do you think that MS must predict the Arch of new FireFox even before release it and changed it's long time available service-HotMail- Methodology based on that In a way, yes. MS has access to the standards and if Hotmail was written with standards in mind, this shouldn't really be too much of a problem. Also, Firefox 3 has been around for a while in beta and RC releases so they should have done testing to make sure it works.
And the energy that you gained came from an external force, i.e. the tide. That's like "powering" the car with water alone and having horses tow the car.
Current hybrids include storage batteries that weigh a lot. They can be replaced with a much lighter flywheel that also has a higher efficiency than batteries Lighter flywheels don't tend to be very effective as they have to spin that much faster...
So I can't be inflammatory back? Mildly inflammatory, perhaps. But it went a little too far.
For someone to sit there and gloat about me or others losing 10-15K on something I think is screwed up. For someone to sit there and gloat about someone being easily murdered by an unnecessarily large vehicle I think is screwed up.
The job that JAG's done in opposing Bush and Yoo--and defending both the Gitmo detainees and the Constitution--at the cost of tens, if not hundreds, of individual careers--is nothing less than heroic. It makes me proud to be an American. Yeah, I would feel really proud too if the leader of my country was an illiterate moron who violated human rights and caused honest people to lose their careers because they chose to do the right thing.
It isn't a coincidence. It is standard semiconductor physics. You can mix an element from the 3rd group with an element from the 5th group together to make semiconductors as well, such as GaAs. Different types of dopant (impurities) determine whether the semiconductor is n-type or p-type. In this case, the Nitrogen atoms have an extra valence electron than Carbon creating an n-type doped semiconductor. Diamond would probably make a decent semiconductor for conventional computers as well, but it is far more expensive than silicon.
What puzzles me is why you are puzzled about something not happening when it actually is? Take a look at the Asus Eee PC and the other competing laptops starting to come out.
Well at least two people interpreted your post the way GP did. Perhaps you should learn to express yourself more clearly? I seem to be picking up that vibe too.
Do you have a proposed mechanism how that scenario could occur? The temperature monitoring subsystem didn't appear to fail with the data reset, but the water subsystem did. The mechanism that supposedly allowed the temperature subsystem to ignore the problem is worth considering as an example.
In any case I don't see the relevance of that to this discussion, which boils down to this: do you assume no news is good news, or bad news? Given that most news these days is bad news, I'd rather have the absence of news. Critical data on the other hand, I'd assume there is a problem if it is missing.
I understand exactly what fail safe means. I agree that no data = very very very bad data. I agree that it should have gone into the safest possible mode. I don't agree that the "low water level" detection is the correct mechanism to determine the "no data = very very very bad data" condition. I'm suggesting that based on the information quoted in my original post,
safety systems to errantly interpret the lack of data as a drop in water reservoirs does not necessarily sound like good planning but sounded more like chance that some erroneous interpretation picked up on the invalid state. It may have detected the "no data = very very very bad data" case and shut down for that reason, but that's not what the article is suggesting. Other users hinting that I am a moron for thinking that the plant shouldn't have shut down have misinterpreted what I was trying to get across.
It did it the way it was programmed to do it. Based on the information provided in the article, it was programmed to shut down due to lack of water. What actually happened was accidental data reset, which is what happened. A separate fail safe mechanism should have detected the missing critical data. Instead, it
errantly interpret the lack of data as a drop in water reservoirs - I would rather it correctly, as opposed to errantly, detect unsafe conditions. The plant should have shut down as it did, but it sounds a bit like chance that it actually did.
The problem wasn't caused by some sensor not sending data, it was data in the database being actively reset on purpose by a bit of software on another machine. This wasn't a case of "if some data anomaly occurs, shut down" - the article suggests this was a case of "some data anomaly occurred which happened to make the system think there is insufficient water" which caused a shutdown by chance. The data anomaly caused by the reset might not have fooled the system into thinking the water level was out of range.
That's not what I'm suggesting at all. I'm suggesting that the accidental reset itself could have triggered a critical system shutdown instead of relying on the reset data being out of range. What if the reset fooled the system into thinking some subsystem that was experiencing a worst case scenario was within safe operating conditions? Why a workstation on the corporate network was able to reset this data is another issue in itself.
So detect software issues and handle (shutdown if necessary) accordingly. All I am saying is that this shutdown was caused by an incorrect reading of "low water levels" which was more luck than good planning of software breakage.
Yeah, so when a sensor breaks and stops sending in data, it'll keep running like usual, with maybe a small error code in the background. I never suggested that the "lack of data" error should be a small background event. When a sensor breaks and stops sending data, I would want it to detect that it has broken and shut down the system with an indication of the correct reason of why it shut down. I don't want the shut down to be left to chance.
That was good software design to assume a worst-case scenario when the sensors stopped sending in data.
...causing safety systems to errantly interpret the lack of data as a drop in water reservoirs that cool the plant's radioactive nuclear fuel rods... Good software design? Reads more like pure luck to me. If it was "good design" it would interpret the lack of data as "lack of data" instead of thinking that the water level has actually dropped...
This model would not work at all for the straight-to-DVD movie market. Not all movies hit the "big screen". They more than make their investment back from the theatre takings Did you even read my comment?
Once the movie has been made, the marginal cost of the DVD is less than $1 But that completely ignores the initial investment to make the movie. This model would not work at all for the straight-to-DVD movie market. Not all movies hit the "big screen".
If shoppers would just exhibit a little patience instead of rushing out to buy the latest shiny, they too would benefit from the eventual lower prices. If everyone employed that tactic, the companies producing them won't make enough money off them, meaning they won't be around for the price to come down.
Slashdot Mirror
And the energy that you gained came from an external force, i.e. the tide. That's like "powering" the car with water alone and having horses tow the car.
...while it's trivial to just ride on the damn sidewalk and stay the hell out of the way of the REAL motorists. Where I come from, that is illegal.Apparently Superman didn't take simple physics at school otherwise he would know what tensile strength meant...
It isn't a coincidence. It is standard semiconductor physics. You can mix an element from the 3rd group with an element from the 5th group together to make semiconductors as well, such as GaAs. Different types of dopant (impurities) determine whether the semiconductor is n-type or p-type. In this case, the Nitrogen atoms have an extra valence electron than Carbon creating an n-type doped semiconductor. Diamond would probably make a decent semiconductor for conventional computers as well, but it is far more expensive than silicon.
Thousands is more than hundreds. It is thousandths that is less than hundredths.
Except to figure out why it is crashing so the problem can be fixed...
What puzzles me is why you are puzzled about something not happening when it actually is? Take a look at the Asus Eee PC and the other competing laptops starting to come out.
A Core 2 Duo running at around 1.5GHz is sufficient to run the average modern game if partnered with a capable graphics card.
The problem wasn't caused by some sensor not sending data, it was data in the database being actively reset on purpose by a bit of software on another machine. This wasn't a case of "if some data anomaly occurs, shut down" - the article suggests this was a case of "some data anomaly occurred which happened to make the system think there is insufficient water" which caused a shutdown by chance. The data anomaly caused by the reset might not have fooled the system into thinking the water level was out of range.
That's not what I'm suggesting at all. I'm suggesting that the accidental reset itself could have triggered a critical system shutdown instead of relying on the reset data being out of range. What if the reset fooled the system into thinking some subsystem that was experiencing a worst case scenario was within safe operating conditions? Why a workstation on the corporate network was able to reset this data is another issue in itself.
So detect software issues and handle (shutdown if necessary) accordingly. All I am saying is that this shutdown was caused by an incorrect reading of "low water levels" which was more luck than good planning of software breakage.
...causing safety systems to errantly interpret the lack of data as a drop in water reservoirs that cool the plant's radioactive nuclear fuel rods... Good software design? Reads more like pure luck to me. If it was "good design" it would interpret the lack of data as "lack of data" instead of thinking that the water level has actually dropped...You owe me $10. These disks have been around for a while already.
...the submitter picks up on the worst one. There's plenty of landfill space. That doesn't mean we have to go and waste it all right now...