And I don't buy the crap that gets spewed about "doesn't matter which party wins they all suck" garbage. That's a lie that the parties of fear and apathy spread who don't want you to vote. Any party that gains advantage by reducing the number or voters (eg. Republicans and Conservatives) is not a party of the people.
... and you would be incorrect. Name-based Virtual Hosting cannot be done with HTTPS.
...and then you would also be incorrect. One can use one IP with multiple host headers and multiple domains by using a UCC Certificate. And I know this because I am doing it right now for 5 domains with one IP and one UCC cert.
http://www.digicert.com/unified-communications-ssl-tls.htm
That's all well and good until one day when the political world changes around you. Or when otherwise unrelated bits of information are cherry picked from an ocean of web page views and forum posts to form an "undeniable chain of incriminating evidence".
Transparency is for organizations not individuals. When we form groups (companies or societies) there is a strong societal interest in knowing how that group is conducting its business. Both for members of the group that are not involved in the day-to-day but nonetheless carry an obligation to know. And also from outside the group, for example to ask why there is no disposal charge on the expense reports for the 20 tons of toxic waste the groups factory produces.
Currently, it seems that groups have more privacy protection then individuals (trade secrets, national interest secretes, privilege of position or power) . I somehow thing that trend will not lead to good ends.
The Canadian Green party has a policy initiative called a "Negative Income Tax". Basically, you just extend the progressive tax system downward so that those level below certain level receive tax dollars instead of paying them. It would save a boatload in administrative expenses because we could abolish the agencies that administer welfare and unemployment insurance.
http://greenparty.ca/node/13380
eBay is closer to home.
"On October 3, 2002, PayPal became a wholly-owned subsidiary of eBay"
Why not pressure eBay to yank to leash of their dog.
Also, I thought the SCOTUS recently ruled that spending money was free speech? And how about anti-discrimination laws? PayPal seems to be discriminating based on a form of "political affiliation" isn't that against the law?
Doesn't take old seasoned professionals just DBA's.
1. Proper use parametrized stored procedures.
2. Use the narrowest permissions possible for website data access accounts
3. Use permission chaining so that actions outside of the purpose of the stored procedure are denied outright.
4. Lock down the tables that allow an attacker to iterate through database objects.eg. "sysobjects"
I think you have that backwards. As far as I know the UK is like Canada everything produced by the government is covered by Crown Copy write. However, in the USA, everything produced by the government is considered public domain (your asked to cite source when using their material).
So the guy was probably at more risk of being sued/charged in the UK then in US.
Well does google need to track? Don't they make the lions share of their revenue from adSense on their search results pages? They don't need to track you to know that your searching for "treatments for crabs". They just show ads relevant to your search.
They don't need to be persistent cookies. Most websites use session cookies for provide stateful information while a user is logged in. And even if they offer a cookie for remembering me for my next visit so I don't have to log in again, they don't have to allow other domains the permission to read the cookie.
He really should have called it "Evidence Based". Conducts some regression analysis to try to determine prime drivers of whatever is the target policy area. Then conduct randomized trials by assigning different policies to different regions. After a given time period select the most effective policy or program and apply it statewide.
I agree that FaceBook has a medium term shelf life. What they have essential done is to recreate AOL within the Internet. (Kinda funny really).
I truly do believe that someone (perhaps even me) will one day soon produce a more open and distributed system that will slowly drain facebook of their top position. Maybe even sending them to the dustbin.
Also, FaceBook's model relies on people surrendering their privacy (knowingly or otherwise) once people can get the same features without the privacy loss to advertisers, facebook is dead.
These meters measure electrical traffic on wires right? and there are available technology for sending data on power wires right? So why would you make them wireless?
Every game CAN be played out to it's ultimate end. It would be tedious to do so but there is nevertheless a rule about how to count points and determine a winner.
However I suppose I see where you might be going. It may be easy for human players to determine at a glance that a corner or area belongs to a certain player and that fighting it out further would gain nothing. It could be a lot harder for a computer to determine the same.
I have to agree with those that are disagreeing with you.
It is a game and it does have rules. A very small number of very simple rules.
1) Black goes first
2) play on the intersections of the game board grid
3) each line extending from a stone or group of stones is called a 'liberty'
4) any stone, or group of stones, that has no liberties at the end of a players turn is removed from play
5) you can not play a stone in a place where it would have no liberties
6) you can not recreate how the board looked on your last turn (The Ko rule). Hard to describe in writting but exceedingly simply to understand when demonstrated.
6 of the simplest rules creating a wonderfully diversity of game play. Easy to learn hard to master, arguably the best type of game and one of my favorites.
I have never had to quarrel with another player about the legality of a rule nor about the current balance of play, nor about who has won or lost.
Perhaps there is a game that is similiar to Go but not Go that you are talking about.
I really think it is up to the industry to decide on safety levels and then enforce them. If there is a concern to the point of wanting me to sign something then maybe they just shouldn't.
Am I also going to get a form that says the surgeon had a fight with his wife or is worried about his investments and so might be distracted?
Do the research, pick an amount of sleep, then enforce the rules.
I am a Liberal and I take my meaning of the word from "Liberty" and from the Liberal Revolutions in Europe around 1848. These revolutions were in a large part inspired by the "Liberation" of the American Colonies.
The revolutions of based in a philosophy of "Liberalism" which in round terms meant screw the kings and the popes and let the people will rule themselves!. Sound familiar to Americans? It should your country is founded on the principals of Liberalism. The fact that this word has been turned into a pejorative by the same group that harkens back to founded principals is hilarious in a sad way.
In the English parliament of the Whigs and the Tories (or liberals and conservatives) the Whigs were the country industrialists who wanted freedom for their capital (the new money), and the Tories (Conservatives) drew their support from the old landed aristocracy. (eg. the old landed money). So I would expect those that called for freedom from government for their business to be Liberals but mostly they call themselves Conservatives. Weird.
Still later one of the defining differences between a liberal and a conservative was between those that supported fiscal policy for managing the economy (Liberals) and those that supported monetary policy (Conservatives). (Which is why I find it funny today that whenever I hear people talk badly about the FED, or central bank monetary system in general, those people are mostly self-described "Conservatives" which again seems backwards to me).
I do see a huge contradiction in the current conservative movement. On the one hand they talk big about the importance about personal liberty but on the other hand they tend to be very authoritarian. They shout about liberty and freedom but then want to jail homosexuals. They yell for the government to get off their backs but if you question anything about national defense they jump on you for being unpatriotic.
Conservatives complain about the nanny state but are far more likely to adopt a "A father knows best so shout up and do what your told" attitude. I think the single best definition of a 'liberal' is one who truly believes in the sovereignty of the individual.
One of my biggest fears for the US is that this misguided and confused conservative movement accidentally gets what it is wishing for by bringing down "Liberal Democracy", and end up getting a form of dictatorship instead to the sound of a collective Whoops! across the red states.
I would highly recommend the book "On Liberty" (1859) is a philosophical work by British philosopher John Stuart Mill. It was a radical work to the Victorian readers of the time because it supported moral and economic freedom of individuals from the state. Wikipedia summary.
On Liberty was an enormously influential work; the ideas presented in the book have remained the basis of much liberal political thought ever since
I think democrats in the US should be proud to call themselves liberals and should stop hiding from a word that is truly to be admired and should stop letting it be re-defined by the forces of evil.
And the final word from Mr. Mill that is as true today as it was then.
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
-- John Stuart Mill
Slashdot Mirror
And I don't buy the crap that gets spewed about "doesn't matter which party wins they all suck" garbage. That's a lie that the parties of fear and apathy spread who don't want you to vote. Any party that gains advantage by reducing the number or voters (eg. Republicans and Conservatives) is not a party of the people.
Thank the gods.
http://www.digicert.com/unified-communications-ssl-tls.htm
Sure. The green party. Dedicated to a healthy environment. (hint: your breathing the environment now)
That's all well and good until one day when the political world changes around you. Or when otherwise unrelated bits of information are cherry picked from an ocean of web page views and forum posts to form an "undeniable chain of incriminating evidence".
Transparency is for organizations not individuals. When we form groups (companies or societies) there is a strong societal interest in knowing how that group is conducting its business. Both for members of the group that are not involved in the day-to-day but nonetheless carry an obligation to know. And also from outside the group, for example to ask why there is no disposal charge on the expense reports for the 20 tons of toxic waste the groups factory produces.
Currently, it seems that groups have more privacy protection then individuals (trade secrets, national interest secretes, privilege of position or power) . I somehow thing that trend will not lead to good ends.
The Canadian Green party has a policy initiative called a "Negative Income Tax". Basically, you just extend the progressive tax system downward so that those level below certain level receive tax dollars instead of paying them. It would save a boatload in administrative expenses because we could abolish the agencies that administer welfare and unemployment insurance. http://greenparty.ca/node/13380
I agree. However it would be a better then having the media continue to call it the "facebook revolutions"
The 2011 "Manning Revolutions" the brought democracy to the middle east.
OK I get it now!!
1) Trademark my name
2) Cite direct mail advertisers for infringement
3) Profit!
eBay is closer to home.
"On October 3, 2002, PayPal became a wholly-owned subsidiary of eBay"
Why not pressure eBay to yank to leash of their dog.
Also, I thought the SCOTUS recently ruled that spending money was free speech? And how about anti-discrimination laws? PayPal seems to be discriminating based on a form of "political affiliation" isn't that against the law?
Doesn't take old seasoned professionals just DBA's.
1. Proper use parametrized stored procedures.
2. Use the narrowest permissions possible for website data access accounts
3. Use permission chaining so that actions outside of the purpose of the stored procedure are denied outright.
4. Lock down the tables that allow an attacker to iterate through database objects.eg. "sysobjects"
I think you have that backwards. As far as I know the UK is like Canada everything produced by the government is covered by Crown Copy write. However, in the USA, everything produced by the government is considered public domain (your asked to cite source when using their material).
So the guy was probably at more risk of being sued/charged in the UK then in US.
Well does google need to track? Don't they make the lions share of their revenue from adSense on their search results pages? They don't need to track you to know that your searching for "treatments for crabs". They just show ads relevant to your search.
They don't need to be persistent cookies. Most websites use session cookies for provide stateful information while a user is logged in. And even if they offer a cookie for remembering me for my next visit so I don't have to log in again, they don't have to allow other domains the permission to read the cookie.
Becoming Venus is not out of the question. Adapting to that would be difficult.
He really should have called it "Evidence Based". Conducts some regression analysis to try to determine prime drivers of whatever is the target policy area. Then conduct randomized trials by assigning different policies to different regions. After a given time period select the most effective policy or program and apply it statewide.
Rinse and repeat.
And don't forget one of the most performent methods for handling trees in SQL...nested sets.
http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/hierarchical-data.html
Sigourney Weaver doesn't do it for you?
:)
How about "I say we blast of and nuke it from space, its the only way to be sure." for a witty catchphrase
How about some blame for the hyperbolic partisan atmosphere in the US right now? And the media that feeds it?
I agree that FaceBook has a medium term shelf life. What they have essential done is to recreate AOL within the Internet. (Kinda funny really).
I truly do believe that someone (perhaps even me) will one day soon produce a more open and distributed system that will slowly drain facebook of their top position. Maybe even sending them to the dustbin.
Also, FaceBook's model relies on people surrendering their privacy (knowingly or otherwise) once people can get the same features without the privacy loss to advertisers, facebook is dead.
These meters measure electrical traffic on wires right? and there are available technology for sending data on power wires right? So why would you make them wireless?
Every game CAN be played out to it's ultimate end. It would be tedious to do so but there is nevertheless a rule about how to count points and determine a winner.
However I suppose I see where you might be going. It may be easy for human players to determine at a glance that a corner or area belongs to a certain player and that fighting it out further would gain nothing. It could be a lot harder for a computer to determine the same.
I have to agree with those that are disagreeing with you.
It is a game and it does have rules. A very small number of very simple rules.
1) Black goes first
2) play on the intersections of the game board grid
3) each line extending from a stone or group of stones is called a 'liberty'
4) any stone, or group of stones, that has no liberties at the end of a players turn is removed from play
5) you can not play a stone in a place where it would have no liberties
6) you can not recreate how the board looked on your last turn (The Ko rule). Hard to describe in writting but exceedingly simply to understand when demonstrated.
6 of the simplest rules creating a wonderfully diversity of game play. Easy to learn hard to master, arguably the best type of game and one of my favorites.
I have never had to quarrel with another player about the legality of a rule nor about the current balance of play, nor about who has won or lost.
Perhaps there is a game that is similiar to Go but not Go that you are talking about.
I really think it is up to the industry to decide on safety levels and then enforce them. If there is a concern to the point of wanting me to sign something then maybe they just shouldn't.
Am I also going to get a form that says the surgeon had a fight with his wife or is worried about his investments and so might be distracted?
Do the research, pick an amount of sleep, then enforce the rules.
The revolutions of based in a philosophy of "Liberalism" which in round terms meant screw the kings and the popes and let the people will rule themselves!. Sound familiar to Americans? It should your country is founded on the principals of Liberalism. The fact that this word has been turned into a pejorative by the same group that harkens back to founded principals is hilarious in a sad way.
In the English parliament of the Whigs and the Tories (or liberals and conservatives) the Whigs were the country industrialists who wanted freedom for their capital (the new money), and the Tories (Conservatives) drew their support from the old landed aristocracy. (eg. the old landed money). So I would expect those that called for freedom from government for their business to be Liberals but mostly they call themselves Conservatives. Weird.
Still later one of the defining differences between a liberal and a conservative was between those that supported fiscal policy for managing the economy (Liberals) and those that supported monetary policy (Conservatives). (Which is why I find it funny today that whenever I hear people talk badly about the FED, or central bank monetary system in general, those people are mostly self-described "Conservatives" which again seems backwards to me).
I do see a huge contradiction in the current conservative movement. On the one hand they talk big about the importance about personal liberty but on the other hand they tend to be very authoritarian. They shout about liberty and freedom but then want to jail homosexuals. They yell for the government to get off their backs but if you question anything about national defense they jump on you for being unpatriotic.
Conservatives complain about the nanny state but are far more likely to adopt a "A father knows best so shout up and do what your told" attitude. I think the single best definition of a 'liberal' is one who truly believes in the sovereignty of the individual.
One of my biggest fears for the US is that this misguided and confused conservative movement accidentally gets what it is wishing for by bringing down "Liberal Democracy", and end up getting a form of dictatorship instead to the sound of a collective Whoops! across the red states.
I would highly recommend the book "On Liberty" (1859) is a philosophical work by British philosopher John Stuart Mill. It was a radical work to the Victorian readers of the time because it supported moral and economic freedom of individuals from the state. Wikipedia summary.
I think democrats in the US should be proud to call themselves liberals and should stop hiding from a word that is truly to be admired and should stop letting it be re-defined by the forces of evil.
And the final word from Mr. Mill that is as true today as it was then.
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. -- John Stuart Mill