I've reported it everytime it crashes (send in the crash report that it asks if it can). I reopen the document, recrash and resend the error report everytime we get a new version number.
Just this week, I finally cut it into smaller pieces because I can no longer yahoo it around (too big an attachment) so maybe I'll see how the pieces work. They are about 3-5 megs each with about a hundred graphics each.
Well actually it's something like 2.13 so more like AA, DD, and a.
little joke there.
Okay so seriously,
For your argument to hold together, you need an isolated population and random trait "E" which for some reason becomes either * becomes common in the population for an unrelated reason (people with popular noses who get laid easily also happen to resist the latest deadly flu because their noses are drier inside.) * is immediately valuable right now (such as rampant Aids in Africa right now is almost certainly causing people resistant or immune to Aids or who breed very quickly or who have certain moral values to become more common in the population).
Speaking at a population level a huge number of random mixes of the two populations would occur. There are not just 2 genes to mix. Any one of those mixes (even without a mutation) could produce something new and very useful in combination.
The likely hood of mutation is random. So the larger the population, the more mutations. Mutations will be preserved if they do not harm reproductive ability. They will become common if they make reproduction more likely.
While two distinct populations faced with a catastropic disease might face either 100% success or 100% failure, a diverse population would have a mixture of success and failure. Given : population A wiped out by virus A. population B wiped out by virus B. Population AA,AB,BA,BB would not be wiped out by either virus. After a pass of virus A, the population is reduced to AB,BA,BB but regenerates to AA,AB,BA,BB. After a pass of virus A and B very close together, the population is reduced to AB,BA but regenerates to AA,AB,BA,BB.
For a real world example: A disease that kills all pureblood chinese would not kill the US or European populations. A disease that kills everyone except chinese would not kill the US or European population.
And given interbreeding by soldiers and locals, not everyone would be killed in almost any country on earth.
Basically, we don't "average" as you seem to mistakenly infer. Instead we create a million distinct sub slices between each race. The only time genetic diversity is lost is if only a small part of the population is able to reproduce. Then you get genetic drift, start losing traits, start emphasizing errors.
To get an average human with only certain traits you would have to breed *very* aggressively like dog breeders do. You would have to test (like we do for certain genetic diseases) and not let those people reproduce.
If you mix members of two races... you get a wider diversity than if you keep them separate.
If members of one group have genes X=AA and members of the other race have genes X=DD, then the results are children with AA, AD, DA, and DD. Effectively creating 2 new groups who may not be affected by the proposed calamity.
So your argument is a good one for heavy interbreeding.
And...if you live in america or europe, it's highly likely you are no more "black" than I am "english" (25%), a "native american" (25% choctaw), a "mick" (12.5%), the other 37.5% likely includes some black, several other native american tribes (cherokee for sure), various other european tribes but probably no asian. I'm a real heinz 57. Most "blacks" in america are too. Thankfully this is becoming even more common with all the interacial dating.
However, you were raised to think of yourself that way so I respect that. You have a right to choose your own racial identity if you really want one.
I look forward to the day we can casually type nigger and other words because they no longer mean anything special.
overuse and humor are probably the best way to drain the words of power.
continuing to act like they have power gives them power they don't deserve.
More to the point--- he was parroting text in common troll spam jokes here at Slashdot.
When I was a young naive programmer... I worked in a language with six letter variables. I had a count field that i wanted to abbreviate. Two letters were reserved for the area (orders, invoices, etc.).
So I dropped the O and and orcunt, incunt, xxcunt. The senior programmer came by and just about had a cow and yet- couldn't explain what the problem was. He finally just said trust him and change it to cont so I did. there was no internet back then so it was a little difficult to find out what the problem was.
I get the impression that the parent poster really just sees nigger as any other mildly derogatory term (and to be fair- a ton of blacks use it daily without any problem- it's a like a special reserved word they can use playfully, insultingly, innocuously but is magically derogatory if anyone else uses).
As more whites and blacks, and mexicans and blacks, and asians and blacks date, marry, and interbreed, the term becomes hard to define anyway.
And personally, I prefer humor about anything (death, aids, my having cancer, me losing my hair, me being a geek) over getting all huffy and serious about it. Only through humor are we going to destroy the true racism by showing just how stupid it is to think you can know about a person because of their skin color.
They didn't say "WARNING! THIS MAN IS DANGEROUS!" they said something like "This man is our new security officer. Make sure you help him out and ensure we follow all security requirements!"
Since sarbanes oxley, I cannot 1) do anything in production except look and I can only look at a few restricted things. 2) can't install or change any code (even to the lowest level past my desktop) without one to three other people's approval. 3) bill time unless it is pre approved (project leader) and post approved (group leader). 4) send any attachments via email except certain types of documents. 5) browse any nasty part of the web (pretty free to do technical sites).
I agree with you. I regularly test OOo and use it for some trivial documents. For my 10 meg documents (I have 2 with several hundred graphics each), OOo crashes. I've sent in the bugs and after a year it still crashes.
But that's not the point. In "theory" I could get a compiler, a debugger, OOo source and analyze why my documents are crashing.
I really *want* to go to OOo. It's just not there yet and even as a programmer, there is no way I can justify spending the time to make it meet my needs when my needs can be met for $39.
And in this case, the airlock had a standard drop in tile false ceiling. The real concrete ceiling/floor of second story was 2' above the false ceiling.
He apparently reached up, grabbed the wall, pushed up the ceiling panel, and climbed up easily using the door handle to step on. It held him about 30 seconds.
And yes, the facility managers posted wanted posters. They addressed the issues he found in his sub 6 months on the job. (it was a sweet six figure salary too for someone without a degree).
I went from very secure passwords to insecure passwords written down on paper slips as a direct result of our security policy.
1) Change every 90 days (up from 60 at least. that was really bad). 2) no repeating letters or numbers 3) no letter or number in the same position as last password. 4) must have a number 5) not be a word in a dictionary Starting password something like YuL1P3729 (the last 4 digits were what changed- they were an old phone number- I slid through it horizontally)
Current password something like secre1t I have about 8 passwords. And they are all on a yellow sticky on my desktop.
Friend of a friend got a job doing security audits for a major energy company here in houston.
1) He broke into a top nuclear facility by holding a box and asking the person ahead of him to hold the door. 2) He set off the "man trap" and found he could easily climb out of it. 3) He found out the heavily secure facility had secure areas protected by sheetrock walls in some areas.
He finally embarrassed so many people that they posted a picture of his face to all employees with a warning to be careful. That destroyed his effectiveness. Some solution.
If "word" for $39 as part of home office meets 99% of my needs and openoffice meets my needs but could in theory be enhanced to meet 100% of my needs- I'll probably go with word despite disliking paying $39 and microsoft in general.
I groan everytime i see a pro-linux person complain "all you have to do is recompile the device drivers!"
The fundamental flaw with your dream is that on average, irrational religious people outbreed rational people by 10 to 1.
Since we both agree that natural selection and evolution exists, I think we should both see the natural conclusion. A population comprised 99%+ of irrational religious people.
In addition, I believe that some religious memes have "evolved" ways to be immune to logic and science. In part by just killing people who don't believe that way but more importantly by certain concepts that redefine rational thought while people are too young to think logically.
A measurement of gravity at a given location and time is a fact.
I've read that the word "Law" is really 1800's talk for "Theory".
The "Law" of gravity is really the "theory" of gravity.
We can observe that gravity exists today. We can use astronomy to look into the past and see evidence that it existed in the past.
But gravity could stop, reverse or change tomorrow.
In that case, the theory of gravitation would have to be changed to fit that change.
And technically the "Law" of gravity was wrong and redefined to be correct as long as relativistic effects were not involved (i.e. for things moving slowly compared to the speed of light).
Part of your purchase of that 80% marked up cinnabon goes to pay for the airport which would otherwise be paid by the airlines and which would be part of your ticket.
Money is so fungible these days.
Pulling example numbers out of my nether regions: Airline Ticket Sales: 60 million. Total cost to run Airport a year 10 million. Airline payments to airport: 6 million. Very high rent to those restaurants: 4 million.
So tickets would have to cost 64 million a year without them.
Slashdot Mirror
I've reported it everytime it crashes (send in the crash report that it asks if it can).
I reopen the document, recrash and resend the error report everytime we get a new version number.
Just this week, I finally cut it into smaller pieces because I can no longer yahoo it around (too big an attachment) so maybe I'll see how the pieces work. They are about 3-5 megs each with about a hundred graphics each.
Actually, they don't allow you to change your password more frequently than every 3 days.
So it takes 18 days to cycle back to a "standard" password.
Well actually it's something like 2.13 so more like AA, DD, and a.
little joke there.
Okay so seriously,
For your argument to hold together, you need an isolated population and random trait "E" which for some reason becomes either
* becomes common in the population for an unrelated reason (people with popular noses who get laid easily also happen to resist the latest deadly flu because their noses are drier inside.)
* is immediately valuable right now (such as rampant Aids in Africa right now is almost certainly causing people resistant or immune to Aids or who breed very quickly or who have certain moral values to become more common in the population).
Speaking at a population level a huge number of random mixes of the two populations would occur. There are not just 2 genes to mix. Any one of those mixes (even without a mutation) could produce something new and very useful in combination.
The likely hood of mutation is random. So the larger the population, the more mutations. Mutations will be preserved if they do not harm reproductive ability. They will become common if they make reproduction more likely.
While two distinct populations faced with a catastropic disease might face either 100% success or 100% failure, a diverse population would have a mixture of success and failure.
Given :
population A wiped out by virus A.
population B wiped out by virus B.
Population AA,AB,BA,BB would not be wiped out by either virus.
After a pass of virus A, the population is reduced to AB,BA,BB but regenerates to AA,AB,BA,BB.
After a pass of virus A and B very close together, the population is reduced to AB,BA but regenerates to AA,AB,BA,BB.
For a real world example:
A disease that kills all pureblood chinese would not kill the US or European populations.
A disease that kills everyone except chinese would not kill the US or European population.
And given interbreeding by soldiers and locals, not everyone would be killed in almost any country on earth.
Basically, we don't "average" as you seem to mistakenly infer. Instead we create a million distinct sub slices between each race. The only time genetic diversity is lost is if only a small part of the population is able to reproduce. Then you get genetic drift, start losing traits, start emphasizing errors.
To get an average human with only certain traits you would have to breed *very* aggressively like dog breeders do. You would have to test (like we do for certain genetic diseases) and not let those people reproduce.
If you mix members of two races... you get a wider diversity than if you keep them separate.
If members of one group have genes X=AA and members of the other race have genes X=DD, then the results are children with AA, AD, DA, and DD. Effectively creating 2 new groups who may not be affected by the proposed calamity.
So your argument is a good one for heavy interbreeding.
And...if you live in america or europe, it's highly likely you are no more "black" than I am "english" (25%), a "native american" (25% choctaw), a "mick" (12.5%), the other 37.5% likely includes some black, several other native american tribes (cherokee for sure), various other european tribes but probably no asian. I'm a real heinz 57. Most "blacks" in america are too. Thankfully this is becoming even more common with all the interacial dating.
However, you were raised to think of yourself that way so I respect that. You have a right to choose your own racial identity if you really want one.
I think a lot of smokers and alcoholics would disagree with you.
Sometimes cold turkey is the only way to quit if you are addicted.
I look forward to the day we can casually type nigger and other words because they no longer mean anything special.
overuse and humor are probably the best way to drain the words of power.
continuing to act like they have power gives them power they don't deserve.
More to the point--- he was parroting text in common troll spam jokes here at Slashdot.
When I was a young naive programmer... I worked in a language with six letter variables.
I had a count field that i wanted to abbreviate. Two letters were reserved for the area (orders, invoices, etc.).
So I dropped the O and and orcunt, incunt, xxcunt. The senior programmer came by and just about had a cow and yet- couldn't explain what the problem was. He finally just said trust him and change it to cont so I did. there was no internet back then so it was a little difficult to find out what the problem was.
I get the impression that the parent poster really just sees nigger as any other mildly derogatory term (and to be fair- a ton of blacks use it daily without any problem- it's a like a special reserved word they can use playfully, insultingly, innocuously but is magically derogatory if anyone else uses).
As more whites and blacks, and mexicans and blacks, and asians and blacks date, marry, and interbreed, the term becomes hard to define anyway.
And personally, I prefer humor about anything (death, aids, my having cancer, me losing my hair, me being a geek) over getting all huffy and serious about it. Only through humor are we going to destroy the true racism by showing just how stupid it is to think you can know about a person because of their skin color.
But. You used a... bad word.
Glad the funny guys finally got you over the hill.
I do not know. They probably store lists of my last 6 passwords.
Password security is not my area tho.
Company politics.
And they were reasonably clever about it.
They didn't say "WARNING! THIS MAN IS DANGEROUS!" they said something like "This man is our new security officer. Make sure you help him out and ensure we follow all security requirements!"
It wouldn't make a difference really.
Since sarbanes oxley, I cannot
1) do anything in production except look and I can only look at a few restricted things.
2) can't install or change any code (even to the lowest level past my desktop) without one to three other people's approval.
3) bill time unless it is pre approved (project leader) and post approved (group leader).
4) send any attachments via email except certain types of documents.
5) browse any nasty part of the web (pretty free to do technical sites).
The environment is fairly locked down.
No we can't use the same letter in the same position in two sequential passwords.
So if you used
stupid123
rocked713 would not be legal (1)
sharing42 would not be legal (2)
crap4suck would not be legal (3)
(1) repeat of the d and the 3
(2) repeat of the s
(3) repeat of the p
Yup.
I.E. Medium strength security was more secure than the current Maximum Strength security.
The letter requirements and frequency of change forced me to writing down the passwords.
Where as my strong programmatic passwords, I still use successfully on websites months apart without writing them down.
I agree with you. I regularly test OOo and use it for some trivial documents. For my 10 meg documents (I have 2 with several hundred graphics each), OOo crashes. I've sent in the bugs and after a year it still crashes.
But that's not the point. In "theory" I could get a compiler, a debugger, OOo source and analyze why my documents are crashing.
I really *want* to go to OOo. It's just not there yet and even as a programmer, there is no way I can justify spending the time to make it meet my needs when my needs can be met for $39.
And in this case, the airlock had a standard drop in tile false ceiling. The real concrete ceiling/floor of second story was 2' above the false ceiling.
He apparently reached up, grabbed the wall, pushed up the ceiling panel, and climbed up easily using the door handle to step on. It held him about 30 seconds.
They hired him as an employee of the company.
And yes, the facility managers posted wanted posters. They addressed the issues he found in his sub 6 months on the job. (it was a sweet six figure salary too for someone without a degree).
Completely agree.
I went from very secure passwords to insecure passwords written down on paper slips as a direct result of our security policy.
1) Change every 90 days (up from 60 at least. that was really bad).
2) no repeating letters or numbers
3) no letter or number in the same position as last password.
4) must have a number
5) not be a word in a dictionary
Starting password something like
YuL1P3729 (the last 4 digits were what changed- they were an old phone number- I slid through it horizontally)
Current password something like
secre1t
I have about 8 passwords.
And they are all on a yellow sticky on my desktop.
Friend of a friend got a job doing security audits for a major energy company here in houston.
1) He broke into a top nuclear facility by holding a box and asking the person ahead of him to hold the door.
2) He set off the "man trap" and found he could easily climb out of it.
3) He found out the heavily secure facility had secure areas protected by sheetrock walls in some areas.
He finally embarrassed so many people that they posted a picture of his face to all employees with a warning to be careful. That destroyed his effectiveness. Some solution.
But that's the real world for you.
If "word" for $39 as part of home office meets 99% of my needs and openoffice meets my needs but could in theory be enhanced to meet 100% of my needs- I'll probably go with word despite disliking paying $39 and microsoft in general.
I groan everytime i see a pro-linux person complain "all you have to do is recompile the device drivers!"
They just don't get it.
Only when the number of possibilities is significantly large compared to an existing working solution by another vendor.
The fundamental flaw with your dream is that on average,
irrational religious people outbreed rational people by 10 to 1.
Since we both agree that natural selection and evolution exists, I think we should both see the natural conclusion.
A population comprised 99%+ of irrational religious people.
In addition, I believe that some religious memes have "evolved" ways to be immune to logic and science. In part by just killing people who don't believe that way but more importantly by certain concepts that redefine rational thought while people are too young to think logically.
Actually it's not a fact.
A measurement of gravity at a given location and time is a fact.
I've read that the word "Law" is really 1800's talk for "Theory".
The "Law" of gravity is really the "theory" of gravity.
We can observe that gravity exists today.
We can use astronomy to look into the past and see evidence that it existed in the past.
But gravity could stop, reverse or change tomorrow.
In that case, the theory of gravitation would have to be changed to fit that change.
And technically the "Law" of gravity was wrong and redefined to be correct as long as relativistic effects were not involved (i.e. for things moving slowly compared to the speed of light).
It may or may not help...
Part of your purchase of that 80% marked up cinnabon goes to pay for the airport which would otherwise be paid by the airlines and which would be part of your ticket.
Money is so fungible these days.
Pulling example numbers out of my nether regions:
Airline Ticket Sales: 60 million.
Total cost to run Airport a year 10 million.
Airline payments to airport: 6 million.
Very high rent to those restaurants: 4 million.
So tickets would have to cost 64 million a year without them.
So your $200 ticket might be $216 without them.
And what kind of a sick liar of a god would do that?
Should you worship such a god?
Which is more plausible. that such a god exists... or that the evidence we can repeatably measure is correct.
What's so funny?
Perhaps you can tell me in a minute. First, let's drink. Me
from my glass, and you from yours.