And then that billion dollar company would have come along, taken their invention, marketed the hell out of it and made a mint, all without compensating the original inventors.
That is what the patent system is supposed to prevent.
Isn't it copyright system, instead of patents, which is meant to prevent that?
At least for me, the best solution would be an "CONFIRM EVERY TIME" option.
Of course this would add one more click to sending an SMS from a non-system application.
Hell, same goes for ANY capabilities.
Microphone? An app might need the capability if I want to record something with it. (assume it really has the feature and that it makes sense)
OTOH I damn well should be notified when the app decides to start recording without user interaction.
For SMS / email also I'd very much like a feature to force the outbound message to Drafts so I can check it myself if there's anything suspicious.
Why isn't this a standard feature?
Also Symbian capabilities aren't fine-grained enough.
You are correct, diesel-electric locomotives could benefit from this. The electromagnetic brakes exist already in some models to provide smoother braking and lessen the wear on the physical brakes. (If I remember correctly.)
However, the parent post contained "..which draws power from the grid to accelerate.." and thus I considered only electric locomotives in my response.
Wouldn't you still need the infrastructure in place to get the train moving in the first place? The required modifications are propably quite cheap compared to several hunred kilograms of these newfangled batteries.
Unless you mean to power the train entirely with the batteries and ditch the wires? 30 MWh worth of batteries.. mmmmmm.. (drooling a bit at the thought:)
Newer electric trains already use electromagnetic brakes and dump the braking energy back to the grid. What would you gain by dumping it into a battery?
Normal-looking female geeks exist. Sometime in their teens they just learn to hide their geekiness (propably because of peer pressure, but I'm just guessing here.) They will not admit their geekiness to you before they know you well and have determined you to be a fellow geek.
Also if you are both still in school of some kind, well, you're out of luck. She would get shunned by her peers were she openly associating herself with (eww) geeks.
On second thought she propably already is a near-outcast in her peer group. This might be a clue in identifying these undercover geeks. You might look for some kind of a behaviour signature: Think how does a male proto-geek behave when he is about to awaken to full geekdom? (No, we are not geeks from birth. We quite propably are predisposed though.)
Then again, she might just be an ordinary lunatic. Be careful.;)
Also being a geek is not an reason to being physically weak. Yes, most geek friends of mine are actually slightly overweight, but they are not in poor shape. Note that I'm not claiming that they are anything resembling body builders.
Wasn't it relatively recently when the geek stereotype was a skeletal freckled young male wearing glasses and carrying a calculator? Whatever happened to it? Sorry for the rambling style. I just woke up and english isn't my primary language.
Do you fire your top salesman because he forgot to lock his office door before he went home?
I think this is more akin to leaving the front doors unlocked and open.
If somebody, for example, stole our customer records because of that, then yes. I would fire him. In any case the event would have some consequences to the person in question, most likely the loss of the door locking/unlocking privileges for a certain time.
A few months of a policy like that and you'll have a bunch of mediocre salesmen with excellent adherence to a door locking policy. At least when your business folds, you'll know it wasn't due to a loss incurred as a result of an unlocked door.
How much damage would it do to the company if someone walked in and stole our customer records and sold them to an competitor?
But failing an actual catastrophe, the WORST they will ever do is say 'Don't do that, pretty please?'
Then what they should say is "That will cause a catastrophe sooner or later and when it does, you will be fired to make an example out of you. So don't do that."
"Don't do that" will only work after "that" has been done. People aren't going to be careful about not doing something which will only result in a "Don't do that, pretty please?" response.
"Don't do that or you will be fired!" makes people WANT to actively avoid doing whatever "that" is.
Slashdot Mirror
Arm Cortex M3 development board with 2.4" touchscreen for £25.19 here
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Brand-New-STM32F103VET6-ARM-Cortex-M3-Development-Board-2-4-Touch-TFT-LCD-7v-/160782712352
I haven't ordered one yet, so I don't know if they're crap or not.
Feature list looks nice though.
A new life awaits you in the Off-world colonies!
A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
By whom? Cat Women? :D
Duhh. Space Nazis of course.
Quick! Add the tags before they notice!
And then that billion dollar company would have come along, taken their invention, marketed the hell out of it and made a mint, all without compensating the original inventors.
That is what the patent system is supposed to prevent.
Isn't it copyright system, instead of patents, which is meant to prevent that?
At least for me, the best solution would be an "CONFIRM EVERY TIME" option. Of course this would add one more click to sending an SMS from a non-system application. Hell, same goes for ANY capabilities. Microphone? An app might need the capability if I want to record something with it. (assume it really has the feature and that it makes sense) OTOH I damn well should be notified when the app decides to start recording without user interaction. For SMS / email also I'd very much like a feature to force the outbound message to Drafts so I can check it myself if there's anything suspicious. Why isn't this a standard feature? Also Symbian capabilities aren't fine-grained enough.
Did you read the link?
The backdoor in question inserts itself into the new "safe" compiler you are compiling with it.
You should use your voice was your passport. Then you'd be safe.
Like I said, it would be useful on diesel-electric locomotives.
Here the situation is a bit different though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VR_Class_Sm3 (electric, top speed 220 km/h, power 4.0 MW, amount 18)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VR_Class_Sr2 (electric, top speed 210 km/h, power 6.1 MW, amount 46)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VR_Class_Dr16 (diesel-electric, top speed 140 km/h, power 1.6 MW, amount 23)
You are correct, diesel-electric locomotives could benefit from this.
The electromagnetic brakes exist already in some models to provide smoother braking and lessen the wear on the physical brakes.
(If I remember correctly.)
However, the parent post contained "..which draws power from the grid to accelerate.." and thus I considered only electric locomotives in my response.
Wouldn't you still need the infrastructure in place to get the train moving in the first place?
The required modifications are propably quite cheap compared to several hunred kilograms of these newfangled batteries.
Unless you mean to power the train entirely with the batteries and ditch the wires? :)
30 MWh worth of batteries.. mmmmmm.. (drooling a bit at the thought
Newer electric trains already use electromagnetic brakes and dump the braking energy back to the grid.
What would you gain by dumping it into a battery?
I believe the host os can order the drives to spin down if they're idle for a certain time.
Why not just use the feature?
Normal-looking female geeks exist. Sometime in their teens they just learn to hide their geekiness (propably because of peer pressure, but I'm just guessing here.)
;)
They will not admit their geekiness to you before they know you well and have determined you to be a fellow geek.
Also if you are both still in school of some kind, well, you're out of luck. She would get shunned by her peers were she openly associating herself with (eww) geeks.
On second thought she propably already is a near-outcast in her peer group. This might be a clue in identifying these undercover geeks.
You might look for some kind of a behaviour signature: Think how does a male proto-geek behave when he is about to awaken to full geekdom? (No, we are not geeks from birth. We quite propably are predisposed though.)
Then again, she might just be an ordinary lunatic. Be careful.
Also being a geek is not an reason to being physically weak. Yes, most geek friends of mine are actually slightly overweight, but they are not in poor shape. Note that I'm not claiming that they are anything resembling body builders.
Wasn't it relatively recently when the geek stereotype was a skeletal freckled young male wearing glasses and carrying a calculator? Whatever happened to it?
Sorry for the rambling style. I just woke up and english isn't my primary language.
Do you fire your top salesman because he forgot to lock his office door before he went home?
I think this is more akin to leaving the front doors unlocked and open. If somebody, for example, stole our customer records because of that, then yes. I would fire him. In any case the event would have some consequences to the person in question, most likely the loss of the door locking/unlocking privileges for a certain time.
A few months of a policy like that and you'll have a bunch of mediocre salesmen with excellent adherence to a door locking policy. At least when your business folds, you'll know it wasn't due to a loss incurred as a result of an unlocked door.
How much damage would it do to the company if someone walked in and stole our customer records and sold them to an competitor?
But failing an actual catastrophe, the WORST they will ever do is say 'Don't do that, pretty please?'
Then what they should say is "That will cause a catastrophe sooner or later and when it does, you will be fired to make an example out of you. So don't do that."
"Don't do that" will only work after "that" has been done. People aren't going to be careful about not doing something which will only result in a "Don't do that, pretty please?" response. "Don't do that or you will be fired!" makes people WANT to actively avoid doing whatever "that" is.