One human death is a tragedy
A million is merely a statistic.
Obvious analogy is obvious.
2662 publicly visible posts • joined 8 Nov 2007
> He could set up here and run an empire of convenience stores and textile shops (no offense intended but that is a common asian / arab business venture and there is nothing at all wrong with that, admirable in fact)
I'm sure not. It's the height of Britishness, after all. At least according to Napoleon.
Hmm.. Come to think of it, that mightn't have been meant as a compliment. Tally ho, what what!
package BPI::Cake;
use Quantum::Entanglement;
sub new { bless { state => entangle( 1=> "have cake", 1=> "eat cake" ) }, shift; }
sub measure { print shift -> {state}, "\n"; }
1; # don't lie
Of course, as much as the BPI would like for this to work, the superposition only works so long as the situation is unobserved. As soon as the value is actually measured, the cake superposition will collapse into having one particular value, as demonstrated by successive runs...
# Assume module stored in BPI.pm in current directory
perl -I. -w -e 'use BPI; my $cake=BPI::Cake->new; $cake->measure'
(Perl, eh? Is there anything it can't do?)
dollar million dollar lottery? ahem.
>That's a lot of money for developers and a da*n good incentive!
No, Mr. Anonymous (if that is indeed your real name) Coward, it's not a *fucking* (/Francais entendu/) good incentive. It's like any other promotional contest, where the company that sets it up is looking for two things: free publicity, and as many schmucks as possible to either talk up the brand or do actual, unpaid, work for the company. I don't care whether this is a beauty contest or a lottery (and you don't even seem to know yourself), the chance of actually winning any money out of this are somewhere between slim and zero. If you're the sort of guy whose reason for continuing to exist every week depends on the possibility that you *might* win a lottery, then by all means knock yourself out. I suppose the rest of us will just have to live with the idea that some idiot cretin is going to win the money. Life goes on.
Jeez, don't astroturfers even *try* to come up with convincing patter these days?
I wonder if maybe you've made the classic mistake of thinking that because your PC has an "ethernet" device, that the web somehow lives in the twilight world of the ether. In fact, this is not the case. The Magnificent Mesh Mondial exists in this plane of existence, and can in fact be "sensored" using mundane this-worldly devices.
> If a message has no validity than there are no followers
You've never met any God-botherers (to cite one among *many* delusional beliefs), I take it? Unfortunately people prefer to believe things they want to believe, the evidence (or lack thereof) be damned.
> If you don't like the channel, change it.
Ah, "consumer choice" ... the pinnacle of western Democracy! Shame about the attention span.
> ... messiahs ... nothing more than terrorists.
You should probably learn to save hyperbole for when you really need it...
Everybody has their taste in noises as well as in other matters; and sounds are quite innoxious, or most distressing, by their sort rather than their quantity. When Lady Russell not long afterwards, was entering Bath on a wet afternoon, and driving through the long course of streets from the Old Bridge to Camden Place, amidst the dash of other carriages, the heavy rumble of carts and drays, the bawling of newspapermen, muffin-men and milkmen, and the ceaseless clink of pattens, she made no complaint. No, these were noises which belonged to the winter pleasures; her spirits rose under their influence; and like Mrs Musgrove, she was feeling, though not saying, that after being long in the country, nothing could be so good for her as a little quiet cheerfulness.
I remember an article from comp.risks many years ago about a couple having sex when they inadvertently hit the redial button on the phone next to the bed. IIRC, the phone was a kind of speakerphone, so the last person to have been dialled (the woman's mother) was privy to all the kinds of ambient grunting and groaning sounds you would imagine. Believing her daughter to be in trouble (I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but I think she recognised the voice rather than having caller ID), she called the police to investigate. Red faces all round, as you would expect...
I haven't been able to find the article in question (probably on a backup tape somewhere)... actually, scratch that... here's a link (in case anyone worried I was setting you up for an urban legend with a ring of truth):
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.risks/tree/browse_frm/month/1994-07?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fcomp.risks%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F1994-07%3F&
mentions "13cm of American-sized buns". Was wondering if it was a subtle dig at American largeness, but 13cm "buns" would be abnormally small (unless you work for Ralph Lauren, I suppose). So I guess it's not a paradoy, though why they think largeness (or Win7, for that matter) is a selling point, I've no idea.
re: meat patties, the ad actually says "beef patties"... so not quite as disgusting-sounding. Shame that the picture does that job all by itself.
PS this is far from the only strange re-imagining of western food out there. Pizza with mashed potatoes comes to mind as one of the odder dishes I've come across...
> On *Nix, nothing that is downloaded is executable."
Not quite true. Haven't you seen stuff like:
wget http://example.com/progs/script.sh && sh ./script.sh
Plus, just because you download a tarball and do sh ./configure && make, does that really mean that you've examined the code to make sure that no evil was lurking within? Or, indeed, have you actually set your umask so that downloaded files *don't* have the executable bit set?
I know I'm being pedantic, and almost beside the point. But don't rule out the possibility of doing stupid things on *nix systems either. You don't have to go as far as Denis Ritchie's Reflections on Trust to come up with ways of duping a *nix admin. The smug attitude that you're above such deceptions as tainted downloads or that your machine is practically immune to viral code could be the fatal step before your downfall...
To be fair to Microsoft here, it's pretty clear that user stupidity or momentary lapse of judgement on their part is the main problem. Put these users on a Linux or BSD system, and you'll still see them falling for tricks like I mentioned above.
That's not to say that I agree with the article, mind. It's a pretty pathetic piece of trollbait, if you ask me. I'm not saying that MS doesn't deserve flak for its laissez-fair attitude to security, but why doesn't the article heap equal blame at the foot of the banks? Trollbait, as I said...
As I understand it, all searches on compromised machines go through the one IP address, but that doesn't mean that that same IP address has to be the one that makes the queries to Google. Could be a multi-homed machine, could use proxies. Could even route the requests back through infected machines, for all that.
Are you even sure, though, that Google actually implements the system you're talking about? How would it handle large networks behind NAT gateways and IP address changes to said gateways?
I can just imagine the new marketing literature...
Anouncing the new digital loom from the leader in clacking technology. Based on innovative new floor-space layouts and inter-loom conveyancing techniques, our new loom achieves clacking rates equivalent to 1 million Jacquard-Acres. Each warp is capable of simultaneously handling over 700 wefts, so even your most complex designs can be programmed without the need for hand weaving.
etc...
They may want to consider dropping that new-fangled "Fermi" name, though. Maybe call it the GargantuRood or something more in keeping.
Will the Register have an exciting follow up where a malware author uses "advanced stegonography" by putting the commands in a Jpeg/PNG/GIF comment section with a "sophisticated self-identification mechanism" (ie, a "start-of-message" indicator at the start, and an "end of messsage" indicator along with a checksum at the end). When you do get around to writing that article, don't forget to mention that the message contents are "encrypted" with a "variable key" (stored right after the start of message indicator, and used to XOR the command data, natch).
Surely a mere exposition of facts in response to a specific question doesn't warrant copyright protection? Also, what's the actual legal status of click-through licenses? Obviously content providers would love it if they were enforceable, and love to act as if they have legal validity, but has this ever been tested in court?