https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from...
Edit: Also, the president of Crime Prevention Research Center is John Lott, who's a known gun rights advocate. Your source does not seem to be very impartial.
https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from...
Edit: Also, the president of Crime Prevention Research Center is John Lott, who's a known gun rights advocate. Your source does not seem to be very impartial.
1. Male underachievement and lack of identity is happening elsewhere. Certainly in Canada. 2. Mass shootings are not happening everywhere
I think there is a much simpler explantion for male mass shooters: men commit vastly more crime. America has a cultural tendency for mass shooting crime, so it shouldn't be surprising men dominate that crime like they do the rest.
Maybe fixing male identity would do it, but that's far from a given, and given international experience it doesn't seem to be the direct cause. (Men committed most crime even when they were confident in their identity)
The more likely cause is the legal structure around gun ownership in the United States.
> The more likely cause is the legal structure around gun ownership in the United States.
Gun ownership may be an enabler in mass shootings, but I don't believe it's the cause. Merely having a gun doesn't automatically make you a mass murderer. There are other underlying issues there. Not that that means the U.S. shouldn't do something about the legal structure around gun ownership. It's probably going to be much much harder to actually address the underlying cause.
That would seem rather detached from reality.
It is for Whatsapp. Not only for sign-up, but actually all communication on the web version goes through the app running on your phone. The web "session" times out constantly, so I'd have to re-pair it with my phone all the time. If I still decided to use whatsapp.
Is it just the container devs dont know routing ?
How are skin color and gender relevant to the article or the point being made?
Is the author implying that white males are to blame for draconic / legalistic Wikipedia?
Has the author proven that draconic wikipedia editting is a bad thing?
Does the author show, in a mere three words) that they're both racist and sexist? (answer: yes).
I like how the author negates the entire point of their article just by casually mentioning thier unproven, unfounded bias. This person's thoughts are not worth anybody's time.
Obviously no one would ever run something like this 1 vm per request thing irl.
I can see plenty of use-cases for doing just that. Large uploads, time-consuming request/responses such as server-side data processing, RPC, as a backend behind a caching front-end so that it only has to respond to invalidated cache entries, etc.
I don't see many people using this to actually serve general website requests though. It'd probably be modified to serve multiple requests until nothing is left to do and then exit.
> For example, cracks have been found in the turbine blades of the high pressure oxygen turbopump. Are they caused by flaws in the material, the effect of the oxygen atmosphere on the properties of the material, the thermal stresses of startup or shutdown, the vibration and stresses of steady running, or mainly at some resonance at certain speeds, etc.? How long can we run from crack initiation to crack failure, and how does this depend on power level? Using the completed engine as a test bed to resolve such questions is extremely expensive. One does not wish to lose an entire engine in order to find out where and how failure occurs. Yet, an accurate knowledge of this information is essential to acquire a confidence in the engine reliability in use. Without detailed understanding, confidence can not be attained.
I'm not sure that would be my takeaway from that quote. In the analogy of Unit testing, the test would have found the cracks in the turbine blades. It seems to me that Feynman continuously argues for deep investigation into any problems encountered, rather than (seemingly) ignoring them or making up excuses for why they're not problems.
He regards independent code verifications and testing highly, it seems:
> The software is checked very carefully in a bottom-up fashion. First, each new line of code is checked, then sections of code or modules with special functions are verified. The scope is increased step by step until the new changes are incorporated into a complete system and checked. This complete output is considered the final product, newly released. But completely independently there is an independent verification group, that takes an adversary attitude to the software development group, and tests and verifies the software as if it were a customer of the delivered product. There is additional verification in using the new programs in simulators, etc. A discovery of an error during verification testing is considered very serious, and its origin studied very carefully to avoid such mistakes in the future.
I'd consider this quote a clear argument for unit testing though:
> There is additional verification in using the new programs in simulators, etc.
In the end, it seems to come down to the simple concept of: spending more time on verifying code results in better code. Whether it is through automated testing, code reviews, independent (and competent) user acceptance testing, etc.
They sent some awfully scary letters for what amounts to legally obtaining an ISO file.
In other words, such things are considered low-hanging fruit by these companies. Just throw it out there and see what sticks.
Err. That's pretty much every implementation of 2FA around the world.
Why isn't this more well known ?
Guess what the send you when you forget your 2FA or password? Yep, an SMS. So out the door goes the whole point of 2FA. Your three factors (account name / email address + password + Google Authenticator) have now been reduced to one factor: your email address.
I can rent a mobile tower in Malaysia or some other asian country, advertise your phonenumber as roaming there for about €10/h and start intercepting all your shit. Or just get your telco's inept service dept to forward your number somewhere else.
Lessons here:
1. Even the giants get it wrong. 2. There is no security anywhere in the tech world. Literally everything is broken. Your electronic car locks / starter system, your phone, your internet, everything is horribly horribly horribly broken beyond any imagining, even for hyper-tech savvy people. 3. Remove your phonenumber as a backup device from your google account and never use it as a backup device every again.