Of course your next question is if it does something similar to infected humans. Supposedly, it has been shown to cause a statistically significant increase in car accidents among the infected.
Yes, because it is a well-known fact that cats like to nibble on traffic accident cadavers...
Otherwise Hotels would get burglarized this way all the time.
There's personnel (or other guests) walking around all the time. The risk of getting caught is probably too big for most thieves.
Discounting the risk of getting caught, there's a very low tech attack against hotels with old-fashioned mechanical keys. Just walk by the reception desk while the receptionist is temporarily out, and grab a key...
RTFA. No need to disassemble the lock - all you do is plug in a small gadget into a nokia-charger-style plug at the bottom of the lock and volià - open door.
Not after the "free" workaround (cap that covers connector, and requires lock disassembly to remove) is applied.
And I guess, if you already have disassembled the lock, you won't need the gadget to open it: a short applied directly at the actuator would do the trick too.
So, the "bandaid-style workaround" (cap) might actually make more sense than the improved circuit board (which may only protect against the current intrusion software, but not against enhancend versions that take into account the new memory layoyt).
Are these instructions even compatible with the constitution, with a sentence such as the following on page 4:
You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree with it or not.
And even without bringing any constitutional arguments about the role of the jury should be, isn't that sentence in logical contradiction with the following, just 2 lines earlier:
You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating that I
have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.
I knew that in general judges don't want juries to know about jury nullification, but my understanding was that this was done more via omission (not talking about this particular right of a jury at all), rather than outright lies (spelling out explicitly that this should not be done).
Weird.
Indeed drilling a hole to the center of the asteroid and blowing it from inside is inefficient and stupid. The best way would be to aply force to the side of the asteroid, so its trajectory would change to non-coliding with earth.
In order to change the trajectory, you need reaction mass. In case of a surface blast, all the reaction mass you'd get would be shrapnel from the bomb itself (tiny mass as compared to the asteroid), so these shrapnel would need to fly away from the asteroid real fast in order to have any noticable effect at all.
With a center blast, splitting the asteroid in two, each half would be reaction mass for the other. The bomb would only need to supply the energy to separate them, but not the mass.
is it me or did the class get it wrong, it was never about destroying an asteroid, it was about splitting it up in pieces or nudging it out of the earth direction
It's you. The class did model it correctly: destroying the asteroid by splitting it into 2 halves, and nudging them so that each passes the earth on opposite sides.
In reality, the picture is actually much more pessimistic than modeled: you wouldn't manage getting exactly two pieces.
If you get more than 2 pieces, the middle pieces would still hit earth and wreak quite some havoc.
If you do manage to get only 2 pieces, but they are not equal sized, the lighter one would clear the earth by a bigger margin than needed, but the heavier one would still smack into it.
If we did a search & replace of "windows" with "blacks"
If my grand-mother had wheels, she'd be a city bus...
we could call your post positively racist.
Let's try it:
He's a black head. He likes to use his blacks maximized. And then wants web sites to have horse blinkers because else the text lines would be too long for him to follow on his expensive widescreen monitor.
And yes, black heads do program too. Although we would call that "monkeying around with Visual Basic".
Doesn't seem to make that much sense actually... Or is any text containing the word black racist for you? And btw, for me "black head" invokes hair colour, rather than skin colour. But either way, it becomes a non-sequitur. Usually the blondes are the butt of jokes, not the black haired...
Way to stereotype the world around you like a KKK idiot.
Just because 1 Mac suffered birth defects does not mean the other 100,000 Macs were bad. Your school should have simply traded the bad Mac for a good Mac.
But, didn't you know, one bad Mac spoils the bunch!
If you're' programming, it's helpful to have enough space for editors/debuggers/IDEs/shells and a couple of web pages/pdfs/dvis for documentation.
He's a windows head. He likes to use his windows maximized. And then wants web sites to have horse blinkers because else the text lines would be too long for him to follow on his expensive widescreen monitor.
And yes, windows heads do program too. Although we would call that "monkeying around with Visual Basic".
Really? You need the rules of 'get off my property if I say so' to be written up for you?
But then, in the interest of fairness, the ticket holder should get his money back. And not only the price of the ticket, but also any other expenses that he had to be able to see the games (hotel, plane trip, and a suitable compensation for his now useless vacation time)
Slashdot Mirror
I just had to look it up, and amazingly, it's not a spelling mistake as long as they are different species. Probably not intended by the author, but enough to protect him from grand ma's brownshirts.
Why the fuck do people always link back to slashdot stories instead of the actual articles?
Maybe, so that people get to see the comments too?
Of course your next question is if it does something similar to infected humans. Supposedly, it has been shown to cause a statistically significant increase in car accidents among the infected.
Yes, because it is a well-known fact that cats like to nibble on traffic accident cadavers...
The only "secure" screw head is one that is custom made for you.
... until somebody comes with a Gator Grip.
How often do you think hotels have someone examine the underside of their locks?
If something gets reported stolen (or a chambermaid claims to have been raped, ...) sure they will!
Otherwise Hotels would get burglarized this way all the time.
There's personnel (or other guests) walking around all the time. The risk of getting caught is probably too big for most thieves.
Discounting the risk of getting caught, there's a very low tech attack against hotels with old-fashioned mechanical keys. Just walk by the reception desk while the receptionist is temporarily out, and grab a key...
And if undetected is not a goal, a small crowbar will do the job easyer.
RTFA. No need to disassemble the lock - all you do is plug in a small gadget into a nokia-charger-style plug at the bottom of the lock and volià - open door.
Not after the "free" workaround (cap that covers connector, and requires lock disassembly to remove) is applied.
And I guess, if you already have disassembled the lock, you won't need the gadget to open it: a short applied directly at the actuator would do the trick too.
So, the "bandaid-style workaround" (cap) might actually make more sense than the improved circuit board (which may only protect against the current intrusion software, but not against enhancend versions that take into account the new memory layoyt).
You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree with it or not.
And even without bringing any constitutional arguments about the role of the jury should be, isn't that sentence in logical contradiction with the following, just 2 lines earlier:
You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating that I have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.
I knew that in general judges don't want juries to know about jury nullification, but my understanding was that this was done more via omission (not talking about this particular right of a jury at all), rather than outright lies (spelling out explicitly that this should not be done).
Weird.
It's the same thing, but in hex.
Perfectly usable cellphones that could have found better usage in third world countries are being destroyed, just for the fun of it
Given that this is in Finland, they are probably Nokia phones... (post Microsoft acquisition, the N900 actually was a great machine...)
Indeed drilling a hole to the center of the asteroid and blowing it from inside is inefficient and stupid. The best way would be to aply force to the side of the asteroid, so its trajectory would change to non-coliding with earth.
In order to change the trajectory, you need reaction mass. In case of a surface blast, all the reaction mass you'd get would be shrapnel from the bomb itself (tiny mass as compared to the asteroid), so these shrapnel would need to fly away from the asteroid real fast in order to have any noticable effect at all.
With a center blast, splitting the asteroid in two, each half would be reaction mass for the other. The bomb would only need to supply the energy to separate them, but not the mass.
is it me or did the class get it wrong, it was never about destroying an asteroid, it was about splitting it up in pieces or nudging it out of the earth direction
It's you. The class did model it correctly: destroying the asteroid by splitting it into 2 halves, and nudging them so that each passes the earth on opposite sides.
In reality, the picture is actually much more pessimistic than modeled: you wouldn't manage getting exactly two pieces.
If you get more than 2 pieces, the middle pieces would still hit earth and wreak quite some havoc.
If you do manage to get only 2 pieces, but they are not equal sized, the lighter one would clear the earth by a bigger margin than needed, but the heavier one would still smack into it.
If we did a search & replace of "windows" with "blacks"
If my grand-mother had wheels, she'd be a city bus...
we could call your post positively racist.
Let's try it:
He's a black head. He likes to use his blacks maximized. And then wants web sites to have horse blinkers because else the text lines would be too long for him to follow on his expensive widescreen monitor.
And yes, black heads do program too. Although we would call that "monkeying around with Visual Basic".
Doesn't seem to make that much sense actually... Or is any text containing the word black racist for you? And btw, for me "black head" invokes hair colour, rather than skin colour. But either way, it becomes a non-sequitur. Usually the blondes are the butt of jokes, not the black haired...
Way to stereotype the world around you like a KKK idiot.
Does this count as invoking Godwyn's law?
Just because 1 Mac suffered birth defects does not mean the other 100,000 Macs were bad. Your school should have simply traded the bad Mac for a good Mac.
But, didn't you know, one bad Mac spoils the bunch!
and another one
If you're' programming, it's helpful to have enough space for editors/debuggers/IDEs/shells and a couple of web pages/pdfs/dvis for documentation.
He's a windows head. He likes to use his windows maximized. And then wants web sites to have horse blinkers because else the text lines would be too long for him to follow on his expensive widescreen monitor.
And yes, windows heads do program too. Although we would call that "monkeying around with Visual Basic".
or even maybe hormonal activity,
O joy, you are too horny, and now you can no longer log in to your favorite porn site...
Betteridge's Law isn't always true. Here is a counter-example (sorry for the German language...):
Question is answered with the affirmative in the subtitle.
Article of the print edition (couple of days later) lacks the question form
Can't program at all doesn't mean not able to get a job programming.
Or maybe he could become a manager.... *ducks*
(n/t)
Really? You need the rules of 'get off my property if I say so' to be written up for you?
But then, in the interest of fairness, the ticket holder should get his money back. And not only the price of the ticket, but also any other expenses that he had to be able to see the games (hotel, plane trip, and a suitable compensation for his now useless vacation time)
But maybe, that's the case?
Is there anything about the Olympics that isn't corrupt and disgusting?
Maybe (slightly...) less doping than in the Tour de France?
... and wouldn't the "hunk" become sterile from the nearby radiation and heat...
Actually he did sign his post. What he forgot was adding any content. What new name is he proposing?