I'm not sure if it can be overridden but I think all Macbooks have a light on the front that lets you know that the camera is on. I'm not sure if there is a easy remote/software only way of disabling that. If not the question would be what do you want out of this scenario? If the guy sees the camera on he might dispose of the laptop. Sure you might get a pic of him (he might as easily be out of the field of view of the camera the first time he notices it on and smart enough to realize it), but either way I think he'd be getting rid of the laptop pronto.
The best way to deal with laptop thieves would be to dual boot a laptop with two separate hdd bays. Set the default OS to a half pound or so of C4. Now as long as you always remember to chose another option it don't go boom. Laptop thieves be warned.
I disagree. What people forget is that most people by a new gadget every year (phone, laptop, desktop on a roughly 3 year life). You are free to buy the gadget you like whether it is a closed model or open. If at some point the closed model isn't to your liking your next product will be open and vis versa. No one is holding a gun to your head and telling you to buy an iPhone or a Mac. If you don't like it by a Windows PC, a PC with linux, a tablet with Android etc etc. While an individual system might be closed the entire market is not so companies still have to compete to get developers to build for their products to attract customers which attract developers etc. It is a circle, some lose ground (win phone) some gain Android but hopefully from losing companies learn to change and offer people better products.
The FOSS community needs to realize that developers have rights too. Their ideas are theirs and they can chose how to make them available to others. I don't agree with software patents but I do agree with copyright/ownership of the overall application by the company/people that make the apps.People can release their programs for anyone to use, they can lease it, sell it and conversely people can chose to lease/buy/or get a free program that does a similar thing. It is afterall the customers money and hardware so they should be able to chose what they put on it including to put on it closed ecosystem apps or even buy a device that itself is closed (game consoles, iPhone etc).
How so? This is like arguing MS is bad because as more people use it they get more power. That is getting things backwards. People chose the platform because it meets their needs whether because it has the apps they need, or the number of users that they want to sell to and the tooling support. Regardless we shouldn't be considering a business model bad because it is successful. Terminals were popular for a while until people found a need for something different, if workstations stop being useful people will move on to a different type of device etc.
Walled garden is still a choice. If you don't like it go to another providers open system, or someone else that manages their garden the way you like it etc. Apple is pretty good at enforcing UI standards on developers. That is a very good thing in that it provides consistency across the platform. Some people will give up so ad hoc innovation in exchange for being able to pick up a random app and know how it works.
I believe though you have the right in most countries to refuse to be questioned. If there is no crime and I don't want to talk to you that is my right. If there is a crime and you want to talk to me then I need my Miranda rights or the equivalent and I have the right to a lawyer.
Oh crap so they did. That is what you get when you don't admin systems for a couple years:-) That stinks. Open Solaris was a bit crippled if I recall a lot of the features that were in the latest releases of Solaris weren't in the open version.
Phase out SPARC: probably exactly what they are planning. Add the features that are cool to OEL and then discontinue SPARC and Solaris. If you really really want Solaris you can still got for Open Solaris, otherwise go for OEL that would be my guess on their strategy.
Indeed. Though furnace technology took a huge leap forward. Seriously though way does it take wars to motivate countries to put a focused effort on a big issue? For example fossil fuel usage. Most people agree it sucks. I'd suspect most people in the west do not like the governments in the middle east and russia that the money goes to supporting. So way can't we get people to agree oil sucks and we need a serious, manhattan project like (~10% GDP) effort to find and utilize alternatives? Better waging a war out greening your ideological enemies that actually produces a benefit to your local economy/trade balance than wage a real war trying to out kill your real enemies to secure more of the crap that makes you give a damn about their two bit dictatorships in the first place.
I'm not even sure if it is actionable. I mean the machine will likely (almost certainly because medicine is always this way) have a 100% accuracy rate either for positive or negative outcomes. So the machine says you are a terrorist, or at least going to do something "malicious". Okay but you haven't actually done anything yet right? We don't have laws against thoughts and wouldn't even know what exactly it was you were planning on doing anyways. So other than already approved checks (x-ray strips, metal detector etc) what can they do to you, at least what can they legally do?
Depends on the circumstances of the offer. My last job I was pretty friendly with management. I was only there for about 3 months and then I got a job offer from a place I applied to before them. The job made more sense to me as it was ~150km from my family versus 4k, pay was the same but cost of living about 40% less etc. Anyways there was no hard feelings and I consulted for them remotely for another 9 months part-time at 20% or so pay raise. I wasn't there to screw them over it just was a logical choice for me and they realized it. I'd say if you weren't actively looking around but had a recruiter come to you with an offer the same thing goes. A business considers what business they want to take on and similarly an employee has to consider his options for where to apply their work.
I let my last employer know and it worked out okay. That said it was a 5 person startup so we knew everyone pretty good and I'd just started 4 months or so prior. Anyways they countered with a 25% raise and a point of stock options. That said cost of leaving still made the other job more desirable but still they did try hard to keep me. I don't agree with other people that if people bring up money than they have other problems with the work. People always have other problems with the work it is after all called work. You are inconvenienced to get to work, they often inconvenience you by telling you what kinds of cloths you can where, the travel time etc. The pay is what you get as compensation for the hassle of working. So if the work is boring I need more money, if the work requires me to travel 2 hrs a day I need to get paid for that time etc. Work and pay has to balance. I think it is silly when an employer will admit you are worth more but won't budge on either the work or the pay (both sides of the balance). It is just gravity that gets you out the door after that.
My work is this way (Canada). They have things in pay trenches. In order to get paid more you have to have more experience. So it doesn't matter if you are crazy skilled if you haven't say published/patented somthing and have the required 5yrs with the company you don't get the raise period full stop. Don't like it go somewhere else. Admittedly I work in the public sector but still very frustrating to be the go to guy for things and be clearly more skilled than people in your trench but still be denied a raise.
Umm, no. Coal http://kilowattcoalco.com/StatsAndLinks.html 2.16 pounds per kwh (why the heck are they mixing empirial and meteric? Damn Yanks:-)). Gas: 9.7kwH per liter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline, and another source 19.4 pounds CO2 per gallon burned. Converting units give 0.529 pounds CO2 per kWh for gas far far better than coal, unless 95% of the coal CO2 is captured AND some fantastic way of recycling the batteries comes up gas better at least on a CO2 standpoint. I agree with you that we need to start somewhere and the market share of electric vehicles is small enough that it isn't that big of a deal at the moment but useful for trying different technologies. But the assumption that because you don't put gas in the front end that it is greener in the backend is false. That said moving generation to the backend makes sense because a single (huge) investment in power generation would automagically make your car base more efficient too.
and where does the electricity come from in the US for example? 68+% is fossil fuels with the majority of that being coal. How is that cleaner? People seem to think that if they don't have to put anything in the car that no emissions are created. As for energy storage/recycling: could be one day but not there now. So again I'd say at the moment EVs are not that green. if you can't do anything with the batteries except hope something some day will come around to get rid of their pollutants and or make use of them then you are in the same wishful thinking place as nuke technology. I like nukes but I don't pretend like they are perfect as they stand. There are still issues and they aren't truly green until they can take care of their waste products.
effort to make electric cool by giving good performance (actually for acceleration usually superior performance) to gas powered cars. That said I don't think electric is all that green in the US or a lot of other cars. Replace gas burned in a car for coal burned in a plant + all the inefficiencies in the power distribution system + all the really crappy components in the batteries. If governments would get of the asses and actually generate electricity from green sources than electric would be green but they do it isn't a clear win in my mind.
It was 100GB in the basement, well actually 96, 2 24TB thumpers and a 48TB 3 years ago, those puppies have 48 disks in them in 4U so I think the 24TB one is 500GB disks and the 48 was 1TB. It was the other unix admin that was more of the ZFS guru. Looking it up your right zfs doesn't have fsck but supposedly it isn't needed. The only thing I can think of other than that that would have taken 3 days or so would be recovering the storage from tape. Could be that was what he was doing. All I remember is he was getting calls every couple hours for days "is it back yet?":-)
Yep that was my experience. we were using SAMFS on it which is Suns(Oracles now or discontinued?) hierarchial storage system. Very nice would background restore from tape files as touched by users, move things based on policy (how old, quota per directory etc. Fun to manage the beast. We had a few thumpers in the basement (~100TB storage) running ZFS to act as a poor mans cache layer for the guys that were dumping 20TB of data at a time at us. This way when they exported things to a near by supercomputing facility and did silly things like an grep on 100M files it was on their own hardware and not on the main fileserver. We had to fsck one of them (48TB) once and it took 3 days I think and didn't find any problems:-( So big arrays are nice but should make small chunks to make the administration crap not take forever was the lesson we learned. Hard with large datasets though where 20TB can be one experiment and all need to be analyzed together.
No not sustained throughout the day, but sustained when I was looking at the system load to see if it was handling it alright. 500 users, at times a single user generates 20TB of data in a weekend but generally about 1-10GB of new data a week per person and lots of analysis running off network since the filessets were too large for desktop users to keep local copies of. So yeah lots of data moving back and forth, maybe not 10Gbps all the time but it reaches that without a problem.
I agree with the I/O. I worked at a large research centre with a 3000 tape LTO 4 library and 200TB (about 20 RAID arrays) disk SAN attached to one 2 socket T2 machine. The machine didn't even budge when recovering from a couple tapes, backing up to another 3, and pumping out 10Gbps to userland. It just gobbled up NFS traffic like crazy because it had 128 concurrent threads of capacity. Even Intels high end chip only has 20 and Intel gets all excited about it but the Sparc has had 64 for 4+ years. Maybe it isn't so great with database load, I'm not sure but it kicked but as a fileserver.
Or "weeping and knashing of teeth" i think the NT is pretty clear on the existence of some sort of afterlife for those that are bad which is unpleasant. I've heard that at least some jewish sects believe that people that are not jews just cease to exist when they die and the jews go hang out with God (perhaps in heaven, perhaps in a New Jerusalem (though why you'd want to live in that arid hellhole is beyond me)).
Slashdot Mirror
In Canada we call it MUTA for Moose Up The A** you don't want to mess with the MUTA team just come up with your hands up ;-)
There's an option. Tell them you are an Apple employee and you've lost a prototype iPhone 5. Yep they will show up quick.
The best way to deal with laptop thieves would be to dual boot a laptop with two separate hdd bays. Set the default OS to a half pound or so of C4. Now as long as you always remember to chose another option it don't go boom. Laptop thieves be warned.
The FOSS community needs to realize that developers have rights too. Their ideas are theirs and they can chose how to make them available to others. I don't agree with software patents but I do agree with copyright/ownership of the overall application by the company/people that make the apps.People can release their programs for anyone to use, they can lease it, sell it and conversely people can chose to lease/buy/or get a free program that does a similar thing. It is afterall the customers money and hardware so they should be able to chose what they put on it including to put on it closed ecosystem apps or even buy a device that itself is closed (game consoles, iPhone etc).
How so? This is like arguing MS is bad because as more people use it they get more power. That is getting things backwards. People chose the platform because it meets their needs whether because it has the apps they need, or the number of users that they want to sell to and the tooling support. Regardless we shouldn't be considering a business model bad because it is successful. Terminals were popular for a while until people found a need for something different, if workstations stop being useful people will move on to a different type of device etc.
Walled garden is still a choice. If you don't like it go to another providers open system, or someone else that manages their garden the way you like it etc. Apple is pretty good at enforcing UI standards on developers. That is a very good thing in that it provides consistency across the platform. Some people will give up so ad hoc innovation in exchange for being able to pick up a random app and know how it works.
I believe though you have the right in most countries to refuse to be questioned. If there is no crime and I don't want to talk to you that is my right. If there is a crime and you want to talk to me then I need my Miranda rights or the equivalent and I have the right to a lawyer.
Oh crap so they did. That is what you get when you don't admin systems for a couple years :-) That stinks. Open Solaris was a bit crippled if I recall a lot of the features that were in the latest releases of Solaris weren't in the open version.
Phase out SPARC: probably exactly what they are planning. Add the features that are cool to OEL and then discontinue SPARC and Solaris. If you really really want Solaris you can still got for Open Solaris, otherwise go for OEL that would be my guess on their strategy.
Hard to do when you work in medicine in a country with universal healthcare. Some tits are tasty and useful.
Indeed. Though furnace technology took a huge leap forward. Seriously though way does it take wars to motivate countries to put a focused effort on a big issue? For example fossil fuel usage. Most people agree it sucks. I'd suspect most people in the west do not like the governments in the middle east and russia that the money goes to supporting. So way can't we get people to agree oil sucks and we need a serious, manhattan project like (~10% GDP) effort to find and utilize alternatives? Better waging a war out greening your ideological enemies that actually produces a benefit to your local economy/trade balance than wage a real war trying to out kill your real enemies to secure more of the crap that makes you give a damn about their two bit dictatorships in the first place.
I'm not even sure if it is actionable. I mean the machine will likely (almost certainly because medicine is always this way) have a 100% accuracy rate either for positive or negative outcomes. So the machine says you are a terrorist, or at least going to do something "malicious". Okay but you haven't actually done anything yet right? We don't have laws against thoughts and wouldn't even know what exactly it was you were planning on doing anyways. So other than already approved checks (x-ray strips, metal detector etc) what can they do to you, at least what can they legally do?
Accelerating expansion => no big crunch.
Depends on the circumstances of the offer. My last job I was pretty friendly with management. I was only there for about 3 months and then I got a job offer from a place I applied to before them. The job made more sense to me as it was ~150km from my family versus 4k, pay was the same but cost of living about 40% less etc. Anyways there was no hard feelings and I consulted for them remotely for another 9 months part-time at 20% or so pay raise. I wasn't there to screw them over it just was a logical choice for me and they realized it. I'd say if you weren't actively looking around but had a recruiter come to you with an offer the same thing goes. A business considers what business they want to take on and similarly an employee has to consider his options for where to apply their work.
I let my last employer know and it worked out okay. That said it was a 5 person startup so we knew everyone pretty good and I'd just started 4 months or so prior. Anyways they countered with a 25% raise and a point of stock options. That said cost of leaving still made the other job more desirable but still they did try hard to keep me. I don't agree with other people that if people bring up money than they have other problems with the work. People always have other problems with the work it is after all called work. You are inconvenienced to get to work, they often inconvenience you by telling you what kinds of cloths you can where, the travel time etc. The pay is what you get as compensation for the hassle of working. So if the work is boring I need more money, if the work requires me to travel 2 hrs a day I need to get paid for that time etc. Work and pay has to balance. I think it is silly when an employer will admit you are worth more but won't budge on either the work or the pay (both sides of the balance). It is just gravity that gets you out the door after that.
My work is this way (Canada). They have things in pay trenches. In order to get paid more you have to have more experience. So it doesn't matter if you are crazy skilled if you haven't say published/patented somthing and have the required 5yrs with the company you don't get the raise period full stop. Don't like it go somewhere else. Admittedly I work in the public sector but still very frustrating to be the go to guy for things and be clearly more skilled than people in your trench but still be denied a raise.
They were thinking ship it and lets get some revenue. We can fix it later with a software update ... probably, hopefully, oh crap I hope we can.
Umm, no. Coal http://kilowattcoalco.com/StatsAndLinks.html 2.16 pounds per kwh (why the heck are they mixing empirial and meteric? Damn Yanks :-)). Gas: 9.7kwH per liter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline, and another source 19.4 pounds CO2 per gallon burned. Converting units give 0.529 pounds CO2 per kWh for gas far far better than coal, unless 95% of the coal CO2 is captured AND some fantastic way of recycling the batteries comes up gas better at least on a CO2 standpoint. I agree with you that we need to start somewhere and the market share of electric vehicles is small enough that it isn't that big of a deal at the moment but useful for trying different technologies. But the assumption that because you don't put gas in the front end that it is greener in the backend is false. That said moving generation to the backend makes sense because a single (huge) investment in power generation would automagically make your car base more efficient too.
and where does the electricity come from in the US for example? 68+% is fossil fuels with the majority of that being coal. How is that cleaner? People seem to think that if they don't have to put anything in the car that no emissions are created. As for energy storage/recycling: could be one day but not there now. So again I'd say at the moment EVs are not that green. if you can't do anything with the batteries except hope something some day will come around to get rid of their pollutants and or make use of them then you are in the same wishful thinking place as nuke technology. I like nukes but I don't pretend like they are perfect as they stand. There are still issues and they aren't truly green until they can take care of their waste products.
effort to make electric cool by giving good performance (actually for acceleration usually superior performance) to gas powered cars. That said I don't think electric is all that green in the US or a lot of other cars. Replace gas burned in a car for coal burned in a plant + all the inefficiencies in the power distribution system + all the really crappy components in the batteries. If governments would get of the asses and actually generate electricity from green sources than electric would be green but they do it isn't a clear win in my mind.
It was 100GB in the basement, well actually 96, 2 24TB thumpers and a 48TB 3 years ago, those puppies have 48 disks in them in 4U so I think the 24TB one is 500GB disks and the 48 was 1TB. It was the other unix admin that was more of the ZFS guru. Looking it up your right zfs doesn't have fsck but supposedly it isn't needed. The only thing I can think of other than that that would have taken 3 days or so would be recovering the storage from tape. Could be that was what he was doing. All I remember is he was getting calls every couple hours for days "is it back yet?" :-)
Yep that was my experience. we were using SAMFS on it which is Suns(Oracles now or discontinued?) hierarchial storage system. Very nice would background restore from tape files as touched by users, move things based on policy (how old, quota per directory etc. Fun to manage the beast. We had a few thumpers in the basement (~100TB storage) running ZFS to act as a poor mans cache layer for the guys that were dumping 20TB of data at a time at us. This way when they exported things to a near by supercomputing facility and did silly things like an grep on 100M files it was on their own hardware and not on the main fileserver. We had to fsck one of them (48TB) once and it took 3 days I think and didn't find any problems :-( So big arrays are nice but should make small chunks to make the administration crap not take forever was the lesson we learned. Hard with large datasets though where 20TB can be one experiment and all need to be analyzed together.
No not sustained throughout the day, but sustained when I was looking at the system load to see if it was handling it alright. 500 users, at times a single user generates 20TB of data in a weekend but generally about 1-10GB of new data a week per person and lots of analysis running off network since the filessets were too large for desktop users to keep local copies of. So yeah lots of data moving back and forth, maybe not 10Gbps all the time but it reaches that without a problem.
I agree with the I/O. I worked at a large research centre with a 3000 tape LTO 4 library and 200TB (about 20 RAID arrays) disk SAN attached to one 2 socket T2 machine. The machine didn't even budge when recovering from a couple tapes, backing up to another 3, and pumping out 10Gbps to userland. It just gobbled up NFS traffic like crazy because it had 128 concurrent threads of capacity. Even Intels high end chip only has 20 and Intel gets all excited about it but the Sparc has had 64 for 4+ years. Maybe it isn't so great with database load, I'm not sure but it kicked but as a fileserver.
Or "weeping and knashing of teeth" i think the NT is pretty clear on the existence of some sort of afterlife for those that are bad which is unpleasant. I've heard that at least some jewish sects believe that people that are not jews just cease to exist when they die and the jews go hang out with God (perhaps in heaven, perhaps in a New Jerusalem (though why you'd want to live in that arid hellhole is beyond me)).