Isn't this more like the exact opposite of those stories? The characters in those stories seemed to recall feelings of the events but had no other memory. TFA talks about erasing the bad emotions associated with past events, leaving the memory of the event itself intact.
With a 1% success rate, 100 people would have close to 100% success and you'd only need 51 people for 50%.
So, wait a sec... you're telling me If I flip a coin with 2 sides twice, I'm guaranteed to get a heads?!? If I have a 6-sided die, and I roll it 6 times, I'm guaranteed to get a 6?!?
I need to book my flight to Vegas now. I've finally got that foolproof strategy to win at games of chance!
Even if those guarantees were true, Vegas would still be taking your money from you.
Neandertal is and has always been the correct spelling. It's nothing new. It's from the German, from the place where they were first discovered, the Neander Valley, or Neander "Tal" ('Tal' means valley in German). However, in German it is common and appropriate to combine words to form compound nouns, as Fahrrad, (from 'fahrt', a trip, and 'rad', wheel) or Schadenfreude (from 'Schade', sadness, and 'Freude', joy). Hence, the words are combined to form the place-name of Neandertal. The spelling with the 'h' is anglicized, technically Neandertal is correct, inasmuch as it is the original name, from the original language.
Why not educate yourself before correcting other people's spelling, smart-ass...
Ouch. Fortunately my education is on my side on this one. The Germans can spell and pronounce the name of their valley however they want, but the scientific name of the Neanderthals is "Homo Neanderthalensis", and when using the name outside of the scientific community either way is acceptable, although the hard 't' sound and spelling has only entered popular usage relatively recently. You can look it up on wikipedia if you want - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal. If it makes you feel better you can go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neandertal, then click the link to take you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal.
And a few researchers say that the study argues for the slow development of artistic skill over tens of thousands of years mdash; not a swift acquisition of talent, as some had argued.
It may now be considered proper to spell and pronounce Neandertal with a 't' not a 'th' sound, but 'mdash' is still normally written as '—'.
"If we let the kids play on dirt floors in a filthy home without any disinfectants or vaccinations the would be healthier".
Ignore the fact that historically half of all children died before age 5.
Selection biases are great. We still get that from some of the older generation "When we were kids we used to ride around in cars without seatbelts and child restraints and we turned out just fine". Sure you did... the ones of you who lived mostly turned out just fine.
"Sorry Boss, I need to take my full hour lunch today to go home and pay some bills" (the sort of stuff you used to have to physically go to each utility office for)
"No I need to leave on time today to make a personal phonecall, i'll have to give that meeting a miss".
Telstra has rolled out 4G in Bendigo (central Victoria) and the Samsumg Galaxy S2 4G works on it just fine. I don't know whether it's a coincidence but 3G has been pretty much useless since they started rolling out 4G. Can't even load a web page a lot of the time.
Q:So, from the answer above, that means that our passwords should always contain at least one of each type of character?
A:Yes, that's exactly what it means. Take, for example, the very weak password “news.” If another lowercase character was added to it (for example to form “newsy”), the total password search space is increased by 26 times. But if, instead, an exclamation point was added, (making it “news!”), the total search space is increased by a whopping 1,530 times! That's how important it is to choose passwords having at least one of every type of character. If anyone ever does try to crack your password, you will have eliminated all shorter searches.
Funny thing is, almost every example I've seen of how to increase the complexity of your password uses the example of putting an exclamation mark or a 1 on the end. Based on what I know about people, that's exactly what they'll do, which doesn't increase the search space by as much as the author thinks, and might even convince the user to use a shorter password with a ! on the end of it, which is worse.
Not to be suspicious, but "doublecheck you password strength! Just enter your passwords below...." even from a relatively trusted source is a little tough to trust....
I've always wondered... do those facebook/google/linkedin/twitter links on the page allow them to determine your facebook account name if you are logged in?
Hell yes. The summary is so stupid i'm not going even bother reading the article. It might make sense to say password X takes 42 times longer to crack than password Y, but to put a real time against the cracking attempt only makes sense if the cracker has access to the hash of your password, in which case you have already lost.
That said, account lockouts and login delays only make sense for a targeted attack. For a widespread brute force attack it doesn't matter - you can saturate your pipeline and still only hit a given host rarely (assuming i'm correct in thinking that making a single login attempt on a million hosts gives the same statistical result as making millions of login attempts on one host)
The findings offer little aid in controlling the pest but could help engineers improve the design of tiny flying robots.
Great! Because I was just thinking to myself, "we really need more tiny flying robots. If I have to wait 20 years for the CIA to solve the raindrop problem and weaponize these things, I'll die of boredom before videos of them assassinating people with them show up on YouTube."
Too heavy on the sarcasm? Fortunately I don't say stuff like this out loud.
FWIW (not much), it would probably be easy to weaponise actual mosquito's than to try and reproduce them as robots. Make a few billion sterile females, load them up with some form or malaria or plague that can't possibly be transmitted by regular mosquito's, and drop them on the enemy. What could possibly go wrong?[1]
[1] For the humour impaired, that's a rhetorical question. I'm well aware of what could go wrong
Were there any overhead power lines nearby? I've seen pairs of birds fall onto the road then get up again a short time later (or a single bird... although normally they don't get up again) after they touch wings when on different wires.
The fact that your bats were wrapped around each other probably means it wasn't an electric shock though... and maybe they were too small to spread across a pair of power line?
You assume the FAA and NTSB can investigate the incident objectively? No? Sheesh, can the US become more of a third world country? I guess they can refuse to investigate unless they get paid by an "interested party", but that's about it. Seriously? You can't investigate objectively because the people involved were in your organisation? What would happen if a medical doctor ever became hurt by another doctor? Send them to Canada?
Exactly how big do you think those organisations (FAA, NTSB) are?? The NTSB at least is tiny - everyone would know everyone else. It's not just about them doing their work objectively, it's about being seen to do their work objectively. If a doctor is ever negligent you certainly wouldn't let his mates conduct the investigation.
Real guns work even better than paintball guns... just sayin.
Yeah, but you can get in trouble for shooting guns in public....how about some of those extremely high powered lasers you can buy off the internet...I'd have to guess a blast of one of those would burn out any sensors on the cameras beyond repair.
I'm Australian so I don't have first hand experience with the laws in America, but was under the assumption that firing a gun in a public place wasn't really a big deal, but shining a laser at something was an act of terrorism and you'd be in big trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
Lets hope Monsanto can quickly genetically engineer this dangerous hybrid grass to something safer before it destroys the world!!
Realistically though, their business model would be more likely to come up with cyanide resistant cows as a more marketable solution...
.. also Total Recall.
Isn't this more like the exact opposite of those stories? The characters in those stories seemed to recall feelings of the events but had no other memory. TFA talks about erasing the bad emotions associated with past events, leaving the memory of the event itself intact.
Helicopter parenting FTW!
Or not... i've seen kids who's parents watch carefully over their shoulders all their childhood. They don't make good adults.
With a 1% success rate, 100 people would have close to 100% success and you'd only need 51 people for 50%.
So, wait a sec... you're telling me If I flip a coin with 2 sides twice, I'm guaranteed to get a heads?!? If I have a 6-sided die, and I roll it 6 times, I'm guaranteed to get a 6?!?
I need to book my flight to Vegas now. I've finally got that foolproof strategy to win at games of chance!
Even if those guarantees were true, Vegas would still be taking your money from you.
BTW, the correct term is "porno scanner", not "nude scanner". The latter sounds too benign. Just FWIW. :-D
If you are going for non- benign, try calling it a "pedo scanner", and use the term often and loudly when young kids are lining up to be scanned.
In Australia it would take more than 90 days just to get planning approval.
Neandertal is and has always been the correct spelling. It's nothing new. It's from the German, from the place where they were first discovered, the Neander Valley, or Neander "Tal" ('Tal' means valley in German). However, in German it is common and appropriate to combine words to form compound nouns, as Fahrrad, (from 'fahrt', a trip, and 'rad', wheel) or Schadenfreude (from 'Schade', sadness, and 'Freude', joy). Hence, the words are combined to form the place-name of Neandertal. The spelling with the 'h' is anglicized, technically Neandertal is correct, inasmuch as it is the original name, from the original language.
Why not educate yourself before correcting other people's spelling, smart-ass...
Ouch. Fortunately my education is on my side on this one. The Germans can spell and pronounce the name of their valley however they want, but the scientific name of the Neanderthals is "Homo Neanderthalensis", and when using the name outside of the scientific community either way is acceptable, although the hard 't' sound and spelling has only entered popular usage relatively recently. You can look it up on wikipedia if you want - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal. If it makes you feel better you can go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neandertal, then click the link to take you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal.
And a few researchers say that the study argues for the slow development of artistic skill over tens of thousands of years mdash; not a swift acquisition of talent, as some had argued.
It may now be considered proper to spell and pronounce Neandertal with a 't' not a 'th' sound, but 'mdash' is still normally written as '—'.
If I hadn't already posted you'd be the first spelling/grammar nazi I would _ever_ have moderated up!
Cue the dirty is better theorists.
"If we let the kids play on dirt floors in a filthy home without any disinfectants or vaccinations the would be healthier".
Ignore the fact that historically half of all children died before age 5.
Selection biases are great. We still get that from some of the older generation "When we were kids we used to ride around in cars without seatbelts and child restraints and we turned out just fine". Sure you did... the ones of you who lived mostly turned out just fine.
Jesus christ
Can't we have an irrational flaming discussion about evolution without bringing him into it??
Simple as that.
If you mean as a form of protest, then hell yes!
"Sorry Boss, I need to take my full hour lunch today to go home and pay some bills" (the sort of stuff you used to have to physically go to each utility office for)
"No I need to leave on time today to make a personal phonecall, i'll have to give that meeting a miss".
and so on...
Nobody else reads the articles, why would you expect the person who wrote the summary to have read it??
I nominate HTTP 451 - Site is not permitted in your country.
Now that would truly be awesome. The best I could come up with was 5318008.
Maybe these guys worked on their marketing campaign? http://dilbert.com/fast/2011-05-10
Telstra has rolled out 4G in Bendigo (central Victoria) and the Samsumg Galaxy S2 4G works on it just fine. I don't know whether it's a coincidence but 3G has been pretty much useless since they started rolling out 4G. Can't even load a web page a lot of the time.
Q:So, from the answer above, that means that our passwords should always contain at least one of each type of character?
A:Yes, that's exactly what it means. Take, for example, the very weak password “news.” If another lowercase character was added to it (for example to form “newsy”), the total password search space is increased by 26 times. But if, instead, an exclamation point was added, (making it “news!”), the total search space is increased by a whopping 1,530 times! That's how important it is to choose passwords having at least one of every type of character. If anyone ever does try to crack your password, you will have eliminated all shorter searches.
Funny thing is, almost every example I've seen of how to increase the complexity of your password uses the example of putting an exclamation mark or a 1 on the end. Based on what I know about people, that's exactly what they'll do, which doesn't increase the search space by as much as the author thinks, and might even convince the user to use a shorter password with a ! on the end of it, which is worse.
Not to be suspicious, but "doublecheck you password strength! Just enter your passwords below...." even from a relatively trusted source is a little tough to trust....
I've always wondered... do those facebook/google/linkedin/twitter links on the page allow them to determine your facebook account name if you are logged in?
Hell yes. The summary is so stupid i'm not going even bother reading the article. It might make sense to say password X takes 42 times longer to crack than password Y, but to put a real time against the cracking attempt only makes sense if the cracker has access to the hash of your password, in which case you have already lost.
That said, account lockouts and login delays only make sense for a targeted attack. For a widespread brute force attack it doesn't matter - you can saturate your pipeline and still only hit a given host rarely (assuming i'm correct in thinking that making a single login attempt on a million hosts gives the same statistical result as making millions of login attempts on one host)
Remember what happened last time someone copied an Australian invention without paying the licensing fee! We own low-latency now.
The findings offer little aid in controlling the pest but could help engineers improve the design of tiny flying robots.
Great! Because I was just thinking to myself, "we really need more tiny flying robots. If I have to wait 20 years for the CIA to solve the raindrop problem and weaponize these things, I'll die of boredom before videos of them assassinating people with them show up on YouTube."
Too heavy on the sarcasm? Fortunately I don't say stuff like this out loud.
FWIW (not much), it would probably be easy to weaponise actual mosquito's than to try and reproduce them as robots. Make a few billion sterile females, load them up with some form or malaria or plague that can't possibly be transmitted by regular mosquito's, and drop them on the enemy. What could possibly go wrong?[1]
[1] For the humour impaired, that's a rhetorical question. I'm well aware of what could go wrong
Were there any overhead power lines nearby? I've seen pairs of birds fall onto the road then get up again a short time later (or a single bird... although normally they don't get up again) after they touch wings when on different wires.
The fact that your bats were wrapped around each other probably means it wasn't an electric shock though... and maybe they were too small to spread across a pair of power line?
that is a great idea...
now how do you propose to find this one particular needle in a giant haystack?
Maybe we could start by looking for elevated 14C level's in the tree rings?
Circular evidence is still evidence right?
You assume the FAA and NTSB can investigate the incident objectively? No?
Sheesh, can the US become more of a third world country?
I guess they can refuse to investigate unless they get paid by an "interested party", but that's about it.
Seriously? You can't investigate objectively because the people involved were in your organisation?
What would happen if a medical doctor ever became hurt by another doctor? Send them to Canada?
Exactly how big do you think those organisations (FAA, NTSB) are?? The NTSB at least is tiny - everyone would know everyone else. It's not just about them doing their work objectively, it's about being seen to do their work objectively. If a doctor is ever negligent you certainly wouldn't let his mates conduct the investigation.
Yeah, but you can get in trouble for shooting guns in public....how about some of those extremely high powered lasers you can buy off the internet...I'd have to guess a blast of one of those would burn out any sensors on the cameras beyond repair.
I'm Australian so I don't have first hand experience with the laws in America, but was under the assumption that firing a gun in a public place wasn't really a big deal, but shining a laser at something was an act of terrorism and you'd be in big trouble.