat of tech wrenching it from him. Short sighted and stupid? Yes. The fault of religion? No.
The problem was that information used to be exceedingly difficult to pass on. If something didn't have immediate practical use it was discarded. The steam toys of the Greeks were chucked when their leisurely (relatively speaking) lifestyle couldn't be sustained anymore. Ever since the invention of the printing press though you have an explosion in cheap mass-producible information. This has only gotten cheaper in the digital computing world of the information age. Now we only have to discover something once and it's locked down forever. How many cavemen had to discover spears independently before it became widespread? Fire? Bronze? Ironworking? The archway? Heck, even calculus was discovered twice and that was fairly recently!
Nowadays a researcher in Russia can publish his work and everyone in that field can know about it in seconds. Processes and discoveries are passed on in exacting detail. We should never again have to endure another dark ages with our current information sharing abilities.
OK, so tell me, why do surgeons want to rub a spermicide on their hands. On second thoughts, please don't tell me; I just ate dinner...
Protip: products often have more than one use. It can kill your little swimmers so I imagine it is also good for killing other microscopic parasites. If you read your own link it also mentions its use in shaving cream.
Slashdot Mirror
We had 3 people die on our SAP software project plus multiple heart attacks and divorces.
From my experience that software is so named because it will sap the life out of you before, during, and after implementation. Three deaths and some divorces for a major rollout is mild in that market.
Is this some kind of meta-humor where you answer his post ironically by responding with a superior attitude to his comment about assholes exhibiting a superior attitude, or were you one of the people that interviewed him in his story?
It's what Sonya Sotomayor said in 60 Minutes this week,.. Until she was working as a prosecutor she didn't really grasp what evil was , that some people were just evil. She had to quit after some years lest she begin to lose a part of her humanity, her faith in the future and in other people.
This is a occupational hazard for cops also.
"Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster; and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you."
-Friedrich Nietzsche
People often say treason when they mean sedition.
>> Fortunately there are ways to gain a measure of security: HTTPS, Tor, SCP, SFTP..
Don't those all rely on SSL?
Do you REALLY believe that the NSA still hasn't cracked/can't decrypt SSL (or any of the stuff mentioned) yet?
Yes I do. Because math.
Admissible probable cause? There was a crash. There was a phone. Done.
You have a finger, we found a gun three blocks from your house. Obviously that's probable cause to toss your apartment looking for drug stashes.
When you are able to see how your statement is equally absurd you may rejoin the conversation. Until then please stop trying to erode my rights.
A better example
And if it turns out that he just blew what might have prevented several 9/11 level attacks?
It would be worth a hundred 9/11 level attacks to preserve our liberties and defend the rights and principles this country was founded on. And one hundred such attacks would *still* be less than two-thirds of the brave American men who gave their lives defending that liberty during World War Two. Man up Nancy.
Imagine we had this: an accused, who has a safe made from unobtanium (which needless to say, is as hard as Minecraft bedrock) with an unpickable lock. Can the accused be ordered to turn over the key if a search warrant to search the safe is properly executed? If this is the case, then why can't someone be ordered to turn over encryption keys in the case of encrypted data where there is a properly issued search warrant?
I lost the key a long time ago (I think it was destroyed in lava) and I forgot what was in there.
I forgot the password I used, it's been so long now. I don't remember what I put on there anymore.
The first question is the only one that matters, and you don't even have to ask it: If you're being held/detained, then they have to read you your rights (unless you're a terrorist apparently).
Not quite. If you're arrested they have to read you your rights. If you're being detained (which they can do without transporting you while investigating if they do in fact need to arrest you) then you still have the right to remain silent, but they have no obligation at that point to inform you of that right. This is entirely separate from a consensual encounter in which you are free to go, though they'll usually game those so that you are free to go by the letter of the law but you get the distinct impression that you are not.
In the instant discussion however a traffic stop is technically an arrest with immediate release on promise to appear (for which they also do not need to Mirandize you). You are not free to go if you are pulled over, and leaving without the officer telling you that you can go is resisting arrest, a vastly more serious offense than a traffic violation. Also signing the ticket is not an admission of guilt, it is a promise to appear only. In all cases though you are better off not engaging the officer in conversation, and only providing the information you are required by law to provide. Though again for traffic violations it's usually a fine and maybe traffic school/points on the license - an inconvenience really, not something serious like potential jail time. Just whatever you do do not consent to a search of your car.
Regardless of your opinion on the matter, possession of child pornography is against the law in this country. The idea being that possession of it is contributory in nature to the furtherance of production - mostly on the theory that you or someone else down the line paid for it. It's treated in a similar fashion to possession of controlled substances. The important thing here is the preservation of constitutional rights. If they can convict him without violating that then I'm perfectly okay with him going to prison. I'm not okay with them landing a conviction after violating his rights. Because a violation of one person's rights is a violation of all of ours.
Laws vary across jurisdictions, but detention is usually a safety first kind of thing designed to be temporary while the officers defuse a situation and assess whether there is cause to charge you with something or if you might reasonably be a suspect in whatever they detained you for in the first place, or possibly even to take your statement if you were a witness.
Being detained does not (generally) allow the officer to transport you against your will, doesn't go on your record, doesn't require you to be charged with anything and doesn't last very long (exact amount of time depends on jurisdiction).
Now, if an officer is detaining you and you leave without him telling you that you are free to go, then they can *easily* arrest you for disobeying a lawful order (or similar statute, again depending on jurisdiction) so don't be stupid if you are being detained, and make sure that you are told that you are free to go before making any move to leave.
In the book "Godel, Escher, Bach" my faint recollection is that the author claimed any programmable machine can be fed a program that can make it "halt". One example given was that of a simple record player; when a specially crafted record was played the precisely made vibrations was such that the turntable shook itself apart (halted). Maybe all intelligent creatures carry this same flaw and as our science and technology we are coming closer and closer to finding it.
Of course we have this "halting" flaw. We see it all the time already. One pop-culture method of exploiting it involves a specially programmed 1/3 ounce piece of lead delivered to the central processing unit at speed.
Official, Blizzard WoW was glitchy as hell for a few hours on Sunday too. I don't think they were behind tanking their own systems too.
I took two combinatorics classes as electives in grad school working on my CS Masters degree. I have to say that learning about set theory and permutations has had a non-obvious but very present impact on my ability to craft and understand SQL queries. One of the many cases where you never know when or why it will be useful.
You want an AppleTV on the corporate network (most likely for the purpose of easily projecting things onto a conference room television instead of physically connecting a video cable between the PC and the TV)? Great! Why the hell NOT allow it? It's pretty much the same guts inside as an iPod touch, except with a locked-down version of iOS. Not exactly anything I'd be concerned about. (If your main objection is something along the lines of not liking the fact it lets people stream TV shows or music when that's not what they're hired to do? Guess what! It's not YOUR job or problem to concern yourself with that! Like the telephone on someone's desk, it's a TOOL. In I.T. you're paid to provide it and make sure it functions well. It's not YOUR problem to try to stop them from making personal calls instead of work-oriented ones. The person's direct supervisor can be concerned with all of that.)
You have to restrict streaming in some fashion because otherwise everyone's internet slows to a crawl because guess what - no budget for a faster pipe. The rules that need to be in place the most are the ones protecting users from themselves. Now this should be coupled with a good communications plan explaining that you're not doing it to be a douche, but limiting streaming is *exactly* something you should be concerned about as a network admin. Any one person doing something? No big deal. 1,000 users doing something? You need to limit it or ration it out somehow so that you make effective use of the resources available.
b) The thought they were important enough for a well regulated militia. Why you people can't read the whole god damn sentence is beyond me.
Hint: is was becasue we couldn't afford a standing army. EOL. It's very clear in all the letters and writing. If we could have afforded a standing army, that bit wouldn't be there.
So...the people that settled the western wilderness would have killed bears, wolves, and bobcats with...knives? Or would the standing army have been responsible for that? I'm just curious how militant your anti-gun stance gets. Maybe an all-expense paid trip to the middle of nowhere Alaska would be in order. I'm sure your sense of self-righteousness would ward off the wolf packs.
It's like blowing your optimization budget on the initialization loop of your program. You make that ~2% really fast/efficient/whatever and you feel all warm and fuzzy while the 98% that's left is still a slow steaming worthless pile of crap.
Smart guns address a problem that affects ~2% of the problem with guns, is going to be ungodly expensive, slow to be adopted, practically impossible to enforce, and the first 10 or so generations of it aren't going to work as advertised anyway. And on top of that 90% of the problems that it would solve (kid getting his hands on daddy's gun) would also be solved by a $25 locking gun case and properly securing your firearm in the first place.
Hmm - $$$ millions in research and development to add ~$100-$200 to the individual price of a gun or cheap $25 gun cases and responsible ownership. This idea is a total non-starter.
I've used a QuickLaunch bar since at least Windows 2000. It's still hackable into Win8 with standard user permissions. And typing is not faster than searching if you haven't used the app in a while and can't recall the exact name of it. Bottom line people should be allowed to access it however they prefer and not have the choice foisted mindlessly upon them by unthinking marketing.
Having North at the top of the map is an international standard (to my knowledge). This has nothing to do with North being good (and therefore S being bad?)
Just so long as you remember that the enemy gate is down.
If Moore's law holds, it means NP-complete problems can be solved in polynomial time. The number of steps is exponential, but the growth of processing power is exponential, too, so one step takes less and less time when time is increased. (This observation abuses the usage of word "time" instead of "steps")
You are conflating complexity with run time. Complexity is orthogonal to actual run time. If the number of steps is exponential then the NP-complete problem is running in exponential time. No amount of handwaving about increases in processor speed will change that fundamental tenant. Now if we ever get quantum computers off of the ground then yeah, maybe you can solve an NP-complete problem in polynomial time, but that would only be because you then have built what is essentially a real-world non-deterministic finite state automaton. Even quantum computing wouldn't answer the deeply interesting question of P ?= NP.
Bear in mind to that even proving P != NP would be huge (I believe it's a million dollar reward for proving either way). The difficulty is we just don't know for sure.
Obviously we need to ban rabbit's foot keychains and retractable pens as well.
If you don't notice that your snazzy Best Buy 3D printer is churning along for two full days and printing out a gun that junior sent to it, then you fail as a parent.
Honestly that has a lot less to do with religion than people being dicks to each other. Your math hating mullah for example was just a dick protecting his own power from the perceived threat of tech wrenching it from him. Short sighted and stupid? Yes. The fault of religion? No.
The problem was that information used to be exceedingly difficult to pass on. If something didn't have immediate practical use it was discarded. The steam toys of the Greeks were chucked when their leisurely (relatively speaking) lifestyle couldn't be sustained anymore. Ever since the invention of the printing press though you have an explosion in cheap mass-producible information. This has only gotten cheaper in the digital computing world of the information age. Now we only have to discover something once and it's locked down forever. How many cavemen had to discover spears independently before it became widespread? Fire? Bronze? Ironworking? The archway? Heck, even calculus was discovered twice and that was fairly recently!
Nowadays a researcher in Russia can publish his work and everyone in that field can know about it in seconds. Processes and discoveries are passed on in exacting detail. We should never again have to endure another dark ages with our current information sharing abilities.
OK, so tell me, why do surgeons want to rub a spermicide on their hands. On second thoughts, please don't tell me; I just ate dinner...
Protip: products often have more than one use. It can kill your little swimmers so I imagine it is also good for killing other microscopic parasites. If you read your own link it also mentions its use in shaving cream.