The tenants are living in rent-stabilized or rent-controlled buildings, which offer highly discounted rents. However, the tenants are required to use the discounted apartments as their primary residences. The city does not want tenants to turn around and sublet their apartments at market rates, and pocket the difference. So landlords have been installing cameras to see who is living in the apartments. The facial recognition system is another step in that direction.
The AOA disagreement light should be standard. However, there should be a MCAS activation light. When ABS goes on, my car signals it to me. Then I know that the automatic system has kicked in. The aircraft should tell me when a safety feature is kicking in. Then I can remember to turn it off.
It's a training problem. Run-away trim (which an MCAS malfunction essentially is) can be fixed by hitting the auto-trim cut-out. There's a video about the issue on the 737 Classic (which is before the 737 NG and the 737 MAX). At the same time, Boeing should have told pilots that MCAS will move the trim automatically, and will progressively move the trim more and more dramatically each time it activates. However, the pilots should have known that there was a trim problem (because they were fixing the problem by moving the trim up only to have the system push it back down), and turn off auto-trim.
There's an auto-trim cut-out switch that shuts off MCAS. The pilots on the Lion Air flight kept on manually adjusting the trim (correctly diagnosing the problem as an auto-trim issue) but didn't cut off the auto-trim system. The penultimate flight crew on the same Lion Air jet also experienced the same problem, but disabled auto-trim and landed.
We tax labor through payroll taxes so why can't we tax robots? Welcoming automation doesn't mean allowing their use without any sort of regulation or taxation. What will people do with their income? Whatever they want. It's a free country.
Nah, you just made that all up to further your hateful agenda. The Lion Air 737 never actually stalled, the control computer never lowered the throttle, and the autopilot was never engaged (which we know because the pilots repeatedly pulled up on the stick). What ACTUALLY happened was that the angle of attack sensor was broken, telling the MCAS that the aircraft was nose-up and about to stall. MCAS lowers the nose to prevent the stall. The flight crew didn't fix the runaway trim problem, and instead spent their time pulling up on the stick.
The aircraft aren't just diving towards the ground as a default behavior. The Lion Air 737 crashed because the angle of attack sensor was defective, giving bad information to the MCAS. As a result, the system thought that the aircraft was nose-up and about to stall when it was actually in level flight.
The AOA sensor gave bad info in the penultimate flight, causing a runaway trim problem. However, the ground crew did not fix the AOA sensor, and did not tell the new flight crew about the AOA problem and runaway trim.
To be fair, the MCAS system that contributed to the Lion Air crash was receiving bad information from a defective angle of attack sensor that had been marked down for repair after the flight right before the fatal one. The ground maintenance crew did not service the AOA sensor, so the MCAS thought the plane was stalling, and then kept on pushing the nose down. The chances of another AOA sensor failing, and then triggering the MCAS system would be astronomically small, but also catastrophic for Boeing if true.
We have a chicken and egg problem when it comes to fanatical violence. ISIS and its successors have been invading the rest of the world. They're shooting up hotels in Kenya, there's Boko Haram in Nigeria kidnapping children, Al-Shabaab in Somalia, LeT in India, Abu Sayaff in the Philippines (blew up a building earlier this year), JAD in Indonesia, and Pakistan in general. Can we just let them do their thing? Would they stop if we stopped? Would ISIS have just gone away if we left them alone, putting aside the fact that they probably wouldn't have become a problem if we didn't invade Iraq?
Yes, we can stop our involvement in the endless war, but let's not pretend that this would stop the endless war.
You're correct. The rise of two-engine, long-range planes such as the A350 and 787 has given rise to the so-called "skinny and long" routes that don't have too many passengers, and are long-distance. The Dreamliner has enabled 170 new routes that wouldn't have been profitable before. Moreover, having two airplanes allows two flights a day, for instance, rather than one flight a day, which gives a convenience that the passenger may prefer.
But why didn't he just ACH his money directly from one bank account to another? Or write himself a check? As far as I know, those are both very low cost or no cost if they really want your business.
Dude, the FBI compromised the sysadmin. I don't give a fuck if you use open source software, but if your sys admin is compromised by a "hostile" actor, then you're fucked.
For those that didn't read the article, Intel's 7 nm technology was developed independently by a separate internal team than the 10 nm technology. The 7 nm tech avoids multi-patterning, which is apparently the part that gave rise to the yield problems with the 10 nm.
1. The problem is that car manufacturing will simply move out of the USMCA region into China, especially smaller, lower-cost cars that do better in Europe, anyway. Manufacturers will simply build cars in China using parts made in China, and sell the cars to China or the EU.
2. Milk manufacturers in the U.S. win. Hurray?!
3. Trump lost on Chapter 19, which he wanted to eliminate. As a result, the international process by which Canada was able to successfully challenge the US rules on softwood lumber stays in place.
4. No auto tariffs for Mexico and Canada! Yay! But the entire small car industry will be leaving the region anyway.
So what did Trump win? Could it have been obtained without disrupting the relationship with Canada?
China has maintained anti-competitive and frankly corrupt practices that should have been challenged by the U.S. a long time ago but I guess the economy has been too poor to risk a trade war. Rampant theft of foreign IP and forcing all foreign investors to partner with Chinese companies are huge issues that had to be resolved.
However, Trump is going absolutely the wrong way about it. Standing up against China unilaterally is a tough go. A multi-lateral negotiation would have been a much better idea but Trump has already declared war on our allies such as Canada, the EU, Britain, and South Korea. Moreover, TPP isn't popular here on Slashdot or Reddit but it was about a compromise that would replace a worse status quo or alternative. The biggest benefit of TPP was to keep China out of the region. We would also have enforced some sort of labor protection laws. And by enforcing IP regimes in the affected nations in return for open markets in the US for their goods, we would have create a market for our IP owners in those markets. A unified marketplace would have resisted China's advances.
But now we are alone standing up to China, when we could have stood up to them with other major economic powers, while locking out avenues of Chinese economic expansion in the region.
Meow meow. But subsidies will provide lower costs in the long-term by allowing manufacturers to benefit from economies of scale, and refining their designs. SpaceX would not be around if NASA didn't provide subsidies. And hybrids in the U.S. benefited from subsidies until a hybrid can be had for $20,000. I mean, it sucks that the rich are early beneficiaries of the subsidies but so eventually costs will drop.
Well, that's really why it makes more sense to spin off AWS. Imagine that you own a building in Manhattan that you use to operate a small storefront. That business is not economically feasible if you had to pay market rentâ"in other words, the business is being subsidized by the building. So from an economics standpoint, you should just close the business and rent out the storefront at a market rent.
Same concept here. If Amazon cannot make money without being subsidized by free or at-cost pricing from AWS, then it should scale down its use of AWS and spend that elsewhere. However, it seems that Amazon doesn't consume a bunch of resources anyway but the core concept isn't different.
Microsoft has been brilliant in diversifying their income streams. Azure and business cloud services, Office and business software, and personal computing such as the Surface and XBox each got about a third of revenue. Windows OEM sales were actually up! So even if Windows stumbles, well, what, are you going to see Linux finally reach the desktop in 2019? I wouldn't bet on it, buddy.
I am 100% with you. American leadership seems content to rest on the laurels of our forefathers, which will lead to China and the rest of the world eating our lunch. We need to cut spending on the military and entitlement programs, increase taxes on the super-wealthy, control healthcare spending, and invest intelligently in infrastructure, basic science, and applied science that will help us compete in the marketplace of tomorrow. Will that happen? Probably not.
1. Cost. Nuclear power plants require large initial infrastructure investments with ridiculous regulatory costs, and significant shutdown costs. 2. There are no real-world commercial fast breeder reactors. We just opened up some Gen3/Gen3+ reactors. 3. Threat of 9/11 attacks. 4. Nuclear waste.
Google is requiring Javascript to log into their services. Almost by definition, the users who log in are going to be tracked with or without Javascript because they're, well, logging into Google. Requiring Javascript decreases security from the point of view of a browser being hacked. However, requiring Javascript increases security from the point of view of decreasing the risk of bots randomly trying to login using bruteforce.
Well, the studios were going to screw Netflix anyway by creating their own streaming services so Netflix made a heads-up move by getting into content production.
That's not true. The EU would happily allow this outcome because then Microsoft and other search engine providers and mobile browser programmers would be able to offer phone manufacturers money for installation. Or, perhaps, Amazon would finally be able to get its app store onto the market.
No one is saying this. I mean, FDA meat inspectors cost money. So do airbags and seat belts that are required by law. But things just cost money. The funny question is how much other companies will be willing to pay phone manufacturers to put their browsers and search engines onto the phones.
Slashdot Mirror
The tenants are living in rent-stabilized or rent-controlled buildings, which offer highly discounted rents. However, the tenants are required to use the discounted apartments as their primary residences. The city does not want tenants to turn around and sublet their apartments at market rates, and pocket the difference. So landlords have been installing cameras to see who is living in the apartments. The facial recognition system is another step in that direction.
The AOA disagreement light should be standard. However, there should be a MCAS activation light. When ABS goes on, my car signals it to me. Then I know that the automatic system has kicked in. The aircraft should tell me when a safety feature is kicking in. Then I can remember to turn it off.
It's a training problem. Run-away trim (which an MCAS malfunction essentially is) can be fixed by hitting the auto-trim cut-out. There's a video about the issue on the 737 Classic (which is before the 737 NG and the 737 MAX). At the same time, Boeing should have told pilots that MCAS will move the trim automatically, and will progressively move the trim more and more dramatically each time it activates. However, the pilots should have known that there was a trim problem (because they were fixing the problem by moving the trim up only to have the system push it back down), and turn off auto-trim.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
There's an auto-trim cut-out switch that shuts off MCAS. The pilots on the Lion Air flight kept on manually adjusting the trim (correctly diagnosing the problem as an auto-trim issue) but didn't cut off the auto-trim system. The penultimate flight crew on the same Lion Air jet also experienced the same problem, but disabled auto-trim and landed.
We tax labor through payroll taxes so why can't we tax robots? Welcoming automation doesn't mean allowing their use without any sort of regulation or taxation. What will people do with their income? Whatever they want. It's a free country.
Nah, you just made that all up to further your hateful agenda. The Lion Air 737 never actually stalled, the control computer never lowered the throttle, and the autopilot was never engaged (which we know because the pilots repeatedly pulled up on the stick). What ACTUALLY happened was that the angle of attack sensor was broken, telling the MCAS that the aircraft was nose-up and about to stall. MCAS lowers the nose to prevent the stall. The flight crew didn't fix the runaway trim problem, and instead spent their time pulling up on the stick.
The aircraft aren't just diving towards the ground as a default behavior. The Lion Air 737 crashed because the angle of attack sensor was defective, giving bad information to the MCAS. As a result, the system thought that the aircraft was nose-up and about to stall when it was actually in level flight.
The AOA sensor gave bad info in the penultimate flight, causing a runaway trim problem. However, the ground crew did not fix the AOA sensor, and did not tell the new flight crew about the AOA problem and runaway trim.
To be fair, the MCAS system that contributed to the Lion Air crash was receiving bad information from a defective angle of attack sensor that had been marked down for repair after the flight right before the fatal one. The ground maintenance crew did not service the AOA sensor, so the MCAS thought the plane was stalling, and then kept on pushing the nose down. The chances of another AOA sensor failing, and then triggering the MCAS system would be astronomically small, but also catastrophic for Boeing if true.
We have a chicken and egg problem when it comes to fanatical violence. ISIS and its successors have been invading the rest of the world. They're shooting up hotels in Kenya, there's Boko Haram in Nigeria kidnapping children, Al-Shabaab in Somalia, LeT in India, Abu Sayaff in the Philippines (blew up a building earlier this year), JAD in Indonesia, and Pakistan in general. Can we just let them do their thing? Would they stop if we stopped? Would ISIS have just gone away if we left them alone, putting aside the fact that they probably wouldn't have become a problem if we didn't invade Iraq?
Yes, we can stop our involvement in the endless war, but let's not pretend that this would stop the endless war.
You're correct. The rise of two-engine, long-range planes such as the A350 and 787 has given rise to the so-called "skinny and long" routes that don't have too many passengers, and are long-distance. The Dreamliner has enabled 170 new routes that wouldn't have been profitable before. Moreover, having two airplanes allows two flights a day, for instance, rather than one flight a day, which gives a convenience that the passenger may prefer.
But why didn't he just ACH his money directly from one bank account to another? Or write himself a check? As far as I know, those are both very low cost or no cost if they really want your business.
Dude, the FBI compromised the sysadmin. I don't give a fuck if you use open source software, but if your sys admin is compromised by a "hostile" actor, then you're fucked.
For those that didn't read the article, Intel's 7 nm technology was developed independently by a separate internal team than the 10 nm technology. The 7 nm tech avoids multi-patterning, which is apparently the part that gave rise to the yield problems with the 10 nm.
1. The problem is that car manufacturing will simply move out of the USMCA region into China, especially smaller, lower-cost cars that do better in Europe, anyway. Manufacturers will simply build cars in China using parts made in China, and sell the cars to China or the EU.
2. Milk manufacturers in the U.S. win. Hurray?!
3. Trump lost on Chapter 19, which he wanted to eliminate. As a result, the international process by which Canada was able to successfully challenge the US rules on softwood lumber stays in place.
4. No auto tariffs for Mexico and Canada! Yay! But the entire small car industry will be leaving the region anyway.
So what did Trump win? Could it have been obtained without disrupting the relationship with Canada?
China has maintained anti-competitive and frankly corrupt practices that should have been challenged by the U.S. a long time ago but I guess the economy has been too poor to risk a trade war. Rampant theft of foreign IP and forcing all foreign investors to partner with Chinese companies are huge issues that had to be resolved.
However, Trump is going absolutely the wrong way about it. Standing up against China unilaterally is a tough go. A multi-lateral negotiation would have been a much better idea but Trump has already declared war on our allies such as Canada, the EU, Britain, and South Korea. Moreover, TPP isn't popular here on Slashdot or Reddit but it was about a compromise that would replace a worse status quo or alternative. The biggest benefit of TPP was to keep China out of the region. We would also have enforced some sort of labor protection laws. And by enforcing IP regimes in the affected nations in return for open markets in the US for their goods, we would have create a market for our IP owners in those markets. A unified marketplace would have resisted China's advances.
But now we are alone standing up to China, when we could have stood up to them with other major economic powers, while locking out avenues of Chinese economic expansion in the region.
Meow meow. But subsidies will provide lower costs in the long-term by allowing manufacturers to benefit from economies of scale, and refining their designs. SpaceX would not be around if NASA didn't provide subsidies. And hybrids in the U.S. benefited from subsidies until a hybrid can be had for $20,000. I mean, it sucks that the rich are early beneficiaries of the subsidies but so eventually costs will drop.
Well, that's really why it makes more sense to spin off AWS. Imagine that you own a building in Manhattan that you use to operate a small storefront. That business is not economically feasible if you had to pay market rentâ"in other words, the business is being subsidized by the building. So from an economics standpoint, you should just close the business and rent out the storefront at a market rent.
Same concept here. If Amazon cannot make money without being subsidized by free or at-cost pricing from AWS, then it should scale down its use of AWS and spend that elsewhere. However, it seems that Amazon doesn't consume a bunch of resources anyway but the core concept isn't different.
Microsoft has been brilliant in diversifying their income streams. Azure and business cloud services, Office and business software, and personal computing such as the Surface and XBox each got about a third of revenue. Windows OEM sales were actually up! So even if Windows stumbles, well, what, are you going to see Linux finally reach the desktop in 2019? I wouldn't bet on it, buddy.
https://venturebeat.com/2018/0...
I am 100% with you. American leadership seems content to rest on the laurels of our forefathers, which will lead to China and the rest of the world eating our lunch. We need to cut spending on the military and entitlement programs, increase taxes on the super-wealthy, control healthcare spending, and invest intelligently in infrastructure, basic science, and applied science that will help us compete in the marketplace of tomorrow. Will that happen? Probably not.
1. Cost. Nuclear power plants require large initial infrastructure investments with ridiculous regulatory costs, and significant shutdown costs.
2. There are no real-world commercial fast breeder reactors. We just opened up some Gen3/Gen3+ reactors.
3. Threat of 9/11 attacks.
4. Nuclear waste.
Google is requiring Javascript to log into their services. Almost by definition, the users who log in are going to be tracked with or without Javascript because they're, well, logging into Google. Requiring Javascript decreases security from the point of view of a browser being hacked. However, requiring Javascript increases security from the point of view of decreasing the risk of bots randomly trying to login using bruteforce.
More like the intelligence agencies can't get TRUMP to do anything about it.
Well, the studios were going to screw Netflix anyway by creating their own streaming services so Netflix made a heads-up move by getting into content production.
That's not true. The EU would happily allow this outcome because then Microsoft and other search engine providers and mobile browser programmers would be able to offer phone manufacturers money for installation. Or, perhaps, Amazon would finally be able to get its app store onto the market.
No one is saying this. I mean, FDA meat inspectors cost money. So do airbags and seat belts that are required by law. But things just cost money. The funny question is how much other companies will be willing to pay phone manufacturers to put their browsers and search engines onto the phones.