In the UK the burden is on the accused to prove their innocence. This is probably why the founding fathers put in an innocent until proven guilty clause in the US's constitution.
Actually price gouging during an emergency is a _good_ thing, as it discourages people from buying more than they need(hoarding) "just in case". When prices don't sharply rise during emergencies, limited supplies are quickly bought out by a small group of people and the rest are fucked. Sure it sucks if a pack of batteries is $30.0 but that is much better than not being able to get any batteries at any cost to power your emergency radio or whatever you need it for. This is hard on poor people, but at least they have the option to pool their money to share some batteries as opposed to no batteries whatsoever.
Plz help me out im looking for a gud torrent of leaked linux source code. Dont ask y i hav mi reasons ^_^ Also wtb leet hax I hear some1 haxed rl for flight and infinite lives? Tru?
I have a computer with multiple partitions and operating systems, 1 is windows xp the rest are *nix. XP has been patched so it has ext2 read/write support although it ignores *nix permissions. I want to sync my bookmarks between all the partitions so that if I add bm on one partition the change is imported to the other OSs. But I only want to sync positive changes (adding bookmarks, not removing them). Is this doable without using a spare partition for data?
Well I would estimate the probability of a risk occuring as totalCompaniesinIndustry / numberOfTimesRiskReported. Then I would probably pad it to account for the unreported cases. Given enough time the probability of a data leak occuring approaches 100% regardless of preventative measures being taken. Good IT policies can only mitigate user stupidity and then there's 0 day exploits. So really you're estimating how long it will take for a risk to occur and how well it's damages can be mitigated. Agreed that there is limited knowledge and this number is only an estimation but it provides a decent starting point.
If you only want maximum personal economic freedom there's plenty of 2nd world countries like Mexico where money speaks the most and many officials can be bribed. Of course corruption will probably decrease over time but then you could relocate to a different developing SA country. Alaska may be a decent compromise for you, it's still in the U.S. so less effort to move there, no sales tax, no state income tax and they pay their citizens a dividend. I don't know if this is still on the table but at one point a town in Alaska was giving away land to encourage people to move there.
Actually there's a vote that counts a lot more than your ballot and won't get you killed. Vote the way that counts the most, with your dollar and emmigrate out of the U.S. Sure, it's a large move, and for people who are already have families here it probably isn't ideal but if enough people leave the U.S. may improve. If not, what do you care? You're already in a better country. Now this is over-simplified and there are serious disincentives to not immigrate, but if you aren't indifferent towards politics and don't feel like wasting your time fighting an entrenched system leave. I know I want a choice better than piss cola vendors or shit sandwich drive-throughs and I don't have any significant roots here, so unless apathy winsn I'll probably leave.
For those who would prefer to stay here and attempt to reform the U.S. government go do this little exercise: Imagine your ideal government and compare the U.S. to it. Estimate roughly how long it would take for the U.S. to reach it. Then go look at other countries, there is probably at least one that is much closer to your idealized government than the U.S. For most of you it would be faster to immigrate to that country, and fully acclimate then it would for the U.S. to change to how you wish it were. If so then whether you emmigrate out of the U.S. comes down to how much you care.
Expenses would be employees, hardware, training users about password security, etc. This is a pretty intuitive equation, if it costs more to avoid a risk than to suffer it isn't worth avoiding.
The point of forensics is to provide legal evidience, and what he did wouldn't be useful in court. For this to count as forensics he should have at a minimium needed to image the server's disk(s). Then calculate and store the images md5 hashes, so he can prove the images haven't been tampered with. Then mount the images on a trusted computer and use a hardware write blocker. Then and *only* then should he poke around.
If any slashdotters are interested in actual forensics I highly recommend File System Forensic Analysis by Brian Carrier. Best part is the author only uses FOSS tools so anyone can follow along (in addition to pragmatic reasons).
Actually you can theoretically win the presidential election with 26.2% popular. Or was it 22.6%? Of course you can win the presidential election with 0% popular if electoral college feels like it. I don't remember the math behind the minimium percentage of popular vote needed to win, but it is less than 30%.
I felt the author did a poor job with the Deathly Hallows and that the book's overall quality was mediocre. First I'll start off with what she did well: 1. Snape as a hero. I doubt it was that surprising for most people, but her explanations of his motives were very plausible. 2. Dumbledore's history was intriguing.
What she did poorly: 1. Character consistency. Neville goes from almost a squib to holding his own against death eaters, where does this come from? Hermione becomes stupid. Hermione knows that there is a spell that can destroy horcruxes and _Crabbe_ of all people is capable of casting it, yet Hermione doesn't consider it worth learning as it is too "dangerous". Clearly running around without a plan and hoping a special sword drops into her lap is a much more intelligent choice.
2. Magic System still isn't explained. We have muggles, purebloods, mudbloods, halfbloods, and squibs and yet why certain people can do magic and others can't isn't even hinted at. Honestly the rules of her magic system are so poorly explained and adhocced that it can almost be considered it's own deus ex machina. Anytime someone is in a sticky situation that couldn't previously be solved, just change the rules of magic! See house-elves, wand pseudo sentience, and transfiguration limitations. I don't know about you, but I would like a magic system that is deeper than speak latin + wave wand + made_up_rule_that_conveniently_solves_plot_problem .
3. The use of house elves as deus ex machina- Oh no Harry Potter is trapped in a dungeon where apparition is impossible. Hah house-elves can teleport where wizards can't, problem solved!
4. Magical battles are _boring_. Yes boring, if you are good you spam stupefy/expelliarmus, if you are evil you spam Unforgivable Curses although mainly Avada Kedavra. Occasionally someone does something mildly clever but this is the exception even for supposedly intelligent characters! No one does anything clever like "accio testicles", or transmogrifying the ground under them to something dangerous, or even something as simple as using a high-powered lumens to blind. Instead it's cast their faction's spell over and over and over. On top of this there are niggling things such as Avada Kedavra being known as the "Unblockable Curse" yet hitting it in midair with stupefy causes it to "explode into red and green fireworks".
5. Voldemort's incompetence isn't believable. Okay so she wanted Voldemort's flaw to be his arrogance, but he isn't a moron. He knows Harry will come back to Godric's Hollow and yet lays a pathetic trap. He should have at least made it unapparatable. He doesn't exploit the mind link like he previously did to kill Sirius. He also continues to be outsmarted by a 17 year old with no plan. It is like watching a movie where the superweapon has a giant self-destruct button that the hero pushes and the villian doesn't see it coming!
6. Cliched- Harry martyrs himself and is brought back to life.
7. Predictable- Who didn't know that Harry was the last Horcrux or that Snape was a good guy, or that Harry wasn't actually dead?
8. It had the plot of a bad rpg- Find the magical item that will help you complete your quest. Now destroy the villain's enchantments. Congratulations, kill the final boss. Scroll credits.
9. Unsatisfying epilogue. Now this could potentially be cleared up in a different book but it would be nice to know what actually happened to everyone. We aren't even told what Harry did afterwards. Did he become an auror, a quidditch player, or did he do something else? All this emphasis on non-human's rights by Hermione and no mention of if wizarding politics changed. Nothing is told about the main characters other than who they reproduced with and how they named their children (also not a surprise). Honestly she may as well have said "And they lived happily ever after.", and it would have conveyed essentially the same information.
While it is good to see the findings of evolutionary psychology become more mainstream much of this has been available for a long time. For anyone who wants a more comprehensive covering of evolutionary pyschology I highly recommend Robert Wright's The Moral Animal. Oh and before people post their kneejerk reactions to the findings of evolutionary pyschology, calm down evol pysch doesn't commit the naturalistic fallacy. However, it would be wise to keep in mind our evolutionary past before designing cures for social ills.
He could find an object or perform a service that John values at $5. But if this example demands that only currency can be used for paying debts then Bob can not pay John back. However, in a real economy sitations such as these do not occur as the money is spread out among many people and Bob can have money transfered from others to himself so that he can pay off his debts. Also it is important to keep in mind that mild inflation is a phenomenon that occurs in all strong economies which means the money supply is also increasing.
You're really confused about the nature of money and the U.S. currency system. Money is merely something that can be exchanged for something else. These somethings can be cows, chickens, water, minerals, coins, slips of paper, reputation, whatever. Currency on the other hand is a type of money that is significantly more convinient to use instead of lugging around everything that someone might want to barter for.
"The first point is that the government and central bankers create money from nothing and create a national IOU to balance it. The government borrows money from the bankers and they write down this debt and demand interest on it. The money has been borrowed into existence. This money is then paid to government employees, contractors, suppliers etc where it enters the economy."
Money has never been created from nothing, as purchasing power has always existed. In any society no matter how primitive there are both finite resources and someone who has greater access to these resources than other people. If you need me to explain this I can. So we have some items that people value more than others because they do. It can be because it is shiny (gold), or it helps them survive (a tool), or it is pleasurable (music). Regardless of why they value some things above others they do. So people barter for a bit, realize the system is annoying and start using a controlled item (currency) to represent relative value.
"The second stage of this is the fractional reserve banking system. This is perhaps the biggest scam ever created. The fractional reserve banking system allows commercial banks to loan out to people more money than they have in reserve. Hence "fractional reserve" Typically they can loan out up to 20 times more than they have in deposits. That is they only have to have on hand about 5% on average of what they are allowed to loan out."
Fractional reserve banking is not a scam. You seem to think that loaning out more money than they have on hand is a bad thing and I'm not sure why. If you want to make a withdrawal no matter how large, the bank can get you what you are owed. It may take a bit of time for them to gather the money but they can't say "Oh sorry you want 6% and we only have 5% guess you'll never see your money." The way banks manage a reserve and maintain their capacity to supply money to people is through microdebt. They take on very short term debt in order to have the money needed to facilitate large withdrawals. Finally, if you are in the U.S. the FDIC protects the amount of money a person has in banks by up to $100k. If you are worried that the government might not be able to make good on their word, don't be. People trusting their banks is essential to the economy and is therefore in the interests of the government to maintain, so the government has no reason to scam you. Further, if the government was in such a situation where it was unable to repay you, you have something significantly worse to be worried about than being out $100k.
"Which the central banks and government attempt to control using the base interest rates. Essentially what it does is divide society into the creditors and the debtors. Every dollar that someone owns is one dollar's worth of debt, owed by someone else."
False dichotomies for the lose. I both have debt and people owe me debt. That last sentence is blatantly false. Bob gives Carl $5. Carl now has $5 that are his and no one elses. That is not debt.
"1. The bankers will ultimately be the sole and inevitable owners of everything. They set the rules of the game years ago."
Unsubtantiated assertion. In the U.S. the banks are closely regulated by the government. There are analytical reasons for why this is blatantly false, the most important one is that it is against the government's interest to allow bankers to have a monopoly on the money supply as without consumers spending money the economy is crippled. Since the government makes the rules and enforce
Eh, I think you're right it's only $6,000 in which case you would need to be pretty desperate to take it. Multiplying the 6k payday by the 21 days of work was a mistake.
Am I the only one who thinks those jobs sound fairly interesting? The NASA 0g tester would be miserably boring but it pays great, over 120k for 21 days of work. All the other jobs seem pretty interesting and don't seem to be exceedingly dangerous. Considering this is their "worst" job list, I'd love to see their "best" job list.
Do you have any plans to moderate the chat channels to keep them on topic for their intended purposes? In particular I'm thinking of/advice,/lookingforfellowship and/region. The spam can get pretty bad which I don't mind as long as it's in the spam channel (/ooc).
Slashdot Mirror
In the UK the burden is on the accused to prove their innocence. This is probably why the founding fathers put in an innocent until proven guilty clause in the US's constitution.
Actually price gouging during an emergency is a _good_ thing, as it discourages people from buying more than they need(hoarding) "just in case". When prices don't sharply rise during emergencies, limited supplies are quickly bought out by a small group of people and the rest are fucked. Sure it sucks if a pack of batteries is $30.0 but that is much better than not being able to get any batteries at any cost to power your emergency radio or whatever you need it for. This is hard on poor people, but at least they have the option to pool their money to share some batteries as opposed to no batteries whatsoever.
That's the gp's point. If it is done like a typical MMO it will be like every other MMO, aka a grindfest.
Ramen!
Plz help me out im looking for a gud torrent of leaked linux source code. Dont ask y i hav mi reasons ^_^ Also wtb leet hax I hear some1 haxed rl for flight and infinite lives? Tru?
I have a computer with multiple partitions and operating systems, 1 is windows xp the rest are *nix. XP has been patched so it has ext2 read/write support although it ignores *nix permissions. I want to sync my bookmarks between all the partitions so that if I add bm on one partition the change is imported to the other OSs. But I only want to sync positive changes (adding bookmarks, not removing them). Is this doable without using a spare partition for data?
Well I would estimate the probability of a risk occuring as totalCompaniesinIndustry / numberOfTimesRiskReported. Then I would probably pad it to account for the unreported cases. Given enough time the probability of a data leak occuring approaches 100% regardless of preventative measures being taken. Good IT policies can only mitigate user stupidity and then there's 0 day exploits. So really you're estimating how long it will take for a risk to occur and how well it's damages can be mitigated. Agreed that there is limited knowledge and this number is only an estimation but it provides a decent starting point.
If you only want maximum personal economic freedom there's plenty of 2nd world countries like Mexico where money speaks the most and many officials can be bribed. Of course corruption will probably decrease over time but then you could relocate to a different developing SA country. Alaska may be a decent compromise for you, it's still in the U.S. so less effort to move there, no sales tax, no state income tax and they pay their citizens a dividend. I don't know if this is still on the table but at one point a town in Alaska was giving away land to encourage people to move there.
Actually there's a vote that counts a lot more than your ballot and won't get you killed. Vote the way that counts the most, with your dollar and emmigrate out of the U.S. Sure, it's a large move, and for people who are already have families here it probably isn't ideal but if enough people leave the U.S. may improve. If not, what do you care? You're already in a better country. Now this is over-simplified and there are serious disincentives to not immigrate, but if you aren't indifferent towards politics and don't feel like wasting your time fighting an entrenched system leave. I know I want a choice better than piss cola vendors or shit sandwich drive-throughs and I don't have any significant roots here, so unless apathy winsn I'll probably leave.
For those who would prefer to stay here and attempt to reform the U.S. government go do this little exercise:
Imagine your ideal government and compare the U.S. to it. Estimate roughly how long it would take for the U.S. to reach it. Then go look at other countries, there is probably at least one that is much closer to your idealized government than the U.S. For most of you it would be faster to immigrate to that country, and fully acclimate then it would for the U.S. to change to how you wish it were. If so then whether you emmigrate out of the U.S. comes down to how much you care.
Cost_of_avoided_risk = Probability_of_risk_occuring * Cost_of_damage - (expenses)
Expenses would be employees, hardware, training users about password security, etc. This is a pretty intuitive equation, if it costs more to avoid a risk than to suffer it isn't worth avoiding.
The point of forensics is to provide legal evidience, and what he did wouldn't be useful in court. For this to count as forensics he should have at a minimium needed to image the server's disk(s). Then calculate and store the images md5 hashes, so he can prove the images haven't been tampered with. Then mount the images on a trusted computer and use a hardware write blocker. Then and *only* then should he poke around.
If any slashdotters are interested in actual forensics I highly recommend File System Forensic Analysis by Brian Carrier. Best part is the author only uses FOSS tools so anyone can follow along (in addition to pragmatic reasons).
People for Eating Tasty Aliens.
Actually you can theoretically win the presidential election with 26.2% popular. Or was it 22.6%? Of course you can win the presidential election with 0% popular if electoral college feels like it. I don't remember the math behind the minimium percentage of popular vote needed to win, but it is less than 30%.
They are both Monomyths.
I felt the author did a poor job with the Deathly Hallows and that the book's overall quality was mediocre. First I'll start off with what she did well:
m .
1. Snape as a hero. I doubt it was that surprising for most people, but her explanations of his motives were very plausible.
2. Dumbledore's history was intriguing.
What she did poorly:
1. Character consistency. Neville goes from almost a squib to holding his own against death eaters, where does this come from? Hermione becomes stupid. Hermione knows that there is a spell that can destroy horcruxes and _Crabbe_ of all people is capable of casting it, yet Hermione doesn't consider it worth learning as it is too "dangerous". Clearly running around without a plan and hoping a special sword drops into her lap is a much more intelligent choice.
2. Magic System still isn't explained. We have muggles, purebloods, mudbloods, halfbloods, and squibs and yet why certain people can do magic and others can't isn't even hinted at. Honestly the rules of her magic system are so poorly explained and adhocced that it can almost be considered it's own deus ex machina. Anytime someone is in a sticky situation that couldn't previously be solved, just change the rules of magic! See house-elves, wand pseudo sentience, and transfiguration limitations. I don't know about you, but I would like a magic system that is deeper than speak latin + wave wand + made_up_rule_that_conveniently_solves_plot_proble
3. The use of house elves as deus ex machina- Oh no Harry Potter is trapped in a dungeon where apparition is impossible. Hah house-elves can teleport where wizards can't, problem solved!
4. Magical battles are _boring_. Yes boring, if you are good you spam stupefy/expelliarmus, if you are evil you spam Unforgivable Curses although mainly Avada Kedavra. Occasionally someone does something mildly clever but this is the exception even for supposedly intelligent characters! No one does anything clever like "accio testicles", or transmogrifying the ground under them to something dangerous, or even something as simple as using a high-powered lumens to blind. Instead it's cast their faction's spell over and over and over. On top of this there are niggling things such as Avada Kedavra being known as the "Unblockable Curse" yet hitting it in midair with stupefy causes it to "explode into red and green fireworks".
5. Voldemort's incompetence isn't believable. Okay so she wanted Voldemort's flaw to be his arrogance, but he isn't a moron. He knows Harry will come back to Godric's Hollow and yet lays a pathetic trap. He should have at least made it unapparatable. He doesn't exploit the mind link like he previously did to kill Sirius. He also continues to be outsmarted by a 17 year old with no plan. It is like watching a movie where the superweapon has a giant self-destruct button that the hero pushes and the villian doesn't see it coming!
6. Cliched- Harry martyrs himself and is brought back to life.
7. Predictable- Who didn't know that Harry was the last Horcrux or that Snape was a good guy, or that Harry wasn't actually dead?
8. It had the plot of a bad rpg- Find the magical item that will help you complete your quest. Now destroy the villain's enchantments. Congratulations, kill the final boss. Scroll credits.
9. Unsatisfying epilogue. Now this could potentially be cleared up in a different book but it would be nice to know what actually happened to everyone. We aren't even told what Harry did afterwards. Did he become an auror, a quidditch player, or did he do something else? All this emphasis on non-human's rights by Hermione and no mention of if wizarding politics changed. Nothing is told about the main characters other than who they reproduced with and how they named their children (also not a surprise). Honestly she may as well have said "And they lived happily ever after.", and it would have conveyed essentially the same information.
Proper ZFS support.
While it is good to see the findings of evolutionary psychology become more mainstream much of this has been available for a long time. For anyone who wants a more comprehensive covering of evolutionary pyschology I highly recommend Robert Wright's The Moral Animal. Oh and before people post their kneejerk reactions to the findings of evolutionary pyschology, calm down evol pysch doesn't commit the naturalistic fallacy. However, it would be wise to keep in mind our evolutionary past before designing cures for social ills.
He could find an object or perform a service that John values at $5. But if this example demands that only currency can be used for paying debts then Bob can not pay John back. However, in a real economy sitations such as these do not occur as the money is spread out among many people and Bob can have money transfered from others to himself so that he can pay off his debts. Also it is important to keep in mind that mild inflation is a phenomenon that occurs in all strong economies which means the money supply is also increasing.
"The first point is that the government and central bankers create money from nothing and create a national IOU to balance it. The government borrows money from the bankers and they write down this debt and demand interest on it. The money has been borrowed into existence. This money is then paid to government employees, contractors, suppliers etc where it enters the economy."
Money has never been created from nothing, as purchasing power has always existed. In any society no matter how primitive there are both finite resources and someone who has greater access to these resources than other people. If you need me to explain this I can. So we have some items that people value more than others because they do. It can be because it is shiny (gold), or it helps them survive (a tool), or it is pleasurable (music). Regardless of why they value some things above others they do. So people barter for a bit, realize the system is annoying and start using a controlled item (currency) to represent relative value.
"The second stage of this is the fractional reserve banking system. This is perhaps the biggest scam ever created. The fractional reserve banking system allows commercial banks to loan out to people more money than they have in reserve. Hence "fractional reserve" Typically they can loan out up to 20 times more than they have in deposits. That is they only have to have on hand about 5% on average of what they are allowed to loan out."
Fractional reserve banking is not a scam. You seem to think that loaning out more money than they have on hand is a bad thing and I'm not sure why. If you want to make a withdrawal no matter how large, the bank can get you what you are owed. It may take a bit of time for them to gather the money but they can't say "Oh sorry you want 6% and we only have 5% guess you'll never see your money." The way banks manage a reserve and maintain their capacity to supply money to people is through microdebt. They take on very short term debt in order to have the money needed to facilitate large withdrawals. Finally, if you are in the U.S. the FDIC protects the amount of money a person has in banks by up to $100k. If you are worried that the government might not be able to make good on their word, don't be. People trusting their banks is essential to the economy and is therefore in the interests of the government to maintain, so the government has no reason to scam you. Further, if the government was in such a situation where it was unable to repay you, you have something significantly worse to be worried about than being out $100k.
"Which the central banks and government attempt to control using the base interest rates. Essentially what it does is divide society into the creditors and the debtors. Every dollar that someone owns is one dollar's worth of debt, owed by someone else."
False dichotomies for the lose. I both have debt and people owe me debt. That last sentence is blatantly false. Bob gives Carl $5. Carl now has $5 that are his and no one elses. That is not debt.
"1. The bankers will ultimately be the sole and inevitable owners of everything. They set the rules of the game years ago."
Unsubtantiated assertion. In the U.S. the banks are closely regulated by the government. There are analytical reasons for why this is blatantly false, the most important one is that it is against the government's interest to allow bankers to have a monopoly on the money supply as without consumers spending money the economy is crippled. Since the government makes the rules and enforce
Eh, I think you're right it's only $6,000 in which case you would need to be pretty desperate to take it. Multiplying the 6k payday by the 21 days of work was a mistake.
Am I the only one who thinks those jobs sound fairly interesting? The NASA 0g tester would be miserably boring but it pays great, over 120k for 21 days of work. All the other jobs seem pretty interesting and don't seem to be exceedingly dangerous. Considering this is their "worst" job list, I'd love to see their "best" job list.
There is already a bot. (waiting for this comment to be +5 funny...)
Do you have any plans to moderate the chat channels to keep them on topic for their intended purposes? In particular I'm thinking of /advice, /lookingforfellowship and /region. The spam can get pretty bad which I don't mind as long as it's in the spam channel (/ooc).
I know it's nitpicking but it bothers me. There are no societies where murder is acceptable as murder by definition means wrongful killing.
Do you get any freebies in NZ like call after 9 and it doesn't cost minutes, or call same carrier to same carrier and it's free?