You see, they can no longer produce an OS which is very much better than the last so they've started releasing really sucky ones so the _next_ one looks so much better.
What's the point of having 128 bit compatibility? 128 bit CPUs don't even exist yet. Heck most of us are still just using 32, and haven't even visited the 64 generation yet.
Maybe because it's easier to include now the ability to extend compatibility to 128-bit processors instead of trying to bolt it on later? Who knows, maybe Microsoft really did learn something from their experience with Windows security.
There's plenty of things all around us in the universe moving above the speed of light, including light.
Maybe, but we haven't detected any of them yet. Unless I missed the announcement of someone detecting tachyons, but I would expect that to have been a big enough deal to make lots of headlines.
I'm a practical guy. When you reach (I'll be generous) 1% c (3,000 kms-1) with your spaceship, I'll think about revising the laws of Newtonian physics.
s/practical guy/guy that refuses to believe 100 years worth of scientific experiments by people far smarter than anyone here/
Yeah, I figured that there would be lost energy in a few places, but I'm assuming that the efficiency in the generation stage would improve over time. With enough engineering and technological advancement, matter/antimatter annihilation should eventually be more efficient than just about any energy storage method we have now.
Wouldn't the efficiency in the reaction itself be very close to 100%? Obviously it costs some energy for transporting and storing the matter and antimatter to be used as fuel and other such overhead, but I had thought that the 2p -> e+ + e- -> 2p reaction had practically zero waste energy. It's been a few years since my last physics class, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
I thought it had something to do with time... Like, positrons were electrons going the other way in time, which is why they annihilate when they collide and produce a photon. Really the electron is hitting a photon and turning around in time. Likewise with pair production. Anyone know if this is right? I honestly think that quantum physics book was chock full of lies...
If I remember correctly, that theory comes from Feynman diagrams. It is a pretty interesting theory, and you can get some other very interesting ideas out of it. As with most other aspects of particle physics, how "true" it is can be debated at length, but the mathematics works, which is probably enough for most physicists.
If Warner Music filed a DMCA takedown notice with MySpace, Collins should be able to send them a counter-notice to have the material restored, at which point it's between Warner Music and Collins to fight it out. If MySpace removed the material without receiving an official DMCA notice, thus leaving Collins with no recourse, then MySpace has done something that they weren't legally required to do, which would make them just plain assholes. If Collins did send them a DMCA counter-notice and MySpace is ignoring it, then MySpace is violating the law.
Like I said, I agree that there are problems with many of the laws, but in this specific case, if the laws were being followed correctly, I don't think it would be so much of a problem than it is.
Not that I necessarily disagree with your sentiment, but does it really apply in this case? The law is pretty clearly on Collins' side, it's just MySpace and/or Warner Music that are being assholes. I suppose you could claim that the cost of solving this problem through the legal system would be prohibitive, but I'm not sure that any specific changes to copyright law would help with that.
Facebook started out as a way for high school and college friends to find each other easily. I remember way back I think you even needed a school email to sign up for Facebook.
I believe Facebook was originally only for college students. It was a bit of a big deal when they started adding high schools as well (that was before it opened to the general public, of course). Originally, yes, you did need a.edu email address from a college that Facebook had added to their system. I even still have my email/password saved in Firefox from when you still accessed http://schoolname.facebook.com/
It leads to an interesting problem though. Suppose I sell you a copy of a GPL product and the source code on two separate CDs. You then sell Person B the binaries CD and he sells it to person C. Is Person B obliged to provide the source to Person C on request even though he isn't capable for doing this?
I assume you meant binaries instead of source code there. I would guess that yes, Person B must provide the source code to Person C. Person B probably could, however, turn around and nail you for failing to follow the terms of the GPL when you didn't provide Person B the source code when you sold the binaries CD. Exactly how a court would handle this situation, especially with regards to Person B not having to pay a huge amount of money for problems that you're responsible for, would be tough to predict.
Probably just to keep the size of the chart reasonable. In order to get the increase in number of elements in each period to match the increase in circumference of the circle, you'd have to do some funky things with the size of each box. In order to fit the lanthanide and actinide series in the circle, you'd have to either make the boxes for those two periods a lot narrower, or the boxes for the lower periods a lot wider. It's kind of like why they're separate in the standard periodic table; you can put them in the middle of the table, but then the table is too wide to fit on a single page.
If the email in question is about a multi-million dollar business deal, then I guarantee you they have a right to have their email read. Suggesting otherwise is a good way to torpedo your company's future.
Assuming that both sides are legitimate businesses (e.g. not selling millions of dollars worth of cocaine), I'm pretty sure they would both spend the extra few dollars on a reliable email provider or a competent IT person to run an SMTP server. Email delivery can fail on the first attempt for many different reasons, so giving up after one failure is never reasonable.
I believe the reason that the "name-calling" makes an assault a worse crime is that the intention of the attacker wasn't just to hurt the victim, but also to terrorize other people that are similar to the victim to some way, i.e. "I shot this person because he's X, and I may shoot one of you other X next".
As for Jack Thompson, wanting people to hurt him obviously isn't a hate crime (in the American legal sense), but actually offering money for someone to attack him would certainly be considered conspiracy to commit battery and/or murder. In the case of a Facebook group, though, there's also the issue of whether or not it was meant as a joke, and whether or not it's obvious that it was meant to be a joke.
What's just as interesting is that the colony that the Puritans founded is now one of the most socially progressive states in the nation. Maybe the religious zealots got sick of the winters and moved south.
I thought laws are overturned because they are ambiguous? Isn't that a tenet of law itself?
That's true, but a certain amount of non-specificity would be good. Otherwise, we would need to duplicate every existing law and add "on the Internet" to it, and we've all seen the horror that's caused by that practice.
Great, common sense wins for once. If the cops really need to track someone, they can still do so. It only takes a short period of time to ask a judge to sign a warrant. If a judge isn't willing to sign the warrant, then the cops have no case, simple as that. Lazy cops who would rather rely on technology instead of "police work" have no business being a cop.
And most of the time, judges will grant retroactive warrants. If time is an issue, you can plant the tracking device when you find that you have the opportunity to get to the suspect's car at 10:00 a.m., then go to the court after lunch to get the warrant for it. The ease of getting a warrant is what bothers me the most about doing anything without one.
Slashdot Mirror
some ancient lunarian race
Cecil's on his way to take care of this, right?
You see, they can no longer produce an OS which is very much better than the last so they've started releasing really sucky ones so the _next_ one looks so much better.
Didn't they start doing that about 10 years ago?
I'm still confused.
What's the point of having 128 bit compatibility? 128 bit CPUs don't even exist yet. Heck most of us are still just using 32, and haven't even visited the 64 generation yet.
Maybe because it's easier to include now the ability to extend compatibility to 128-bit processors instead of trying to bolt it on later? Who knows, maybe Microsoft really did learn something from their experience with Windows security.
There's plenty of things all around us in the universe moving above the speed of light, including light.
Maybe, but we haven't detected any of them yet. Unless I missed the announcement of someone detecting tachyons, but I would expect that to have been a big enough deal to make lots of headlines.
I'm a practical guy. When you reach (I'll be generous) 1% c (3,000 kms-1) with your spaceship, I'll think about revising the laws of Newtonian physics.
s/practical guy/guy that refuses to believe 100 years worth of scientific experiments by people far smarter than anyone here/
Yeah, I figured that there would be lost energy in a few places, but I'm assuming that the efficiency in the generation stage would improve over time. With enough engineering and technological advancement, matter/antimatter annihilation should eventually be more efficient than just about any energy storage method we have now.
Wouldn't the efficiency in the reaction itself be very close to 100%? Obviously it costs some energy for transporting and storing the matter and antimatter to be used as fuel and other such overhead, but I had thought that the 2p -> e+ + e- -> 2p reaction had practically zero waste energy. It's been a few years since my last physics class, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
I thought it had something to do with time... Like, positrons were electrons going the other way in time, which is why they annihilate when they collide and produce a photon. Really the electron is hitting a photon and turning around in time. Likewise with pair production. Anyone know if this is right? I honestly think that quantum physics book was chock full of lies...
If I remember correctly, that theory comes from Feynman diagrams. It is a pretty interesting theory, and you can get some other very interesting ideas out of it. As with most other aspects of particle physics, how "true" it is can be debated at length, but the mathematics works, which is probably enough for most physicists.
If Warner Music filed a DMCA takedown notice with MySpace, Collins should be able to send them a counter-notice to have the material restored, at which point it's between Warner Music and Collins to fight it out. If MySpace removed the material without receiving an official DMCA notice, thus leaving Collins with no recourse, then MySpace has done something that they weren't legally required to do, which would make them just plain assholes. If Collins did send them a DMCA counter-notice and MySpace is ignoring it, then MySpace is violating the law.
Like I said, I agree that there are problems with many of the laws, but in this specific case, if the laws were being followed correctly, I don't think it would be so much of a problem than it is.
Not that I necessarily disagree with your sentiment, but does it really apply in this case? The law is pretty clearly on Collins' side, it's just MySpace and/or Warner Music that are being assholes. I suppose you could claim that the cost of solving this problem through the legal system would be prohibitive, but I'm not sure that any specific changes to copyright law would help with that.
Facebook started out as a way for high school and college friends to find each other easily. I remember way back I think you even needed a school email to sign up for Facebook.
I believe Facebook was originally only for college students. It was a bit of a big deal when they started adding high schools as well (that was before it opened to the general public, of course). Originally, yes, you did need a .edu email address from a college that Facebook had added to their system. I even still have my email/password saved in Firefox from when you still accessed http://schoolname.facebook.com/
Maybe Saturn has a problem with ring around the collar.
It leads to an interesting problem though. Suppose I sell you a copy of a GPL product and the source code on two separate CDs. You then sell Person B the binaries CD and he sells it to person C. Is Person B obliged to provide the source to Person C on request even though he isn't capable for doing this?
I assume you meant binaries instead of source code there. I would guess that yes, Person B must provide the source code to Person C. Person B probably could, however, turn around and nail you for failing to follow the terms of the GPL when you didn't provide Person B the source code when you sold the binaries CD. Exactly how a court would handle this situation, especially with regards to Person B not having to pay a huge amount of money for problems that you're responsible for, would be tough to predict.
I was wondering why I saw a security update for wget the other day. The only thing I could think of was some kind of buffer overflow.
Probably just to keep the size of the chart reasonable. In order to get the increase in number of elements in each period to match the increase in circumference of the circle, you'd have to do some funky things with the size of each box. In order to fit the lanthanide and actinide series in the circle, you'd have to either make the boxes for those two periods a lot narrower, or the boxes for the lower periods a lot wider. It's kind of like why they're separate in the standard periodic table; you can put them in the middle of the table, but then the table is too wide to fit on a single page.
...the default is correct, and to deviate from the default and setup systems with bad security takes 2 minutes on Google
Fixed that for you.
Progressive Conservative party
Wait, what?
If the email in question is about a multi-million dollar business deal, then I guarantee you they have a right to have their email read. Suggesting otherwise is a good way to torpedo your company's future.
Assuming that both sides are legitimate businesses (e.g. not selling millions of dollars worth of cocaine), I'm pretty sure they would both spend the extra few dollars on a reliable email provider or a competent IT person to run an SMTP server. Email delivery can fail on the first attempt for many different reasons, so giving up after one failure is never reasonable.
Blame Evolution.
You mean Intelligent Design!
</joke>
I believe the reason that the "name-calling" makes an assault a worse crime is that the intention of the attacker wasn't just to hurt the victim, but also to terrorize other people that are similar to the victim to some way, i.e. "I shot this person because he's X, and I may shoot one of you other X next".
As for Jack Thompson, wanting people to hurt him obviously isn't a hate crime (in the American legal sense), but actually offering money for someone to attack him would certainly be considered conspiracy to commit battery and/or murder. In the case of a Facebook group, though, there's also the issue of whether or not it was meant as a joke, and whether or not it's obvious that it was meant to be a joke.
What's just as interesting is that the colony that the Puritans founded is now one of the most socially progressive states in the nation. Maybe the religious zealots got sick of the winters and moved south.
of course, parts of the US were British prison colonies, too
Wasn't that just Georgia, and just for debtors?
I thought laws are overturned because they are ambiguous? Isn't that a tenet of law itself?
That's true, but a certain amount of non-specificity would be good. Otherwise, we would need to duplicate every existing law and add "on the Internet" to it, and we've all seen the horror that's caused by that practice.
Why would a ruling by the Supreme Court of Maine affect anything in Oregon?
Maine and Massachusetts have been separate states for almost 200 years.
Great, common sense wins for once. If the cops really need to track someone, they can still do so. It only takes a short period of time to ask a judge to sign a warrant. If a judge isn't willing to sign the warrant, then the cops have no case, simple as that. Lazy cops who would rather rely on technology instead of "police work" have no business being a cop.
And most of the time, judges will grant retroactive warrants. If time is an issue, you can plant the tracking device when you find that you have the opportunity to get to the suspect's car at 10:00 a.m., then go to the court after lunch to get the warrant for it. The ease of getting a warrant is what bothers me the most about doing anything without one.