Comment Re:Various methods exist... (Score 4, Funny) 275
Well, it's a shot in the dark.
But, take a stab at it.
Well, it's a shot in the dark.
But, take a stab at it.
You can interpret it that way. That's not the only way to interpret it.
The straightforward reading, however, is that it is forbidden to use proxy services. You're also not allowed to run them, but that's specified separately.
No that's not a straightforward reading at all.
Lets drop the 'or run' to simplify it slightly and read that:
You're right: if you change what it says by deleting some of the words, then it says something different.
In the next sentence, it says in particular what you're not allowed to use or run, including proxy services.
Use or run: It's not merely that you're not allowed to run proxy services: you're not allowed to use them, either.
If that's stupid-- well, how about that.
As I said: the interpretation of this text could be ambiguous. You could do the lawyer thing and claim to interpret it the way you say. But the clear straightforward text is: proxies are listed on the list of things you are specifically not allowed to use or run.
Huh? It is a violation to RUN a proxy. Not USE a proxy.
Here is the text of what's forbidden, from TFA. Note the bold face on the word use (bold is from the original):
use or run dedicated, stand-alone equipment or servers from the Premises that provide network content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises local area network (“PremisesLAN”), also commonly referred to as public services or servers. Examples of prohibited equipment and servers include, but are not limited to, email, web hosting, file sharing, and proxy services and servers;
Agreed, the interpretation of this text could be ambiguous. The straightforward reading, however, is that it is forbidden to use proxy services. You're also not allowed to run them, but that's specified separately.
Then TOR will be wrapped by a VPN service, and Comcast will be fscked.
Didn't you read the article? VPN is against Comcast's terms of service-- it's a proxy.
And if that had been what they'd asked, fine.
But it wasn't. They asked about her membership in groups advocating overthrow of the US government, not about whether she knew or wrote letters to people in prison.
The report is pretty clear. In her original interview, she denies involvement:
During that session, Barr answered “no” when asked if she had ever been a member of an organization “dedicated to the use of violence” to overthrow the U.S. government or to prevent others from exercising their constitutional rights.
Then, they actually checked what they told the interviewers. Despite being a self-described "worker bee," she had been involved with a groups actively dedicated to the use of violence to overthrow the government.
Nope. Actually read the article, instead of just skimming. The two groups that she was involved with in the 1980s were not "dedicated to the use of violence to overthrow the U.S. government." That was a different group, which OPM said "had ties" to the organizations she'd belonged to. She wasn't a member of the third group, or, as far as I can tell, the OPM doesn't claim she was.
I don't know what "had ties" means. But, was she a member of a group dedicated to the use of violence to overthrow the government: apparently not.
"Valerie Barr was a tenured professor of computer science at Union College in Schenectady,"
is.
No, it puts quantitative limits on what is to be expected.
Delta G = Delta H - T Delta S
where S = k ln (omega)
Any other quesitons?
Meh. Information is basically tied to entropy. You can reduce entropy (which is to say, you can order information); it just takes energy to do so (and in the process releasing waste heat).
So, basically, this says nothing more useful than "Life requires a source of free energy, and a way to reject waste heat."
Sure, but we knew that already.
I find it a bit hard to believe that a guy who is able to get one of the largest black-market enterprises running on a server/farm connected to an anonymous/decentralized network isn't smart enough to *not* give it a public IP and/or put the equivalent to a home internet router in front of it.
People make mistakes all the time. Even smart people.
You've never made a mistake? Never missed a bug? Never misconfigured a system? Ever?
Do a hundred things right, and one thing wrong, and just guess which one will get caught.
it would still be decelerated to a safe velocity before hit hit the gorund and would just bounce.
Bounce?? This was calculated using Kermit's space program?
What I find cool about this asteroid is that it's in a 1.5 year orbit. That means it's in a 3:2 resonance with Earth. So it'll come by again if you miss it this time, every 3 years.
Normally you'd expect asteroids that makes this close an approach to Earth to have a bit of a change in orbital parameters after the flyby, but that 3:2 orbital ratio is unlikely to be a coincidence-- it looks like a resonant orbit, in which the Earth's gravitational perturbation has already modified the orbit until it reached that stable resonance.
The small-body page allows you to propagate the orbit into the future, if you're interested. (Not a good tool to use if you're calculating missions, though-- you'll want a more accurate simulator! The V_infinity is a bit large for a rendezvous, though.)
"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll
