The simple truth is that we can't predict what would have happened if one or more of the "accidents" had happened differently. There are many paths to the present. If one of them, the one we know about, had been blocked, who's to say that the end-effect would have been substantially different?
Of course, things happen that are out of our control, whether out of sight or just random.
This does not justify characterizing luck as something you have or lucky as something you are. No one has a field that is either attractive or repulsive to the fates.
Horizons and random events are uniformly distributed across all of humanity. If you must use the term, we are all equally lucky. It's only after the fact that it seems otherwise. "Luck" is an artifact of the human obsession for finding easy explanations. I prefer rational explanations.
Oh yeah. Your Russian Engineer. Right after getting his degree, he was offered an opportunity to emigrate and go to work for a small American startup. He decided to stay in Russia instead. Is he still "unlucky"?
Your sorry attempt falls flat, being examples of a lack of what you call luck. Clearly, for these people, luck doesn't exist.
You'll need to do better. You might get yourself off the hook by equating random events, chance, and luck. But that begs a whole new set of questions.
The point is that you can't win if you don't play. What you call luck is is a combination of personality traits that repeatedly puts the "lucky" person in a position to harvest opportunities.
Interesting that in a technical forum anyone would give credit to "luck".
There is no luck, just being alert and open to opportunities, having the courage to act on them, and having the intelligence to bend them to your benefit..
They refer to it as a "Trusted Repeater Paradigm" precisely because you can do a man-in-the-middle attack. The repeater is doing man-in-the-middle forwarding with the exposed key. That's why it has to be trusted.
I'm at a loss to find a use case for this.
You need a secured repeater/router every 25 to 50 km, carrying a signal using an expensive technology whose justification can only be that the path between nodes can't be secured. There's a bit of tension between those two.
So where would you use this that a secure repeater network can be put in place but you can't carry a CD full of OTP every couple of months?
Nah. The problem is that there's no "-1 Disagree" mod, so people too stupid to frame an intelligible response use "troll" or "flamebait" as a kind of disapproving grunt.
I don't know any way to secure an electronic election
Nobody does. The literature is clear on this. Just a few of the many problems:
Confidentiality: the voter must be identified but the vote must be anonymous
Integrity: How do you do a recount?
Less Integrity: If I control a router between the server and a district that votes solidly against my party, how many votes can I redirect to a bit bucket without raising suspicions?
Availability: What if I DoS the most popular ISP in such a district?
This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.
Cheap, clean, non-fossil power sources mean both low pollution (religion #1) and reduced carbon emissions to stop global warming (religion #2). But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere and bring solar energy to the surface that would otherwise miss us entirely. This puts Green in conflict with AGW. It should be interesting to watch the sparks fly.
I'm not too sure what the problem is. Up here in Canada, we use the American and French systems interchangeably. I buy a pound of butter and a liter of milk. It's a foot-long submarine sandwhich and it has 100 grams of meat in it, as does a Quarter-Pounder. We get water in half-liter bottles, and beer by the pint. We buy gas by the liter and our cars get good mileage with 35psi in the tires.
The only downside is that our toolboxes have twice as many tools in them.
The program was included in the Obama administration's 2010 budget request
It seems the opening paragraph should have said, "The Obama administration had plans in place to use spy satellites to spy on American citizens." On the other hand, why let the facts get in the way of a good line?
To get net neutrality you need new regulations and more bureaucrats to enforce them and more bureaucrats to wipe the first gang's noses. What else would you expect from the Liberals?
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what I'm saying.
The simple truth is that we can't predict what would have happened if one or more of the "accidents" had happened differently. There are many paths to the present. If one of them, the one we know about, had been blocked, who's to say that the end-effect would have been substantially different?
Of course, things happen that are out of our control, whether out of sight or just random.
This does not justify characterizing luck as something you have or lucky as something you are. No one has a field that is either attractive or repulsive to the fates.
Horizons and random events are uniformly distributed across all of humanity. If you must use the term, we are all equally lucky. It's only after the fact that it seems otherwise. "Luck" is an artifact of the human obsession for finding easy explanations. I prefer rational explanations.
"Draek" is an odd name for a girl; especially one that's preparing to become a nun.
Oh yeah. Your Russian Engineer. Right after getting his degree, he was offered an opportunity to emigrate and go to work for a small American startup. He decided to stay in Russia instead. Is he still "unlucky"?
Your sorry attempt falls flat, being examples of a lack of what you call luck. Clearly, for these people, luck doesn't exist.
You'll need to do better. You might get yourself off the hook by equating random events, chance, and luck. But that begs a whole new set of questions.
The point is that you can't win if you don't play. What you call luck is is a combination of personality traits that repeatedly puts the "lucky" person in a position to harvest opportunities.
What you're describing is poor planning.
Interesting that in a technical forum anyone would give credit to "luck".
There is no luck, just being alert and open to opportunities, having the courage to act on them, and having the intelligence to bend them to your benefit..
No. It was the quants—Physicists and mathematicians with overblown confidence in their formulae.
It was cloud computing in its purest form, with the dumbest terminal possible.
I schlepped one of these and a 40-pound modem all over North America, doing time-sharing demos. Not fun, but I have some stories...
They refer to it as a "Trusted Repeater Paradigm" precisely because you can do a man-in-the-middle attack. The repeater is doing man-in-the-middle forwarding with the exposed key. That's why it has to be trusted.
I'm at a loss to find a use case for this.
You need a secured repeater/router every 25 to 50 km, carrying a signal using an expensive technology whose justification can only be that the path between nodes can't be secured. There's a bit of tension between those two.
So where would you use this that a secure repeater network can be put in place but you can't carry a CD full of OTP every couple of months?
Nah. The problem is that there's no "-1 Disagree" mod, so people too stupid to frame an intelligible response use "troll" or "flamebait" as a kind of disapproving grunt.
Now this is funny.
Two climate-related messages and both are the subject of mod wars between the skeptics and those who consider the posts blasphemy.
The score so far is skeptics:0, disciples:1.
You didn't address anonymity or recounts.
We have no faith in people who say "tubes".
And a swan song for the losing candidate.
I don't know any way to secure an electronic election
Nobody does. The literature is clear on this. Just a few of the many problems:
Get all of these and we have a few dozen more.
Better yet: If Quebec won't leave voluntarily, TROC should force them out.
Myst lets you teleport to places you've been and can see. Seems like a reasonable compromise.
Second hand smoke, mercury, now global warming. Shouldn't the EPA be registered as a lobby group?
This summary is false to the article. ("It's time to show most passwords in clear text as users type them")
The knee jerk reactions by people who read the summary but not the article have all been addressed in the article.
And what happens to all that power when it's used on the ground? Oh yeah, it's teleported into outer space to keep it from heating up the atmosphere.
Let me try again: all the power transmitted, since it will be used to do work, will sooner or later be released as heat and warm the atmosphere.
It's not sufficient to have studied thermodynamics, you have to have understood it.
This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.
Cheap, clean, non-fossil power sources mean both low pollution (religion #1) and reduced carbon emissions to stop global warming (religion #2). But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere and bring solar energy to the surface that would otherwise miss us entirely. This puts Green in conflict with AGW. It should be interesting to watch the sparks fly.
I'm not too sure what the problem is. Up here in Canada, we use the American and French systems interchangeably. I buy a pound of butter and a liter of milk. It's a foot-long submarine sandwhich and it has 100 grams of meat in it, as does a Quarter-Pounder. We get water in half-liter bottles, and beer by the pint. We buy gas by the liter and our cars get good mileage with 35psi in the tires.
The only downside is that our toolboxes have twice as many tools in them.
The program was included in the Obama administration's 2010 budget request
It seems the opening paragraph should have said, "The Obama administration had plans in place to use spy satellites to spy on American citizens." On the other hand, why let the facts get in the way of a good line?
To get net neutrality you need new regulations and more bureaucrats to enforce them and more bureaucrats to wipe the first gang's noses. What else would you expect from the Liberals?