if someone tries to steal it at least you'll be able to get a recording of them doing it.
Not if they come up from behind it or wear a mask. Trust me, if there is something to be stolen, someone will figure a way to do it. Take a look at the houses in Detroit (and other places) which are up for foreclosure. People are stealing the siding off of them to be sold as scrap.
why hasn't someone setup a webcam to record these rock movements and solve this thing once and for all?
The reason is because there is no way to know when these rocks, or which rocks, will move. Since we don't currently know what causes them to move, there is no way to wait for those conditions and then start filming. Even with the best guess (wind + water or ice) you'd still have the multi-choice selection of subjects to choose from.
What would have to be done is to have multiple cameras pointing at multiple rocks waiting for something to happen. It could take days, months or years for these things to move.
Yes, it would be nice to know what causes these things to move but having all that equipment outside for years is just begging someone to steal it.
Gold is a heavy metal and if put into your system the correct way, it can become toxic. See this link for how one can get heavy metal poisoning from gold.
I don't remember what his wife used to poison him but it was in liquid form.
the two odd (interesting?) things about these pictures?
1. Almost without exception, the ships depicted in space, on the moon, etc, are shown with pointy or round noses. If you're in space, you don't have to worry about aerodynamics and certainly not on places which have no atmosphere (the moon).
2. The first picture below To Saturn and beyond: shows people on a moon of Saturn wearing full spacesuits EXCEPT for the camera man.
There is no hope till the present day youngsters who grew up with internet and IM become the senior legislators and judges.
If that is supposed to make me feel warm and fuzzy, you've done the very opposite. The people you talk about are the same ones who give you a deer-in-the-headlights look when you tell them that by putting up pictures of themselves and personal information such as where they go to school on Facebook, someone could figure out where they live.
They current crop of legislators aren't the only ones who have no idea about what the internet is.
Which is exactly what happened to a patient on a recent episode of House (see further up the page for the original discussion of House and reality).
Magician attempts Houdini water trick. Magician starts spewing blood while suspended upside down in water tank. Houses' minions go to do MRI to see inside. Magician starts screaming. Minions notice large bruise-like area in lower abdomen. House walks in on magician undergoing surgery to determine source of bleeding and pulls out key magician had swallowed rather than being used to unlock himself during trick.
While yes, the show is really about the rantings of socially disfunctional, yet somehow brilliant, doctor, each diagnosis has a bit of truth behind it.
Take one of the most recent shows where House gets taken away by the CIA to diagnose an agent who is afflicted with a mysterious condition. In the end, the reason for the illness came down to radiation poisoning caused by eating too many brazil nuts which contain selenium.
If you remember when House was consulting with the other doctor who was brought in, the subject of chestnuts was brought up. House immediately dismissed the idea that the agent had eaten horse chestnuts because of the effects they have on a person. An effect my dad can attest to and who never fails to tell his story of what happened when he bought what someone told him were chestnuts when the subject is brought up.
Then there was the show where the guy was brought in after he and his wife had a round of semi-kinky sex. In the end, it turns out she had been poisoning him with gold and House used stanis chloride, something the egyptians knew about, to turn her hands purple to confirm heavy metal poisoning.
So yes, House is entertainment. If this were reality, House wouldn't have been allowed to get a medical degree with all the shortcuts and other unethical behavior he exhibits. However, there is always some truth to the show which is what I find interesting.
As an aside to your quick-pick scenario, on those rare occasions I play the lottery, I tried an experiment. In the past, I would put the quick-pick as the last one and my manually chosen numbers first.
I noticed, whether true or not, that when I chose numbers this way, there was a higher chance that numbers I had already chosen would also be chosen by the computer.
I then changed things around and had the first and last games chosen by the computer while my manually chosen numbers were in the middle. This seemed to cause the amount of numbers that overlapped to decrease slightly.
Finally, I had the quick-picks first and my numbers last. I still get some overlapping choices but on the whole this method seems to give the truest random number picks with the fewest overlaps.
Don't know if there is anything to it but to maximize my chances on those times I do play, the computer goes first and I go afterwards.
Anything which can cause fear is therefore subject to the war.
Like today's news conference on a bill discussing IED's in this country. You think I'm kidding? I saw a blurb this morning on CNN and here's the link to USA Today verifying the news conference will take place. Second item in the list.
Can you honestly say that you WOULDN'T go to a Jurassic Park if someone managed to pull it off?
Every time the scene where they first see the dinos roaming about is shown, all I think is, "I'd give my entire life savings to visit such a place." I almost cry thinking about how cool it would be to walk with dinosaurs (present day birds, alligators, komodo dragons and other such creatures excluded).
So yes, in my case I would do everything both within and outside my power to see such a place. Not a zoo but a real, honest-to-goodness park where they can roam free and be who they are.
Don't let one issue (non-issue?) keep you from thinking about the rest of his platform.
Why not? When I worked on the Perot campaign I had anti-choicers tell me that if Ross were not pro-choice, they would vote for him.
I understand what you're saying. If this is the only issue I have with a candidate, I need to look at the big picture. Which I do. No candidate will perfectly match what anyone wants. However, despite what Ron says, can we be sure that if he were elected to the presidency that if a bill came before him which would limit or eliminate a woman's right to choose, that he wouldn't sign it? Can you be absolutely 100% sure he wouldn't?
As the current nutjob officeholder has shown, people will say anything to get elected. Once they get into office, all bets are off.
He is the only Republican candidate who is committed to reducing the government regulations and protecting personal liberties.
Except for the right of a woman to have an abortion. In other words, he wants more government regulation of what a person can do with their body and more restrictions on personal liberty.
Logic is the backbone of programming and if you haven't got a decent grounding in it, your coding skills are going to be atrocious, no matter what language you use.
Overall I agree with your sentiment but I have one little quibble with it. I know I've said it somewhere else on here but when it comes to programming, I can logically tell you what needs to be done (i.e. in what order the program should do things), I can read other code and tell you what it does but for whatever reason, I cannot physically put the code down. Sure, I can do some IF. ..WHILE or even some SELECT statements but anything beyond simple code and my coding breaks down.
Don't know why that is, whether I'm just not predisposed to coding or something hasn't clicked in me but for now, it's just not in me to code.
Aside from that, yes, logic is needed to code. If one can't figure out what a program is supposed to do, and in what order, or how to pass values (which I admit I have problems with), forget trying to write any code.
That's an easy one: Volume license installs don't require activation
Fair enough. But that does not explain my parents two pcs. In neither case have I ever had to do an activation or reactivation. I manually do their updates so they've never been activated (as far as I know) but they've never been nagged to activate either.
Did you swap out the motherboard for another identical one?
Sort of. The boards were the same (as far as I know) but the BIOS levels were different. These were older Dell GX270s which have a history of bad capacitors. Since I'm the only one around here which believes in upgrading BIOS', I'm constantly doing BIOS upgrades.
No cpus yet but there have been a few situations where I've upgraded the memory on laptops with XP already installed. Again, no reactivation necessary.
to avoid the OEM crapware, advertising, 'free' promo software and the bullshit of Windows itself forcing me to reactivate it after making hardware changes.
Typical of someone who thinks stealing is acceptable. I had to do a complete, top-to-bottom reinstall of my parents one XP machine this weekend. Used a Dell install disk and not once was I asked to add any crapware, advertising or other such nonsense. The ONLY thing I unchecked when asked was not to install the PaintShop Pro software which would have to be paid for after 30 days after first use.
I know, I know. It boggles the mind having to pay for something that a company worked hard to produce.
To add to this: Not once have I ever had to reactivate a legitimate copy of XP here at work despite having swapped out motherboards on a few occasions.
Even at home when my dad was given an ATI Radeon 9500 Pro video card to try out, he never had to reactivate his legitimate copy of XP.
Maybe, under certain circumstances, one has to reactivate a copy of XP when they change hardware but I have yet to come across any such situation.
Can't speak about their phone service but yes, their service is dreadful. I live just outside Harrisburg proper and they are our only cable operator to choose from. Time Warner is further south in the Lancaster area but as far as I know, they haven't tried to come into this area. If they did, I'd be on them in a minute since I did have them for a while when I lived elsewhere.
and now they refuse to offer the Big Ten network which broadcasts our team...
The same thing has happened in my area (central PA). Comcast has a monopoly and has stated emphatically they will not, under any circumstances, offer the Big Ten Network on their Basic/Standard cable packages. They will only offer it on their upper tier programming which means one would have to upgrade their service to get it (i.e. pay for more channels you don't want to watch to get one channel you do want to watch).
Here's the thing though; they've already eliminated two channels from their Standard package, have not lowered their prices to reflect this and refuse to slot the Big Ten into one of those now empty channels. I was really ticked when I found out that after years of having it, they stopped carrying Channel 11 out of New York. Now I can't get my Julie Chang fix in the morning or check out what's happening in the Big Apple. When I inquired about them dropping this channel, the girl on the phone apologized that I wouldn't be able to see the Mets play. I'm sure she was surprised when I told her I didn't care about the Mets but wanted the channel for other reasons.
To top things off, Comcast just announced that next month they will be raising their rates for the second time this year (~5%) which means that again I'll be paying more for but getting nothing new in return since the upgrades will only apply to their Premium services. As soon as the last season of Battlestar Galactica is over, I'm cancelling my service and they can go pound sand trying to get me back.
Thanks. I appreciate the heads up. Considering that next month Comcast is raising their rates for the second time this year (~5%) and with what you just told me, I'll be cancelling my service after the final season of Battle Star Galactica.
I'd cancel sooner but I can't get naked broadband in my area. It's either pay $100/month to Comcast for their triple-play or pay $100/month to Verizon for their triple-play.
Trust me, 200+ channels is a pain to flip through trying to find something to watch.
No it's not. If I had such a service (and I have no intention of doing so), I'd do what I do now with my ~70 basic cable: block out channels. Religious channels? Begone! Shopping channels? Don't see them. Ad channels? Yeah right. Golf? Get real.
By the time I had blocked out all the channels I didn't want in the first place, I'd probably be down to about the same number I have now. 200 channels? No problem.
Unless you're now going to tell me that using digital cable/set top boxes/whatever, that one can't block channels. If that's the case, then there is absolutely no way I'll be getting any such service.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if they come up from behind it or wear a mask. Trust me, if there is something to be stolen, someone will figure a way to do it. Take a look at the houses in Detroit (and other places) which are up for foreclosure. People are stealing the siding off of them to be sold as scrap.
The reason is because there is no way to know when these rocks, or which rocks, will move. Since we don't currently know what causes them to move, there is no way to wait for those conditions and then start filming. Even with the best guess (wind + water or ice) you'd still have the multi-choice selection of subjects to choose from.
What would have to be done is to have multiple cameras pointing at multiple rocks waiting for something to happen. It could take days, months or years for these things to move.
Yes, it would be nice to know what causes these things to move but having all that equipment outside for years is just begging someone to steal it.
I don't remember what his wife used to poison him but it was in liquid form.
the two odd (interesting?) things about these pictures?
1. Almost without exception, the ships depicted in space, on the moon, etc, are shown with pointy or round noses. If you're in space, you don't have to worry about aerodynamics and certainly not on places which have no atmosphere (the moon).
2. The first picture below To Saturn and beyond: shows people on a moon of Saturn wearing full spacesuits EXCEPT for the camera man.
If that is supposed to make me feel warm and fuzzy, you've done the very opposite. The people you talk about are the same ones who give you a deer-in-the-headlights look when you tell them that by putting up pictures of themselves and personal information such as where they go to school on Facebook, someone could figure out where they live.
They current crop of legislators aren't the only ones who have no idea about what the internet is.
Which is exactly what happened to a patient on a recent episode of House (see further up the page for the original discussion of House and reality).
Magician attempts Houdini water trick. Magician starts spewing blood while suspended upside down in water tank. Houses' minions go to do MRI to see inside. Magician starts screaming. Minions notice large bruise-like area in lower abdomen. House walks in on magician undergoing surgery to determine source of bleeding and pulls out key magician had swallowed rather than being used to unlock himself during trick.
To quote Independence Day:
While yes, the show is really about the rantings of socially disfunctional, yet somehow brilliant, doctor, each diagnosis has a bit of truth behind it.
Take one of the most recent shows where House gets taken away by the CIA to diagnose an agent who is afflicted with a mysterious condition. In the end, the reason for the illness came down to radiation poisoning caused by eating too many brazil nuts which contain selenium.
If you remember when House was consulting with the other doctor who was brought in, the subject of chestnuts was brought up. House immediately dismissed the idea that the agent had eaten horse chestnuts because of the effects they have on a person. An effect my dad can attest to and who never fails to tell his story of what happened when he bought what someone told him were chestnuts when the subject is brought up.
Then there was the show where the guy was brought in after he and his wife had a round of semi-kinky sex. In the end, it turns out she had been poisoning him with gold and House used stanis chloride, something the egyptians knew about, to turn her hands purple to confirm heavy metal poisoning.
So yes, House is entertainment. If this were reality, House wouldn't have been allowed to get a medical degree with all the shortcuts and other unethical behavior he exhibits. However, there is always some truth to the show which is what I find interesting.
than this article from 2 days ago?
Hey! I resent that remark! Putting wombat and Microsoft in the same sentence is an insult to all the decent, fuzzy wombats of the world.
Just as revealing the identity of an undercover CIA agent is traiterous and should be punished as such, right? Right?
I always use cash when I go to Achmed's Food Emporium with his "special" back room full of "good deals".
As an aside to your quick-pick scenario, on those rare occasions I play the lottery, I tried an experiment. In the past, I would put the quick-pick as the last one and my manually chosen numbers first.
I noticed, whether true or not, that when I chose numbers this way, there was a higher chance that numbers I had already chosen would also be chosen by the computer.
I then changed things around and had the first and last games chosen by the computer while my manually chosen numbers were in the middle. This seemed to cause the amount of numbers that overlapped to decrease slightly.
Finally, I had the quick-picks first and my numbers last. I still get some overlapping choices but on the whole this method seems to give the truest random number picks with the fewest overlaps.
Don't know if there is anything to it but to maximize my chances on those times I do play, the computer goes first and I go afterwards.
Like today's news conference on a bill discussing IED's in this country. You think I'm kidding? I saw a blurb this morning on CNN and here's the link to USA Today verifying the news conference will take place. Second item in the list.
Every time the scene where they first see the dinos roaming about is shown, all I think is, "I'd give my entire life savings to visit such a place." I almost cry thinking about how cool it would be to walk with dinosaurs (present day birds, alligators, komodo dragons and other such creatures excluded).
So yes, in my case I would do everything both within and outside my power to see such a place. Not a zoo but a real, honest-to-goodness park where they can roam free and be who they are.
Why not? When I worked on the Perot campaign I had anti-choicers tell me that if Ross were not pro-choice, they would vote for him.
I understand what you're saying. If this is the only issue I have with a candidate, I need to look at the big picture. Which I do. No candidate will perfectly match what anyone wants. However, despite what Ron says, can we be sure that if he were elected to the presidency that if a bill came before him which would limit or eliminate a woman's right to choose, that he wouldn't sign it? Can you be absolutely 100% sure he wouldn't?
As the current nutjob officeholder has shown, people will say anything to get elected. Once they get into office, all bets are off.
Except for the right of a woman to have an abortion. In other words, he wants more government regulation of what a person can do with their body and more restrictions on personal liberty.
From CS to math? No thanks. I'm not sure I can do compound equations at this point. Math was never my strong suit except for certain areas.
I'm more of a logical-let's-get-this-done kinda guy. I'll never be a programmer but I will be able to tell you what is wrong with your system and why.
Overall I agree with your sentiment but I have one little quibble with it. I know I've said it somewhere else on here but when it comes to programming, I can logically tell you what needs to be done (i.e. in what order the program should do things), I can read other code and tell you what it does but for whatever reason, I cannot physically put the code down. Sure, I can do some IF. .
Don't know why that is, whether I'm just not predisposed to coding or something hasn't clicked in me but for now, it's just not in me to code.
Aside from that, yes, logic is needed to code. If one can't figure out what a program is supposed to do, and in what order, or how to pass values (which I admit I have problems with), forget trying to write any code.
Fair enough. But that does not explain my parents two pcs. In neither case have I ever had to do an activation or reactivation. I manually do their updates so they've never been activated (as far as I know) but they've never been nagged to activate either.
Sort of. The boards were the same (as far as I know) but the BIOS levels were different. These were older Dell GX270s which have a history of bad capacitors. Since I'm the only one around here which believes in upgrading BIOS', I'm constantly doing BIOS upgrades.
No cpus yet but there have been a few situations where I've upgraded the memory on laptops with XP already installed. Again, no reactivation necessary.
Typical of someone who thinks stealing is acceptable. I had to do a complete, top-to-bottom reinstall of my parents one XP machine this weekend. Used a Dell install disk and not once was I asked to add any crapware, advertising or other such nonsense. The ONLY thing I unchecked when asked was not to install the PaintShop Pro software which would have to be paid for after 30 days after first use.
I know, I know. It boggles the mind having to pay for something that a company worked hard to produce.
To add to this: Not once have I ever had to reactivate a legitimate copy of XP here at work despite having swapped out motherboards on a few occasions.
Even at home when my dad was given an ATI Radeon 9500 Pro video card to try out, he never had to reactivate his legitimate copy of XP.
Maybe, under certain circumstances, one has to reactivate a copy of XP when they change hardware but I have yet to come across any such situation.
Can't speak about their phone service but yes, their service is dreadful. I live just outside Harrisburg proper and they are our only cable operator to choose from. Time Warner is further south in the Lancaster area but as far as I know, they haven't tried to come into this area. If they did, I'd be on them in a minute since I did have them for a while when I lived elsewhere.
The same thing has happened in my area (central PA). Comcast has a monopoly and has stated emphatically they will not, under any circumstances, offer the Big Ten Network on their Basic/Standard cable packages. They will only offer it on their upper tier programming which means one would have to upgrade their service to get it (i.e. pay for more channels you don't want to watch to get one channel you do want to watch).
Here's the thing though; they've already eliminated two channels from their Standard package, have not lowered their prices to reflect this and refuse to slot the Big Ten into one of those now empty channels. I was really ticked when I found out that after years of having it, they stopped carrying Channel 11 out of New York. Now I can't get my Julie Chang fix in the morning or check out what's happening in the Big Apple. When I inquired about them dropping this channel, the girl on the phone apologized that I wouldn't be able to see the Mets play. I'm sure she was surprised when I told her I didn't care about the Mets but wanted the channel for other reasons.
To top things off, Comcast just announced that next month they will be raising their rates for the second time this year (~5%) which means that again I'll be paying more for but getting nothing new in return since the upgrades will only apply to their Premium services. As soon as the last season of Battlestar Galactica is over, I'm cancelling my service and they can go pound sand trying to get me back.
Thanks. I appreciate the heads up. Considering that next month Comcast is raising their rates for the second time this year (~5%) and with what you just told me, I'll be cancelling my service after the final season of Battle Star Galactica.
I'd cancel sooner but I can't get naked broadband in my area. It's either pay $100/month to Comcast for their triple-play or pay $100/month to Verizon for their triple-play.
Isn't competition grand?
No it's not. If I had such a service (and I have no intention of doing so), I'd do what I do now with my ~70 basic cable: block out channels. Religious channels? Begone! Shopping channels? Don't see them. Ad channels? Yeah right. Golf? Get real.
By the time I had blocked out all the channels I didn't want in the first place, I'd probably be down to about the same number I have now. 200 channels? No problem.
Unless you're now going to tell me that using digital cable/set top boxes/whatever, that one can't block channels. If that's the case, then there is absolutely no way I'll be getting any such service.