Ok, how about this: design a way to determine if the light is in trouble (hard part, I admit. Maybe it could be with cameras or sensors on the lights?) Force the intersection to go in emergency blinky red mode if a problem is detected.
Well, the trend today, especially with large drives, is to go for a cluster size of 4k anyway. Sure, there'll be a lot of system files under 4k, but there's going to be much more music and pictures over 4k that will likely take more space.
Yeah, in exchange's case what you need is something that hooks into the databases and scans the mail directly. Scanning a database as a virus just isn't going to work. It's like a zip file with a virus inside. You can scan the zip file and it'll pass. You need to look inside to figure out if you're safe.
The moment you demand all skeptics believe "just because", it stops being science.
Understanding why the speed of light in a vacuum is the universe's speed limit requires a 300 year history in scientific advances, and that's considered dogma.
Sometimes you just have to accept that the other person just might know more about a topic than you.
So, what about NASA's climate data? What about NOAA's climate data?
Oh, but those weren't "debunked" so we're just going to conveniently ignore it. You cannot pick and choose what datasets you're going to side with. You have to either accept them all or debunk them all.
They destroyed raw data because they needed the space. (Further research on this leads me to believe it was just tapes being reused so the old data was overwritten, but on one level it's still the same.)
In a perfect world, all raw data could be saved. In the real world, there's budgets, square footage issues and environmental control issues. (You can't keep punchcards in a U-Store-It for 40 years otherwise they get all warped and rotted bugs eat them.)
Why? Because back in the days storage space was a premium. There just wasn't the room. Someone made an executive decision to make more space and they decided to get rid of the raw data.
Not saying this is what happened to the climate data, but sometimes shit happens. This isn't stuff people consider historic, so while we'll go out of our way to save Terabytes of White House email because it's instantly an historic record (...the ones that still exist *snort*) no one gives a poop about the raw data on the mytosis of genetic material in the Burandan Sea Slug.
Which scientists do they believe when it comes to Autism and vaccines?
Which scientists say vaccines and Autism are related? The people I hear expounding that link are anecdotes from "concerned" parents and especially Jenny McCarthy.
sometimes you've got to recognize that someone who studied climatology for X years might actually know a thing or two that you can't pick up from reading a blog
This.
Happens in every field; I get it all the time supporting computers. I ask them to do something, and suddenly I'm questioned, berated, argued with, told it won't work, they've done it, yadda yadda, and when I finally get them to do it and humor me...it fixes their problem and they hang up. No apology, no thank you, and likely no realization that they don't know my field as well as I know my field.
I suppose I could've left the cruise control bit out, but my thought process at the time was "I don't want friction to kick in so soon..."
The rest are necessary to remove any controlling aspect from the car. I could've said driverless, but someone would've chirped in "remote control!" for example, so I've found trying to rigidly define conditions a necessity for/.
Out of control doesn't not imply erratic, it simply means it cannot be controlled. A car going 90 mph in cruise control with a locked steering wheel and no breaks is 'out of control' in a 90 mph line assuming a flat course.
If the rocket was in a steady roll it could easily make a nigh perfect spiral if other conditions warrant. (Leaking/venting fuel is the current odds favorite?)
I just threw jet engines as an example because I know GE makes them.
I'm sure GE makes a lot more than just those as well that would experience a growth under a right-wing chief executive, but I don't know enough (or care enough really to research) about GE's product line to start weighing what product would benefit more from which administration's ideology.
Mostly I wanted to point out that it's probably not so cut and dried.
It was released through Miramax, which is under the Disney umbrella (bought 1993). So, yes, it's a Disney film. This also includes the Touchstone and Buena Vista labels.
Now what does this have to do with GE? Who do you think would give more for green programs, Obama or McCain? Obviously Obama. Who stands to make a fortune off green programs? GE! GE makes the wind generators for wind farms, CFL and LED light bulbs and are well invested in other "green" areas.
GE also makes jet engines, for example, which military aircraft use. I think they would have been fine with either candidate.
Well, I'll be nice and answer your questions despite you not answering mine.
1) No. Did I say it was? No. Did I give any indication that I was trying to make a generalizing sweep of the history of computer vulnerabilities? No. Your topic was focused on this particular incident, and in my personal experience, most bad stuff to hit Windows boxes (that I deal with) are from people who click stuff they should not. If you're going to make statements with such finality, you should expect people to bring up exceptions.
2) Not really; 15 years ago I would have been in middle school and most of my early PC history was "OK, what game can I play next?" I didn't *really* start getting myself educated on things like this until the early XP era. This isn't to say I'm ignorant of Windows' rather unflattering past but I was never on the receiving end of a Slammer, Code Red or Blaster storm.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, how about this: design a way to determine if the light is in trouble (hard part, I admit. Maybe it could be with cameras or sensors on the lights?) Force the intersection to go in emergency blinky red mode if a problem is detected.
Ever hear of wind?
Well, the trend today, especially with large drives, is to go for a cluster size of 4k anyway. Sure, there'll be a lot of system files under 4k, but there's going to be much more music and pictures over 4k that will likely take more space.
Yeah, in exchange's case what you need is something that hooks into the databases and scans the mail directly. Scanning a database as a virus just isn't going to work. It's like a zip file with a virus inside. You can scan the zip file and it'll pass. You need to look inside to figure out if you're safe.
And you spend your spare time... playing a game as a virtual virtual wal-mart stocker.
The moment you demand all skeptics believe "just because", it stops being science.
Understanding why the speed of light in a vacuum is the universe's speed limit requires a 300 year history in scientific advances, and that's considered dogma.
Sometimes you just have to accept that the other person just might know more about a topic than you.
So, what about NASA's climate data? What about NOAA's climate data?
Oh, but those weren't "debunked" so we're just going to conveniently ignore it. You cannot pick and choose what datasets you're going to side with. You have to either accept them all or debunk them all.
I'm waiting...
Did you know there was a time before floppy disks existed?
Man, I had that argument one day with someone who, I'll be honest, is much more clever at math than I am as a whole.
Honestly, I don't see what's so hard about this...
1/3 + 2/3 = 3/3.
0.333... + 0.666... = 0.999...
thus 3/3 = 0.999... = 1
Apparently 1/3 doesn't equal 0.333.. because 0.333.. ends at some point...
So, you're saying NASA doesn't employ scientists?
They destroyed raw data because they needed the space. (Further research on this leads me to believe it was just tapes being reused so the old data was overwritten, but on one level it's still the same.)
In a perfect world, all raw data could be saved. In the real world, there's budgets, square footage issues and environmental control issues. (You can't keep punchcards in a U-Store-It for 40 years otherwise they get all warped and rotted bugs eat them.)
http://arstechnica.com/science/guides/2009/11/the-complicated-truth-behind-scientific-findings.ars
It's hard to even explain seemingly obvious scientific truisms when it takes a 300 year history lesson on one topic.
NASA destroyed old tapes of data too.
Why? Because back in the days storage space was a premium. There just wasn't the room. Someone made an executive decision to make more space and they decided to get rid of the raw data.
Not saying this is what happened to the climate data, but sometimes shit happens. This isn't stuff people consider historic, so while we'll go out of our way to save Terabytes of White House email because it's instantly an historic record (...the ones that still exist *snort*) no one gives a poop about the raw data on the mytosis of genetic material in the Burandan Sea Slug.
Which scientists do they believe when it comes to Autism and vaccines?
Which scientists say vaccines and Autism are related? The people I hear expounding that link are anecdotes from "concerned" parents and especially Jenny McCarthy.
sometimes you've got to recognize that someone who studied climatology for X years might actually know a thing or two that you can't pick up from reading a blog
This.
Happens in every field; I get it all the time supporting computers. I ask them to do something, and suddenly I'm questioned, berated, argued with, told it won't work, they've done it, yadda yadda, and when I finally get them to do it and humor me...it fixes their problem and they hang up. No apology, no thank you, and likely no realization that they don't know my field as well as I know my field.
SEE?! SEE?!!
(Although now that I saw that I knew I should've forseen someone attaching a sail to it...paddle I likely never would've guessed though.)
...I also would've caught the double negative I left in early on. (doesn't not.)
The remnant of a rewording that wasn't entirely highlighted and deleted.
If I paid as much attention to detail as you claim, I guess I would've double checked my homonyms.
Nice rebuttle though.
Step up to red alert!
Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb.
Exhaust contaminated by something?
I suppose I could've left the cruise control bit out, but my thought process at the time was "I don't want friction to kick in so soon..."
The rest are necessary to remove any controlling aspect from the car. I could've said driverless, but someone would've chirped in "remote control!" for example, so I've found trying to rigidly define conditions a necessity for /.
Out of control doesn't not imply erratic, it simply means it cannot be controlled. A car going 90 mph in cruise control with a locked steering wheel and no breaks is 'out of control' in a 90 mph line assuming a flat course.
If the rocket was in a steady roll it could easily make a nigh perfect spiral if other conditions warrant. (Leaking/venting fuel is the current odds favorite?)
I just threw jet engines as an example because I know GE makes them.
I'm sure GE makes a lot more than just those as well that would experience a growth under a right-wing chief executive, but I don't know enough (or care enough really to research) about GE's product line to start weighing what product would benefit more from which administration's ideology.
Mostly I wanted to point out that it's probably not so cut and dried.
It was released through Miramax, which is under the Disney umbrella (bought 1993). So, yes, it's a Disney film. This also includes the Touchstone and Buena Vista labels.
Now what does this have to do with GE? Who do you think would give more for green programs, Obama or McCain? Obviously Obama. Who stands to make a fortune off green programs? GE! GE makes the wind generators for wind farms, CFL and LED light bulbs and are well invested in other "green" areas.
GE also makes jet engines, for example, which military aircraft use. I think they would have been fine with either candidate.
Well, I'll be nice and answer your questions despite you not answering mine.
1) No. Did I say it was? No. Did I give any indication that I was trying to make a generalizing sweep of the history of computer vulnerabilities? No. Your topic was focused on this particular incident, and in my personal experience, most bad stuff to hit Windows boxes (that I deal with) are from people who click stuff they should not. If you're going to make statements with such finality, you should expect people to bring up exceptions.
2) Not really; 15 years ago I would have been in middle school and most of my early PC history was "OK, what game can I play next?" I didn't *really* start getting myself educated on things like this until the early XP era. This isn't to say I'm ignorant of Windows' rather unflattering past but I was never on the receiving end of a Slammer, Code Red or Blaster storm.