"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to build bigger and better idiots. So far the universe is winning"
Yes, and this 'need for more processing power' , is exactly what Moore's law exploits : Moore's law basically dictates that the demand for processing power doubles every year.
As a result , it's most profitable to follow this demand.
Speeding it up would be silly ( even if new technology would allow it ) , because that means you lose money :
For example , if i suddenly were to create a processor which has 10.000x the processing power , i would go brankrupt :
- Either it would be so expensive , that no one would buy it , because no one would need that much processing power anyway . - If it would not be that expensive , than everyone might buy it . But afterwards , it would be many many years before anyone needed a more powerful processor , and i'm not making much money in the mean time.
Moore's Law ensures that every year people will find that their computer is too slow , and they will buy a new one , which in turn provides revenue for the manufacturers.
The more you have to lose , the more vulnerable you are.
The government is not going to concern itself about us : we are not worth the effort : to many of us , and there's not much we can do to the government anyway
Corporations, however , can do much more , but they can be taken down very easily by governments.
Whether the governments control the corporations , or the corporations control the governments , doesn't matter much : the end result is that they will work together , as this is much more profitable then working against each other.
There was an article some time ago , about someone who made a powerful laserbeam by using lots of tiny mirrors ( basically concentrating the power of the sun ).
If your idea is Harmony at any cost ( some sort of global ideology ) , i don't want to live on your world.
The fact is , there are differences between people , and there are idealists in all groups of people.
This naturally leads to conflict , but that's not a problem : if those people are allowed to voice there opinion , there may be heated discussions , but the end result will probably be something useful for everyone.
However, if you block certain ideas and opinions from public debate , then you are causing problems , because you effectively force the idealists to use other methods to impose themselves. And this will often result in violence in the end.
The point is not that she posted on facebook , or what she posted on facebook. The point is that she shouldn't be driving and using her cellphone at the same time. The timestamp of the post is being used to 'prove' that she posted while having the accident , and could have prevented the accident by not using her cellphone.
But, as mentioned above , a timestamp is not always accurate ( time on server may be off ) , and neither is the estimation of the time of the accident.
So , it's also possible that she posted after the crash . That could be relevant if you were on your way to an event which was planned on facebook , thus informing everyone that you won't be able to attend ( something like 'i was just in a car crash , i won't be able to make it in time ' ) .
However, in that case , it doesn't prove that she was using facebook while driving ( doesn't prove she wasn't either , but that's not required ).
I guess it depends on what you call "tracking" : the GPS is able to track someone , in the sense that it can find out it's current location, and if you happen to be near it , you also know where you are ( that's the point of a GPS:-) )
However , if you want someone else to see your location , you need something to transmit that location , which can be done with a cell phone.
If the data is transmitted over the air , it may be possible to intercept it.
The statement is pretty cryptic , and could be interpreted in many ways . You could always claim you understood it differently , or that you were admiring his poetry ( there's a lot of morbid poetry ) .
But i just 'liking' it won't make you an accomplice . If something happens it will certainly make you a suspect though.
Okay... Leaving browser exploits out of it for the moment, though, isn't cookie access restricted to the domain that set it?
The ads may be placed on different pages , but they themselves are from the same domain ( for example an image in the page , or an iframe ). When you visit the ad url , a cookie is created . Then , when you visit another ad ( from the same domain ) , the browser will send the cookie that was created earlier . This can be received at server side, so in the second ad , it's possible to know that the first ad was visited.
They also share this information. I once found out because some company had my name with a typo in it . Then i suddenly got advertisements with the exact same typo in it.
Well , it depends : if you want to find out if product is good , you could look at the comments. But with fake users , it's hard to know how much of the comments are actually genuine. Not to mention that all those users could be downmodding the actual critics.
I don't think anything can be done about it though , but it's good to be aware.
The content is not the problem , the fake users who write positive comments are : it can give the impression that something is a lot better than it actually is.
Offcourse, on Youtube they have to go to the trouble of creating new accounts. Here , they could just post as an AC , and no one would notice.
Freedom is typically limited to the extend where it interferes with someone else's freedom.
At one side , there's the freedom of the owner , on the other side , there's the freedom of the customer.
The freedom the bar keeper has to establish the rules of his establishment , do not weigh up against the limitation to freedom a person receives from not being allowed entrance to the place.
In this case however, the person is not being disallowed access . He's just not allowed to use his kindle .
Gandhi accomplished his goal. An idea that lives in the heart of many people , is not so easily killed as a human being . You may be able to suppress it , but you will never destroy it , because it is born out of necessity. As long as there is tyranny , people will rise up against it.
Nothing. But the user could at least be aware that something is amiss as the password reset probably wouldn't be affected and this would only work for as long as the attacker maintains access (rather than syphoning off the user/pass data for later analysis elsewhere).
Unless the attackers stored the original hash first , then resets the password , and puts the original hash back after he's done.
It all depends : IN my country , there's a shortage of IT people , so my company simply doesn't find the needed people here. As a result , they have no other choice but to outsource some development to India.
So in that case , there is no "neighbor who will be out of a job" , since none of the 'neighbours' are interested in the job in the first place.
I actually wonder how they can know the sex of all the contributors. I don't recall having to fill this in , and i just looked at my preferences , i don't see it there.
So how can do they know this 13% ? If they did a poll , that may only mean women are less likely to fill in polls.
Personally , if more women want to join wikipedia , they are welcome , if they don't want to , we should respect that too.
The idea that you need to change wikipedia , so it attracts more women, implies that you do not respect women enough to allow them to make up there own mind about whether to join or not ( as you already assume that they won't like it, before they had a chance to voice their opinion ).
Somebody typed the word into a Bing query entry box and hit submit. I.e.: A person searches for a term, and if Bing doesn't have any results for that term, then it goes to google.com, performs a search for the same term and returns those results. Does that help?
So , if i understand it correctly , google could add a search result for that word, mapping it to one specific result. Then , since google added it , they know the word , so they can type the word into the bing toolbar , and see if this turns up their result. Brilliant.
Slashdot Mirror
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to build bigger and better idiots. So far the universe is winning"
Yes, and this 'need for more processing power' , is exactly what Moore's law exploits : Moore's law basically dictates that the demand for processing power doubles every year.
As a result , it's most profitable to follow this demand.
Speeding it up would be silly ( even if new technology would allow it ) , because that means you lose money :
For example , if i suddenly were to create a processor which has 10.000x the processing power , i would go brankrupt :
- Either it would be so expensive , that no one would buy it , because no one would need that much processing power anyway .
- If it would not be that expensive , than everyone might buy it . But afterwards , it would be many many years before anyone needed a more powerful processor , and i'm not making much money in the mean time.
Moore's Law ensures that every year people will find that their computer is too slow , and they will buy a new one , which in turn provides revenue for the manufacturers.
The more you have to lose , the more vulnerable you are.
The government is not going to concern itself about us : we are not worth the effort : to many of us , and there's not much we can do to the government anyway
Corporations, however , can do much more , but they can be taken down very easily by governments.
Whether the governments control the corporations , or the corporations control the governments , doesn't matter much : the end result is that they will work together , as this is much more profitable then working against each other.
There was an article some time ago , about someone who made a powerful laserbeam by using lots of tiny mirrors ( basically concentrating the power of the sun ).
I would go for a self-driving car ( can be useful on long trips ) , but only if it's also possible to drive manually.
Having your own car has more to do with freedom , than with status. It allows you to go wherever you want to go , whenever you want to.
Besides, it is a call to wipe Zionism from the world (which is a very legitimate decent request), not a country.
So it's ' legitimate and decent ' , to call for the wiping out of a political movement ?
If your idea is Harmony at any cost ( some sort of global ideology ) , i don't want to live on your world.
The fact is , there are differences between people , and there are idealists in all groups of people.
This naturally leads to conflict , but that's not a problem : if those people are allowed to voice there opinion , there may be heated discussions , but the end result will probably be something useful for everyone.
However, if you block certain ideas and opinions from public debate , then you are causing problems , because you effectively force the idealists to use other methods to impose themselves. And this will often result in violence in the end.
The point is not that she posted on facebook , or what she posted on facebook. The point is that she shouldn't be driving and using her cellphone at the same time.
The timestamp of the post is being used to 'prove' that she posted while having the accident , and could have prevented the accident by not using her cellphone.
But, as mentioned above , a timestamp is not always accurate ( time on server may be off ) , and neither is the estimation of the time of the accident.
So , it's also possible that she posted after the crash . That could be relevant if you were on your way to an event which was planned on facebook , thus informing everyone that you won't be able to attend ( something like 'i was just in a car crash , i won't be able to make it in time ' ) .
However, in that case , it doesn't prove that she was using facebook while driving ( doesn't prove she wasn't either , but that's not required ).
I guess it depends on what you call "tracking" : the GPS is able to track someone , in the sense that it can find out it's current location, and if you happen to be near it , you also know where you are ( that's the point of a GPS :-) )
However , if you want someone else to see your location , you need something to transmit that location , which can be done with a cell phone.
If the data is transmitted over the air , it may be possible to intercept it.
I was thinking the same thing.
I actually read the title as " Braid , creator of 'Evil' Social games" . That would have been fun.
The statement is pretty cryptic , and could be interpreted in many ways . You could always claim you understood it differently , or that you were admiring his poetry ( there's a lot of morbid poetry ) .
But i just 'liking' it won't make you an accomplice . If something happens it will certainly make you a suspect though.
Okay... Leaving browser exploits out of it for the moment, though, isn't cookie access restricted to the domain that set it?
The ads may be placed on different pages , but they themselves are from the same domain ( for example an image in the page , or an iframe ).
When you visit the ad url , a cookie is created . Then , when you visit another ad ( from the same domain ) , the browser will send the cookie that was created earlier . This can be received at server side, so in the second ad , it's possible to know that the first ad was visited.
They also share this information. I once found out because some company had my name with a typo in it . Then i suddenly got advertisements with the exact same typo in it.
Well , it depends : if you want to find out if product is good , you could look at the comments. But with fake users , it's hard to know how much of the comments are actually genuine. Not to mention that all those users could be downmodding the actual critics.
I don't think anything can be done about it though , but it's good to be aware.
To bad i didn't think about that earlier :-)
The content is not the problem , the fake users who write positive comments are : it can give the impression that something is a lot better than it actually is.
Offcourse, on Youtube they have to go to the trouble of creating new accounts. Here , they could just post as an AC , and no one would notice.
Freedom is typically limited to the extend where it interferes with someone else's freedom.
At one side , there's the freedom of the owner , on the other side , there's the freedom of the customer.
The freedom the bar keeper has to establish the rules of his establishment , do not weigh up against the limitation to freedom a person receives from not being allowed entrance to the place.
In this case however, the person is not being disallowed access . He's just not allowed to use his kindle .
Is India still under British rule ?
Gandhi accomplished his goal.
An idea that lives in the heart of many people , is not so easily killed as a human being . You may be able to suppress it , but you will never destroy it , because it is born out of necessity. As long as there is tyranny , people will rise up against it.
Nothing. But the user could at least be aware that something is amiss as the password reset probably wouldn't be affected and this would only work for as long as the attacker maintains access (rather than syphoning off the user/pass data for later analysis elsewhere).
Unless the attackers stored the original hash first , then resets the password , and puts the original hash back after he's done.
Wait , then what does it mean exactly ?
It all depends : IN my country , there's a shortage of IT people , so my company simply doesn't find the needed people here. As a result , they have no other choice but to outsource some development to India.
So in that case , there is no "neighbor who will be out of a job" , since none of the 'neighbours' are interested in the job in the first place.
I actually wonder how they can know the sex of all the contributors. I don't recall having to fill this in , and i just looked at my preferences , i don't see it there.
So how can do they know this 13% ? If they did a poll , that may only mean women are less likely to fill in polls.
Personally , if more women want to join wikipedia , they are welcome , if they don't want to , we should respect that too.
The idea that you need to change wikipedia , so it attracts more women, implies that you do not respect women enough to allow them to make up there own mind about whether to join or not ( as you already assume that they won't like it, before they had a chance to voice their opinion ).
Since you are talking about a duel , i was wondering :
What would the effect be of placing 2 'solar death rays' against each other , in such way that the beams point to each other ?
where does the string come from?
Somebody typed the word into a Bing query entry box and hit submit. I.e.: A person searches for a term, and if Bing doesn't have any results for that term, then it goes to google.com, performs a search for the same term and returns those results. Does that help?
So , if i understand it correctly , google could add a search result for that word, mapping it to one specific result.
Then , since google added it , they know the word , so they can type the word into the bing toolbar , and see if this turns up their result. Brilliant.