To me, this seems to imply that pretending to be stunned stupid would be a good ploy for a male.

Goodness knows he wouldn't want to seem too witty from the start, and make her think he considers her ugly.

It's probably because I come from a blue collar family and have always had that kind of job. But, most of the Harley owners that you see riding around aren't dentists or accountants. I doubt most of them could handle much of the Sturgis crowd.

I agree with everything you've said regarding how the phone associates with a single tower at a time and such.

However, I was under the impression that the "cells" were only cells when they didn't overlap.

I can't speak for every city, but this one's "towers" aren't so much towers anymore. Most of them are little gadgets on the side of a building, or in the parking lot underground, or scattered everywhere. They don't just kind of overlap, they mesh, allowing a phone to pick the strongest/nearest/best/available one.

But hey, maybe I'm just harping on the four letter word.

In any event, doesn't it bother you to name things based on tehir particular implimentation instead of their function? It bothers me.

Damnit! Thanks for pointing that out. I had just watched an episode of House M.D. and got my hemispheres mixed up.

Stop claiming that I said "homosexuals are flawed" as if I mean they are less worth! I meant that logically, they are attracted to mates with whom they cannot reproduce which from natures point of view seems.. illogical. Granted, I have been corrected. I knew there are homosexual animals, but I didn't know homosexual individuals could contribute to group survival better than their heterosexual counterparts. As for evolution in humans.. As a previous poster pointed out, it's not happening. Or rather, evolution is happening but not survival of the fittest...

..for which I am rather glad. God knows I'm riddled with genetic trash and fuck-ups! Born with Asthma Bronchitis, developed allergies (both of which have been slapped into medication free submission), and now I have T1 diabetes. Do I consider myself of less worth? Well.. no, not as a human. As breeding stock? If T1 diabetes is in fact genetic and I can pass it on to my offspring, I will consider adoption both to spare my kids this crap and to at least contribute in my small way to the gene pool. Say what you like, but that is at least a personal choice.

This reminded me instantly of Asimov's 3 Laws of Robotics. Specifically, the first:
"A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm."
A conflict between the two caused the robot to freeze, so unfortunately it is no help to us with resolving this...

So like 99% of the nitrous you breath in, you end up breathing back out

You waste your $5 that way. Take small breaths, mix it with some air so you can hold it it in longer. SIT DOWN before you fall down. Wrap the balloon end around your finger so you don't slip and lose any. Don't breathe out until you have to.

You cannot talk a person into doing something they truly don't want to do.

Sure you can. It's called "charisma." And anyway, you don't talk them into doing something they don't want to do. You convince them that they want to do it.

It's the stupid prosecutor's fault, there were plenty of more viable angles that wouldn't endanger everyone's rights, they just wanted to use this one to fluff up their careers. For example, suicide is a crime (odd but true) and she contributed to a minor's decision to commit that crime. Therefor she should be tried for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. She deliberately inflicted an emotional damage on a child, so assault. She is a mother who has demonstrated that she doesn't have sufficient emotional maturity to behave responsibly. Perhaps social services should look in to that.

But NO, the prosecutors were determined to grab some headlines and make it a "cybercrime" for their own benefit and so she goes free.

Web programming is not, nor should it be, something anyone can "whip up" without understanding what they're doing

Sure, in make-believe land this will happen. But here in reality, there are tons of rookie coders writing crap, insecure web programs. Given this will *never* be stopped, the *least* PHP might do is make it feel natural to do the right thing.

For example, if you search "PHP send mail", one of first hits you get has example code that *will* be exploited by spammers. The fact that the *core default way to send mail* does not have a parameter for "From:" has resulted in thousands of websites getting reamed by spammers. Everbody wants to customize the "From:" in an email based on user input! No novice will know how to properly construct a "From: $username" to pass into the additional_headers! They'll gloss over the warning in the link I gave--why? Like most people they will assume the warning only applies to people doing advanced tricks with email like attachments; all they are doing is something "simple" like customizing the From: line! Hell, that is how I got burned. I assumed since I was doing something simple, PHP would do the right thing for me. I was wrong. Live and learn!

The easy to exploit mail function isn't what is happening in the article. That "exploit" isn't even really an exploit but it is what I originally called it--a rookie mistake. That kind of thing can be done in any language and you'd be lying to say your first email form didn't have the exact same problem!

(Hands up if you would actually consider using a graphical interface without a task bar.)

Posts using ratpoison. (Before everyone starts screaming, yes, I'm an efficiency nerd, I do a lot of things reflexively, and I cannot imagine trying to teach a high percentage normal lusers to use this.)