Comment Re:100% effectiveness against any unknown attacks (Score 1) 145
This one weird trick protects government systems from malware! How does it work? The developers don't want you to know!
This one weird trick protects government systems from malware! How does it work? The developers don't want you to know!
Sounds a lot like AppArmor.
It would be ideal if every house on my block resisted NSA spying and illegal FBI wiretapping.
Apple pays attention to sound quality. This is evident from what comes out of the iphone, ipad, mac mini.
Beats, on the other hand, dips the music in sweet syrup, then wraps it in a soft blanket and then gives the bass a +10db boost. That's what their headphones sounded like to me.
I can only hope Apple will show beats what music really sounds like.
And as for bluetooth speakers, I use a JBL Clip. At least JBL remembers how to make good sound. Beats never learned. Plus it's really hard to clip a Pill to your backpack.. unless you improvise a carrying handle out of 1/2 inch velcro like a bud of mine did.
I was running OpenWRT on a WRT54GS, but moved and ended up with 50Mbit Comcast (crap) rather than ~2Mbit Sonic.net (awesome! but too damn slow due to distance from CO). If discovered the WRT was limiting thruput to ~12Mbit rather than the 50Mbit I had on the other side of it, so I'm using an Apple Airport Express with stock firmware until I can get OpenWRT setup on a Netgear WNDR3700.
And I thought I was way behind the times when i was still running the WRT54GS. So I guess my question is, is anyone still running that ancient hardware for their main connection?
Dr. Cox would call the side effect a major case of "deadness."
This is certainly one of the motivations.
By combining anti-structuring laws with asset forfeiture the feds can steal most anything they'd like. There have been a lot of stories in recent years about small businesses that make frequent deposits under 10k getting their accounts and even their business siezed.
All without even an allegation of any criminal activity other than making deposits that are below the threshold for reporting. The drug warriors thought they were playing a game of gotcha with the drug kingpins. Nice work, geniuses....
No it shouldn't. If gender is a predictor of ability then the probability distributions are BY DEFINITION not independent. If therefore you use the knowledge of gender after evaluating ability then you are treating them as independent variables when you combine them. This is mathematically bogus.
Actually, that's just mathematically simplistic. Here's what your reasoning does not account for: There are leanings, abilities and competencies that do not exist in isolation from other influences. Gender can be one of those. Therefore, to the extent that affect is possible, it is a valid consideration.
It could be a positive for either sex.
For instance, the air force has definitively determined that females are significantly better at maintaining more comprehensive situational awareness in complex aerial situations. This is because of a real world gender-based difference in information processing.
On the other hand, if one was hiring a bouncer, the competencies lean strongly the other way.
There will be outliers, of course, but that's why we need to think about these things rather than operate by rote. The law, unfortunately, but needfully (due to blind prejudice), specifies decision by rote. This is why many parts of the decision making process have gone missing from public view.
No thanks. Big government is the problem, here. It's used by the wealthy to enslave the rest of us with our own money spent against our will.
You are mostly correct, but the problem isn't being controlled by the "wealthy". Most of the problem are wealthy, but not all. I'll give you a hint. They control the media, hollywood and ironically they have a hook in their nose.
Really? This tired crap?
Australia has experimented with various alternate voting methods including compulsory voting, still get the authoritarian right wing types in government.
People like authoritarian, protective governments. They like for someone to focus their fear on a particular movement or group. They like to think that something is being done about that threat. They know they're not doing anything wrong and will be untouched by those protective measures. Even if there is some small consequence, the security is worth it.
These people don't speak, so you don't know they exist. They're part of the 95% of slashdot readers who have never posted a comment. They don't have strong opinions. They are good people, always ready with a smile and a wave, always ready to help a neighbor in need, and never asking for anything in return. They just want to go about their life, and a strong, protective government with visible police and pro-active defense is very comforting.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."
-Blazing Saddles
I don't want to do any of those things. I merely stated, if you want to solve one problem, don't introduce legislation for a different one (IE minimum wage to fix lack of phones for the unemployed)
Lack of phones for the unemployed is not the problem I want to solve. The need for the government wellfare programs we both agree ned to be heavily cut back is.
And you are right, people do the math and then collect food stamps instead of working.
And you change that by changing the math. If all they can find is part-time minimum wage work, you make that livable (note that I didn't say comfortable, that was your addition to the discussion). How do you make part-time minimumwage work livable? Increase the minimum wage. Then, we'll be in a position to require a job and one or more dependent children in order to qualify for any wellfare programs; tie that qualification to the job so that losing the job means losing the wellfare benefits. The only exception to both the "must have a job" and "must have dependent children" restrictions would be a disability that legitimately prevents one from working; not just one that makes finding work difficult, but one that bars you from working at all. I can't think of any, off the top of my head, that don't also typically include living in a hospital or care facility, so that should cut down on the "something for nohing" problem.
Minimum wage isn't a government program, it's a law put in place because businesses have shown repeatedly, throughout the history of civilization, that they will have slaves where they're not forced to have employees. Minimum wage has also failed to keep up with inflation for at least the past 50 years, so a massive increase is due in order to correct that.
It used to be trivial to find $15/hr full-time work in a factory and support a family of 3 on a single income, but we've sent all of that work overseas and replaced it with $7.25/hr 16hr/wk shitjobs a single person can't even afford to support themselves on. Do you not agree that this needs to be corrected? We'll, we're not going to convince companies to re-open their factories on American soil (and even if they did, the unions are gone so they'd get away with only offering $7.25/hr 16hr/wk work and nothing would be solved), which leaves increasing the minimum wage as the sole solution if you want to cut back on government wellfare without increasing the prison popularion, which costs considerably more than the wellfare programs you want to cut in the first place.
Otherwise, it seems we're in agreement regarding wellfare programs. Cut the hell out of them.
Just because Jenny's child has a serious condition doesn't mean she has the right to give thousands of other children a different serious condition.
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
