If they're on 5.1, they may be vulnerable. The parent to your post said that 5.2 was released in February, which contains the fix. He didn't say if that's the first version that has the fix or not, but if it is, then your 5.1 is still vulnerable.
There is absolutely no legal duty to report someone else's possession of stolen property to the police.
You sure about that? In most juisdictions, it's called "an accessory after the fact". If you know a crime has been committed, and you are not in the position for that knowledge to be privileged (doctor, lawyer, clergy), you are usually obligated to report it to the police.
Hungarian notation is bad because you are encoding type and scope information into the name, which makes it harder to change things later.
Actually, this is exactly the reason I think Hungarian is useful. If you change a variable from, say, an unsigned int to a signed int, you had better check every place you use that variable to make sure that you didn't assume something about the type that now requires a different check. For example, underflow/overflow, indexing into an array, etc... By making you do a search/replace to rename the variable, you should go over every place. The person code reviewing will also see each line that had to change as a result, and can easily check that the assumptions are still valid.
Not completely sure, but I think only the windshield filters out UV rays. Your tan/burn from long car trips is probably happening due to UV coming through the side windows.
You do not have a constitutional right to free speech. You have a constitutional right to not being censored by the GOVERNMENT:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
1. Cut the lock off
2. Open the lock because they have a key
In both cases, the result is the luggage is now open and they can steal any property they wish.
Previously, when we could lock the luggage and it would REMAIN locked, we could be assured our stuff would not be stolen. We no longer have that assurance, whether we lock our luggage or not. That's the point the GPP was making...
"There is no such thing as a blind spot, on any vehicle."
This is a lie. It so stupid, a can't even chalk it up to ignorance. Maybe extreme stupidity.
Try re-reading my post. You see, you only quote one part, which when not paired with the other sentence, seems unreasonable. Here, let me give you the whole quote:
There is no such thing as a blind spot, on any vehicle. If there is a blind spot that cannot be resolved by repositioning the mirrors, or physically turning your head, then you do not have the correct mirrors for the vehicle you are driving.
In other words, if you have a blind spot that cannot be corrected for by doing a headcheck, then you do not have the proper mirrors for the vehicle you are driving. I stand by that statement, as will any law officer or insurance company. If your statement after hitting someone while changing lanes is "he was in my blind spot!!!", you are admitting fault. Your responsibility as a driver making a lane change is to ensure that the spot you are moving into is clear of any other vehicle. If you do not verify that, you have made an unsafe lane change. And if you do not have the tools to do that (signal, check mirror, head check the blind spot), then you should be getting better mirrors.
Uh-huh, sure. You very clearly stated "Sure, I can spend my time trying to look behind me before I change lanes, but I learned the hard way that if you look behind you for too long, you will hit something in front of you." Which certainly seems to indicate that you don't take the time to head-check your blind spot, you just check your mirrors
I have no expectation of perfection. I realize that mistakes do happen. But which is it? Do you do a head check for your blind spot, or not? Because it seems that you cannot be bothered. And doing a headcheck to cover your blind spot is part of a safe lane change.
I don't know what driver's ed course you've taken, but I've never once heard of being told not to do a head check. The procedure is always:
1. Signal
2. Check mirrors
3. Check your blind spot (this requires a head check)
Do a simple search for "safe lane changes" and you'll find that just about every recommendation has those steps. I'm glad that you actually turn and look. Most drivers don't do step 1 or step 3, and somehow magically expect that there will be no vehicle there.
As I said in my original post, "If there is a blind spot that cannot be resolved by repositioning the mirrors, or physically turning your head, then you do not have the correct mirrors for the vehicle you are driving". See, the problem is that you cannot be bothered to do a head check. You are obviously driving too close to the vehicle in front of you such that doing an actual head check is dangerous. The standard procedure for lane changes is seen in this Georgia State "Safe Lane Change" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87pSEXKebQ8
1. Signal
2. Check your mirrors
3. Check your blind spot.
No, motorcyclists do not think people try to run them off the road on purpose. We just know that assholes like you who think the excuse "he was in my blind spot" is a legitimate reason for almost running someone off the road are, well, assholes. There is no such thing as a blind spot, on any vehicle. If there is a blind spot that cannot be resolved by repositioning the mirrors, or physically turning your head, then you do not have the correct mirrors for the vehicle you are driving.
A few years ago, Denver passed a resolution comparing marijuana to alcohol. It basically said you can possess up to 1 ounce of the stuff, must not consume it in public, drive while impaired, and you cannot sell it. I don't remember if you couldn't grow it... Very similar to alcohol. I can brew my own beer but cannot sell that beer, I can drink beer in private but not while walking down the street, and I cannot drive a motor vehicle while under the influence.
I think it passed 55-45%. Very sensical.
Re:average daily temperature
on
Water Ice On Mars
·
· Score: 4, Funny
They would be better off sending their own fucking probe than subtracting 32 and multiplying by 4/9. I'm not sure what units those are, but certainly not Celsius.
I completely agree. I ask my friends "when was the last time you intentionally clicked on a web ad, and then actually bought something as a result?". They can't seem to recall. I'm sure there is something to be said for getting the product name out there -- somehow, subconciously, people will remember their product name, but I doubt it's worth that much.
I keep waiting for companies to figure this out, but online advertising keeps growing. I don't get it.
For example, the denial of the vote to women is not a vestige of slavery since at the time of the passage of the 14th Amendment free women did not have the vote. However, I am sure that the Supreme Court would overturn a state statute denying the vote to women on the grounds that it violates the Equal Protection clause, which is extended to the states by the 14th amendment.
Microsoft already has free viewers for Word, PPT, Excel, and probably some others. While the article doesn't say specifically that these will continue to work, or that these free viewers are the way to continue to read data after the subscription ends, it's a pretty good bet that whatever the final product looks like, there will always be a way to view the documents, supported from Microsoft, and a part of the original package deal.
Pretty soon we'll realize that anything a human can discern on the internet a computer can discern.
Then a computer will be able to discern spam, and the problem will solve itself. Until we get to that point, though, we have to keep one-upping the spammers.
Think about the applications for finding porn. You train the software to your ideal of beauty, then hook it into some automated porn-crawler. In the end, you only have pictures of women you find beautiful.
Slashdot Mirror
What about Noah's sons' wives?
Milky Way doesn't have peanuts -- that's Snickers. It has nougat, caramel, and milk chocolate.
If they're on 5.1, they may be vulnerable. The parent to your post said that 5.2 was released in February, which contains the fix. He didn't say if that's the first version that has the fix or not, but if it is, then your 5.1 is still vulnerable.
You sure about that? In most juisdictions, it's called "an accessory after the fact". If you know a crime has been committed, and you are not in the position for that knowledge to be privileged (doctor, lawyer, clergy), you are usually obligated to report it to the police.
Actually, this is exactly the reason I think Hungarian is useful. If you change a variable from, say, an unsigned int to a signed int, you had better check every place you use that variable to make sure that you didn't assume something about the type that now requires a different check. For example, underflow/overflow, indexing into an array, etc... By making you do a search/replace to rename the variable, you should go over every place. The person code reviewing will also see each line that had to change as a result, and can easily check that the assumptions are still valid.
Not completely sure, but I think only the windshield filters out UV rays. Your tan/burn from long car trips is probably happening due to UV coming through the side windows.
Nice job reading. I quote from the Ask Slashdot itself:
He didn't say it HAD to be FOSS, but if possible, he would like it.
You do not have a constitutional right to free speech. You have a constitutional right to not being censored by the GOVERNMENT:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
So you can lock your luggage. They will either:
1. Cut the lock off
2. Open the lock because they have a key
In both cases, the result is the luggage is now open and they can steal any property they wish.
Previously, when we could lock the luggage and it would REMAIN locked, we could be assured our stuff would not be stolen. We no longer have that assurance, whether we lock our luggage or not. That's the point the GPP was making...
Who's name?
Try re-reading my post. You see, you only quote one part, which when not paired with the other sentence, seems unreasonable. Here, let me give you the whole quote:
In other words, if you have a blind spot that cannot be corrected for by doing a headcheck, then you do not have the proper mirrors for the vehicle you are driving. I stand by that statement, as will any law officer or insurance company. If your statement after hitting someone while changing lanes is "he was in my blind spot!!!", you are admitting fault. Your responsibility as a driver making a lane change is to ensure that the spot you are moving into is clear of any other vehicle. If you do not verify that, you have made an unsafe lane change. And if you do not have the tools to do that (signal, check mirror, head check the blind spot), then you should be getting better mirrors.
Uh-huh, sure. You very clearly stated "Sure, I can spend my time trying to look behind me before I change lanes, but I learned the hard way that if you look behind you for too long, you will hit something in front of you." Which certainly seems to indicate that you don't take the time to head-check your blind spot, you just check your mirrors
I have no expectation of perfection. I realize that mistakes do happen. But which is it? Do you do a head check for your blind spot, or not? Because it seems that you cannot be bothered. And doing a headcheck to cover your blind spot is part of a safe lane change.
I don't know what driver's ed course you've taken, but I've never once heard of being told not to do a head check. The procedure is always:
1. Signal
2. Check mirrors
3. Check your blind spot (this requires a head check)
Do a simple search for "safe lane changes" and you'll find that just about every recommendation has those steps. I'm glad that you actually turn and look. Most drivers don't do step 1 or step 3, and somehow magically expect that there will be no vehicle there.
As I said in my original post, "If there is a blind spot that cannot be resolved by repositioning the mirrors, or physically turning your head, then you do not have the correct mirrors for the vehicle you are driving". See, the problem is that you cannot be bothered to do a head check. You are obviously driving too close to the vehicle in front of you such that doing an actual head check is dangerous. The standard procedure for lane changes is seen in this Georgia State "Safe Lane Change" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87pSEXKebQ8
1. Signal
2. Check your mirrors
3. Check your blind spot.
No, motorcyclists do not think people try to run them off the road on purpose. We just know that assholes like you who think the excuse "he was in my blind spot" is a legitimate reason for almost running someone off the road are, well, assholes. There is no such thing as a blind spot, on any vehicle. If there is a blind spot that cannot be resolved by repositioning the mirrors, or physically turning your head, then you do not have the correct mirrors for the vehicle you are driving.
Wow, never thought I'd see it. A strawman about strawman arguments...
A few years ago, Denver passed a resolution comparing marijuana to alcohol. It basically said you can possess up to 1 ounce of the stuff, must not consume it in public, drive while impaired, and you cannot sell it. I don't remember if you couldn't grow it... Very similar to alcohol. I can brew my own beer but cannot sell that beer, I can drink beer in private but not while walking down the street, and I cannot drive a motor vehicle while under the influence.
I think it passed 55-45%. Very sensical.
They would be better off sending their own fucking probe than subtracting 32 and multiplying by 4/9. I'm not sure what units those are, but certainly not Celsius.
I completely agree. I ask my friends "when was the last time you intentionally clicked on a web ad, and then actually bought something as a result?". They can't seem to recall. I'm sure there is something to be said for getting the product name out there -- somehow, subconciously, people will remember their product name, but I doubt it's worth that much.
I keep waiting for companies to figure this out, but online advertising keeps growing. I don't get it.
I think he means that Washington, DC is wind-powered by politicians...
Microsoft already has free viewers for Word, PPT, Excel, and probably some others. While the article doesn't say specifically that these will continue to work, or that these free viewers are the way to continue to read data after the subscription ends, it's a pretty good bet that whatever the final product looks like, there will always be a way to view the documents, supported from Microsoft, and a part of the original package deal.
Think about the applications for finding porn. You train the software to your ideal of beauty, then hook it into some automated porn-crawler. In the end, you only have pictures of women you find beautiful.