That's true, however, there's a legal difference between hidden cameras and ones that are in full view when deciding how reasonable it is. If you've gone to the trouble of going someplace that's technically public, but where there are no cameras, you may very well still have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
No, it's not. Apart from hardcore pedants, everybody else accepts it as a legitimate meaning for the phrase. Bottom line is that things like this mean what they do by consensus, not because people refuse to recognize newer definitions.
And I suppose you don't accept that "literally all the time" does not necessarily mean constantly.
Grow up, begging the question is the same thing as raising the question, it means that something somebody has said begs further questions to be asked. Begging the question is something completely different and it's contextually clear which one the GP was intending.
It is quite slow, I remember back before I learned to touch type, that I could hunt and peck at around 35wpm, and even somebody of low skill ought to be able to do at least 15wpm with some practice. Anybody doing less than that hasn't had much practice and is having to hunt over the entire keyboard without any clue as to roughly where the keys are that they're needed.
It's largely because we have too much hydroelectric capacity where it's present and the tradeoffs aren't so good. The places where we really need it tend to be places where we can't install it. Such as the midwest where there's plenty of demand, but little or no opportunity to install it.
As somebody who lives in a part of the world where the fisheries are a significant part of the economy, I say fuck you. We have so much hydroelectric power around here that most of it gets sold to folks living in other parts of the country. But, the fisheries themselves are in much worse condition. Thankfully, because we've been removing dams the fisheries are improving and that sector of our economy is becoming healthier.
Nothing is without it's costs and the bottom line is that idiots like you are just making things worse. Why should we in WA have to ruin our fisheries because people in CA are so wasteful?
That is true, however the assumption needs to be that since we're burning oil millions of times faster than it was produced in the first place that we'll run out of it in any useful sense at some point. As a result we'll do something to ensure that we have contingency plans in place for when that happens before we're forced to do so suddenly.
You do realize that we won't run out of oil, but not because there's so much of it, but because of the fuel efficiency standards and alternatives that the environmentalists are always pushing for right? And furthermore that if we hit the point where we've used 80% of the oil there is, that we're going to have to change to something else as the last remaining bits are going to be expensive to drill with no guarantee that we're going to have a replacement if we don't switch early.
Bottom line is that we've been using oil at such a fast rate over the last century that we will run out of it eventually. You can't consume something millions of times faster than it's being created and expect to have it last forever. Just doesn't work that way.
I disagree, unless you're plugging a keyboard into it, they are piss poor as a means of creating content. At which point, you have a device that's barely any smaller than a laptop and quite a bit slower.
I don't know about that, even my grandmother used to use her computer for email, which was much less efficient on a tablet than on even an entry level netbook.
Except that chargers are not all over the place, and I'm sure there are plenty of places where you can go 1500 miles without having the opportunity to charge. What's more, even if you do have a charger available, due to the lengthy time it takes to charge, you might not have the luxury of plugging it in.
It's less of an issue for gasoline and diesel cars because of the ubiquitous gas stations and the short period of time it takes to refill the gas tank.
I'm sure that in the long run it will be solved, they solved the mud and stream fording by building up the interstate highways so that it wasn't an issue. I'm sure that when they have more charging stations and can figure out how to make the batteries charge more efficiently, that the 1500 mile road trip standard will be less important.
I'm not so sure about that. I could see something like the Asus Transformer becoming the standard in a few years.
The main problem that Tablets have, IMHO, is that they are an awkward compromise that nobody has really figured out how to make work. Without a keyboard, the input tasks for text take forever compared with touch typing, and you have to give up a portion of the screen in order to have the onscreen keyboard. Because they need to be so small, you have to give up processing power and the ability to replace components.
But, I do like the basic idea behind the Transformer, and I think that's going to be much more common in the future as it seems to be a pretty good compromise that actually has real world utility.
No, AFAIK it was just conjecture at the time. There wasn't the DNA or knowledge of DNA to know what color the dinosaurs should be. This was also millions of years before Kodachrome so the only pictures we have are in black and white or various monochrome pigmentation.
Fortunately, with a skin sample we might learn what color one specific dinosaur was. But, it's safe to say that it was some sort of earth tone.
Whether or not you need the degree really depends a great deal on the specifics. If the company isn't paying for properly engineered code, then it probably doesn't matter at all.
If they do require properly engineered code, then it probably doesn't matter, provided you've bothered to learn the necessary engineering outside of school and can convince them of that fact.
The big problem is that HR morons are being used to make the hiring decisions. That's a pretty huge red flag and I never take such a job when I can help it.
The real hurdle here is audience. With traditional printers, they were basically replacing typewriters with computer consoles and there was a clear need that could reach a large number of people.
Comparatively speaking, the number of people that need to print something in 3D is comparatively small and for the most part they'd be better off going to a hackerspace or Kinkos when it does become more affordable.
Ultimately, I'm sure that there are plenty of uses for them, it's just that until these things are extremely inexpensive to own and operate it's going to be more cost effective to just go to the local store and buy one of the mass produced pieces than to print them yourself.
This is in some ways the same problem that videophones had. They have a use, but it's not a very broad audience and it can take a long time to hit critical mass. And in the case of videophones, ultimately they were replaced by webcams that were integrated into computers well before they ever really took off.
Same thing here. Until somebody finds a use for these things that's broad enough to be appealing to a relatively large audience and cost effective over mass produced parts coming from China the prices are likely to remain high and the utility relatively low.
Sigh, somebody else trots out that stupid XKCD cartoon without understanding it.
The example that he used substituting for troubadour with a 2 character chaser is not something that has ever been recommended password policy anywhere I've seen recommendations made. It was specifically warned that you not take a dictionary word and transliterate it into leet speak because it wasn't a strong password.
Bottom line is that the suggested option is easier to reconstruct than a random password and that once you get more than a small number of passwords, you're probably not going to be memorizing them anyways, as you're supposed to be changing them from time to time.
What inconvenience? It's precisely the same amount of work for me to use a 2 character password as it is to use a 100 character password. Once you get more than about 4 log ins, it becomes inconvenient to memorize them anyways, and with a keychain the length of the string and the component characters are moot.
You'd be surprised, I run into a fair number of sites where you have to use alphanumeric characters and nothing else. I've also run into a fair number of sites where the validation algorithm doesn't work so it will accept passwords that you can't use and just silently truncate or adjust them to whatever it takes without telling you what the new password is.
Then there's the sites that require at least 12 characters and the ones that limit it at 8. Really, it's a mess and the people paying for these systems don't care about security beyond appearances.
It's impossible to clear this mess up without using the same password and log in for everything. Right now I have over 400 log ins in my database. I'm not sure how many of those are ones that I need to log into again, but that's a large enough number that even changing them on a regular basis is unlikely.
Trying to unify that under the same log in that the sites get, is not something that's technically desirable. I'm not really sure how one can solve this problem form the server side, because you'd need 3rd party to access all of the passwords without the users' permission in order to know.
That's why we have rules of evidence. I'm not sure about Finland, but in the US you would have to present somebody to testify as to how the data was selected and collected in the first place.
And what's more that log script would be something that would be subject to discovery anyways.
Indeed, even if, for the sake of argument, the only alteration was the username. The system in place authenticated the altered version just fine, until they did some digging. Apparently there's an acknowledgement that there was a username changed to protect an identity.
The problem then becomes exactly what you're describing, how do we know that was the only change that was made to those files. And given that it apparently wasn't disclosed, how do we know that all of the changes were and what the original evidence would have looked like.
I used to work security, and I remember in the fire control center they had a log that would always print out to an old dotmatrix printer and just about every bit of information would be spit out on there throughout the day to one long sheet of paper, which made it easy to show what had and hadn't been omitted. The only real trick was when we had to change paper, but everything else there was incredibly difficult to change compared with other methods of record keeping.
Slashdot Mirror
With an average lens or video camera, which means that it doesn't apply to super telephoto lenses and it doesn't apply to cameras that are concealed.
That's true, however, there's a legal difference between hidden cameras and ones that are in full view when deciding how reasonable it is. If you've gone to the trouble of going someplace that's technically public, but where there are no cameras, you may very well still have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
No, it's not. Apart from hardcore pedants, everybody else accepts it as a legitimate meaning for the phrase. Bottom line is that things like this mean what they do by consensus, not because people refuse to recognize newer definitions.
And I suppose you don't accept that "literally all the time" does not necessarily mean constantly.
I should have been more specific. The second begging the question is the logical fallacy. The first is just the phrase that means raises the question.
Grow up, begging the question is the same thing as raising the question, it means that something somebody has said begs further questions to be asked. Begging the question is something completely different and it's contextually clear which one the GP was intending.
It is quite slow, I remember back before I learned to touch type, that I could hunt and peck at around 35wpm, and even somebody of low skill ought to be able to do at least 15wpm with some practice. Anybody doing less than that hasn't had much practice and is having to hunt over the entire keyboard without any clue as to roughly where the keys are that they're needed.
It's largely because we have too much hydroelectric capacity where it's present and the tradeoffs aren't so good. The places where we really need it tend to be places where we can't install it. Such as the midwest where there's plenty of demand, but little or no opportunity to install it.
As somebody who lives in a part of the world where the fisheries are a significant part of the economy, I say fuck you. We have so much hydroelectric power around here that most of it gets sold to folks living in other parts of the country. But, the fisheries themselves are in much worse condition. Thankfully, because we've been removing dams the fisheries are improving and that sector of our economy is becoming healthier.
Nothing is without it's costs and the bottom line is that idiots like you are just making things worse. Why should we in WA have to ruin our fisheries because people in CA are so wasteful?
That is true, however the assumption needs to be that since we're burning oil millions of times faster than it was produced in the first place that we'll run out of it in any useful sense at some point. As a result we'll do something to ensure that we have contingency plans in place for when that happens before we're forced to do so suddenly.
You do realize that we won't run out of oil, but not because there's so much of it, but because of the fuel efficiency standards and alternatives that the environmentalists are always pushing for right? And furthermore that if we hit the point where we've used 80% of the oil there is, that we're going to have to change to something else as the last remaining bits are going to be expensive to drill with no guarantee that we're going to have a replacement if we don't switch early.
Bottom line is that we've been using oil at such a fast rate over the last century that we will run out of it eventually. You can't consume something millions of times faster than it's being created and expect to have it last forever. Just doesn't work that way.
I'm sure that they've thought about that already. The question is whether they've done the work necessary to deal with the problem.
I disagree, unless you're plugging a keyboard into it, they are piss poor as a means of creating content. At which point, you have a device that's barely any smaller than a laptop and quite a bit slower.
I don't know about that, even my grandmother used to use her computer for email, which was much less efficient on a tablet than on even an entry level netbook.
Except that chargers are not all over the place, and I'm sure there are plenty of places where you can go 1500 miles without having the opportunity to charge. What's more, even if you do have a charger available, due to the lengthy time it takes to charge, you might not have the luxury of plugging it in.
It's less of an issue for gasoline and diesel cars because of the ubiquitous gas stations and the short period of time it takes to refill the gas tank.
I'm sure that in the long run it will be solved, they solved the mud and stream fording by building up the interstate highways so that it wasn't an issue. I'm sure that when they have more charging stations and can figure out how to make the batteries charge more efficiently, that the 1500 mile road trip standard will be less important.
I'm not so sure about that. I could see something like the Asus Transformer becoming the standard in a few years.
The main problem that Tablets have, IMHO, is that they are an awkward compromise that nobody has really figured out how to make work. Without a keyboard, the input tasks for text take forever compared with touch typing, and you have to give up a portion of the screen in order to have the onscreen keyboard. Because they need to be so small, you have to give up processing power and the ability to replace components.
But, I do like the basic idea behind the Transformer, and I think that's going to be much more common in the future as it seems to be a pretty good compromise that actually has real world utility.
No, AFAIK it was just conjecture at the time. There wasn't the DNA or knowledge of DNA to know what color the dinosaurs should be. This was also millions of years before Kodachrome so the only pictures we have are in black and white or various monochrome pigmentation.
Fortunately, with a skin sample we might learn what color one specific dinosaur was. But, it's safe to say that it was some sort of earth tone.
Whether or not you need the degree really depends a great deal on the specifics. If the company isn't paying for properly engineered code, then it probably doesn't matter at all.
If they do require properly engineered code, then it probably doesn't matter, provided you've bothered to learn the necessary engineering outside of school and can convince them of that fact.
The big problem is that HR morons are being used to make the hiring decisions. That's a pretty huge red flag and I never take such a job when I can help it.
I'm pretty sure that the first market for this is going to be printing sex toys in the privacy of your own home.
The real hurdle here is audience. With traditional printers, they were basically replacing typewriters with computer consoles and there was a clear need that could reach a large number of people.
Comparatively speaking, the number of people that need to print something in 3D is comparatively small and for the most part they'd be better off going to a hackerspace or Kinkos when it does become more affordable.
Ultimately, I'm sure that there are plenty of uses for them, it's just that until these things are extremely inexpensive to own and operate it's going to be more cost effective to just go to the local store and buy one of the mass produced pieces than to print them yourself.
This is in some ways the same problem that videophones had. They have a use, but it's not a very broad audience and it can take a long time to hit critical mass. And in the case of videophones, ultimately they were replaced by webcams that were integrated into computers well before they ever really took off.
Same thing here. Until somebody finds a use for these things that's broad enough to be appealing to a relatively large audience and cost effective over mass produced parts coming from China the prices are likely to remain high and the utility relatively low.
Sigh, somebody else trots out that stupid XKCD cartoon without understanding it.
The example that he used substituting for troubadour with a 2 character chaser is not something that has ever been recommended password policy anywhere I've seen recommendations made. It was specifically warned that you not take a dictionary word and transliterate it into leet speak because it wasn't a strong password.
Bottom line is that the suggested option is easier to reconstruct than a random password and that once you get more than a small number of passwords, you're probably not going to be memorizing them anyways, as you're supposed to be changing them from time to time.
What inconvenience? It's precisely the same amount of work for me to use a 2 character password as it is to use a 100 character password. Once you get more than about 4 log ins, it becomes inconvenient to memorize them anyways, and with a keychain the length of the string and the component characters are moot.
You'd be surprised, I run into a fair number of sites where you have to use alphanumeric characters and nothing else. I've also run into a fair number of sites where the validation algorithm doesn't work so it will accept passwords that you can't use and just silently truncate or adjust them to whatever it takes without telling you what the new password is.
Then there's the sites that require at least 12 characters and the ones that limit it at 8. Really, it's a mess and the people paying for these systems don't care about security beyond appearances.
It's impossible to clear this mess up without using the same password and log in for everything. Right now I have over 400 log ins in my database. I'm not sure how many of those are ones that I need to log into again, but that's a large enough number that even changing them on a regular basis is unlikely.
Trying to unify that under the same log in that the sites get, is not something that's technically desirable. I'm not really sure how one can solve this problem form the server side, because you'd need 3rd party to access all of the passwords without the users' permission in order to know.
That's why we have rules of evidence. I'm not sure about Finland, but in the US you would have to present somebody to testify as to how the data was selected and collected in the first place.
And what's more that log script would be something that would be subject to discovery anyways.
Indeed, even if, for the sake of argument, the only alteration was the username. The system in place authenticated the altered version just fine, until they did some digging. Apparently there's an acknowledgement that there was a username changed to protect an identity.
The problem then becomes exactly what you're describing, how do we know that was the only change that was made to those files. And given that it apparently wasn't disclosed, how do we know that all of the changes were and what the original evidence would have looked like.
I used to work security, and I remember in the fire control center they had a log that would always print out to an old dotmatrix printer and just about every bit of information would be spit out on there throughout the day to one long sheet of paper, which made it easy to show what had and hadn't been omitted. The only real trick was when we had to change paper, but everything else there was incredibly difficult to change compared with other methods of record keeping.