Re: Wrong thread???
Seriously? You manage to pick up that you might be mistaken, but then couldn't be bothered to re-read the short article to see why you might be mistaken?
672 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Sep 2007
Given a hypothetical bomb that size, who says the objective has to be depressurization?
Even if it "only" managed to kill one person, do you really think the rational action afterwards would be to fly on to the scheduled destination? Especially since the crew wouldn't know if that was the only device on the plane.
Very few people of my generation wear wristwatches.
Really? A lot of my friends are unaware that you're their spokesman, then -- I've been getting questions about my watch, because people of your generation got tired of pulling out their phone to check the time.
Your downvotes, much like your tears, are delicious.
Ah, passive-aggressive hipsters, how predictable you are.
Atmospheric noise (and other sources) have been done, although I suppose you'd want a plugin device instead of a web site. To quote myself from over a year ago:
Other sites that have done this: Lavarnd (<http://www.lavarnd.org/>, yes, randomness from a lava lamp), Hotbits (<http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/>, "Genuine random numbers, generated by radioactive decay"), and Random.org (<http://www.random.org/>, which uses atmospheric noise).
but the really cool stuff is the cubesats (see the blog for one of them, for example).
And side-note, the Kickstarter project to propel objects like cubesats has succeeded .
Having said that, I do want a patch with the NRO logo.
Okay... I dislike our current copyright system, and bravo to Australia for shining a light on TPPA negotiations, but "running the US software industry into the ground"? Cite, please?
Speaking of citations, crediting the National Commission on Excellence in Education's famous quote to Jerry Pournelle says something about your own education.
Damn. Does that make me part of an identifiable demographic?
Not at all. There are no thought police in Canada.
Of all the anniversary articles The Reg has presented so far, this is by far the best. BBC special effects manged to do a lot with very little, and one of the reasons for that is the sound that accompanied them.
The theme song itself is still a marvel and the admiration I have for Derbyshire for creating the "orchestra" that played it is limitless.
Yes, the problem with judging the best is that one has to also consider the quality of the scripts. I think Peter Davidson could easily have ranked higher in viewers' estimations if the script quality hadn't started dropping around that time.
(Is it my imagination or did Davidson get saddled with a large number of scripts with downer endings, including Tegan's departure?)
I came in with Tom Baker, and still rank him highly, but I really like Smith, who seems to have incorporated much of what I like about Baker and Troughton in his performance.
None if you live in a well-lit city, but in more remote areas the ability to have the home lights on before you get home is a plus.
The internet-lightbulb is something of a straw dog anyway. The question is rather "what devices would it make sense to remotely control", and while the fanboi-types will certainly go overboard, in my case the ability to remotely monitor the temperature (and choose to turn on the air-conditioning) would be a plus for example. Or to turn on the outdoor lights.
Hmm. They have Sargon Chess. I remember when it was famous, and I even have the book with the source code in it (yes, a published book with Z80 source code listings). They specify 1981 in the listings, so presumably it has some improvements over the 1978 version.
(For those who want to look it up [good luck], it's Sargon: A Computer Chess Program by Dan and Kathe Spracklen, ISBN 0-8104-5155-7.)
Obviously an asymmetric design needs to be the choice. So that gives us the ones by Dirk Duckhorn, Gareth Jenkins, and ... Ariadne.
(Nit pickers will mention the ones by Adrian Lynch and Marten Erdelen, I consider those to be symmetries of a different sort.)
Obviously this means that combined with the groundswell of opinion offered by your other posters, Adriane is the clear front-runner.
Honestly, the notion that I could pound like a gorilla is actually flattering.
Somewhat relevant: 1971 American Tourister commercial.
"Starting fractured is not great."
Except, as Steve Knox pointed out above: "A few variations of the same CPU architecture and a few variations of the same general GPU architecture?"
As someone who prefers ATI/AMD's offerings, I'd actually prefer a bit more fracturing.
As for Thorium and fusion, those will be interesting in the future ...
Fusion, yeah well, I'm still hoping to see it within my lifetime. Thorium though is for all practical puroses here: CANDU reactors would have no trouble making use of it (the adjustments that I can see being necessary have to do with the level of heat capture, there may be others).
No, I mean another passive or low power display tech. One which does proper colour.
They exist, although currently the color is so washed out as to be almost indistinguishable from grey scale. The reviews so far have been uniformly low.
It's a technology that isn't quite ready yet. Presumably it will get better given a few years. I know that I'd trade in my e-reader the moment even a four-color screen appeared.
Here is a real-world example of what happens to security when you have blinders on:
http://trac.filezilla-project.org/ticket/5530
A gaping security hole has existed in a popular open source tool for literally years because the maintainers just can't accept that they have a weakness.
Ouch. I was completely unaware of this, and I've used FileZilla. Thank you for the heads-up.
No, you dont. I studied cryptography back then, and I remembered that some company, was it Netscape?, used the space left on the hard disk as one of the inputs to create random numbers. They used "PC noise", that is for sure. It seems you have not read the same story as I did.
Please don't mix and match stories. I was referring to your reference to Knuth's mixed-input RNG, and nothing else. Obviously, his conclusion, which you used repeatedly and wrongly, had to do with linear congruential generators, and nothing else.
As for Netscapes's alleged use of a bad source of randomness, no one is disputing that bad sources of randomness exist. But that has nothing to do with Knuth's example, and has even less to do with current cryptographic random number generators, except as a cautionary tale. At best you are woefully out of date on the state of current technology.
I know of the story you're referring to, and you're mis-stating it. First, the "mixed sources" random number generator used linear congruential generators -- no PC noise, no cryptographic hashing, and no use of Blum, Micali, and Yao's paper published in 1984 (which is referenced in the current edition of Knuth, see page 179). Knuth argued that if you're going to use a LCG random number generator, use one -- don't mix them.
This obviously has nothing to do with the current situation, and has had nothing to do with modern cryptographic-level random number generators for twenty years now.
Do Knuth a favor. Stop misquoting him, and buy the latest edition of his The Art of Computer Programming. It is quite worth it.
Nylon? Not powdered sugar? I'm disappointed.
Well, maybe you can make smaller scale versions of your models to decorate your victory cakes.
Yup. Brief history courtesy of The Straight Dope: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/568/how-do-lava-lamps-work
Sure, and the reason one would want a 68000 chip is to run a MacOS. Oh, wait...
The x86 chips are not going away yet, true, and they may hold the lead for a very long time, but it's not guaranteed that they'll still hold the majority. What's going to drive chip choice now is the software that runs on it, and there are plenty of platforms that would be equally happy running on a PowerPC as on an x86 chip.
I think I'll wait until the Chicago Manual of Style weighs in.
Jokes aside, style guides can prevent a certain amount of irrational anger in a group coding effort. I have my preferred style, but setting up one's editor for the employer-of-the-month's style can save a lot of aggravation.
(Oh, and of course indentation should be done with tabs. This fad for indenting with spaces is troubling.)