The issue I don't understand: this galaxy must have been some 13.3 bln light years away from us, as the light took that long to reach us. Anything closer we'd see "nearer in time". This means the galaxy must have been at least that big already at that time.
Or more simply, space time expanded throughout the entire process. Take two points A and B on the aforementioned balloon. Blow the balloon fast enough (space time expands), and they will see each other as they were shortly after the big bang; or never, for that matter, if you blow it even faster.
I think the point of OP is different: the light from this galaxy took 13.3 bln years to reach us; so this implies the light has been travelling for that distance (13.3 bln light-years) before it reached us. Otherwise it should have reached us earlier. (...)
Or are OP and me missing something? If so, what?
I suspect you're misunderstanding space inflation. The big bang wasn't so much an explosion in space than it was an explosion of space. Picture a balloon with dots on it. Roughly speaking, our 3d space would correspond to the balloon's surface. (The balloon's volume corresponds to nothing physical.) There isn't such a thing as a center of the balloon's surface any more than there is a center of the universe, and the big bang corresponds to a huge initial blowing into the balloon. Crunchy details if needed.
Consider two objects moving vertically from one another (along the x axis, and along the y axis), or in the same direction at different speed, or in opposite directions. At some point, light from the first will need a year to reach the other; what the other will then see is what the first looked like a year before.
Tal Beery, a security researcher at Imperva, analyzed the data dump in the Connectusers Pastebin post and found that the list appears to be valid and that the hacked database was relatively old.
Color me puzzled... How the heck does Mr Beery have the slightest damn clue that the list appears to be valid and that -- even more incredibly -- the database was relatively old? He's hacking it every day?
There might all sorts of traffic related to your router that you're not seeing. AT&T is likely metering your connection on their end, both in and out, and consequentially finding more overhead than you do related to signaling, headers, error correction, and so forth. They might additionally be metering ATM traffic or such instead of IP traffic -- aka even more network data.
Methinks the support guy saying it is "proprietary" is a candid way of saying he has no clue of what is being measured - let alone how. Also, it seems conceivable that AT&T might be using different techs depending on the location, and this may very well result in different connections being metered differently or at different levels. This is not to say that they shouldn't be transparent on how they meter you and what they meter exactly. I just doubt your contract entitles you to a full disclosure of how they run their network -- which is indeed proprietary and subject to change without notice.
A mailing list is much nicer. No web UI to deal with. Just your e-mail client. Everything sorted into folders. Easy to get private replies.
Part of the benefit of running a forum, is to avoid receiving extra emails.
With a forum, you can monitor (or have someone monitor) unanswered threads and pop in once or twice per day for the trickier questions. Doing the same with a mailing list is a lot harder, especially if most replies are sent off-list.
Youngsters with magic coder fingers are far in between. I'll take a coder with 20+ years of experience over a half dozen near-rookies any day, thank you very much. The senior will typically be cheaper, much faster, and will invariably produce much less bugs.
In my lifetime, I don't recall a single industry that that has started a successful union in the U.S. (not in ANY field).
Pardon me for asking, "in your lifetime" without giving any indication of your age is a non-starter for this kind of remark.
If your 2,598,719 user ID is any indicator, and assuming most slashdot users create an account when they're in their mid- or late teens, you were born during the Reagan or Bush administration.
If correct: News flash! The only thing the US economy has ever known since the 1970s were periods of stagflation, recession, and bubble growth, with a political background that saw the rise of ultra-libertarian economic doctrine (think Thatcher/Reagan), and a job market that saw a major shift from factory jobs towards services. This isn't exactly a healthy breeding ground for new unions...
The current economy and political context (an economic depression with currency wars and the seeds for rampant extremism to make a comeback) may very well see the rise of new unions, or the reinvention of existing ones...
Out of curiosity if you don't mind the (potentially awkward) question, how does it work/feel when you control a bionic leg? Scanning the wiki article, I sounds like it's basically plugged into the nervous system at where the amputation took place, and you had to retrain the neural system so the bionic limb responds accurately? (Complete with some level of sensory feedback?)
Every time you make a system too efficient, you reduce the number of workers but with economies it's important to have as many people working as possible.
At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: "You don’t understand. This is a jobs program." To which Milton replied: "Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels."
So, in other words, expand something like the EU's common currency to the entire world for the sake of simplicity? A little birdy tells me this might be problematic in the current political and economic environments.
The actual report is about all virtual currency schemes, including the likes of Bitcoin, PayPal, or Second Life money.
Moreover, the precise conclusions from the executive summary:
It can be concluded that, in the current situation, virtual currency schemes:
- do not pose a risk to price stability, provided that money creation continues to stay at a low level; - tend to be inherently unstable, but cannot jeopardise financial stability, owing to their limited connection with the real economy, their low volume traded and a lack of wide user acceptance; - are currently not regulated and not closely supervised or overseen by any public authority, even though participation in these schemes exposes users to credit, liquidity, operational and legal risks;
Translation: they're completely irrelevant to the monetary system as things stand, are unregulated, and present the same kind of risks as legal tender does (aka you can go in debt).
- could represent a challenge for public authorities, given the legal uncertainty surrounding these schemes, as they can be used by criminals, fraudsters and money launderers to perform their illegal activities;
Translation: criminals can do illegal stuff with Bitcoin and PayPal.
- could have a negative impact on the reputation of central banks, assuming the use of such systems grows considerably and in the event that an incident attracts press coverage, since the public may perceive the incident as being caused, in part, by a central bank not doing its job properly;
Translation: if a virtual currency scheme collapses, victims might point to us for not having regulated it earlier.
- do indeed fall within central banks’ responsibility as a result of characteristics shared with payment systems, which give rise to the need for at least an examination of developments and the provision of an initial assessment.
Translation: those victims would be right in the sense that they traded actual currency for virtual currency.
So... basically, the ECB is flexing its muscle in the hopes of getting more power and responsibilities.
The whole thing prompts a remark, though: the cases of PayPal et al in the EU are reasonably well settled insofar as who gets to regulates: most operate as UK financial institutions. To the best of my knowledge, things are a lot murkier outside of the EU, or in the case of Bitcoin or virtual currency bought through in-app purchases.
Did I miss the headlines when all those services decided they refused to be listed unless they got a share of phone book profits? Last I noticed all of those services paid to be listed more prominently in phone books and anywhere else they can get their name and contact information displayed.
You might have missed the headline that said businesses increasingly refused to pay the huge fees associated with being listed in the phone book in a meaningful manner. Or maybe you're simply not managing a business' marketing/sales budget, and have thus never ended up interacting with a phone book salesperson. Some are good. Really good, even.
Give this a thought, though: when was the last time you actually opened a phone book? Are you now seeing how that prominent listing isn't a good investment for them? Phone books are a dying business.
It's a meta question. If you were a banker on Wall Street, would you find it off topic if someone in 2005 had posted a thread questioning the moral value of products that packaged tiny slices of tens of thousands of subprime, no-documentation loans as derivatives with a triple-A credit ratings?
Probably not, if I were a banker with the slightest clue in finance. You do realize that banks were going full throttle towards bankruptcy back then for any observer who bothered to look, and that they're now all zombies, right?
And again, I don't question the premises in TFS, it's just that this belongs on some other site imho. I'd rather be reading about IBM's latest breakthrough on carbon nanotubes, thank you very much.
Not that I seriously disagree with TFS, but... Since when is this tech news or stuff that matters?
News at four! Business is focused on its own interest rather than on the public's good in corporate America! Read all about it on Slashdot!
Seriously... This is the kind of stuff I'd expect to be reading on some political site, not on slashdot. I barely cope with the US political news and the US elections. (How about EU, Asia or Latin America political news for a change?) Wtf?
If you ever get beaten up and arrested by cops for no other reason than just standing there, and subsequently booted out of court when you press charges against them for assault, you'll probably hold a very different opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue I don't understand: this galaxy must have been some 13.3 bln light years away from us, as the light took that long to reach us. Anything closer we'd see "nearer in time". This means the galaxy must have been at least that big already at that time.
Or more simply, space time expanded throughout the entire process. Take two points A and B on the aforementioned balloon. Blow the balloon fast enough (space time expands), and they will see each other as they were shortly after the big bang; or never, for that matter, if you blow it even faster.
I think the point of OP is different: the light from this galaxy took 13.3 bln years to reach us; so this implies the light has been travelling for that distance (13.3 bln light-years) before it reached us. Otherwise it should have reached us earlier. (...)
Or are OP and me missing something? If so, what?
I suspect you're misunderstanding space inflation. The big bang wasn't so much an explosion in space than it was an explosion of space. Picture a balloon with dots on it. Roughly speaking, our 3d space would correspond to the balloon's surface. (The balloon's volume corresponds to nothing physical.) There isn't such a thing as a center of the balloon's surface any more than there is a center of the universe, and the big bang corresponds to a huge initial blowing into the balloon. Crunchy details if needed.
Consider two objects moving vertically from one another (along the x axis, and along the y axis), or in the same direction at different speed, or in opposite directions. At some point, light from the first will need a year to reach the other; what the other will then see is what the first looked like a year before.
You'll find plenty here:
http://www.deepcapture.com/tag/wikipedia/
Cool. So pigs will be the petri dishes to test new medical treatments. This will end well.
Meh, it's Digitimes. Never believe anything Digitimes publishes. They pull rumors and facts out of their arse all the time.
Tal Beery, a security researcher at Imperva, analyzed the data dump in the Connectusers Pastebin post and found that the list appears to be valid and that the hacked database was relatively old.
Color me puzzled... How the heck does Mr Beery have the slightest damn clue that the list appears to be valid and that -- even more incredibly -- the database was relatively old? He's hacking it every day?
There might all sorts of traffic related to your router that you're not seeing. AT&T is likely metering your connection on their end, both in and out, and consequentially finding more overhead than you do related to signaling, headers, error correction, and so forth. They might additionally be metering ATM traffic or such instead of IP traffic -- aka even more network data.
Methinks the support guy saying it is "proprietary" is a candid way of saying he has no clue of what is being measured - let alone how. Also, it seems conceivable that AT&T might be using different techs depending on the location, and this may very well result in different connections being metered differently or at different levels. This is not to say that they shouldn't be transparent on how they meter you and what they meter exactly. I just doubt your contract entitles you to a full disclosure of how they run their network -- which is indeed proprietary and subject to change without notice.
From Wikipedia:
A red team is an independent group that seeks to challenge an organization in order to improve effectiveness.
Does that make them communists?
SMF is a sloppy mess to customize in my experience. If your need is to integrate something to WordPress, you might as well use BBPress:
http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/bbpress/
A mailing list is much nicer. No web UI to deal with. Just your e-mail client. Everything sorted into folders. Easy to get private replies.
Part of the benefit of running a forum, is to avoid receiving extra emails.
With a forum, you can monitor (or have someone monitor) unanswered threads and pop in once or twice per day for the trickier questions. Doing the same with a mailing list is a lot harder, especially if most replies are sent off-list.
Youngsters with magic coder fingers are far in between. I'll take a coder with 20+ years of experience over a half dozen near-rookies any day, thank you very much. The senior will typically be cheaper, much faster, and will invariably produce much less bugs.
In my lifetime, I don't recall a single industry that that has started a successful union in the U.S. (not in ANY field).
Pardon me for asking, "in your lifetime" without giving any indication of your age is a non-starter for this kind of remark.
If your 2,598,719 user ID is any indicator, and assuming most slashdot users create an account when they're in their mid- or late teens, you were born during the Reagan or Bush administration.
If correct: News flash! The only thing the US economy has ever known since the 1970s were periods of stagflation, recession, and bubble growth, with a political background that saw the rise of ultra-libertarian economic doctrine (think Thatcher/Reagan), and a job market that saw a major shift from factory jobs towards services. This isn't exactly a healthy breeding ground for new unions...
The current economy and political context (an economic depression with currency wars and the seeds for rampant extremism to make a comeback) may very well see the rise of new unions, or the reinvention of existing ones...
Congrats!
Out of curiosity if you don't mind the (potentially awkward) question, how does it work/feel when you control a bionic leg? Scanning the wiki article, I sounds like it's basically plugged into the nervous system at where the amputation took place, and you had to retrain the neural system so the bionic limb responds accurately? (Complete with some level of sensory feedback?)
"Lack of revenue" is NEVER a business model.
Unless you're just aiming for eyeballs and a quick sellout, like YouTube or Instagram.
Every time you make a system too efficient, you reduce the number of workers but with economies it's important to have as many people working as possible.
Ever heard of Milton Friedman?
At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: "You don’t understand. This is a jobs program." To which Milton replied: "Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels."
So, in other words, expand something like the EU's common currency to the entire world for the sake of simplicity? A little birdy tells me this might be problematic in the current political and economic environments.
The actual report is about all virtual currency schemes, including the likes of Bitcoin, PayPal, or Second Life money.
Moreover, the precise conclusions from the executive summary:
It can be concluded that, in the current situation, virtual currency schemes:
- do not pose a risk to price stability, provided that money creation continues to stay at a low level;
- tend to be inherently unstable, but cannot jeopardise financial stability, owing to their limited connection with the real economy, their low volume traded and a lack of wide user acceptance;
- are currently not regulated and not closely supervised or overseen by any public authority, even though participation in these schemes exposes users to credit, liquidity, operational and legal risks;
Translation: they're completely irrelevant to the monetary system as things stand, are unregulated, and present the same kind of risks as legal tender does (aka you can go in debt).
- could represent a challenge for public authorities, given the legal uncertainty surrounding these schemes, as they can be used by criminals, fraudsters and money launderers to perform their illegal activities;
Translation: criminals can do illegal stuff with Bitcoin and PayPal.
- could have a negative impact on the reputation of central banks, assuming the use of such systems grows considerably and in the event that an incident attracts press coverage, since the public may perceive the incident as being caused, in part, by a central bank not doing its job properly;
Translation: if a virtual currency scheme collapses, victims might point to us for not having regulated it earlier.
- do indeed fall within central banks’ responsibility as a result of characteristics shared with payment systems, which give rise to the need for at least an examination of developments and the provision of an initial assessment.
Translation: those victims would be right in the sense that they traded actual currency for virtual currency.
So... basically, the ECB is flexing its muscle in the hopes of getting more power and responsibilities.
The whole thing prompts a remark, though: the cases of PayPal et al in the EU are reasonably well settled insofar as who gets to regulates: most operate as UK financial institutions. To the best of my knowledge, things are a lot murkier outside of the EU, or in the case of Bitcoin or virtual currency bought through in-app purchases.
Maybe if the average newspaper contained any content, people might be willing to pay for them.
FTFY
Did I miss the headlines when all those services decided they refused to be listed unless they got a share of phone book profits? Last I noticed all of those services paid to be listed more prominently in phone books and anywhere else they can get their name and contact information displayed.
You might have missed the headline that said businesses increasingly refused to pay the huge fees associated with being listed in the phone book in a meaningful manner. Or maybe you're simply not managing a business' marketing/sales budget, and have thus never ended up interacting with a phone book salesperson. Some are good. Really good, even.
Give this a thought, though: when was the last time you actually opened a phone book? Are you now seeing how that prominent listing isn't a good investment for them? Phone books are a dying business.
only an IDE could love AbstractSingletonProxyFactoryBean.
Uh huh? Naturally, class names such as ASPFB and GDMF and RSAP are evidently more lovable. So much simpler to write...
It's a meta question. If you were a banker on Wall Street, would you find it off topic if someone in 2005 had posted a thread questioning the moral value of products that packaged tiny slices of tens of thousands of subprime, no-documentation loans as derivatives with a triple-A credit ratings?
Probably not, if I were a banker with the slightest clue in finance. You do realize that banks were going full throttle towards bankruptcy back then for any observer who bothered to look, and that they're now all zombies, right?
And again, I don't question the premises in TFS, it's just that this belongs on some other site imho. I'd rather be reading about IBM's latest breakthrough on carbon nanotubes, thank you very much.
Not that I seriously disagree with TFS, but... Since when is this tech news or stuff that matters?
News at four! Business is focused on its own interest rather than on the public's good in corporate America! Read all about it on Slashdot!
Seriously... This is the kind of stuff I'd expect to be reading on some political site, not on slashdot. I barely cope with the US political news and the US elections. (How about EU, Asia or Latin America political news for a change?) Wtf?
Don't they also get tornados?
If you ever get beaten up and arrested by cops for no other reason than just standing there, and subsequently booted out of court when you press charges against them for assault, you'll probably hold a very different opinion.