jimwhitson
jimwhitson on Hacker News
Not only a losing battle, but one lost many centuries ago.
IANAL, but I think "knowledge ... a crime" means a particular crime, not a general category. So if you reasonably suspect that your work might be useful to criminals, that's not conspiracy, but as soon as one particular criminal tells you he intends to use your software for a particular crime, you're a conspirator unless you report him to the authorities. So honest cryptographers have nothing to fear, unless a criminal tells them about his crypto-assisted crimes and they don't report it.
The OED defines sarcasm as 'a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt'. Irony is often used in a sarcastic remark, but it's generally the cheap sort of irony - 'Well done, genius' in response to a stupid error - rather than the more literary sort, which when particularly well-developed we call satire.
In the UK, 'free-range' is a legal designation, as opposed to battery-farmed. To call eggs or poultry free-range, certain standards must be met - not very high standards, but enough to exclude stacked-cage-based methods. We also have various other marks defined by other bodies: some companies (e.g. Marks & Spencer, a supermarket chain) define an in-house standard, some are defined by charities (e.g. the RSPCA, a bird conservancy), and so on.
I suppose similar things exist in the US?
This has been my experience as well. Truly free-ranging hens give the best eggs, often almost up to the quality of ducks' eggs. Interestingly I find very little perceptible difference between the eggs of different breeds (once cooked at least), but roasted cocks of different breeds taste vastly different.
I'd call this person a technical writer, and it's a pretty tough job to fill. I have some experience in this area, so if you'd like to talk about options feel free to email me -
[email protected].
By the GP's definition there are a lot of us hobby programmers. I used to write code to run on all kinds of weird servers, SPARCs, IBM POWER kit, ARM dev boards and so on - I hate to think how a non-hobby programmer would have approached that job...
Here's an example, but it's hardly scholarly:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/LessWrong.
You're right that it doesn't get discussed much, I think largely because the explanatory material is dense and rather turgid, so would-be critics don't get far enough to make meaningful criticisms; that's certainly the case for me.
All the comments have a 'reply' link for me - is it still broken for you?
Very interesting - I've had the 'you are x and I claim my five pounds' applied to me before, but the good captain is new to me. Having been to school an hour from Sevenoaks, I at first suspected someone who knows me, but thanks to google I see I can rest easy. Thanks for prompting an amusing bit of reading.
I'd also mention that it's in Leeds - even if I'd known the event was in the UK, I'd have assumed it was in London. Great to see this kind of thing in the North, keep up the good work.
I wouldn't buy this particular car, but that's because I detest microchips. In general I would - and do - pay money for products or features to decrease my chance of hurting other people; I see this as a fundamental part of living in society, a simple consequence of the Golden Rule.
> Flexibility in a language leads to flexibility of the mind. The English language's incredible variety, massive vocabulary, and huge range of idioms is of great benefit to those that speak it (while also making it difficult to learn). Subtlety in a language is a virtue, not a vice.
Indeed, but I think we're talking about language in two different ways: all your points are completely correct, but mainly of value to those who understand the language fairly well; my points were implicitly from the POV of a foreign learner trying to pick the language up.
As a native Anglophone, I love our freaky language, orthography and all. However, I try to keep reminding myself how horrible it is for new learners.
Although I broadly agree with your point about significant details, it's absolutely not the case that English 'isn't much of a problem'. English is an extraordinarily hard language for a foreign learner: the grammar is idiosyncratic and subtle, our use of prepositions is frankly bizarre, the orthography is about as difficult as they get, etc. etc. etc.. English is a dominant language for historical reasons, but it would be hard to choose a worse one on linguistic grounds.
I believe Ehrlich's tests for indoles, a family which includes tryptamines, but also lots of other things. Colour tests are never conclusive; increasingly persuasive results are usually obtained by combining several different colour tests, for example this post discussing LSD testing:
http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1101068&....
AIUI, the point is that a sane dose of LSD doesn't taste bitter, so if one rejects any bitter blotter then one would be erring on the side of caution - possibly rejecting perfectly good LSD due to a bitter ink or paper, but avoiding the great majority non-LSD psychedelics.
It's certainly preferable to identify a substance before tasting it, but it's not too late - spitting the paper out and rinsing the mouth out is likely at least to reduce the absorbed dose.
A perhaps more pressing problem is the risk of anxiety due to an innocently-bitter piece of blotter - I imagine a borderline-bad trip could be made much worse by a persistent fear that it would last >24h.
Of course, real caution would mean not eating anything cooked up by criminals in an illicit lab...
Indeed, but where the downside is getting an unwanted dose of something like DOB it's advisable to err on the side of caution.
The first part of your message is a rather dangerous misconception. Many, many drugs can and have been dispensed on blotter paper, often as LSD mimics. For dozens of examples, see DEA Microgram bulletins passim (
http://www.justice.gov/dea/pr/micrograms.shtml).
The point about bitterness is absolutely correct though, and certainly any purported LSD blotter that tastes bitter should be suspect.
Interestingly, at least one non-psychedelic has been found distributed on blotter paper: alprazolam (See http://www.justice.gov/dea/pr/micrograms/2008/mg0508.pdf), for which I'd tentatively expect the bitterness rule also to work.
Posted by
jimwhitson on Friday December 21, 2012 @02:43PM
from the indiegogo.com dept.
Very likely it's forbidden at some companies, but last time I left a job (IBM UK), DBANning all one's computers was a step on the official checklist. It seems to be a good idea for any company that allows its employees to use work computers for personal web browsing etc., as the employee then takes responsibility for his own private data, rather than trusting the company's IT admins to deal with it.
At IBM, we were very keen on what we called 'FFDC' - 'first- failure data capture'. This meant having enough layers of error-detection, ideally all the way down to the metal, so that failures could be detected cleanly and logged before (possibly) going down, allowing our devs to reproduce and fix customer bugs. Naturally it wasn't perfect, and it depending on lots of very tedious planning meetings, but on the stuff I worked with (storage devices mainly) it was remarkably effective.
In my experience in more 'agile' firms - startups, web dev shops and so on - it would be very hard to make a scheme like this work well, because of all the grinding bureaucracy, fiddly spec-matching and endless manual testing required, as well as the importance of controlling - and deeply understanding - the whole stack. Nonetheless, for infrastructure projects like Redis, I can see value in having engineering effort put explicitly into making 'prettier crashes'.
I suspect they've done it deliberately, to avoid having a malware link on their site. With the link as given, a reader would have to consciously change the 'x' for a 'p' to visit it, making it unlikely that anyone would do it accidentally.
Had I but votes enough and timeThank you, Thomas, for saving me writing a much less eloquent comment along the same lines. As a startup founder way out in the wilderness, I'm often equally amused and saddened by SV tales of woe. We must all keep reminding ourselves of the '48-year-old employee of a midwest factory being shut down', and try to keep a proper perspective on values.
Grover's algorithm does indeed look rather like magic, but even better is the geometrical proof - WP's description looks good at a quick skim. In my (fairly limited) experience, this sort of geometrical thinking is the best way to understand quantum algorithms intuitively.
Would it be overly conspiratorial to suggest that the CIA and NSA are in fact interested in a large-scale implementation of Shor's algorithm? Perhaps I underestimate how much use intelligence agencies have for optimization...
Abstract/linear algebra. I enjoyed it thoroughly at university but it never seemed very useful in practice, until I had to deal with a complex problem of manipulating graphs. All of a sudden I found semi-ring homomorphisms coming in handy again, and on the back of that realisation have made some very cool software.
The risky learning curve came when I had to revise all the stuff I'd half-forgotten, taking a few weeks out to do nothing but maths, in the hope that my hunch would pan out. It did pan out, and now I'm settling down to the long hard slog of exploiting it properly.
I've used Google's Merchant service to bill US customers and it worked very nicely for me.
Another one for the chorus of yesses. Single founders can and do build great businesses, but of course the dynamic can be rather different from a multi-founder firm. Although it's not a valley-style startup, I'm in the early stages of a solo software business in the UK, so feel free to get in touch if you're short of fellow-sufferers.
Posted by
jimwhitson on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @03:36PM
from the security.stackexchange.com dept.