They also make it harder to have an election, and as the population grows larger and larger we will have even more difficulty than we did before.
Furthermore, a huge part of what is wrong with this country is the bipartisan system. A large cause of bipartisanism is the notion that a vote for a third party is a wasted vote. We could dispel this thinking through the use of runoff elections. The problem with runoff elections, however, is that every person ends up casting multiple ballots throughout the election season - as many ballots as there are candidates. While this may not be realistic with our paper system, it could be realized electronically. Perfecting electronic voting could revolutionize the democratic process as we know it.
Right, because it is utterly ridiculous on our planet to think that someday you might need a weapon to defend yourself or your community from an attack. Clearly, anyone interested in weapons is flagrantly undermining our perfectly peaceful and harmonious world.
How do you deal with jurors that decide to do their own investigating at home? Kick them off the jury and hold them in contempt of court. And make sure it is done very, very publicly so everyone in the country knows about it. Do this 10 times and the problem starts to go away.
A better question, then, is "how do you discover jurors that decide to do their own investigating at home?"
If they don't tell anyone they did investigating then there's no way to punish them.
Here is the big problem -- if a juror does independent research to uncover facts about the case, and uses those facts to come to a decision regarding guilt or innocence, the attorneys for the defense and the prosecution have a right and a duty to hear of those facts and either support or debunk them in the courtroom. Furthermore, some forms of evidence, such as hearsay, are not legally admissible. It is the responsibility of the judge to ensure that hearsay is not admitted into the trial and allowing jurors to do their own research prevents the judge from performing his responsibility and thereby ensuring a fair and legal trial.
If the player can only see a part of the battlefield (like in Starcraft) then the AI should have the same limit and need adjust its own viewport to gain awareness of an area. It should also be limited by the fog of war, and lack the ability to see out of the back of its head.
The AI in Crysis did a wonderful job of this. The game is more than just eye candy.
I'm quite alright with commercials. Even with commercials, though, watching TV on the internet makes more sense. Have you checked out southparkstudios.com, or thedailyshow.com?
Show me any computer setup that can have my show on the screen in the time it takes for me to get home tired from work, toss my shoes off, plop on the couch and just press "on" one time to be where I want to be.
1) Turn on any computer with an internet connection
2) Visit hulu.com
3) ????
4) profit!
That's more than just one button. But it's less than five buttons, and you have the added benefit of watching what you want, when you want, instead of being forced to watch whatever is playing on the channel at any given moment. So if you're going to pay an extra $50/month on top of your internet bill for an inferior service just to get out of pressing a few extra buttons, you're basically a lazy slob and you deserve the financial punishment for your laziness. Visiting a website is hardly a formidable feat of technical wizardry like you imply.
You're right about one thing though -- this has nothing to do with facebook.
He's not installing this into an eye that actually provides him with eyesight. We're talking about putting a glass eye with a camera in it into an empty eyesocket.
Because Communists have never done anything that didn't make economic sense, right? Like the USSR's rampant mismanagement of Russia that led to the starvation of millions?
At least with a Capitalist system everyone is doing something a little different, instead of all doing exactly the same thing. That diversifies our risk, which does make economic sense. Humans are fallible, so you can either choose between a large number of small fuck-ups, or the chance of one really big fuck-up.
If everyone came together and bought electric cars, the cost would eventually come down as the capital provided to the company would allow further R it would also signal a demand for the car to GM's management.
Which is where the tax credit comes in. It gives a further incentive for everyone to make the best collective choice, without directly seizing their freedom (which engenders resentment and rebellion). Personally, I think we should raise the gasoline tax as well, in order to force a faster transition to non-oil energy sources.
The fact that policymakers in the U.S. could do that really just goes to show that we have a mixed economy with aspects of socialism now; like almost every other industrialized country in the modern world.
All this will do will be to paint giant bullseye targets on all of the locations they want to "protect." Potential terrorists will see that the area is blurred out, investigate it on foot via spies and "sleeper agents" to plan their attack (which will produce much more detailed recon than some crummy single-frame Google Map satellite image).
If they're close enough to attack then they're close enough to reconnoiter this information for themselves anyway, and trying to "censor" it just shows them what we are afraid they will attack. Stupid measures like these are drowning our economy in opportunity losses -- if it goes through, some poor sap at Google is going to have to waste his days blurring out little bits of the map in a totally vain attempt at some hick senator's backwards notions of security.
Seriously, Congress, leave espionage to the people you appointed to carry out such activities. Meddling in things you don't know about is asinine.
Yeah, I was just using "4-star" as a euphemism for "top-notch." Clearly, I'm not sophisticated enough to realize there's an extra star on that metric.
And you're right, most people wouldn't. I was banking this on the assumption that you could have a total monopoly, charge practically any price you wanted, and market it to celebrities and others who actually have billions of dollars to blow. At some point or another advances in technology should make it feasible.
Well, I basically described how you can recover from any virus on any computer, regardless of your OS. The computer used to repair the infected one does not have to be very expensive, either; $40 at Goodwill ought to get you such a tower if you don't have these sort of things lying around from past upgrades. It can also run on a different OS than the computer you're recovering; you could recover your Windows box with a free install of Ubuntu.
That's a much better deal, financially, than hauling the thing to a mom-and-pop PC repair shop and getting them to install the stuff for you. If everyone had that kind of DIY ethic those places would go out of business -- but we'd all be a little richer for it.
I do agree that this is a digression, since we were discussing the security of Windows specifically and I've bypassed that issue entirely, but it is an accurate testimonial regarding why Windows' security is generally irrelevant and why it's never been a problem for me. There's just so much good, free, antivirus
conservatives... are the very bankers and governments that want to sweep away all local traditions and customs in favor of some U.S. Congress-like body of arrogant bureacrats whose only concern for the so-called working man is a disdainful accounting of how much he can be used as a political chip.
Slashdot Mirror
They also make it harder to have an election, and as the population grows larger and larger we will have even more difficulty than we did before.
Furthermore, a huge part of what is wrong with this country is the bipartisan system. A large cause of bipartisanism is the notion that a vote for a third party is a wasted vote. We could dispel this thinking through the use of runoff elections. The problem with runoff elections, however, is that every person ends up casting multiple ballots throughout the election season - as many ballots as there are candidates. While this may not be realistic with our paper system, it could be realized electronically. Perfecting electronic voting could revolutionize the democratic process as we know it.
Right, because it is utterly ridiculous on our planet to think that someday you might need a weapon to defend yourself or your community from an attack. Clearly, anyone interested in weapons is flagrantly undermining our perfectly peaceful and harmonious world.
How do you deal with jurors that decide to do their own investigating at home? Kick them off the jury and hold them in contempt of court. And make sure it is done very, very publicly so everyone in the country knows about it. Do this 10 times and the problem starts to go away.
A better question, then, is "how do you discover jurors that decide to do their own investigating at home?"
If they don't tell anyone they did investigating then there's no way to punish them.
Here is the big problem -- if a juror does independent research to uncover facts about the case, and uses those facts to come to a decision regarding guilt or innocence, the attorneys for the defense and the prosecution have a right and a duty to hear of those facts and either support or debunk them in the courtroom. Furthermore, some forms of evidence, such as hearsay, are not legally admissible. It is the responsibility of the judge to ensure that hearsay is not admitted into the trial and allowing jurors to do their own research prevents the judge from performing his responsibility and thereby ensuring a fair and legal trial.
The AI in Crysis was much, much better. If F.E.A.R. is the best FPS AI I've seen, I'll bet money you haven't played Crysis.
If the player can only see a part of the battlefield (like in Starcraft) then the AI should have the same limit and need adjust its own viewport to gain awareness of an area. It should also be limited by the fog of war, and lack the ability to see out of the back of its head.
The AI in Crysis did a wonderful job of this. The game is more than just eye candy.
Not because I enjoy forking
Don't kid yourself, this is slashdot. You and all the other geeks here would love to do some forking.
What a lovely straw man you've built there.
Examine British history in the pre-1900's and you'll get what he is talking about.
Mr. Ellison, is that you?
I'm quite alright with commercials. Even with commercials, though, watching TV on the internet makes more sense. Have you checked out southparkstudios.com, or thedailyshow.com?
Show me any computer setup that can have my show on the screen in the time it takes for me to get home tired from work, toss my shoes off, plop on the couch and just press "on" one time to be where I want to be.
1) Turn on any computer with an internet connection
2) Visit hulu.com
3) ????
4) profit!
That's more than just one button. But it's less than five buttons, and you have the added benefit of watching what you want, when you want, instead of being forced to watch whatever is playing on the channel at any given moment. So if you're going to pay an extra $50/month on top of your internet bill for an inferior service just to get out of pressing a few extra buttons, you're basically a lazy slob and you deserve the financial punishment for your laziness. Visiting a website is hardly a formidable feat of technical wizardry like you imply.
You're right about one thing though -- this has nothing to do with facebook.
I can't decide if this is +1 informative or +1 funny. All I know is I wish I had mod points.
He's not installing this into an eye that actually provides him with eyesight. We're talking about putting a glass eye with a camera in it into an empty eyesocket.
Because Communists have never done anything that didn't make economic sense, right? Like the USSR's rampant mismanagement of Russia that led to the starvation of millions?
At least with a Capitalist system everyone is doing something a little different, instead of all doing exactly the same thing. That diversifies our risk, which does make economic sense. Humans are fallible, so you can either choose between a large number of small fuck-ups, or the chance of one really big fuck-up.
If everyone came together and bought electric cars, the cost would eventually come down as the capital provided to the company would allow further R it would also signal a demand for the car to GM's management.
Which is where the tax credit comes in. It gives a further incentive for everyone to make the best collective choice, without directly seizing their freedom (which engenders resentment and rebellion). Personally, I think we should raise the gasoline tax as well, in order to force a faster transition to non-oil energy sources.
The fact that policymakers in the U.S. could do that really just goes to show that we have a mixed economy with aspects of socialism now; like almost every other industrialized country in the modern world.
All this will do will be to paint giant bullseye targets on all of the locations they want to "protect." Potential terrorists will see that the area is blurred out, investigate it on foot via spies and "sleeper agents" to plan their attack (which will produce much more detailed recon than some crummy single-frame Google Map satellite image).
If they're close enough to attack then they're close enough to reconnoiter this information for themselves anyway, and trying to "censor" it just shows them what we are afraid they will attack. Stupid measures like these are drowning our economy in opportunity losses -- if it goes through, some poor sap at Google is going to have to waste his days blurring out little bits of the map in a totally vain attempt at some hick senator's backwards notions of security.
Seriously, Congress, leave espionage to the people you appointed to carry out such activities. Meddling in things you don't know about is asinine.
Yeah, I was just using "4-star" as a euphemism for "top-notch." Clearly, I'm not sophisticated enough to realize there's an extra star on that metric.
And you're right, most people wouldn't. I was banking this on the assumption that you could have a total monopoly, charge practically any price you wanted, and market it to celebrities and others who actually have billions of dollars to blow. At some point or another advances in technology should make it feasible.
What you have just described basically outlines why a 4-star "moon hotel" would be a multi-billion dollar business.
The only thing mind-boggling here is the magnitude of tjstork's ignorance and back-water, inbred country-boy notions of patriotism.
... software made by third parties out there that the sporadic vulnerabilities in Windows/Internet Explorer/etc. have never been an issue for me.
Well, I basically described how you can recover from any virus on any computer, regardless of your OS. The computer used to repair the infected one does not have to be very expensive, either; $40 at Goodwill ought to get you such a tower if you don't have these sort of things lying around from past upgrades. It can also run on a different OS than the computer you're recovering; you could recover your Windows box with a free install of Ubuntu.
That's a much better deal, financially, than hauling the thing to a mom-and-pop PC repair shop and getting them to install the stuff for you. If everyone had that kind of DIY ethic those places would go out of business -- but we'd all be a little richer for it.
I do agree that this is a digression, since we were discussing the security of Windows specifically and I've bypassed that issue entirely, but it is an accurate testimonial regarding why Windows' security is generally irrelevant and why it's never been a problem for me. There's just so much good, free, antivirus
That's still no reason not to maintain secrecy if possible. Any security solution should be multi-faceted and obscurity can be one of those facets.
conservatives ... are the very bankers and governments that want to sweep away all local traditions and customs in favor of some U.S. Congress-like body of arrogant bureacrats whose only concern for the so-called working man is a disdainful accounting of how much he can be used as a political chip.
There, I fixed that for you.
By this logic, we should let our wartime enemies know all the details of our troop sizes, locations and movements.
I'm pretty sure you've got Sun Tzu rolling in his grave. The first line of "The Art of War" is "all warfare is deception." Nothing could be more true.
That sounds great. Surely stoking the fires of Nationalism will improve all of our real incomes, and help to put an end to international warfare.