Does it make anyone else uncomfortable that this story about industrial networks being vulnerable to cyberattacks follows immediately after a story about robotic surgeons?
How will we know the robotic surgeons have installed the most recent security updates? Will they be WiFi enabled so the teenager sitting in the hospital cafeteria can use them to play Operation and try to light up my nose while trying to take out my funny bone?
I scrolled down knowing I would find my brethren. I will upgrade when he does. Mark my words...
I will have to grab a copy from MSDN though.
Try manual - that may work. I have not tried it but manual would (likely) mean that you could manually start the update process from the start menu and not need to turn the service back on so you will save a step.
That's cute. You think that actual benefits of GMOs mean anything to the people listening to all the FUD that gets spread about them.
And you think that hiding the foods' provenance is the way to make people stop believing the FUD? That's very interesting.
Because when someone tells me I'm not allowed to know something about a product I'm buying, it immediately endears me to the company hiding the information.
The only logical thing to do with such power is use it to rape, murder, pillage, and burn... Anything else would be less civilized. Done in the wrong order, however, is not civilized at all.
There is this nice Chinese diner, looks like hell, right off the rip in Terre Haute, Indiana. The food is awesome. I did get food poisoning (or something else) that kept me in a hotel room for three days. It was worth it.
Actually, I meant in the other sense. The American public has a right to know that an agency of it's government is illegally spying on them. The public has no such overriding interest in the personal details of federal employees.
I kind of hope this goes to SCOTUS. We could use a precedent and sooner rather than later.
You're like the fifth person to state this. Who the hell are you hunting with? I would be unhappy on General Principle (and his army of ants) and not hunt with them again. No! Even if "safe" you do not fire over my fucking head. (It is pretty safe though. I am still not okay with it.)
It could, of course, be that they reviewed the benefits and risks and drew their own conclusions which sometimes match the consensus and sometimes don't.
I have seen the text we type here. The last thing I am doing is accepting porn advice from Slashdotters.
I do not have rock salt loads. If I shoot someone my goal is not to hurt them. No, that is not my goal at all. I would much rather not shoot anyone, however. Having been shot at and returned fire in an active combat zone was not something I enjoyed. I would take no pleasure in taking someone's life but, if I am shooting at someone my goal is certainly not to cause them pain.
My primary defensive weapon is just a Mark II in
Really though, it is like throwing rocks at an intruder. We have done so since age immemorial. Today we just throw rocks a little faster and a little more accurately.
... what's it taste like?
With all these miraculous properties, you'd think companies would want to let people know that their food is GMO. You know, like on the label.
In many rural areas they have an exception for a gun firing shot. They are much slower and heavier rounds or much smaller rounds and do not travel as far as those fired from a rifle. Handguns, also slower and sometimes heavier, are also prohibited but that is for a different reason I suspect.
Many areas no longer have this exemption but a number still do. As a bit of a hobbyist I have looked into the laws in a variety of places where I have spent time. They do not usually advertise this exemption any more but the exemption is *maybe* still on the books.