You may have better luck asking the baby with a large cork.

That or perhaps replacing the exploding popcorn in the microwave with the soon-to-be exploding baby.
Just don't confuse which was which when you sit down for the movie!

I myself just recently discovered the existence of non-invasive probing (a feature included in a microwave just purchased by a friend last month), and while very impressed with the concept, was less so with the outcome.

I'm not sure if there are different non-invasive methods on the market, but this particular model somehow ended up using the water vapor released during microwaving to obtain its feedback.
In cases where it couldn't read anything (seemingly for foods that don't release much vapor) it wouldn't kick in, but when it did the foods still seemed to be more crisped on the outside while colder on the inside.

Certainly an improvement over cheap-o walmart microwaves on sale these days, but I guess I'm spoiled.

My microwave is a hand-me-down from my parents, who purchased it within the first year I was born.
It is a 35 year old GE brand, sporting a VFD, a "new solid state!" tag line on the front panel, and inside is a 1/4th inch headphone jack for use with a metal probe.
I've only ever used the probe once for cooking a turkey, more as an experiment as I usually use the oven for that and prefer including stuffing - but was amazed how even from outside-in the meat ended up cooked.

I assumed such research already took place long ago in-so-far as wired probes were concerned, but your comment makes me wonder if a newer model microwave still using a wired probe would have substantial improvements...
I realize the reliability will be next to crap, but such is most all products sold these days sadly :/

I'm not exactly "seriously shopping" for a new microwave, but the realist in me knows my current one likely won't last as long as I do (I hope anyway!), and as friends replace their current units so frequently I'm often reminded I'll eventually have to deal with and be in that situation myself too.

Usually that refers to the carriers fixed hotspots around town that one can pay by the hour or whatnot for access. If you have a cell package with them, use of the hotspots does not cost extra nor on a timer.

Personally I don't spend much time in McDonalds and the like, let alone spending time there on the Internet, but for people who are this feature is aimed at them.

Of course any access point that is open or you have access to is always available.

Don't blame me for firefox spell check. But to answer your question, no I am very bad at spelling, which is why I only questioned that "fix" for a few seconds instead of not at all as would be usual.

Why would you suspect I am not familiar with what it entails however? Was that the multiple times I described it in detail that threw you off? Or was it your inability to look past a couple letters being swapped around that clearly had no effect on your understanding of my point?

Since you seem OK making such assumptions, I'll take the safe route and answer my own question with a likely incorrect but still comical answer.

SHH!!! I dont know about you, but I personally am really looking forward to the $50000/month checks these businesses are arguing they must pay me and every other land owner for the right to run their cables and such through our yards!

At this point I don't care which side the companies want to argue for - I just plan to hold them to it across the board.

They can either give us net neutrality regulations and keep imminent domain regulations as well, or alternately, they can say none of that regulation should exist, because net neutrality will harm their bottom line and they want to cut us all checks for the privileged of actually having this cable network they want say-so over.

So even if we lose the net neutraliy battle, at the rates I plan to charge them for a cable troff I can safely say we will still have won the regulation war (and I'll never have to work another day again!)

Perhaps the biggest advantage in favor of that option is by following both lines of logic to their ultimate conclusions. Both will end up fucking up most of the remaining first world features this country still has left, and fuck it pretty equally bad.
If the ISPs insist on destroying world altering infrastructure that has been built over the past 200 years no matter which path they go down, we can at least shore up our retirement funds at their expense!

I say it's a win-win for us, and the ISPs argued yesterday this would be a win-win for them too (before they thought things through, which while unlikely, still technically may happen)

OK, I'm willing to grant that the public mostly doesn't understand, let alone care about, net neutrality.
I'll also go along and grant that companies such as ISPs don't see regulation as good, and that is a point against net neutrality in their case.

So lets follow such a setup to end game. Lets revoke imminent domain regulations as well!
This should be pretty easy comparatively.

a) I can't see many, if any, individuals seeing this move as a bad thing in any way. Especially so once explained that imminent domain is the only thing keeping comcast and time warner telecom from paying you a monthly rental fee for running their wires on/under your land.
Being able to charge each utility $10000 /month is a hell of a lot of missed income for us!

b) The ISPs are already starting off with a negative score in attempting to argue for keeping imminent domain regulation, after all the quotes and talking points they have put out stating how awful and destructive such regulation will be to them.
I personally wouldn't want to see them go out of business, so we should get rid of the regulations and have each and every land owner charging them extra rent in order to not have them go under.

(No I don't understand how spending more than $0 saves them money - but I don't care either, it was their claim, and not my place to explain how their finances work. Otherwise we might have to grant that the ISPs are lying about their finances)

Wow, I think I just felt two brain vessels pop from the sheer concentration of stupidity and lies.

So you can get your so claimed non-existent caching servers right here
https://www.netflix.com/openco...

You could also get free peering agreements with netflix, with more info at that same URL.
If offering free peering is being assholes about things however, I'd hate to see the cruel names you throw out at netflix when your own ISP tells you to go fuck yourself with your netflix peer...

If your ISP can't afford the internet bandwidth for one copy of a stream, in order to send that cached copy to each and every one of their customers an infinite amount of times... Well hopefully you can see why the ISP would get the blame here.

Also you really should do something about the guys in your home holding a gun to your head and forcing you to demand netflix send data to you. Would you like us to contact the police for you?

Sadly a surprisingly large number of core routers out there won't even propagate a /24, despite being the official minimum. A lot still dropped /22's and smaller, some even dropping /20's.
I can understand end point routers doing this, as Cisco RAM isn't exactly cheap and in the end that normally would only actually effect the users at that one end point. But I was surprised how many were actually backbone routers! (I'm looking at you cogent)

Back in 1996 or so the ISP I worked for had to get a /20 just to avoid all that crap, which arguably was more than overkill (we did dialup, webhosting, and "low speed" colo aka T1 speeds)

Ironically, a couple years after that ISP went out of business, ARIN still didn't revoke the IP block or ASN despite being a year behind on payment.
The contacts were still in my name (apparently being the last sysadmin to bother updating them) so after checking with the founder I ended up making the payments and keeping the IP block myself for another few years.

I relinquished the /20 back to ARIN in 2007 mainly due to the shortages, and they reallocated it to another company not 3 months later (their standard at the time was to not reallocate for at least one full year)

There are still days when I wonder if I should have kept it... But at least I can say I did my part as a good netizen.

Perhaps I am still misunderstanding the features of tmux (most likely in fact), but to say that is implausible to add to screen is misleading to say the least, since I have been doing exactly that in screen for nearly a decade.

On one terminal, either start a new screen session or -r to a detached session.
If starting a new one, try: screen -S LetsShare

On a second terminal, run: screen -list
You should see a list of screen sessions and their status (attached, detached, multi, etc)
If you used -S on start that will be the name, otherwise it's some tty.host.number string.

Now on that second terminal run: screen -x

Try to adjust both terminal sessions so you can see them at the same time. Type in either, watch in either. They are shared seemingly matching your tmux description.

You can change permissions per terminal so others can't type but will see everything you do (aka tutorial mode) using ^a *

Also for split/multiple windows showing on the same terminal, use ^a S (control-a capital-S)
To switch between split windows use ^a tab
Close a section of split window with ^a Q

The status bar problem is true and pretty annoying. I fixed it myself with a line in ~/.screenrc but of course I have to pretty much install that user config file on every new system I use which can get annoying.
If you want an always-on status bar showing window numbers and titles (^a A to change the title), add this to .screenrc (and hope slashdot doesn't munge it!)

hardstatus alwayslastline "%{= wk}%-Lw%{= BW}%n%f* %t%{-}%+Lw %-=%{= BW}%H%{-}%{-}"

Note the two "BW" bits? That's background blue and foreground white, and applies to the window with focus. Change B to R for red for example (production vs not-production in my case)

Here is my whole .screenrc file for copy/paste purposes: http://pastebin.com/kMkuFXi9
No splash screen, always on status bar, 10k line scrollback history for copy/paste (^a [ and ^a ] ), and auto-open three windows with preset titles and commands running in them.

I don't mean to knock tmux in any way at all, having not used it (and I do plan to check it out now) - but hopefully these screen tips help out others here.

As an atheist who also happens to believe we are in fact living in a simulation, let me be the first reply to say - that is an excellent point!

The mind that created the universe simulation would perfectly fit the literal definition of God, and I suppose in that sense I'm not truly an atheist either, since such a mind would be a strong likelihood given the assumptions we are already making are true.

But then thinking a moment and recalling what we currently know of our observable universe, with all of the matter and energy out there that must be kept track of in such a simulation, it's fair to also think that us teeny tiny human energy structures are /nothing/ compared to that, and barely nothing in the grand scheme.

Any such mind that is able to simulate all of this wouldn't have any reason to care about me personally, any more than you care about the fate of a single specific atom in your body.
There would be no reason to lay praise or prayer upon such a mind, nor any reason to expect any special treatment over any other equally small structure that is another human.

That still tells me that even if I am factually wrong about the existence of such a God, my behavior and actions in this life so far are still perfectly aligned with how I have behaved and acted. No harm done :}

Actually it does, frighteningly well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

You are quite correct however, this is a painfully ridiculous situation with the input handlers in Linux.
Multiseat and multihead seems so perfectly fitting as something Linux should be doing, but it fails miserably from the start due to the input handlers.

The real kick in the teeth bit about the Windows solution? You have to pay a full OS license for each seat/head configured!
If your goals are anything more complex than "I just wanted to see if it would work" then this licensing detail makes Windows pretty much the worst OS for such a use case, despite being the only OS that handles it correctly at the input layer.

Where I work a good number of the surface mount assembly lines are run by windows 2000 and XP.
The screen printers still run DOS. Many of the electrical testers and chip programmer rigs need XP or lower as well.

As most of these setups require custom PCI IO cards, visualization isn't an option either.
(Though I am happy to have found an ISA to USB adapter that works well under visualization)

When "a pc upgrade" involves replacing a quarter million dollars in hardware and finding the time to eat the cost of downtime over three running shifts, even I couldn't justify the cost of doing so just to get a newer OS (that will still be windows and still go EOL at some future point!)

My solution is to segment older OSes on the network. They can reach the SQL server and occasionally the file server as needed.
NO email, NO internet, NO intranet, no random transfers between there and other networks.

Everyone has Win7 desktops for office, outlook, and firefox. There is no need to even treat the XP systems as computers anymore. They are now appliances.

With the SMT line PCs not even showing a desktop or letting the operators exit the controller GUI, and the test hardware being locked to a list of approved executables (More for QA actually), the likelyhood of an infection requiring a reinstall is next to nill.

That leaves hardware failures. I have full drive images to restore once the HDs fail. On a more serious failure, the entire rig is considered failed. Either time to pony up the $25k for a new system, or we do without.

As long as you get your desktops upgraded, there is a lot less you need to use XP for, and most attack vectors can actually be completely blocked without effecting any work flow what so ever.

He has every right to complain, a lot more than you or I.

He has been put in prison for a crime that even the US government does not believe is a crime, proven by the fact they SHOW it is OK to do this to other people.

If it is acceptable for this action to be done at all, then clearly Weev has done nothing at all wrong here and shouldn't be in prison in the first place.

You don't get to claim "this person should be punished for doing X to be" and then turn around and expect to be treated differently when you do X to other people.

I know you are just trolling, but in case anyone considers that you might sound like you know what you're taking about...

No, actually "you" can't. Our ERP system that runs the company cost around 2.5 million all said and done, and it only runs on Windows.
For our industry, there are only three (3!) such ERP packages in existance, ALL of which require windows to run (Except Oracles product, which can use windows and/or work poorly in non-IE browsers, but better than nothing if you can afford them)

Do YOU plan on cutting me a check to have this non-existant software created and paid for?
No? Hello? I hear crickets from you now.

Every solution you suggest would literally be no different than tossing out every computer and going back to pen and paper. You might as well suggest that a raw pork chop is a far superior weapon to a gun when the stated goal is to kill someone - obviously stupid and incorrect.

Except for that little fact that there is no software to use. Yea, I kinda think our users will notice that tasks previously taking 60 seconds now take 4-8 hours to complete.

Considering that advice would make the stock holders lose billions and no longer have a business, thanking me would not be on their list of methods to extract revenge and pain out of me.

As a troll I realize you only have the goals of causing pain and misery in others lives, but most of us actually don't enjoy seeing that.

I hate Microsoft garbage as much as the next person, most likely more since I actually use the crap and you clearly admit you don't and thus have no experience about the claims you also made.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how poorly microsoft software works, that poor solution is surrounded on all sides by non-solutions that don't even function. There is nothing better.

But if you truly believe your other solutions will work as drop-in replacements, will earn companies so much more money, and get you placed on a kingly pedestal showered in thanks - just put your money where your mouth is.
Once you pay all the change costs, and take on the risk your suggestions will incur, I will jump at the chance to rid ourselves of microsoft faster than you could sing trololol.

I'm just waiting on that check still...

1000 years of subjective time is more than suitable to plan and plot any revenge against the ones that put you through that...

"In his house at R'lyeh, dead Cthulu waits dreaming"