Do you not understand the purpose of peer-review? If results that were peer-reviewed are not reproducible, that is not a failing of the scientific method itself, nor is it a failing of peer review. Peer review does not exist to validate methods as that would be quite nearly an impossible task for the majority of all scientific papers that are published currently unless the journal sent an editor to the lab that submitted said paper to rerun the work themselves - which would be so absurdly expensive that nobody would ever pay to publish. Peer review is intended to make sure that work published is scientifically rigorous and well written.
Many of the published results and methods being verified are ones that have questionable results - such as producing too much output chemicals or reactions don't appear they should work at all. Those are papers for which peer-review has failed to provide adequate review. If the paper was truly read in-depth by other equally qualified scientists these issues would have been noticed and the paper (published or not) would have been called into question.
The caveat to this would be papers that are published with the sole purpose of seeking peer review and inviting other to validate the results, for example many of the cold fusion papers and the experiment which implied neutrinos were traveling faster than light.
I also recognize that peer review happens both before and after publication, and in fact the bloggers are part of the peer-review process.
Most a/v apps use the same common definitions. It's their heuristics against unknown malware, speed, and ability to clean contamination that distinguish one from the other. Running to a/v programs usually just results in a slower system.
Wearing two rubbers with holes is no more effective than one with a hole. Two different methods improves your odds. So user training ("don't open shit from sites you don't trust"), a better browser that does proper sandboxing, and an antivirus to look for suspicious files.
Kapserasky was accused of this when it was noticed that their definition files contained signatures for some zero-days that hadn't been seen in the wild yet.
There are settings for whether they are allowed to check that though.
Yup, you can check a box to allow MS to upload info about files it's unsure of. It's just uploading checksums and not the actual file. Other antivirus software such as Symantec Endpoint Protection does the exactly same thing.
Repelling fluids does not imply low friction or even durability, for example water beading up on soft silicon rubber. Plus I would think you would want an oil attracting surface for a friction surface.
Well we certainly agree on separating the concept of Christian marriage from civil law. To me that's the most glaring example of the states and the fed establishing laws with respect to religion. I still believe tax exempt status for religious groups is another law meant to encourage approved religions. It certainly benefits those very large church sthat you believed the state should be wary of.
I'm not saying the govt should specifically tax religions, I'm saying they should stop giving them preferential treatment and treat them like every other organized group. This would follows the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion*" part of the amendment. If they are a corporation, treat them as such.
The tax exemption law is already used to play favorites as the govt is allowed to determine who qualifies as a religious group. If you're a group of people that worship a Christian god and follow a mainstream religion then you're tax exempt. If you're a small group of a non-typical religion or atheists then you're not. The NAC calls itself a church now because there is a financial benefit. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act Amendments which exempted peyote use goes against the spirit of the 1st amendment. The govt should be blind to religion, giving neither benefit nor hindrance to specific religions.
Since you think the Indians deserve special treatment with respect to class 2 drugs, perhaps you feel the govt should exempt the Mormons from the laws regarding polygamy and underage sex as well? Oh wait, those laws regarding marriage are religious in nature aren't they?
*A point of interpretation: In the 1st amendment, most scholars consider the phrase "establishment of religion" to mean a religious establishment, not the process of establishing a religion. In other words there should be no laws that control or apply to religion.
I don't think you understand what separation of Church and State means. It does not mean they get preferential treatment. It does not mean they should get a free pass on paying corporate taxes or property taxes.
"The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The original text makes the intent a little clearer - ie no state run or mandated religion. The omitted last line also implies that religion should not influence the state, which is clearly the case when you have Congress introducing bills proclaiming it to uphold good Christian values.
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
I didn't necessarily think it should be a high priority, just that it was reasonable to look at their budget and nothing should be off-limits for scrutiny. In reality, the EPA budget makes up less than 1/10 of a percent of the overall federal budget. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total. Or about 1% of the total spending deficit. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/breakdown. Really insignificant when you consider the total deficit is 17.5-trillion,
No politician is willing to commit political suicide by trying to tackle medicare and social security which are the major spending.
Well yes, Churches and self righteous asshats do seem to go together. To be fair, the Atheists have Richard Dawkins. Why NOT taxes churches. They are run as businesses, often for profit. Tax them like you'd tax any other entertainment industry.
The EPA budget for FY 2013 is $8.6 billion dollars (not including other funding sources like enforcement fines). Many view it as too damn costly for the benefit seen, considering that it overlaps heavily with State functions. It's very reasonable to question this spending when you consider this country is in heavy debt and needs to figure out what can be trimmed from the budget.
It's far more effective than a.223, which was a caliber chosen by the US military in large part because it tends to produce incapacitating wounds, not death. Not that death is your goal, but the "incapacitating wounds" sought by armies are wounds that make a soldier ineffective in minutes whereas for self-defense you want wounds that incapacitate in seconds. Armies want the injured soldier to be unable to charge across a 100-yard battlefield or accurately shoot a rifle at moderate ranges. You want the intruder to be unable to charge 10 feet or stab with a knife. The shotgun is far better for that.
There was also the adage that a wounded enemy takes more men off the field and consumes more resources than a dead one.
He is a gun owner, whether that gun qualifies as an antique firearm is a different question. They may also count as unserviceable. You would also need to consider the laws of his specific state as the references above are federal and ATF.
Define Assault rifle. You realize the "assault rifle" the media is hyping was a run of the mill, somewhat boring hunting rifle right? In this instance, the shotgun that was left in his car would have been more effective as close range than a hunting rifle.
Lobotomies were very popular because they turned a violent, unpredictable patient into a tractable, easy to manage patient (or prisoner). The impact to mental acuity and the resulting stupor were just considered a tradeoff. Often it allowed an unstable patient to return home instead of remaining in a psychiatric hospital.
Nowadays, we just dope them with drugs like Topomax. Having done foster care for a while, I can say it was very common to see troubled kids put on mood altering drugs to make them easier to manage as it was cheaper than getting them the psychiatric help they actually needed. It's also troubling to see just how many kids are on psychiatric drugs, even though side effects such as rage, extreme depression, paranoia are not unusual. The Sandy Hook shooter being one such example. People complain that he should have gotten mental help before it reached that point - he did, they just doped him up and made it worse!
Aircraft are not designed with Faraday cages for the passenger compartment, nor are they equipped with RF interference detectors.
Both of which are easily solved problems. 2.4 GHz WiFi wavelength is about 4.8", meaning something as coarse as chicken wire would block it (and has, for example http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126221116097210861.html). Although if you're designing a cage, you usually aim for mesh holes about 1/10 of the wavelength so 1/2" rat wire would work well. Of course since a plane is already a long aluminum tube, you just have to worry about the windows, internal gaps, cable runs, and emf picked up from non-shielded cables in/out of the passenger compartment.
If errant EMI from devices was really such a problem, I would expect the FAA would require adequate shielding anyway. The reality is that the cockpit electronics themselves produce a substantial amount of EMI. Being in close proximity, they are generally shielded pretty well already. One should also realize the APUs (power generators) and engines themselves spit out a lot of broadband EMI all by themselves.
Earlier versions of the Cisco VOIP phone firmware allowed users associated with the phone to connect via http and instruct the phone to initiate a voice stream from the phone's mic to another ip address and eavesdrop. The only indication that the mic was active and the phone streaming was a small arrow on the screen. That's since been fixed so that the function starts the voice stream remotely but the phone is muted. This could also be done the other way to stream sounds to the speaker on the phone - I had a bit of fun with that:}
Helping secure domestic computer systems and communications falls under the definition of counterintelligence. They don't need to acquire information concerting the domestic activities of US persons. A business or the govt is not a person, either.
I would expect the first driverless mode of transportation will be limited to specific areas or roads that have been approved and properly mapped. For example major highways with well defined conditions. The highway department would interact more with the manf to ensure they are apprised of highway maps, ongoing construction and road changes. In the boonies, local neighborhoods, etc the driver would need to assume control. At least until the tech becomes more foolproof. Kinda like the judge dress movie and the I robot remake. Eventually you will be required to have an driverless autopilot to use major highways which may even have increased speeds due to better vehicles control and coordination.
I don't doubt the study was biased simply because it was conducted by the group trying to get more funding. The survey had questions like "if you liked chess, would you join the chess club" and answers like "my friends would tease me about it" translated to bullying. The questions about bullying are didn't tally the severity or frequency. It's like going to a college and asking students if they ever got shitfaced (even once) and then claiming 90% of the student body has a drinking problem.
Also, 50% false positive rate is useless and surprisingly bad, what sort of tools have you used?
Try running eEye Retina against a Redhat box. At least half of the findings are because Retina is simply checking version numbers and doesn't understand that Redhat backports fixes. There are also a bunch of false positive findings for Microsoft products, where for example it doesn't differentiate between XP 32-bit and 64-bit (64-bit settings should follow the 2003 guidelines).
Unfortunately, management often puts too much stock in these automated tools, either insisting the site be fixed to remove non-issue findings which end up breaking it, or they feel too good about the site because it didn't find anything.
Absolutely the automated tools catch the low-hanging fruit and stuff an amateur hacker might try. They don't check for serious methodology errors like keeping plain text passwords in the database or putting the credentials in the url for the world to see.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you not understand the purpose of peer-review? If results that were peer-reviewed are not reproducible, that is not a failing of the scientific method itself, nor is it a failing of peer review. Peer review does not exist to validate methods as that would be quite nearly an impossible task for the majority of all scientific papers that are published currently unless the journal sent an editor to the lab that submitted said paper to rerun the work themselves - which would be so absurdly expensive that nobody would ever pay to publish. Peer review is intended to make sure that work published is scientifically rigorous and well written.
Many of the published results and methods being verified are ones that have questionable results - such as producing too much output chemicals or reactions don't appear they should work at all. Those are papers for which peer-review has failed to provide adequate review. If the paper was truly read in-depth by other equally qualified scientists these issues would have been noticed and the paper (published or not) would have been called into question.
The caveat to this would be papers that are published with the sole purpose of seeking peer review and inviting other to validate the results, for example many of the cold fusion papers and the experiment which implied neutrinos were traveling faster than light.
I also recognize that peer review happens both before and after publication, and in fact the bloggers are part of the peer-review process.
Most a/v apps use the same common definitions. It's their heuristics against unknown malware, speed, and ability to clean contamination that distinguish one from the other. Running to a/v programs usually just results in a slower system.
Not necessarily. Just think about it as of a ball bearing made out of oil droplets...
That just squirt out the side of the bearing? Oil and grease need to stay in the interface to actually work.
Wearing two rubbers with holes is no more effective than one with a hole. Two different methods improves your odds. So user training ("don't open shit from sites you don't trust"), a better browser that does proper sandboxing, and an antivirus to look for suspicious files.
Kapserasky was accused of this when it was noticed that their definition files contained signatures for some zero-days that hadn't been seen in the wild yet.
There are settings for whether they are allowed to check that though.
Yup, you can check a box to allow MS to upload info about files it's unsure of. It's just uploading checksums and not the actual file. Other antivirus software such as Symantec Endpoint Protection does the exactly same thing.
Repelling fluids does not imply low friction or even durability, for example water beading up on soft silicon rubber. Plus I would think you would want an oil attracting surface for a friction surface.
Well we certainly agree on separating the concept of Christian marriage from civil law. To me that's the most glaring example of the states and the fed establishing laws with respect to religion. I still believe tax exempt status for religious groups is another law meant to encourage approved religions. It certainly benefits those very large church sthat you believed the state should be wary of.
I'm not saying the govt should specifically tax religions, I'm saying they should stop giving them preferential treatment and treat them like every other organized group. This would follows the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion*" part of the amendment. If they are a corporation, treat them as such.
The tax exemption law is already used to play favorites as the govt is allowed to determine who qualifies as a religious group. If you're a group of people that worship a Christian god and follow a mainstream religion then you're tax exempt. If you're a small group of a non-typical religion or atheists then you're not. The NAC calls itself a church now because there is a financial benefit. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act Amendments which exempted peyote use goes against the spirit of the 1st amendment. The govt should be blind to religion, giving neither benefit nor hindrance to specific religions.
Since you think the Indians deserve special treatment with respect to class 2 drugs, perhaps you feel the govt should exempt the Mormons from the laws regarding polygamy and underage sex as well? Oh wait, those laws regarding marriage are religious in nature aren't they?
*A point of interpretation: In the 1st amendment, most scholars consider the phrase "establishment of religion" to mean a religious establishment, not the process of establishing a religion. In other words there should be no laws that control or apply to religion.
I don't think you understand what separation of Church and State means. It does not mean they get preferential treatment. It does not mean they should get a free pass on paying corporate taxes or property taxes.
"The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The original text makes the intent a little clearer - ie no state run or mandated religion. The omitted last line also implies that religion should not influence the state, which is clearly the case when you have Congress introducing bills proclaiming it to uphold good Christian values.
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
Must be pretty big hands to count that high. 26 earned CVE designations since 2006, and those are just the ones that made it into the public light.
http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-5/product_id-1526/cvssscoremin-6/cvssscoremax-6.99/SUN-JRE.html
I didn't necessarily think it should be a high priority, just that it was reasonable to look at their budget and nothing should be off-limits for scrutiny. In reality, the EPA budget makes up less than 1/10 of a percent of the overall federal budget. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total. Or about 1% of the total spending deficit. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/breakdown. Really insignificant when you consider the total deficit is 17.5-trillion,
No politician is willing to commit political suicide by trying to tackle medicare and social security which are the major spending.
Well yes, Churches and self righteous asshats do seem to go together. To be fair, the Atheists have Richard Dawkins. Why NOT taxes churches. They are run as businesses, often for profit. Tax them like you'd tax any other entertainment industry.
The EPA budget for FY 2013 is $8.6 billion dollars (not including other funding sources like enforcement fines). Many view it as too damn costly for the benefit seen, considering that it overlaps heavily with State functions. It's very reasonable to question this spending when you consider this country is in heavy debt and needs to figure out what can be trimmed from the budget.
It's far more effective than a .223, which was a caliber chosen by the US military in large part because it tends to produce incapacitating wounds, not death. Not that death is your goal, but the "incapacitating wounds" sought by armies are wounds that make a soldier ineffective in minutes whereas for self-defense you want wounds that incapacitate in seconds. Armies want the injured soldier to be unable to charge across a 100-yard battlefield or accurately shoot a rifle at moderate ranges. You want the intruder to be unable to charge 10 feet or stab with a knife. The shotgun is far better for that.
There was also the adage that a wounded enemy takes more men off the field and consumes more resources than a dead one.
You should probably read the legal definitions, because 1898 isn't a magic cutoff and you're confusing the terms firearm, antique firearm, gun, and weapon.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845
http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/antique-firearm/
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/collectors.html
He is a gun owner, whether that gun qualifies as an antique firearm is a different question. They may also count as unserviceable. You would also need to consider the laws of his specific state as the references above are federal and ATF.
The Bushmaster used was a SEMI-automatic rifle. Learn the difference. You might also learn about what size clip it usually comes with.
Define Assault rifle. You realize the "assault rifle" the media is hyping was a run of the mill, somewhat boring hunting rifle right? In this instance, the shotgun that was left in his car would have been more effective as close range than a hunting rifle.
Lobotomies were very popular because they turned a violent, unpredictable patient into a tractable, easy to manage patient (or prisoner). The impact to mental acuity and the resulting stupor were just considered a tradeoff. Often it allowed an unstable patient to return home instead of remaining in a psychiatric hospital.
Nowadays, we just dope them with drugs like Topomax. Having done foster care for a while, I can say it was very common to see troubled kids put on mood altering drugs to make them easier to manage as it was cheaper than getting them the psychiatric help they actually needed. It's also troubling to see just how many kids are on psychiatric drugs, even though side effects such as rage, extreme depression, paranoia are not unusual. The Sandy Hook shooter being one such example. People complain that he should have gotten mental help before it reached that point - he did, they just doped him up and made it worse!
Aircraft are not designed with Faraday cages for the passenger compartment, nor are they equipped with RF interference detectors.
Both of which are easily solved problems. 2.4 GHz WiFi wavelength is about 4.8", meaning something as coarse as chicken wire would block it (and has, for example http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126221116097210861.html). Although if you're designing a cage, you usually aim for mesh holes about 1/10 of the wavelength so 1/2" rat wire would work well. Of course since a plane is already a long aluminum tube, you just have to worry about the windows, internal gaps, cable runs, and emf picked up from non-shielded cables in/out of the passenger compartment.
If errant EMI from devices was really such a problem, I would expect the FAA would require adequate shielding anyway. The reality is that the cockpit electronics themselves produce a substantial amount of EMI. Being in close proximity, they are generally shielded pretty well already. One should also realize the APUs (power generators) and engines themselves spit out a lot of broadband EMI all by themselves.
Earlier versions of the Cisco VOIP phone firmware allowed users associated with the phone to connect via http and instruct the phone to initiate a voice stream from the phone's mic to another ip address and eavesdrop. The only indication that the mic was active and the phone streaming was a small arrow on the screen. That's since been fixed so that the function starts the voice stream remotely but the phone is muted. This could also be done the other way to stream sounds to the speaker on the phone - I had a bit of fun with that :}
Helping secure domestic computer systems and communications falls under the definition of counterintelligence. They don't need to acquire information concerting the domestic activities of US persons. A business or the govt is not a person, either.
I would expect the first driverless mode of transportation will be limited to specific areas or roads that have been approved and properly mapped. For example major highways with well defined conditions. The highway department would interact more with the manf to ensure they are apprised of highway maps, ongoing construction and road changes. In the boonies, local neighborhoods, etc the driver would need to assume control. At least until the tech becomes more foolproof. Kinda like the judge dress movie and the I robot remake. Eventually you will be required to have an driverless autopilot to use major highways which may even have increased speeds due to better vehicles control and coordination.
I don't doubt the study was biased simply because it was conducted by the group trying to get more funding. The survey had questions like "if you liked chess, would you join the chess club" and answers like "my friends would tease me about it" translated to bullying. The questions about bullying are didn't tally the severity or frequency. It's like going to a college and asking students if they ever got shitfaced (even once) and then claiming 90% of the student body has a drinking problem.
Also, 50% false positive rate is useless and surprisingly bad, what sort of tools have you used?
Try running eEye Retina against a Redhat box. At least half of the findings are because Retina is simply checking version numbers and doesn't understand that Redhat backports fixes. There are also a bunch of false positive findings for Microsoft products, where for example it doesn't differentiate between XP 32-bit and 64-bit (64-bit settings should follow the 2003 guidelines).
Unfortunately, management often puts too much stock in these automated tools, either insisting the site be fixed to remove non-issue findings which end up breaking it, or they feel too good about the site because it didn't find anything.
Absolutely the automated tools catch the low-hanging fruit and stuff an amateur hacker might try. They don't check for serious methodology errors like keeping plain text passwords in the database or putting the credentials in the url for the world to see.