Which is great when you have the luxury to study the phenomenon, but not terribly practical.
Let me give an example: You are out in the woods with a group of friends and encounter an animal you've never seen or heard about before. It is showing a set of sharp teeth in its mouth to you. Do you A) back away slowly or B) wait until it eats one of your group members before determining that it is a predator and then running away? Better yet, what if a local told you that there's a strange man-eating predator out in the woods beforehand? Do you still wait until your hypothesis is tested first? (The obvious answer would be to bring a gun with you, but let's assume that no such third solution exists.)
Science isn't the answer to everything. It'll only produce an answer if you have the time to wait for the analysis. Furthermore, science doesn't produce phenomenon. It requires an existing phenomenon to act upon, which it will then (hopefully) produce a likely cause for the phenomenon.
That having been said, it's a good idea to listen to what science says after the test results and subsequent analysis have come in. But just because a phenomenon hasn't been proven by science to exist doens't mean it doesn't exist. (And in this sense, I'm not so much replying to you directly as I am to some of the other replies out there.)
China has a nationally standardized spoken dialect. It's called Putonghua translated literally to mean "normal language" in China and also known as Mandarin in Taiwan and pretty much everywhere else. Yes, they're technically different, but most people tend to use them synonymously because they're pretty close dialects of each other.
If you speak that, everybody in China (including Taiwan, for the most part) will understand, even if they speak a different dialect at home. Even in many SAR's, the sheer economic pressure from mainland China forces those residents to learn the national language.
That having been said, the only form of language relevant to the internet in its current incarnation is the written part, so everything you've said about the spoken part isn't actually applicable.
The problem of perfect security in general is that you need to secure the whole system. That's an impossibility, which is why three-letter agencies also secure the premises the systems are housed in.
Of course, you can compete on complexity (e.g. fighting timing attacks with one-time pads or otherwise inserting bits of entropy into the system), but there's a point when things just get too complex to be usable.
The only thing the masses have against a determined attacker is to be one among the herd.
That argument only holds water in the US. And it's not common sense that lends that idea any credence; it's the founding princple that the government, and hence anything deemed public is in service of the people.
Governments not founded on this idea do not give the people such protections.
I personally rather that someone be ME and the other 300 million Americans (plus or minus the 100-thousand or so who are employed by the particular affected corporations) instead of the 100 guys sitting at the top of said affected corporations.
More likely, they released Java to compete with MS's Visual products like Visual Basic. They made their language platform-independent to try to level the playing field so that companies wouldn't become increasingly dependent on MS APIs--and the latest version at that.
MS did try to kill Java with their own JVM implementation. Fortunately, the market and consumers were wising up to MS's business practices and Sun sued.
From one perspective, Java did its job. A lot of (new) enterprise code is written is Java nowadays, whereas it would've otherwise had to have been written in C or a C-derivative, most likely against a Windows-based compiler and using Windows libraries. It pretty much removed Visual Studio as a threat to the server application development environment, and it quite possibly single-handedly stopped MS from further penetrating into the entreprise server market.
On the other hand, all Java really did in the end was swap one dictator for another. Sun may have been benevolent, but Oracle certainly isn't. And with the threat of patents against alternative-VM implementations, it's quite possible Oracle is now going to get where Microsoft would have been fifteen years ago, and where IBM was 40 years ago.
Interesting times we're living in... interesting times...
All you really have to do is bring up task manager or run top and look for the biggest memory hogs. 95% of software written in Java will suck up memory, especially after long periods of use. The only way I've seen people (Oracle) get around this is to spawn new processes to do all of the heavy lifting.
The point is, Nokia foresaw the strategic value of actually owning its own platform instead of using the trendy new technology, and did what it needed to achieve just that. This will just be incentive to move to fully using Maemo on most, if not all of their fully-featured phones.
Note that they acquired Trolltech a few years back right when they became serious about shifting to Qt.
the existence of alternate compilers, alternate VMs, and extensions to the language not officially sanctioned by Sun (or Oracle) seem to indicate that Java isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
That's what Oracle is suing everybody and their moms over. Very soon, those alternate compilers, alternate VM's, etc. will be buried under a very large, hot, steaming pile of legal refuse.
Most of the major renaissance and post-renaissance western thinkers were theologists. Descartes came up with "cogito ergo sum" trying to prove the existence of God. Only in modern times did thinking become the providence of the secular.
When someone's used to cherry picking their "knowledge" anyway, they tend to do it for everything.
I'm not implying that science is some kind of religion, but the last mile of all knowledge, including that which is created or discovered by empiricism is for the individual to believe, trust, or accept the conclusions that the empirical results imply. That last mile between sensory input and brain is where the cherry picking happens, and is also where people who are already used to cherry picking which ideas to acknowledge and which to discard fail.
I am implying that religious practitioners, fundamentalists or otherwise, cherry pick from their source material what they decide to believe and follow. While most other people pick and choose their knowledge, they don't pick information based on convenience in the way that religious practitioners do.
Don't forget, had there been a Texan with a pistol on each of those airplanes on 9/11, there would have been no terrorist attack.
You don't even need guns. The 9/11 hijackers used metal knives and forks not unlike what they used to provide with your on-board meals. All that was really needed was a karate team on their way to a national championship. And a locked cockpit. The Israelies have known that one for years.
That's a whole 2 more years to undo 6 years worth of damage (when the Glass-Stegall Act was repealed in '00, or over 18 years of damage if you think the whole thing started with Reagan's appointing of Greenspan).
Laws of nature dictates that it takes less effort to destroy than it does to create. Without some kind of miracle like a new 3rd world country to exploit, the Dems were not going to be able to fix such a heavily-damaged the economy in 10 years, much less 4 (or 2 if you thought Obama had such a power).
Worse, the prosperity of the previous 10 years (really of the previous 60 years) has ingrained into the psyche of the populace a desire for excess and a sense of entitlement (though whether that is a result of prosperity alone is debatable) that will be harder to overcome than the actual economic troubles. Unfortunately, most people aren't going to think the economy's fixed until they can afford to buy that brand spankin' new 63" TV (or subsequent equivalent) every Black Friday.
Yeah, but they don't nearly have the kind of manpower to pull it off. The ones who can actually do this effectively work for three-letter agencies that are higher up in the totem pole, i.e. FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, etc.
The TSA is just there to look intimidating, not unlike a big bouncer at the door. Push comes to shove, it's the guy at the control room looking at the monitors that's calling the shots.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is great when you have the luxury to study the phenomenon, but not terribly practical.
Let me give an example:
You are out in the woods with a group of friends and encounter an animal you've never seen or heard about before. It is showing a set of sharp teeth in its mouth to you. Do you A) back away slowly or B) wait until it eats one of your group members before determining that it is a predator and then running away? Better yet, what if a local told you that there's a strange man-eating predator out in the woods beforehand? Do you still wait until your hypothesis is tested first? (The obvious answer would be to bring a gun with you, but let's assume that no such third solution exists.)
Science isn't the answer to everything. It'll only produce an answer if you have the time to wait for the analysis. Furthermore, science doesn't produce phenomenon. It requires an existing phenomenon to act upon, which it will then (hopefully) produce a likely cause for the phenomenon.
That having been said, it's a good idea to listen to what science says after the test results and subsequent analysis have come in. But just because a phenomenon hasn't been proven by science to exist doens't mean it doesn't exist. (And in this sense, I'm not so much replying to you directly as I am to some of the other replies out there.)
Are you ignorant, or just trolling?
China has a nationally standardized spoken dialect. It's called Putonghua translated literally to mean "normal language" in China and also known as Mandarin in Taiwan and pretty much everywhere else. Yes, they're technically different, but most people tend to use them synonymously because they're pretty close dialects of each other.
If you speak that, everybody in China (including Taiwan, for the most part) will understand, even if they speak a different dialect at home. Even in many SAR's, the sheer economic pressure from mainland China forces those residents to learn the national language.
That having been said, the only form of language relevant to the internet in its current incarnation is the written part, so everything you've said about the spoken part isn't actually applicable.
The problem of perfect security in general is that you need to secure the whole system. That's an impossibility, which is why three-letter agencies also secure the premises the systems are housed in.
Of course, you can compete on complexity (e.g. fighting timing attacks with one-time pads or otherwise inserting bits of entropy into the system), but there's a point when things just get too complex to be usable.
The only thing the masses have against a determined attacker is to be one among the herd.
Maybe because Google uses a better prediction algorithm than simple pattern matching?
What appears immediately is a huge contributing factor to whether the feature is usable (and hence liked) or not.
Beta software is completely stable software with an incomplete set of features.
-- Google
That argument only holds water in the US. And it's not common sense that lends that idea any credence; it's the founding princple that the government, and hence anything deemed public is in service of the people.
Governments not founded on this idea do not give the people such protections.
I personally rather that someone be ME and the other 300 million Americans (plus or minus the 100-thousand or so who are employed by the particular affected corporations) instead of the 100 guys sitting at the top of said affected corporations.
Instead of putting up the actual news, the editors just went straight to the news on the ensuing /. effect.
I think you might've just gotten trained by the cat.
Reminds me of an old Garfield comic: "Claws on a chalkboard?"
More likely, they released Java to compete with MS's Visual products like Visual Basic. They made their language platform-independent to try to level the playing field so that companies wouldn't become increasingly dependent on MS APIs--and the latest version at that.
MS did try to kill Java with their own JVM implementation. Fortunately, the market and consumers were wising up to MS's business practices and Sun sued.
From one perspective, Java did its job. A lot of (new) enterprise code is written is Java nowadays, whereas it would've otherwise had to have been written in C or a C-derivative, most likely against a Windows-based compiler and using Windows libraries. It pretty much removed Visual Studio as a threat to the server application development environment, and it quite possibly single-handedly stopped MS from further penetrating into the entreprise server market.
On the other hand, all Java really did in the end was swap one dictator for another. Sun may have been benevolent, but Oracle certainly isn't. And with the threat of patents against alternative-VM implementations, it's quite possible Oracle is now going to get where Microsoft would have been fifteen years ago, and where IBM was 40 years ago.
Interesting times we're living in... interesting times...
But the Baroness really is a part of Cobra!
http://services.parliament.uk/hansard/Lords/bydate/20101101/mainchamberdebates/part009.html
And has ties to sketchy Russians.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303215/MI5-vetoed-Security-Minister-Baroness-Pauline-Neville-Jones-links-Ukrainian-oligarchs.html
Maybe someone wants to see if Cuthulu really is on the moon.
All you really have to do is bring up task manager or run top and look for the biggest memory hogs. 95% of software written in Java will suck up memory, especially after long periods of use. The only way I've seen people (Oracle) get around this is to spawn new processes to do all of the heavy lifting.
The point is, Nokia foresaw the strategic value of actually owning its own platform instead of using the trendy new technology, and did what it needed to achieve just that. This will just be incentive to move to fully using Maemo on most, if not all of their fully-featured phones.
Note that they acquired Trolltech a few years back right when they became serious about shifting to Qt.
the existence of alternate compilers, alternate VMs, and extensions to the language not officially sanctioned by Sun (or Oracle) seem to indicate that Java isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
That's what Oracle is suing everybody and their moms over. Very soon, those alternate compilers, alternate VM's, etc. will be buried under a very large, hot, steaming pile of legal refuse.
Copernicus was a priest (or close to one).
Most of the major renaissance and post-renaissance western thinkers were theologists. Descartes came up with "cogito ergo sum" trying to prove the existence of God. Only in modern times did thinking become the providence of the secular.
When someone's used to cherry picking their "knowledge" anyway, they tend to do it for everything.
I'm not implying that science is some kind of religion, but the last mile of all knowledge, including that which is created or discovered by empiricism is for the individual to believe, trust, or accept the conclusions that the empirical results imply. That last mile between sensory input and brain is where the cherry picking happens, and is also where people who are already used to cherry picking which ideas to acknowledge and which to discard fail.
I am implying that religious practitioners, fundamentalists or otherwise, cherry pick from their source material what they decide to believe and follow. While most other people pick and choose their knowledge, they don't pick information based on convenience in the way that religious practitioners do.
Romance is the new porn.
Not sure what the new romance is.
Don't forget, had there been a Texan with a pistol on each of those airplanes on 9/11, there would have been no terrorist attack.
You don't even need guns. The 9/11 hijackers used metal knives and forks not unlike what they used to provide with your on-board meals. All that was really needed was a karate team on their way to a national championship. And a locked cockpit. The Israelies have known that one for years.
Cut one of the plugs from the power supply and run a current from right to left through the CPU?
That's a whole 2 more years to undo 6 years worth of damage (when the Glass-Stegall Act was repealed in '00, or over 18 years of damage if you think the whole thing started with Reagan's appointing of Greenspan).
Laws of nature dictates that it takes less effort to destroy than it does to create. Without some kind of miracle like a new 3rd world country to exploit, the Dems were not going to be able to fix such a heavily-damaged the economy in 10 years, much less 4 (or 2 if you thought Obama had such a power).
Worse, the prosperity of the previous 10 years (really of the previous 60 years) has ingrained into the psyche of the populace a desire for excess and a sense of entitlement (though whether that is a result of prosperity alone is debatable) that will be harder to overcome than the actual economic troubles. Unfortunately, most people aren't going to think the economy's fixed until they can afford to buy that brand spankin' new 63" TV (or subsequent equivalent) every Black Friday.
it describes Tony Blair's relationship with George W Bush, nose planted firmly up arse.
I think I like that meaning better.
I used to be one
A gummy bear or a fingerprint scanner?
I sense a priest fetish...
Yeah, but they don't nearly have the kind of manpower to pull it off. The ones who can actually do this effectively work for three-letter agencies that are higher up in the totem pole, i.e. FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, etc.
The TSA is just there to look intimidating, not unlike a big bouncer at the door. Push comes to shove, it's the guy at the control room looking at the monitors that's calling the shots.