less does it too. Actually I find that the / was very natural, since I use vi and less a lot. However, the Ctrl-g for next match was the problem, since the others both support 'n' for next match. Though supporting that would make text editing clunky... or require modal browsing. I tried a vi command interface for firefox but, it was a bit too radical of a change for my liking (though, I found it usable)
Have we forgotten that time is relative? If you can get to a significant portion of the speed of light...but still under it... then the subjective time for the traveler can be under a decade to some of the more nearby stars.
One might conclude that a human can never travel further from the earth than 40 light years, if the traveler is active between the age of 20 and 60. So a traveler would never be able to reach more than the very few star systems which exist within the limit of 20–40 light years from the earth. But that would be a mistaken conclusion. Because of time dilation, he can travel thousands of light years during his 40 active years. If the spaceship accelerates at a constant 1G, he will after 10 years reach speeds close to the speed of light, and time dilation will increase his lifespan to thousands of years, seen from the reference system of the Solar System, but his subjective lifespan will not thereby change.
I wouldn't say I have mixed feelings, since some things don't mix well.
on one hand, I think investigation into interstellar travel is cool, and would be nice to see someone working on, even if just to see what comes out of the research. Long term, very cool projects.
On the other hand... I thought that foreign wars were stretching it for a "Defense Department". Interstellar travel? What exactly are they defending against?
I was thinking that this sort of open breakdown into lawlessness provides a nice check and balance to the whole power structure. The government and those generally in positions of power may do many things, but they always have the fundamental responsibility to make sure that enough people don't come to disdain their social order to such an extent that they stop respecting it entirely and erupt into riots... possibly ending with the elimination of those who were in positions of power, possibly not.
This sort of massive disrespect of social order, even if the surface appears to be sparked by entertainment, requires a bed of fuel to be burning on.
I guess he must have gotten distracted while editing. Reminds me of when I used to sign my posts here:
-Steve
but every once in a while (read: a few times a week), I would be about done, sign the post...then realize I want to add something at the end... add it, but now my original was scrolled out of the visible text box... so I would sign it and end up posting like this:
I really want to agree here but, this is one of those areas that tests my resolve a bit.
Look at the pictures on this guys blog. He blew up a container that he was working in and contaminated his whole stove area. Who knows what other messes this guy was making. Did you see the pictures of the original Radioactive Boyscout recently? (when he was caught stealing smoke detectors).
Admittedly, they are doing some cool stuff, and I have no qualms about them putting their own lives at risk for the love of their hobbies but... Even the original guy said that by the end of it, he could detect the elevated levels of radiation several houses away. Given the inverse square law, thats, a bit scary.
Never mind the contaminated mess he could be leaving behind. An apartment where someone else may have to live, and you share walls with others, just really is a bad spot for this.
Thats not to say he couldn't savely have the reactor there once built but...preparing the materials, and other operations that can contaminate the apartment?
Sounds pretty much the way it is here in the states. You bitch about the police and people will tell you all day how "its a hard job", or "they keep us safe", or "Well if your wife was murdered... blah blah". Never mind that they spend most of their resources trapping people for minor speeding violations and other BS. Never mind that half the prison system is nonviolent drug offenders... and thats not even counting the constant churn of people who never make prison and just end up railroaded through probation.
The timing on this sounds about right, I bet they are all too happy to have something that will "look positive" about now, while their feet are in the fire.
1. Most people in a voluntary botnet attack don't know tor.
2. Of those who do, some percentage both know how to use it, and understand why multiple people deciding to do thios would quickly become a DOS of the tor network, and we would hope decide not too. (as someone who keeps a lazy eye on the tor mailing lists, I never saw any threads about how LOIC attacks were bringing it to its knees, nor do I remember noticing it being slower than normal then)
3. I expect the set of people who would participate, know about tor, and would decide to use it for this is a vanishingly small group. (though, probably non-zero)
Because maybe the BSA destroyed their record of the identity after they discovered their claim was false/total bunk, or their case got thrown out? That's the main reason I can think of -- you pursued the identity of the reporter too late, after the BSA's need to preserve that information was gone.
If they lose out because the claim was false, then they have no reason to destroy his info. I would be shocked if they wouldn't want to at least make threats of suing him for the loses incurred because he lied.
You still have not explained what, exactly, makes bitcoin a ponzi scheme.
What entity, in this alleged scheme, is playing the roll of ponzi? Is it the miners? All of them collectively? Or some subset of them?
It would also be nice to know, if it is indeed a ponzi scheme, what special properties of bitcoin make it a ponzi scheme, without also categorizing any form of money as, a ponzi scheme.
Your assessments of who is interested and why they might be interested, while providing a fascinating window into your opinion of people, doesn't really say anything about bitcoin or ponzi schemes.
Actually I never claimed ponzi schemes were up front. In fact, I would posit that NOT being upfront *IS* what makes a ponzi scheme a scheme. If I actually TELL YOU "hey I am going to take your money, and pay you back from future investors doing the same".... then there is no ponzi scheme. Its stupid, but no fraud is going on. One of the essential features of the scheme is... the fact that it pretends to be something that it isn't. The money from future investors is used to HIDE OR OBSCURE the fact that there is no real value.
What really sets bitcoin, or any currency, apart from this is just that, its just a token, and nobody is hiding that fact. A bitcoin is nothing more than an entry in a distributed ledger. The ledger says "this many went here, that many went there". If that is a ponzi scheme, then accounting is a ponzi scheme.
What about a distributed ledger used as a virtual place holder for trading (which is what all money is) makes it a ponzi scheme? If paypal changed the $ symbol to something else and changed the word "deposit" to "buy palbux" and "withdraw" to "sell palbux" would that magically make them a ponzi scheme?
Fundamentally whats really different is, there is no "rob peter to pay paul". Bitcoins are sold on open markets. I may buy them from you, and trade or sell them to someone else. I pay, or get paid, no more or less than we agree upon. Nobody is out there saying "this is what they are worth". The only "indicator" is...what people are actually trading them for.
So basically...its traded exactly like any other commodity, it just happens to be a virtual commodity, used as a placeholder for trades. Just like cash, except without a federal reserve.
So how is that a ponzi scheme if a) it is upfront b) has no central authority setting prices or "robbing peter to pay paul".
I am still waiting for someone to explain how something can be a ponzi scheme when its NOT sold as a money making investment scheme but literally as a trading commodity. At no point, in any of the bitcoin litterature, is it suggested that one can expect to keep buying more bitcoin and just make more and more money. People who get that idea are usually looking at mining and mistaking a technical explanation for a description of what they should do.
The whole point of a ponzi scheme is it encourages people to buy in to something that provides no service or product, and instead pays them back with new investment. This is providing a service of a decentralized proxy for currency at publically visible exchange rate. It works and performs exactly as advertised.... which... at its very heart, violates the entire concept of a ponzi scheme.
I guess I can see that. Personally.... I started boycotting them the moment that they stopped taking wikileaks donations. I don't care what service they provide, or how much more convenient it makes things. I actually had a vendor who only wanted to do paypal or a direct deposit from the bank. I actually setup the direct deposit rather than cross the virtual picket line.
Its gone on too long for me now, no forgiveness, even if they change their tune...its too late for them in my eyes.
Really? You are actually going to argue that replacing what we assume is the word "nigger", with the phrase "racial slur", somehow protects us from future generations knowing what these words are? Do you really think that just banning a few words from our vocabulary somehow prevents us from having prejudiced thoughts? Seriously?
Perhaps you need to reread 1984.... it was about far more than just removing a few choice words from people's vocabularies. Aside from that, I shudder to think that your takeaway from the book was "Look if we force people to speak the way we want, maybe we can force them to think that way".
Words are weapons only when used as such. Anyone offended by the use of a word without any respect for context just needs to get the fuck over themselves. Words are only weapons when wielded by intention.
Course that ian fucker both had the balls to not be Anonymous when he talked shit about Obama he even used a real racist slur. Even if you don't know one for the armos, it takes all of two seconds to google a couple for a post... even if all you can find are a couple of lame ones (I bet there are some good ones in farsi...)
Who actually says "Shoot the racist slur"? What a lame racist. A real racist would have called him a nigger. Nigger. Its ok to write it, its just a word. It is especially ok to write it, when quoting someone else who said it.
I mean do we really need to edit what a racist said to make it more genetic and palatable? I mean seriously.... of all the things to PC up.... I am sure he isn't embarrassed to be known as the guy who called Obama a nigger.. if thats even what he said...since he obviously wasn't quoted correctly.
Well every technology has a dark side. The same gun that can drop your dinner, can be used to threaten your life. The same medical knowledge that can keep you alive through sickness, can keep you alive and awake for extended torture sessions.
Body builders, or anyone looking to keep tabs on some process in their body that is conducive to this sort of measurement. Hell, people trying to lose weight, adjust their diet. Women looking to track their fertility, either to bring about or prevent pregnancy... perhaps anyone on birth control?
It is a nice new tool, something so often hard to do, now could become relatively easy and portable. It still remains to be seen what is actually practical... but... it has a lot of potential.
Real threat "on the battlefield" is totally not what I meant.
If we met in a bar, I could put up a fight. I might not win, but I could make just about any man at least have to pay attention to me and use force to take me down. However, nearly anybody can put up a fight. The ability to put up a fight or even win a fight is not, in and of itself what makes someone a threat.
I am no threat to you or anyone in a bar because... I have no desire to get into bar fights. I have a wife to come home to, a job that I rely on the income from. Just as Canada and France are not considered threats,... because of political ties.
Nobody who has made threats, has been a threat, and nobody who could have been a threat was or is all that interested. Is some of it because of our defensive capability? Undoubtedly, but... defense can be done so much more effectively and cheaper. 50 well run state militias could defend us and deter real threats.
I am saying there was no legitimate threat that justified Korea, Viet Nam, or anything since. I am not entirely above humanitarian missions, operations like Serbia.... sure.... but it does suck that a big international force is well... comprised primarially of our one country. Its high time that places like western europe kicked a bit more in for their own issues.
But overall... I have no problem with taxes paying for roads and infrastructure.... but I don't think its right to be using tax money, which is involuntarily given, for foreign wars. I think a voluntary tax of those interested in it should pay for it. For anything that is not a direct existential threat. That is...threat to our very existence as a people. That is.... a whole fuckton bigger than Al Quaida. If its that...then use taxes....if not...then I see it as theft.
It would really save some annons a lot of trouble if this distro would just upload all of the confidential files to pirate bay.
Think how much time we would save waiting for the right person with the right access, or the right system to be vulnerable and get exploited. Its all going up there eventually anyway, so why not skip the middle man? I suppose thats too much efficiency to hope for.
Slashdot Mirror
less does it too. Actually I find that the / was very natural, since I use vi and less a lot. However, the Ctrl-g for next match was the problem, since the others both support 'n' for next match. Though supporting that would make text editing clunky... or require modal browsing. I tried a vi command interface for firefox but, it was a bit too radical of a change for my liking (though, I found it usable)
What does that have to do with the question of whether or not FTL (which is likely impossible) is a requirement?
Why?
Have we forgotten that time is relative? If you can get to a significant portion of the speed of light...but still under it... then the subjective time for the traveler can be under a decade to some of the more nearby stars.
Or as Wikipedia explains it: ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel#How_far_can_one_travel_from_the_Earth.3F )
All without FTL.
I wouldn't say I have mixed feelings, since some things don't mix well.
on one hand, I think investigation into interstellar travel is cool, and would be nice to see someone working on, even if just to see what comes out of the research. Long term, very cool projects.
On the other hand... I thought that foreign wars were stretching it for a "Defense Department". Interstellar travel? What exactly are they defending against?
So why isn't this happening in more places?
I was thinking that this sort of open breakdown into lawlessness provides a nice check and balance to the whole power structure. The government and those generally in positions of power may do many things, but they always have the fundamental responsibility to make sure that enough people don't come to disdain their social order to such an extent that they stop respecting it entirely and erupt into riots... possibly ending with the elimination of those who were in positions of power, possibly not.
This sort of massive disrespect of social order, even if the surface appears to be sparked by entertainment, requires a bed of fuel to be burning on.
And why would I listen to a head on a stick that talks backwards and I pelted with about 500 rockets?
Nah why broadcast SSID at all to sniff?
They can use off the shelf wifi NICs for that.
Well lets be honest, FBI? Their contractor buys off the shelf NICs, repackages them and sells them for 1000X the price.
Stll not broadcasting an SSID though.
And bitcoin is backed by the resources, goods, and services of the international community of people who accept bitcoins.
I guess he must have gotten distracted while editing. Reminds me of when I used to sign my posts here:
-Steve
but every once in a while (read: a few times a week), I would be about done, sign the post...then realize I want to add something at the end... add it, but now my original was scrolled out of the visible text box... so I would sign it and end up posting like this:
-Steve
-Steve
I really want to agree here but, this is one of those areas that tests my resolve a bit.
Look at the pictures on this guys blog. He blew up a container that he was working in and contaminated his whole stove area. Who knows what other messes this guy was making. Did you see the pictures of the original Radioactive Boyscout recently? (when he was caught stealing smoke detectors).
Admittedly, they are doing some cool stuff, and I have no qualms about them putting their own lives at risk for the love of their hobbies but... Even the original guy said that by the end of it, he could detect the elevated levels of radiation several houses away. Given the inverse square law, thats, a bit scary.
Never mind the contaminated mess he could be leaving behind. An apartment where someone else may have to live, and you share walls with others, just really is a bad spot for this.
Thats not to say he couldn't savely have the reactor there once built but...preparing the materials, and other operations that can contaminate the apartment?
Welcome to the Internet. You look a little lost. Are you new here?
Sounds pretty much the way it is here in the states. You bitch about the police and people will tell you all day how "its a hard job", or "they keep us safe", or "Well if your wife was murdered... blah blah". Never mind that they spend most of their resources trapping people for minor speeding violations and other BS. Never mind that half the prison system is nonviolent drug offenders... and thats not even counting the constant churn of people who never make prison and just end up railroaded through probation.
The timing on this sounds about right, I bet they are all too happy to have something that will "look positive" about now, while their feet are in the fire.
Doubtful.
1. Most people in a voluntary botnet attack don't know tor.
2. Of those who do, some percentage both know how to use it, and understand why multiple people deciding to do thios would quickly become a DOS of the tor network, and we would hope decide not too. (as someone who keeps a lazy eye on the tor mailing lists, I never saw any threads about how LOIC attacks were bringing it to its knees, nor do I remember noticing it being slower than normal then)
3. I expect the set of people who would participate, know about tor, and would decide to use it for this is a vanishingly small group. (though, probably non-zero)
If they lose out because the claim was false, then they have no reason to destroy his info. I would be shocked if they wouldn't want to at least make threats of suing him for the loses incurred because he lied.
You still have not explained what, exactly, makes bitcoin a ponzi scheme.
What entity, in this alleged scheme, is playing the roll of ponzi? Is it the miners? All of them collectively? Or some subset of them?
It would also be nice to know, if it is indeed a ponzi scheme, what special properties of bitcoin make it a ponzi scheme, without also categorizing any form of money as, a ponzi scheme.
Your assessments of who is interested and why they might be interested, while providing a fascinating window into your opinion of people, doesn't really say anything about bitcoin or ponzi schemes.
Actually I never claimed ponzi schemes were up front. In fact, I would posit that NOT being upfront *IS* what makes a ponzi scheme a scheme. If I actually TELL YOU "hey I am going to take your money, and pay you back from future investors doing the same".... then there is no ponzi scheme. Its stupid, but no fraud is going on. One of the essential features of the scheme is... the fact that it pretends to be something that it isn't. The money from future investors is used to HIDE OR OBSCURE the fact that there is no real value.
What really sets bitcoin, or any currency, apart from this is just that, its just a token, and nobody is hiding that fact. A bitcoin is nothing more than an entry in a distributed ledger. The ledger says "this many went here, that many went there". If that is a ponzi scheme, then accounting is a ponzi scheme.
What about a distributed ledger used as a virtual place holder for trading (which is what all money is) makes it a ponzi scheme? If paypal changed the $ symbol to something else and changed the word "deposit" to "buy palbux" and "withdraw" to "sell palbux" would that magically make them a ponzi scheme?
Fundamentally whats really different is, there is no "rob peter to pay paul". Bitcoins are sold on open markets. I may buy them from you, and trade or sell them to someone else. I pay, or get paid, no more or less than we agree upon. Nobody is out there saying "this is what they are worth". The only "indicator" is...what people are actually trading them for.
So basically...its traded exactly like any other commodity, it just happens to be a virtual commodity, used as a placeholder for trades. Just like cash, except without a federal reserve.
So how is that a ponzi scheme if a) it is upfront b) has no central authority setting prices or "robbing peter to pay paul".
I am still waiting for someone to explain how something can be a ponzi scheme when its NOT sold as a money making investment scheme but literally as a trading commodity. At no point, in any of the bitcoin litterature, is it suggested that one can expect to keep buying more bitcoin and just make more and more money. People who get that idea are usually looking at mining and mistaking a technical explanation for a description of what they should do.
The whole point of a ponzi scheme is it encourages people to buy in to something that provides no service or product, and instead pays them back with new investment. This is providing a service of a decentralized proxy for currency at publically visible exchange rate. It works and performs exactly as advertised.... which... at its very heart, violates the entire concept of a ponzi scheme.
I guess I can see that. Personally.... I started boycotting them the moment that they stopped taking wikileaks donations. I don't care what service they provide, or how much more convenient it makes things. I actually had a vendor who only wanted to do paypal or a direct deposit from the bank. I actually setup the direct deposit rather than cross the virtual picket line.
Its gone on too long for me now, no forgiveness, even if they change their tune...its too late for them in my eyes.
Really? You are actually going to argue that replacing what we assume is the word "nigger", with the phrase "racial slur", somehow protects us from future generations knowing what these words are? Do you really think that just banning a few words from our vocabulary somehow prevents us from having prejudiced thoughts? Seriously?
Perhaps you need to reread 1984.... it was about far more than just removing a few choice words from people's vocabularies. Aside from that, I shudder to think that your takeaway from the book was "Look if we force people to speak the way we want, maybe we can force them to think that way".
Words are weapons only when used as such. Anyone offended by the use of a word without any respect for context just needs to get the fuck over themselves. Words are only weapons when wielded by intention.
Course that ian fucker both had the balls to not be Anonymous when he talked shit about Obama he even used a real racist slur. Even if you don't know one for the armos, it takes all of two seconds to google a couple for a post... even if all you can find are a couple of lame ones (I bet there are some good ones in farsi...)
Who actually says "Shoot the racist slur"? What a lame racist. A real racist would have called him a nigger. Nigger. Its ok to write it, its just a word. It is especially ok to write it, when quoting someone else who said it.
I mean do we really need to edit what a racist said to make it more genetic and palatable? I mean seriously.... of all the things to PC up....
I am sure he isn't embarrassed to be known as the guy who called Obama a nigger.. if thats even what he said...since he obviously wasn't quoted correctly.
Well every technology has a dark side. The same gun that can drop your dinner, can be used to threaten your life. The same medical knowledge that can keep you alive through sickness, can keep you alive and awake for extended torture sessions.
Not just divers.
Body builders, or anyone looking to keep tabs on some process in their body that is conducive to this sort of measurement. Hell, people trying to lose weight, adjust their diet. Women looking to track their fertility, either to bring about or prevent pregnancy... perhaps anyone on birth control?
It is a nice new tool, something so often hard to do, now could become relatively easy and portable. It still remains to be seen what is actually practical... but... it has a lot of potential.
Real threat "on the battlefield" is totally not what I meant.
If we met in a bar, I could put up a fight. I might not win, but I could make just about any man at least have to pay attention to me and use force to take me down. However, nearly anybody can put up a fight. The ability to put up a fight or even win a fight is not, in and of itself what makes someone a threat.
I am no threat to you or anyone in a bar because... I have no desire to get into bar fights. I have a wife to come home to, a job that I rely on the income from. Just as Canada and France are not considered threats,... because of political ties.
Nobody who has made threats, has been a threat, and nobody who could have been a threat was or is all that interested. Is some of it because of our defensive capability? Undoubtedly, but... defense can be done so much more effectively and cheaper. 50 well run state militias could defend us and deter real threats.
I am saying there was no legitimate threat that justified Korea, Viet Nam, or anything since. I am not entirely above humanitarian missions, operations like Serbia.... sure.... but it does suck that a big international force is well... comprised primarially of our one country. Its high time that places like western europe kicked a bit more in for their own issues.
But overall... I have no problem with taxes paying for roads and infrastructure.... but I don't think its right to be using tax money, which is involuntarily given, for foreign wars. I think a voluntary tax of those interested in it should pay for it. For anything that is not a direct existential threat. That is...threat to our very existence as a people. That is.... a whole fuckton bigger than Al Quaida. If its that...then use taxes....if not...then I see it as theft.
It would really save some annons a lot of trouble if this distro would just upload all of the confidential files to pirate bay.
Think how much time we would save waiting for the right person with the right access, or the right system to be vulnerable and get exploited. Its all going up there eventually anyway, so why not skip the middle man? I suppose thats too much efficiency to hope for.