Whilst many things about American culture are lamentable, I would not say that fattened and sweetened chocolate is "American", nor that "Swiss" means "dark". Swiss dark, Swiss milk, and Swiss white are all kinds of Swiss chocolates, and many American companies make dark chocolates and many Americans, myself included, eat them.
The common mispronunciation of the element is FLOHR-een, sounding like the English "floor" or "core". It's supposedly an "acceptable" pronunciation, but it's one of those poor-discernment mistakes that causes a devolution of the language.
To distinguish it from other similarly-sounding spellings I recommend pronouncing it like "lure".
I bet if people drink lots of Coca Cola everyday the odds of them getting Alzheimer's go way down.
...
Say what?
Even "moderate" consumption of sodas results in elevated triglyceride levels. Having a daily 12 oz. Coke significantly increases your bad cholesterol levels, your inflammation levels, your propensity for obesity, your risk of atherosclerosis and heart disease.
Elevated triglyceride levels have been shown to precede Alzheimer's factors (amyloid deposition).
Emoticon usage panels have agreed in majority that the simple smiley emoticon to indicate archness or conspiratorial irony is unacceptable. The overwhelming vote for appropriate emoticon to indicate these things is the winky.;)
Last time we targeted a single platform it was a disaster.
Last Time We Targeted A Single Platform It Was A Disaster.
LAST TIME WE TARGETED A SINGLE PLATFORM IT WAS A DISASTER.
How is this thinking still going on?... ?
You've got a low enough UID to have been there and seen it happen, do you just not realize what put us in IE's stranglehold? Developers who did not care about interoperability as much as making their lives easy put us there. They saw the easy way out, they fell for the sweet promises of the One True Provider, and now here we are, still trying to get out from underneath IE.
You want to extract our collective neck from Microsoft's stranglehold and put it in Apple's instead?
Is it going to be better this time around because Apple's prettier or something?
We are basically taking our first joyous steps in the springtime of smooth interoperability, with the ease of coding to unified standards, while the difficulty of handling incompatibilities is hastening the demise of incompatible browsers, rushing us onwards to a beautiful, sunny season of web development, and you would have us turn the clock around? Send us back to the bitter winter of a single corporate master?
We should probably put a more critical eye towards possibilities.
The system turns on when it detects gunshots. But it's extra sensitive, so it often catches things that aren't actually gunshots. And it stays on for half an hour. Effectively, it's recording half the day.
It's inherently an interaction between individual parties. Services that provide social interaction are doing what could otherwise be done with protocols and local servers if not merely clients. Advances in software will burst this bubble.
Indeed, no one company should control all the information, and we well recognize that privacy is a major concern, so we have forces that will push us in the direction of developing the protocols and software.
If it's elite not to be abusive to one's self through sleep cycle negligence, then I agree with you that I'm elitist.
Let me clarify this in case you get me wrong. I'm elitist in the regard that I support the elite (i.e., the persons who get to bed at a regular time, and more generally the disciplined practice of doing so). I personally share your problem of rolling my clock forward through lack of discipline.
Note that length-of-day disorder ("Non-24") does exist. But you don't have it. You have lack of discipline.
The European portal for rare diseases, Orphanet, lists Non-24 as a rare disease by their definition: 1 person per 2,000 or more. There are about 140,000 sufferers of Non-24 in the European Union; a prevalence of approximately 0.03%, or 3 per 10,000.
There's a difference between time-of-day and length-of-day and you appear to be conflating the two.
So-called "evening persons" could, if they were disciplined, get to bed every 4AM and wake at noon (or when their body is ready), and not suffer a "rolling forward" or other putative lag or length-of-day effects.
I'm not saying that evening persons lack discipline nor am I implying that morning persons don't. I'm saying that "forward-rolling sleep cycle" persons lack discipline.
If it's elite not to be abusive to one's self through sleep cycle negligence, then I agree with you that I'm elitist.
Free market advocates are quite often very smart people, I admit. They're 90th, maybe 95th percentile and above for intelligence. And they, reasonably, see everyone else as relatively stupid, and they also disdain the average man, knowing that they can outsmart and outcompete them. Ironically, at the same time they think that the force of the market, which is overwhelmingly a sum of the urges of these relatively stupid, disdainful people, is going to drive things in a good direction. A bit o' paradox there, eh?
The market brought you The Great Web Languish by letting IE be dominant for a dozen years. Web tech was seriously retarded and OS infections were rampant. Imagine how much time would have been saved in system reinstalls, and how much further along web technology would be today? Just one example of how we all got screwed by the market.
Putting the market on a pedestal and catering to it doesn't make the world a better place. Well, it might make your little world a better funded place and maybe more pleasant. Mostly. Until the market's stupidity defiles the greater environment enough that you get poisoned too. You can be 95th percentile smart and still not recognize that what's good for everyone is good for you.
A number of things cause your internal clock to resync, including when you go to bed. So his schedule is probably getting resync'd daily.
You're not rolling forward because your internal clock is pushing you forward, you're rolling forward because you're just not disciplined at getting to bed.
Allow me to take this opportunity to bring up again the idea of "transparent" remailers. The term may seem paradoxical at first, until you realize what "transparent" applies to.
Here's the idea:
If remailers are getting taken down because authorities want images of their hard drives, what about just giving that to them? Preemptively? The hard drives should have nothing revealing on them, I think. (Is that your understanding, too?) If the drives have nothing revealing, then remailers could continue to operate despite law enforcement investigation.
You just submit a drive image to the law enforcement agency.
The possible sticking points I see:
thermal freezing of RAM for memory recovery may make physical confiscation still desirable
the attackers may not believe the accuracy of your hard drive content reports
(ad hoc) hard drive reports may still somehow leak information and undermine anonymity
knowing exact software state (which programs and versions being used and their configurations) may increase vulnerability to intrusion
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
If remailers are getting taken down because authorities want images of their hard drives, what about just giving that to them? Pre-emptively? The hard drives should have nothing revealing on them, I think. Is that your understanding, too? If so, then remailers could continue to operate despite law enforcement investigation.
The sticking points I see:
thermal freezing of RAM for memory recovery may make physical confiscation still desirable
the attackers may not believe the accuracy of your hard drive content reports
(ad hoc) hard drive reports may still somehow leak information and undermine anonymity
knowing exact software state (which programs and versions being used and their configurations) may increase vulnerability to intrusion
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
From the perspective of a constituent, the question doesn't make as much sense, or the idea just seems futile and impractical. From the perspective of the representative it makes much more sense.
How can I, as a representative, sort my email to better identify relevant and actual constituent messages?
Maybe bayesian filtering. The bayesian filters that people use for sorting spam are often actually general purpose with regards to the quality you are judging your messages by. People are saying "spam" or "not spam", but they could be saying instead "relevant constituent message" or "not relevant constituent message".
Anyway, imagine GP's idea with whatever vector of travel you've got, just pointing the heat radiation backwards so as not to impede your progress.
There are degrees, if you will, of backward pointing, from perpendicular and not affecting the travel vector, to nearly directly back and maximizing forward thrust, to directly back and catching maximal solar radiation.
The idea is that your system keeps no logs, as is typical for these anonymity-providing services, so the anonymity is preserved. And it makes this anonymity clear to the authorities by providing complete visibility into the hard drive contents at the FBI's requests. Voilà, law enforcement has no reason to take your server down. They're not going to get any additional information.
The sticking points I see:
thermal freezing of RAM for memory recovery may make physical confiscation still desirable
the attackers may not believe the accuracy of your hard drive content reports
(ad hoc) hard drive reports may leak information and undermine anonymity
exact software state (which programs and versions being used and their configurations) may increase vulnerability to intrusion
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
Could you develop a service for allowing anonymous communication that you gave the FBI pre-emptive visibility into without compromising the anonymity of the system?
Allow the FBI to snapshot the whole hard drive and peruse it at their leisure any time they requested.
Perhaps the FBI wouldn't trust you and your fancy transparency, but maybe you could make it plausibly accurate enough such that a server confiscation would be equal to an unwarranted attack from a legal standpoint.
Denying that we are fundamentally emotional creatures with reasoning ability kludged on is, ironically, most often emotionally motivated.
It's our feelings that drive us. We make up our minds before we invoke reasons for why. (There are studies on this, check 'em out.) Our reasoning ability is called in afterwards to explain why we feel the way we do, to fit our decisions about things (our feelings about things) into the language of logic. "The facts are being made to fit the policy."
It's kind of horrific, this idea, especially if you're coming across it for the first time. Quite aversive. (Quick, come up with reasons why it's wrong.)
We start with a lot of receptivity to facts, and early experiences influence our feelings strongly. Over time our experiences forge ever stronger emotional reactions to various stimuli, including concepts. How well we manage/navigate our biases, how well we can cope with having emotional urges, these skills heavily influence our ability to objectively take in new information.
If you think you're not fundamentally emotional, that your reasoning isn't emotion's weaker cousin, you're already losing the battle. Reasoning has to understand its position if it wants to drive the process. It can't go head to head with emotion, without any sort of battle plan. (The good news is that emotions have their own logic which can be understood and employed to manipulate our feelings, and that we can, if we practice, be aware of when our emotions are driving us strongly, so we know when to pay special attention.)
This is the underlying mechanism at work here. With this core process churning out beliefs you can see how the results, especially of more complex and subtle thoughts, end up warped to suit our personalities.
You mean despite the PR machines of the businesses with vested interests? You think they wouldn't have been practically as effective without this particular conservatives' token contemptible person?
print " Set metadata tags for artist, album, and track number on all FLACs in a directory tree.\n";
It happens. Strings for printing especially are much clearer when not folded. Especially if you're flowerboxing. Or hardcoding data structures.
The "10 inches" bit isn't actually mentioned in the original study write-up, 95 characters was. "10 inches" seems to just be editorial. Probably reasonably close anyway.
The 95 also just happened to be the longest line length they used. Longer might have resulted in even faster reading (and less preference). The 10 inches the editorial refers to has to be at a certain distance, too, right? They really mean a viewing angle.
participants were seated approximately 52 cm from the screen
... and the screen was how big with what resolution?
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, Swiss chocolatier Daniel Peter was the fellow who invented milk chocolate.
Whilst many things about American culture are lamentable, I would not say that fattened and sweetened chocolate is "American", nor that "Swiss" means "dark". Swiss dark, Swiss milk, and Swiss white are all kinds of Swiss chocolates, and many American companies make dark chocolates and many Americans, myself included, eat them.
The common mispronunciation of the element is FLOHR-een, sounding like the English "floor" or "core". It's supposedly an "acceptable" pronunciation, but it's one of those poor-discernment mistakes that causes a devolution of the language.
To distinguish it from other similarly-sounding spellings I recommend pronouncing it like "lure".
Say what?
Even "moderate" consumption of sodas results in elevated triglyceride levels. Having a daily 12 oz. Coke significantly increases your bad cholesterol levels, your inflammation levels, your propensity for obesity, your risk of atherosclerosis and heart disease.
Elevated triglyceride levels have been shown to precede Alzheimer's factors (amyloid deposition).
A Coke-heavy diet stupefies and kills .
Emoticon usage panels have agreed in majority that the simple smiley emoticon to indicate archness or conspiratorial irony is unacceptable. The overwhelming vote for appropriate emoticon to indicate these things is the winky. ;)
Last time we targeted a single platform it was a disaster.
Last Time We Targeted A Single Platform It Was A Disaster.
LAST TIME WE TARGETED A SINGLE PLATFORM IT WAS A DISASTER.
How is this thinking still going on? ... ?
You've got a low enough UID to have been there and seen it happen, do you just not realize what put us in IE's stranglehold? Developers who did not care about interoperability as much as making their lives easy put us there. They saw the easy way out, they fell for the sweet promises of the One True Provider, and now here we are, still trying to get out from underneath IE.
You want to extract our collective neck from Microsoft's stranglehold and put it in Apple's instead?
Is it going to be better this time around because Apple's prettier or something?
We are basically taking our first joyous steps in the springtime of smooth interoperability, with the ease of coding to unified standards, while the difficulty of handling incompatibilities is hastening the demise of incompatible browsers, rushing us onwards to a beautiful, sunny season of web development, and you would have us turn the clock around? Send us back to the bitter winter of a single corporate master?
SERIOUSLY, JUST DON'T DO IT.
NOT AGAIN.
We should probably put a more critical eye towards possibilities.
The system turns on when it detects gunshots. But it's extra sensitive, so it often catches things that aren't actually gunshots. And it stays on for half an hour. Effectively, it's recording half the day.
Nominal behavior is not actual behavior.
It's inherently an interaction between individual parties. Services that provide social interaction are doing what could otherwise be done with protocols and local servers if not merely clients. Advances in software will burst this bubble.
Indeed, no one company should control all the information, and we well recognize that privacy is a major concern, so we have forces that will push us in the direction of developing the protocols and software.
Or so I think. How are things coming along?
I thought Bathsheba Grossman was "3D Printing's First Celebrity".
Let me clarify this in case you get me wrong. I'm elitist in the regard that I support the elite (i.e., the persons who get to bed at a regular time, and more generally the disciplined practice of doing so). I personally share your problem of rolling my clock forward through lack of discipline.
Note that length-of-day disorder ("Non-24") does exist. But you don't have it. You have lack of discipline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-24-hour_sleep-wake_syndrome#Prevalence :
There's a difference between time-of-day and length-of-day and you appear to be conflating the two.
So-called "evening persons" could, if they were disciplined, get to bed every 4AM and wake at noon (or when their body is ready), and not suffer a "rolling forward" or other putative lag or length-of-day effects.
I'm not saying that evening persons lack discipline nor am I implying that morning persons don't. I'm saying that "forward-rolling sleep cycle" persons lack discipline.
If it's elite not to be abusive to one's self through sleep cycle negligence, then I agree with you that I'm elitist.
Free market advocates are quite often very smart people, I admit. They're 90th, maybe 95th percentile and above for intelligence. And they, reasonably, see everyone else as relatively stupid, and they also disdain the average man, knowing that they can outsmart and outcompete them. Ironically, at the same time they think that the force of the market, which is overwhelmingly a sum of the urges of these relatively stupid, disdainful people, is going to drive things in a good direction. A bit o' paradox there, eh?
The market brought you The Great Web Languish by letting IE be dominant for a dozen years. Web tech was seriously retarded and OS infections were rampant. Imagine how much time would have been saved in system reinstalls, and how much further along web technology would be today? Just one example of how we all got screwed by the market.
Putting the market on a pedestal and catering to it doesn't make the world a better place. Well, it might make your little world a better funded place and maybe more pleasant. Mostly. Until the market's stupidity defiles the greater environment enough that you get poisoned too. You can be 95th percentile smart and still not recognize that what's good for everyone is good for you.
A number of things cause your internal clock to resync, including when you go to bed. So his schedule is probably getting resync'd daily.
You're not rolling forward because your internal clock is pushing you forward, you're rolling forward because you're just not disciplined at getting to bed.
Allow me to take this opportunity to bring up again the idea of "transparent" remailers. The term may seem paradoxical at first, until you realize what "transparent" applies to.
Here's the idea:
If remailers are getting taken down because authorities want images of their hard drives, what about just giving that to them? Preemptively? The hard drives should have nothing revealing on them, I think. (Is that your understanding, too?) If the drives have nothing revealing, then remailers could continue to operate despite law enforcement investigation.
You just submit a drive image to the law enforcement agency.
The possible sticking points I see:
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
If remailers are getting taken down because authorities want images of their hard drives, what about just giving that to them? Pre-emptively? The hard drives should have nothing revealing on them, I think. Is that your understanding, too? If so, then remailers could continue to operate despite law enforcement investigation.
The sticking points I see:
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
Encrypt as much as possible.
Use HTTPS Everywhere.
Have your mail use opportunistic SSL.
Make privacy the norm.
From the perspective of a constituent, the question doesn't make as much sense, or the idea just seems futile and impractical. From the perspective of the representative it makes much more sense.
How can I, as a representative, sort my email to better identify relevant and actual constituent messages?
Maybe bayesian filtering. The bayesian filters that people use for sorting spam are often actually general purpose with regards to the quality you are judging your messages by. People are saying "spam" or "not spam", but they could be saying instead "relevant constituent message" or "not relevant constituent message".
Some links to help you understand the idea here:
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/03/not-an-april-fool-1.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/
More precisely, you're the kind of person who wants to fix the root of the problem.
The evaporation of privacy is inexorable, it is something you can only impede, not forestall.
Great, work on impeding it. But recognize that long-term solutions require working with the whole system.
Anyway, imagine GP's idea with whatever vector of travel you've got, just pointing the heat radiation backwards so as not to impede your progress.
There are degrees, if you will, of backward pointing, from perpendicular and not affecting the travel vector, to nearly directly back and maximizing forward thrust, to directly back and catching maximal solar radiation.
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear.
The idea is that your system keeps no logs, as is typical for these anonymity-providing services, so the anonymity is preserved. And it makes this anonymity clear to the authorities by providing complete visibility into the hard drive contents at the FBI's requests. Voilà, law enforcement has no reason to take your server down. They're not going to get any additional information.
The sticking points I see:
My intuition says it may be possible to overcome each of these.
Could you develop a service for allowing anonymous communication that you gave the FBI pre-emptive visibility into without compromising the anonymity of the system?
Allow the FBI to snapshot the whole hard drive and peruse it at their leisure any time they requested.
Perhaps the FBI wouldn't trust you and your fancy transparency, but maybe you could make it plausibly accurate enough such that a server confiscation would be equal to an unwarranted attack from a legal standpoint.
Denying that we are fundamentally emotional creatures with reasoning ability kludged on is, ironically, most often emotionally motivated.
It's our feelings that drive us. We make up our minds before we invoke reasons for why. (There are studies on this, check 'em out.) Our reasoning ability is called in afterwards to explain why we feel the way we do, to fit our decisions about things (our feelings about things) into the language of logic. "The facts are being made to fit the policy."
It's kind of horrific, this idea, especially if you're coming across it for the first time. Quite aversive. (Quick, come up with reasons why it's wrong.)
We start with a lot of receptivity to facts, and early experiences influence our feelings strongly. Over time our experiences forge ever stronger emotional reactions to various stimuli, including concepts. How well we manage/navigate our biases, how well we can cope with having emotional urges, these skills heavily influence our ability to objectively take in new information.
If you think you're not fundamentally emotional, that your reasoning isn't emotion's weaker cousin, you're already losing the battle. Reasoning has to understand its position if it wants to drive the process. It can't go head to head with emotion, without any sort of battle plan. (The good news is that emotions have their own logic which can be understood and employed to manipulate our feelings, and that we can, if we practice, be aware of when our emotions are driving us strongly, so we know when to pay special attention.)
This is the underlying mechanism at work here. With this core process churning out beliefs you can see how the results, especially of more complex and subtle thoughts, end up warped to suit our personalities.
You mean despite the PR machines of the businesses with vested interests? You think they wouldn't have been practically as effective without this particular conservatives' token contemptible person?
print " Set metadata tags for artist, album, and track number on all FLACs in a directory tree.\n";
It happens. Strings for printing especially are much clearer when not folded. Especially if you're flowerboxing. Or hardcoding data structures.
The "10 inches" bit isn't actually mentioned in the original study write-up, 95 characters was. "10 inches" seems to just be editorial. Probably reasonably close anyway.
The 95 also just happened to be the longest line length they used. Longer might have resulted in even faster reading (and less preference). The 10 inches the editorial refers to has to be at a certain distance, too, right? They really mean a viewing angle.