Rule one: all servers running on this new port have to be doing https.
That's going to work just fine for IRC, right?
The people who want a 'cleaned kid friendly Internet' can establish an alternate port where such a thing would be delivered.
No, that'd be a kid friendly World Wide Web.
And it wouldn't be what the TOTC crowd wants: if you create KidSpace or FaceTube or whatever on there so that little Dick can talk to little Jane, then Dick can bully Jane, and Jane is going to be upset (and kill herself, of course).
Teh interwebs is a communications medium. If you want to be sure that "only good people" use it to send stuff, you have to destroy what the Internet really is: a many-to-many communications medium.
If you want a walled garden, why not just carve off some range of the spectrum and allow only on-demand kid-friendly TV on it, and by the kids a TV which only listens for data on that part of the spectrum? It'd be the same.
And if you let kids watch the Superbowl (a reasonable thing to do), they might still see nipples.
The problem CAN NOT be solved. Only mitigated through competent parenting, meaning you talk to your kids and hope for the best.
Censorship, no matter for what "righteous" purpose you might intend it, always, always, always, leads to tyranny.
So not true!
In the US, right after September 11th (2001), certain songs were banned from the radio (Leaving on a Jet Plane, for one); the drawings of Mohammed in Cartoon Wars (South Park episodes) were blackboxed out (despite him being drawn in Super Best Friends, an earlier episode). The 09 F9 11 number has been censored (at least it was attempted).
And look! Nobody lost any civil liberties in the US, right?
This relates to an argument about making furnaces better. The furnace company has very little incentive to make a more efficient furnace because they do not have to pay for the consumables [...]
They can tell their customers "our furnaces are more efficient and will help you save money (and help the environment too)".
I want cheap rather than expensive (all else equal). I'm going to be profitable to them rather than their competitors.
Saving the customer money makes you more competitive, even if the money saved isn't the money that you would have gotten. See also "Total Cost of Ownership".
If I recall my statistics class correctly, 345 measurements in any one category is plenty.
The real problem is when you get some combinatorial explosion of variables that you want to control for, such that each category is much smaller (for the same total number of samples).
In any case, please show your calculation that demonstrates that the sample size is not large enough to reasonably conclude the stated conclusion. If you can't, one of the reasons might be that the sample size was just fine.
Whether the gathered data is of a kind and structure that allows you to deduce a particular causative relationship is another question.
In the future, whenever someone complains about (too) small sample size, make sure to make them back up that claim, just like I am now.
Anyone have anyway of pulling this on the record companies?
That's easy: you just patent putting DRM on music.
Whether it's a business method patent or a software patent or a patent on the cryptographic math (x \mapsto x + 13) is irrelevant. Whether there's prior art is completely irrelevant.
(IANAL, but this interpretation of patent law seems to work fine in practice.)
As for replacing it, since you do that once every few years I can't see that as a serious concern.
Let me get this straight: during the lifetime of your device, something will happen that will make it substantially less useful unless you change the battery. And you don't see this as a serious concern. And the reason you don't see it as a serious concern is that your device will only be made much less useful once or twice...
If you car's gas tank capacity would get reduced to $[amount of gas that lets you drive a mile] every five years of use, you wouldn't worry about it because it'll only happen once or twice during your use of the car?
There must be something I'm misunderstanding here...
BSCS well that hasnt changed in what...40-50 years?
I hear that MIT uses python instead of scheme (and SICP) for 6.001 (Introduction to Programming).
Something more substantial: you might learn something different in cryptography class. Public key cryptography was born in the 70's, remember?
The seminal work in lattice cryptography is from the 90's; for my exam I presented an article published about 45 days before the exam.
I suspect that Doug Engelbart's demo (mother of them all) has caused some changes in the field of human-computer interaction. If not the demo itself, then at least the technologies that were demoed.
overall, I think message boards provide the most accurate, unbiased information for a particular subject.
Really? There's no asymmetry? I'd think maybe you'd have to like a product very much to voice good opinions, but not hate it quite as much to dis it.
I guess if all products get the same slightly more negative or positive (or in other ways skewed) forum feedback, then it evens out. Maybe.
But I think that the motivation to tell the world how you feel is going to make you deliver a more true message than money (reviewer salary), money (get-the-facts advertisement) or money (volunteer reviews for some organization so they can save money).
Just like when you play a record backwards you can hear the devil speak---especially rock music or, going from the 50s to the 90s, rap music---the true meaning of LAPTOP is in the reversal:
POT PAL.
Awww, the whatever-it-is wants to be your smoke bloke.
Slashdot Mirror
As you will note[1], becoming Skynet is so frigging unlikely and demanding that it will never happen.
[1] http://xkcd.com/534/
The kind that have never heard of slashdot for sure.
Even better, the kind that have never heard of the daily WTF and are on it ;)
You have to file them if you're in the US software business, or else risk getting sued for $billions.
I'm not great at perl, but couldn't you just set
my $billions = 0;
Marketing is jazzing up the name is marketing.
Redundancy is repeating things is redundancy.
you can also buy faster/denser hardware cheaper then you can pay someone to use their head.
Yeah, but the cheaper hardware won't do as much independent thinking. You will. Go and tell you manager that ;-)
Rule one: all servers running on this new port have to be doing https.
That's going to work just fine for IRC, right?
The people who want a 'cleaned kid friendly Internet' can establish an alternate port where such a thing would be delivered.
No, that'd be a kid friendly World Wide Web.
And it wouldn't be what the TOTC crowd wants: if you create KidSpace or FaceTube or whatever on there so that little Dick can talk to little Jane, then Dick can bully Jane, and Jane is going to be upset (and kill herself, of course).
Teh interwebs is a communications medium. If you want to be sure that "only good people" use it to send stuff, you have to destroy what the Internet really is: a many-to-many communications medium.
If you want a walled garden, why not just carve off some range of the spectrum and allow only on-demand kid-friendly TV on it, and by the kids a TV which only listens for data on that part of the spectrum? It'd be the same.
And if you let kids watch the Superbowl (a reasonable thing to do), they might still see nipples.
The problem CAN NOT be solved. Only mitigated through competent parenting, meaning you talk to your kids and hope for the best.
(disclaimer: I'm not a parent)
Censorship, no matter for what "righteous" purpose you might intend it, always, always, always, leads to tyranny.
So not true!
In the US, right after September 11th (2001), certain songs were banned from the radio (Leaving on a Jet Plane, for one); the drawings of Mohammed in Cartoon Wars (South Park episodes) were blackboxed out (despite him being drawn in Super Best Friends, an earlier episode). The 09 F9 11 number has been censored (at least it was attempted).
And look! Nobody lost any civil liberties in the US, right?
Hippocrite
From The Twisted Slashdot Abridged Dictionary of English:
Hippocrite \Hip"o*crite\, n. [F., fr. L. hypocrita]
A person who has jumped the Hippo... given the Hippopota... Hippocritical oath!
(I think)
This relates to an argument about making furnaces better. The furnace company has very little incentive to make a more efficient furnace because they do not have to pay for the consumables [...]
They can tell their customers "our furnaces are more efficient and will help you save money (and help the environment too)".
I want cheap rather than expensive (all else equal). I'm going to be profitable to them rather than their competitors.
Saving the customer money makes you more competitive, even if the money saved isn't the money that you would have gotten. See also "Total Cost of Ownership".
"We are a xerographic company"
I thought Slackware was the zero graphic company...
For a minute I thought I was hoing to be able to encrypt/decrypt my hard drive by my computer taking a sample of my blood...
<Deep, dark voice> You can have even better protection against the RIAA goons if you give up just a small sliver of your soul...
I also found it on pastebin:
http://rafb.net/p/jqJCYC53.html
Spread it around. 09 F9 11 and all that :)
Small Sample [...] They took 345 people
If I recall my statistics class correctly, 345 measurements in any one category is plenty.
The real problem is when you get some combinatorial explosion of variables that you want to control for, such that each category is much smaller (for the same total number of samples).
In any case, please show your calculation that demonstrates that the sample size is not large enough to reasonably conclude the stated conclusion. If you can't, one of the reasons might be that the sample size was just fine.
Whether the gathered data is of a kind and structure that allows you to deduce a particular causative relationship is another question.
In the future, whenever someone complains about (too) small sample size, make sure to make them back up that claim, just like I am now.
Show us your data.
And while we could all benefit from DVD, not all of us have the 1080i/p display that is necessary to derive any actual benefit from it.
DVDs worked wonders for users of the pirate bay.
Do you know how frigging hard it is to digitally rip a VHS tape?
:(
Anyone have anyway of pulling this on the record companies?
That's easy: you just patent putting DRM on music.
Whether it's a business method patent or a software patent or a patent on the cryptographic math (x \mapsto x + 13) is irrelevant. Whether there's prior art is completely irrelevant.
(IANAL, but this interpretation of patent law seems to work fine in practice.)
I'd have predicted Apply buying or merging with [...]
I'd have predicted that Apply would merge with Eval. It'd be kinda' metacircular...
So this cthulhu walks into a bar, right, and... Hey, anyone remember how this one goes?
Maybe something like this: http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/09mar/xuf012518.gif
:)
As for replacing it, since you do that once every few years I can't see that as a serious concern.
Let me get this straight: during the lifetime of your device, something will happen that will make it substantially less useful unless you change the battery. And you don't see this as a serious concern. And the reason you don't see it as a serious concern is that your device will only be made much less useful once or twice...
If you car's gas tank capacity would get reduced to $[amount of gas that lets you drive a mile] every five years of use, you wouldn't worry about it because it'll only happen once or twice during your use of the car?
There must be something I'm misunderstanding here...
I have Photoshop CS2, Dreamweaver CS2 and MS Office 07 running
Ouch. I feel sorry for you.
can break a cipher in 15 minutes while getting a blowjob and having a gun pointed at his head
Fixed that for you. Get your geek lore straight, or we revoke your certificate and you'll lose route cred.
BSCS well that hasnt changed in what...40-50 years?
I hear that MIT uses python instead of scheme (and SICP) for 6.001 (Introduction to Programming).
Something more substantial: you might learn something different in cryptography class. Public key cryptography was born in the 70's, remember?
The seminal work in lattice cryptography is from the 90's; for my exam I presented an article published about 45 days before the exam.
I suspect that Doug Engelbart's demo (mother of them all) has caused some changes in the field of human-computer interaction. If not the demo itself, then at least the technologies that were demoed.
Things change (a bit)...
How can anyone want to not be associated with the lyrics "you can get this lap dance here for free".
Free lap dances, all you have to do is show up and talk nonsense about symmetric ciphers? I'm in---Why do you think I'm doing my phd in crypto?
:-O
What's the e for? The rest is for alt.binaries.porn, right? ;-)
overall, I think message boards provide the most accurate, unbiased information for a particular subject.
Really? There's no asymmetry? I'd think maybe you'd have to like a product very much to voice good opinions, but not hate it quite as much to dis it.
I guess if all products get the same slightly more negative or positive (or in other ways skewed) forum feedback, then it evens out. Maybe.
But I think that the motivation to tell the world how you feel is going to make you deliver a more true message than money (reviewer salary), money (get-the-facts advertisement) or money (volunteer reviews for some organization so they can save money).
Just like when you play a record backwards you can hear the devil speak---especially rock music or, going from the 50s to the 90s, rap music---the true meaning of LAPTOP is in the reversal:
POT PAL.
Awww, the whatever-it-is wants to be your smoke bloke.