US defence forces no match for the unstoppable fiend known as Reply-All
theregister.com
theregister.com
But good luck replacing it.
Random idea: Add a few commands to ESMTP, which allow the mail server to tentatively accept an e-mail for delivery, then examine the message, then either handle it normally...or, optionally, do some basic back-and-forth with the sender. "Do you really want to sent this to 17,000 recipients?" "Your 50MB attachment is too large for reliable delivery." "Your system has the Zandu-j84 virus; an alert was sent to the IT Dept." Etc.
I feel comfortable telling you because most of your content isn't inflammatory, so I fear you might have been wrongly filtered out.
i encourage others to question this behavior and vouch gratuitously, otherwise we'll hivemind ourselves. when vc stops being en vogue, hn loses about 50% of its luster, and whats left will rely on the quality and diversity of discussion here. the day will come where yc shits the bed and there is someone new, don't leave yourself without a nerd community if/when that happens by encouraging samethink.
edit: now the user's <5 minute old grey posts are un-vouchable. this is fucking pathetic
They will be polite and responsive even if you both don’t agree on something.
Remember eg the battle of RISC vs CISC?
These days we accept that a reduced instruction set is a better idea, but those bloated instruction sets barely take up any any space on the chip anymore compared to all the caching we do.
Why is vsync still a thing? Originally it came from how broadcast TV worked with CRTs, but the fundamental technologies are different today. Yet, we still update the entire screen, all at once, on a fixed rate timer with blanking intervals[0]. I'm certainly not an expert in how LCDs work, but my understanding is that there is no fundamental reason we cannot update different parts of the screen at completely different rates or on-demand. We just don't do that, because the convention is a stream of pixel data from top left to bottom right.
Or take process memory isolation and remapping. There's a lot of overhead there, and the whole thing looks like a solution to make a program think it has all the memory to itself and no other processes exist, and then we have to work around that specially to let them share it, and still have to add extra complication to deal with malicious jumps, and now timing attacks. What if there were a better way, so long as your programs didn't essentially act like they were running on a Commodore 64?
What could something like Unicode look like if it had never had to deal with any kind of legacy nonsense, han unification, or the UCS2/UTF-16 debacle? Oh and if it didn't have such an obsession with emoji.
Those are just off the top of my head. Undoubtedly my lack of expertise in these domains means I'm probably missing or misunderstanding some things, but I think there is practical value in occasionally re-examining all of our assumptions and starting from scratch.
[0] Free/Gsync exists now, but we still update the entire screen.
The unusable, highly orthogonal, composable sets are more efficient than the usable, interdependent, all in one piece instructions. At least with our current compiler tech.
I have no idea what the military are using these days. They mention Outlook in the article so I assume they are using O365 or whatever it was renamed to. O365 has the ability to write rules based on AD group membership to limit who can mass email. Perhaps the military can temporarily take away those permissions until people have had training.
Something of nearly zero importance to the army. What were they going to do, send paratroopers at it?
>Second, it was quite clearly far from a wise use of military resources.
While true, I doubt this caused a significant waste of resources.
The third issue is fair.
The original source opinion piece seems better than this writeup.
I think the balloon was flying at 60,000 feet. I'm not qualified to know if paratroopers can operate at that altitude, but it sounds tough. They'd need oxygen at the very least.
It would certainly make for a cool scene in a movie, although it seems pointless?
In military operations, HALO is also used for delivering equipment, supplies, or personnel, while HAHO is generally used exclusively for personnel. In typical HALO/HAHO insertions the troops jump from altitudes between 15,000 and 35,000 feet (4,600 and 10,700 m). Military parachutists will often reach a terminal velocity of 126 mph (203 km/h), allowing for a jump time under two minutes.
...
All types of parachuting techniques are dangerous, but HALO/HAHO carry special risks. At high altitudes (greater than 22,000 feet or 6,700 metres), the partial pressure of oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere is low. Oxygen is required for human respiration and lack of pressure can lead to hypoxia. Also, rapid ascent in the jump aircraft without all nitrogen flushed from the bloodstream can lead to decompression sickness, also known as caisson disease or "the bends".
---
You'll note that the numbers there are much less than 60,000 feet.
The altitude here is closer to the ceiling for the U2 spy plane (famously known for being high altitude) at 70,000 or so feet.
For further context with the U2, here's the pilot suit required to operate at those altitudes - https://www.afcent.af.mil/Units/380th-Air-Expeditionary-Wing...
I'm aware, I was just playing along.
But ok, a sidewinder shot from a Apache flying at the top of his ceiling should do the job as well. My personal pet theory so is, that some USAF pilot wants to become a fighter ace of aces for balloons and is using his political connections within the USAF and the Pentagon to lobby for enough balloon shoot downs to get there. Come thinking of it, maybe it is the USAF fighter pilot community launching those balloons themselves???
Yes. I recently had to explain that to my bank. Now I have the names and email addresses of all my fellow customers of the bank.
Meta question:
How many folks, or at what age cut-off, know what the "CC" stands for? And how many know where the 'carbon copy' term comes from?
For those that don't know:
> A sheet of carbon paper is placed between two or more sheets of paper. The pressure applied by the writing implement (pen, pencil, typewriter or impact printer) to the top sheet causes pigment from the carbon paper to reproduce the similar mark on the copy sheet(s). More than one copy can be made by stacking several sheets with carbon paper between each pair. Four or five copies is a practical limit. The top sheet is the original and each of the additional sheets is called a carbon copy.
If I receive an email because it's part of a mailing list it should be in 'To' or in 'Cc'.
Otherwise I have no way of filtering out the email based on its origin.
Here is an archive link [1]
[1] - https://archive.ph/6TBGB