But in the US, the chickens outnumber foxes 2-to-1:
Several chickens say that the foxes have been abused by the chickens too much in the past, starving them nearly to death. Those chickens and the foxes set up affirmative action protections. They say that the foxes can occasionally eat chickens in the name of equality.
There is no chicken or fox running for President; they must choose between a monkey and a pig. The monkey wins, and declares that eating is illegal. Everyone dies.
The problem is that America is not a democracy, and is nothing close. It is virtually guaranteed that:
Just under half of Americans do not agree with most of the ideas from their elected representatives
Just over half of Americans (the rest) probably don't agree with most of the ideas from their elected representative, but more than the ideas of other candidates
Since our representatives disagree with us for the most part, they probably don't care what we think and listen more to money and lobbyists.
So, because of this "republic" two-party system, we're screwed. We have no real voice.
Serious question: should the inability to prove or disprove a theory automatically preclude it?
Remember, one of the tenets of faith (not intelligent design... a very different concept) is that it cannot be proven except to each individual in a personal way. Thus, although I may have proof of it myself, I have no ability to share that proof. Does that make it invalid?
It's up to you whether to believe one thing or another, but I fear for a society that forces the prominent persons of intellect to be limited to any particular school of thought, including evolution, intelligent design, or other similar theories.
Ben's point is that discussion is not being permitted in academia, and in fact the opposite is happening, it is being suppressed. How is "being suppressed" the opposite of "not being permitted"?
If you claim to be an open-minded scientist, wouldn't this line of thought be contradictory? I'm not suggesting that you go so far as to change your beliefs at the first sound of something different, but don't claim to be open minded when you're not.
I do all the time; it's on a (nicely equipped) Dell laptop running Ubuntu that I use at work. I'm actually quite impressed with what you can do, and I'm even more impressed by the ability to customize it.
I also use an Apple Macbook all the time (at home).
So, which one has the more impressive graphics? I've got to say, Apple. It's hard to pinpoint what makes OS X "feel" so nice, but it is definitely something with the graphics.
Aqua's feel is more "solid". I don't know how to explain it, except that moving a window around the screen actually feels like you're moving a solid object around. In Aero and Compiz, the compositing engine indeed makes those Windows feel more solid than in, for instance, XP or Ubuntu without Compiz. But both still feel like they're drawn on the screen; they don't seem to be as "real" as in Aqua.
The same can be said in general about the effects in Aqua vs. Compiz and Aero. And again, I really do like Compiz... I wish there was as much configurability available in OS X.
You say you can plug in the real numbers and make it work, so go and do it. Post it right here. If you are so sure of yourself, back it up instead of saying "I stand by my ability to do arithmetic."
I don't care if you can do math on the wrong numbers; do it on the right numbers, and prove yourself not to be so politically motivated that you would make up numbers to prove a point.
I'm all for learning programming languages as a general discipline, but I don't see any reason to learn all the ins and outs of something as complex as C++. It is a language that tries to be everything for everyone, but it completely misses when it comes to understandability. More pure languages often sacrifice the "all-in-one" role in order to be something that promotes maintainability. And if they aren't good for your situation, use something else.
I'm not saying that Windows Mail takes 2 minutes to load, but that it takes longer than Safari, so the exploit ultimately clocks in slower.
Another example: I get the fastest Windows XP machine on the market, and test it against an old 60 MHZ Windows 95 machine, with a similar web-based exploit. Which one gets compromised faster? The XP machine... because it loads faster.
I've tested the load times of (clean) Vista vs. (year-old) OS X 10.4, on the same machine (a 2G Macbook with Boot Camp). Vista took twice as long to boot, and three times as long from hitting enter on the login screen to the time the hard drive stops being accessed. Safari loads 25% faster than IE 7 on Windows XP, in my tests, and its recent JavaScript benchmarks have shown a much higher rate of speed than any other browser. So yes, I have a right to make this claim.
How would you enforce that rule? By reading people minds?
No, you enforce it using a clean room and no Internet access. I'm not saying that you couldn't memorize how to create an exploit, but you have to create it on-site.
Ok, look at it another way: what if there is a very serious Vista exploit based on opening Outlook Express (Windows Mail or whatever it's called now) and open an email in their Inbox. But they can't get it to happen within 2 minutes, because Outlook Express takes longer to load than Safari. How fair would that be? You are punishing Apple because they have an extremely fast browser.
Q:What makes this guy better than all the others out there who post IE, Firefox, and Safari exploits? A: He was smart enough to wait until he could win money to let it loose.
Don't get me wrong, an exploit is an exploit, but come on... it should only count if the entire exploit was created and performed on-site. Who is to say that someone else would not have found a Vista exploit that way, in much less time than Charlie Miller did?
For those of us too lazy to even click on the link, the reason is "Because it is fun."
It really makes sense. Don't get me wrong, having the freedom to tinker with the kernel is nice. Having the ability to see the source code to ensure safety is great. But the majority of users don't actually use Linux (or any computer OS) for those purposes... they aren't a means to an end.
I personally use Linux third to Mac OS X (at home), which is second to Windows (at work). I like understanding the different systems, because that's how I can keep up with the extreme pace of the software development industry. But I almost never use Windows at home, and here's why: competition.
I want Microsoft to feel the pressure of competition. They have been feeling it for the past couple of years. And what do you know, it works! Firefox has caused the IE team to push towards open standards compliance. Love or hate OOXML, it's easier to work with than older formats (due to pressure from OOo and iWork). And there are many reasons to hate Vista, but it is more secure than older versions of Windows, it has much more advanced compositing, and a host of new things that are good for the future, even if they hurt now.
So, I care more about the future of the computing world... the future of my career, a future of openness by major corporations that enables someone little like me to start and run a business. And I'm doing my part to make sure that happens.
Combine this with text-to-speech and wireless headphones, you have an effective non-vocal (and two-way) communication system that doesn't require the use of the hands or the knowledge of surrounding personnel.
The military uses, as well as civilian, are probably limitless. Of course, we're now one step closer to making it impossible to detect cheating on tests, and similar scenarios.
Absolutely. Last semester in my graduate robotics class, I had robots follow each other through loops (eventually meant to simulate an intersection control technique). I used collision avoidance on each robot.
I first tested each loop in simulation. The robots would all start at the same acceleration. At a certain saturation of robots, the whole system would break down due to the "waves" of traffic congestion caused by collision avoidance.
Mind you, this was with simulation that was nearly perfect (the only imperfections would have been in thread timings).
Then Firefox and open source is serving its purpose.
Really... does everyone hate IE because Microsoft has a browser monopoly, or because IE has sucked for so long and there was no competition to force them to do anything about it?
Are you suggesting that throwing more money into our current situation is a good idea?
I bet you abide by the assumption that two wrongs make a right. You might not agree with the fact that we're in Iraq, or with the reasons we went to war, but what makes you think it's a good idea to leave our military stranded there without the technology to win it?
And don't give me any of this "we can just pull out" crap. You know that's not going to happen... we will stay there, and we will either starve our troops of the data and advancements to get it done, or we will find a way to settle it on our terms.
In case you didn't read the article, it's the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
By the way... both UA and UAH are national leaders in homeland security and law enforcement technology research. Add UAB, with its biomedical research and other engineering programs, and Alabama universities are home to some of the best engineering and technology research in the nation.
<sarcasm>Wow... who thought there would be an ignorant post on Slashdot?</sarcasm>
Of course, I shouldn't be surprised. Most people don't realize that Alabama universities are on the leading edge of homeland security and law enforcement research. They tend not to be interested in anything coming out of the state that doesn't deal with football or some guy in a rural town that got caught making out with his sister.
You might want to research some of the many lesser-known things about Alabama... oh, like say, NASA... or the automobile manufacturing industry that has recently become a national leader. Or, say, our economy, which has kept strong even as the rest of the nation is falling into recession.
It would be a good idea to learn what an exponent is.
It would be a good idea to learn what an exaggeration is.
And it's not really an exaggeration... the 2004 election had a turnout of 122 million, and there are currently 1236 posts on this thread (more than any other Slashdot post I've seen in a while)... doing the math, log_1236 (122 million) = 2.62, thus an exponential amount.
"The entire 'religious right' issue" is not a negative for Huckabee. It may not appeal to you, but millions of voters disagree, especially Republicans.
And mind you, alot of sites like Slashdot tend to veer left in their readership. It tends to come as a shock to many on this site that there are exponentially many more voters in America than there are readers of Slashdot, and their views sway as far left and right as can be imagined.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod parent Insightful. These issues will be real if they implement this technology.
Manufacturers should at least give each device the ability to ignore these "manners" policies.
I love that quote.
But in the US, the chickens outnumber foxes 2-to-1:
Several chickens say that the foxes have been abused by the chickens too much in the past, starving them nearly to death. Those chickens and the foxes set up affirmative action protections. They say that the foxes can occasionally eat chickens in the name of equality.
There is no chicken or fox running for President; they must choose between a monkey and a pig. The monkey wins, and declares that eating is illegal. Everyone dies.
The end.
Democracy? Since when is America a democracy?
The problem is that America is not a democracy, and is nothing close. It is virtually guaranteed that:
So, because of this "republic" two-party system, we're screwed. We have no real voice.
Probably not. Windows 7 : Windows Vista :: Windows XP SP2 : Windows 2000.
At least that's how I predict it... they plan to not alienate users like Vista did, while building some strength onto the platform.
Was DOS ready for the desktop? By many definitions, people would say no, but that's exactly what started Microsoft's dominance of the OS market.
Serious question: should the inability to prove or disprove a theory automatically preclude it?
Remember, one of the tenets of faith (not intelligent design... a very different concept) is that it cannot be proven except to each individual in a personal way. Thus, although I may have proof of it myself, I have no ability to share that proof. Does that make it invalid?
It's up to you whether to believe one thing or another, but I fear for a society that forces the prominent persons of intellect to be limited to any particular school of thought, including evolution, intelligent design, or other similar theories.
If you claim to be an open-minded scientist, wouldn't this line of thought be contradictory? I'm not suggesting that you go so far as to change your beliefs at the first sound of something different, but don't claim to be open minded when you're not.
Why do people automatically assume Evolution is true just because they don't understand what other theories actually mean?
I do all the time; it's on a (nicely equipped) Dell laptop running Ubuntu that I use at work. I'm actually quite impressed with what you can do, and I'm even more impressed by the ability to customize it.
I also use an Apple Macbook all the time (at home).
So, which one has the more impressive graphics? I've got to say, Apple. It's hard to pinpoint what makes OS X "feel" so nice, but it is definitely something with the graphics.
Aqua's feel is more "solid". I don't know how to explain it, except that moving a window around the screen actually feels like you're moving a solid object around. In Aero and Compiz, the compositing engine indeed makes those Windows feel more solid than in, for instance, XP or Ubuntu without Compiz. But both still feel like they're drawn on the screen; they don't seem to be as "real" as in Aqua.
The same can be said in general about the effects in Aqua vs. Compiz and Aero. And again, I really do like Compiz... I wish there was as much configurability available in OS X.
You say you can plug in the real numbers and make it work, so go and do it. Post it right here. If you are so sure of yourself, back it up instead of saying "I stand by my ability to do arithmetic."
I don't care if you can do math on the wrong numbers; do it on the right numbers, and prove yourself not to be so politically motivated that you would make up numbers to prove a point.
Learn the tool that suites your needs best.
I'm all for learning programming languages as a general discipline, but I don't see any reason to learn all the ins and outs of something as complex as C++. It is a language that tries to be everything for everyone, but it completely misses when it comes to understandability. More pure languages often sacrifice the "all-in-one" role in order to be something that promotes maintainability. And if they aren't good for your situation, use something else.
I'm not saying that Windows Mail takes 2 minutes to load, but that it takes longer than Safari, so the exploit ultimately clocks in slower.
Another example: I get the fastest Windows XP machine on the market, and test it against an old 60 MHZ Windows 95 machine, with a similar web-based exploit. Which one gets compromised faster? The XP machine... because it loads faster.
I've tested the load times of (clean) Vista vs. (year-old) OS X 10.4, on the same machine (a 2G Macbook with Boot Camp). Vista took twice as long to boot, and three times as long from hitting enter on the login screen to the time the hard drive stops being accessed. Safari loads 25% faster than IE 7 on Windows XP, in my tests, and its recent JavaScript benchmarks have shown a much higher rate of speed than any other browser. So yes, I have a right to make this claim.
No, you enforce it using a clean room and no Internet access. I'm not saying that you couldn't memorize how to create an exploit, but you have to create it on-site.
Ok, look at it another way: what if there is a very serious Vista exploit based on opening Outlook Express (Windows Mail or whatever it's called now) and open an email in their Inbox. But they can't get it to happen within 2 minutes, because Outlook Express takes longer to load than Safari. How fair would that be? You are punishing Apple because they have an extremely fast browser.
Q: What makes this guy better than all the others out there who post IE, Firefox, and Safari exploits?
A: He was smart enough to wait until he could win money to let it loose.
Don't get me wrong, an exploit is an exploit, but come on... it should only count if the entire exploit was created and performed on-site. Who is to say that someone else would not have found a Vista exploit that way, in much less time than Charlie Miller did?
xkcd
It really makes sense. Don't get me wrong, having the freedom to tinker with the kernel is nice. Having the ability to see the source code to ensure safety is great. But the majority of users don't actually use Linux (or any computer OS) for those purposes... they aren't a means to an end.
I personally use Linux third to Mac OS X (at home), which is second to Windows (at work). I like understanding the different systems, because that's how I can keep up with the extreme pace of the software development industry. But I almost never use Windows at home, and here's why: competition.
I want Microsoft to feel the pressure of competition. They have been feeling it for the past couple of years. And what do you know, it works! Firefox has caused the IE team to push towards open standards compliance. Love or hate OOXML, it's easier to work with than older formats (due to pressure from OOo and iWork). And there are many reasons to hate Vista, but it is more secure than older versions of Windows, it has much more advanced compositing, and a host of new things that are good for the future, even if they hurt now.
So, I care more about the future of the computing world... the future of my career, a future of openness by major corporations that enables someone little like me to start and run a business. And I'm doing my part to make sure that happens.
Combine this with text-to-speech and wireless headphones, you have an effective non-vocal (and two-way) communication system that doesn't require the use of the hands or the knowledge of surrounding personnel.
The military uses, as well as civilian, are probably limitless. Of course, we're now one step closer to making it impossible to detect cheating on tests, and similar scenarios.
Absolutely. Last semester in my graduate robotics class, I had robots follow each other through loops (eventually meant to simulate an intersection control technique). I used collision avoidance on each robot.
I first tested each loop in simulation. The robots would all start at the same acceleration. At a certain saturation of robots, the whole system would break down due to the "waves" of traffic congestion caused by collision avoidance.
Mind you, this was with simulation that was nearly perfect (the only imperfections would have been in thread timings).
Then Firefox and open source is serving its purpose.
Really... does everyone hate IE because Microsoft has a browser monopoly, or because IE has sucked for so long and there was no competition to force them to do anything about it?
I bet you abide by the assumption that two wrongs make a right. You might not agree with the fact that we're in Iraq, or with the reasons we went to war, but what makes you think it's a good idea to leave our military stranded there without the technology to win it?
And don't give me any of this "we can just pull out" crap. You know that's not going to happen... we will stay there, and we will either starve our troops of the data and advancements to get it done, or we will find a way to settle it on our terms.
In case you didn't read the article, it's the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
By the way... both UA and UAH are national leaders in homeland security and law enforcement technology research. Add UAB, with its biomedical research and other engineering programs, and Alabama universities are home to some of the best engineering and technology research in the nation.
<sarcasm>Wow... who thought there would be an ignorant post on Slashdot?</sarcasm>
Of course, I shouldn't be surprised. Most people don't realize that Alabama universities are on the leading edge of homeland security and law enforcement research. They tend not to be interested in anything coming out of the state that doesn't deal with football or some guy in a rural town that got caught making out with his sister.
You might want to research some of the many lesser-known things about Alabama... oh, like say, NASA... or the automobile manufacturing industry that has recently become a national leader. Or, say, our economy, which has kept strong even as the rest of the nation is falling into recession.
Safari (3.x, Mac) also does not work. The Windows Live login screen redirects in a loop.
The workaround is to click on the link to sign-up for Hotmail. Clicking on the first option (register for free Hotmail) takes you to your mailbox.
I haven't attempted this on Firefox for Linux, or anything else... if the issue sounds the same, the workaround may work for other browsers.
It would be a good idea to learn what an exaggeration is.
And it's not really an exaggeration... the 2004 election had a turnout of 122 million, and there are currently 1236 posts on this thread (more than any other Slashdot post I've seen in a while)... doing the math, log_1236 (122 million) = 2.62, thus an exponential amount.
"The entire 'religious right' issue" is not a negative for Huckabee. It may not appeal to you, but millions of voters disagree, especially Republicans.
And mind you, alot of sites like Slashdot tend to veer left in their readership. It tends to come as a shock to many on this site that there are exponentially many more voters in America than there are readers of Slashdot, and their views sway as far left and right as can be imagined.