Selling little bottles of very expensive water with labels that very carefully imply that they do, indeed, cure diseases (while legally not saying anything of the sort) to people who don't know any better is what gets people up in arms.
I've come to the conclusion that victims that falls prey to homeopathy are probably similar to those victims that falls prey to nigerian scams.
When you receive an email from someone claiming to be Prince/Minister/whatever of Nigeria with some large amount of money they need to transfer, suggesting you could be a middle man for a fair share, it is common knowledge that this is scam and fraud. So since Nigeria is so heavily assosiated with this, on the surface it does not make sense for the scammers to continue to claim to be from Nigeria since that would potensially put off more potential victims, right? Well, that is true but it turns out that there is still a benefit for the scammers to continue to claim to be from Nigeria because that also acts like a very good filter to only get responses from those naive persons that will fall victim to the scam.
I think the same goes for homeopathy, Yes, the pyiscs clearly proves that this does not work, but it works nevertheless!. If you are naive enough to fall though that filter, then you are a good victim.
Lidzborski said that 100 percent of email messages that Gmail users send or receive are encrypted while moving internally. “This ensures that your messages are safe not only when they move between you and Gmail's servers, but also as they move between Google's data centers—something we made a top priority after last summer’s revelations,” he said.
Joseph Hall, chief technologist at the Center for Democracy and Technology, told AFP that Google's encryption "would make it very difficult" for the NSA or others to tap into email traffic directly. "I'm reluctant to say anything is NSA-proof," Hall said. "But I think what Google is trying to do is make sure they come through the front door and not the back door."
In December, Microsoft said it would “pursue a comprehensive engineering effort to strengthen the encryption of customer data” in order to protect its customers from prying eyes and increase transparency."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
No, the ++ operation will take place before the next sequence point (super important concept! If you do not fully grok sequence points, you are not really programming C). The end of a statement is one sequence point, a function call is another sequence point.
Here you have two modifications to i before that, and that is what is invoking undefined behaviour (in the same way i = array[i++]; is also undefined behaviour since i is modified twice before the end of the statement).
Do you have more information on Apple's security track-record? Seems to me to be much better than Microsoft or Android.
No, this is not true. Two main notes:
1) The only reason people hear about Android "malware" is because antivirus companies are allowed to provide antivirus software for Android. Rarely do they mention that it's people downloading pirated apps from shady third party app stores after they've disabled all the security features.
2) All those "jailbreaks" for iPhones? Those are ALL security exploits. If they can be used to jailbreak the phone, they can be (and have been) used to completely pwn the phone.
Easy solution: if the camera is vandalized, lock the doors and drive to the police station.
No way, the Google Now widget is indispensable.
When I turn on my phone in the morning, it tells me how long it'll take me to get to work, the current weather, any out-of-the-ordinary movement of the stocks I have in Google Finance, flight information if I have any coming up, release dates of video games movies or albums, etc. etc.
Pretty wonderful, and way more "magical" and "innovative" than anything Apple has done recently.
Link to Original Source
The thing is, he's not even making much sense. He's looking at fighting one fight and missing the overall battle.
Sure, preventing disease is a great thing and will save lives, but so will access to knowledge via the internet. Knowledge of how to prevent disease in the first place. Knowledge of how to best grow food in crappy soil. Knowledge of how to know if drinking water is safe. Knowledge of the first signs of disease so you can go to a doctor. Knowledge of preventative care.
Not to mention the fact that knowledge leads to development of society and better economies, which will help drag these nations out of poverty, which will do more for preventing disease than Gates could ever do.
This is particularly amusing because such game theory examples have been proved to only apply to WEIRD (white educated industrialised rich and democratic) nations.
Quite possibly not only WEIRD, but perhaps only for college students from those countries as well. From What happens when actual prisoners play The Prisoner's Dilemma?:
And here's the surprise: Compared to college students, the prisoners actually cooperated with each other much more often.
I'm going to try to avoid finding out who the next doctor will be, though it'll probably be next to impossible.
Though I'd love to see the nerdrage/glee if they name a female actor to the role.
For any (large) group communication space, there is always a need for (some) moderation. See http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/05/a-group-is-its-own-worst-enemy.html for some discussion for instance.
Imagine a line representing freeness of speech, with 0% at one end and 100% at the other end (the word freeness here meaning lack of any restrictions). Where on that line would you put a cross for the optimum value of free speech? There are no countries in the world (or any society though history) that allows 100%. There are typically many things you are not allowed to say, like uttering death threats, crying fire in a theatre when there is no fire, in a court you are not allowed to lie (think about how enormous restriction of free speech that actually is), etc.
The point is, exactly what the "optimum" value of free speech is is always a subjective opinion, and it is always less than 100% (although normally quite close).
Also I assume you are a man that have not been exposed to the darker side of the this problem which apparently is significant (I am also a man so I have neither a first hand experience). I recommend you to watch the documentary "Uppdrag granskning: Menn som nÃtthatar kvinnor " (men net hating women), http://www.svt.se/ug/man-som-nathatar-kvinnor, if you can find a translated version (https://sv-se.facebook.com/granskning/posts/10151724543289883).
Dear Anonymous Coward.
Please take a piece of paper, divide it into four coloums and put on top of each coloumn the questions respectively
- What is the problem(s)?
- What is the cause(s)?
- What can be done to solve these?
- Who should do that?
From your already performed actions you can in the third coloumn fill in "call someone on slashdot a brainwashed, ignorant luser" and in the fourth coloumn put your real name. But I am really curious what you would put into the two first coloums! My suspicion is that the problem might be something along "you (e.g. Anonymous Coward) feels offended/hurt and respond with childish/immature name calling". Since I do not know you I am blank on what the cause might be. These are just my speculations though and I might be wrong, so if you could provide your answers that would be great.
No, the stock market reflects what the people who own the company think it's worth, which is absolutely tied to their current and perceived future value.