Not necessarily true. The universe could indeed have infinite space, or it could expand infinitely, but that wouldn't necessarily mean that it also contains infinite matter or infinite stars and planets. Perhaps there was a big bang, inflation took off, and there were 100 trillion galaxies that formed within the first 10 billion years. The universe might expand infinitely then, though the quantity of matter (and therefore the number of galaxies, stars, and habitable planets) could still be quite finite, unless there is something really crazy going on and matter is popping into existence. Even if the universe is infinite, you can't just assume that it is the same throughout unless you also know that it has always been infinite and is uniformly smooth.
Infinite habitable planets would mean infinite mass, and infinite mass would force the universe to contract to an infinitely small point (zero dimensional?), wouldn't it? And we observe it to be expanding, probably at an increasing rate (and faster than the speed of light), right? Be careful multiplying by infinity, or attempts at mathematical proofs can get really screwy. Infinity is not a perfect substitute for even REALLY big numbers.
Just a few thoughts that might make sense. Maybe not. After all, I'm only an amateur cosmologist.
You're right, I'm not seeing the number of comments, either. I liked having it - I knew instantly if there was a big buzz about something, or if taking time to throw in my two cents might matter for a stalled thread.
The key is that everyone should get what they pay for. If I pay for 768kbps, then I should get at least 768kbps. If google wants to pay extra, then I'm ok with google gettting to me at 2mbps, but not with google paying my ISP so that yahoo only comes to me at 250kbps.
Well said! But it goes further than that: ISPs should not be permitted to completely block legal content, either. Any restrictions at all they put into place are highly questionable. You have to remember that telcos and cable companies have received a LOT of preferential treatment over the years. RBOCs and cable providers have generally been granted local monopolies, severely limiting competition, yet we have still been forced to pay extra to ensure universal service. We wouldn't let the USPS places limits on where or who your mail could come from, right? If the carriers get monopolies, we have to maintain net neutrality or they'll drive prices up even further, despite our prices already being high and bandwidth low.
Dennis Miller was always an idiot. He always came across as a pseudo-intellectual who was always so proud of his simple-minded jokes that he could never wipe the smug grin off his face. The only "funny man" with a worse delivery is Jay Leno, with his high voice and how he always repeats himself after a punch line so stupid audience has a cue to laugh and applaud. In contrast, Franken can think on his feet and debate articulately and intelligently with anyone, unlike Miller who can barely read a cue card without chomping at the bit for a chance to deliver the zinger he worked all week on.
As for Garofalo, I could take her or leave her. She can be quite funny but gets in over her head and doesn' talways seem to know what she's talking about.
You know, I personally think Al Franken would make a great president. He is level-headed, understands middle- and working-class Americans, and has more common sense than most of Washington put together. But it will never happen. Yeah, it may have shocked some folks when Ronald Reagan (the actor) began to have some success in politics, but Franken is a different type of character. An opposing party's followers will never take a comedy writer/comedic actor/political satirist seriously. And he's a Jew, which would certainly not sit well with a lot of Americans, even in an age when we have had a mixed-race president. Hopefully he'll spend a long time in the Senate, at least.
How can you not like a guy who is blunt enough to call liars liars, and not be afraid to call Rush Limbaugh a "Big at Idiot?"
Is there any irony here: a company who's first products came in kit form, which helped establish their reputation among geeks, now goes to great lengths to make it very difficult for DIY'ers and anyone with a clue to fix, modify, or use their own possessions as they please?
Phone numbers and home addresses are public knowledge already — it's called a phone book. If you want to be ex-directory, then you wouldn't put this info on your Facebook profile in the first place.
Score:4 Insightful ???
Never heard of unpublished and unlisted numbers, for the dinosaurs who still have landlines at home? They aren't expensive. And the mobile-only crowd don't even have to worry about that at all.
Most people expect some level of privacy and professionalism from those companies and services whom they choose to trust, and they expect that the associated terms of service will not change drastically. Maybe it is a bit naive, but it seems like damn near everyone (not literally everyone - I've never signed up) has trusted Facebook.
I work for a bank, and if i had emails on yahoo related to my work and got caught, i would be dismissed, end of story.
Well, yes, you or I should be dismissed for being reckless with sensitive information. But in Palin's case, you can't fire a quitter!
...i'm not an American... Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen.
You caught the difference already - things are different for us, and the American justice system is not fair or equal for all. The system greatly favors those who wield political power, have powerful friends, or are rich. There is a real disparity between how minorities and poor people are sentenced compared to wealthy or otherwise notable white people. The statistics don't lie, and poor minorities are disproportionately represented in the prison population, to a great degree.
Folks who can't afford their own lawyers are found guilty of crimes at a much higher rate than those who have money, and they are also sentenced more harshly. Even some laws are skewed as they exist on the books, before court even comes into play, such as the way possession or sale of crack cocaine (a drug whose users are disproportionately black and poor) often carries much heftier penalties than a similar crime involving powder cocaine (which is effectively the same drug but used mainly by whites and has been considered glamorous at times). Even the pre-trial bond release system is unfair, as it places an unrealistic burden on people of meager means.
Considering past precedent (which our justice system claims to rely so heavily on), guessing a password and publishing someone's email without permission should probably warrant probation and a small fine for anyone without a lengthy record of prior criminal activity. Federal prison is completely out of line with normal sentencing, and the BoP's curious decision is quite ridiculous when our prisons are already filled to capacity and community-based sanctions have been proven to work reliably and efficiently.
Hold on a second. Maybe you hate Google. Maybe you hate all large corporations. Maybe you genuinely think Google's Street View data collections are invasive. Maybe you are extremely paranoid about your security and privacy, and are constantly peering out from under your tinfoil hate and over your shoulder. Maybe Larry Page raped your dog. Even if all of these things are true, I think you have to admit that Google being investigated by the Korean Cyber Terror Response Center seems a little overblown and inflamatory. Cyber "terror?" Are you kidding me? Their intention is to create fear and panic, not to continue to dominate their competition and rake in piles of cash? Really? You've got to be kidding me. This is the same thing we have begun to see in the US, thankfully on a limited basis. Please not that most criminal actions are *NOT* terrorism or cyber terror.
I suppose I don't know enough about ROK law enforcement and the inner workings of their government, but an agency with "terror" in its name doesn't seem like the appropriate choice for investigating non terror-related crimes. Are they somehow responsible for all "cyber" crimes, as a poorly named authority?
A report by The Real News, which followed a similar report by Smart People, says that any report by FOX News should be completely ignored until corroborated by a genuine news agency.
Google took a pic of my house when there was no foil cover over the roof. I had such anxiety knowing that aliens would see my naked house and come to use their mind control powers while I slept, that I gave up sleeping and lost my job. Do I have a chance of winning if I sue Google? Lord, I hope not, and I hope that woman doesn't, either.
Privacy is important, but if you don't want anyone to see your underwear, DON'T FUCKING HANG IT ON A LINE OUTSIDE IN PLAIN VIEW. Duh. First of all, is she even hot? Second, shouldn't she be more worried about the pervs in her neighborhood who walk by every day and use telescopes to peep her windows than someone using the one-time still pic on Google to "stalk" her? Can you say, "overreaction?"
The FBI is not the NSA, but they definitely have access to good people.
Yes, there are many very smart people who work for the FBI. They also have money, guns, and a means for reprisals (frame-jobs, media leaks, prosecutions, etc.) at their disposal, which are things that could influence many people, if not most. So I agree, they are not the NSA, but they should never be underestimated, and they were/are capable of backdoors and much more.
You have to remember that something like that wouldn't be in the code with a/*evil shit goes here*/ before it.
Yes, anyone capable of doing this would have been smart enough not to be that obvious - which is clear, since no one caught it. So we should be looking for something that says/*non-evil shit goes here so move along*/
This sounds bad, and I admit that this is the first I've heard about this particular pesticide being especially toxic to bees, but let's not get carried away. The longstanding mystery of Colony Collapse Disorder in bees has pretty much been solved. A few months ago, it was published that a double whammy of a fungus and a virus acting at the same time are almost certainly what have decimated bee populations around the world. A bee colony can usually survive either of the two pathogens, and it will recover, but being hit by both at the same time is deadly. The science behind this conclusion looked sound, and most experts have agreed. Sure, this pesticide has clearly not helped bees, and perhaps a ban is in order, but it is not the main factor behind all the recent hubbub about honeybees.
I don't want to hear anything about evil electromagnetic radiation, cell phones, wifi, government conspiracies, aliens, a grassy knoll, or malnutrition induced by an exploding pooh bear population. The answer is simple and makes sense. Bee populations have suffered around the world, including where there is neither ubiquitous wifi nor this pesticide, and the virus/fungus combo has been found everywhere anyone has looked. Now, maybe aliens brought the virus and communists spread the fungus, but...
Chrome doesn't trust applications, or users — and neither can modify the system.
That's okay, because this user doesn't trust Google or Chrome OS, and they will not be permitted to install an OS on my computer. I'll stick to linux, which I know I can sort of trust most of the time, and my own judgment, which is well known to be predictably untrustworthy.
If there must be such a thing as a Caps Lock key on conventional keyboards, I wish it could be banished (along with the Insert/Delete pair) to a hard-to-fumble-upon switch on the bottom of the keyboard or laptop.
Yeah, if you remove the CAPS LOCK key from your keyboard, you could save enough space to add a key. If I had one, it would have been used to type the sentence before this one.
The fact that he is still alive raises some questions, for me. WHY is he still alive if what he had to leak was as important as has been said? Was the information not as significant as we have been told? Is the CIA really off their game, and not capable of clandestine actions anymore?
The US government knows what Assange knows, they say him divulging it will endanger security, yet they don't stop him? Is he a necessary demon, needed for the future of their security theater? Something about this saga just doesn't add up.
The idea of scrambling cell signals in cars is wishful thinking by a cellphone hater. Here are just a few of the many reasons why it will not happen any time soon:
1. Not that easy to do cheaply.
2. Older cars are not going to banned or force retro-fitted, creating an obvious problem.
3. Not everyone in a car is the driver.
4. Not all drivers allow themselves to be dangerously distracted by cellphones, or use them while on the road.
5. Pressure against such a measure from phone, bluetooth accessory and car manufacturers would be huge.
6. Cellphones, OnStar, etc., are very useful for drivers who have been hurt in accidents.
7. Not gonna happen in the good ol' U S of A. It's just not. Freedom! 'Merica.
8. They haven't found a way to take our guns yet, and the phone is more powerful. Yee-haa!!!
9. There are limits to how much safety we want, when it infringes on our freedoms. Witness all the 300+ hp cars we buy. We don't need to do 0-60mph in 4 seconds, but we insist on it. Merica!
10. there are too many other potential distraction you could never ban to focus so severely on this one. Imagine trying to ban eating, smoking, fiddling with the stereo, talking, and tending to children. Right...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm hoping for a 4-5 screen phone soon, since if I've learned anything from shopping for razor blades, it's that more is always way better.
This just in, MIT-educated statistician Mohan Srivastava has retired suddenly at a young age and is not taking questions.
Not necessarily true. The universe could indeed have infinite space, or it could expand infinitely, but that wouldn't necessarily mean that it also contains infinite matter or infinite stars and planets. Perhaps there was a big bang, inflation took off, and there were 100 trillion galaxies that formed within the first 10 billion years. The universe might expand infinitely then, though the quantity of matter (and therefore the number of galaxies, stars, and habitable planets) could still be quite finite, unless there is something really crazy going on and matter is popping into existence. Even if the universe is infinite, you can't just assume that it is the same throughout unless you also know that it has always been infinite and is uniformly smooth. Infinite habitable planets would mean infinite mass, and infinite mass would force the universe to contract to an infinitely small point (zero dimensional?), wouldn't it? And we observe it to be expanding, probably at an increasing rate (and faster than the speed of light), right? Be careful multiplying by infinity, or attempts at mathematical proofs can get really screwy. Infinity is not a perfect substitute for even REALLY big numbers. Just a few thoughts that might make sense. Maybe not. After all, I'm only an amateur cosmologist.
You're right, I'm not seeing the number of comments, either. I liked having it - I knew instantly if there was a big buzz about something, or if taking time to throw in my two cents might matter for a stalled thread.
The key is that everyone should get what they pay for. If I pay for 768kbps, then I should get at least 768kbps. If google wants to pay extra, then I'm ok with google gettting to me at 2mbps, but not with google paying my ISP so that yahoo only comes to me at 250kbps.
Well said! But it goes further than that: ISPs should not be permitted to completely block legal content, either. Any restrictions at all they put into place are highly questionable. You have to remember that telcos and cable companies have received a LOT of preferential treatment over the years. RBOCs and cable providers have generally been granted local monopolies, severely limiting competition, yet we have still been forced to pay extra to ensure universal service. We wouldn't let the USPS places limits on where or who your mail could come from, right? If the carriers get monopolies, we have to maintain net neutrality or they'll drive prices up even further, despite our prices already being high and bandwidth low.
Dennis Miller was always an idiot. He always came across as a pseudo-intellectual who was always so proud of his simple-minded jokes that he could never wipe the smug grin off his face. The only "funny man" with a worse delivery is Jay Leno, with his high voice and how he always repeats himself after a punch line so stupid audience has a cue to laugh and applaud. In contrast, Franken can think on his feet and debate articulately and intelligently with anyone, unlike Miller who can barely read a cue card without chomping at the bit for a chance to deliver the zinger he worked all week on.
As for Garofalo, I could take her or leave her. She can be quite funny but gets in over her head and doesn' talways seem to know what she's talking about.
You know, I personally think Al Franken would make a great president. He is level-headed, understands middle- and working-class Americans, and has more common sense than most of Washington put together. But it will never happen. Yeah, it may have shocked some folks when Ronald Reagan (the actor) began to have some success in politics, but Franken is a different type of character. An opposing party's followers will never take a comedy writer/comedic actor/political satirist seriously. And he's a Jew, which would certainly not sit well with a lot of Americans, even in an age when we have had a mixed-race president. Hopefully he'll spend a long time in the Senate, at least.
How can you not like a guy who is blunt enough to call liars liars, and not be afraid to call Rush Limbaugh a "Big at Idiot?"
What's AOL?
Is there any irony here: a company who's first products came in kit form, which helped establish their reputation among geeks, now goes to great lengths to make it very difficult for DIY'ers and anyone with a clue to fix, modify, or use their own possessions as they please?
Maybe if a single copy of Windows didn't cost an entire month's wages for 90% of Chinese software users they wouldn't pirate it so much.
Phone numbers and home addresses are public knowledge already — it's called a phone book. If you want to be ex-directory, then you wouldn't put this info on your Facebook profile in the first place.
Score:4 Insightful ???
Never heard of unpublished and unlisted numbers, for the dinosaurs who still have landlines at home? They aren't expensive. And the mobile-only crowd don't even have to worry about that at all.
Most people expect some level of privacy and professionalism from those companies and services whom they choose to trust, and they expect that the associated terms of service will not change drastically. Maybe it is a bit naive, but it seems like damn near everyone (not literally everyone - I've never signed up) has trusted Facebook.
Trend Micro Chairman Says Open Source Is a Security Risk
I think someone slipped and mixed up their words, because open source software is generally less of a security risk than is Trend Micro software.
I work for a bank, and if i had emails on yahoo related to my work and got caught, i would be dismissed, end of story.
...i'm not an American... Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen.
Well, yes, you or I should be dismissed for being reckless with sensitive information. But in Palin's case, you can't fire a quitter!
You caught the difference already - things are different for us, and the American justice system is not fair or equal for all. The system greatly favors those who wield political power, have powerful friends, or are rich. There is a real disparity between how minorities and poor people are sentenced compared to wealthy or otherwise notable white people. The statistics don't lie, and poor minorities are disproportionately represented in the prison population, to a great degree.
Folks who can't afford their own lawyers are found guilty of crimes at a much higher rate than those who have money, and they are also sentenced more harshly. Even some laws are skewed as they exist on the books, before court even comes into play, such as the way possession or sale of crack cocaine (a drug whose users are disproportionately black and poor) often carries much heftier penalties than a similar crime involving powder cocaine (which is effectively the same drug but used mainly by whites and has been considered glamorous at times). Even the pre-trial bond release system is unfair, as it places an unrealistic burden on people of meager means.
Considering past precedent (which our justice system claims to rely so heavily on), guessing a password and publishing someone's email without permission should probably warrant probation and a small fine for anyone without a lengthy record of prior criminal activity. Federal prison is completely out of line with normal sentencing, and the BoP's curious decision is quite ridiculous when our prisons are already filled to capacity and community-based sanctions have been proven to work reliably and efficiently.
Hold on a second. Maybe you hate Google. Maybe you hate all large corporations. Maybe you genuinely think Google's Street View data collections are invasive. Maybe you are extremely paranoid about your security and privacy, and are constantly peering out from under your tinfoil hate and over your shoulder. Maybe Larry Page raped your dog. Even if all of these things are true, I think you have to admit that Google being investigated by the Korean Cyber Terror Response Center seems a little overblown and inflamatory. Cyber "terror?" Are you kidding me? Their intention is to create fear and panic, not to continue to dominate their competition and rake in piles of cash? Really? You've got to be kidding me. This is the same thing we have begun to see in the US, thankfully on a limited basis. Please not that most criminal actions are *NOT* terrorism or cyber terror.
I suppose I don't know enough about ROK law enforcement and the inner workings of their government, but an agency with "terror" in its name doesn't seem like the appropriate choice for investigating non terror-related crimes. Are they somehow responsible for all "cyber" crimes, as a poorly named authority?
A report by The Real News, which followed a similar report by Smart People, says that any report by FOX News should be completely ignored until corroborated by a genuine news agency.
Google took a pic of my house when there was no foil cover over the roof. I had such anxiety knowing that aliens would see my naked house and come to use their mind control powers while I slept, that I gave up sleeping and lost my job. Do I have a chance of winning if I sue Google? Lord, I hope not, and I hope that woman doesn't, either.
Privacy is important, but if you don't want anyone to see your underwear, DON'T FUCKING HANG IT ON A LINE OUTSIDE IN PLAIN VIEW. Duh. First of all, is she even hot? Second, shouldn't she be more worried about the pervs in her neighborhood who walk by every day and use telescopes to peep her windows than someone using the one-time still pic on Google to "stalk" her? Can you say, "overreaction?"
The FBI is not the NSA, but they definitely have access to good people.
Yes, there are many very smart people who work for the FBI. They also have money, guns, and a means for reprisals (frame-jobs, media leaks, prosecutions, etc.) at their disposal, which are things that could influence many people, if not most. So I agree, they are not the NSA, but they should never be underestimated, and they were/are capable of backdoors and much more.
You have to remember that something like that wouldn't be in the code with a /*evil shit goes here*/ before it. /*non-evil shit goes here so move along*/
Yes, anyone capable of doing this would have been smart enough not to be that obvious - which is clear, since no one caught it. So we should be looking for something that says
This sounds bad, and I admit that this is the first I've heard about this particular pesticide being especially toxic to bees, but let's not get carried away. The longstanding mystery of Colony Collapse Disorder in bees has pretty much been solved. A few months ago, it was published that a double whammy of a fungus and a virus acting at the same time are almost certainly what have decimated bee populations around the world. A bee colony can usually survive either of the two pathogens, and it will recover, but being hit by both at the same time is deadly. The science behind this conclusion looked sound, and most experts have agreed. Sure, this pesticide has clearly not helped bees, and perhaps a ban is in order, but it is not the main factor behind all the recent hubbub about honeybees.
I don't want to hear anything about evil electromagnetic radiation, cell phones, wifi, government conspiracies, aliens, a grassy knoll, or malnutrition induced by an exploding pooh bear population. The answer is simple and makes sense. Bee populations have suffered around the world, including where there is neither ubiquitous wifi nor this pesticide, and the virus/fungus combo has been found everywhere anyone has looked. Now, maybe aliens brought the virus and communists spread the fungus, but...
I'm not sure you can do anything damaging with a Google Accounts session cookie stolen by firesheep.
Mod parent up, if the comment is in fact correct, because this is significant.
Chrome doesn't trust applications, or users — and neither can modify the system.
That's okay, because this user doesn't trust Google or Chrome OS, and they will not be permitted to install an OS on my computer. I'll stick to linux, which I know I can sort of trust most of the time, and my own judgment, which is well known to be predictably untrustworthy.
If there must be such a thing as a Caps Lock key on conventional keyboards, I wish it could be banished (along with the Insert/Delete pair) to a hard-to-fumble-upon switch on the bottom of the keyboard or laptop.
Yeah, if you remove the CAPS LOCK key from your keyboard, you could save enough space to add a key. If I had one, it would have been used to type the sentence before this one.
I'm very surprised Julian Assange is still alive.
The fact that he is still alive raises some questions, for me. WHY is he still alive if what he had to leak was as important as has been said? Was the information not as significant as we have been told? Is the CIA really off their game, and not capable of clandestine actions anymore?
The US government knows what Assange knows, they say him divulging it will endanger security, yet they don't stop him? Is he a necessary demon, needed for the future of their security theater? Something about this saga just doesn't add up.
In another shocking development, it has been reported that wolves think sheep are tasty.
The idea of scrambling cell signals in cars is wishful thinking by a cellphone hater. Here are just a few of the many reasons why it will not happen any time soon:
1. Not that easy to do cheaply.
2. Older cars are not going to banned or force retro-fitted, creating an obvious problem.
3. Not everyone in a car is the driver.
4. Not all drivers allow themselves to be dangerously distracted by cellphones, or use them while on the road.
5. Pressure against such a measure from phone, bluetooth accessory and car manufacturers would be huge.
6. Cellphones, OnStar, etc., are very useful for drivers who have been hurt in accidents.
7. Not gonna happen in the good ol' U S of A. It's just not. Freedom! 'Merica.
8. They haven't found a way to take our guns yet, and the phone is more powerful. Yee-haa!!!
9. There are limits to how much safety we want, when it infringes on our freedoms. Witness all the 300+ hp cars we buy. We don't need to do 0-60mph in 4 seconds, but we insist on it. Merica!
10. there are too many other potential distraction you could never ban to focus so severely on this one. Imagine trying to ban eating, smoking, fiddling with the stereo, talking, and tending to children. Right...