That's odd, but I'm Canadian and for some reason I would have sworn the names on each ballot were randomized. Really they should be for fairness. It turns out I'm wrong (no big surprise) - they are alphabetical. I wonder if that fact influences elections at all.
That's true, and why Blackberries continue to hang on in work environments. They are productive little tools. However, things changed for Blackberry (RIM) when people's friends started pulling out iPhones at dinner and laughing at their friend's clunky Blackberry. Suddenly executives wanted iPhones even though you can't type quite as fast on them, the integration to Exchange wasn't as good (at the time) and security was arguably better with a Blackberry (though they may have been wrong about that). The fact is, people tell me dumb things about their phones all the time, and none of it's about usefulness, it's all about whiz-bang and flashy "cool" stuff. Oh, and how many gigs of data they have and how much they're paying for it. That's fine, but it's not why I want a phone. I mainly just need calendar/reminders and the ability to make a phone call in an emergency. GPS app is useful. People disappear into the bathroom for 30 to 60 minutes with their phone. It's just entertainment and distraction, not productivity.
Windows will continue to sell on the desktop as long as they remember to keep it productive. I need Windows so I can get work done. On the other hand, phone interfaces sell the majority of their devices by appealing to the part of the consumer's brain that wants to pull one out at dinner and have their acquaintances ooh and ahh over it. Windows is for getting work done, and smartphones are for getting laid. Two very different requirements.
This is spoken like someone who's never been to a race. The cars (while mostly old technology) are being pushed to the edge and the drivers are in the car so if something goes wrong, they could, and have, been killed. The engines are powerful enough that the ground shakes. Look, I'm not a huge fan of NASCAR, but even I can see what the draw is, and I just don't see it with drone racing. I'm not saying drone racing won't have an audience, but looking at NASCAR for inspiration doesn't make much sense.
All you have to do is compare Transformers 1 to Transformers 4. The first one is actually an enjoyable movie. The fourth starts out OK, but 2/3 of the way through it doesn't even have any plot consistency left (why is that girl in that car again?) and it's simply big CGI with thing that I don't care about being blown up. Same with the newer Superman movie... invincible people fighting each other is boring, no matter how many buildings they throw each other through.
It was a loop. Scary shit. At least it wasn't recursive wooOOOooOOoooooo
Recursion in original BASIC is complicated by the fact that all variables are global. You can GOSUB to your same subroutine, but I don't think the stack was very large either, so you could easily have a stack overflow.
From what I'd heard (from people who were there last year), China was installing new coal fired power plants at the rate of about 1 per day through 2015. While I agree that's anecdotal, it's not like the Chinese government numbers are reliable. This article boils down to: "I can draw unreliable conclusions from unreliable data."
In the workplace, procrastination can be useful on a project because the requirements can, and often do, change. If the amount of actual work is a small fraction of the time allotted, then putting it off to the end of the timeframe can prevent having to re-do your work when things change. I've met a co-worker who used this reasoning explicitly, and she was very good at getting lots of work done (and on time too).
This isn't that new. People in unions can typically calculate what anyone else makes based on their position and seniority. People in the military know just by rank plus a couple other factors like danger pay. In Ontario, Canada if you work for the public sector and make over $100,000 your name and salary are published in a list every year (colloquially called the "sunshine list"). This is usually done for the same reasons stated above, and usually benefits the employees overall (which is why unions request it). Just because some companies do it, it's news?
So the correct way to handle that situation is to take a picture of the dufus that's taking a picture of a body being pulled out of a car, and post a picture of them on social media.
I assure you most effort in an office is wasted on Facebook, "news" (i.e. entertainment) sites, and Youtube. If that weren't enough, they have to waste the time of people around them who are working with stuff like "hey, did you see...?"
The original movies were done well over 30 years ago. The people who are fans of the originals and saw it in the theatre are parents now and want something similar to take their kids to see. These are people who've watched the originals dozens of times. They want almost exactly the same experience. It's supposed to be nostalgia, and it is. I salute Lucas for wanting to make a different movie, but it's probably wrong to make a different *Star Wars* movie. He's got 4 billion dollars now, he can go make as many interesting big budget high risk revolutionary movies as he wants. The thing is, he wanted to do that and have the guaranteed return of a Star Wars movie, which is how we ended up with the prequels. He was definitely pushing the technology of film-making with the prequels, but he also screwed up with the direction and didn't produce good movies.
Windmills do have a reasonable payback with government subsidies, so you can get capital to invest, but in most cases the purpose seems to be for someone with lots of money to be able to talk about his windmill farm at the country club, and if that's the case they need to be able to pull up the control panel on their iPhone to show their buddies.
This isn't too difficult. A couple years ago you could go to Shodan, search for well-known industrial automation equipment providers like Phoenix Contact, and try to find their devices with embedded web servers that someone has connected to the internet. Start clicking on IP addresses. Make sure you don't mess with anything you find. One interesting find was some of the big windmill turbines with real-time monitoring and everything. People installing this stuff really don't understand what they're doing.
That's kind of funny. I spent about 6 years driving through Detroit for my commute, and one day I was stuck in traffic on I-75 right downtown, and this small pickup stops next to me. An old beater of a car comes up behind him, doesn't stop in time and smacks the rear bumper of the truck. The guys get out of the truck, look at the bumper, jump on it a bit, and while this is happening, the driver of the car backs up, drives around the truck and leaves down the shoulder. During this, none of the guys from the truck even looked at the car or the guy driving the car. I was pretty shocked. I knew I was in the US but it felt a little like some 3rd world shit-hole that day, and let's be honest, downtown Detroit is pretty much a 3rd world shit-hole.
I imagine one of the problems (self-driving cars being rear-ended) is because when a light turns yellow or something happens, the self-driving car can react faster and might even apply the brakes much faster than a human would, so the normal space a person leaves to another human-driven car isn't enough. At least a symbol on the back indicating it's a self-driving car and a warning that it can brake faster than a human might help.
They would also retain all the power and influence of being in control of Facebook, plus the power and influence of being the ones deciding where the foundation spends its money. I would assume one of the major things they want to do with the foundation is increase CS education, which they believe will directly benefit Facebook in decades to come. It's basically a way to withhold taxes from the government (which gets spent on things like education) and saying you'll spend it on education yourself, except you want to spend it on the parts of education that are important to you.
Wouldn't a million monkeys on a million typewriters eventually write something "really deep"? It's nice to use randomly generated strings of words but first of all you'd have to run them through a filter to make sure you didn't accidentally create one that really did have meaning, right?
As someone who has studied the subject, I can tell you that software-based "pseudo-" random number generators aren't really good enough for competition use, and making a true random number generator that actually generates bits of equal probability is somewhat difficult (it's been done but requires a lot of know-how). There are some very interesting designs. The other major problem is that as a user it's very difficult to validate that the device will work correctly. Sure you can do lots of tests, but it's a software based device, so it could be programmed to change odds at a later time, or change odds based on how you hold it, etc. I wouldn't trust one for the same reason I don't trust electronic voting machines: it's too easy to tamper with them and hide the evidence.
At a previous company we were making kiosks for securing some rather high value items. The storage lockers and the kiosk used an off-the-shelf Bluetooth board to communicate. My boss defined the communication spec, and part of it was that the kiosk had to use a hard coded password to the lockers in order to "authenticate." I had several arguments with him about how this wasn't really secure, and I proposed other ways to do it. Eventually he got annoyed (nobody likes being told they might be wrong). He told me in his best "bosses voice": "it's good enough." So we did it that way. That's how this shit happens. There were other security problems, like the fact that it was hooked to the customer's office network over their WiFi (with a WEP password), and included a built-in webserver for web reports, only used HTTP (not SSL). Even if the web interface used a password (can't remember) it likely sent it across in the clear.
I know you're trolling, but my wife is arguably smarter than I am (and has the Ph.D. to prove it). The fact is, outside of technology circles, nobody knows or cares about this stuff (which was my point).
Slashdot Mirror
That's odd, but I'm Canadian and for some reason I would have sworn the names on each ballot were randomized. Really they should be for fairness. It turns out I'm wrong (no big surprise) - they are alphabetical. I wonder if that fact influences elections at all.
That's true, and why Blackberries continue to hang on in work environments. They are productive little tools. However, things changed for Blackberry (RIM) when people's friends started pulling out iPhones at dinner and laughing at their friend's clunky Blackberry. Suddenly executives wanted iPhones even though you can't type quite as fast on them, the integration to Exchange wasn't as good (at the time) and security was arguably better with a Blackberry (though they may have been wrong about that). The fact is, people tell me dumb things about their phones all the time, and none of it's about usefulness, it's all about whiz-bang and flashy "cool" stuff. Oh, and how many gigs of data they have and how much they're paying for it. That's fine, but it's not why I want a phone. I mainly just need calendar/reminders and the ability to make a phone call in an emergency. GPS app is useful. People disappear into the bathroom for 30 to 60 minutes with their phone. It's just entertainment and distraction, not productivity.
Windows will continue to sell on the desktop as long as they remember to keep it productive. I need Windows so I can get work done. On the other hand, phone interfaces sell the majority of their devices by appealing to the part of the consumer's brain that wants to pull one out at dinner and have their acquaintances ooh and ahh over it. Windows is for getting work done, and smartphones are for getting laid. Two very different requirements.
The other option is to only support some weird form of tail recursion.
This is spoken like someone who's never been to a race. The cars (while mostly old technology) are being pushed to the edge and the drivers are in the car so if something goes wrong, they could, and have, been killed. The engines are powerful enough that the ground shakes. Look, I'm not a huge fan of NASCAR, but even I can see what the draw is, and I just don't see it with drone racing. I'm not saying drone racing won't have an audience, but looking at NASCAR for inspiration doesn't make much sense.
All you have to do is compare Transformers 1 to Transformers 4. The first one is actually an enjoyable movie. The fourth starts out OK, but 2/3 of the way through it doesn't even have any plot consistency left (why is that girl in that car again?) and it's simply big CGI with thing that I don't care about being blown up. Same with the newer Superman movie... invincible people fighting each other is boring, no matter how many buildings they throw each other through.
It was a loop. Scary shit. At least it wasn't recursive wooOOOooOOoooooo
Recursion in original BASIC is complicated by the fact that all variables are global. You can GOSUB to your same subroutine, but I don't think the stack was very large either, so you could easily have a stack overflow.
I though "peak CGI" had to be Transformers 4. That movie was sooo bad, but if you really like explosions, I guess that's who liked it.
From what I'd heard (from people who were there last year), China was installing new coal fired power plants at the rate of about 1 per day through 2015. While I agree that's anecdotal, it's not like the Chinese government numbers are reliable. This article boils down to: "I can draw unreliable conclusions from unreliable data."
In the workplace, procrastination can be useful on a project because the requirements can, and often do, change. If the amount of actual work is a small fraction of the time allotted, then putting it off to the end of the timeframe can prevent having to re-do your work when things change. I've met a co-worker who used this reasoning explicitly, and she was very good at getting lots of work done (and on time too).
This isn't that new. People in unions can typically calculate what anyone else makes based on their position and seniority. People in the military know just by rank plus a couple other factors like danger pay. In Ontario, Canada if you work for the public sector and make over $100,000 your name and salary are published in a list every year (colloquially called the "sunshine list"). This is usually done for the same reasons stated above, and usually benefits the employees overall (which is why unions request it). Just because some companies do it, it's news?
What's in it for me?
So the correct way to handle that situation is to take a picture of the dufus that's taking a picture of a body being pulled out of a car, and post a picture of them on social media.
I assure you most effort in an office is wasted on Facebook, "news" (i.e. entertainment) sites, and Youtube. If that weren't enough, they have to waste the time of people around them who are working with stuff like "hey, did you see...?"
The original movies were done well over 30 years ago. The people who are fans of the originals and saw it in the theatre are parents now and want something similar to take their kids to see. These are people who've watched the originals dozens of times. They want almost exactly the same experience. It's supposed to be nostalgia, and it is. I salute Lucas for wanting to make a different movie, but it's probably wrong to make a different *Star Wars* movie. He's got 4 billion dollars now, he can go make as many interesting big budget high risk revolutionary movies as he wants. The thing is, he wanted to do that and have the guaranteed return of a Star Wars movie, which is how we ended up with the prequels. He was definitely pushing the technology of film-making with the prequels, but he also screwed up with the direction and didn't produce good movies.
Windmills do have a reasonable payback with government subsidies, so you can get capital to invest, but in most cases the purpose seems to be for someone with lots of money to be able to talk about his windmill farm at the country club, and if that's the case they need to be able to pull up the control panel on their iPhone to show their buddies.
This isn't too difficult. A couple years ago you could go to Shodan, search for well-known industrial automation equipment providers like Phoenix Contact, and try to find their devices with embedded web servers that someone has connected to the internet. Start clicking on IP addresses. Make sure you don't mess with anything you find. One interesting find was some of the big windmill turbines with real-time monitoring and everything. People installing this stuff really don't understand what they're doing.
That's kind of funny. I spent about 6 years driving through Detroit for my commute, and one day I was stuck in traffic on I-75 right downtown, and this small pickup stops next to me. An old beater of a car comes up behind him, doesn't stop in time and smacks the rear bumper of the truck. The guys get out of the truck, look at the bumper, jump on it a bit, and while this is happening, the driver of the car backs up, drives around the truck and leaves down the shoulder. During this, none of the guys from the truck even looked at the car or the guy driving the car. I was pretty shocked. I knew I was in the US but it felt a little like some 3rd world shit-hole that day, and let's be honest, downtown Detroit is pretty much a 3rd world shit-hole.
I imagine one of the problems (self-driving cars being rear-ended) is because when a light turns yellow or something happens, the self-driving car can react faster and might even apply the brakes much faster than a human would, so the normal space a person leaves to another human-driven car isn't enough. At least a symbol on the back indicating it's a self-driving car and a warning that it can brake faster than a human might help.
This assumes that what you're seeing with your eyes is "reality". There's no absolute proof of that. :)
They would also retain all the power and influence of being in control of Facebook, plus the power and influence of being the ones deciding where the foundation spends its money. I would assume one of the major things they want to do with the foundation is increase CS education, which they believe will directly benefit Facebook in decades to come. It's basically a way to withhold taxes from the government (which gets spent on things like education) and saying you'll spend it on education yourself, except you want to spend it on the parts of education that are important to you.
Wouldn't a million monkeys on a million typewriters eventually write something "really deep"? It's nice to use randomly generated strings of words but first of all you'd have to run them through a filter to make sure you didn't accidentally create one that really did have meaning, right?
As someone who has studied the subject, I can tell you that software-based "pseudo-" random number generators aren't really good enough for competition use, and making a true random number generator that actually generates bits of equal probability is somewhat difficult (it's been done but requires a lot of know-how). There are some very interesting designs. The other major problem is that as a user it's very difficult to validate that the device will work correctly. Sure you can do lots of tests, but it's a software based device, so it could be programmed to change odds at a later time, or change odds based on how you hold it, etc. I wouldn't trust one for the same reason I don't trust electronic voting machines: it's too easy to tamper with them and hide the evidence.
At a previous company we were making kiosks for securing some rather high value items. The storage lockers and the kiosk used an off-the-shelf Bluetooth board to communicate. My boss defined the communication spec, and part of it was that the kiosk had to use a hard coded password to the lockers in order to "authenticate." I had several arguments with him about how this wasn't really secure, and I proposed other ways to do it. Eventually he got annoyed (nobody likes being told they might be wrong). He told me in his best "bosses voice": "it's good enough." So we did it that way. That's how this shit happens. There were other security problems, like the fact that it was hooked to the customer's office network over their WiFi (with a WEP password), and included a built-in webserver for web reports, only used HTTP (not SSL). Even if the web interface used a password (can't remember) it likely sent it across in the clear.
I know you're trolling, but my wife is arguably smarter than I am (and has the Ph.D. to prove it). The fact is, outside of technology circles, nobody knows or cares about this stuff (which was my point).