But props to the guy - he has improved his posting somewhat the last couple of months, and has squeaked back into being worth paying attention to. In particular, in this one he STARTS with a link to TFP (that The FUCKING PAPER, for the multitude of Slashdotters whose association with science is more in their imagination than the reality) on ARXIV. So I think he's learning his craft.
I've no idea what his writing on Forbes is like because I can RTFP, so I don't need second hand presentations. But if he's trying to be a science journalist there, then the fact he's appreciating the importance of primary sources is worth noting and encouraging.
IPv6 specific security features, such as not automatically assigning IP addresses to anything that may just be loitering about in the vicinity of the network?
I didn't see any mention of this being a wireless router, so I'd expect the simples way of not having random devices connect to it would be to not plug a cable into the router.
... Downloading away merrily on the account, not seeing any adverts.
Right, so long as its not my offspring that you are willing to sacrifice. And everybody has this same viewpoint for his own value of "my".
You chose to use the word "everyone" ; that is a word with only one meaning.
You are wrong. It is absolutely and incontrovertibly untrue that "everyone has this same viewpoint". I do not hold this opinion. The two-decade old receipt for my vasectomy (before having any children ; it was a bureaucratic struggle) supports my assertion that I hold a different opinion to you on this matter. I can also think of at least ten others of my friends who do not have children and who assert that they do not want to have children ; several of them are at or beyond the technical limits of child-starting age and remain child-free. This also supports my correction of your claim that "everyone" thinks like you. "Every-", "all" etc are words and prefixes that you should think several times before ever using.
Incidentally, I object to paying taxes to subsidise your children, their education and your spending on food and clothing for them. I'd rather spend the money on development of elder-care robots and extending lifespans. Robots are considerably less resource wasteful than people. Since I do get out and vote, this might be an incentive for you to do likewise.
But "Backup Earth" is not the only reason to go out colonizing.
"Backup Earth" never has been a credible reason for going out to colonise, in any sense of possibly providing a place where Earth-born humans can go to in any demographically significant numbers (for Earth ; far smaller numbers would be significant for the putative colony). The number of people who will ever die on a planet that they were not born on is always (caveat follows!) going to be far smaller than the number who die on the planet of their birth, for the same reason that today most people die in the country of their birth : transport is expensive. Colonies rarely receive more than 1% / year of their population by immigration - most of their growth is by local breeding of second and higher generation natives. Meanwhile the colony's internal growth can exceed 3% / year. Those numbers add up.
(Caveat : assuming that the currently-understood laws of physics hold, in particular the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass, and the speed of light being an upper limit on speed. Actually, it doesn't matter that c is "legal max" ; even getting to c/10 qualifies as "expensive".)
If we (our generations) conspire with your children to fuck up the planet for their children, then it is your children's grandchildren who will suffer on Earth in consequence. The odds of your descendants including anyone who gets off planet (e.g., to the asteroids) are low (the corresponding probability for me is zero, of course).
Mars will be much easier to colonize than the moon.
That's a moot point.
Neither place is going to provide a solution to Earth's population problems and environmental problems. If people go around gibbering that "if we fuck up on Earth, we can always go to Mars or the Moon", then they're condemning the large majority of the Earth's population to death in the ecological collapse they'll allow on Earth.
The inhabitable area of the Earth is approximately 510072000 sq.km.
Allowing that Mars can be terraformed to Earth standards (if it's not impossible, I reckon that's a multi-million year project), then the inhabitable area of the Earth plus Mars is about 654870500 sq.km, a 28% increase. Human population on Earth has increased by that much in my lifetime, so a terraforming project on Mars would buy less than 50 years of human population growth. Let's be optimistic and hope that the Solar system has enough available volatiles to perform the terraforming project, and I'm wrong by a factor of a hundred on how fast that atmosphere can be put onto Mars - so a 10,000 year terraforming project on Mars would yeild a 50 year buffer space to stack humans on. Humankind must get it's addiction to population increase under control. Permanently.
In reality, I would expect that the first humans to live in space will continue to grow as human populations do. So before the terraforming project on Mars is half-way complete, there will be another Earth-full or several of humans who will need accommodating. Mars simply won't get the resources (volatiles) for the terraforming unless someone goes around mining Jupiter's atmosphere.
Oh, Unobtanium cake! Lovely!
I suppose they've both eligible for a "lifetime achievement" type award of some sort though. Might be worth suggesting. I'll get on the phone to Nobel, if you get on the phone to Oscar?
The Hobbit book wasn't that, it was all in good fun.
Which is precisely why Tolkein had Gandalf (the Ainu) go off to do his "big scene" stuff with the "Necromancer" (another Ainu, called Sauron) OFF STAGE. Same reason that some guy called Shakespeare (who is reputed to know a thing or several about writing screenplays) had his guys Rosencrantz and Guildenstern killed offstage - to keep the focus on Hamlet.
God-mode Mary Sue
You don't understand Tom, do you? He's not "God Mode" anything. He's a god (well, Ainu), though not one of the major ones. He certainly out ranks the other Ainu in the plot (Gandalf, Sarumen, Radagast, Sauron) put together, but he's not allowed to act by orders of the Boss.
returned soldiers from WWII
Tolkein was referring to his own return from the trenches of WW1. Remember that he started to write this in the late 1920s.
They should have left the Scouring in. but that wouldn't have fitted in with Hollywood's requirement for happy endings. Sucks to work with Hollywood.
Whoever designed that power cord connector was a dribbling idiot, as was everyone in the design chain up to the level at which someone realised "we can make a shitload of profit on selling replacements when this breaks." Which moved it's problems from being design deficiencies to being business assets.
A reversible, magnetically latched power lead - sounds a cool idea. But the consequence of needing a contact pin, a sliding contact, and a spring instead of a static soldered joint triples the component count and triples the number of failure points. And sure enough, the guy in question has a useless lump of Apple hardware (until he gets to a store - next month) because of the failure of one of those 3 failure points. It's the third such failure he has had at the same point in consecutive power bricks, each brought from Apple at full retail price. We've got three Electronics Technicians on board with a reasonably equipped lab - and ont one of them wants to take responsibility for trying to repair this failed component, because it is very compactly put together and designed to be irreparable.
The guy with the borked Apple won't be buying any more Apple hardware - that's for certain. I won't either (I sold my Apple gear about 5 years ago).
Really great piece of design, Apple's business managers!
The pacing of the LoTR films was a bit too rushed. The pacing of the Hobbit film was dragged out to at least twice it's appropriate length, and more likely three times it's appropriate length.
As a matter of the fact, he is not the first person to think of this.
Quite. just as a "for instance,", in the late 1990s I was reading related ideas by a German called Manfreid Eigen published back in the early 1990s, and Eigen was referring back to work from the 80s and 70s. It's a well-established way of thinking about things, even if it does somewhat bemuse chemists, geologist and others trying to approach the same problems from their own fields of expertise.
was it somehow "collected" from the system over the generations (i.e. it was always present in the system since the Big Bang?) or is information somehow "generated" over time (which is strange, because the process that creates it would probably contain the information in its definition).
This is where the geologists and crystallographers throw in their few cents, because the realities of crystal structures and their interactions include a LOT of information, some of which is repetitive, constrained in possible values, reproducible with modest error rates
If you're not careful, you're going to catch something.