Somebody please explain to me what new browsers have that a car manufacturing corporation needs for its daily business. Flash games? WebGL? Or a bit lower, popup-blocker and google search field?
HELLO?
Obviously this entry is for unexperienced people of the IT, which neglect the fact that your stuff is only safe as long someone hasn't found it's weakness.
"Obviously this entry is for unexperienced people of the IT"
They are giving the unexperianced wrong information and making them misinformed. If they want to help the unexperianced, they shouldn't tell them that a secure experience can be guaranteed with IE6. They should encourage them to use modern browsers which are still regularly supported with security patches.
honey you DID read it's in their B2B folder? So this is for BUSINESS TO BUSINESS and they want to interact in a secure way with small companies which probably have 0 IT professionals and old software.
He only proves you wrong. The fact that is for B2B doesn't change a damn thing, false and dangerous information is false and dangerous information, and in fact EVEN MORE SO, since it is addressed to "small companies which probably have 0 IT professionals and old software".
you don't get it, right? You already ARE a customer even BEFORE you agree to something which they don't abide. They use YOU even if you don't like it ..
Yeah - when I saw that after watching the Take This Lollipop video, which is an extremely well-done fake, I immediately lumped this one into the "cool special effects, but not real" category.
So ... this is actually real? If so, that's pretty awesome :)
although I like people who use facts, please enlighten me, how do they cook their food? And why is there such a huge desertification in countries with an exploding population? And if hunger is so bad for a population, how did Sudan manage to multiply it's population by 20 within the last 100 years?
Sorry if my 6-sentence post failed to provide encyclopedic coverage of the issue. (Snarky start aside...)
I'm a bit confused by the prevalence of the "so how do they cook it?" question in such discussions when I point out that one can live sustainably, if not well, on very little. It's as though many have never gone camping and cooked over a fire. Gas/electric stoves and metal cookware are recent developments which humans got by without for a long time - and many still do. For starters, shish-kabobs come to mind for cooking veggies on a stick.
In a cramped/austerity situation, little actually needs cooking, given that much can be either eaten raw, or just dried and eaten straight or reconstituted as needed. What needs cooking can be over a fire using the dried inedible remainder of the plants. Stir-fry Solar ovens are not hard to build. High-tech solutions, at the other extreme, could provide very efficient heat sources. (We need not abandon high- and future-tech for high-population-density scenarios; to the contrary, there would be great motivation to advance technology to match demands for efficiency.)
Desertification correlating with population growth? Will have to look into it more. Causation is not obvious (which influences which how & more?). Seems people _are_ figuring out how to feed a population with little resources, translating to sustainability with small per-capita footprint.
BTW: Gladwell's "Outliers" spends a lot of time researching how ancient/remote/low-tech/cramped/austerity populations managed to feed themselves with few farming resources. For one, Japanese rice farming was a tour-de-force of squeezing as many calories out of a very limited space per capita. Worth a read.
Desertification often results from destroying native trees and grasses so you can find plenty of older instances. EX: The US Dust Bowl in the 1930's all the way back to Egypt the Late Lower Paleolithic due to pigs.
and another uncertainty is the deforestation these Europeans then made to build their new homes on the other continent. Considering how the Buffalos almost died out they weren't that ecofriendly ..
- A log scale is far better than a linear one. While it's not top-end limited, it does tend to flatten the scale markedly.
- A decay function on older contributions is helpful. Especially if users start abusing the system. Bank karma, abuse system, run karma down slowly, with an eternal linear system. With a logrithmic decaying system, abuse degrades reputation far more rapidly.
- Other options are to rank users by percentile or other bases. Given the various problems of innate / explicit moderation / ranking (see A Better Wayto Rate Films: http://blog.goodfil.ms/blog/2011/10/07/a-better-way-to-rate-... ) an explicit percentile norming preserves meaningful distinctions (though individuals ratings may not be directly comparable).
I don't think encouraging activity is necessarily good. A lot of comments do not really contribute something useful to the discussion. I'd rather people just posted when they have something really useful or insightful to say. Less comments means less time wasted for the readers.
Ever watched both parts of "Die Nibelungen Saga" silent movie version from 1924 by Fritz Lang? After 4.5 hours reading these old letters you will hate them ..
There are not many countries better than that, because most politicians become "prostitutes of publicity" sooner or later. And in the parliament then 99% of the time they throw mud at other politicians, it's not about showing the best way to go - it derives to blocking all other ways.
