The myth of clear-cutting as a lumbering practice is also crazy. Think about it, the infrastructure needed to process and move the crop would have to be continually rebuilt. How many farmers do that? They will rotate the harvest areas as a way to let the soil regenerate but they don't strip the surface and continually move on.
You can say that, but they really do "rebuild" the infrastructure, as far as they need to. Loggers currently use big trucks and specialized (but moveable) equipment to load the timber onto the trucks.
I live in Oregon. I've seen very fucking huge forests clear cut. Yes, they plant trees when they're done. And it'll take 20 years before they're ready to come back. So they move on every 5 years or so, and will be back in 4 cycles. Should that make the ecosystem feel any better?
The rainforests being chopped down isn't sensationalism. They aren't being chopped down for paper, but they're being chopped down to create new grasslands for cattle and for planting cash crops. This is very old news.
Microsoft is gone, just a memory, like Commodore is today. Who are we going to sue? And how does that help get XP or Vista or HooHaOS working again, anyway?
If Microsoft is gone, it might be time to start looking at alternatives. Microsoft is a big company, and it would take an amazing product marketed correctly to bring them down.
You can criticize America's policy all you want. BUT, and this is a big one, you keep a unified front while you are oversees. We are a constitutional democratic republic,
Bullshit. The constitution you mentioned yields freedom of speech, with no mention of where that speech is supposed to occur. And for good reason.
Do I really have to quote the text?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law abridging my freedom of speech. Even if said speech occurs outside of the country.
I don't know RMS's position on Cuba or China. But I will say this: As an American, it is my duty to criticize America's policy first, since it is the only policy I have a chance of influencing.
Then you probably shouldn't leave the garden hose out. Nobody is going to just assume your plumbing sucks. And thirst is a good reason to borrow your hose.
If there is no afterlife, why bother being a 'good person' in this life?
As the Buddha said (paraphrasing), "I know nothing except that I can make myself better." Put into a western context, if life has no intrinsic meaning, I am the only person who can give it meaning. Through my thoughts and actions.
So why try to do good? Because I've found people I care about.
I can't think of any session id url vulnerability I've seen that doesn't have a cookie analog, but SEO and ease of browsing are still big issues. For instance, Wikipedia uses session cookies if you're logged in. And if I'm logged in, I would rather type "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/" (note that the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/" part is in my browser history) than a huge URL that has nothing to do with what I'm interested in.
Many frameworks support using session id's in the URL, but that ends up breaking the framework's namespacing -- a big issue in modern MVC frameworks.
Take a site that is for an airline. They have it available in heaps of languages. So I click English, and then click something else, and it takes me back to the front page. Why the fuck cant' it use server side sessions?
Because HTTP is a stateless protocol. When implementing user sessions, you have to rely on extra-protocol information, either with cookies or by including a session id in the url. Cookies tend to be easier to work with.
If it is "aberrant to subject 149 million people to a preference of 151 million", what is it to subject 149 thousand people to a preference of 151 thousand? Or 149 people to 151? Does local government act more in the spirit of the constitution than the federal government?
Yes. For a simple reason. Americans live in relatively small communities and have very different beliefs. Laws that would work in Ohio might not work in Montana. Laws that would work in California might not work in New York. The smaller the body in which a law is proposed and considered, the more the law represents the will of the people.
Just to take one counter-example that Americans should be familiar with, if Abraham Lincoln had let the local governments decide there'd be plenty of slave states left. Today, I think everyone agrees it was the right decision (which is why I chose it and not something more current). Sure, letting the federal government decides means it gets either right for everyone, or wrong for everyone (unless it's one of those issues that really should be different around the country), but that's what you get when you put all the eggs in one basket.
You don't have to approve of slavery to disapprove of the Civil War. It was caused by a series of abuses of Federal power. There are many parallels between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War with respect to the rebels' reasons and attitudes.
This is nitpicking, but the Pythagorean Theorem is a mathematical axiom. It must be true according to the definition of the triangle; it is *inconceivable* that the Pythagorean theorem could be false.
If you're going to nitpick, try to be accurate. The Pythagorean Theorem is a theorem, meaning it is proven from a set of stated assumptions. There are sets of assumptions that generate geometries where the Pythagorean theorem fails. Neither kind of geometry is "primary". Logically and mathematically, they stand on equal, independent footing. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometr y.
On the face of it I agree, but I'm still waiting for proponents of the "It's open, obviously I'm meant to use it" theory to suggest how much use of an open AP is "fair."
It depends. Mostly on the AP owner's usage patterns. If the AP owner has a fast cable connection, but uses it only to check his email, I don't think there's anything inherently unfair about using up even 5 mb/s.
Very few people pay for bandwidth specifically. They pay for relatively quick access to their favorite sites. (To use your fleet analogy, paying for bandwidth is like paying for a car to show up within 20 seconds (high availability of the resource), whereas paying for access is like paying for a car to show up within 5 minutes (access to the resource))
I think the rogue neighbor should use as much as he wants without affecting the owner's usage. The rogue neighbor must therefore adapt to the owner's usage. Obviously, in practice, this may be difficult. But using a lot of bandwidth with minimal impact is not impossible. (Using it during off hours, or having a packet sniffer measure the other host's incoming/outgoing bandwidth and setting triggers when a reasonable threshhold is crossed, etc)
Where this analogy fails is that most people should not have to tell their drivers not to drive people to Alaska. How many people know they have to do anything to their wrouter to restrict access to it?
It's a bit of a misanalogy because "merely" using an open access point doesn't deprive the owner of its use either. Abusing it for P2P or something might. But checking your email or sshing in to the office or reading slashdot won't.
You wouldn't have to test for longer than hours or a few days if you had a comprehensive suite of unit tests. This is just a buffer overflow, not a feature addition. QA/acceptance testing should consist of checking that only code relevant to the bug was modified, and that the modification actually addresses the bug.
I can't blame Microsoft for having to use a longer term testing plan. Many developers have abused the APIs, and Microsoft has shown themselves to be committed to making Windows backwards compatible, to a fault.
If Linux developers abused the APIs this way, the API maintainers would tell them to get stuffed. Everyone involved knows it, so API abuse isn't much of an issue, and so smarter testing strategies can work.
In short, Microsoft screwed themselves out of doing things the "right" (expedient) way by holding developer's hands. Of course, holding developer's hands made it a very attractive platform to work with -- the strategy has obviously worked to their financial advantage.
Security is not just about buffer overflows and SQL injection; it's about anything that could let someone get access they shouldn't have. Which can happen from plain old bad logic.
Then again, if your C code is good enough that you get the logic right but sometimes have a buffer overflow, using Java, or Ruby, or any other of a number of high level languages would have prevented the bug.
Slashdot Mirror
The face on mars was just a freak of low-resolution photography, couldn't the same sort of human error be responsible here?
d ia/pia09185.html
No. The hexagon is huge. See http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multime
The myth of clear-cutting as a lumbering practice is also crazy. Think about it, the infrastructure needed to process and move the crop would have to be continually rebuilt. How many farmers do that? They will rotate the harvest areas as a way to let the soil regenerate but they don't strip the surface and continually move on.
You can say that, but they really do "rebuild" the infrastructure, as far as they need to. Loggers currently use big trucks and specialized (but moveable) equipment to load the timber onto the trucks.
I live in Oregon. I've seen very fucking huge forests clear cut. Yes, they plant trees when they're done. And it'll take 20 years before they're ready to come back. So they move on every 5 years or so, and will be back in 4 cycles. Should that make the ecosystem feel any better?
The rainforests being chopped down isn't sensationalism. They aren't being chopped down for paper, but they're being chopped down to create new grasslands for cattle and for planting cash crops. This is very old news.
It costs the US$8bill a yr in subsidies to pay for recycling and cleaning up the chemical by-products, it costs much less to plant and cut down trees.
That's not just the paper you're paying for. Glass is very expensive to recycle, but it's still a net savings.
Perhaps you should read about modern English usage before spouting off.
Linguistic prescriptivism is bad enough, but uninformed prescriptivism is worse.
Microsoft is gone, just a memory, like Commodore is today. Who are we going to sue? And how does that help get XP or Vista or HooHaOS working again, anyway?
If Microsoft is gone, it might be time to start looking at alternatives. Microsoft is a big company, and it would take an amazing product marketed correctly to bring them down.
Awww, poopy. Too bad you didn't get Funny karma too.
Bullshit. The constitution you mentioned yields freedom of speech, with no mention of where that speech is supposed to occur. And for good reason.
Do I really have to quote the text?
Congress shall make no law abridging my freedom of speech. Even if said speech occurs outside of the country.
I don't know RMS's position on Cuba or China. But I will say this: As an American, it is my duty to criticize America's policy first, since it is the only policy I have a chance of influencing.
companies are regarded as plural from a grammatical standpoint, since they are viewed as a collection of people rather than a single entity.
Is this true of all collective nouns? For instance, would you say that "a flock fly" or "a flock flies"?
For fucks sake, it's spelled "faux pas".
You are now a member of my foes list, teenie.
Then you probably shouldn't leave the garden hose out. Nobody is going to just assume your plumbing sucks. And thirst is a good reason to borrow your hose.
If there is no afterlife, why bother being a 'good person' in this life?
As the Buddha said (paraphrasing), "I know nothing except that I can make myself better." Put into a western context, if life has no intrinsic meaning, I am the only person who can give it meaning. Through my thoughts and actions.
So why try to do good? Because I've found people I care about.
I can't think of any session id url vulnerability I've seen that doesn't have a cookie analog, but SEO and ease of browsing are still big issues. For instance, Wikipedia uses session cookies if you're logged in. And if I'm logged in, I would rather type "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/" (note that the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/" part is in my browser history) than a huge URL that has nothing to do with what I'm interested in.
Many frameworks support using session id's in the URL, but that ends up breaking the framework's namespacing -- a big issue in modern MVC frameworks.
Take a site that is for an airline. They have it available in heaps of languages. So I click English, and then click something else, and it takes me back to the front page. Why the fuck cant' it use server side sessions?
Because HTTP is a stateless protocol. When implementing user sessions, you have to rely on extra-protocol information, either with cookies or by including a session id in the url. Cookies tend to be easier to work with.
Your house has shitty plumbing.
If it is "aberrant to subject 149 million people to a preference of 151 million", what is it to subject 149 thousand people to a preference of 151 thousand? Or 149 people to 151? Does local government act more in the spirit of the constitution than the federal government?
Yes. For a simple reason. Americans live in relatively small communities and have very different beliefs. Laws that would work in Ohio might not work in Montana. Laws that would work in California might not work in New York. The smaller the body in which a law is proposed and considered, the more the law represents the will of the people.
Just to take one counter-example that Americans should be familiar with, if Abraham Lincoln had let the local governments decide there'd be plenty of slave states left. Today, I think everyone agrees it was the right decision (which is why I chose it and not something more current). Sure, letting the federal government decides means it gets either right for everyone, or wrong for everyone (unless it's one of those issues that really should be different around the country), but that's what you get when you put all the eggs in one basket.
You don't have to approve of slavery to disapprove of the Civil War. It was caused by a series of abuses of Federal power. There are many parallels between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War with respect to the rebels' reasons and attitudes.
This is nitpicking, but the Pythagorean Theorem is a mathematical axiom. It must be true according to the definition of the triangle; it is *inconceivable* that the Pythagorean theorem could be false.
r y.
If you're going to nitpick, try to be accurate. The Pythagorean Theorem is a theorem , meaning it is proven from a set of stated assumptions. There are sets of assumptions that generate geometries where the Pythagorean theorem fails. Neither kind of geometry is "primary". Logically and mathematically, they stand on equal, independent footing. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geomet
There are two different things known as gall. One is a solid. The other a fluid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/bile
On the face of it I agree, but I'm still waiting for proponents of the "It's open, obviously I'm meant to use it" theory to suggest how much use of an open AP is "fair."
It depends. Mostly on the AP owner's usage patterns. If the AP owner has a fast cable connection, but uses it only to check his email, I don't think there's anything inherently unfair about using up even 5 mb/s.
Very few people pay for bandwidth specifically. They pay for relatively quick access to their favorite sites. (To use your fleet analogy, paying for bandwidth is like paying for a car to show up within 20 seconds (high availability of the resource), whereas paying for access is like paying for a car to show up within 5 minutes (access to the resource))
I think the rogue neighbor should use as much as he wants without affecting the owner's usage. The rogue neighbor must therefore adapt to the owner's usage. Obviously, in practice, this may be difficult. But using a lot of bandwidth with minimal impact is not impossible. (Using it during off hours, or having a packet sniffer measure the other host's incoming/outgoing bandwidth and setting triggers when a reasonable threshhold is crossed, etc)
Basement Pub?
Where this analogy fails is that most people should not have to tell their drivers not to drive people to Alaska. How many people know they have to do anything to their wrouter to restrict access to it?
It's a bit of a misanalogy because "merely" using an open access point doesn't deprive the owner of its use either. Abusing it for P2P or something might. But checking your email or sshing in to the office or reading slashdot won't.
You wouldn't have to test for longer than hours or a few days if you had a comprehensive suite of unit tests. This is just a buffer overflow, not a feature addition. QA/acceptance testing should consist of checking that only code relevant to the bug was modified, and that the modification actually addresses the bug.
I can't blame Microsoft for having to use a longer term testing plan. Many developers have abused the APIs, and Microsoft has shown themselves to be committed to making Windows backwards compatible, to a fault.
If Linux developers abused the APIs this way, the API maintainers would tell them to get stuffed. Everyone involved knows it, so API abuse isn't much of an issue, and so smarter testing strategies can work.
In short, Microsoft screwed themselves out of doing things the "right" (expedient) way by holding developer's hands. Of course, holding developer's hands made it a very attractive platform to work with -- the strategy has obviously worked to their financial advantage.
Security is not just about buffer overflows and SQL injection; it's about anything that could let someone get access they shouldn't have. Which can happen from plain old bad logic.
Then again, if your C code is good enough that you get the logic right but sometimes have a buffer overflow, using Java, or Ruby, or any other of a number of high level languages would have prevented the bug.