Once I had to transfer a few gigabytes from one machine to the other, and I was doing this by piping the data through netcat. When running XP on the sending box and Ubuntu on the receiving box, the speed was much slower than I expected, so I rebooted the sending box from a Ubuntu livecd and tried again, and the speed was approximately what it should have been.
But if it/did/ crash, then that would be very strong evidence that it/was/ date-related, and then he could find the cause and make sure it didn't happen next time. So, it might still be a useful thing to do.
I once programmed my scroll lock LED to light up when my CPU was at 100% (since, of course, the scroll lock LED basically never gets used for anything much.) That was sort of cool.
The headline is an exaggeration. The impression I got from the article was that they intend to selectively filter or monitor BitTorrent, not block it altogether.
It might contain code they don't actually have the right to release (e.g code licensed from other companies.) Or it might contain code which they want to keep and use in future releases.
you could run this program all day long and it'll never get better than it was during the first 10 generations. that's because every time it mutates it throws out all the previous data
I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong. Did you even run this program? Did you notice the messages about selection and crossover, which show that it doesn't throw out all the previous data? Or the graphs that clearly demonstrate the performance of the car improving?
After running it for a while, the cars appear to get killed without colliding with anything, so I'm assuming this is because there's some time or distance limit on each run. That's why the evolution appears to stop after ~10 generations.
I assume they would have advertised internet with some fine print saying "Terms and conditions apply". When you read the contract you signed up to, it's likely that there's nothing in there actually requiring them to provide you with anything at all.
There are two main problems with that: Nobody wants to remember an IP address, and if you somehow lose your IP address (e.g if that server/network/ISP goes down) then redirecting it to another one is more complicated than just changing DNS records.
I assume your digital multimeter has 7-segment displays. Perhaps the OCR software wasn't designed with that sort of thing in mind at all, but works much better with printed text.
Checksums don't work for comparing photos, because two photos of the same object won't be identical, due to random fluctuations in the CCD sensor and slight changes in lighting.
(Although there are algorithms which actually will work, so your idea is good, it's just the 'checksum' part that's not quite right.)
He probably has a computer running all the time anyway. And a webcam presumably doesn't consume much power, especially if it's turned off most of the time and just wakes up occasionally to grab a single frame.
To be completely cloaked, no light may be absorbed by an object, because otherwise that light will be missing on the other side so the object will be detectable.
Thus, you can't have a perfect cloak and also be able to see.
Since there was no year 0, if the current four-year cycle were to be extended into the past indefinitely, elections would be held in AD 8, AD 4, 1 BC, 5 BC, etc.
If by 'blog' you mean The Atlantic, a printed magazine which has existed since 1857 and has hundreds of thousands of subscribers, then perhaps you're right.
Obviously, taken to the extreme, privacy means not communicating with anyone.
At some point, you have to find the balance between protecting your personal information and actually being able to interact with other people.
Consider the chance that your life will be somehow ruined by some comment you post on Facebook. It's very low, I think. Now consider how bad you're making life for yourself by refusing to communicate in order to avoid this risk. Is it really worth it?
I, for one, think the benefit I gain from Web 2.0 sites is generally worth the risk.
Slashdot Mirror
Once I had to transfer a few gigabytes from one machine to the other, and I was doing this by piping the data through netcat. When running XP on the sending box and Ubuntu on the receiving box, the speed was much slower than I expected, so I rebooted the sending box from a Ubuntu livecd and tried again, and the speed was approximately what it should have been.
The UNIX time rollover happens on 2038-01-19. So, I don't see how it would have anything to do with a problem that occurred at the end of a year.
Very likely it uses the same clock driver as the 30GB Zune (which had the exact same behaviour)
Maybe your IP address changed and you've been given one which was previously used by a spyware-infested box.
But if it /did/ crash, then that would be very strong evidence that it /was/ date-related, and then he could find the cause and make sure it didn't happen next time. So, it might still be a useful thing to do.
I once programmed my scroll lock LED to light up when my CPU was at 100% (since, of course, the scroll lock LED basically never gets used for anything much.) That was sort of cool.
Sell advertising space.
The headline is an exaggeration. The impression I got from the article was that they intend to selectively filter or monitor BitTorrent, not block it altogether.
It might contain code they don't actually have the right to release (e.g code licensed from other companies.) Or it might contain code which they want to keep and use in future releases.
(google "in Soviet China, government watches Google watch you!" with quotes)
I accidentally modded you redundant; I'm posting this to undo the moderation.
I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong. Did you even run this program? Did you notice the messages about selection and crossover, which show that it doesn't throw out all the previous data? Or the graphs that clearly demonstrate the performance of the car improving?
After running it for a while, the cars appear to get killed without colliding with anything, so I'm assuming this is because there's some time or distance limit on each run. That's why the evolution appears to stop after ~10 generations.
I assume they would have advertised internet with some fine print saying "Terms and conditions apply". When you read the contract you signed up to, it's likely that there's nothing in there actually requiring them to provide you with anything at all.
There are two main problems with that: Nobody wants to remember an IP address, and if you somehow lose your IP address (e.g if that server/network/ISP goes down) then redirecting it to another one is more complicated than just changing DNS records.
I assume your digital multimeter has 7-segment displays. Perhaps the OCR software wasn't designed with that sort of thing in mind at all, but works much better with printed text.
(Although there are algorithms which actually will work, so your idea is good, it's just the 'checksum' part that's not quite right.)
He probably has a computer running all the time anyway. And a webcam presumably doesn't consume much power, especially if it's turned off most of the time and just wakes up occasionally to grab a single frame.
To be completely cloaked, no light may be absorbed by an object, because otherwise that light will be missing on the other side so the object will be detectable. Thus, you can't have a perfect cloak and also be able to see.
Isn't this trademark infringement? Hijacking Google's domain to sell their own products?
Since there was no year 0, if the current four-year cycle were to be extended into the past indefinitely, elections would be held in AD 8, AD 4, 1 BC, 5 BC, etc.
Browse with telnet. Masturbate more.
If by 'blog' you mean The Atlantic, a printed magazine which has existed since 1857 and has hundreds of thousands of subscribers, then perhaps you're right.
Our Liberals, for some reason, are actually conservatives.
At some point, you have to find the balance between protecting your personal information and actually being able to interact with other people.
Consider the chance that your life will be somehow ruined by some comment you post on Facebook. It's very low, I think. Now consider how bad you're making life for yourself by refusing to communicate in order to avoid this risk. Is it really worth it?
I, for one, think the benefit I gain from Web 2.0 sites is generally worth the risk.
Hint: It was about widespread use of Internet-based TV. Which is not what you're talking about.