vassillios
Apr 15, 12:37 PM
Obviously fake. Look at the slanted iPhone writing on the bottom photo. Horrible photoshop skills
gnasher729
Oct 5, 02:45 PM
Methinks you don't have a good grasp of public key encryption. (Or at least how it's supposed to work).
It seems that you got encryption and decryption mixed up.
It seems that you got encryption and decryption mixed up.
mattcube64
Apr 9, 10:28 PM
My first foray into either series! :)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5189/5604518861_bfd913b136_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5189/5604518861_bfd913b136_b.jpg
Muadib
Oct 3, 10:32 AM
V. L. C.
don't tell me you haven't use this magnificient software? (on mac, linux and win32)
don't tell me you haven't use this magnificient software? (on mac, linux and win32)
more...
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
rdowns
Apr 17, 12:12 PM
Awesome, to make enough time for this lets just forget everything after the Great Depression because it's not like that junk matters as much as gays being persecuted. Seriously, the Holocaust and the Rape of Nanjing are totally trivial events compared to the Stonewall riots. We should totally drop coverage of the bombing of Pearl Harbor to make room for a lecture on how NAMBLA doesn't represent gays. To top it off we should ditch the civil rights movement in favor of the White Night riots!
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
Where do you get this stuff? :rolleyes:
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this, if we teach this something else gets whacked. As is we get to the 1930s by the tests which go to the 1980s...
Where do you get this stuff? :rolleyes:
more...
SevenInchScrew
Mar 11, 04:43 PM
Transition.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
Eric5h5
Mar 24, 09:11 PM
Downhill since Tiger.
No, I'd say Snow Leopard is about 80% better than Tiger and 20% worse. I mostly skipped over Leopard, and went from 10.4 on a G5 to 10.6 on a Mac Pro. There are quite a number of improvements all over the place that show it's clearly the result of taking a look at earlier versions and saying "wouldn't it be better if...", and then acting on it. There are a few steps backwards though, the biggest one for me being the incomprehensible mutilating of Expos�. Fortunately there's a nice hack which restores the correct behavior (and makes the dock look better), but it's a little annoying to have to re-apply that after every update.
--Eric
No, I'd say Snow Leopard is about 80% better than Tiger and 20% worse. I mostly skipped over Leopard, and went from 10.4 on a G5 to 10.6 on a Mac Pro. There are quite a number of improvements all over the place that show it's clearly the result of taking a look at earlier versions and saying "wouldn't it be better if...", and then acting on it. There are a few steps backwards though, the biggest one for me being the incomprehensible mutilating of Expos�. Fortunately there's a nice hack which restores the correct behavior (and makes the dock look better), but it's a little annoying to have to re-apply that after every update.
--Eric
more...
superfula
Apr 29, 05:09 PM
You're mixing up your kernels. NT 4.0 doesn't share a kernel with 95/98, NT 3.51 doesn't share a kernel with Windows 3.x...
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
katanna
Jan 7, 09:18 PM
lol, I get back from out of town for the weekend and my little post has exploded and my dream has been filed.
Thanks guys!!!
Matthew
Thanks guys!!!
Matthew
more...
chrmjenkins
Dec 13, 07:51 PM
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
BRLawyer
Sep 12, 04:41 AM
So, let me see...for those of us NOT living in the US, what do we have?
Movie Store - NOT available (downloading movies is not my cup of tea anyway);
Streaming device for movies bought in the iTMS - NOT available as well
New Nanos with SAME capacity?? - No, thanks...
I was going to receive a (female) friend tonight, but she postponed for tomorrow...so this means I will have instead a big "yawning" session tonight at Apple news/rumor sites, with few things applicable to people outside of the US...move along, citizens... :(
Movie Store - NOT available (downloading movies is not my cup of tea anyway);
Streaming device for movies bought in the iTMS - NOT available as well
New Nanos with SAME capacity?? - No, thanks...
I was going to receive a (female) friend tonight, but she postponed for tomorrow...so this means I will have instead a big "yawning" session tonight at Apple news/rumor sites, with few things applicable to people outside of the US...move along, citizens... :(
more...
finkmacunix
Apr 29, 07:58 PM
Why all the iCal/Address Book hate? I find it looks awesome!
citizenzen
Apr 17, 09:52 AM
:rolleyes: there is no time available to teach this ...
Everybody stop doing stuff.
History's all full now.
Everybody stop doing stuff.
History's all full now.
more...
fr33 loader
Jan 10, 11:01 PM
Hahaha, that would be hilarious! C'mon guys, seriously. No harm done.
Unless you are the one standing and giving the presentation. The wasted manpower to fix it. Money to use the stage for certain alloted time. Negative effect on brand name thinking it was a real malfunction on the TV set. All of this to gain what?:(
Unless you are the one standing and giving the presentation. The wasted manpower to fix it. Money to use the stage for certain alloted time. Negative effect on brand name thinking it was a real malfunction on the TV set. All of this to gain what?:(
bazzalisk
Oct 3, 03:17 PM
Merrom MBP ;p
more...
macteo
Apr 29, 03:55 PM
Yeah, I preferred the iOS scrollbars, and the slider buttons.
Why Apple did it?
Why Apple did it?
i0Nic
Jan 10, 10:59 AM
iPhone will be release in Australia within the next month (end of Feb by the latest) only on the Telstra network. Unfortunately Telstra has exclusive rights for the iPhone, so the product will be awesome (e.g. being Apple) but the service provider will be crap....
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
Umm is this for real? I would've thought Australia wouldn't get the iPhone until the 3G version is out.
I think I will still hold out for the next version, even though I am keen on getting an iphone.
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
Umm is this for real? I would've thought Australia wouldn't get the iPhone until the 3G version is out.
I think I will still hold out for the next version, even though I am keen on getting an iphone.
porcupine8
May 4, 09:27 PM
You're getting negative votes on your post just because people here know that Apple will never do that, but I think I have to agree with you. I mean I own the iPad 1 now and love it, but I'd love it even more if I could write on it with a pen. It would be amazing for taking notes. I can't take notes by typing on the thing, I still have to bring a notebook (as in an actual notebook, made of paper lol) or my MacBook.
Have you actually tried any of the styli out there with the notetaking apps? I balked at first because it looks like no way could it work, but now I love writing in Notes Plus with my Targus stylus (same as the boxwave). It's surprisingly fluid, and I've heard that other apps do an even better job.
Have you actually tried any of the styli out there with the notetaking apps? I balked at first because it looks like no way could it work, but now I love writing in Notes Plus with my Targus stylus (same as the boxwave). It's surprisingly fluid, and I've heard that other apps do an even better job.
173080
Oct 7, 08:09 PM
Wonder what the stairway leads to?
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
Heaven. Oh wait... :D
leroypants
Apr 8, 03:53 PM
It's still pretty ******.
If I walk into a Best Buy and to buy a product that's for sale, knowing full well they have it in stock but they just want to "hold it" for something, I'd be pissed.
How pissed do you think people would be when they get the Sunday ad and see a guaranteed minimum of 20 ipads, travel to the store only to find out they only have 3 instock because they sold 17 on Saturday? They hold a certain amount because the Sunday ads say they have a minimum in stock.
If I walk into a Best Buy and to buy a product that's for sale, knowing full well they have it in stock but they just want to "hold it" for something, I'd be pissed.
How pissed do you think people would be when they get the Sunday ad and see a guaranteed minimum of 20 ipads, travel to the store only to find out they only have 3 instock because they sold 17 on Saturday? They hold a certain amount because the Sunday ads say they have a minimum in stock.
Illuminated
Apr 6, 12:48 PM
You'd pair food with a trash can? :confused:
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
Um, a brand new trash can. Plus you would have to burn inside of the trashcan first...pretty much build a fire inside it using coals and wood.
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
Um, a brand new trash can. Plus you would have to burn inside of the trashcan first...pretty much build a fire inside it using coals and wood.
roadbloc
Mar 13, 04:34 AM
Transition.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
gugy
Sep 26, 11:45 AM
Ignore me if you wish, but I'm pretty sad about not getting the machine promised by the rumour mill. I'm happy for y'all with your updated photo software, but wouldn't you have liked it to be true that we'd get a nice new C2D MBP to use it on?
That's the whole point.
people just expect too much. Since they announced Photokina I was just being realistic and expecting things relate to photography. Maybe I am the only one.
The problem is that everybody starts making these crazy predictions and they get all pissed after.
We still have 17 minutes before 10am PT so hope exists for a Tuesday MBP update. if not there is always another Tuesday coming up the following week.:rolleyes:
That's the whole point.
people just expect too much. Since they announced Photokina I was just being realistic and expecting things relate to photography. Maybe I am the only one.
The problem is that everybody starts making these crazy predictions and they get all pissed after.
We still have 17 minutes before 10am PT so hope exists for a Tuesday MBP update. if not there is always another Tuesday coming up the following week.:rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment