Who cares? If he enjoys killing himself with cigarettes, it's his business. He's not hurting anybody but himself.
That's an oversimplification.
Smokers have more sick days off of work. When they get sick they often get sicker than non-smokers and take longer to recover. More visits to the doctor and more hospital stays meaning more load on the health system meaning less room for others (although that argument is questionable - the health system will always be underfunded).
I'd argue that he is hurting others, but I still agree that a smoker has the right to smoke, as long as the rest of us retain the right to complain bitterly about it.
smartphone — a press of a button and you are "on."'
I don't know what smartphones they are referring to. My iPhone and my laptop are seldom 'off'. They both go into standby when i'm not using them, the times to come out of standby are very similar, and if I actually had to type a password into my iPhone to bring it out of standby the computer would beat it by far.
Has Mr Hobbs never turned a smartphone on from a complete off state? There is a negligible difference between booting my iPhone vs my Windows XP laptop. My old HP iPaq wasn't much different.
1. Find out where a camera are pointed 2. Perform some antic in front of the camera that no camera watching monkey could resist putting on youtube (eg "Man getting hit by football in the groin") 3. When it appears on youtube, take them to court 4. Profit!
Instead they built themselves a 1st party case study in how the GPL is a virus that forces companies to give up their intellectual property.
Or, alternatively, also based on no evidence at all, they were embarrassed to find that they had shipped a product with GPL code in it, and in a sudden outbreak of common sense figured they had nothing to lose and released the code.
I think taking the software down is a very boding/bodeable/bodeful/whatever thing to do. I wouldn't expect anything else unless they had concrete proof that there was absolutely no chance at all that there was even the remote possibility of a GPL violation, and unless the software was developed completely in house and the claim of GPL violation was made with no evidence at all they can't be sure of that.
Sounds like a good thing to ping every so often. If the latency goes up or it stops responding altogether then the chances are that a whole load of people somewhere know something that you don't.
some of these viri are designed to do harm if disabled improperly, and some of these computers could be in situations where their failure could cause the loss of lives.
If you have a computer that could fail in such a way that lives could be lost, and the computer is in a situation where it has enough connectivity to the internet to form part of a botnet, then all bets are off anyway.
IMHO, the best way to resolve the botnet is to overwrite the bootsector (but not the partition table) and do a hard reboot. Easy to recover from and minimises the further damage that could be done. Also resolves the "lives could be list" problem.
Where in TFA does it say that? The headline says "Murdoch may block Google searches", the body has gems like "he will explore ways to remove stories from Google's search indexes, including Google News.", and "He believes that search engines cannot legally use headlines and paragraphs of news stories as search results.", and I believe he has previously said that he would like Google to pay him for results.
I can find no evidence of him actually ASKING Google to block his pages. There is lots of hearsay and conjecture, but despite what Lionel Hutz would have you believe, they are not kinds of evidence.
Does google have a feature that says "don't show results from this site anymore"? I can see a promote option, and a remove option, but I don't know that they are permanent.
If I were Google, I'd just cut all his sites off for a month and let them see how far their click-revenue falls off.
Then they would actually have a legitimate cause to sue google. They might not win, but it would get a huge amount of press (I can think of at least one media empire that would cover it closely, and with plenty of spin in their direction).
And it would demonstrate how much power google has in a practical rather than theoretical sense, which would get the attention of regulatory bodies much more quickly than an idiot like Rupert jumping up and down and holding his breath.
There is a saying that goes something like "never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity". I don't think it applies here.
Except for the fact that her brain was molded at least a little by being in the womb of a chinese-speaking woman:)
There is plenty of egg swapping going on these days, either a woman 'renting out' her uterus for a couple who can't otherwise have children themselves, or where a woman is implanted with an egg that isn't hers, because her eggs are defective. In the latter case the egg is normally chosen from a woman who is similar in appearance to the owner of the uterus, so the child looks at least a little like its mother, so maybe that wouldn't be a good test. There is also the odd occurrence where the wrong egg is implanted due to an error on the part of the hospital.
There should be enough entropy available to rule genetics out as a causal factor.
Millions of ordinary people didn't know there was a vulnerability until now.
Dear Ordinary Person,
As you may have heard in the media, there has been an exploit discovered in the security protocols used in the banking sector. As such, we require you to log on and reset your password. Please click on this link and enter your security details there. Please ignore any certificate warnings that you might see, they are unavoidable while we implement a more secure protocol.
Actually I think you may be right... now that you mention it I do seem to remember that in any car i've driven recently the key needs to be removed to engage the steering column lock. Maybe I was being a little overzealous in my recommendations...
I've done exactly the opposite. Put my foot gently on the accelerator and the car seemed to slow down. Pressed it a bit harder and got a hell of a jolt. I was hitting the brake instead. I'd just gotten into the car after putting some air in the tyres and had foolishly started to drive off before getting comfortable.
I've been doing some pretty long drives lately and have become conscious of the fact that when cruise control is engaged and my foot is anywhere other than resting on the accelerator, that finding the brake takes longer than I would like it to. In particular, if my foot is resting to the right of the accelerator, then I figure that in an emergency, moving it to the left to find the brake might not find the brake first go, with unwanted results.
I rest my foot on the accelerator now when on cruise control, although more and more I just use the speed limiter instead which is great when following behind someone who's speed is varying wildly, or going around winding roads - so many times i've been concentrating on the winding roads and not looking at the speedo and just doing a speed that feels safe, and suddenly i'm doing 120 in a 100 zone!
Turning off the engine should basically be a last resort to be used only if the transmission won't go to neutral.
You just can't say this loudly enough. My car key turns about 180 degrees between off and start, with positions for "off", "accessories", "on", and "start". I think there is somewhere between 45 and 90 degrees between "on" and "start", leaving the other settings reasonably close to each other. In an emergency you would need to turn it to 'accessories' without moving it to 'off' which would engage the steering column lock. There was an accident just recently here in Australia where some kids were driving and someone turned the keys to the off position. They crashed... can't remember how many were killed.
You don't lose power assisted braking or steering as long as the engine is turning. If you turn an engine off as it is running full throttle I guarantee it will diesel along for a while, enough time to slow the car even without power assisted braking.
Power assist brakes have to be able to stop a car even with the engine is not turning.
The last time I seriously looked under the bonnet (1978 Ford Cortina), the power brakes were assisted via a vacuum reservoir. The reservoir was kept in a state of vacuum via a hose from the inlet manifold. This means that with the throttle in full closed position (eg in the kind of state you'd want to apply the brakes anyway) and the engine turning, you should get some vacuum happening. The vacuum reservoir will stay in a state of vacuum for a bit after the engine stops... i've never had cause to find out exactly how long though.
The power steering gets its power from a hydraulic pump attached (via a belt) to the crankshaft. So in theory, as long as the engine is turning you should get some assist.
By 1978 though, and probably much earlier, the dieseling problem had been solved via a fuel cutoff solenoid in the carburetor, so it simply won't happen. A fuel injected vehicle doesn't have the problem, as obviously the fuel is completely cut off if the engine has stopped. The engine might be kept turning via the drive train in a manual vehicle, as long as it is kept in gear, but possibly not so much in an automatic vehicle. That's not dieseling though.
Never had your accelerator cable become stuck then? I think that if you do the numbers you'll find that a fully mechanical system has a far higher chance of an unsafe failure mode (eg butterfly valve stuck open) than the 'fly by wire' systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Who cares? If he enjoys killing himself with cigarettes, it's his business. He's not hurting anybody but himself.
That's an oversimplification.
Smokers have more sick days off of work. When they get sick they often get sicker than non-smokers and take longer to recover. More visits to the doctor and more hospital stays meaning more load on the health system meaning less room for others (although that argument is questionable - the health system will always be underfunded).
I'd argue that he is hurting others, but I still agree that a smoker has the right to smoke, as long as the rest of us retain the right to complain bitterly about it.
smartphone — a press of a button and you are "on."'
I don't know what smartphones they are referring to. My iPhone and my laptop are seldom 'off'. They both go into standby when i'm not using them, the times to come out of standby are very similar, and if I actually had to type a password into my iPhone to bring it out of standby the computer would beat it by far.
Has Mr Hobbs never turned a smartphone on from a complete off state? There is a negligible difference between booting my iPhone vs my Windows XP laptop. My old HP iPaq wasn't much different.
I'm sure you could make a fortune just taking money from the tobacco industry to _not_ take this product to market for another 12 months.
If the LHC doesn't kill us now, the Sun will eventually devour the earth anyway in a few million years. Paying those bills does seem pretty pointless.
I guess Opera's release and development cycle(s) is why it is so popular!
I thought I read in the news that they were pulling the plug on that in 2011...
So this is what it feels like to be the first one to post?
Nope. I think I beat you to it.
Business plan:
1. Find out where a camera are pointed
2. Perform some antic in front of the camera that no camera watching monkey could resist putting on youtube (eg "Man getting hit by football in the groin")
3. When it appears on youtube, take them to court
4. Profit!
Wouldn't that be great? You'd be able to rest easy while I'm always watching, knowing that you don't have to worry about being robbed.
Meh.
Instead they built themselves a 1st party case study in how the GPL is a virus that forces companies to give up their intellectual property.
Or, alternatively, also based on no evidence at all, they were embarrassed to find that they had shipped a product with GPL code in it, and in a sudden outbreak of common sense figured they had nothing to lose and released the code.
The article was posted by samzenpus.
*snigger* when I saw that name I read it as sanspenis *snigger*
My guess is that if it was filed under 'idle' where it belongs, nobody would see it.
I think taking the software down is a very boding/bodeable/bodeful/whatever thing to do. I wouldn't expect anything else unless they had concrete proof that there was absolutely no chance at all that there was even the remote possibility of a GPL violation, and unless the software was developed completely in house and the claim of GPL violation was made with no evidence at all they can't be sure of that.
Handy thing to have bookmarked
Sounds like a good thing to ping every so often. If the latency goes up or it stops responding altogether then the chances are that a whole load of people somewhere know something that you don't.
some of these viri are designed to do harm if disabled improperly, and some of these computers could be in situations where their failure could cause the loss of lives.
If you have a computer that could fail in such a way that lives could be lost, and the computer is in a situation where it has enough connectivity to the internet to form part of a botnet, then all bets are off anyway.
IMHO, the best way to resolve the botnet is to overwrite the bootsector (but not the partition table) and do a hard reboot. Easy to recover from and minimises the further damage that could be done. Also resolves the "lives could be list" problem.
He ASKED google to stop using his pages.
Where in TFA does it say that? The headline says "Murdoch may block Google searches", the body has gems like "he will explore ways to remove stories from Google's search indexes, including Google News.", and "He believes that search engines cannot legally use headlines and paragraphs of news stories as search results.", and I believe he has previously said that he would like Google to pay him for results.
I can find no evidence of him actually ASKING Google to block his pages. There is lots of hearsay and conjecture, but despite what Lionel Hutz would have you believe, they are not kinds of evidence.
Does google have a feature that says "don't show results from this site anymore"? I can see a promote option, and a remove option, but I don't know that they are permanent.
Is that an analogy? It's hard to tell as it doesn't involve a car...
If I were Google, I'd just cut all his sites off for a month and let them see how far their click-revenue falls off.
Then they would actually have a legitimate cause to sue google. They might not win, but it would get a huge amount of press (I can think of at least one media empire that would cover it closely, and with plenty of spin in their direction).
And it would demonstrate how much power google has in a practical rather than theoretical sense, which would get the attention of regulatory bodies much more quickly than an idiot like Rupert jumping up and down and holding his breath.
There is a saying that goes something like "never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity". I don't think it applies here.
but culturally 100% American.
Except for the fact that her brain was molded at least a little by being in the womb of a chinese-speaking woman :)
There is plenty of egg swapping going on these days, either a woman 'renting out' her uterus for a couple who can't otherwise have children themselves, or where a woman is implanted with an egg that isn't hers, because her eggs are defective. In the latter case the egg is normally chosen from a woman who is similar in appearance to the owner of the uterus, so the child looks at least a little like its mother, so maybe that wouldn't be a good test. There is also the odd occurrence where the wrong egg is implanted due to an error on the part of the hospital.
There should be enough entropy available to rule genetics out as a causal factor.
Millions of ordinary people didn't know there was a vulnerability until now.
Dear Ordinary Person,
As you may have heard in the media, there has been an exploit discovered in the security protocols used in the banking sector. As such, we require you to log on and reset your password. Please click on this link and enter your security details there. Please ignore any certificate warnings that you might see, they are unavoidable while we implement a more secure protocol.
Sorry for the inconvenience
Bad Guy^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Yourbank
Actually I think you may be right... now that you mention it I do seem to remember that in any car i've driven recently the key needs to be removed to engage the steering column lock. Maybe I was being a little overzealous in my recommendations...
I've done exactly the opposite. Put my foot gently on the accelerator and the car seemed to slow down. Pressed it a bit harder and got a hell of a jolt. I was hitting the brake instead. I'd just gotten into the car after putting some air in the tyres and had foolishly started to drive off before getting comfortable.
I've been doing some pretty long drives lately and have become conscious of the fact that when cruise control is engaged and my foot is anywhere other than resting on the accelerator, that finding the brake takes longer than I would like it to. In particular, if my foot is resting to the right of the accelerator, then I figure that in an emergency, moving it to the left to find the brake might not find the brake first go, with unwanted results.
I rest my foot on the accelerator now when on cruise control, although more and more I just use the speed limiter instead which is great when following behind someone who's speed is varying wildly, or going around winding roads - so many times i've been concentrating on the winding roads and not looking at the speedo and just doing a speed that feels safe, and suddenly i'm doing 120 in a 100 zone!
Turning off the engine should basically be a last resort to be used only if the transmission won't go to neutral.
You just can't say this loudly enough. My car key turns about 180 degrees between off and start, with positions for "off", "accessories", "on", and "start". I think there is somewhere between 45 and 90 degrees between "on" and "start", leaving the other settings reasonably close to each other. In an emergency you would need to turn it to 'accessories' without moving it to 'off' which would engage the steering column lock. There was an accident just recently here in Australia where some kids were driving and someone turned the keys to the off position. They crashed... can't remember how many were killed.
You don't lose power assisted braking or steering as long as the engine is turning. If you turn an engine off as it is running full throttle I guarantee it will diesel along for a while, enough time to slow the car even without power assisted braking.
Power assist brakes have to be able to stop a car even with the engine is not turning.
The last time I seriously looked under the bonnet (1978 Ford Cortina), the power brakes were assisted via a vacuum reservoir. The reservoir was kept in a state of vacuum via a hose from the inlet manifold. This means that with the throttle in full closed position (eg in the kind of state you'd want to apply the brakes anyway) and the engine turning, you should get some vacuum happening. The vacuum reservoir will stay in a state of vacuum for a bit after the engine stops... i've never had cause to find out exactly how long though.
The power steering gets its power from a hydraulic pump attached (via a belt) to the crankshaft. So in theory, as long as the engine is turning you should get some assist.
By 1978 though, and probably much earlier, the dieseling problem had been solved via a fuel cutoff solenoid in the carburetor, so it simply won't happen. A fuel injected vehicle doesn't have the problem, as obviously the fuel is completely cut off if the engine has stopped. The engine might be kept turning via the drive train in a manual vehicle, as long as it is kept in gear, but possibly not so much in an automatic vehicle. That's not dieseling though.
Never had your accelerator cable become stuck then? I think that if you do the numbers you'll find that a fully mechanical system has a far higher chance of an unsafe failure mode (eg butterfly valve stuck open) than the 'fly by wire' systems.