However, in this case, there was a direct correlation of time as well. Everything you listed happened in all the studied areas around the same time - and were they related to violent crime, the drop in violent crime would happen around the same time in all of these locations, which it didn't.
* Slide Rule and CPUs: This would show a marked drop which could be mapped by time and income bracket (as these would be the two factors mandating uptake), and not geographic region by state. * Global warming: This would show a marked drop which could be mapped by latitude, proximity to large bodies of water, and time, as these would all be mitigating/exaggerating factors in the relevant changes.
Find correlations with these factors, and maybe one of your theories can be tested. (and actually, global warming might be a good one - too much heat means more agitated people at lower latitudes, more happy people at higher latitudes, if we take the theory that crime to be inversely proportionate to happiness).
Occams razor people - this correlation works because it is one of the simpler explanations that fits what happened. Additionally, a testable prediction has been made from it - in 10-15 years, the theory will be tested.
I won't argue against your point about, power - I agree, but there are a lot more dangerous bromine compounds than hydrogen compounds.
But there are also worse chemicals than bromine (radon anyone?)
So, maybe I jumped the gun a bit, as I dont know what the alternatives in the manufacturing process are, but in the post regarding Hydrogen vs. Bromine, I'd rather rule-of-thumb it and take a hydrogen based substance over a bromine based substance if there was no time for serious study, and bromine does tend to be more dangerous.
Yes, anything can be dangerous, but this isn't a true/false or 1/0 option, it's a gradient.
Interesting. I've litterally worked with hundreds of people who have not had issues with Windows machines with a good internet connection, and machines that are up between 8 and 24 hours a day. Probably less than a third have had any serious issues with Windows 2000 or XP.
The trick? 1) Don't download and run random crap - that goes for any OS. 2) Sit behind a decent firewall - that also goes for any OS. 3) Don't have a blank or stupid password - hmm, again, good advice for any OS. 4) Get security updates regularly - again, same for any OS, though it happens more often for windows. 5) Don't use IE unless necessary - I'd say "same for any OS," but it is hard to violate this one on other OSes.
So, 5 is the only serious difference.
Oh, and since the other relpy was a bit of an ass - regarding NT - saying Windows NT is like 98 with better networking, is like saying MacOS X is like MacOS 9 with better networking - in both cases it is a completely different OS, that happens to have quite a number of backwards compatibility features.
Actually, bromine is a neurotoxin. Typically, compounds with bromine in them will be a lot more harmful to human health than those with hydrogen, and not just due to explosions. It tends to be more corrosive than hydrogen as well.
You want something similarly dangerous that is common, you'd be better off picking oxygen, but even that isn't as bad.
Sorry, but you can try to recognize patterns in anything including what patterns are found in compilers. It is not always easy, but hard isn't impossible. As soon as you can recognize those patterns, you can write the trojan described.
simple - one of the fields in computers is pattern recognition. Compilers can follow patterns as well. If one is trained or programmed to detect certain code or binary elements commonly found in compilers, then it can affect more than one compiler.
I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying it's possible.
You didn't evevn read the quote? The only way to bypass this is to hand build the compiler in binary. You won't *EVER* see the attack because it's in the compiler's binary, and the compiler puts it in the binary of any compiler it compiles - even if it is not in the source of the compiler it compiles.
I bought mine two or three months ago. At the time, I wasn't seriously trying to get it, I just figured if I stopped in a store and if they had one, I might buy it. I think I ended up going through three or four EB/GameStops and Targets (don't laugh... too hard) before I saw one. I thought for a few, and figured since they were non-trivial (not quite hard mind you) to find, I'd get it.
They aren't hard to find, you just have to do a bit of leg work.
Reread my post, your comment, while partially ignorant of biology and genetics, is also completely irrelevant to my point.
You are talking beginning point and end point - which is irrelevant to evolution by the way. I was discussing the process.
Oh, and the stuff you see in in many multicelluar organisms (like conciousness), is not bells and whistles. There is junk DNA, but even it often serves a purpose (especially if you consider evolution).
(A) re-writes of the code base or (B) takeing a minimal functionality codebase/toolkit (i.e. Gecko), and adding fewer features than the competition?
In the case of (A), you can argue it's not really the same software any more, just a conceptual child. For B, it is at least larger than the base app, just better implemented in terms of size/speed/bloat than the competition.
actually - software development is trial and error also.
The difference is not the trial and error part, but the fact that in evolutionary theory, the trials are random, in computer software design, the trials are not (and are usually kept unless the error is considered really bad)
I'd argue that software in general tends to get bigger, slower and more bloated.
Typically, new releases of software tend to have more features - these added features are what cause the bigger-slower-bloatier effect, as the take space to store, time to execute, and not everyone wants them. I don't know of one piece of software that has managed to avoid this fate.
Actually - I do have friends and have had family who work in such stores (wouldn't mind working for one myself, if I didn't already have a job that pays a lot better)
Actually, I never snuck into an R Rated movie, correct. My parents took me to some though - those they felt appropriate.
If I were a parent, I would rather my kids play a GTA game than a spongebob game if that gives you an indication of my thoughts. But every parent has their own views, and there are still games I'd rather my kids not play if I had any (ex - while I like GTA, there are reasons I would say no to Mortal Kombat). As such, I would like to have some control of what my [hypothetical] kids could get access too, and would not mind assistance to ensure store clerks aren't selling things they shouldn't to the kids. I'd not object to some assistance in the matter.
And actually, as far as the latter point - yes I do agree with making movie theaters accountable for letting minors access R movies without a guardian, or video rental places renting such material, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
However, in this case, there was a direct correlation of time as well. Everything you listed happened in all the studied areas around the same time - and were they related to violent crime, the drop in violent crime would happen around the same time in all of these locations, which it didn't.
* Slide Rule and CPUs: This would show a marked drop which could be mapped by time and income bracket (as these would be the two factors mandating uptake), and not geographic region by state.
* Global warming: This would show a marked drop which could be mapped by latitude, proximity to large bodies of water, and time, as these would all be mitigating/exaggerating factors in the relevant changes.
Find correlations with these factors, and maybe one of your theories can be tested. (and actually, global warming might be a good one - too much heat means more agitated people at lower latitudes, more happy people at higher latitudes, if we take the theory that crime to be inversely proportionate to happiness).
Occams razor people - this correlation works because it is one of the simpler explanations that fits what happened. Additionally, a testable prediction has been made from it - in 10-15 years, the theory will be tested.
I won't argue against your point about, power - I agree, but there are a lot more dangerous bromine compounds than hydrogen compounds.
But there are also worse chemicals than bromine (radon anyone?)
So, maybe I jumped the gun a bit, as I dont know what the alternatives in the manufacturing process are, but in the post regarding Hydrogen vs. Bromine, I'd rather rule-of-thumb it and take a hydrogen based substance over a bromine based substance if there was no time for serious study, and bromine does tend to be more dangerous.
Yes, anything can be dangerous, but this isn't a true/false or 1/0 option, it's a gradient.
Interesting. I've litterally worked with hundreds of people who have not had issues with Windows machines with a good internet connection, and machines that are up between 8 and 24 hours a day. Probably less than a third have had any serious issues with Windows 2000 or XP.
The trick?
1) Don't download and run random crap - that goes for any OS.
2) Sit behind a decent firewall - that also goes for any OS.
3) Don't have a blank or stupid password - hmm, again, good advice for any OS.
4) Get security updates regularly - again, same for any OS, though it happens more often for windows.
5) Don't use IE unless necessary - I'd say "same for any OS," but it is hard to violate this one on other OSes.
So, 5 is the only serious difference.
Oh, and since the other relpy was a bit of an ass - regarding NT - saying Windows NT is like 98 with better networking, is like saying MacOS X is like MacOS 9 with better networking - in both cases it is a completely different OS, that happens to have quite a number of backwards compatibility features.
Actually, bromine is a neurotoxin. Typically, compounds with bromine in them will be a lot more harmful to human health than those with hydrogen, and not just due to explosions. It tends to be more corrosive than hydrogen as well.
You want something similarly dangerous that is common, you'd be better off picking oxygen, but even that isn't as bad.
Might I suggest against commenting on the literacy of others?
A detector would definetly be harder than an obtusificator. But look how that worked for MS and security.
100% success may be virtually impossible, but 90% is probably significantly easier, and nearly as dangerous.
obviously wrong maybe.
Sorry, but you can try to recognize patterns in anything including what patterns are found in compilers. It is not always easy, but hard isn't impossible. As soon as you can recognize those patterns, you can write the trojan described.
simple - one of the fields in computers is pattern recognition. Compilers can follow patterns as well. If one is trained or programmed to detect certain code or binary elements commonly found in compilers, then it can affect more than one compiler.
I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying it's possible.
You didn't evevn read the quote? The only way to bypass this is to hand build the compiler in binary. You won't *EVER* see the attack because it's in the compiler's binary, and the compiler puts it in the binary of any compiler it compiles - even if it is not in the source of the compiler it compiles.
Good luck with that.
I bought mine two or three months ago. At the time, I wasn't seriously trying to get it, I just figured if I stopped in a store and if they had one, I might buy it. I think I ended up going through three or four EB/GameStops and Targets (don't laugh... too hard) before I saw one. I thought for a few, and figured since they were non-trivial (not quite hard mind you) to find, I'd get it.
They aren't hard to find, you just have to do a bit of leg work.
I use .doc (MS) and .rtf (if you need to ask...) for all of my stuff, as those are the most widly supported.
So far, OO only seems to have problem with font size of superscripted items, and page margin sizes.
Didn't they have to exist for you to find that out? Why cant the government use existing pits.
Sure the government can build new rivers and lakes - but they also use existing ones. They use existing oceans too (which they cannot build)
Reread my post, your comment, while partially ignorant of biology and genetics, is also completely irrelevant to my point.
You are talking beginning point and end point - which is irrelevant to evolution by the way. I was discussing the process.
Oh, and the stuff you see in in many multicelluar organisms (like conciousness), is not bells and whistles. There is junk DNA, but even it often serves a purpose (especially if you consider evolution).
But, in most cases, weren't these either
(A) re-writes of the code base
or
(B) takeing a minimal functionality codebase/toolkit (i.e. Gecko), and adding fewer features than the competition?
In the case of (A), you can argue it's not really the same software any more, just a conceptual child. For B, it is at least larger than the base app, just better implemented in terms of size/speed/bloat than the competition.
Apple has always been a very agressive company (which has its good and bad points), and this is pretty much a continuation of the norm for Steve.
what is it with all the people calling it the "Nobel Price" today?
actually - software development is trial and error also.
The difference is not the trial and error part, but the fact that in evolutionary theory, the trials are random, in computer software design, the trials are not (and are usually kept unless the error is considered really bad)
there's a value in creating and protecting it, yes, but there is also a penalty in hoarding it.
In these third world countries, the leadership can be fairly well off - the problem is that all of the wealth is congealed into a very small space.
A balance is needed, as with anything.
I'd argue that software in general tends to get bigger, slower and more bloated.
Typically, new releases of software tend to have more features - these added features are what cause the bigger-slower-bloatier effect, as the take space to store, time to execute, and not everyone wants them. I don't know of one piece of software that has managed to avoid this fate.
Yes. I admitted Linux had some advantages over Windows and that I don't use Windows at home.
I must be a Windows shill.
Just because I give credit where credit is due, and consider non-dos Windows, does not make me a Windows shill.
I am just not clouded by blind hatred. Learn from your enemies my friend, it makes them easier to beat.
Ninja can and sometimes do have associations...
Ninjas just don't need associations.
I believe the stores should be accountable and recieve the fines. It is then their job to handle the offending employees as they see fit.
Actually - I do have friends and have had family who work in such stores (wouldn't mind working for one myself, if I didn't already have a job that pays a lot better)
And I still agree with the fine.
Actually, I never snuck into an R Rated movie, correct. My parents took me to some though - those they felt appropriate.
If I were a parent, I would rather my kids play a GTA game than a spongebob game if that gives you an indication of my thoughts. But every parent has their own views, and there are still games I'd rather my kids not play if I had any (ex - while I like GTA, there are reasons I would say no to Mortal Kombat). As such, I would like to have some control of what my [hypothetical] kids could get access too, and would not mind assistance to ensure store clerks aren't selling things they shouldn't to the kids. I'd not object to some assistance in the matter.
And actually, as far as the latter point - yes I do agree with making movie theaters accountable for letting minors access R movies without a guardian, or video rental places renting such material, etc.
Sometimes, its a choice between
(1) Work 12-16 hours a day
(2) not have enough food to eat.
I've known people in that situation who've chosen #1, and people who've chosen #2.
Both have their drawbacks, but I've a lot more respect for those who choose #1. Not all jobs pay enough to live on sadly.