People aren't protesting to get free stuff, but to express their disagreement with a country where 1% of the population control 40% of the wealth and growing, being able to use this to influence legislation in order to keep it that way.
I wonder if it will have an impact on the way people speak. Especially if someone comes up with a Linguo app to correct the grammar of people nearby. People love having their grammar corrected.
Or maybe a virus that you can't get rid of that causes the phone to only understand you when you speak with a Scottish accent.
For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.
WTF? While you're right about birth control, you're dead wrong about disease risk. The invention of antibiotics has made a gigantic difference to disease risk, and while resistance is starting to increase the risk is still massively lower than it was for virtually all of human history. Things that were death sentences 100 years ago can now be cured (or at least contained) with pharmaceuticals. (I wouldn't say that we should trust big pharma, but they've managed to do a lot of good for all that. Their problem is that the low-hanging fruit is now mostly gone; future advances are going to be much harder won.)
You can throw all the antibiotics you like at HIV, Herpes, HPV, and viral hepatitis, and it won't do much except expose the recipient to increased risk of yeast infections. Sure, there are drugs for controlling those to some extent but... you know... better to not catch them in the first place.
And bacteria as a whole are slowly becoming immune to the various antibiotics we do throw at them, and there is some concern that we'll be right back where we started at some point in the future unless we can come up with something new.
Having said that, the increasing prevalence of those diseases would indicate that you might be right about the risk of disease not being a discouraging factor to the urge to engage in sex:)
But seriously, this myth that men are obsessed with sex needs to die.
Well... since lifeforms split into male and female, and the female landed the bigger biological burden of making a new lifeform, there's been a big payoff for the male to be obsessed with sex. And there is a corresponding payoff for the female to be picky about who she lets make a new lifeform inside her. You'll always find exceptions of course, but myths tend to have some truth behind them.
For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.
If the CERN result is correct, they should have arrived in 1982.
How sure are we that they didn't, and that the ones that arrived in 1987 were just late or due to some later effect of the supernova?
If a bunch of neutrino's arrive 3 hours before a supernova becomes visible then it's pretty easy to put the two together. If a bunch of neutrino's arrive 5 years before a supernova becomes visible it might not be so obvious. We're only talking about a handful of neutrino's detected in 1987. Were there as many and as sensitive neutrino detectors online 5 years earlier?
I wonder if there are good records going back that far... at the time you might just write it off as a glitch, or maybe the Russians doing nuclear testing, especially if nothing obvious was happening in the sky. A peak somewhere around 1982 would be quite interesting to find...
OTOH, reactions to vaccines do happen, and in some cases can be fatal. If a reaction was near-fatal, it could cause brain damage (eg heart stops beating for long enough that bits of the brain starts to die) and the resulting mental disability could share symptoms with autism. One case would be all the nutjobs need to 'prove' their link.
The way I see it, even if there was a 1-in-a-million chance of something bad happening as a result of vaccination, it is more likely that something bad will happen if you don't vaccinate, so it's not a hard decision to make.
Not that such a thing exists, but if it did, infrared may not be the way to go. If something has adapted to live in Siberia, it will be well insulated which means that the temperature of the outermost layers of skin and/or fur will remain close to ambient temperatures. Polar bears, for example, are not effectively detected on infrared cameras.
So what? All they have to do is send the drones in and look for places without a heat signature?:)
That phenomenon was observed before three earthquakes since 2004.
Certainly this opens an argument for more research in this area. However how about actually figuring out if it's not just co-incidence before talking about building "detection systems" and putting numbers to the "lives saved". Otherwise you're going to get all geologists arrested and extradited to Italy to face manslaughter charges.
That was my first thought. It's one thing to say that a high electron count was present when an earthquake was coming, but another to say that the high electron count was _only_ present when an earthquake was coming. Too many false alarms would make the system useless.
Then again, remember that sunlight contains lots of UV light, so those levels are fine (except if you're a basement dweller)
Except that the filter that prevents the UV reaching the back of his eyeball is now gone... There is probably a good reason why you have that filter there in the first place!
You're more secure if attackers don't know that information about your systems, because it forces them to discover it. That takes additional time and effort, and they may not be able to discover that information at all.
But on the other hand if you find a back door to a security system, you now have access to all such security systems. Not publishing the intricate details about the security system doesn't add nearly as much security as people think.
Put it another way, if your security system is completely open and documented and nobody has ever discovered a backdoor that would allow them access without a key, then you can say it is secure with a great degree of confidence.
Someone else can get in -- all they need is a little bit of information you've left out (like a key). Obscurity. Right there. Self defeating posts are self defeating.
If you have the key then all bets are off. But if the inner workings of the lock are completely known to the opponent and they still can't get in without the key then you can say your system is secure. If there is a flaw in your lock such that it is possible to get in without requiring the key then you have to obscure the inner workings of the lock, and you can't say your system is secure because it's always possible that someone could reverse engineer it and find the flaw, allowing them access to _all_ such locks.
My memory of highschool physics tells me that if one side is taking hydrogen out of water, then oxygen must be left... why doesn't that oxygen bubble up as well like the hydrogen does? Or does the split off Oxygen somehow make it to the other side?
You mean the anonymous-and-too-timid-to-put-grammar-nazi-on-your-resume police.
The word "data" is plural, hence your subject title should be "What are the data?"
Perhaps that was true 100 years ago. Today the word "data" is valid as a singular noun ("singular mass noun") and so "is" is correct in the title (or at least as correct as "are" would be).
Evolution is one of the beautiful things about the English language.
How likely is it that someone is ever even going to try and get the data off the disks? Obviously it's not national security data or you wouldn't be asking here. Put it another way, how much is your data worth to others? Would someone want to invest $10, $100, $1000, or $1000000 of effort in trying to recover it?
For something different - open the lid of the drive, put some sand in there, close the lid, give it a vigorous shake, then power it up. It should be destroyed in no time.
In the next decade, we'll see machines barge into areas of the economy that we'd never suspected possible — they'll be diagnosing your diseases, dispensing your medicine, handling your lawsuits, making fundamental scientific discoveries, and even writing stories just like this one.
Yeah right. Like i'd believe anything written by a robot.
The SAM file on Windows is impossible to retrieve while the Windows kernel is running. The kernel has an exclusive read/write lock on the file and any attempt to access it will be denied. It is possible to read an NTFS file-system outside of the OS even while the OS is running but we're talking about deep-file system inspection.
You meant any attempt by a user without admin privileges of course. VSS solved the backup-open-files problems a long time ago.
Obviously that would have nothing to do the the wick effect, and there doesn't seem to be any corroboration of the event. Still... makes you wonder.
But she didn't combust. And if there was enough heat in the mysterious blue flashes to ignite her she probably would have noticed (why are my shoes smoking?). And if there was enough energy to ignite her, you would need something like the wick effect to sustain the combustion. And she'd need to be by herself or someone would just throw a bucket of water over her.
Slashdot Mirror
The expensive part is buying the 50foot extension cord and loping it's ends off.
The other expensive part is keeping a car idling for a long period of time...
People aren't protesting to get free stuff, but to express their disagreement with a country where 1% of the population control 40% of the wealth and growing, being able to use this to influence legislation in order to keep it that way.
Very nicely put.
I wonder if it will have an impact on the way people speak. Especially if someone comes up with a Linguo app to correct the grammar of people nearby. People love having their grammar corrected.
Or maybe a virus that you can't get rid of that causes the phone to only understand you when you speak with a Scottish accent.
For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.
WTF? While you're right about birth control, you're dead wrong about disease risk. The invention of antibiotics has made a gigantic difference to disease risk, and while resistance is starting to increase the risk is still massively lower than it was for virtually all of human history. Things that were death sentences 100 years ago can now be cured (or at least contained) with pharmaceuticals. (I wouldn't say that we should trust big pharma, but they've managed to do a lot of good for all that. Their problem is that the low-hanging fruit is now mostly gone; future advances are going to be much harder won.)
You can throw all the antibiotics you like at HIV, Herpes, HPV, and viral hepatitis, and it won't do much except expose the recipient to increased risk of yeast infections. Sure, there are drugs for controlling those to some extent but... you know... better to not catch them in the first place.
And bacteria as a whole are slowly becoming immune to the various antibiotics we do throw at them, and there is some concern that we'll be right back where we started at some point in the future unless we can come up with something new.
Having said that, the increasing prevalence of those diseases would indicate that you might be right about the risk of disease not being a discouraging factor to the urge to engage in sex :)
But seriously, this myth that men are obsessed with sex needs to die.
Well... since lifeforms split into male and female, and the female landed the bigger biological burden of making a new lifeform, there's been a big payoff for the male to be obsessed with sex. And there is a corresponding payoff for the female to be picky about who she lets make a new lifeform inside her. You'll always find exceptions of course, but myths tend to have some truth behind them.
For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.
Why don't they just ask him if it's true?
Oh. Right. How convenient.
If the CERN result is correct, they should have arrived in 1982.
How sure are we that they didn't, and that the ones that arrived in 1987 were just late or due to some later effect of the supernova?
If a bunch of neutrino's arrive 3 hours before a supernova becomes visible then it's pretty easy to put the two together. If a bunch of neutrino's arrive 5 years before a supernova becomes visible it might not be so obvious. We're only talking about a handful of neutrino's detected in 1987. Were there as many and as sensitive neutrino detectors online 5 years earlier?
I wonder if there are good records going back that far... at the time you might just write it off as a glitch, or maybe the Russians doing nuclear testing, especially if nothing obvious was happening in the sky. A peak somewhere around 1982 would be quite interesting to find...
Nice try.
Sincerely,
Einstein
You do know Einstein is dead right? The effect is probably caused by him rotating in his grave...
Did this in the Navy, wrap a submarine in about 300 turns of cable and run a few thousand amps through them.
I think I saw that movie...
OTOH, reactions to vaccines do happen, and in some cases can be fatal. If a reaction was near-fatal, it could cause brain damage (eg heart stops beating for long enough that bits of the brain starts to die) and the resulting mental disability could share symptoms with autism. One case would be all the nutjobs need to 'prove' their link.
The way I see it, even if there was a 1-in-a-million chance of something bad happening as a result of vaccination, it is more likely that something bad will happen if you don't vaccinate, so it's not a hard decision to make.
Not that such a thing exists, but if it did, infrared may not be the way to go. If something has adapted to live in Siberia, it will be well insulated which means that the temperature of the outermost layers of skin and/or fur will remain close to ambient temperatures. Polar bears, for example, are not effectively detected on infrared cameras.
So what? All they have to do is send the drones in and look for places without a heat signature? :)
I wonder if this is like the 'leaked' information that companies use to measure consumer backlash whilst still maintaining plausible deniability...
That phenomenon was observed before three earthquakes since 2004.
Certainly this opens an argument for more research in this area. However how about actually figuring out if it's not just co-incidence before talking about building "detection systems" and putting numbers to the "lives saved". Otherwise you're going to get all geologists arrested and extradited to Italy to face manslaughter charges.
That was my first thought. It's one thing to say that a high electron count was present when an earthquake was coming, but another to say that the high electron count was _only_ present when an earthquake was coming. Too many false alarms would make the system useless.
Then again, remember that sunlight contains lots of UV light, so those levels are fine (except if you're a basement dweller)
Except that the filter that prevents the UV reaching the back of his eyeball is now gone... There is probably a good reason why you have that filter there in the first place!
You're more secure if attackers don't know that information about your systems, because it forces them to discover it. That takes additional time and effort, and they may not be able to discover that information at all.
But on the other hand if you find a back door to a security system, you now have access to all such security systems. Not publishing the intricate details about the security system doesn't add nearly as much security as people think.
Put it another way, if your security system is completely open and documented and nobody has ever discovered a backdoor that would allow them access without a key, then you can say it is secure with a great degree of confidence.
Someone else can get in -- all they need is a little bit of information you've left out (like a key). Obscurity. Right there. Self defeating posts are self defeating.
If you have the key then all bets are off. But if the inner workings of the lock are completely known to the opponent and they still can't get in without the key then you can say your system is secure. If there is a flaw in your lock such that it is possible to get in without requiring the key then you have to obscure the inner workings of the lock, and you can't say your system is secure because it's always possible that someone could reverse engineer it and find the flaw, allowing them access to _all_ such locks.
My memory of highschool physics tells me that if one side is taking hydrogen out of water, then oxygen must be left... why doesn't that oxygen bubble up as well like the hydrogen does? Or does the split off Oxygen somehow make it to the other side?
Excuse me, grammar police here.
You mean the anonymous-and-too-timid-to-put-grammar-nazi-on-your-resume police.
The word "data" is plural, hence your subject title should be "What are the data?"
Perhaps that was true 100 years ago. Today the word "data" is valid as a singular noun ("singular mass noun") and so "is" is correct in the title (or at least as correct as "are" would be).
Evolution is one of the beautiful things about the English language.
How likely is it that someone is ever even going to try and get the data off the disks? Obviously it's not national security data or you wouldn't be asking here. Put it another way, how much is your data worth to others? Would someone want to invest $10, $100, $1000, or $1000000 of effort in trying to recover it?
For something different - open the lid of the drive, put some sand in there, close the lid, give it a vigorous shake, then power it up. It should be destroyed in no time.
You won't be paying extra for jailbroken motherboards
You might be paying a fine for jailbreaking your motherboard though...
In the next decade, we'll see machines barge into areas of the economy that we'd never suspected possible — they'll be diagnosing your diseases, dispensing your medicine, handling your lawsuits, making fundamental scientific discoveries, and even writing stories just like this one.
Yeah right. Like i'd believe anything written by a robot.
The SAM file on Windows is impossible to retrieve while the Windows kernel is running. The kernel has an exclusive read/write lock on the file and any attempt to access it will be denied. It is possible to read an NTFS file-system outside of the OS even while the OS is running but we're talking about deep-file system inspection.
You meant any attempt by a user without admin privileges of course. VSS solved the backup-open-files problems a long time ago.
Obviously that would have nothing to do the the wick effect, and there doesn't seem to be any corroboration of the event. Still... makes you wonder.
But she didn't combust. And if there was enough heat in the mysterious blue flashes to ignite her she probably would have noticed (why are my shoes smoking?). And if there was enough energy to ignite her, you would need something like the wick effect to sustain the combustion. And she'd need to be by herself or someone would just throw a bucket of water over her.
The thing about Slashdot is that you could be a slower-than-stopped particle, and the news would still be old.
(if you can have a particle that goes faster than light, then a particle that goes slower than stopped is surely possible!)
Or maybe they were just too busy surviving in Africa to take the time to paint lots of pictures?