Oh yeah all the ones from fbi-official-investigation@gmail.com telling you the FBI has caught you doing something and you need to send $500 through Western Union?
I almost got in trouble for not paying the dentist though, but I never gave them consent for using my email for billing so I wrote those of as phishing too
@Margarine I dunno. I like ghosts in (some) horror movies, but I was recently told that my 'suspension of disbelief' is really bad. So ... Yeah. Ghosts aren't real or a problem to me :P
@Margarine So is "seeing" only when something reflects enough visible light in daylight conditions? If you can only see something with bright enough light shining on it, is that not "seeing"? What if it produces its own light? Is that not "seeing"?
For AFM it makes sense to say that it's not really seeing, because it involves a machine physically touching the atom and generating a computer image of what it feels, but in this case, every photon that you are seeing is coming from one atom.
@Margarine If there are a trillion atoms all releasing a few photons, you would say you can see it (a spec of dust, for example). How is that different from one atom releasing a lot of photons?
@Margarine Literally everything you see right now is atoms absorbing then emitting. :P
It's just that this one atom is emitting enough photons that we are capable of seeing it, whereas otherwise one atom would not emit nearly enough to cause a response.
@Margarine Sure it is, but that one atom behaves the same way to our perception as a macroscopic object. It is subject to depth perception, the opponent process in the retina allows us to perceive an aggregate wavelength, etc.
The trick is to abuse the stochastic bits of the compensator to compute really complicated probabilities and then try to infer something useful from which outcome is the most probable.
You put some atoms in here and there and if you're really, really gentle with them, you can close your eyes and when you open them, they'll be rearranged!
Reviewing (together with interlinking existing content) is one of the key tasks for the SO community now that the site is past its initial growth stage. And the infamous overload of review queues and other community feedback shows that the current mechanism for that task is not efficient enough.
...
You get more points answering than dupe-closing, and it's easier
user302202
8:57 PM
> UPDATE: We can now confirm that our investigation suggests the requests in question affected approximately 250 public network users. Affected users will be notified by us.
user302202
There we have it, an update to the update of security update.
I worked with someone who did all his dev work on an ancient Windows 2000 machine. Whenever he wasn't on ancient Windows, he was using an even more ancient UNIX machine. Everything he did on there, he pushed to prod.
It doesn't actually harm the computer but it does download hundreds of empty WMV files, and loudly plays audio saying "hey everyone, I'm watching gay porno".
Some of the tricks it used don't work on modern browsers anymore though, like controlling the position of a popup window in real time. You have no idea how frustrating it is to have a window with horribly offensive contents pop up which literally runs away from your mouse when you try to navigate to the X to close it.
The creators used to register a bunch of sites with benign names like feenode (typo of freenode) or wikipaste or biogspot (typo of blogspot) and put LM on it.
If you think that's the worst animation built in to chat, try executing the Wheel of Blame Easter egg. (It's there in SE, you just need a helper script to access it, or you can manually type in the commands in your JS console.)
@forest The same could be said for closure: "If something gets closed so many times, it should just stay closed." (Equal number of times closed and reopened = 2).
