Agreed -- Lewman answered like the head of a corporation, not like the leader of a privacy movement.
The NSA TrueCrypt Ploy Again? - trust us.
Cryptowall 2.0 - we're legitimate and don't like bad things.
Tor connections - we're interested and have been considering this, but haven't made any headway. We need you to join our community and implement this for us.
Have you used I2P... - yes. And most of the others. We'd love for their developers to join our community and implement some of their good ideas for us.
Balance between simple privacy and lawlessness - we're legitimate and don't like bad things.
What is your biggest fear? - that we won't get more people joining our community and will instead have people leave it.
Tor has been compromised - it hasn't been compromised in the ways we consider important. Trust us.
Darknet takedowns. - on the other hand, maybe it's been compromised and we just haven't figured out how yet. We don't know. Trust us.
On iOS you've got a few alternatives. 1) Set up a VPN, and run that VPN through privoxy to strip the junk. 2) Jailbreak and install Adblocker 2, Firewall iP, PrivaCy and if you want, Tor.
Yeah; I was wondering about this. I run 13km'h 3 times/week. However, my relaxed walking speed is faster than many people's jogging speed.
Taking physiology into account is necessary until they get their test populations to a significant figure -- which they are unlikely to have done so far.
I think you missed the point -- with directions from the government, you are compelled to say "We did not get a NSL THIS particular month" even when you did. That's what leaving the canary in place is all about.
Indeed... it doesn't. Apple removed its canary last year -- not necessarily because it had been served, but because the government put them in a legal situation where they couldn't keep it up.
As far as the government is concerned, if a corporation has to choose between disobeying the government and lying to the public... the corporation has to lie to the public (which means leaving the canary in place, even when it's not true anymore).
Since the government rotates regularly, by the time these shenanigans come out, they are no longer politically an issue. They still will be for the corporation though, which gives them an incentive not to get into this position in the first place.
He doesn't need a methodology for analyzing the changes to point out that the scientists could not arrive at the conclusions presented in the media (not I'm not saying they arrived at those conclusions) without such a methodology.
I'll add to that that the information as presented in TFS does not prove or disprove that descendents of the original bacteria evolved -- it just shows (if you accept their methodology) that at least some of them didn't, at least not in the ways the scientists were measuring.
Since these bacteria DO use DNA, which has built-in mutation weaknesses, this is impressive no matter how you look at it. It is possible we will find that they have some process that inhibits the mutation of their genome in a significant portion of their culture.
Thing 1: Didn't anyone think to take a picture of the device and ask if anyone knew what it was? 1a) Doesn't anyone know what a pinhole camera looks like?
Thing 2: Where does GSU get off attaching private property to public infrastructure? That's a known no-no. At a minimum, you notify public works first so that things like this don't happen. There was no ass covering done here.
As a result, the bomb squad, the police, and the university all end up looking foolish.
That's not pedantry. If you were being pedantic in that way, he's missing the word "the" before "Wiki".
Also, while in some English language variants "a software" would be acceptable, "a code" is quite a different thing than "code" in common parlance. "a code" usually refers to specific ciphertext; "code" or "software code" is the common use.
But then, TFS has so many grammatical and other errors in it that this point is moot.
They definitely ensured that all pedants would pay attention to the article though:)
Yeah; I remember digging out the Apple ][ that ended up in the janitorial closet not too long after it showed up -- I can thank where I am today for the fact that I convinced my teachers to let me mess around with that after I'd completed all my schoolwork (it drove me to accomplish my work faster, AND taught me the basics of ProDos BASIC). After I showed them some of what I had learned from it, they moved it back out to the Library and kept an Oregon Trail floppy loaded, and teachers could sign for a time slot for "worthy" students. Thankfully by that point, I was already hooked on computers.
Students with no technology would be sitting naked in the dust. Students with too much technology would have equipment at hand that they had no hope of learning to master (or in some cases even use).
Tech is neither the problem nor the solution. The problem is outside (and inside) agencies attempting to use objects to solve their teaching problems. Technology is just another word for Tool. It's possible to have a really good teaching session with a bunch of 5-year-olds wielding iPads. It's also possible to have just as good a teaching session with a bunch of 5-year-olds wielding blocks or finger paints.
The big thing people have to realize is that "new" technology doesn't make it better OR worse technology. We've now got to the point where people have more tools to accomplish a task than they have time to accomplish those tasks. So just pick a few tools out of the set and use them appropriately to the task.
Yeah; and for all those people who don't know what micelles are, they could have said surfactants. It's still a novel idea and soft on hands while you do dishes, but much less media-friendly.
The funny thing is, he's been working on 6 books over a span of 20 years.
Compare that to Terry Pratchett: 22 Discworld novels in the same timeframe, all in the same universe, all hanging together, including hanging together with the previous 18 novels he had written over the previous 13 years. And that's with him having Early Onset Alzheimer's which has caused his writing to slow considerably in the last 8 years.
Sure, they write in different sub-genres, but Martin could easily have broken his novels up in this manner as well, but chose not to.
Tolkien had to do it all by hand -- Martin has the luxury of software development and movie writing tools that will plot out all the charaters/relationships etc. and point out any potential inconsistencies. He also releases his manuscripts out to test groups, who among other things go over it for inconsistencies.
So doing something this complex isn't really all that complex these days. He can have the software split it all up into workable chunks that just have to hold together on their own, and meet up with the overall story arc at some point. The later books indicate that he's using some of these techniques because of how the writing style changed. I'm pretty sure he didn't do that on the first two or three.
Martin already stated that to avoid pulling a Jordan, he wrote the ending first, and gave copies to interested parties. He also wrote the storyline, so it's just the actual textual details and plot twists that haven't been fully hammered out yet.
What got me to start reading the series in the first place was his promise that he wouldn't leave the story arc open-ended and then die. He also got a thorough check-up from his doctor giving him a full bill of health prior to starting the TV series.
My point exactly; I'd rather live on actual plants and animals than on Soylent (funny thing that: based off of the name "Soylent Green" which is either made of people [with DNA] or soybeans and lentils [with DNA] -- but Soylent recipes exist which contain no DNA traces.)
Personally, I'd love government action on labeling ALL food products that DON'T contain DNA. It'd be nice to be able to separate the ultra-refined or synthetic foods from the real thing.
Everyone I know believes humans do influence changes in climate. The difference is that a few people are complete deniers, and a few people are total climate change zealots. With all due respect, your message seems like a cut and paste from a climate zealot site.
Wait... what?
I'm sure we've got climate zealots on here, but claiming that a request for clarification on which part is a scam, outlining the various ACTUAL issues for debate, doesn't seem very zealotish to me.
And it's a checklist that I think should be part of any debate on HIGW. I bet if each of those items were polled, we'd get much different results for each one than we do for HIGW as a whole.
...until the point where that one company has its software totally pwned, all source code released to the public, and an overproportionate number of security holes and backdoors found.
Suddenly, they're an industry pariah, not just because they were a scab, but because nobody can trust their prioduct anymore. The short term profit is not sustainable.
Same question from me -- VirtualBox is the basis for many niche solutions, such as http://www.cuckoosandbox.org/. The command-line toolset is great, and better than I've found for other similar products; you can easily do offline analysis of product runs, easily automate running test suites across multiple OSes, create a virtual network of VBox guests, and much more. VMWare does some of this, but is really aimed ad virtualized servers and desktops, not at testing and analysis. KVM could work, but is still maturing and hasn't quire reached the same level yet -- plus, it's nowhere near as portable to any host.
I also like that VBox inherits any improvements made in QEmu.
Slashdot Mirror
Two words:
Great Firewall.
Time to change my official name to Anonymous Coward. I'll use my prior name as an alias for all off-line transactions.
- Pinhole camera + film
- Duct tape
- Novel way of looking at the world that will impact how they approach the rest of their life (especially with two so far being blown up as threats).
Unless the rest of the students were less imaginative and kept their cameras on private property.
Agreed -- Lewman answered like the head of a corporation, not like the leader of a privacy movement.
The NSA TrueCrypt Ploy Again?
- trust us.
Cryptowall 2.0
- we're legitimate and don't like bad things.
Tor connections
- we're interested and have been considering this, but haven't made any headway. We need you to join our community and implement this for us.
Have you used I2P...
- yes. And most of the others. We'd love for their developers to join our community and implement some of their good ideas for us.
Balance between simple privacy and lawlessness
- we're legitimate and don't like bad things.
What is your biggest fear?
- that we won't get more people joining our community and will instead have people leave it.
Tor has been compromised
- it hasn't been compromised in the ways we consider important. Trust us.
Darknet takedowns.
- on the other hand, maybe it's been compromised and we just haven't figured out how yet. We don't know. Trust us.
On iOS you've got a few alternatives.
1) Set up a VPN, and run that VPN through privoxy to strip the junk.
2) Jailbreak and install Adblocker 2, Firewall iP, PrivaCy and if you want, Tor.
Yeah; I was wondering about this. I run 13km'h 3 times/week. However, my relaxed walking speed is faster than many people's jogging speed.
Taking physiology into account is necessary until they get their test populations to a significant figure -- which they are unlikely to have done so far.
I think you missed the point -- with directions from the government, you are compelled to say "We did not get a NSL THIS particular month" even when you did. That's what leaving the canary in place is all about.
Indeed... it doesn't. Apple removed its canary last year -- not necessarily because it had been served, but because the government put them in a legal situation where they couldn't keep it up.
As far as the government is concerned, if a corporation has to choose between disobeying the government and lying to the public... the corporation has to lie to the public (which means leaving the canary in place, even when it's not true anymore).
Since the government rotates regularly, by the time these shenanigans come out, they are no longer politically an issue. They still will be for the corporation though, which gives them an incentive not to get into this position in the first place.
He doesn't need a methodology for analyzing the changes to point out that the scientists could not arrive at the conclusions presented in the media (not I'm not saying they arrived at those conclusions) without such a methodology.
I'll add to that that the information as presented in TFS does not prove or disprove that descendents of the original bacteria evolved -- it just shows (if you accept their methodology) that at least some of them didn't, at least not in the ways the scientists were measuring.
Since these bacteria DO use DNA, which has built-in mutation weaknesses, this is impressive no matter how you look at it. It is possible we will find that they have some process that inhibits the mutation of their genome in a significant portion of their culture.
Thing 1: Didn't anyone think to take a picture of the device and ask if anyone knew what it was?
1a) Doesn't anyone know what a pinhole camera looks like?
Thing 2: Where does GSU get off attaching private property to public infrastructure? That's a known no-no. At a minimum, you notify public works first so that things like this don't happen. There was no ass covering done here.
As a result, the bomb squad, the police, and the university all end up looking foolish.
Hey now... you were supposed to leave that for all the other pedants to agonize over.
Either way, I'm not willing to consider Ebonics to be an allowable English dialect in this discussion.
That's not pedantry. If you were being pedantic in that way, he's missing the word "the" before "Wiki".
Also, while in some English language variants "a software" would be acceptable, "a code" is quite a different thing than "code" in common parlance. "a code" usually refers to specific ciphertext; "code" or "software code" is the common use.
But then, TFS has so many grammatical and other errors in it that this point is moot.
They definitely ensured that all pedants would pay attention to the article though :)
Yeah; I remember digging out the Apple ][ that ended up in the janitorial closet not too long after it showed up -- I can thank where I am today for the fact that I convinced my teachers to let me mess around with that after I'd completed all my schoolwork (it drove me to accomplish my work faster, AND taught me the basics of ProDos BASIC). After I showed them some of what I had learned from it, they moved it back out to the Library and kept an Oregon Trail floppy loaded, and teachers could sign for a time slot for "worthy" students. Thankfully by that point, I was already hooked on computers.
Students with no technology would be sitting naked in the dust. Students with too much technology would have equipment at hand that they had no hope of learning to master (or in some cases even use).
Tech is neither the problem nor the solution. The problem is outside (and inside) agencies attempting to use objects to solve their teaching problems. Technology is just another word for Tool. It's possible to have a really good teaching session with a bunch of 5-year-olds wielding iPads. It's also possible to have just as good a teaching session with a bunch of 5-year-olds wielding blocks or finger paints.
The big thing people have to realize is that "new" technology doesn't make it better OR worse technology. We've now got to the point where people have more tools to accomplish a task than they have time to accomplish those tasks. So just pick a few tools out of the set and use them appropriately to the task.
Really -- it's not that hard.
I'm surprised you left out the TSA -- that should be the control question.
Yeah; and for all those people who don't know what micelles are, they could have said surfactants. It's still a novel idea and soft on hands while you do dishes, but much less media-friendly.
The funny thing is, he's been working on 6 books over a span of 20 years.
Compare that to Terry Pratchett: 22 Discworld novels in the same timeframe, all in the same universe, all hanging together, including hanging together with the previous 18 novels he had written over the previous 13 years. And that's with him having Early Onset Alzheimer's which has caused his writing to slow considerably in the last 8 years.
Sure, they write in different sub-genres, but Martin could easily have broken his novels up in this manner as well, but chose not to.
Tolkien had to do it all by hand -- Martin has the luxury of software development and movie writing tools that will plot out all the charaters/relationships etc. and point out any potential inconsistencies. He also releases his manuscripts out to test groups, who among other things go over it for inconsistencies.
So doing something this complex isn't really all that complex these days. He can have the software split it all up into workable chunks that just have to hold together on their own, and meet up with the overall story arc at some point. The later books indicate that he's using some of these techniques because of how the writing style changed. I'm pretty sure he didn't do that on the first two or three.
Martin already stated that to avoid pulling a Jordan, he wrote the ending first, and gave copies to interested parties. He also wrote the storyline, so it's just the actual textual details and plot twists that haven't been fully hammered out yet.
What got me to start reading the series in the first place was his promise that he wouldn't leave the story arc open-ended and then die. He also got a thorough check-up from his doctor giving him a full bill of health prior to starting the TV series.
My point exactly; I'd rather live on actual plants and animals than on Soylent (funny thing that: based off of the name "Soylent Green" which is either made of people [with DNA] or soybeans and lentils [with DNA] -- but Soylent recipes exist which contain no DNA traces.)
Personally, I'd love government action on labeling ALL food products that DON'T contain DNA. It'd be nice to be able to separate the ultra-refined or synthetic foods from the real thing.
Everyone I know believes humans do influence changes in climate. The difference is that a few people are complete deniers, and a few people are total climate change zealots. With all due respect, your message seems like a cut and paste from a climate zealot site.
Wait... what?
I'm sure we've got climate zealots on here, but claiming that a request for clarification on which part is a scam, outlining the various ACTUAL issues for debate, doesn't seem very zealotish to me.
And it's a checklist that I think should be part of any debate on HIGW. I bet if each of those items were polled, we'd get much different results for each one than we do for HIGW as a whole.
...until the point where that one company has its software totally pwned, all source code released to the public, and an overproportionate number of security holes and backdoors found.
Suddenly, they're an industry pariah, not just because they were a scab, but because nobody can trust their prioduct anymore. The short term profit is not sustainable.
Same question from me -- VirtualBox is the basis for many niche solutions, such as http://www.cuckoosandbox.org/. The command-line toolset is great, and better than I've found for other similar products; you can easily do offline analysis of product runs, easily automate running test suites across multiple OSes, create a virtual network of VBox guests, and much more. VMWare does some of this, but is really aimed ad virtualized servers and desktops, not at testing and analysis. KVM could work, but is still maturing and hasn't quire reached the same level yet -- plus, it's nowhere near as portable to any host.
I also like that VBox inherits any improvements made in QEmu.