You are quite right about lost knowledge. I grew up in the '60s and '70s in the south. In that time and place, real men fixed their own car. I cannot think of even one man I met as a child who didn't know how to fix a car. I know there are households that don't have so much as a screwdriver, but it still seems very strange to me.
Even more fundamentally, more and more households have nobody that even knows the basics of cooking. Everything they eat comes in a box that goes in the microwave. That seems even more strange to me. Considering we all have to eat every day, I would think that knowledge would be important to people.
It's not just the candidates doing the lying. The talking heads don't seem fond of the truth either.
Lying has long been a part of politics. One readily finds references to it in the 19th century. It's the magnitude that seems changed.
I can't help but think that part of the problem is parents not having enough free time to teach their children important skills such as critical thinking. Schools don't do it either, so the result in about 20 years is an adult voter who isn't well prepared to evaluate the claims of the candidates and pundits.
Replying to AC post: Of course, it is hard to make good choices through the massive cloud of lies and the carefully pruned options made available to choose from.
I asked my magic 8ball^w^wScientific testimony device how accurate this thing is and it said "outlook not so good". Naturally, it uses proprietary algothingamajigs so I will not be submitting it to examination.
But yes, an unproven methodology implemented by unproven software and they want to hang a man's life on it's results.
However, the defense DOES have a right to bring in their own expert witness. That witness has to be allowed to examine all of the evidence and methodology used by the prosecution's expert.
Honestly, the 50,000 foot view of the methodology sounds a bit dodgy to me. I would like to know what peer reviewed experiments have demonstrated that the methodologies in use can identify a single person out of a mix of DNA that actually owned the item. Were they replicated? Then there is a need to show that the software actually performed that methodology without error. Perhaps the prosecution would care to have a third party run the methodology by hand in a blind test?
If those 2 sticking points cannot be satisfied, then the "evidence" is bunk.
Seriuoosly cancer does not work like that most of the time. As in the really rare cases of spontaneous remission.
We don't actually know that. We know that thyroid cancer that gets bad enough to be symptomatic doesn't just go away spontaneously. We have no idea what percentage of cases detected in intensive screening will just go away because intensive screening is rare. We don't know how many of the positives are false.
That may or may not be the same for thyroid cancer. We better figure that out fast or a lot of kids will get a lot of unnecessary procedures done on them and will end up on replacement therapy for life.
True. It will be worth checking for evidence of VW like fraud, but there is no evidence for it currently.
The good news is that the results in TFA were a comparison between the current test and the one that will become law in the EU in 2017, so the problem is already being corrected. The results suggest that the manufacturers have their work cut out for them.
The point is that some people are more naturally managers. All things being the same, even if that person had your qualifications and experiance, he would remain a manager even if he could make just as much in a technical role.
The artificial division in the pay scale is what pushes you away from your preference and natural talent. It's not that management is actually a more difficult job, it's just that it's out of your wheelhouse even though it is still within your capability.
Given how everyone seems to be screaming about a STEM shortage but not a management shortage, supply and demand suggests you should be able to get a raise by going back to tech. Reality begs to differ.
Mostly, they already have the separate processor. They have to because the analog gear won't put up with the jitter caused by the CPU running an OS and userspace. So it's just a matter of having the flash not be co-mingled with the flash that holds the OS. OR, the processor can check the signature of the blob it gets handed before enabling Tx (that one would add no hardware).
Now, go fetch me a fab, and a team and I'll get right on that for you.
But if you object to those pennies, you should object to the new FCC reg that demands that they actually secure the things and write a detailed report on how they did so. It's cheaper still to just leave it the way it is now.
The sad part is that this regulation will do nothing. People who want to use the forbidden channels will just order the hardware from somewhere that permits those channels.
Yes, but if the Feds are acting legally due to the lack of a federal law against it rather than under a federal law that expressly permits their action, then the state law will apply.
If you don't have the $10 to spare for it (often true of teens and early 20s who are the largest market for music) then downloading a copy changed nothing for the copyright holder. If you didn't think it was worth $10, you wouldn't have bought it, but you might download it. Either way, they were never going to get $10 from you and you downloading the music doesn't change that.
Support?!? You mean the guy with a thick Indian accent who claims to be "Bob" who talks you through the process to unplug and replug the device? What support?
As for what makes it cheapest, that would be leaving it unlocked and terminating warranty if you do anything like re-flashing.
As for cheapest to the consumer while being in compliance, a lot of people saved a lot of money by using a re-flashed Linksys rather than the much more expensive (but no better) APs that had the needed features in the OEM software. It's a great way to correct an unhealthy market.
Of course, you're forgetting that this will also include WiFi cards in laptops Enjoy your driver compatibility hell and OS lock-in.
The correct response, rather than locking up the entire OS and driver layer is to handle the low level stuff with a separate processor with it's own flash. The separate processor is almost an absolute requirement since the hardware is unlikely to deal well with a processor delay caused by handling an exception/fault in the OS kernel. The latter is the contentious part. The manufacturer might enjoy saving that dime by having the OS driver verify and load the firmware on init rather than loading it from onboard flash or having the radio processor verify it like it should.
The FCC seems to believe that they'll spend the dime to be compliant. I believe they are being naive and they need to be more specific and force that behavior if that's what they want.
To be more specific, different countries allow different subsets of the channels and different signal strength. Typically, the OS driver tells the radio what regulatory domain is in effect. The FCC doesn't want the end user to be able to change a config file or recompile the driver to select a non-US domain in order to use a forbidden channel or turn the transmitter power up. The FCC thinks the manufacturer will embed the domain in the radio firmware and verify that signed firmware in the radio (creating no problems for Free software). I'm pretty sure they'll leave all that like it is and forbid re-flashing anything at all (Tivoize it)
Perhaps that's because you are naturally a techie who has been able to adapt in order to progress on a career path. Perhaps it would be better if you could remain a techie but continue to accrue seniority and raises if that opportunity was available to you. Likely it is not, and you made the best move you could under the circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
You are quite right about lost knowledge. I grew up in the '60s and '70s in the south. In that time and place, real men fixed their own car. I cannot think of even one man I met as a child who didn't know how to fix a car. I know there are households that don't have so much as a screwdriver, but it still seems very strange to me.
Even more fundamentally, more and more households have nobody that even knows the basics of cooking. Everything they eat comes in a box that goes in the microwave. That seems even more strange to me. Considering we all have to eat every day, I would think that knowledge would be important to people.
It's not just the candidates doing the lying. The talking heads don't seem fond of the truth either.
Lying has long been a part of politics. One readily finds references to it in the 19th century. It's the magnitude that seems changed.
I can't help but think that part of the problem is parents not having enough free time to teach their children important skills such as critical thinking. Schools don't do it either, so the result in about 20 years is an adult voter who isn't well prepared to evaluate the claims of the candidates and pundits.
Replying to AC post: Of course, it is hard to make good choices through the massive cloud of lies and the carefully pruned options made available to choose from.
It's even worse. The methodology that the software might or might not correctly implement is itself unproven.
I asked my magic 8ball^w^wScientific testimony device how accurate this thing is and it said "outlook not so good". Naturally, it uses proprietary algothingamajigs so I will not be submitting it to examination.
But yes, an unproven methodology implemented by unproven software and they want to hang a man's life on it's results.
However, the defense DOES have a right to bring in their own expert witness. That witness has to be allowed to examine all of the evidence and methodology used by the prosecution's expert.
That sounds to me like an inconclusive result, not something you should use to send someone to death.
If they only have it in binary, that would mean that they are falsely testifying to the validity of code they haven't examined.
Honestly, the 50,000 foot view of the methodology sounds a bit dodgy to me. I would like to know what peer reviewed experiments have demonstrated that the methodologies in use can identify a single person out of a mix of DNA that actually owned the item. Were they replicated? Then there is a need to show that the software actually performed that methodology without error. Perhaps the prosecution would care to have a third party run the methodology by hand in a blind test?
If those 2 sticking points cannot be satisfied, then the "evidence" is bunk.
Public record, yes. But in cases where the material is identified beforehand as proprietary, the judge can extend protection including sealing it.
It still wouldn't get rid of the patents.
It may not totally solve their problem, but cutting him will do as much for them as cutting nearly 1,000 other employees.
Try watching any movie involving romance up to the late '80s or so. You'll be surprised.
Seriuoosly cancer does not work like that most of the time. As in the really rare cases of spontaneous remission.
We don't actually know that. We know that thyroid cancer that gets bad enough to be symptomatic doesn't just go away spontaneously. We have no idea what percentage of cases detected in intensive screening will just go away because intensive screening is rare. We don't know how many of the positives are false.
We have much better data on breast cancer screening. The big surprise there was that 20% of the detected (but asymptomatic) cancers do spontaneously regress.
That may or may not be the same for thyroid cancer. We better figure that out fast or a lot of kids will get a lot of unnecessary procedures done on them and will end up on replacement therapy for life.
YUes, they will "accidentally" degrade your WiFi, but don't worry, when you lose your nearly free connectivity, they will happily $ell you $some.
True. It will be worth checking for evidence of VW like fraud, but there is no evidence for it currently.
The good news is that the results in TFA were a comparison between the current test and the one that will become law in the EU in 2017, so the problem is already being corrected. The results suggest that the manufacturers have their work cut out for them.
The point is that some people are more naturally managers. All things being the same, even if that person had your qualifications and experiance, he would remain a manager even if he could make just as much in a technical role.
The artificial division in the pay scale is what pushes you away from your preference and natural talent. It's not that management is actually a more difficult job, it's just that it's out of your wheelhouse even though it is still within your capability.
Given how everyone seems to be screaming about a STEM shortage but not a management shortage, supply and demand suggests you should be able to get a raise by going back to tech. Reality begs to differ.
Mostly, they already have the separate processor. They have to because the analog gear won't put up with the jitter caused by the CPU running an OS and userspace. So it's just a matter of having the flash not be co-mingled with the flash that holds the OS. OR, the processor can check the signature of the blob it gets handed before enabling Tx (that one would add no hardware).
Now, go fetch me a fab, and a team and I'll get right on that for you.
But if you object to those pennies, you should object to the new FCC reg that demands that they actually secure the things and write a detailed report on how they did so. It's cheaper still to just leave it the way it is now.
The sad part is that this regulation will do nothing. People who want to use the forbidden channels will just order the hardware from somewhere that permits those channels.
Yes, but if the Feds are acting legally due to the lack of a federal law against it rather than under a federal law that expressly permits their action, then the state law will apply.
You do realize we're talking about pennies per unit, don't you?
If you don't have the $10 to spare for it (often true of teens and early 20s who are the largest market for music) then downloading a copy changed nothing for the copyright holder. If you didn't think it was worth $10, you wouldn't have bought it, but you might download it. Either way, they were never going to get $10 from you and you downloading the music doesn't change that.
Support?!? You mean the guy with a thick Indian accent who claims to be "Bob" who talks you through the process to unplug and replug the device? What support?
As for what makes it cheapest, that would be leaving it unlocked and terminating warranty if you do anything like re-flashing.
As for cheapest to the consumer while being in compliance, a lot of people saved a lot of money by using a re-flashed Linksys rather than the much more expensive (but no better) APs that had the needed features in the OEM software. It's a great way to correct an unhealthy market.
Of course, you're forgetting that this will also include WiFi cards in laptops Enjoy your driver compatibility hell and OS lock-in.
An executive wants to take all the credit and kick the blame down hill? Well slap my ass and color me surprised!!
Given the general state of decay in journalism, they're as good as any.
The correct response, rather than locking up the entire OS and driver layer is to handle the low level stuff with a separate processor with it's own flash. The separate processor is almost an absolute requirement since the hardware is unlikely to deal well with a processor delay caused by handling an exception/fault in the OS kernel. The latter is the contentious part. The manufacturer might enjoy saving that dime by having the OS driver verify and load the firmware on init rather than loading it from onboard flash or having the radio processor verify it like it should.
The FCC seems to believe that they'll spend the dime to be compliant. I believe they are being naive and they need to be more specific and force that behavior if that's what they want.
To be more specific, different countries allow different subsets of the channels and different signal strength. Typically, the OS driver tells the radio what regulatory domain is in effect. The FCC doesn't want the end user to be able to change a config file or recompile the driver to select a non-US domain in order to use a forbidden channel or turn the transmitter power up. The FCC thinks the manufacturer will embed the domain in the radio firmware and verify that signed firmware in the radio (creating no problems for Free software). I'm pretty sure they'll leave all that like it is and forbid re-flashing anything at all (Tivoize it)
Perhaps that's because you are naturally a techie who has been able to adapt in order to progress on a career path. Perhaps it would be better if you could remain a techie but continue to accrue seniority and raises if that opportunity was available to you. Likely it is not, and you made the best move you could under the circumstances.