For men, military style tactical boots, kept polished, can be almost indistinguishable from dress shoes, and are an order of magnitude or two more comfortable. In addition, the type with steel toes and non-slip soles are approved footwear for any place I have ever been that required safety boots.

Add a set of comfortable gel insoles to those and you will have foot nirvana all day.

For women, stick with comfortable shoes over pretty/fancy ones. Even sitting at a desk all day, your feet have a major impact on your overall comfort. Low heels or flats that match a variety of clothes can be life savers. And don't forget that you too can use the lovely gel insoles to improve comfort.

In either case, it is also nice to be able to sneak the shoes off under a desk and stretch your feet out while you work. Just keep clean feet and no one will even know. (Except the support monkey checking your Ethernet cables)

If you are sitting for longer hours than standing and moving around, wear a belt that is slide adjustable instead of one that has pre-punched holes. Remember that the longer you are sitting, the more your spine compresses and the more your girth temporarily increases (no matter how fit you are).

If you end up having to wear dress shirts and find them uncomfortably hot or cool, Under Armor and similar companies make thermal regulating undershirts in a variety of colors, including black, white, and neutral/tan that work well enough for desert and cold weather troops. They are well worth the investment in my opinion. They also allow you to slip off a dress shirt if you have to do a desk dive, dust yourself off in the appropriate restroom, and return to full dress without missing a beat.

In other words, programming through a thought based interface will use a language based on Ada?

I suggest that we all start putting down our "race" on those forms as Homo Sapiens Cogitans (Thinking Knowing Man). Everyone else can use the rest of the entries.

Of course, the long-winded way of saying it obfuscates the arguments:

1. Things change and adapt.
2. God, our all-powerful creator, changes and adapts things.

Since in this telling 1 does not require the addition of God, 1 is the simpler.

Just give me a shirt treated with something that reacts to the radiation at different levels, similar to how flourescing materials react at different wavelengths, and tickets, and I'll gather your readings. You can stand in line outside the checkpoint and use your personal recording device (cell phone, camera, etc.) to film the reaction of the materials. All you have to do is pretend to be taking video of, say, your son about to take his first flight before you let him go through the checkpoint you can't, since you don't have a ticket. Oh, and since they won't let you, as his parent, accompany him to the gate, hope he doesn't get kidnapped or worse.

Or use something that retains changes after exposure to radiation. Lots of easy ways to get measurements without asking permission from the TSA or violating their rules.

So then I propose the following experiment - while noting the time delay will need to be on the order of milliseconds most likely to make it work.

1) A statistically significant number of photon pairs are generated, e.g. 100, and measured by Alice and Bob.
2) Alice and Bob compare all of their results, under the following rule:
a) If the results are coordinated in a statistically significant portion of the measurements, say 80%?, then the bit is read as a 1.
b) If the results are coordinated in what statistically is random chance, basically random, then the result is a 0.
3) Victor then decided to send a 0 or a 1, and if sending a 1 entangles all the pairs. If sending a 0, Victor entangles none of the pairs.

While the number of photons required and the delay would have to be calibrated such that random chance is distinctly differentiated from correlation, since they already have established that the correlation is statistically significant, that is just a matter of the volume of photons required.

While this comic is accurate in the basic calculation, there are several assumptions that a password hacker can use to simplify even a semi-brute force search.

* The US keyboard layout only has 94 symbols (~7 bits).

* Unless the site is completely non-English, there are probably some US users.

Applying those criteria, the base search would be 7^Length for the initial scan, with a very high probability of finding the password in that pass. That is n-(floor(n/8)) actual entropic bits. A 1024 bit password reduces to 1016 bits. Further reductions in the initial scan can be made by only scanning for common substitution characters, and removing the lower 19 ASCII codes from the space (which are not easily used in a password. That leaves behind 5 bits per character. The remaining space for the 1024 bit password is now n-(floor(n/8)*4)=~n/2 or 512 bits of entropy. A brute force search can be conducted on that space in mere seconds.

So our attacker manages to obtain more than one password, possibly an entire file. Since one vulnerability is usually all that is required to gain further access, they only need one or two successes. They use the above methodology, in all reality gaining more than one or two passwords. Game, set, match.

In theory, salting the passwords is only effective if they are performing a man-in-the-middle capture. If they obtain the list of hashed passwords directly, salt does nothing to help.

There are ways to mitigate this threat, such as multi-factor authentication. But thinking that passwords are going to do more than slow a determined attacker down is subscribing to the illusion of security.

And see, that is what happens when you idealize the appearance of your wenche... wrenches. My toolbox is full of single piece cast wrenches with plenty of nice curves on the outside. It actually makes the grip much more comfortable when working for longer than five minutes. Some of the more high end ones also have "clothing" on them, rubber grips wrappings.

Actually, come to think of it, my wrenches have a more natural human-like curve than those plastic models.

So toward the end of your study, you had learned to seek and use reference resources, aggregate the data from those sources, and derive conclusions based on your research. Congratulations, you learned to learn. The only thing you missed, your sources deserved credit to avoid it being plagiarism.

And to further your education, and acknowledged expert in the field is a legitimate reference, since the only difference between an acknowledged expert and a published work by an expert is peer review of the data (where applicable).

So basically, if I get what you're saying, it's Somebody Else's Problem?

Exactly, Shatner has an image to maintain. And give the man due credit, he even managed to lose his shirt when talking about wardrobe. How many actors can manage to pull that off in a text only medium?

WICD10.01X for the initial nap, WICD10.01XA for subsequent, and since this seminar obviously included sharks, W56.42EXA for inability to find sharks exciting. In case of further symptoms related to W56.42EXA and related codings, consult the PDR to determine if the conditional is pathological, psychological, meteorological, or meta-logical.

Cases where meta-logical stress induced psychological pathology is indicated should be admitted to trauma care within one hour to prevent further loss of cognitive faculties and potential decrease in billable coding according to EMCR401-36 subsection ii(a).

If unable to determine the exact morphology of the shark, repeated cranial impact stimulation using a arboreal mesh imprinted with all potential ICD codes is required. Avoid stimulation of the frontal and prefrontal cortices unless patient displays negative reactions to application on the posterior sinister epidural surfaces.

If in doubt of final diagnosis, select all available codes and notify the patient's HMO, secondary insurance provider, preferred mortician, and nearest organ donor collection facility. Ensure that the patients organ donor card is completed properly to ensure prompt and accurate payment for donated organs.

I hate to tell you this, but I am provably able to detect electromagnetic radiation using reliable, reproducible methods.

My first method is to open my eyes. Since light is a form of EM, the rod and cone cells in them are quite adequate as receptors.

As an adjunct to that, I have tactile response to high voltage, low amperage electrical fields, e.g. a Tesla Coil's emissions. This is, of course, because my entire nervous system is electrical in operation, and those high energy fields can produce current in a conductor under the right circumstances.

I am also able, through chemical means, to perceive strong infrared fields through the epidermal layers of my integument. The translation of infrared to localized heat is chemically translated into an electrical signal in the aforementioned nervous system.

In addition to my senses, many species of avian are able to sense magnetic fields.

The point here is that while some trials have been conducted, establishing the absence of a sense in x population does not mean that all populations lack the sense. Otherwise, a double blind, fully randomized study of penguins would very inaccurately conclude that all birds, and even some flying mammals, are flightless.

No sir, we did notify you that your rate plans were now going to double and include a free gynecological examination of the female users of your family plan. The notice was posted to your phone the first of last month. Just go to Settings -> About Phone -> Software Version -> Intraorifice Updates -> Rates -> Basic and Enhanced Network Devices -> Open Version Enhancement Reader -> Analysis. If you scroll to page five, paragraph 21 subsection S clearly explains the changes.

Yes sir, I understand that you don't speak Spanish, which is why the information was posted to your phone in Linear-A.

Yes sir, I can certainly adjust your bill for the month, would you like the anterior or posterior adjustment inserted?

I am head of an IT department at an academic hospital. My fellow faculty (a dozen or so) want to switch from a caffeine to amphetamines (night and weekend on-call schedule). Most have an hypodermic or similar, so I envisaged a ephedra lacing. The Hospital Doctor doesn't offer any ephedra laced amphetamines, so I bought (with my cash) a chemistry set, combined methamphetamines and ephedra for kick, and buffered it with saline. After I tested it out on a neighbor's cat, I emailed the doctor to ask to allow extra hypodermics for this dosing. The doctor (after asking what the sodium hydroxide was for), said he would allow the dosage after I provide him with a record of clinical trials. I was taken aback, and after considering it, I am still leaning toward opposing this request, possibly taking this up the chain. I'm happy to allow any local trial, to ensure it has no major issues, but I'd rather not let anyone else have the secret formula. What do the readers of Slashdot think? Should I give doctor the clinical trials of a formula that is not owned or managed by him?

So go ahead, inject caffeine into your veins all you want.