Here I was thinking that the security benefits of open source arose from the source code being open to all. More eyes on the code means more opportunity to find and fix holes. I also thought that open source had a built in Plan B that if a hole was found, anyone could submit a patch and it would get folded in as soon as it was reviewed and approved.
so without facts, examples, supporting evidence, you choose to let it sit with the equivalent of "You're just wrong?" Oh, I'm super convinced. Enlighten me scholar of the mass media.
If you take and type a full page (no carriage returns) into notepad and save it, you end up with 5kb per printed page at the default font/print settings. When was the last time that a web page designer cared about 5kb? If 150 bytes (yes, 150 char's) is a concern, trim back on the dancing babies and mp3 backgrounds before you get rid of the ugly url's.
Besides, if not for those incredibly long and in need of shortening URL's, how else would we be able to feed rick astley's music video youtube link into tinyurl and expect people to click it, expecting it to be a real URL?
I hope that they don't demonstrate that cockroaches suffer. Have you ever sprayed a big one with roach spray? It takes a while to die. Seeing as lobster are the overly-large cousins of cockroaches, if they get protection from pain, I'd hate to see the same protection awarded to cockroaches.
Besides, its easier on your cookware if you stick the lobster in the freezer for a half hour first then cut its head piece in half with a large chef's knife (brain it).
Its only surprising in retrospect. Does corn feel pain? how about tape worms? At what point on the evolutionary ladder does pain fold into the equation?
This is not surprising to anyone who assumes that it requires a central nervous system to feel pain, but it is to people that assume that you need more than just a hard shell and feeler hairs to feel pain. The study is significant because it lowers the evolutionary level required for pain sensation.
Do squid feel pain? Do clams? Do Bacteria? If you answered no to 1 or more of those, then you might agree that more studies are needed to figure out where the pain bar is set.
Its the opposite. The government is not punishing any existing newspapers that wish to continue to endorse candidates, instead, they're providing a reward for news papers that wish to return to reporting news instead of making it.
Anyone ever get into a car with lots of windows that's been sitting in the sun? Sunlight gets in, and the light is converted to IR as it heats the insides. The glass doesn't let the IR back out so the insides heat up. This is going on whether the car is running or not and happens regardless of the color. Not to mention that glass is heavier than sheet metal, so you save on the energy required to accelerate and decelerate all that glass and the roads have less wear and tear, requiring less asphalt over time. So lets ban windshields and windows as well. Tinting you say? But aren't tints made from petroleum products? Even natural based tints require oil to extract, refine, and produce. You might burn as much oil to make tints as you might save over the life of the car. Not to mention the reduced visibility.
/sarcasm
California is the home of LA, possibly the only city in the US to have a fashion police, so I wouldn't be surprised if they banned yellow, lime green, and other obnoxious car colors, all in the name of global warming (they don't contribute to heat sequestering like the darker paints used to.)
He's not giving away wolfenstein 3d away for free, its 4.99 in the app store. Only the source code is free, which, while good for developers, is not immediately free for end users.
I brought up types of brain disfunctions, or, in more extreme situations, brain damage. If you're trying to create kidneys that function as a mass of simulated kidney cells, you should be worrying about simulating kidney stones and other disorders of the kidney. If you're trying to create a brain, then you should worry about brain disorders. I know dogs can have narcolepsy, would you have been happier if I had used an example that isn't just human?
By the way, it is for this very reason that NASA should learn from the past (your example of the mass renamings after hitler) and not name anything big after someone who's alive.
Here's the deal. My core argument was that if you name something after somebody, its because they did something to earn it. Colbert did nothing beyond allow the glow from his spot light to illuminate NASA for a short time.
My next point was that if you named something after a living person and they did an atrocity, it would be a bad thing. If it was uncovered that Edwin Hubble raped and killed children, NASA would have more on its plate than a simple renaming meeting.
If the deli is named after Joe Hitler, who did not do anything more than overcook the pastrami, that's unfortunate, but joe hitler didn't murder millions of people. Having the same name as something is NOT the same as naming something after somebody. If the deli was named after THE Hitler, they might be facing a boycott. If some other Hubble went on a shooting rampage, NASA would not have to answer to anybody, Edwin Hubble earned the honor.
If NASA named something after somebody who killed people or did stuff, there would ALWAYS be that note. The XXXX station (formerly the Colbert station, but was renamed because of YYYYY)... And so on. There are some times when there is such a thing as bad publicity.
By the way, it was unwarranted, we were not discussing the 2nd world war, we were not discussing germany, and you were the one who elevated getting drunk and running over a family to the level of killing millions by bringing hitler into this. That's precisely what invoking Godwin's law is supposed to prevent. If you didn't intend to elevate drunk driving and vehicular homicide to the same level as genocide, why weren't you more selective with your example? Leave the truly atrocious people for illuminating and calling the people to act against true atrocities (like genocide).
I think that the reason why firefox takes more resources to run than early 90's operating systems might be evidence of the fact that having the browser do all might not be the best. (And my early 90's os was perfectly capable of browsing the internet via an early 90's browser, all for less resources than firefox is taking up right now.)
The more I learned about computers, the more I figured that they were more like a complex engine (data or gasoline is input, its moved around, operated on by parts, and then output as results/exhaust). Maybe that's why car analogies are so popular?
But another thing to be wary of is chemical imbalances. How many brain disorders are caused by the absence of a protein or inhibitor? The chip might take several redesigns over several years to get a solid model of a properly functioning neuron. I mean, who is going to notice a schizophrenic ant or beetle, or a rat with the mental equivalent of down's syndrome? They might spend a decade building up a brain with the complexity of a human brain only to find out that its "mentally disabled". Just look at how many people have mental issues, be it emotional, learning, or developmental issues with "properly functioning" neurons but are lacking one of a hundred chemicals that make them all work together as a whole.
I'm sure that the end result of this experimentation is not a human brain, but instead a robot that can navigate ruins like a rat (downs syndrome or not) or work together like (schizophrenic or normal) ants. I'm sure they'll eventually make a financial computer that can work like a wall street broker (employed by aig or not).
I'm not sure if youtube is as popular in china as it is over here, or if there is a native type video site that is more popular because it was founded and grew in the culture it intends to serve rather than than be adapted and spread by its foreign owners. Google isn't number 1 everywhere. It just seems that way.
I wonder how many people would react if the number 2 or number 3 video site in America disappeared for a week or two. (assuming, of course, that we have been conditioned to accept bullying and censoring from the government and ISPs bent on controlli
I do watch the show, but if you think that a couple of interviews with astronauts and talking about space stuff is grounds for naming, by all means, go ahead.
Personally, I think he's given more to the Saginaw Spirit than NASA. But i guess that's ok, they did name something after him.
By the way, how would you feel if he did the above acts that I mentioned? How would YOU have felt if NASA named something after Mel Gibson before his anti-semetic tirade? Or OJ Simpson before he killed his wife?
My point is, it'd be insane to name something after a living person. While people will find stuff in space named after living people, generally those people discovered something or gave a great deal more than "talks about Nasa and space stuff [...] even [...] a couple of interviews with astronauts aboard the ISS."
"Stephen Colbert gets drunk and runs over a widow and her three childeren. He then goes on and exposes himself to a church choir. Colbert is undergoing drug testing. [...] Nasa plans for a decommissioning of the Colbert module by burning up in the atmosphere."
Yeah, right, like they'll name a module after someone who has given and done absolutely nothing for/to the space program.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm seeing the benefit, just not the surprise.
Here I was thinking that the security benefits of open source arose from the source code being open to all. More eyes on the code means more opportunity to find and fix holes. I also thought that open source had a built in Plan B that if a hole was found, anyone could submit a patch and it would get folded in as soon as it was reviewed and approved.
Silly me.
so without facts, examples, supporting evidence, you choose to let it sit with the equivalent of "You're just wrong?" Oh, I'm super convinced. Enlighten me scholar of the mass media.
If you take and type a full page (no carriage returns) into notepad and save it, you end up with 5kb per printed page at the default font/print settings. When was the last time that a web page designer cared about 5kb? If 150 bytes (yes, 150 char's) is a concern, trim back on the dancing babies and mp3 backgrounds before you get rid of the ugly url's.
Besides, if not for those incredibly long and in need of shortening URL's, how else would we be able to feed rick astley's music video youtube link into tinyurl and expect people to click it, expecting it to be a real URL?
Don't forget about the life lead by Sea Kittens!
I hope that they don't demonstrate that cockroaches suffer. Have you ever sprayed a big one with roach spray? It takes a while to die. Seeing as lobster are the overly-large cousins of cockroaches, if they get protection from pain, I'd hate to see the same protection awarded to cockroaches.
Besides, its easier on your cookware if you stick the lobster in the freezer for a half hour first then cut its head piece in half with a large chef's knife (brain it).
Its only surprising in retrospect. Does corn feel pain? how about tape worms? At what point on the evolutionary ladder does pain fold into the equation?
This is not surprising to anyone who assumes that it requires a central nervous system to feel pain, but it is to people that assume that you need more than just a hard shell and feeler hairs to feel pain. The study is significant because it lowers the evolutionary level required for pain sensation.
Do squid feel pain? Do clams? Do Bacteria? If you answered no to 1 or more of those, then you might agree that more studies are needed to figure out where the pain bar is set.
I like to think that yellow journalism was spawned with the advent explosion of the USS Maine.
Its the opposite. The government is not punishing any existing newspapers that wish to continue to endorse candidates, instead, they're providing a reward for news papers that wish to return to reporting news instead of making it.
I think i want to create a service that will be known as spaz, so that new hardware spazzes out when XXXX happens.
Anyone ever get into a car with lots of windows that's been sitting in the sun? Sunlight gets in, and the light is converted to IR as it heats the insides. The glass doesn't let the IR back out so the insides heat up. This is going on whether the car is running or not and happens regardless of the color. Not to mention that glass is heavier than sheet metal, so you save on the energy required to accelerate and decelerate all that glass and the roads have less wear and tear, requiring less asphalt over time. So lets ban windshields and windows as well. Tinting you say? But aren't tints made from petroleum products? Even natural based tints require oil to extract, refine, and produce. You might burn as much oil to make tints as you might save over the life of the car. Not to mention the reduced visibility.
/sarcasm
California is the home of LA, possibly the only city in the US to have a fashion police, so I wouldn't be surprised if they banned yellow, lime green, and other obnoxious car colors, all in the name of global warming (they don't contribute to heat sequestering like the darker paints used to.)
IT DOES EXIST!!
Does it mean that the moon landing happened too?
It not working for me. Cydia half installs it and when i click on the icon, it shows a splash screen and then goes back to the desktop.
He's not giving away wolfenstein 3d away for free, its 4.99 in the app store. Only the source code is free, which, while good for developers, is not immediately free for end users.
I brought up types of brain disfunctions, or, in more extreme situations, brain damage. If you're trying to create kidneys that function as a mass of simulated kidney cells, you should be worrying about simulating kidney stones and other disorders of the kidney. If you're trying to create a brain, then you should worry about brain disorders. I know dogs can have narcolepsy, would you have been happier if I had used an example that isn't just human?
By the way, it is for this very reason that NASA should learn from the past (your example of the mass renamings after hitler) and not name anything big after someone who's alive.
Here's the deal. My core argument was that if you name something after somebody, its because they did something to earn it. Colbert did nothing beyond allow the glow from his spot light to illuminate NASA for a short time.
My next point was that if you named something after a living person and they did an atrocity, it would be a bad thing. If it was uncovered that Edwin Hubble raped and killed children, NASA would have more on its plate than a simple renaming meeting.
If the deli is named after Joe Hitler, who did not do anything more than overcook the pastrami, that's unfortunate, but joe hitler didn't murder millions of people. Having the same name as something is NOT the same as naming something after somebody. If the deli was named after THE Hitler, they might be facing a boycott. If some other Hubble went on a shooting rampage, NASA would not have to answer to anybody, Edwin Hubble earned the honor.
If NASA named something after somebody who killed people or did stuff, there would ALWAYS be that note. The XXXX station (formerly the Colbert station, but was renamed because of YYYYY)... And so on. There are some times when there is such a thing as bad publicity.
By the way, it was unwarranted, we were not discussing the 2nd world war, we were not discussing germany, and you were the one who elevated getting drunk and running over a family to the level of killing millions by bringing hitler into this. That's precisely what invoking Godwin's law is supposed to prevent. If you didn't intend to elevate drunk driving and vehicular homicide to the same level as genocide, why weren't you more selective with your example? Leave the truly atrocious people for illuminating and calling the people to act against true atrocities (like genocide).
I think that the reason why firefox takes more resources to run than early 90's operating systems might be evidence of the fact that having the browser do all might not be the best. (And my early 90's os was perfectly capable of browsing the internet via an early 90's browser, all for less resources than firefox is taking up right now.)
The more I learned about computers, the more I figured that they were more like a complex engine (data or gasoline is input, its moved around, operated on by parts, and then output as results/exhaust). Maybe that's why car analogies are so popular?
But another thing to be wary of is chemical imbalances. How many brain disorders are caused by the absence of a protein or inhibitor? The chip might take several redesigns over several years to get a solid model of a properly functioning neuron. I mean, who is going to notice a schizophrenic ant or beetle, or a rat with the mental equivalent of down's syndrome? They might spend a decade building up a brain with the complexity of a human brain only to find out that its "mentally disabled". Just look at how many people have mental issues, be it emotional, learning, or developmental issues with "properly functioning" neurons but are lacking one of a hundred chemicals that make them all work together as a whole.
I'm sure that the end result of this experimentation is not a human brain, but instead a robot that can navigate ruins like a rat (downs syndrome or not) or work together like (schizophrenic or normal) ants. I'm sure they'll eventually make a financial computer that can work like a wall street broker (employed by aig or not).
I'm not sure if youtube is as popular in china as it is over here, or if there is a native type video site that is more popular because it was founded and grew in the culture it intends to serve rather than than be adapted and spread by its foreign owners. Google isn't number 1 everywhere. It just seems that way.
I wonder how many people would react if the number 2 or number 3 video site in America disappeared for a week or two. (assuming, of course, that we have been conditioned to accept bullying and censoring from the government and ISPs bent on controlli
woosh
I bet that those establishments were named after Der Fuhrer.
By the way, I call Godwin's Law. You lose.
I do watch the show, but if you think that a couple of interviews with astronauts and talking about space stuff is grounds for naming, by all means, go ahead.
Personally, I think he's given more to the Saginaw Spirit than NASA. But i guess that's ok, they did name something after him.
By the way, how would you feel if he did the above acts that I mentioned? How would YOU have felt if NASA named something after Mel Gibson before his anti-semetic tirade? Or OJ Simpson before he killed his wife?
My point is, it'd be insane to name something after a living person. While people will find stuff in space named after living people, generally those people discovered something or gave a great deal more than "talks about Nasa and space stuff [...] even [...] a couple of interviews with astronauts aboard the ISS."
"Stephen Colbert gets drunk and runs over a widow and her three childeren. He then goes on and exposes himself to a church choir. Colbert is undergoing drug testing. [...] Nasa plans for a decommissioning of the Colbert module by burning up in the atmosphere."
Yeah, right, like they'll name a module after someone who has given and done absolutely nothing for/to the space program.
I think "Cold" could possibly refer to the not-being-as-hot-as-the-heart-of-our-sun temperature range. Everything's relative, except absolute zero.