Let's just send a giant magnet up and start over...
Giant magnets are hard to come by these days. It used to be, the earth naturally contained many thousands of millions of tons of giant magnets. Even amateurs long ago could dig them up and get themselves into all sorts of unexpected trouble. Now, things are different. We've devastated our natural resources, and man-made electromagnets just don't work the same way. In fact, that's the primary reason you don't see many giants loping around the hills waving clubs any more.
He should be disbarred for offering a reward to anyone who helps strengthen the case AGAINST his client.
The idea of legal representation is to ESTABLISH THE TRUTH. It's a very strange notion that proving some truth is not helping the client. Justice is supposed to be based on the notion that ethical behaviour benefits all, and that if a person steps off that path, they should be helped or even forced back onto it, since they will become harmful to others AS WELL AS themselves.
If we're saying that investigating a matter and finding a person guilty is bad, then we should just scrap the whole system and start again, as that's what the whole system is designed (albeit poorly) to do.
It's like reporting a string of car thefts exploiting a defect in Ford's keyless entry systems and ending the story by reminding Chevy drivers that their keyless entry sytem is also flawed but luckily since fewer people drive Chevy's (and Ford drivers are usually foolish enough to park their car in front of a big warehouse with a sign that says "Not a chop shop") no one's bothered to learn how to break in to a Chevy yet.
Yeah, except for that whole thing being an unsubstantiated claim that was first promoted by the news anchors, of all people, on the Microsoft-owned MSNBC channel.
I'm not a student of Kabbalah (mildly interested though), but I'm pretty sure Kabbalah texts do not include the words "current configuration", in any reasonable translation.
I find that most spiritual texts are (very valid) metaphor, and it's usually a big mistake to interpret them as (probably very invalid) physics.
No, no, no. That's only half of the problem. Don't forget the inevitable social side-story, where some kid's pet tribble has gotten into the jeffries tubes, and his mom will be angry if he doesn't get it out and safe the ship in the process.
You're the perfect person to ask then: a french teacher once told me that bilingual people develop memory problems in old age sooner than others. I'm not sure if he specifically mentioned Alzheimer's or not. Have you heard of this, and do you know of anything to back it up or refute it?
What about downloading hi-res astronomy photos requires anonymity?
That's not for you to decide. What about posting information requires anonymity? To you, maybe nothing. To someone in an oppressive environment, maybe everything. Maybe some kid's parent thinks astronomy and astrology are the same thing, for instance.
More importantly, there is a well-known security principle that if only the sensitive information is encrypted, it's pretty much painting a target on your back. Imagine if all your letters were on postcards, except for the ones you didn't want anyone to see, and the sensitive ones are put in sealed envelopes. Now the postman, police, national security agencies, etc. know exactly which mails to look at, and can be pretty much guaranteed to read your sealed mails.
almost all of them enjoy the new GUI and once they start using Office 2007 for a few weeks they never want to go back to 2003.
That's probably because, after a few weeks of a replacement, it's hard to remember the original, much less the REAL original (the one with simple menus rather than personalised menus).
Personally, I can never find things in the ribbon. Menus are much simpler and more intuitive, EVEN when organised incorrectly.
There are plenty of large files on the net that have NOTHING to do with P2P, and look entirely like any other file or link until you click on them (and conceptually ARE entirely like any other link, regardless of the larger size). PDFs, for instance, can be any size, and even the same content in PDFs can vary hugely in filesize just depending on which PDF generator is used. High-res astronomy photos that enthusiasts might need or care to share with friends, etc. Tor could legitimately be used for downloading medical case histories of some embarrassing medical condition that only affects 43 people around the world, and isn't popular enough to be on P2P, for instance.
The web has large files. Tor is built on the assumption that people are entitled to access the web anonymously. Therefore, Tor must be able to access large files. Simple really.
He's not talking about P2P over Tor, he's talking about large files. Since the web is designed to handle links without caring about their size, Tor's solution is flawed if it can't handle them. When's the last time you saw a link with a size attribute, or a "too big for anonymous networks" flag along with the href?
Calculations of this sort may serve to boost our confidence in the strength of elliptic curve cryptography (ECC). To better understand how hard it would be to solve the supposedly hard mathematical problems underlying ECC, we try to solve ECDLP for parameters that are relatively small compared to those that would be used in ECC. The resulting runtimes combined with common extrapolation methods then yield hardness estimates based on which "secure" parameters can be selected or the security of employed ECC systems can be assessed.
A soon to be abolished ECC standard uses 160-bit prime fields. Solving ECDLP over such fields is generally believed to require an effort that is at least 16 million times as large as for 112-bit prime fields. The runtime that we observed for the 112-bit case implies that, even though the 160-bit ECC standard is supposed to be phased out by the end of the year 2010, for the next decade no regular user needs to be overly concerned about the security of 160-bit ECC.
In other words, they're overconfident for now, but someone will crack it next year and prove 'em all wrong.
they compared people yelling profanities with other people "chanting neutral words".
Which is entirely the wrong thing to be comparing with. Everyone has heard people say that swearing makes them feel better, and anyone with some insight into their own minds can tell that's probably true, without a study.
What they SHOULD be comparing with is other things that people say make them feel better -- meditation, and a massage, for instance. If they're all equally effective, then you can say that it's all in the mind, and that there's nothing special about swearing, except that we... well, feel better.
The question is... WHY do we feel better? My bet is that it's got nothing to do with swearing, and much more to do with subjects building up tension through stupid thought processes and then finally releasing them whatever way they know how.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the primary benefit is that we can call this a Class 1 Naval Drive, thus affirming our fantasies about one day living like Commander Jameson.
Giant magnets are hard to come by these days. It used to be, the earth naturally contained many thousands of millions of tons of giant magnets. Even amateurs long ago could dig them up and get themselves into all sorts of unexpected trouble. Now, things are different. We've devastated our natural resources, and man-made electromagnets just don't work the same way. In fact, that's the primary reason you don't see many giants loping around the hills waving clubs any more.
Vacuums are not absolute things though. Even deep space is not a perfect vacuum, and I'd imagine high orbit's quality of vacuum is far from perfect.
The idea of legal representation is to ESTABLISH THE TRUTH. It's a very strange notion that proving some truth is not helping the client. Justice is supposed to be based on the notion that ethical behaviour benefits all, and that if a person steps off that path, they should be helped or even forced back onto it, since they will become harmful to others AS WELL AS themselves.
If we're saying that investigating a matter and finding a person guilty is bad, then we should just scrap the whole system and start again, as that's what the whole system is designed (albeit poorly) to do.
Hahhah, 100% accurate, and nicely put :D
Yeah, except for that whole thing being an unsubstantiated claim that was first promoted by the news anchors, of all people, on the Microsoft-owned MSNBC channel.
I stand corrected :) Very unusual word for a scriptural text; I've never seen it used, outside of technical manuals.
Thanks for the book link, I might take the time to read the whole thing :)
I'm not a student of Kabbalah (mildly interested though), but I'm pretty sure Kabbalah texts do not include the words "current configuration", in any reasonable translation.
I find that most spiritual texts are (very valid) metaphor, and it's usually a big mistake to interpret them as (probably very invalid) physics.
No, no, no. That's only half of the problem. Don't forget the inevitable social side-story, where some kid's pet tribble has gotten into the jeffries tubes, and his mom will be angry if he doesn't get it out and safe the ship in the process.
I think you'll find they cast a shadow because the actors had to wield a bright blue brush-shaft whilst filming, before the CG was put in ;)
Unlike like their ethernet chip, which absolutely will stop on a 64bit machine with over 4GB.
You're the perfect person to ask then: a french teacher once told me that bilingual people develop memory problems in old age sooner than others. I'm not sure if he specifically mentioned Alzheimer's or not. Have you heard of this, and do you know of anything to back it up or refute it?
That's not for you to decide. What about posting information requires anonymity? To you, maybe nothing. To someone in an oppressive environment, maybe everything. Maybe some kid's parent thinks astronomy and astrology are the same thing, for instance.
More importantly, there is a well-known security principle that if only the sensitive information is encrypted, it's pretty much painting a target on your back. Imagine if all your letters were on postcards, except for the ones you didn't want anyone to see, and the sensitive ones are put in sealed envelopes. Now the postman, police, national security agencies, etc. know exactly which mails to look at, and can be pretty much guaranteed to read your sealed mails.
That's probably because, after a few weeks of a replacement, it's hard to remember the original, much less the REAL original (the one with simple menus rather than personalised menus).
Personally, I can never find things in the ribbon. Menus are much simpler and more intuitive, EVEN when organised incorrectly.
Between Windows, Doors, and Offices, it's pretty clear that programmers need to get outside more.
There are plenty of large files on the net that have NOTHING to do with P2P, and look entirely like any other file or link until you click on them (and conceptually ARE entirely like any other link, regardless of the larger size). PDFs, for instance, can be any size, and even the same content in PDFs can vary hugely in filesize just depending on which PDF generator is used. High-res astronomy photos that enthusiasts might need or care to share with friends, etc. Tor could legitimately be used for downloading medical case histories of some embarrassing medical condition that only affects 43 people around the world, and isn't popular enough to be on P2P, for instance.
The web has large files. Tor is built on the assumption that people are entitled to access the web anonymously. Therefore, Tor must be able to access large files. Simple really.
He's not talking about P2P over Tor, he's talking about large files. Since the web is designed to handle links without caring about their size, Tor's solution is flawed if it can't handle them. When's the last time you saw a link with a size attribute, or a "too big for anonymous networks" flag along with the href?
No, they're going to let slashdotters whine about it, and see if it cracks.
Come on. You don't really expect a dimwit of his calibre to be able to track moving objects, do you?
In other words, they're overconfident for now, but someone will crack it next year and prove 'em all wrong.
Namely, Ancient Egypt.
Personally, I favour Springbrook Valley Woodelven.
That's nothing. The Wii version will crunch those numbers as fast as you can wave your arms.
Sure we can. I believe the traditional preparation is to repent of your sins and write a will.
Which is entirely the wrong thing to be comparing with. Everyone has heard people say that swearing makes them feel better, and anyone with some insight into their own minds can tell that's probably true, without a study.
What they SHOULD be comparing with is other things that people say make them feel better -- meditation, and a massage, for instance. If they're all equally effective, then you can say that it's all in the mind, and that there's nothing special about swearing, except that we... well, feel better.
The question is... WHY do we feel better? My bet is that it's got nothing to do with swearing, and much more to do with subjects building up tension through stupid thought processes and then finally releasing them whatever way they know how.