I must say I am impressed by the radio person that manage to connect the song title Is this reebook or nike? with the intended song.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
If I know I'm right, there's a damn good chance I'm correct because those moments of idiocy tend to be rare.
You should perhaps not be so sure about that, see my signature.
- There is no trusted third party. There is the only a) the user and b) the website (and also notice that each website will receive different identities, so no cross site spying).
- The creator, Steve Gibson, is doing this just because it is a good security solution and have no other interests. He has a long track record of being an security expert, starting the podcast Security Now! in 2005, currently up to 467 episodes.
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.
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).
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.
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.