This has happened before. Apple makes a product that is a little too much upscale and pricey for average joe, and fails miserably. Apple may be the Cadillac Of technology... However when they try to push out the Rolls Royce type of technology, it goes too far.
I can't see myself getting one for the price. 1. The next year or 2 it will be thinner, more powerful, and easier to use. For a watch I want something timeless. 2. How long can you have such a device until it is not supported by you other device. 3. I am not getting any real good features from it. The iPhone has became todays pocket watch. the Apple watch, only adds a minor convenience.
If it does success the apple watch 2 or 3 may be much more affordable under the $100 range where I can justify the expense.
The problem is most of the people do not like a group of people, and such business are allowed to refuse services, we can create a situation where the outcast group cannot use the goods and services they need to function/survive in society.
We need business to offer goods and services for us to function, otherwise we will spending all of our time on our own survival. Having businesses refuse business based on aspects people cannot control means your are forcing people from the society.
I found found, it isn't about technical skills, but stupid decisions made from a group think process. While prevalent in all sectors government is the biggest offenders because government culture of "It is the mistakes you make which can hurt you" vs. Private which focuses more on your success. So government spends a lot of its time trying to figure out how many ways something can fail catastrophically, which could hurt their career.
So for this case, I get the impression that they put in a funky system to try to prevent bots from filling out the paperwork, because if they hear that their website allows bots to fill out licenses they could get in trouble. I am guessing they added this near the last minute of the project so the page was designed differently. Causing this complex stupidness.
No it is partisan politics. If Hillary personal email server was really an issue, it would have brought up years ago before the start of the next presedential run. But because she is a political threat it is a good discression that the republicans can make a fuss about, and this time the media is on their side, because they want access to her personal email. While the media touts government transparency they really want to see if Hillary is on good terms with Bill.
Now if Hillary stunk up the bathroom. The republicans will deny that they would never do that.
Sigh. What a difference a few years make. I am a late gen x. And I would say the same thing but with DOS, and not having a hard disk drive and a CGA 4 color monitor. By the time windows 95 came out, I have already been hooked on Linux.
The problems with such rules, means the are plenty of work arounds,
In general booth babes are hired, because they know there are plenty of ongoers who still sexually are teenagers. And use them to attract people to their booth.
However what will happen they will have people dressed to fit the rules. However still be sexy, and they will flirt with the potentional customer anyways.
The spine was design to stay at an ideal location, with enough flexibility to accommodate movement. Our hands on the otherwise have joints and muscles designed for more purpose. However some activities, usually in the terms of fine movement, may put more strain than larger movements and grips.
Insightful? More like hippy liberal corporation bashing. Now this isn't some conservative rant. The FAA should be taking such things carefully, so not to cause problems. However, some of the rules are not focused on more agile aircraft development, where drones are involved there is less needs to verify personal safety, and changes to the drone technology shouldn't need as much screwenty. So unlike a Jet where they decided to change a component, as the safety of the pilot is a major concern, and such change should be completely reviewed. For a drone, just as long it fits in the recommended size and flight area it should be allowed more flexibility in changes without as much FAA review. Being that the overall risk of such changes is so small.
In general writing to RAM is faster than writing to the disk. However there are things that get in the way of both. 1. OS Memory Management: So you making a small memory string to a big one. So will the os fragment the string, when it comes up to an other systems reserved memory spot. Will it overwrite it (Buffer overflow), will it find a contiguous larger memory block and copy the data there. Will it copy and move the memory slots to a new location away from the memory. Will this be happening preemptively, or when the error condition occurs, will all this stuff happen with a cpu cycle that is not sharing with your app. Also if you are low on memory the system may dump it to the disk anyways.
2. OS Disk management: A lot of the same concerns that memory management has. However a bunch of small request is easier to find free space, then asking for a larger spot. So they may be more seek time.
3. Disk Caching: You tell the program to append to the disk. The OS sends the data to the drive, the drive responds back Yea I got it. then the OS goes back to handling your app, in the mean time your drive is actually spinning to save the data on the disk.
4. How your compiler handles the memory. Data = Data + "STRING" vs. Data+="STRING" vs Data.Append("STRING") vs { DataVal2=malloc(6); DataVal2="STRING"; DataRec->Next = *DataVal2; } You could be spending O(n) time saving your memory where you can be doing in in O(1)
Now sometime I do change my algorithm to write to the disk vs. handling it in memory. Mostly because the data I am processing is huge, and I much rather sacrifice speed, in order to insure that the data gets written.
Except for the fact that many of these representatives represent rural communities, where they need to travel miles to even see a local town government official, or police man. This stuff has limited impact on their lives. While the City Folk who see a Homeland security truck parked outside their home feel more threatened. They rural folk are more likely to see the PA as something that affects other people.
It appears crazy at first. But it was actually designed rather well as to not have your hand move from the core of the keyboard. As well vi was one of the first full screen editors. So a lot of terminals had inconsistent keys on the keyboard, you could only really trust the core set. The fact it was using the esc key was pushing it.
People where hostile to people with Cell phones in the 1980's, In college back in my day, if a student went to class with a Laptop we were hostile towards them. Portable technology takes a while to get into the culture.
Google keeps telling us what the future is going to be... the problem is that future is designed to profit Google. Well Duh! Google isn't going to try to push a product that will put them out of business?
In general Google Glass may or may not make it. However its failure doesn't mean the end. The Apple Newton failed too, from its experience and lessons learned it became the iPhone, and iPad.
The vast majority of students will never need to know how to analyse literature. The vast majority of students will never need to know about world history. The vast majority of students will never need to solve algebraic equations.
Learning to code, isn't about knowing the silly commands, but training your mind into solving problems by breaking them down into elementary instructions. It helps you understand the world and trains your mind into different ways of thinking.
I think we need to get off this GPA concept. Right now students with strong in Language skills, get a higher GPA than students who has strong analytical skills.
By keeping the system, such students with stronger analytical skills, will not get credit for what they are good at and will penalized for deficiencies in language skills.
I was able to write code at 6 years of age, I knew more about science than most adults. However in elementary school, I was placed as a troubled student group, because my reading and writing performance was behind my grade level. Sure we had science classes, and a few other classes where I was excelling at, but they were pass/fail... So I was still tagged as the stupid student.
I am all for greater education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. However when they put it in a group called STEM, that makes me nervous. Just like in the 1990's when they decided to teach kids how to use computers. They had a watered down process. In the 1980s while I was in elementary school, when they taught how to use computer they showed the class how to program, in the 1990's when they really pushed computer education, the focus was on how to use Windows, Word, and Excel. When you make it a requirement, it means the class needs to be watered down, so the average student can get an A+ in the class, otherwise, they would be making a class that could hurt their GPA. Where before, it was an elective class, where the student can take the class if they knew they could do in it.
Security vs. Liberty, It is always a tradeoff. And basicly we as a culture doesn't want to accept that reality. If you want the liberty without people spying on you, you will need to be brave enough as an overall population to say, I am willing to accept the Risks to our safety so we can have our liberty. Or if you want to stay secure, we as a population will need to say, We want to be safe, and are willing to trade our liberty for it.
America like to say Land of the Free and Home of the brave. You need to be brave and accept the risks to be free. The more we cower in fear that the popular bad guys of the time will get us, either being the native americans, british, anarchist, communists, terrorists... The more liberties we lose. Or we stand up an say we are willing to take the risks, even it it means those guys will sneak in, but we will have more liberties.
However Efficiency is one of these numbers used to explain the lack of common sense. Sometimes the best method isn't the most efficient one. How much extra power and wasted disk space are you actually using in your RAID 5 Systems? It is more efficient to have everyone live and work in one building. But efficiency is only part of the issue. Having a lot of small power generation, while say wasting twice as much power generation, means no wide scale power outages. Also easy to heal environmental wounds.
Hydroelectric for some reason is never talked about for green energy. Because of the Hoover dam image. A large structure that completely changes the local environment. The problem is in america, we are still stuck on the idea of Big Energy large grids covering the nation. We don't think in terms of small energy, having a small community powered by modest green sources. And every community can have different sources to meet their needs. Solar is good. But some of us live in areas where there is a lot of tree cover (and cutting trees isn't really the green option), Other areas have a decent wind, and others are near running water. These smaller sections will in agragate may take up more space, their impact is actually a lot less, as a smaller plot of land can heal a lot faster then say plowing down hundred acres.
That is arguing that using the Web Standard as a means for Application deployment isn't the best method. I agree... However it became the only practical one organically. It offered a few key advantages. 1. Everyone had a browser. Not everyone had any other thin client protocol that works with Windows, Mac, and Linux and Unix systems. So for a thin client solution it was the only tool you had without additional downloads.
2. The Web give your data then disconnect. Design while an issue in programming, does allow the server to handle much more active users then say with Xwindows, or Telnet or most other thin client solutions.
3. HTML was designed for relatively slow connections. If you were to strip out images, you probably can still browse many pages even with a 14.4k modem.
I wouldn't say a browser is trying to be an OS but more of an interpreted language compiler. But if you turn off those nostalgia blinders. Of the days of the old web. We needed to install a program for almost everything, you needed an encyclopedia, then you put in that Encarta CD. Every piece of software worked for a particular OS. We had some multi-platform but they required other software that you needed to be lucky enough to have a version for your system as well. You needed ports open to share data with an other system...
This is why back in the 1990's nearly everyone had to use windows. It is because buying a Mac, or using Linux will give you disadvantage in available software. The advanced browser opened up your Linux and Mac to the world, and people really don't care much what freaking OS you are using, because the content renders nearly the same.
I want to know how vulnerable browsers are, not if they are. Always assume what you are using is vulnerable, if you feel completely safe with your software, then you are the one most likely to get hacked. But I want to know the level of effort it will take to perform such exploits. Some interestly coded HTML/XML/Javascript where you can drop the files on Any Web Server and perform the export. Perhaps it is in the HTTP protocol, where you need to write a Server Side application to perform the HTTP Calls. Or is it in in the level of special TCP/IP packets where you need to have the OS send funny data. Is the exploit Just by going local and using local data, is it outside exploitable.
This is important. Not to excuse having a software vulnerability, but by having a priority for them to get fixed, and assessing how far such things can spread.
As far as I see, there is just as much danger for a rating system to be packed with ultra conservative everything is evil, as it is with an ultra liberal where everything is OK.
Now that said, just because you may make morally questionable products, it doesn't mean you think that it should be all rated "e"
Most of the fear around genetic manipulation falls around Science-Fiction scenarios. Which in order to make it entertaining they will often play with the worst case scenarios. Super soldiers, Freaky Person/Animal hybrids, etc. which to get such a case means a lot of experimentation, that would lead to a lot of dead or grossly Ill people. Such science on humans is already unethical, as your are giving birth to a bunch of people with a high chance of failure, and Illness.
However the goal for Genetic Manipulation in humans, isn't making someone a super human, but an average human. For people with genetic traits that make people sick and prone to disease. Giving them a chance to live a healthy normal life.
Slashdot Mirror
This has happened before. Apple makes a product that is a little too much upscale and pricey for average joe, and fails miserably.
Apple may be the Cadillac Of technology... However when they try to push out the Rolls Royce type of technology, it goes too far.
I can't see myself getting one for the price.
1. The next year or 2 it will be thinner, more powerful, and easier to use. For a watch I want something timeless.
2. How long can you have such a device until it is not supported by you other device.
3. I am not getting any real good features from it. The iPhone has became todays pocket watch. the Apple watch, only adds a minor convenience.
If it does success the apple watch 2 or 3 may be much more affordable under the $100 range where I can justify the expense.
The problem is most of the people do not like a group of people, and such business are allowed to refuse services, we can create a situation where the outcast group cannot use the goods and services they need to function/survive in society.
We need business to offer goods and services for us to function, otherwise we will spending all of our time on our own survival. Having businesses refuse business based on aspects people cannot control means your are forcing people from the society.
I found found, it isn't about technical skills, but stupid decisions made from a group think process. While prevalent in all sectors government is the biggest offenders because government culture of "It is the mistakes you make which can hurt you" vs. Private which focuses more on your success. So government spends a lot of its time trying to figure out how many ways something can fail catastrophically, which could hurt their career.
So for this case, I get the impression that they put in a funky system to try to prevent bots from filling out the paperwork, because if they hear that their website allows bots to fill out licenses they could get in trouble. I am guessing they added this near the last minute of the project so the page was designed differently. Causing this complex stupidness.
No it is partisan politics.
If Hillary personal email server was really an issue, it would have brought up years ago before the start of the next presedential run.
But because she is a political threat it is a good discression that the republicans can make a fuss about, and this time the media is on their side, because they want access to her personal email. While the media touts government transparency they really want to see if Hillary is on good terms with Bill.
Now if Hillary stunk up the bathroom. The republicans will deny that they would never do that.
Sigh. What a difference a few years make. I am a late gen x. And I would say the same thing but with DOS, and not having a hard disk drive and a CGA 4 color monitor.
By the time windows 95 came out, I have already been hooked on Linux.
The problems with such rules, means the are plenty of work arounds,
In general booth babes are hired, because they know there are plenty of ongoers who still sexually are teenagers. And use them to attract people to their booth.
However what will happen they will have people dressed to fit the rules. However still be sexy, and they will flirt with the potentional customer anyways.
The spine was design to stay at an ideal location, with enough flexibility to accommodate movement. Our hands on the otherwise have joints and muscles designed for more purpose. However some activities, usually in the terms of fine movement, may put more strain than larger movements and grips.
Insightful? More like hippy liberal corporation bashing.
Now this isn't some conservative rant. The FAA should be taking such things carefully, so not to cause problems. However, some of the rules are not focused on more agile aircraft development, where drones are involved there is less needs to verify personal safety, and changes to the drone technology shouldn't need as much screwenty. So unlike a Jet where they decided to change a component, as the safety of the pilot is a major concern, and such change should be completely reviewed. For a drone, just as long it fits in the recommended size and flight area it should be allowed more flexibility in changes without as much FAA review. Being that the overall risk of such changes is so small.
Or they will find some way the guy is linked to islamic terrorists. Or maybe he had stated an unpopular political view.
Or perhaps he just snapped. Often people with suicidal depression is really good at hiding it so other people don't realize it.
In general writing to RAM is faster than writing to the disk. However there are things that get in the way of both.
1. OS Memory Management: So you making a small memory string to a big one. So will the os fragment the string, when it comes up to an other systems reserved memory spot. Will it overwrite it (Buffer overflow), will it find a contiguous larger memory block and copy the data there. Will it copy and move the memory slots to a new location away from the memory. Will this be happening preemptively, or when the error condition occurs, will all this stuff happen with a cpu cycle that is not sharing with your app. Also if you are low on memory the system may dump it to the disk anyways.
2. OS Disk management: A lot of the same concerns that memory management has. However a bunch of small request is easier to find free space, then asking for a larger spot. So they may be more seek time.
3. Disk Caching: You tell the program to append to the disk. The OS sends the data to the drive, the drive responds back Yea I got it. then the OS goes back to handling your app, in the mean time your drive is actually spinning to save the data on the disk.
4. How your compiler handles the memory. Data = Data + "STRING" vs. Data+="STRING" vs Data.Append("STRING") vs { DataVal2=malloc(6); DataVal2="STRING"; DataRec->Next = *DataVal2; } You could be spending O(n) time saving your memory where you can be doing in in O(1)
Now sometime I do change my algorithm to write to the disk vs. handling it in memory. Mostly because the data I am processing is huge, and I much rather sacrifice speed, in order to insure that the data gets written.
Except for the fact that many of these representatives represent rural communities, where they need to travel miles to even see a local town government official, or police man. This stuff has limited impact on their lives. While the City Folk who see a Homeland security truck parked outside their home feel more threatened.
They rural folk are more likely to see the PA as something that affects other people.
It appears crazy at first. But it was actually designed rather well as to not have your hand move from the core of the keyboard.
As well vi was one of the first full screen editors. So a lot of terminals had inconsistent keys on the keyboard, you could only really trust the core set. The fact it was using the esc key was pushing it.
People where hostile to people with Cell phones in the 1980's, In college back in my day, if a student went to class with a Laptop we were hostile towards them. Portable technology takes a while to get into the culture.
Google keeps telling us what the future is going to be ... the problem is that future is designed to profit Google. Well Duh! Google isn't going to try to push a product that will put them out of business?
In general Google Glass may or may not make it. However its failure doesn't mean the end. The Apple Newton failed too, from its experience and lessons learned it became the iPhone, and iPad.
The vast majority of students will never need to know how to analyse literature.
The vast majority of students will never need to know about world history.
The vast majority of students will never need to solve algebraic equations.
Learning to code, isn't about knowing the silly commands, but training your mind into solving problems by breaking them down into elementary instructions. It helps you understand the world and trains your mind into different ways of thinking.
I think we need to get off this GPA concept.
Right now students with strong in Language skills, get a higher GPA than students who has strong analytical skills.
By keeping the system, such students with stronger analytical skills, will not get credit for what they are good at and will penalized for deficiencies in language skills.
I was able to write code at 6 years of age, I knew more about science than most adults. However in elementary school, I was placed as a troubled student group, because my reading and writing performance was behind my grade level. Sure we had science classes, and a few other classes where I was excelling at, but they were pass/fail... So I was still tagged as the stupid student.
I am not talking about the money. But how such programs are implemented to get it.
I am all for greater education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. However when they put it in a group called STEM, that makes me nervous.
Just like in the 1990's when they decided to teach kids how to use computers. They had a watered down process. In the 1980s while I was in elementary school, when they taught how to use computer they showed the class how to program, in the 1990's when they really pushed computer education, the focus was on how to use Windows, Word, and Excel. When you make it a requirement, it means the class needs to be watered down, so the average student can get an A+ in the class, otherwise, they would be making a class that could hurt their GPA. Where before, it was an elective class, where the student can take the class if they knew they could do in it.
Security vs. Liberty, It is always a tradeoff. And basicly we as a culture doesn't want to accept that reality.
If you want the liberty without people spying on you, you will need to be brave enough as an overall population to say, I am willing to accept the Risks to our safety so we can have our liberty. Or if you want to stay secure, we as a population will need to say, We want to be safe, and are willing to trade our liberty for it.
America like to say Land of the Free and Home of the brave. You need to be brave and accept the risks to be free. The more we cower in fear that the popular bad guys of the time will get us, either being the native americans, british, anarchist, communists, terrorists... The more liberties we lose. Or we stand up an say we are willing to take the risks, even it it means those guys will sneak in, but we will have more liberties.
However Efficiency is one of these numbers used to explain the lack of common sense. Sometimes the best method isn't the most efficient one. How much extra power and wasted disk space are you actually using in your RAID 5 Systems? It is more efficient to have everyone live and work in one building.
But efficiency is only part of the issue. Having a lot of small power generation, while say wasting twice as much power generation, means no wide scale power outages. Also easy to heal environmental wounds.
Hydroelectric for some reason is never talked about for green energy. Because of the Hoover dam image. A large structure that completely changes the local environment. The problem is in america, we are still stuck on the idea of Big Energy large grids covering the nation. We don't think in terms of small energy, having a small community powered by modest green sources. And every community can have different sources to meet their needs. Solar is good. But some of us live in areas where there is a lot of tree cover (and cutting trees isn't really the green option), Other areas have a decent wind, and others are near running water. These smaller sections will in agragate may take up more space, their impact is actually a lot less, as a smaller plot of land can heal a lot faster then say plowing down hundred acres.
That is arguing that using the Web Standard as a means for Application deployment isn't the best method. I agree... However it became the only practical one organically.
It offered a few key advantages.
1. Everyone had a browser. Not everyone had any other thin client protocol that works with Windows, Mac, and Linux and Unix systems. So for a thin client solution it was the only tool you had without additional downloads.
2. The Web give your data then disconnect. Design while an issue in programming, does allow the server to handle much more active users then say with Xwindows, or Telnet or most other thin client solutions.
3. HTML was designed for relatively slow connections. If you were to strip out images, you probably can still browse many pages even with a 14.4k modem.
I wouldn't say a browser is trying to be an OS but more of an interpreted language compiler.
But if you turn off those nostalgia blinders. Of the days of the old web. We needed to install a program for almost everything, you needed an encyclopedia, then you put in that Encarta CD. Every piece of software worked for a particular OS. We had some multi-platform but they required other software that you needed to be lucky enough to have a version for your system as well. You needed ports open to share data with an other system...
This is why back in the 1990's nearly everyone had to use windows. It is because buying a Mac, or using Linux will give you disadvantage in available software. The advanced browser opened up your Linux and Mac to the world, and people really don't care much what freaking OS you are using, because the content renders nearly the same.
I want to know how vulnerable browsers are, not if they are. Always assume what you are using is vulnerable, if you feel completely safe with your software, then you are the one most likely to get hacked. But I want to know the level of effort it will take to perform such exploits. Some interestly coded HTML/XML /Javascript where you can drop the files on Any Web Server and perform the export. Perhaps it is in the HTTP protocol, where you need to write a Server Side application to perform the HTTP Calls. Or is it in in the level of special TCP/IP packets where you need to have the OS send funny data.
Is the exploit Just by going local and using local data, is it outside exploitable.
This is important. Not to excuse having a software vulnerability, but by having a priority for them to get fixed, and assessing how far such things can spread.
As far as I see, there is just as much danger for a rating system to be packed with ultra conservative everything is evil, as it is with an ultra liberal where everything is OK.
Now that said, just because you may make morally questionable products, it doesn't mean you think that it should be all rated "e"
Most of the fear around genetic manipulation falls around Science-Fiction scenarios. Which in order to make it entertaining they will often play with the worst case scenarios. Super soldiers, Freaky Person/Animal hybrids, etc. which to get such a case means a lot of experimentation, that would lead to a lot of dead or grossly Ill people. Such science on humans is already unethical, as your are giving birth to a bunch of people with a high chance of failure, and Illness.
However the goal for Genetic Manipulation in humans, isn't making someone a super human, but an average human. For people with genetic traits that make people sick and prone to disease. Giving them a chance to live a healthy normal life.