Before entering sensitive information into a browser window check the address bar and make sure you are where you think you are.
Oh, and I almost forgot about iframes. You know, that feature that lets you put another site inside your site, without changing the address bar or showing an obvious frame border? Yeah.
By the way, chances are I am not behind a firewall or proxy, can we get that stupid condescending message changed to just "Slow down Cowboy, do you think this is a discussion forum?"
Yes of course! Why didn't they realize that DNS has been an absolutely reliable indicator of the authenticity of a site, ever since DNSSEC was implemented way back in 1997.
I'll tell you why: because that happened in an alternate reality, not this one!
So, we should call off the search for Exterritorial life?
Extraterrestrial, you mean? Evolutionary biology and astrophysics tells us there is nothing special about the Earth or its place in the cosmos. There is no scientific reason why life could not arise in other places where conditions are suitable. To test this idea, we must look for life. If we find it, the theory is vindicated. If we go on for centuries and do not find it where we think we will find it, then our theories about where else life might arise would need refining. Indeed, I am at a loss to imagine how else we would determine whether life exists outside the Earth without actively looking for it. Got any ideas?
We shouldn't never have bother looking at trying to split the atom because there was no evidence that it could be split
At the time this experiment was first undertaken, there was a lot of evidence that the atom could be split. That's why it was undertaken, to show that the theory was correct.
Evolution is a Theory
Yes, and in science, this is as good as it gets. Calling an idea a Theory means it is mainstream, widely accepted, and constitutes a coherent and useful framework for further investigation and insight. If evolutionary theory did not provide that, it would not be scientifically useful and would be abandoned by scientists without the bible thumpers having to do anything. You Bible Thumpers simply cannot compete with What Works.
How are the relativistic effects due to speed separated from the relativistic effects of gravity?
By software algorithms in the GPS satellites and receivers that take into account effects of Special Relativity. Without it, GPS would only be able to achieve an accuracy to tens of meters, rather than tens of centimeters.
Mercury is rather close to the sun. Its orbit could also be affected by atmospheric and electric/magnaetic effects from the sun. Since the electric force is 36 orders of magnitude greater than gravity, only a small offset from perfect electrical charge balance between Mercury and the sun could also affect its planetary orbit.
These effects were long ago all accounted for, yet the discrepancy that remained is explained - as accurately as our instruments can measure - only by Special Relativity.
my problem with evolution is that it excludes the possibility of an external force guiding changes
If there was evidence for an external force, scientists would strive to account for it in their theory. What evidence is there for an external force? None? Then that's why it is excluded.
Well I have news for you. Newton STILL is the last word on gravity for our our frame of existence. Now if you can get near the speed of light, then some of the additional effects that Einstein theorized may come into effect.
Nope. You don't need to get anywhere near the speed of light to see effects that have only been accounted for by Special Relativity. Just for one example, Newton's theory cannot account for Mercury's "anomalous" precession of its periapsis, which is a phenomena that occurs at ordinary velocities common in our reference frame. But Special Relativity accounts for it all the way to the limit of our ability to measure the effects. Another example: GPS satellites must take into account relativistic effects of spacetime curvature from Earth's gravitational field in order to achieve their superb accuracy. Newton's theory is not the last word on our reference frame, either, not from a practical standpoint and not from a theoretical standpoint.
There is no fact behind the Theory of Evolution in relation to the creation of different species.
You are mistaken.
It has been proven that genetic mutations exist, and that they cause illness and deformations, but not that they have the ability to create limbs, wings, lungs, etc. in perfect working order.
You are mistaken.
One thing that I am constantly amazed about is that people implant their own logic into Evolution; DNA does not have an agenda. It does not wake up one day and say "over the next 100 generations, I'm going to grow wings and fly!".
No one says that, except the people who are mistaken about what evolution is, what the theory proposes, and how it is tested. People like the ones you got your mistaken information from.
Charles Darwin wrote....
Something, I am sure. But Charles Darwin is not the last word in evolution or natural selection, anymore than Newton is the last word on gravity. Can you at least update your criticisms to refer to science done in the 20th and 21st centuries? A lot of ground has been covered since Darwin.
It is a HUGE leap from this to saying that "We all came from fish".
No one says that. But fish and humans have a common ancestor, which was not a fish nor was it a human.
It is not correct to look at fossils and assume that one came from another because they look similar.
Of course. And no one does that.
You have some very fuzzy and shadowy ideas about what scientists do, and how they come to the conclusions they do. I suggest you do some reading of works by scientists who do evolution, not any more reading of works by preachers debunking it with folklore and thought experiments.
You say I fell for Discovery Institute's trick, but it seems you are under the impression that anyone who believes that God is the Creator must also believe that He scattered dinosaurs fossils around and that the Earth is 6,000 years old.
No one gives a shit what you believe about God and creation. That's totally beside the point. All we care about is whether you want to pass it off as science and have it taught in schools as science. If you're not into that, no one cares whether you've managed to suppress cognitive dissonance enough to accept science and superstition at the same time. Knock yourself out. Have a fulfilling life, or afterlife, or whatever.
It's not a patent on 404 handlers. It's a patent on a client-side component that detects errors including, but not limited to 404s, then relays the error to an external server and receives an alternate URL or resource to serve the user.
Keep that up, and you'll NEVER be asked to be a Slashdot editor. Who the fuck wants a clear, concise and specific one-line statement about the gist of the off-site article? Where's the adventure in that?
I wonder what happens if the external server throws an error when trying to deliver the alternate URL? And even if the external server never throws any errors, this "invention" doesn't seem to be very useful. If I get a 404-error on a image embedded in a page on some random blog, how the hell would Amazon know the right URL? Maybe the image doesn't exist anymore because it was removed by a DMCA take down order? Does this invention file a counterclaim to have it re-instated?
Isn't that what it's really all about, the movies? If you care at all about having HD media on a physical format prosper, you'll throw your full backing behind Blu-Ray and help to convince people it's worth while switching from DVD.
Physical media is dying. Best Buy and the rest will be totally online entities by the time the last HD-DVD and BluRay discs are sold to the last physical player owners. Ephemeral media delivered on demand will win the format wars. BluRay and HD-DVD will become nothing Wikipedia entries by the time the next console generation is introduced, which will be more like digital media centers that can play games and save purchased content to cheap mass storage.
YOU lost the format war, bub. You still think a shiny disc in wasteful paper and plastic packaging that you have to get up off your butt to buy and put in the player, is cool.
If market forces work like they are supposed to according to free-market-groupies, the poor are already getting all the service they want. If you give them more than they can buy, that isn't market forces, that's charity.
If you ever want to know how lopsided and ad-hock capitalism is, this bozo is its biggest success, and he doesn't even know how it fucking works!
Those who oppose religious intrusion into public life have lots of valid reasons for holding that position, and for advocating it to a broad audience. It's not bigotry when you have many good and valid reasons for opposing something. Bigots don't think about their positions. The opponents of religious zealotry are not bigots.
Banning the Pope today from speaking at a University because of what was done to Galileo 400 years ago is the thinest of all possible excuses for blatant anti-religious prejudice.
The Pope is not being banned. He chose to cancel.
The protest was about then-Cardinal Ratzinger's comments in 1990 about what the church did to Galileo 400 years ago.
Your comment was not insightful, it was ignorant and lazy, just like the moderators who bumped it up.
Just wait until Sony jacks up the licensing fees for the BR tech. You didn't think they pulled out all the stops to win the format war just so they could say they were #1, did you? They intend to cash in on being the monopoly HD disc format vendor. Expect BR movies to climb past $50 in a year or so.
Contrary to what music industry public relations like to say, the overwhelming majority of people who are inconvenienced or outright robbed by intrusive DRM are people who have already paid for the content through publisher-approved channels and just want to use the content they paid for. Most of the people paying for the music do so specifically because they thought they would get something for it.
Oh brother! Another wildcard DNS server (not even RFC compliant, it returns a CNAME for every query, with no glue and no SOA, even when asked explicitly). These domains are parked on ns1. and ns2.reserveddomainname.com. All a spammer needs to do is search NSI for a domain, and it begins to resolve and can be used to spam.
The following domains are installed on my anti-spam relays' caching nameservers as empty stub zones. It prevents my anti-spam relays from resolving any domains hosted on nameservers that live in these zones. It accounts for a very large percentage of blocked spam on my systems, and I recommend mail admins start blocking domains hosted on wildcard DNS servers. It's quick, easy, painless, and your content filter will thank you for easing its workload (if it could talk and had emotions, that is).
Slashdot Mirror
Before entering sensitive information into a browser window check the address bar and make sure you are where you think you are.
Oh, and I almost forgot about iframes. You know, that feature that lets you put another site inside your site, without changing the address bar or showing an obvious frame border? Yeah.
By the way, chances are I am not behind a firewall or proxy, can we get that stupid condescending message changed to just "Slow down Cowboy, do you think this is a discussion forum?"
It's called the address bar.
Yes of course! Why didn't they realize that DNS has been an absolutely reliable indicator of the authenticity of a site, ever since DNSSEC was implemented way back in 1997.
I'll tell you why: because that happened in an alternate reality, not this one!
So, we should call off the search for Exterritorial life?
Extraterrestrial, you mean? Evolutionary biology and astrophysics tells us there is nothing special about the Earth or its place in the cosmos. There is no scientific reason why life could not arise in other places where conditions are suitable. To test this idea, we must look for life. If we find it, the theory is vindicated. If we go on for centuries and do not find it where we think we will find it, then our theories about where else life might arise would need refining. Indeed, I am at a loss to imagine how else we would determine whether life exists outside the Earth without actively looking for it. Got any ideas?
We shouldn't never have bother looking at trying to split the atom because there was no evidence that it could be split
At the time this experiment was first undertaken, there was a lot of evidence that the atom could be split. That's why it was undertaken, to show that the theory was correct.
Evolution is a Theory
Yes, and in science, this is as good as it gets. Calling an idea a Theory means it is mainstream, widely accepted, and constitutes a coherent and useful framework for further investigation and insight. If evolutionary theory did not provide that, it would not be scientifically useful and would be abandoned by scientists without the bible thumpers having to do anything. You Bible Thumpers simply cannot compete with What Works.
Evolutionary Theory Works.
How are the relativistic effects due to speed separated from the relativistic effects of gravity?
By software algorithms in the GPS satellites and receivers that take into account effects of Special Relativity. Without it, GPS would only be able to achieve an accuracy to tens of meters, rather than tens of centimeters.
Mercury is rather close to the sun. Its orbit could also be affected by atmospheric and electric/magnaetic effects from the sun. Since the electric force is 36 orders of magnitude greater than gravity, only a small offset from perfect electrical charge balance between Mercury and the sun could also affect its planetary orbit.
These effects were long ago all accounted for, yet the discrepancy that remained is explained - as accurately as our instruments can measure - only by Special Relativity.
my problem with evolution is that it excludes the possibility of an external force guiding changes
If there was evidence for an external force, scientists would strive to account for it in their theory. What evidence is there for an external force? None? Then that's why it is excluded.
Well I have news for you. Newton STILL is the last word on gravity for our our frame of existence. Now if you can get near the speed of light, then some of the additional effects that Einstein theorized may come into effect.
Nope. You don't need to get anywhere near the speed of light to see effects that have only been accounted for by Special Relativity. Just for one example, Newton's theory cannot account for Mercury's "anomalous" precession of its periapsis, which is a phenomena that occurs at ordinary velocities common in our reference frame. But Special Relativity accounts for it all the way to the limit of our ability to measure the effects. Another example: GPS satellites must take into account relativistic effects of spacetime curvature from Earth's gravitational field in order to achieve their superb accuracy. Newton's theory is not the last word on our reference frame, either, not from a practical standpoint and not from a theoretical standpoint.
There is no fact behind the Theory of Evolution in relation to the creation of different species.
You are mistaken.
It has been proven that genetic mutations exist, and that they cause illness and deformations, but not that they have the ability to create limbs, wings, lungs, etc. in perfect working order.
You are mistaken.
One thing that I am constantly amazed about is that people implant their own logic into Evolution; DNA does not have an agenda. It does not wake up one day and say "over the next 100 generations, I'm going to grow wings and fly!".
No one says that, except the people who are mistaken about what evolution is, what the theory proposes, and how it is tested. People like the ones you got your mistaken information from.
Charles Darwin wrote....
Something, I am sure. But Charles Darwin is not the last word in evolution or natural selection, anymore than Newton is the last word on gravity. Can you at least update your criticisms to refer to science done in the 20th and 21st centuries? A lot of ground has been covered since Darwin.
It is a HUGE leap from this to saying that "We all came from fish".
No one says that. But fish and humans have a common ancestor, which was not a fish nor was it a human.
It is not correct to look at fossils and assume that one came from another because they look similar.
Of course. And no one does that.
You have some very fuzzy and shadowy ideas about what scientists do, and how they come to the conclusions they do. I suggest you do some reading of works by scientists who do evolution, not any more reading of works by preachers debunking it with folklore and thought experiments.
Ummm, if I were stranded on a desert island, the one device I'd wish to have was a 406Mhz PLB or EPIRB. I mean, come on.
You say I fell for Discovery Institute's trick, but it seems you are under the impression that anyone who believes that God is the Creator must also believe that He scattered dinosaurs fossils around and that the Earth is 6,000 years old.
No one gives a shit what you believe about God and creation. That's totally beside the point. All we care about is whether you want to pass it off as science and have it taught in schools as science. If you're not into that, no one cares whether you've managed to suppress cognitive dissonance enough to accept science and superstition at the same time. Knock yourself out. Have a fulfilling life, or afterlife, or whatever.
I'm not sure. I couldn't get past the part where he figured out it wasn't MS' fault facebook didn't work, but still blamed Vista anyway.
That and his continuing obsession with posing as a teenager on Facebook. It's getting creepy!
It's not a patent on 404 handlers. It's a patent on a client-side component that detects errors including, but not limited to 404s, then relays the error to an external server and receives an alternate URL or resource to serve the user.
Keep that up, and you'll NEVER be asked to be a Slashdot editor. Who the fuck wants a clear, concise and specific one-line statement about the gist of the off-site article? Where's the adventure in that?
I wonder what happens if the external server throws an error when trying to deliver the alternate URL? And even if the external server never throws any errors, this "invention" doesn't seem to be very useful. If I get a 404-error on a image embedded in a page on some random blog, how the hell would Amazon know the right URL? Maybe the image doesn't exist anymore because it was removed by a DMCA take down order? Does this invention file a counterclaim to have it re-instated?
Isn't that what it's really all about, the movies? If you care at all about having HD media on a physical format prosper, you'll throw your full backing behind Blu-Ray and help to convince people it's worth while switching from DVD.
Physical media is dying. Best Buy and the rest will be totally online entities by the time the last HD-DVD and BluRay discs are sold to the last physical player owners. Ephemeral media delivered on demand will win the format wars. BluRay and HD-DVD will become nothing Wikipedia entries by the time the next console generation is introduced, which will be more like digital media centers that can play games and save purchased content to cheap mass storage.
YOU lost the format war, bub. You still think a shiny disc in wasteful paper and plastic packaging that you have to get up off your butt to buy and put in the player, is cool.
Wouldn't her new immune system see the rest of her body apart from the liver as a foreign invader, and attack it?
If market forces work like they are supposed to according to free-market-groupies, the poor are already getting all the service they want. If you give them more than they can buy, that isn't market forces, that's charity.
If you ever want to know how lopsided and ad-hock capitalism is, this bozo is its biggest success, and he doesn't even know how it fucking works!
And then that whole thread is sent to your ticket queue for you to act on.
Moderator dudes, this guy is employing irony, so he should be moderated Funny, not Interesting, you morons.
(This is exactly why legislators keep looking at things like "customer bill of rights" legislation...
And they just keep looking, and looking, and looking.... "Now them's some pretty fine consumer rights we're admiring in this here bill."
Those who oppose religious intrusion into public life have lots of valid reasons for holding that position, and for advocating it to a broad audience. It's not bigotry when you have many good and valid reasons for opposing something. Bigots don't think about their positions. The opponents of religious zealotry are not bigots.
Banning the Pope today from speaking at a University because of what was done to Galileo 400 years ago is the thinest of all possible excuses for blatant anti-religious prejudice.
The Pope is not being banned. He chose to cancel.
The protest was about then-Cardinal Ratzinger's comments in 1990 about what the church did to Galileo 400 years ago.
Your comment was not insightful, it was ignorant and lazy, just like the moderators who bumped it up.
Many scientists are pushing atheism as the new religion and they seem to want to force everyone to accept it.
Atheism is not new, nor is it a religion.
Silencing is the way of Hilter, Stalin, and others.
The Pope has not been silenced, not one bit.
It's exactly what the church did centuries ago to scientists and now its redeveloping on the other side of the coin.
If ever the Pope is burned at the stake with scientists lighting the pyre, you'll have a point.
That's not funny!
Who expected otherwise?
Just wait until Sony jacks up the licensing fees for the BR tech. You didn't think they pulled out all the stops to win the format war just so they could say they were #1, did you? They intend to cash in on being the monopoly HD disc format vendor. Expect BR movies to climb past $50 in a year or so.
Contrary to what music industry public relations like to say, the overwhelming majority of people who are inconvenienced or outright robbed by intrusive DRM are people who have already paid for the content through publisher-approved channels and just want to use the content they paid for. Most of the people paying for the music do so specifically because they thought they would get something for it.
Oh brother! Another wildcard DNS server (not even RFC compliant, it returns a CNAME for every query, with no glue and no SOA, even when asked explicitly). These domains are parked on ns1. and ns2.reserveddomainname.com. All a spammer needs to do is search NSI for a domain, and it begins to resolve and can be used to spam.
The following domains are installed on my anti-spam relays' caching nameservers as empty stub zones. It prevents my anti-spam relays from resolving any domains hosted on nameservers that live in these zones. It accounts for a very large percentage of blocked spam on my systems, and I recommend mail admins start blocking domains hosted on wildcard DNS servers. It's quick, easy, painless, and your content filter will thank you for easing its workload (if it could talk and had emotions, that is).
cheap-dns-host.com
domainservice.com
fastpark.net
namesdiscount24.net
name-services.com
names-service.com
parked.com
parkingsave.net
reserveddomainname.com
versans1.com
versans2.com
versans3.com
versans4.com
versans.com
If you are really from Network Solutions, I don't believe you. You are probably lying. It's part of your brand identity.
And if you are not from Network Solutions, then you're definitely lying.
Basically, you're lying. There's no escaping that.