A mix of the first and the second; most English "old testament biblical" names are really English bastardizations of Latin bastardizations of Greek/Hebrew bastardizations of the original names. That's why you've got Jesus/Jeshu/Joshua, Moses/Moshi/Mushi, Johannes/Ian/John/Yanni, etc. Lots of names have roots that pass through the Bible, but usually it's just a case of cultural influence. After all, Flyboy is much preferred to Zebub (another biblical name) these days.
And then there's the fact that Biblical New Testament names just tended to be descriptors in the first place; Peter/Petra/Cephas "The Rock" Sim(e)on, for example. In this case, Moxie is actually following in strong biblical tradition, picking a name that is more an adjective than a noun with historical lineage.
My mod points appear to have just expired. But I have to say, "Hear Hear."
However, Good IT and Security SHOULD be invisible to the user. It should be invisible not because IT services and InfoSec is invisible, but because all users should be following best practices out of pure habit. When this is the case, you should NEVER have to see anything IT or InfoSec has to handle, unless it's a cataclysmic network failure.
Of course, the downside to this is that if you're bringing your own kit to work, IT and InfoSec will need to have complete access to it, and the ability to lock you out of doing things they don't want you doing on your equipment.
If this happened, what they do should be invisible to you (assuming work is investing enough in IT and Security to enable them to do their jobs appropriately... this rarely happens in real life), but at the expense of you no longer having a private life on those devices.
Where I work, you can connect to the local network with your personal Android or iOS device, but to do so, you must have a non-jailbroken device that has had the corporate security policy applied to it. If you do this, IT will monitor the device for you and fix/prevent what it can in the background, alerting you if there is something you personally have to do (like bring it in for repairs).
You can not have invisible support and privacy; you have to pick one or the other.
Ooh! Are we going to take Robot Wars out of the arena and into the air? Will we have RC copters with cattle prods, tasers and buzz saws falling out of the sky?
On the other hand, if you want complete privacy, conduct your private acts in a sealed soundproof room.:P
Unfortunately, if you have a room sealed to visible light and sound egress, you've still got other factors, such as ventilation ducts (unless you bring your own air supply), EM radiation outside the visible spectrum, power supply variation, etc.
Right now, it's really easy to say "Some people walked into that sealed room and have been in there for 2 hours. My scanner indicates that there are now 2 cell phones registered to X and Y that made their way to that room from locations A and B, and one WiFi client currently broadcasting SSID ABC and transmitting this data stream over "secure" WPA2. Of course, the laptop also has a RAT installed, and we've been able to turn on the video camera and microphone; here's the feed...."
If it truly costs $50 - $75K per day to operate, somebody's making a really fat margin. I suggest that all beat cops bone up on their RC skills and become independent contractors.
I don't have one, and see no reason to get one. Why get an HD TV when you can get a large screen monitor for around the same price, with a much better resolution? I don't want blue-ray, I don't want HDMI/HDCP, or any of that hassle. I just rent over the internet and play to a monitor if I'm in a "sit on the sofa" mood, or play on my tablet if I'd rather be somewhere else.
Conversely, you can play some pretty fun games on a Jailbroken AppleTV. And if you want retro, the jailbroken version has emulators for Playstation, GBA, GBC SNES, NES, Genesis and MasterSystem (as well as the Mac Plus, MAME, etc.)....
Actually, there's a pretty easy way to get at these deposits: reduce the pressure on them from above by melting the polar ice. This will cause the methane to unfreeze and sublimate.
The trick would be to get the gas collectors in place prior to the sublimation phase... then we could actually have global warming working FOR us for a change.
This is long-range thinking however; most corps/countries aren't willing to invest in a system that may have a payoff over a hundred years in the future.
Indeed... I remember at the height of the global warming debate that denialists were pointing to large amounts of methane being continuously released across Siberia, with any specific area having too low a concentration to be viable as an energy soruce.
The analogy... is requiring the telephone company to let you call their competitors without an additional charge, vs blocking you from saying particular things.
More like vs changing your phone number to a government response number in all published phone directories and making it illegal to list your real number, but essentially, yes.
I've seen how hamburgers are photographed, and they generally don't consist of any of the same materials you're actually going to consume. The reason is that the real thing looks very different under a hot floodlight than it does in real life, so they change the materials to compensate... and usually slightly over-compensate.
You find this most often with the photography of heat-sensitive foods, like ice cream.
If you're upset, make sure you have some kleenex handy; remember that it's pretty easy to hoover up the information you need online; no need to flip through xeroxes.
Depends whether or not you're in the entertainment industry or some other public forum. Pretty much everyone who appears on TV wears makeup to make them look similar to real life... otherwise they'd be washed out by the lights required to get the correct exposure. Most stage performers also wear makeup to make their facial expressions visible at a distance. Politicians wear makeup for the same reason.
So yes, it's common, but it's used as a specific tool, not as a catch-all like women's cosmetics.
I forgot to mention: the easiest way to make a set of clackers is to get two celluloid cue balls (the white ones), drill holes through the middle, and string them up, tying a washer in the middle to hold on to. You make them work by bouncing them together until you can get them bouncing on both the down and up swing. At this point you have two wildly caroming balls of kinetic energy, which you keep away from anything breakable, including faces and fingers.
I had a set of clackers made of celluloid when I was young, and then carved a pair out of cherry wood. They were great! They taught me how to pay attention to what I was doing. As long as you kept the knots secure and the string didn't break, they only bruised up your fingers if your attention slipped. And they doubled as bolos in those cases where you needed a weapon:D
I presume you mean all Xerox copier and printers produced in the last year? Many of the Xerox products I've used predate Linux, let alone VNC and Ogg. Of course, they also predate LCD screens with informational videos....
I do think it's nifty that Xerox was able to produce something using some of its own tech though... who knew VNC would be useful for anything beyond the XEROX Parc mobile desktop?
Not only this, if it DID have access to the P codes, that likely would have been the most valuable thing to the Iranian reverse engineers on the drone.
You mean the CIA has been actively trying to halt the nuclear weapons program of a nation who is opposed to the United States?
Maybe a better, simpler solution is to build good relations with those who oppose you? This current strategy doesn't seem to be working very well and looks like it will only end with lots of people getting killed.
Building good relations with Iran probably wouldn't go over very well, given the results in the past when the US has "built good relations with Iran". Avoiding screwing things up like the US has historically done would be a good first step, however. Working to remove the label of "international power-hungry bully" from the non-domestic US branches of government would also help. Until this happens, Iran's not going to trust the US further than it can throw a sandal.
I thought accident rates DID increase dramatically when cellphones became popular. They didn't decrease when they were banned because people in the most at-risk category didn't stop using cellphones; they just attempted to hide their use, resulting in further distraction.
What about evidence that talking to passengers in the car is distracting? I've experienced that myself and actively avoid being distracted now. Drivers must be responsible enough to judge when any conversation is too distracting and get off the road if necessary.
If you talk to passengers, are you automatically a bad driver too? I can't wait for the day when there are listening devices inside everyone's car so police can find out if the driver was talking to anyone regardless of whether she was in the car or not.
Passengers in the car are aware of the environmental cues around you, and you are aware of their activity and can tune them out. Actively avoiding being distracted by an ongoing phone call is significantly more difficult for the human brain.
The issue is that cell phone usage is not part of a regular driver's examination (passenger distraction is), and has a significant impact on driving performance... and like DUI, that impact isn't always immediately noticeable to the driver.
Personally, I'd prefer that proximity sensors and accident/collision avoidance systems be legislated mandatory; that would fix these issues (bzzt... the onboard system has detected that you are driving in an unsafe manner. Please pull over or correct your behaviour) but the same people who disable the seatbelt buzzers would disable these, and that tends to be the same group that talks on their phone while driving.
I remember when this same argument went around regarding drinking and driving. Eventually people admitted that it was an endemic societal issue and could not depend on the individual's sound judgement (or lack thereof). Unfortunately, the same seems to hold true for phones.
Slashdot Mirror
In which case, they should sue him over this in civil court, just like everyone else does.
To validate the prison sentence, you have to explain how this was detrimental to society such that he needed to be locked up to protect everyone.
A mix of the first and the second; most English "old testament biblical" names are really English bastardizations of Latin bastardizations of Greek/Hebrew bastardizations of the original names. That's why you've got Jesus/Jeshu/Joshua, Moses/Moshi/Mushi, Johannes/Ian/John/Yanni, etc. Lots of names have roots that pass through the Bible, but usually it's just a case of cultural influence. After all, Flyboy is much preferred to Zebub (another biblical name) these days.
And then there's the fact that Biblical New Testament names just tended to be descriptors in the first place; Peter/Petra/Cephas "The Rock" Sim(e)on, for example. In this case, Moxie is actually following in strong biblical tradition, picking a name that is more an adjective than a noun with historical lineage.
This is not just a fabricated story. This is my company's policy. It works well :)
My mod points appear to have just expired. But I have to say, "Hear Hear."
However, Good IT and Security SHOULD be invisible to the user. It should be invisible not because IT services and InfoSec is invisible, but because all users should be following best practices out of pure habit. When this is the case, you should NEVER have to see anything IT or InfoSec has to handle, unless it's a cataclysmic network failure.
Of course, the downside to this is that if you're bringing your own kit to work, IT and InfoSec will need to have complete access to it, and the ability to lock you out of doing things they don't want you doing on your equipment.
If this happened, what they do should be invisible to you (assuming work is investing enough in IT and Security to enable them to do their jobs appropriately... this rarely happens in real life), but at the expense of you no longer having a private life on those devices.
Where I work, you can connect to the local network with your personal Android or iOS device, but to do so, you must have a non-jailbroken device that has had the corporate security policy applied to it. If you do this, IT will monitor the device for you and fix/prevent what it can in the background, alerting you if there is something you personally have to do (like bring it in for repairs).
You can not have invisible support and privacy; you have to pick one or the other.
Ooh! Are we going to take Robot Wars out of the arena and into the air? Will we have RC copters with cattle prods, tasers and buzz saws falling out of the sky?
On the other hand, if you want complete privacy, conduct your private acts in a sealed soundproof room. :P
Unfortunately, if you have a room sealed to visible light and sound egress, you've still got other factors, such as ventilation ducts (unless you bring your own air supply), EM radiation outside the visible spectrum, power supply variation, etc.
Right now, it's really easy to say "Some people walked into that sealed room and have been in there for 2 hours. My scanner indicates that there are now 2 cell phones registered to X and Y that made their way to that room from locations A and B, and one WiFi client currently broadcasting SSID ABC and transmitting this data stream over "secure" WPA2. Of course, the laptop also has a RAT installed, and we've been able to turn on the video camera and microphone; here's the feed...."
If it truly costs $50 - $75K per day to operate, somebody's making a really fat margin. I suggest that all beat cops bone up on their RC skills and become independent contractors.
I don't have one, and see no reason to get one. Why get an HD TV when you can get a large screen monitor for around the same price, with a much better resolution? I don't want blue-ray, I don't want HDMI/HDCP, or any of that hassle. I just rent over the internet and play to a monitor if I'm in a "sit on the sofa" mood, or play on my tablet if I'd rather be somewhere else.
Conversely, you can play some pretty fun games on a Jailbroken AppleTV. And if you want retro, the jailbroken version has emulators for Playstation, GBA, GBC SNES, NES, Genesis and MasterSystem (as well as the Mac Plus, MAME, etc.)....
Things being banned by international treaty has never stopped the US before....
Actually, there's a pretty easy way to get at these deposits: reduce the pressure on them from above by melting the polar ice. This will cause the methane to unfreeze and sublimate.
The trick would be to get the gas collectors in place prior to the sublimation phase... then we could actually have global warming working FOR us for a change.
This is long-range thinking however; most corps/countries aren't willing to invest in a system that may have a payoff over a hundred years in the future.
Indeed... I remember at the height of the global warming debate that denialists were pointing to large amounts of methane being continuously released across Siberia, with any specific area having too low a concentration to be viable as an energy soruce.
The analogy ... is requiring the telephone company to let you call their competitors without an additional charge, vs blocking you from saying particular things.
More like vs changing your phone number to a government response number in all published phone directories and making it illegal to list your real number, but essentially, yes.
I've seen how hamburgers are photographed, and they generally don't consist of any of the same materials you're actually going to consume. The reason is that the real thing looks very different under a hot floodlight than it does in real life, so they change the materials to compensate... and usually slightly over-compensate.
You find this most often with the photography of heat-sensitive foods, like ice cream.
Those just soften the entire image.
However, back in the film days, people did retouch lashes... the job was done in the photo shop section of the developing room. Hmm....
If you're upset, make sure you have some kleenex handy; remember that it's pretty easy to hoover up the information you need online; no need to flip through xeroxes.
Depends whether or not you're in the entertainment industry or some other public forum. Pretty much everyone who appears on TV wears makeup to make them look similar to real life... otherwise they'd be washed out by the lights required to get the correct exposure. Most stage performers also wear makeup to make their facial expressions visible at a distance. Politicians wear makeup for the same reason.
So yes, it's common, but it's used as a specific tool, not as a catch-all like women's cosmetics.
I forgot to mention: the easiest way to make a set of clackers is to get two celluloid cue balls (the white ones), drill holes through the middle, and string them up, tying a washer in the middle to hold on to. You make them work by bouncing them together until you can get them bouncing on both the down and up swing. At this point you have two wildly caroming balls of kinetic energy, which you keep away from anything breakable, including faces and fingers.
I had a set of clackers made of celluloid when I was young, and then carved a pair out of cherry wood. They were great! They taught me how to pay attention to what I was doing. As long as you kept the knots secure and the string didn't break, they only bruised up your fingers if your attention slipped. And they doubled as bolos in those cases where you needed a weapon :D
I presume you mean all Xerox copier and printers produced in the last year? Many of the Xerox products I've used predate Linux, let alone VNC and Ogg. Of course, they also predate LCD screens with informational videos....
I do think it's nifty that Xerox was able to produce something using some of its own tech though... who knew VNC would be useful for anything beyond the XEROX Parc mobile desktop?
Bah; that was only offtopic. I still need troll, underrated, overrated, insightful and informative....
Not only this, if it DID have access to the P codes, that likely would have been the most valuable thing to the Iranian reverse engineers on the drone.
You mean the CIA has been actively trying to halt the nuclear weapons program of a nation who is opposed to the United States?
Maybe a better, simpler solution is to build good relations with those who oppose you? This current strategy doesn't seem to be working very well and looks like it will only end with lots of people getting killed.
Building good relations with Iran probably wouldn't go over very well, given the results in the past when the US has "built good relations with Iran". Avoiding screwing things up like the US has historically done would be a good first step, however. Working to remove the label of "international power-hungry bully" from the non-domestic US branches of government would also help. Until this happens, Iran's not going to trust the US further than it can throw a sandal.
I thought accident rates DID increase dramatically when cellphones became popular. They didn't decrease when they were banned because people in the most at-risk category didn't stop using cellphones; they just attempted to hide their use, resulting in further distraction.
What about evidence that talking to passengers in the car is distracting? I've experienced that myself and actively avoid being distracted now. Drivers must be responsible enough to judge when any conversation is too distracting and get off the road if necessary.
If you talk to passengers, are you automatically a bad driver too? I can't wait for the day when there are listening devices inside everyone's car so police can find out if the driver was talking to anyone regardless of whether she was in the car or not.
Passengers in the car are aware of the environmental cues around you, and you are aware of their activity and can tune them out. Actively avoiding being distracted by an ongoing phone call is significantly more difficult for the human brain.
The issue is that cell phone usage is not part of a regular driver's examination (passenger distraction is), and has a significant impact on driving performance... and like DUI, that impact isn't always immediately noticeable to the driver.
Personally, I'd prefer that proximity sensors and accident/collision avoidance systems be legislated mandatory; that would fix these issues (bzzt... the onboard system has detected that you are driving in an unsafe manner. Please pull over or correct your behaviour) but the same people who disable the seatbelt buzzers would disable these, and that tends to be the same group that talks on their phone while driving.
I remember when this same argument went around regarding drinking and driving. Eventually people admitted that it was an endemic societal issue and could not depend on the individual's sound judgement (or lack thereof). Unfortunately, the same seems to hold true for phones.