I found your post very informative. However, I was hoping that you would give us more insight into what you actually learned from this study. For example, how different were the species then and how much did they adapt since that time. Have you done dna analysis on some of those species? Have you discovered new species. etc.
Evolution can not be wrong. It's not a theory - it's just a plain fact.
If your DNA causes you to have more children than me, then the DNA of our species has taken a step in the direction of your DNA rather than mine. If the DNA of species A group #1 has diverged from that of species A group #2 to the extent that they can't interbreed then (by definition) one of these groups is a new species.
There may be additional subtleties to how evolution actually plays out (there's plenty of post-Darwin realizations such as that it's environmental change that drives punctuated equilibrium), but the mechanism itself can't be wrong - it's just plain fact. More children = more descendents with your DNA.
Actually, evolution is an interpretation of facts observed in nature and is thus a theory. All the data observed could conveivably be used to support another theory as to how life came to be the way it is. Also, such things as proof of http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2 007/01/21/ING5LNJSBF1.DTL retrocausality could throw a curveball to evolutionism.
A little bit back on topic, is anyone else disturbed that unwavering belief in the theory of evolution has become a litmus test for intelligence?
I disagree. The best intelligence litmus test is to be skeptic and never accept everything as the complete unquestionable truth. The way I see it, the creationists have about 0.000001% chance of being completely right, the evolutionists have about a 30% chance of being completely right. The complete truth is probably either a slight modification of the evolution theory or a completely different concept that either no one has ever thought of, or that no one is capable of thinking of.
Not a bad argument for why rural areas are lagging, but why are urban areas lagging too?
The United States was one of the first countries to have internet widely available, as such they have the infrastructures of that generation. However, countries in which internet sprung up later have newer infrastructures that have better capacity. The internet capacity of the United States then becomes an economic problem: is the cost of updating the entire internet infrastructure of the United States worth the benefit? If you examine it from a telco point of view, you will get subscriptions whether you have a fast connection or a faster connection. There is basically no new market to gain by increasing the speed of the internet connection, but an enormous sunk cost. Also, the nature of the industry makes it almost impossible for a startup to come in, up the ante and increase the speed of the internet. Telecommunication is a natural monopoly in that sense.
In short, wait a few years, or decades.
This might have something to do with the US being such a big country. It's quite easy to put cables through a heavily concentrated Asian population. It's quite another thing to lay thousands of miles of cable across the United Staes.
If by "bullshit" you mean "American" then I'm pretty sure you can find 35,000,000 people living just north of you who wouldn't mind saying it.
But internet use among Eskimos is known to be quite low so there is maybe 10 people among those 35,000,000 who use the internet to download polar bear porn.
If you use a precomputation attack with a 128 bit salt, the dictionary must be 2^128=3.4028236692093846346337460743177e+38 times larger than it would be without it. That's a lot. Say you have a 1 password that is 1 byte long and you want to encrypt it for all possiblities of salt it would take you 340282366920938463463374607431.77 gigabytes to store that information or about 85070591730234615865843651857.942 dvd's. Good luck:D
Not if you use a random salt. By using a random salt, that's say 16 bits(Can't remember the optimal number from security class but was something like that), added to the public salt, the normal users of the systems must perform 65536/2 average checks against the hash with a proper password. That's a slowdown of a few seconds which is something a normal user can easily stand. However, a hacker has to multiply his number of attempts by 65536
If you've spent the past two years organizing your porn collection on flickr then they notice, you might get the chance to export your photo collection to pr0nr.com
Slashdot Mirror
Hey Scott Elrick,
I found your post very informative. However, I was hoping that you would give us more insight into what you actually learned from this study. For example, how different were the species then and how much did they adapt since that time. Have you done dna analysis on some of those species? Have you discovered new species. etc.
Any sort of ramp would do. I really don't see why he has to specify that it's a spiral ramp.
This post is funny. Mod it accordingly. Thank you.
Vista is a waffle-thin wafer and nerds are all named Creosote.
Evolution can not be wrong. It's not a theory - it's just a plain fact. If your DNA causes you to have more children than me, then the DNA of our species has taken a step in the direction of your DNA rather than mine. If the DNA of species A group #1 has diverged from that of species A group #2 to the extent that they can't interbreed then (by definition) one of these groups is a new species. There may be additional subtleties to how evolution actually plays out (there's plenty of post-Darwin realizations such as that it's environmental change that drives punctuated equilibrium), but the mechanism itself can't be wrong - it's just plain fact. More children = more descendents with your DNA.2 007/01/21/ING5LNJSBF1.DTL retrocausality could throw a curveball to evolutionism.
Actually, evolution is an interpretation of facts observed in nature and is thus a theory. All the data observed could conveivably be used to support another theory as to how life came to be the way it is. Also, such things as proof of http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/
A little bit back on topic, is anyone else disturbed that unwavering belief in the theory of evolution has become a litmus test for intelligence?
I disagree. The best intelligence litmus test is to be skeptic and never accept everything as the complete unquestionable truth. The way I see it, the creationists have about 0.000001% chance of being completely right, the evolutionists have about a 30% chance of being completely right. The complete truth is probably either a slight modification of the evolution theory or a completely different concept that either no one has ever thought of, or that no one is capable of thinking of.
So what are the fees that people pay for media for?
Protection money.
Not a bad argument for why rural areas are lagging, but why are urban areas lagging too?
The United States was one of the first countries to have internet widely available, as such they have the infrastructures of that generation. However, countries in which internet sprung up later have newer infrastructures that have better capacity. The internet capacity of the United States then becomes an economic problem: is the cost of updating the entire internet infrastructure of the United States worth the benefit? If you examine it from a telco point of view, you will get subscriptions whether you have a fast connection or a faster connection. There is basically no new market to gain by increasing the speed of the internet connection, but an enormous sunk cost. Also, the nature of the industry makes it almost impossible for a startup to come in, up the ante and increase the speed of the internet. Telecommunication is a natural monopoly in that sense. In short, wait a few years, or decades.
This might have something to do with the US being such a big country. It's quite easy to put cables through a heavily concentrated Asian population. It's quite another thing to lay thousands of miles of cable across the United Staes.
its only old movies and Julia Child cooking shows though (so far)
Thanks for reminding me why I haven't gone to a public library in years.
We'll see if they run linux on those tough books. Of course this assumes that the whole web site is run on a tough book.
Don't torrents pretty much do that? So when it's a community initiative, it's piracy, but if the goverment does it, it's ...
No, they run windows.
That's called stalking which IS illegal Unless you have a badge
A criminal mastermind would likely not use a windows software for protecting his secrets. Sharks with lasers on their heads, on the other hand...
Pr0n for every child!!!
As the first result for a google search on mac fanboy, I feel qualified to answer this.
Your mother must be proud
Just don't wear those white earbuds and I probably ... I mean, they probably won't notice that you have iPods.
Read more about tungsten here
If you use a precomputation attack with a 128 bit salt, the dictionary must be 2^128=3.4028236692093846346337460743177e+38 times larger than it would be without it. That's a lot. Say you have a 1 password that is 1 byte long and you want to encrypt it for all possiblities of salt it would take you 340282366920938463463374607431.77 gigabytes to store that information or about 85070591730234615865843651857.942 dvd's. Good luck :D
Not if you use a random salt. By using a random salt, that's say 16 bits(Can't remember the optimal number from security class but was something like that), added to the public salt, the normal users of the systems must perform 65536/2 average checks against the hash with a proper password. That's a slowdown of a few seconds which is something a normal user can easily stand. However, a hacker has to multiply his number of attempts by 65536
and what about the increase in size of the earth... It could disrupt the orbit and everything...
If you've spent the past two years organizing your porn collection on flickr then they notice, you might get the chance to export your photo collection to pr0nr.com