One of the things the shuttle could do that most other spacecraft couldn't is to bring stuff down from space. Apparently the spooks liked this feature...
If nobody needed this feature, they wouldn't need all the crap you mentioned. Could send stuff to space way cheaper.
I've proposed this here (and to others) before: Start a TV reality show (or mock one) called "Vote Them Off The Planet".
Multiple categories - live contestants, politicians, celebrities, etc. One way and return. So you could have a mock vote to vote Obama or Bush off the planet- one way or return.
You could even have it for real where they could choose not to go (or choose to pay for the return trip if they "won" the one-way;) ).
The real reason was the US politicians were being insane/assholes/idiots about it. Not that the debt ceiling was raised, or had to be raised.
If you just "somehow find the money" to make the interest payments (as you did for how many dozen times), the banks wouldn't give a damn (even if it meant creating more US dollars out of thin air). Because the people working in those banks would just hope that the time you guys finally blow up, they might be safely retired in the Bahamas.
BUT the minute you have a very public discussion about whether you are going to bother to find the money or not, the banks will get worried. And rightfully so.
That's why many around the world were calling the US politicians all sorts of things: irresponsible, reckless, absurd etc.
They can't peacefully farm on the rich dirt by the volcano once the volcano makes crazy noises...
They love profit. If it makes them more money to host Cosmos they will. If it makes them more money to host a series on "Intelligent Design", they will. If it makes them even more money to host both series, they will- hey think of the synergies:).
If you're grumbling about Foxnews, from a Free Market Capitalist's view they're doing things fine, depending on how you measure it they're the top or amongst the top for their sector. Foxnews makes less money than CNN, but I'm sure if it was viable Fox would buy CNN to cover both demographics...
Years ago people could already look at BIND, Sendmail and other "ISC goodness" and work out the probability that they would have at least one exploitable vulnerability a year (>90%);). http://www.isc.org/advisories/bind?page=8
The problem is many people (bosses, project managers, developers, etc) don't understand the big difference between "Software Engineering" and say Civil Engineering.
In Civil Engineering creating all the blueprints and plastic models necessary is typically 1/10th the cost of building the "Real Thing", and make up a smaller portion of the total cost.
For software, creating the source code (drafts, blueprints) costs more than 100 times the cost of "make all" (building the "Real Thing"), and form a large portion of the total cost.
So if "stuff happens" and you need to spend 50% more to fix the design, with Civil Engineering the bosses are more likely to agree (unhappily) to "fix the design", because nobody can afford to build the whole building a few times till you get the design right...
Whereas with "Software Engineering", the bosses are more likely to go "Ship and sell it, we'll fix it in the next release!".
And if you're a boss, you'd likely do the same thing;).
So even if you could work out the probabilities of some software component failing, nobody would care. Because all you need to work out is: which bugs need to be fixed first, out of the hundreds or thousands of bugs.
That changes if you are willing to spend 10x the cost (in $$$ and time) of creating each internal "release". By the time the 10th (final) release is written and tested (specs remaining the same - no features added) the stuff should work rather reliably. But you'd be 5 years behind everyone else...
Wait this is only a network neutrality problem? If I did this to someone else wouldn't it be a computer crime?
I suppose it's like when Sony rootkits everybody it's just an embarrassment that they are caught doing it, but when I rootkit even one person it's a computer crime?
Early this year I "upgraded" from Sun VirtualBox to Oracle VitualBox, and stuff started to not work. In the end I had to uninstall and go back to the previous version.
these things have a limited amount of resources and thus keeping things running in the background, eating both CPU time and memory,
My 4GB PC at work has limited resources too. And it officially does not support more than 4GB RAM. So I do have to close apps from time to time, and restart them.
Firefox, Chrome etc all tend to use up hundreds of megabytes after a while. I use separate browsers so that I can isolate tasks, and test things differently.
There's now a way to maximize a window too. So you don't have to keep clicking on zoom just because more content has been added. Or manually maximizing windows by moving them and using the right hand corner...;)
Meh many people have been using Windows XP for years and it's been better than GNOME 3 for a decade. It might not be better than GNOME 2, but there must be a reason why Linus hasn't gone back to GNOME 2 either.;)
FWIW, I personally prefer the Win2K/"classic" mode, with all the task buttons ungrouped etc. But I guess I'm strange - my taskbar at work often has > 30 task buttons, I sent someone a pic of it to explain why OSX GUI and Expose won't be that helpful for me - it would require me to make extra clicks and waits. He called me a freak:).
I don't mind GUI designers creating GUIs for the people who like OSX style stuff. But I think GUI designers should keep in mind that computer gamers ( plus cashiers and "dumb terminal" users) are proof that significant numbers of people can actually learn to use UIs that allow trained/skilled users to achieve many actions per second. Anything that slows them down (like weapon/skill activation time) is usually considered a disadvantage and not a feature.
If you had to keep switching desktops or jumping through other hoops to find your units in Starcraft or some other RTS game it would be considered a disadvantage. Same if you had to pause for some fancy "expose" animation before you could select a unit. Or you were required to click on the group first then only be able to select a unit in that group.
If a cashier had to wait for some stupid animation before a button on the cash register worked it would be considered a bug. If some front-desk staff had to keep switching between mouse and keyboard to enter data it would also be considered a disadvantage.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know.
I've seen lots of people try it but do it wrong. They do a select, then insert if the row doesn't exist, update if it does. But if the row doesn't exist and something else tries the same thing at about the same time, both will correctly think the row doesn't exist and both will try to insert.
A constraint on the table it could prevent both inserts from succeeding and only allow one to succeed while raising an error with the other, but I personally prefer that such a DB error is avoided. DB errors can cause transactions to be rolled back, and create more work/problems.
Yeah. It's about time we had tech like this. The WiFi vendors and standards bunch have just been screwing up for nearly a decade. Now IBM has hopefully brought WiFi up to today's standards (which aren't that great but still better than what those WiFi bunch have come up with).
Now at least hotels, cafes etc can make a reasonable effort at providing some security for their guests/users.
I hope there's an "SSH-style" option, so we don't all have to pay CAs every year or so.
Slashdot Mirror
From my cynical POV, the industry is all about money and little to do with security. From the browser makers to the CAs.
The browsers by default won't warn you if say your US bank's server cert is one day signed by CNNIC (China) while you're in China. Or vice versa.
The CAs (Verisign, Comodo etc) have been known to sign certs that they shouldn't. And the browser makers don't kick those who repeatedly screw up.
One of the things the shuttle could do that most other spacecraft couldn't is to bring stuff down from space. Apparently the spooks liked this feature...
If nobody needed this feature, they wouldn't need all the crap you mentioned. Could send stuff to space way cheaper.
I've proposed this here (and to others) before: Start a TV reality show (or mock one) called "Vote Them Off The Planet".
;) ).
Multiple categories - live contestants, politicians, celebrities, etc. One way and return. So you could have a mock vote to vote Obama or Bush off the planet- one way or return.
You could even have it for real where they could choose not to go (or choose to pay for the return trip if they "won" the one-way
Force? Should be energy. Kinetic energy = 0.5 * mass * velocity ^ 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
Even google agrees. Google for: 1000 kg * (60 kph ) ^ 2
Notice the resulting unit is in joules and not newtons.
The real reason was the US politicians were being insane/assholes/idiots about it. Not that the debt ceiling was raised, or had to be raised.
If you just "somehow find the money" to make the interest payments (as you did for how many dozen times), the banks wouldn't give a damn (even if it meant creating more US dollars out of thin air). Because the people working in those banks would just hope that the time you guys finally blow up, they might be safely retired in the Bahamas.
BUT the minute you have a very public discussion about whether you are going to bother to find the money or not, the banks will get worried. And rightfully so.
That's why many around the world were calling the US politicians all sorts of things: irresponsible, reckless, absurd etc.
They can't peacefully farm on the rich dirt by the volcano once the volcano makes crazy noises...
why the hell an organization that hates science and rational thought is hosting Cosmos,
Does Fox really hate science? AFAIK they do National Geographic ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Geographic_Channel )
They love profit. If it makes them more money to host Cosmos they will. If it makes them more money to host a series on "Intelligent Design", they will. If it makes them even more money to host both series, they will- hey think of the synergies :).
If you're grumbling about Foxnews, from a Free Market Capitalist's view they're doing things fine, depending on how you measure it they're the top or amongst the top for their sector. Foxnews makes less money than CNN, but I'm sure if it was viable Fox would buy CNN to cover both demographics...
Years ago people could already look at BIND, Sendmail and other "ISC goodness" and work out the probability that they would have at least one exploitable vulnerability a year (>90%) ;). http://www.isc.org/advisories/bind?page=8
;).
The problem is many people (bosses, project managers, developers, etc) don't understand the big difference between "Software Engineering" and say Civil Engineering.
In Civil Engineering creating all the blueprints and plastic models necessary is typically 1/10th the cost of building the "Real Thing", and make up a smaller portion of the total cost.
For software, creating the source code (drafts, blueprints) costs more than 100 times the cost of "make all" (building the "Real Thing"), and form a large portion of the total cost.
So if "stuff happens" and you need to spend 50% more to fix the design, with Civil Engineering the bosses are more likely to agree (unhappily) to "fix the design", because nobody can afford to build the whole building a few times till you get the design right...
Whereas with "Software Engineering", the bosses are more likely to go "Ship and sell it, we'll fix it in the next release!".
And if you're a boss, you'd likely do the same thing
So even if you could work out the probabilities of some software component failing, nobody would care. Because all you need to work out is: which bugs need to be fixed first, out of the hundreds or thousands of bugs.
That changes if you are willing to spend 10x the cost (in $$$ and time) of creating each internal "release". By the time the 10th (final) release is written and tested (specs remaining the same - no features added) the stuff should work rather reliably. But you'd be 5 years behind everyone else...
That sure looks like bleeding edge technology...
Reminds me of this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8400222.stm
A Chinese woman managed to enter Japan illegally by having plastic surgery to alter her fingerprints, thus fooling immigration controls, police claim.
The iris scan ones aren't so bad for many things.
They don't work for those completely without eyes (note: many blind people still have eyes), but for many things eyes are already a prerequisite.
Wait this is only a network neutrality problem? If I did this to someone else wouldn't it be a computer crime?
I suppose it's like when Sony rootkits everybody it's just an embarrassment that they are caught doing it, but when I rootkit even one person it's a computer crime?
Early this year I "upgraded" from Sun VirtualBox to Oracle VitualBox, and stuff started to not work. In the end I had to uninstall and go back to the previous version.
No. Look at who most of the GNOME devs work for. That's who they listen to. That's why GNOME is what it is.
Let me guess: they're either working for Microsoft or Apple?
They might not be paid by Microsoft or Apple, but what they're doing certainly benefits Microsoft and Apple in the long term. ;)
these things have a limited amount of resources and thus keeping things running in the background, eating both CPU time and memory,
My 4GB PC at work has limited resources too. And it officially does not support more than 4GB RAM. So I do have to close apps from time to time, and restart them.
Firefox, Chrome etc all tend to use up hundreds of megabytes after a while. I use separate browsers so that I can isolate tasks, and test things differently.
There's now a way to maximize a window too. So you don't have to keep clicking on zoom just because more content has been added. Or manually maximizing windows by moving them and using the right hand corner... ;)
Because Linus has many followers. Leaders achieve some change by themselves alone, but greater change through their followers.
In your context he's just another user. But perhaps you should consider other contexts too.
Meh many people have been using Windows XP for years and it's been better than GNOME 3 for a decade. It might not be better than GNOME 2, but there must be a reason why Linus hasn't gone back to GNOME 2 either. ;)
:).
FWIW, I personally prefer the Win2K/"classic" mode, with all the task buttons ungrouped etc. But I guess I'm strange - my taskbar at work often has > 30 task buttons, I sent someone a pic of it to explain why OSX GUI and Expose won't be that helpful for me - it would require me to make extra clicks and waits. He called me a freak
I don't mind GUI designers creating GUIs for the people who like OSX style stuff. But I think GUI designers should keep in mind that computer gamers ( plus cashiers and "dumb terminal" users) are proof that significant numbers of people can actually learn to use UIs that allow trained/skilled users to achieve many actions per second. Anything that slows them down (like weapon/skill activation time) is usually considered a disadvantage and not a feature.
If you had to keep switching desktops or jumping through other hoops to find your units in Starcraft or some other RTS game it would be considered a disadvantage. Same if you had to pause for some fancy "expose" animation before you could select a unit. Or you were required to click on the group first then only be able to select a unit in that group.
If a cashier had to wait for some stupid animation before a button on the cash register worked it would be considered a bug. If some front-desk staff had to keep switching between mouse and keyboard to enter data it would also be considered a disadvantage.
Not phase change but somewhat related (tech that helps keep people comfy): http://www.uniqlo.com/ht_w/us/
As Donald Rumsfeld said:
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know.
I've seen lots of people try it but do it wrong. They do a select, then insert if the row doesn't exist, update if it does. But if the row doesn't exist and something else tries the same thing at about the same time, both will correctly think the row doesn't exist and both will try to insert.
A constraint on the table it could prevent both inserts from succeeding and only allow one to succeed while raising an error with the other, but I personally prefer that such a DB error is avoided. DB errors can cause transactions to be rolled back, and create more work/problems.
Doesn't matter how much time you spend hardening your system. If there is a single exploit in your system every piece of malware will use it.
Not true. Like the joke goes, I don't need to outrun the "bear", I only need to outrun the majority...
Wasn't "The Shining" a romantic comedy? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmkVWuP_sO0
p.s. Watch the Top Gun recut too...
Yeah. It's about time we had tech like this. The WiFi vendors and standards bunch have just been screwing up for nearly a decade. Now IBM has hopefully brought WiFi up to today's standards (which aren't that great but still better than what those WiFi bunch have come up with).
Now at least hotels, cafes etc can make a reasonable effort at providing some security for their guests/users.
I hope there's an "SSH-style" option, so we don't all have to pay CAs every year or so.
"REPLACE INTO" is NOT insert/update. it is insert and delete if there's a duplicate.
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/replace.html
If you want insert/update on mysql you use this: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/insert-on-duplicate.html
There is a difference between updating if there's a duplicate and deleting and inserting if there's a duplicate. The differences might cause pain :).
The Postgresql bunch appear to be working on implementing MERGE instead:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SQL_MERGE
At my workplace we probably have at least 100 VMs already, if not more. We have more VMs than employees.
4000VMs actually sounds interestingly low if its a global total.