When are we ever going to have adequate security? The term adequate is subjective. An unpatched, unfirewalled, virgin copy of WinXP could be adequate for any novice user, on the other hand, some would argue a computer with no external drives, nothing on the hard disks, locked inside of an Iresali safe, with welded chains on the outside, then sent into orbit in the outer parts of our solar system is still not secure!
There will never be adequate security. This is for one small reason. There is no such thing as a pefect system. The more advanced they become, the higher our standards will get. Adequate security is relative to our standards, thus is subjective.
Yes, smart people still trump over stupid people in most aspects of life, but stupid people still reproduce.
"Modern" human evolution is actually reversing the process. In general, more intelligent folks are aware of various birth control methods. These people know where and how and why it is important to use these devices. They also tend to wait to have kids, after college, and have some security built up.
On the other hand, we have the lesser minds who belive "I can't get pregnant" or "I can pull out in time" or whatever.
Bottom line: Stupid people are reproducing at a faster pace than intelligent people. Which really, when you think about it, explains a lot of why things are the way they are.
So whether you believe in evolution or not does not change the data that we have. It only provides an explaination for the observable data.
My point was not whether my personal beliefs are true or not, but that we keep teaching kids a very flawed theory. It is presented in a way that is "theory", however the average student doesn't take this into account, and simply acts as if were fact.
Scientific ideas may come and go, but the data set just gets larger. That is why this guy can claim the others are wrong: he has a better data set.
The problem is that all the while these ideas are "coming and going", we are teaching these theories in schools. Yes, they are supposed to be taught as theories, but the vast majority of either teachers, or the more likely case, high school students take it as fact. Which is completely absurd.
And please don't label me as some crazy creationist, persoanlly I don't believe either side of the presented argument, and am awaiting my death to make up my mind:D
...that Windows hasn't been around for the past 15-20 years) -- how is causing people to choose Windows as their first system?
Ermm.. well, the average user doesn't build their own computers, they either go online, or to Best Buy/Circuit City/Comp USA/Whatever, and pick one up that looks purrdy and what the, most likely, uninformed computer salesman says would be good for them based on "their needs". Almost all of these retailers sell Windows pre-packaged (with the exception of, gasp, Walmart who sells a few low end machines with linux, or Dell, I believe, who will be getting the OSX sooner or later). Point being, the average user DOES NOT have an option in choosing their operating system.
Hell, even when my brother showed up to Dell coorp offices with the Windows XP EULA, which specifically states that you can get a refund for an unused product, they sent him over to Microsoft. MS did the same, sent him back to the manufactuer.
So how would the average user figure out how to NOT use MS OS's for their first system??
Well, I must say, you obviously don't know what poker (generally in any form) really is. If you think it is "gambling" you're only about 5% correct, the other 95% is comprised of statisical knowledge, human psychology, knowing *how* to bet, and the 5% is just a touch of luck/karma/whatever, hence it's not quite "gambling" in relation to say, slot machines or roulette.
That said, online poker takes away A LOT of that 95% and throws it over the side of the *boat. However there are still many tells you can pick up from a player online.
I'll let you all in on a tell if you're playing a bot. If the user name is pcktAA94mdk109ck1 or sxyGrl30dk20dks5k or is always saying "cum l00k @t mi 53xy p1c5 @t www.properEnglishName.com", then you're most likel playing a bot!
Also, when you say:
"Who do you think pays for all those lights in Vegas? The losers!"
It just shows you really don't know what you are saying. Vegas dealers don't play against people (at least that I know of), they take a rake. Now, you would be right if it were a "gambling" game, but not poker.
Anyways, I'll stop ranting now.
*Yes, I did use a pun in/. post. I'm just that ballsy.
"It includes a fingerprint reader, a 400MHz PowerPC, 64MB of DRAM and 256MB or 512MB of flash and it runs Debian..."
Umm.. server.. what the hell can you serve up running with these specs? Seriously, what practical applications could be run with this now-a-days, or more the relavent question, in the coming future?
I can't wait until every car, bus, plane, train, lawnmower, etc. runs on hydrogen! With the exhaust of pure oxygen, we can finally get rid of those pesky trees.
This does help solve the problem of distrobution however. You can just ship the powder, and at "gas stations" the water is mixed, and you fill up your tank. Or maybe even a fuel system will be made where you just add the powder directly to the applied device(car, lawnmower, whatever) and the process happens inside the machine itself.
I, for one, think they should attach a giant nose so they can smell it too.
Ermm.. it is a machine this guy was talking about, so no need to fear the vacuum of space. This is ridiculous slashdot stuff though.. and hmm... why am I still typing??
Maybe not hot water, but certainly boiled tap water. There are a number of additives in tap water, Chlorine and Flouride for example. There can be any number of "extra" ingredients. When boiled, most (probably not all), will evaporate away (assuming there is no lid on the pot).
Flouride has a freezing point of -137C, and Chlorine has a freezing point of -100C. Obviously we all know 0C is the freezing point for H2O.
I'd be willing to bet that if you took all the extra stuff you find in tap water, look up their freezing points, you'll find most of them are far colder than H2O.
Yea, it's only a small amount of extra stuff, but it adds up quickly.
I'm all in favor of cutting 12% straight away. Why you may ask? TV, IMHO, is holding back a lot of potential for intelligent people who are brainwashed into believing they must see the next episode of some guy eating a dung beetle's nest filled to the brim with it's larva. This all so the contestant can win $25K.
All the while, without a TV, one might be more inclined to read a book.. or God forbid, take a class at a college, so they might actually start EARNING an extra $25K (or at least more than they do now).
Damn.. since the major news shows are all on NBC, CBS, FOX, ABC.. maybe people will start thinking for themselves again about politcs. And not buy into the smokescreen new stations regularly adhere to.
We all know TV advertisers spend millions upon millions to figure out how to train the human pysche to:
1) stay in their chair
2) buy what is presented to them
So why would it be a bad thing if 33 million people suddenly lost a majority of their favorite shows?
Of course this would all this ludacris idealology would have to happen in a matter of days. Most likely in the time peoples' addictions start to catch up to their pocketbooks.
I'd actually go with number of lines. What you're trying to calculate is the number of people using broadband connections, and the numOfLines * numAvgUserPerLine would result in horrid stats. You'd also have to think about municiple connections(including schools, public offices, etc.), and find the stats for other wifi connections (internet cafes and most major cities have complete wifi connectivity).
It also begs the question, are you actually "using" broadband if you are a non-computer person who only uses email, or plays MShearts online.
All in all, number of subscribers (meaning lines) would be a better, more accurate discription.
If you look at that pic in like 16x or so, you can see two red spots, aligned with the waves, where the first (top down) red stripe should be. The blue square containing the stars looks more rectangluar than it should be as well. This leads me to the conclusion that it wasn't left out, intentionally, or by mistake, but rather is the result of poor rendering.
Slashdot Mirror
What if he gets hit by a bus?
Arrg.. Please, for the love of God, don't give Bill any ideas!!
The enemies sats are using a virgin XP minus SP2, and our stuff is running a DoS attack.
When are we ever going to have adequate security? The term adequate is subjective. An unpatched, unfirewalled, virgin copy of WinXP could be adequate for any novice user, on the other hand, some would argue a computer with no external drives, nothing on the hard disks, locked inside of an Iresali safe, with welded chains on the outside, then sent into orbit in the outer parts of our solar system is still not secure!
There will never be adequate security. This is for one small reason. There is no such thing as a pefect system. The more advanced they become, the higher our standards will get. Adequate security is relative to our standards, thus is subjective.
I'm confused by the title. Is this meant to be *dumb* ideas, or a dumb *list* of ideas? "Hacking is cool" and "Educating Users"?
WTF!
And where the hell is "Security by obscurity" on that list?
Yes, smart people still trump over stupid people in most aspects of life, but stupid people still reproduce.
"Modern" human evolution is actually reversing the process. In general, more intelligent folks are aware of various birth control methods. These people know where and how and why it is important to use these devices. They also tend to wait to have kids, after college, and have some security built up.
On the other hand, we have the lesser minds who belive "I can't get pregnant" or "I can pull out in time" or whatever.
Bottom line: Stupid people are reproducing at a faster pace than intelligent people. Which really, when you think about it, explains a lot of why things are the way they are.
I'd 1ik3 70 533 7h47 d4mn 41g0ri7hm w0rk 0n 7hiz 5hi7!
So whether you believe in evolution or not does not change the data that we have. It only provides an explaination for the observable data.
My point was not whether my personal beliefs are true or not, but that we keep teaching kids a very flawed theory. It is presented in a way that is "theory", however the average student doesn't take this into account, and simply acts as if were fact.
Scientific ideas may come and go, but the data set just gets larger. That is why this guy can claim the others are wrong: he has a better data set.
:D
The problem is that all the while these ideas are "coming and going", we are teaching these theories in schools. Yes, they are supposed to be taught as theories, but the vast majority of either teachers, or the more likely case, high school students take it as fact. Which is completely absurd.
And please don't label me as some crazy creationist, persoanlly I don't believe either side of the presented argument, and am awaiting my death to make up my mind
...that Windows hasn't been around for the past 15-20 years) -- how is causing people to choose Windows as their first system?
Ermm.. well, the average user doesn't build their own computers, they either go online, or to Best Buy/Circuit City/Comp USA/Whatever, and pick one up that looks purrdy and what the, most likely, uninformed computer salesman says would be good for them based on "their needs". Almost all of these retailers sell Windows pre-packaged (with the exception of, gasp, Walmart who sells a few low end machines with linux, or Dell, I believe, who will be getting the OSX sooner or later). Point being, the average user DOES NOT have an option in choosing their operating system.
Hell, even when my brother showed up to Dell coorp offices with the Windows XP EULA, which specifically states that you can get a refund for an unused product, they sent him over to Microsoft. MS did the same, sent him back to the manufactuer.
So how would the average user figure out how to NOT use MS OS's for their first system??
Well, I must say, you obviously don't know what poker (generally in any form) really is. If you think it is "gambling" you're only about 5% correct, the other 95% is comprised of statisical knowledge, human psychology, knowing *how* to bet, and the 5% is just a touch of luck/karma/whatever, hence it's not quite "gambling" in relation to say, slot machines or roulette.
/. post. I'm just that ballsy.
That said, online poker takes away A LOT of that 95% and throws it over the side of the *boat. However there are still many tells you can pick up from a player online.
I'll let you all in on a tell if you're playing a bot. If the user name is pcktAA94mdk109ck1 or sxyGrl30dk20dks5k or is always saying "cum l00k @t mi 53xy p1c5 @t www.properEnglishName.com", then you're most likel playing a bot!
Also, when you say:
"Who do you think pays for all those lights in Vegas? The losers!"
It just shows you really don't know what you are saying. Vegas dealers don't play against people (at least that I know of), they take a rake. Now, you would be right if it were a "gambling" game, but not poker.
Anyways, I'll stop ranting now.
*Yes, I did use a pun in
for my wind powered car pantent to go through.
Basically the idea is you strap on a big windmill to the roof of the car, and as the car moves, electricity is produced, thus moving the car.
The added bonus is that you get free meals from all the birds that get caught up.
Care to sample some Pigeon Pie anyone?
"It includes a fingerprint reader, a 400MHz PowerPC, 64MB of DRAM and 256MB or 512MB of flash and it runs Debian..."
Umm.. server.. what the hell can you serve up running with these specs? Seriously, what practical applications could be run with this now-a-days, or more the relavent question, in the coming future?
I really should copyright A.S.S. - Artificial Stupidity System..
Isn't there some rule of thumb - never fight evil with evil? This is a vigilante approach which is reserved exclusively for BATMAN
How about a real super-hero - Google.
I'm sure their brilliant engineers could come up with some decent solution. Hell, Gmail is already pretty damn effective.
Then again, I suppose we can't always ask Google to bail us out!
Interesting situation this puts the /. crowd in.
Generally we tend to flame anything remotely doing with censorship. With the obvious exception of religious programming.
I bet if there were a channel for the pro-evolution believers out there, more people here would put up a fuss.
Oh.. wait.. TLC, Discovery, National Geographic, etc.. Hmm..
I highly encourage anyone to do this. Poor, college geeks like dumpster diving for electronics.
Hmm.. maybe I can finally build my server farm I've always dreamt about.
I can't wait until every car, bus, plane, train, lawnmower, etc. runs on hydrogen! With the exhaust of pure oxygen, we can finally get rid of those pesky trees.
This does help solve the problem of distrobution however. You can just ship the powder, and at "gas stations" the water is mixed, and you fill up your tank. Or maybe even a fuel system will be made where you just add the powder directly to the applied device(car, lawnmower, whatever) and the process happens inside the machine itself.
I, for one, think they should attach a giant nose so they can smell it too.
Ermm.. it is a machine this guy was talking about, so no need to fear the vacuum of space. This is ridiculous slashdot stuff though.. and hmm... why am I still typing??
heh.. well I've trademarked tm and c (which is of course, tm'ed and c'ed (tm(tm and c) and c'ed(tm and c)).
DAMN recursiveness! Oh.. wait a tic.. I can sue myself, and make a fortune! And all these slashdotter's think I'm a moron..
Maybe not hot water, but certainly boiled tap water. There are a number of additives in tap water, Chlorine and Flouride for example. There can be any number of "extra" ingredients. When boiled, most (probably not all), will evaporate away (assuming there is no lid on the pot).
Flouride has a freezing point of -137C, and Chlorine has a freezing point of -100C. Obviously we all know 0C is the freezing point for H2O.
I'd be willing to bet that if you took all the extra stuff you find in tap water, look up their freezing points, you'll find most of them are far colder than H2O.
Yea, it's only a small amount of extra stuff, but it adds up quickly.
I'm all in favor of cutting 12% straight away. Why you may ask? TV, IMHO, is holding back a lot of potential for intelligent people who are brainwashed into believing they must see the next episode of some guy eating a dung beetle's nest filled to the brim with it's larva. This all so the contestant can win $25K.
All the while, without a TV, one might be more inclined to read a book.. or God forbid, take a class at a college, so they might actually start EARNING an extra $25K (or at least more than they do now).
Damn.. since the major news shows are all on NBC, CBS, FOX, ABC.. maybe people will start thinking for themselves again about politcs. And not buy into the smokescreen new stations regularly adhere to.
We all know TV advertisers spend millions upon millions to figure out how to train the human pysche to:
1) stay in their chair
2) buy what is presented to them
So why would it be a bad thing if 33 million people suddenly lost a majority of their favorite shows?
Of course this would all this ludacris idealology would have to happen in a matter of days. Most likely in the time peoples' addictions start to catch up to their pocketbooks.
I'd actually go with number of lines. What you're trying to calculate is the number of people using broadband connections, and the numOfLines * numAvgUserPerLine would result in horrid stats. You'd also have to think about municiple connections(including schools, public offices, etc.), and find the stats for other wifi connections (internet cafes and most major cities have complete wifi connectivity).
It also begs the question, are you actually "using" broadband if you are a non-computer person who only uses email, or plays MShearts online.
All in all, number of subscribers (meaning lines) would be a better, more accurate discription.
Well.. it's not that hard to find out ;)
The USA is still the world's largest broadband country with 36.5 mln lines, and China remains in second place with 28.3 mln lines.
US - (36,500,000 / 295,734,134 = 0.123) = 12.3%
China - (28,300,000 / 1,306,313,812 = 0.0216) = 2.16%
*population data via google search "USA Population" and "China Population" respectively (July 2005 est.)
If you look at that pic in like 16x or so, you can see two red spots, aligned with the waves, where the first (top down) red stripe should be. The blue square containing the stars looks more rectangluar than it should be as well. This leads me to the conclusion that it wasn't left out, intentionally, or by mistake, but rather is the result of poor rendering.