The reason why it probably worked for those publications is because they target an elite audience who finds a subscription to such things a triviality and/or a business expense to be written off.
As I said, I was relaying MY UNDERSTANDING of how Roundup works, which is that it does not stick around in the soil or affect future growth of plants growing in that soil.
Sure I could go and research Roundup myself, but since you had already started the conversation, I figured I'd just ask you instead.
I guess next time I'll stick to Google and skip the attitude.
My understanding is that Roundup works by stopping photosynthesis in plants that it comes in direct contact with. It does not contaminate soil and prevent photosynthesis in future plants that might try to grow in the soil. It also should have little effect on any living matter in the soil that is not dependent on photosynthesis.
As far as the lay public is concerned, the damage has already been done. They were already convinced that these were a bunch of self-serving interests promoting their cause, and the leaked emails affirmed it for them.
>In CompSci in particular, a lot of people come in with no understanding of what the subject is really about.
I agree with you.
Universities with Computer Science programs need to be more clear, then, in expressing what the degree is about.
I hold a B.S. in Computer Science. In my opinion, a Computer Science education is primarily a course of study in algorithm development. You do, of course, do some programming, and even some breadboard electronics work. But these are all just canvases upon which rudimentary algorithms are created and tested, with the goal of being able to learn to extrapolate and create new algorithms to solve more complicated problems later.
I think that "Computers" have become so ubiquitous that many people believe that a study in "computer science" is simply a science course about computers. I'd almost more simplistically call it a giant math word problem.
Check back further up in this thread. At least two people have described how to hiijack incoming SSL connections. I don't understand the details, but they are setting up a transparent proxy that intercepts the SSL connection and substitutes their own certificate to the user's browser.
>They are raising funds for a movie called The Tunnel by letting people invest in individual frames for $1 apiece. >When the movie is complete, it will be released for free on torrent sites.
Sounds like a return to the days of commissioned art.
I have seen this coming for some time, as I'm sure many people have.
Most of the time when you go to the doctor, he is guessing at your symptoms based on a verbal patient interview. Unless the symptoms have a physical manifestation that the doctor can see or measure, diagnosis is largely guesswork.
There is no reason why this sort of guesswork needs to be done by a highly trained and expensive person. The only reason why we do is we are afraid of the consequences of guessing wrong so we feel better by having they highly trained expert do the guessing.
But we are entering an era where automated diagnostic tools, such as the camera tool in the article, are going to become a reality. We are not yet to the "Star Trek Tricorder", but I don't think it will be long and you/could/ go to a kiosk at the drug store and be scanned, including a blood analysis, by an automated piece of machinery that will be able to diagnose based on observable information rather than guessing based on how the patient is able to describe their symptoms.
This is going to eat into doctor revenues massively.
For society, this will be a good thing. Doctors will be freed up from diagnosing ailments to concentrate on actually curing ailments.
But doctors are not likely to take kindly to these new tools. Just like today there is pushback against the mall-store ultrasound clinics that people can use to get ultrasound images of their unborn babies. The doctors are claiming that these services are "unsafe", despite the fact that you don't have to be a rocket scientist to operate the things. They just don't want their business undercut.
It is assumed that you are falling into the black hole accelerating according to the force of the gravitational pull of the black hole. So you WILL pass through the event horizon in a heartbeat.
Think of it this way:
Even if you had a magical platform that you could stand on just/outside/ the event horizon, you'd still be dead. The amount of gravity pulling down on your would not just stop your blood from flowing upwards, it would crush you into a puddle of goo on the platform.
The ONLY way you could survive the fall into the black hole would be under freefall. Any attempt to appreciably slow down your fall would result in you getting crushed. So any trip through the even horizon will be very, very fast. Probably an an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.
One of the problems with approaching a black hole (aside from massive amounts of radiation around ones actively eating matter) is the fact that the force of gravity increases as you approach the mass responsible for the gravity.
With small black holes, as you approach (feet first) the difference in gravitational pull at your feet would be many times larger than the gravitational pull at your head. You would be literally ripped apart, down to the molecular level. This is known as "Spaghettification".
However, with a large enough black hole, you should be able to pass the event horizon before these tidal forces grow large enough to rip you apart. Of course, this does you no good, because once you are inside the event horizon you cannot exert a great enough force to prevent yourself from falling deeper until the forces ARE great enough to rip you apart.
But for a large black hole, in theory, you could cross the event horizon without being ripped apart.
It is no longer production that you are paying for. It's advertising. The big media companies MARKET STARS.
Sure, you could be the world's greatest singer and post your songs on your web site and maybe you'll get a small gathering of fans.
Or you can have a multi-billion-dollar advertising agency market you to the world, for a cut, and have millions of fans, even if you're not a great singer, as long as you have a pretty face.
You're paying for the marketing, not the distribution.
>Is hacking mobile phones a big business nowadays? Should we expect to see more security issues with our smartphones as
>they increase in popularity? I'm not being facetious, I come here because I don't know these answers.
If it's not, it will be. Clearly there is big business to be made in compromising traditional computer systems today. In the early days (and I've been around computers since the TI99/4A) it seems that "viruses" were primarily made as a prank. But today the biggest threats seem to be botnets which are used for profit to either propagate spam and execute denial of service attacks through distributed means, or simply to skim valuable user account data off of the compromised systems. This is all far beyond the amateur pranks of old. It is now done for financial gain.
Cell phones have rapidly become computers. All the benefits of compromising traditional computers will likely follow.
>Disregard any tablet running a desktop OS; they've been on the market for years and nobody wants them.
I don't care what the OS is.
What I want is an electronic notepad that I can write on just like a traditional notepad. But I'm not going to pay $1500 or more for one.
Now $200? Now you're talking.
If I can legibly write on it, this thing is a student's dream. One notebook for all your classes. Essentially infinite paper. The ability to email your notes. If it records audio, even better.
The difference here is that Asus is about to bring forth a tablet PC that costs less than $200.
This is precisely what I have been waiting for. I want an electronic appliance that I can write in like a notebook with infinite paper, for school and for work.
I deal extensively with mathematical, physics, and engineering equations, so I want to write with a pencil rather than a keyboard.
For $200, I am there. This is exactly what I want.
If I can store PDF versions of my textbooks on it, even better.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason why it probably worked for those publications is because they target an elite audience who finds a subscription to such things a triviality and/or a business expense to be written off.
Coming soon: Your insurance company will pay the maximum benefit if and only if you use their preferred tele-presence doctors from India.
You go to the media and Mr. Thief is going to take his new laptop and dump it in a dumpster next time he catches the news.
As I said, I was relaying MY UNDERSTANDING of how Roundup works, which is that it does not stick around in the soil or affect future growth of plants growing in that soil.
Sure I could go and research Roundup myself, but since you had already started the conversation, I figured I'd just ask you instead.
I guess next time I'll stick to Google and skip the attitude.
http://www.guarding-our-earth.com/aggrand/roundup.htm
My understanding is that Roundup works by stopping photosynthesis in plants that it comes in direct contact with. It does not contaminate soil and prevent photosynthesis in future plants that might try to grow in the soil. It also should have little effect on any living matter in the soil that is not dependent on photosynthesis.
As far as the lay public is concerned, the damage has already been done. They were already convinced that these were a bunch of self-serving interests promoting their cause, and the leaked emails affirmed it for them.
>In CompSci in particular, a lot of people come in with no understanding of what the subject is really about.
I agree with you.
Universities with Computer Science programs need to be more clear, then, in expressing what the degree is about.
I hold a B.S. in Computer Science. In my opinion, a Computer Science education is primarily a course of study in algorithm development. You do, of course, do some programming, and even some breadboard electronics work. But these are all just canvases upon which rudimentary algorithms are created and tested, with the goal of being able to learn to extrapolate and create new algorithms to solve more complicated problems later.
I think that "Computers" have become so ubiquitous that many people believe that a study in "computer science" is simply a science course about computers. I'd almost more simplistically call it a giant math word problem.
I have canceled cable TV service, and only use the cable for internet access.
>Slashdot already does this though Amazon affiliate links.
The what? Didn't know they had those. I see the ads every day though.
Slashdot also allows me to turn off advertising, but I don't take that option, either, because I like supporting the site.
If you have to have advertising, why not have advertising that is relevant?
Thank you, that is precisely what I meant.
Check back further up in this thread. At least two people have described how to hiijack incoming SSL connections. I don't understand the details, but they are setting up a transparent proxy that intercepts the SSL connection and substitutes their own certificate to the user's browser.
There should be bounties put on these folks spreading this shit.
What Elon Musk is doing is similar to the assembly line process Henry Ford brought to the automotive industry.
Instead of each item being lovingly hand-crafted by thousands of pork-fueled constituents, SpaceX is making a rocket factory. It's fantastic.
>They are raising funds for a movie called The Tunnel by letting people invest in individual frames for $1 apiece.
>When the movie is complete, it will be released for free on torrent sites.
Sounds like a return to the days of commissioned art.
I have seen this coming for some time, as I'm sure many people have.
Most of the time when you go to the doctor, he is guessing at your symptoms based on a verbal patient interview. Unless the symptoms have a physical manifestation that the doctor can see or measure, diagnosis is largely guesswork.
There is no reason why this sort of guesswork needs to be done by a highly trained and expensive person. The only reason why we do is we are afraid of the consequences of guessing wrong so we feel better by having they highly trained expert do the guessing.
But we are entering an era where automated diagnostic tools, such as the camera tool in the article, are going to become a reality. We are not yet to the "Star Trek Tricorder", but I don't think it will be long and you /could/ go to a kiosk at the drug store and be scanned, including a blood analysis, by an automated piece of machinery that will be able to diagnose based on observable information rather than guessing based on how the patient is able to describe their symptoms.
This is going to eat into doctor revenues massively.
For society, this will be a good thing. Doctors will be freed up from diagnosing ailments to concentrate on actually curing ailments.
But doctors are not likely to take kindly to these new tools. Just like today there is pushback against the mall-store ultrasound clinics that people can use to get ultrasound images of their unborn babies. The doctors are claiming that these services are "unsafe", despite the fact that you don't have to be a rocket scientist to operate the things. They just don't want their business undercut.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI9CvipHl_c
It is assumed that you are falling into the black hole accelerating according to the force of the gravitational pull of the black hole. So you WILL pass through the event horizon in a heartbeat.
Think of it this way:
Even if you had a magical platform that you could stand on just /outside/ the event horizon, you'd still be dead. The amount of gravity pulling down on your would not just stop your blood from flowing upwards, it would crush you into a puddle of goo on the platform.
The ONLY way you could survive the fall into the black hole would be under freefall. Any attempt to appreciably slow down your fall would result in you getting crushed. So any trip through the even horizon will be very, very fast. Probably an an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.
One of the problems with approaching a black hole (aside from massive amounts of radiation around ones actively eating matter) is the fact that the force of gravity increases as you approach the mass responsible for the gravity.
With small black holes, as you approach (feet first) the difference in gravitational pull at your feet would be many times larger than the gravitational pull at your head. You would be literally ripped apart, down to the molecular level. This is known as "Spaghettification".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification
However, with a large enough black hole, you should be able to pass the event horizon before these tidal forces grow large enough to rip you apart. Of course, this does you no good, because once you are inside the event horizon you cannot exert a great enough force to prevent yourself from falling deeper until the forces ARE great enough to rip you apart.
But for a large black hole, in theory, you could cross the event horizon without being ripped apart.
It is no longer production that you are paying for. It's advertising. The big media companies MARKET STARS.
Sure, you could be the world's greatest singer and post your songs on your web site and maybe you'll get a small gathering of fans.
Or you can have a multi-billion-dollar advertising agency market you to the world, for a cut, and have millions of fans, even if you're not a great singer, as long as you have a pretty face.
You're paying for the marketing, not the distribution.
>Is hacking mobile phones a big business nowadays? Should we expect to see more security issues with our smartphones as >they increase in popularity? I'm not being facetious, I come here because I don't know these answers. If it's not, it will be. Clearly there is big business to be made in compromising traditional computer systems today. In the early days (and I've been around computers since the TI99/4A) it seems that "viruses" were primarily made as a prank. But today the biggest threats seem to be botnets which are used for profit to either propagate spam and execute denial of service attacks through distributed means, or simply to skim valuable user account data off of the compromised systems. This is all far beyond the amateur pranks of old. It is now done for financial gain. Cell phones have rapidly become computers. All the benefits of compromising traditional computers will likely follow.
>Disregard any tablet running a desktop OS; they've been on the market for years and nobody wants them.
I don't care what the OS is.
What I want is an electronic notepad that I can write on just like a traditional notepad. But I'm not going to pay $1500 or more for one.
Now $200? Now you're talking.
If I can legibly write on it, this thing is a student's dream. One notebook for all your classes. Essentially infinite paper. The ability to email your notes. If it records audio, even better.
The difference here is that Asus is about to bring forth a tablet PC that costs less than $200.
This is precisely what I have been waiting for. I want an electronic appliance that I can write in like a notebook with infinite paper, for school and for work.
I deal extensively with mathematical, physics, and engineering equations, so I want to write with a pencil rather than a keyboard.
For $200, I am there. This is exactly what I want.
If I can store PDF versions of my textbooks on it, even better.
Now I understand what is going on.
Basically, the chips are sold to reliably run at what they are set to run at, but they might run faster, especially if you put in robust cooling.
Interesting.
I just bought a new system with a i7-930. Supposedly it can be overclocked. I have not fooled with it. The system does have liquid cooling though.
Steve