The problem of course is USB keys that autorun on insertion (which shoudn't even be an option on a modern OS)...
Unfortunately, neither one of these is something that can be changed.
Darn! If only someone could figure out a way to modify an operating system. They could start a company and make a fortune. Maybe even become the richest person in the country...
I guess we'll just be stuck with our current OS options forever.
Anyways I'd argue his math is flawed as we don't know the number of porn sites in existance... ... Pulling numbers out of you ass without backing it up only results in figures favorable to your cause...
Did you actually read what he was saying? He made up some numbers to demonstrate his point. To paraphrase his statements...
You can pick one of two methods of calculating "the overblocking rate". With these numbers (that I made up), you can say "the overblocking rate is 5%" or "the overblocking rate is 83%". Both statements are factually correct, so you need to be specific about what method of calculation you're using.
Although its impossible for the creators of a (HD-)DVD to guarantee it will work on every player, they should at least make sure it works on the "the format's leading playback device."
Client certificates. When you register your account the first time with some site you get a certificate that your browser has to use each time you visit the site, or you can't get in without say actually calling the business to get one.
Your system breaks down in a couple different scenarios:
I don't have access to my certificate because I don't have it with me. (e.g. I usually contact the site from my laptop and I don't have it with me, the battery is dead, or the hard drive crashed.)
I access the site on a shared computer. Either I need to remove the certificate after every use (and call the business to get a new one for next time), or someone else will have access to it.
I realize there are work-arounds to these, but it's starting to sound less than "user-friendly".
In the western states, there are lots of mountains taller than 7000 feet. Having the sunlight available at the end of a work day gives you the extra edge you need to avoid encountering cumulo graniti if you want to get in some flight time.
I can't speak from experience (having never flown over that area except on commercial flights), but I would image that even if there is enough light (from the moon and stars) to see the mountains, it would be too dark to pick out landmarks on them. If you were in an area with few people, you could easily get lost in a valley. (Yes, I know you could climb out, but there is a maximum altitude a small plane can reach.)
As far as I recall, that would be perfectly legal, but fortunately, the pilot training industry is capable of determining for itself that first solo at night is a bad idea, and I don't know of anyone who has done that.
I don't know anyone who has done that either, but if you only have a couple hours of daylight between work and sunset, it's tough to get much experience without flying at night (unless you can fly on the weekends).
That being said, in the U.S., if you fly in the great flat midwest of the U.S., flying at night is fairly safe. Anything tall has a light on it, and it is often EASIER to fly by ground reference at night, at least if you are using highways, not so much if you are using lakes and rivers. It is amazing how similar city shapes on the map correspond to the pattern of lights that they put off.
That point is debatable. A pilot with a decent amount of experience flying at night might find it easier, but before you get to that point, you've got to learn to identify things and judge distances in the dark. (It's kind of hard to accurately tell how far away a point of light is.)
Sure, Iran could make nukes, but economically they are pointless to them other than nuclear energy since using them would entail the extermination of 90 million Iranians by a US retaliation response. Besides... The could inflict more political damage and gain so much more with using proxy groups like Hezbollah than actively taking on the US directly in a nuclear arms race.
So if they do make some nukes, what's to stop them from giving them to one of these "proxy groups"? If they ever get traced back to Iran, the Iranians can say, "Those nukes were stolen last year. We didn't want to tell anyone because it would have caused a panic."
Sorry, I should have said sapient (possessing the ability to act with judgment) rather than sentient (the ability to feel or perceive).
The common perception is that dogs and cats are sentient, but not sapient. (i.e. They can feel and perceive their environment, but they do not make judgements based on rational thought.)
But getting back to robots, I'm not sure we can say if they are sentient or sapient or neither. If they are not at least sentient, this whole thing is pointless. (How can you be "cruel" or "kind" to something that doesn't feel?)
This is an excellent point. The follow-up is that until the robots can actually have an opinion on the subject, they don't need rights...
That is debatable. Dogs and cats are not sentient creatures (as far as we know), but most people believe they have a right to not be abused.
I guess it's really a question of determining which of the following catagories robots fall into: (1) non-living, non-feeling things, (2) living, feeling things (non-sentient), or (3) sentient beings.
It is being put together by a five member team of experts that includes futurists and a science fiction writer.
If we're creating laws about how humans and robots should treat each other, shouldn't the robots be part of the decision-making process? This sounds a little too much like "the founding fathers" determining what rights slaves had (not many at the time).
Then shouldn't everybody's voice but one be distorted, with frequencies outside 300 Hz to 3300 Hz filtered out and some sort of saturation on the waveform?
Is it possible that, with all their futuristic technology, they might have made a few improvements on their communications equipment too?
It's no worse than what is rumoured to have happened when Tom Clancy's book, "Hunt for Red October" came out: People at the Pentagon were wondering why they hadn't been kept "in the loop" about certain technologies.
I've heard another rumor that shortly after publishing one of his early novels (not sure which) he received a visit from some government people wanting to know where he'd obtained classified defense plans for Western Europe.
It turns out he'd used as much non-classified information he could get and made some suprisingly accurate guesses at the classified stuff.
The iPod FDR would work with the patented iPod Dock Connector port on the bottom of the iPod, for which there is a large software developer community.
I think they're talking about software that interacts with the iPod. I know of hardware that interacts with it (e.g. "iPod speakers"). There must be some software developers working in that area too.
Large financial institutions in Europe use telnet, as use of encryption is restricted on their trusted networks, for reasons of transparency to the stock regulating authorities.
I think the key phrase here is trusted network. Unless "the Internet" is a trusted network or they don't properly firewall their trusted network, they should be fine.
I agree it's a good quote, but it's certainly not original. A brief search uncovers this:
[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Slashdot Mirror
Make sure you take your flashlight. The lights have gone out.
Darn! If only someone could figure out a way to modify an operating system. They could start a company and make a fortune. Maybe even become the richest person in the country...
I guess we'll just be stuck with our current OS options forever.
I though slashdot had a "Preview Button". I apologize.
Did you actually read what he was saying? He made up some numbers to demonstrate his point. To paraphrase his statements...
You can pick one of two methods of calculating "the overblocking rate". With these numbers (that I made up), you can say "the overblocking rate is 5%" or "the overblocking rate is 83%". Both statements are factually correct, so you need to be specific about what method of calculation you're using.
It's hard to believe that such an insightful statement could come from a "Profane MuthaFucka".
Although its impossible for the creators of a (HD-)DVD to guarantee it will work on every player, they should at least make sure it works on the "the format's leading playback device."
How do you calculate the monetary value of characters? I didn't know they could depreciate.
Or did you mean to say they are deprecated?
So we could theoretically have sex at any level... but this is slashdot, so it's not likely to happen for anyone around here.
Your system breaks down in a couple different scenarios:
I realize there are work-arounds to these, but it's starting to sound less than "user-friendly".
I can't speak from experience (having never flown over that area except on commercial flights), but I would image that even if there is enough light (from the moon and stars) to see the mountains, it would be too dark to pick out landmarks on them. If you were in an area with few people, you could easily get lost in a valley. (Yes, I know you could climb out, but there is a maximum altitude a small plane can reach.)
I don't know anyone who has done that either, but if you only have a couple hours of daylight between work and sunset, it's tough to get much experience without flying at night (unless you can fly on the weekends).
That point is debatable. A pilot with a decent amount of experience flying at night might find it easier, but before you get to that point, you've got to learn to identify things and judge distances in the dark. (It's kind of hard to accurately tell how far away a point of light is.)
Whether it's banned or not, I wouldn't want a new pilot taking his first solo flight at night.
So if they do make some nukes, what's to stop them from giving them to one of these "proxy groups"? If they ever get traced back to Iran, the Iranians can say, "Those nukes were stolen last year. We didn't want to tell anyone because it would have caused a panic."
I think it was about ten years ago for me. I remember it pretty well, so I don't need to do much research.
Sorry, I should have said sapient (possessing the ability to act with judgment) rather than sentient (the ability to feel or perceive).
The common perception is that dogs and cats are sentient, but not sapient. (i.e. They can feel and perceive their environment, but they do not make judgements based on rational thought.)
But getting back to robots, I'm not sure we can say if they are sentient or sapient or neither. If they are not at least sentient, this whole thing is pointless. (How can you be "cruel" or "kind" to something that doesn't feel?)
That is debatable. Dogs and cats are not sentient creatures (as far as we know), but most people believe they have a right to not be abused.
I guess it's really a question of determining which of the following catagories robots fall into: (1) non-living, non-feeling things, (2) living, feeling things (non-sentient), or (3) sentient beings.
A small section of floor and the cloak being the only parts of the Death Star to withstand the massive explosion...
Sorry, did you miss that part of the movie?
Well, if you spend all your money on movie props rather than gifts for the 'babes', I don't think they'll be too impressed.
If we're creating laws about how humans and robots should treat each other, shouldn't the robots be part of the decision-making process? This sounds a little too much like "the founding fathers" determining what rights slaves had (not many at the time).
Is it possible that, with all their futuristic technology, they might have made a few improvements on their communications equipment too?
I've heard another rumor that shortly after publishing one of his early novels (not sure which) he received a visit from some government people wanting to know where he'd obtained classified defense plans for Western Europe.
It turns out he'd used as much non-classified information he could get and made some suprisingly accurate guesses at the classified stuff.
I think they're talking about software that interacts with the iPod. I know of hardware that interacts with it (e.g. "iPod speakers"). There must be some software developers working in that area too.
I think the key phrase here is trusted network . Unless "the Internet" is a trusted network or they don't properly firewall their trusted network, they should be fine.
You've got an overdeveloped sense of vengeance. It's going to get you into trouble someday
I agree it's a good quote, but it's certainly not original. A brief search uncovers this: