I personally think that Valve's tech would mesh quite well with modern laser tag arenas. Basically give everyone a VR headset, a "gun" and play it in an empty warehouse. The only real problem is the price or rather the danger of breaking one in the action.
Not everybody lives in US suburbia where space is plentiful and the houses are made of cardboard. (Yes, I know, wood beams and drywall.) I live in an apartment in a beautiful old building. The apartment is 90 m (968 sqft) but only three large room (plus bath and kitchen). Being a family of three you get my child's bedroom, the living room and bedroom. In out case the bedroom also doubles are office.
Once you are over a certain age, social convention has it that you don't have a PC in the living room. Many have an office, but that commonly gets converted into a bedroom for a child once that's on the way. The result is that, unless you are exorbitantly wealthy and you have a dedicated office, the PC moves back into the bedroom.
The issue is not that they are not science, but that they are darn hard to isolate. Neuroscience is quite straight forward, it's basically applied chemistry. Psychology becomes harder to isolate. Although it technically is just applied neuroscience, but unless you constantly take blood samples, monitor the brain waves and have an exact map of the brain, it will contain allot of fuzzy guess work. Sociology is get worse, since it is applied psychology to a large group of people. The key problem is that the system they are trying to describe is constantly changing. Even worse, policy makers are tying to influence the system based on the findings of sociology. Economy is basically just sociology centered around money. Here the feedback loop is even worse, people are constantly trying to influence the system. The key problem is if ever the system is sufficiently well described (it that is ever possible), this model becomes invalid the moment people try to game eh system using that model.
I think you two are thinking along the correct lines. Although ex-military types may have the better training and discipline, they still generally have a well adjusted moral compass (at first), but the criminal types don't. The criminals may still have the upper hand, until the shooting starts, since they don't care for others.
The key point that shows this is a scam is the fact that they are equipped and stocked for one year. In almost all scenarios where you would need something like this, one year later is not much less lethal than the day you got into the shelter. Generally speaking, if you take it seriously, you should aim for 25 years.
I also find the claim that the shelter will sustain a direct hit by a nuclear bomb ludicrous. I think they do not realize what a nuke can do in lay down deployment. Nuclear bunkers that are built for direct hit are a thick outer shell and an inner shell connected by hydraulic shock absorbents. Most nuclear shelters where designed with the calculated risk that they will not survive a direct hit, since you will not waste a nuke on civil targets. (If that is true, is a totally different question.)
Looks out of window, yup coal plant still running as base load / backup for wind.
Power generation of wind may be the cheapest, but it generally is not factored into the equation, that other power plants need to be ready to take up the slack when demand rises or generation drops. But since that is the problem of the network operator, not the power plant operator, this is generally handled under "transmission costs". The network operators pay reliable power plants run on standby and these are commonly nuclear, coal and gas power plants. This is then partially subsidized, a subsidy that is commonly not associated with the wind power generation.
Ignoring the financial aspect of it all, as long as coal and gas power plants serve as base load providers for wind and solar, no ecological gain is achieved. The problem is that big coal power plants need the better part of a day to go from cold to operational, but need to switch into the network within seconds. The result is that they run in standby, which still produces 75% of the CO2 but adds no power to the Grid.
What if that ubernerd, brony and pony BDSM loving person is your no. 1 contributor? Who cares what it does while not coding, if the code is awesome, functional and just fits in?
This is more a matter of priorities. Generally speaking in open source development everybody is time poor. You get a bunch of requests on input on how do to something, half of them never become contributors, even if you invest time. As a result idle chatter on possible solutions is held to a minimum. On the other hand a patch must either be accepted or rejected. As a result it must be reviewed and thus it will get focus form core developers. Although it may appear so, it has nothing to do with power display, it is simple a human trait to work on the important things (accepting & rejecting patches) and mostly ignoring idle chatter. This is one of the reasons you don't generally hear much in mailing lists by the core developers.
The irony if it all is that Brooks himself proposed solutions how to cope with the Mythical Man Month. One of them was the "surgical team". In that developers are supported by additional staff. That is you don't add programmers to the team, you add specialists that take tasks of the hands of the programmers so that the programmers can work more efficient. If I see this correct, TFA is suggesting just that; split the problem into smaller problems (divide and conquer) and then put additional staff on hand to manage the Ops part and closely mesh them with the Dev part, thus DevOps. If people would actually read the damned book they would not spout nonsense the they are "proving this decades-old theory wrong", when actually implementing variations on solutions proposed in 1975!
In addition to that, the issue of gender is sort of fake. Since most open source is done online and everybody hides behind nicknames and avatars gender the last thing you know about a contributor. You just can't tell the gender un1c0rn23@gmail.com and if you can something is deeply wrong with that person. This is about software development and not a singles bar.
I find the "I'm a girl and you hurt my feelings" type of articles and posts really odd. Somehow you should sense that the contributor is a woman and thus be "nice" to her; like accept all patches unquestioned or something. I have shied away from some projects where the meritocracy was too deeply entrenched, but the last thing I would think about was writing a long article how mean these people are...
I think in this case the issue was not really the fraud protection, but the abysmal customer service. Similar things happened to my, but one phone call always resolves the issue; even at 11PM on Sunday.
Yes they will and that is a future you need to get to grips with. Now these systems that are tested now will still have a driver on board. They may reduce the regulation on mandatory breaks and maximum working hours, but we are talking 5-10% reduction in workforce. I seriously don't think that any real autonomous car or truck will be fielded any time soon, within the next ten years.
Trains are only efficient if you can get the train full. For example, take mail. For about the same capacity, you can send one train with 7 carriages once a week or one truck every day. Sure the trucks are probably more expensive, but the customer would rather have their book tomorrow morning for a higher fee, than in a week. Trains only work where really large amount of freight is transported from one location to the other and the actual duration of trip is not that important. These are thinks like raw materials, such as coal; a domain where you will also see river barges.
I once drove a car that was fitted with adaptive cruise control and lane assist. I very rarely needed to do anything, just watch traffic and be ready when the systems disengaged or misbehaved. This system is basically a beefed up version of the combination of the two.
This feels quite like the autopilot on an airplane. You focus on the big picture tasks and don't concentrate on the minute details of flying the airplane. The result is that the pilot is more alert over a longer period of time.
I can see these type of systems work, well before we see fully autonomous cars. The Google cars look interesting, but are a joke if you look at the details and the amount of precise and accurate data that needs to be fed into the system. These systems work of the bat and need little extra data and can rely on nothing but their sensors.
learn a proper object oriented language before you write any serious programs
Although I agree with the general gist of your comment; I could not disagree more strongly about learning a "proper object oriented language". I would rather have you learn functional programming than object oriented; but optimally both. The problem is that allot of object oriented code is redundant and bloated, generally stemming from kingdom of the nouns type syndrome. Hybrid languages like C++ or JavaScript are genius in that you can mix functional and object oriented programming to form a concise solution to the problem.
Google is a search engine, it should not be liable to the content it indexes. The "right to be forgotten" as applies to say Facebook makes sense, if you close your account you have the right that all content about you and of you is deleted. What google is handling is not data about people, it's data about publicly available web sites. If a news outlet reports falsely about you, bring it up to them (slander and libel laws). But articles that are truthful a few years in the past should not be magically delisted.
Getting training is not the same as certification. Yes if you want to become a project manager, training is a good idea; but that is true for all field of work. The certification on the other hand is in my opinion nonsense. Basically all certification proves that you where able to sit down and learn the answers to a set of possible questions. It does not convey any skill in actually performing the task.
The interesting thing and lack of basic reasoning skills comes from the fact that Dr. Richardson apparently can only picture sex robots as being a simulacrum of the female gender. Although I don't have hard numbers at hand, I read in an interview with the Real Doll creator, that the male gender did sell almost as well as their female gendered dolls. The kicker is that most dolls were soled with the swap-able genitalia and both genitalia. If we see a usable sex robot any time soon, you can rest assured that it will probably come in both gendered versions.
But no, let's make this about women and how they are objectified.
AND that is what TFA sais. In 3.5% of all reports, the incident was classified as a NMAC (near mid air collision). The remainder of the reports where either air space violations, flying above 500 ft AGL in C or B airspace (5 nm from an Airport), incidents with military drones, that have a special FAA permission or vague reports that my not have been a drone at all, like a "drone" at 51,000 ft.
The only thing the hobbyist are pointing out is that the report appears to be way worse than it actually is.
I liked LILO, because of the simple fact that is was so much simpler than GRUB. If you are booting a single partition system (plus swap) from ext3, there is not much wizbang you need. But then I also just use what the distro uses by default, since it works out of the box.
Actually that analogy holds up quite well, just they ignore the corollary. A good craftsman does not blame his tools, since he knows that the tool selection process is part of the job. A good craftsman will not even start a job with a crappy tool.
Exactly, I was going to propose SCL (Simatic Control Language), but you beat me to it. SCL is a pre standard dialect of IEC 61131-3, ST. In the case of PCS7 the CFC and SFC code is first translated to SCL and then to S7 byte code.
Slashdot Mirror
I personally think that Valve's tech would mesh quite well with modern laser tag arenas. Basically give everyone a VR headset, a "gun" and play it in an empty warehouse. The only real problem is the price or rather the danger of breaking one in the action.
It's awwwww right.
Not everybody lives in US suburbia where space is plentiful and the houses are made of cardboard. (Yes, I know, wood beams and drywall.) I live in an apartment in a beautiful old building. The apartment is 90 m (968 sqft) but only three large room (plus bath and kitchen). Being a family of three you get my child's bedroom, the living room and bedroom. In out case the bedroom also doubles are office.
Once you are over a certain age, social convention has it that you don't have a PC in the living room. Many have an office, but that commonly gets converted into a bedroom for a child once that's on the way. The result is that, unless you are exorbitantly wealthy and you have a dedicated office, the PC moves back into the bedroom.
Were I a philosopher of mathematics, I'd have a theory
I think for a start you would have a hypothesis. *Flies away.*
The issue is not that they are not science, but that they are darn hard to isolate. Neuroscience is quite straight forward, it's basically applied chemistry. Psychology becomes harder to isolate. Although it technically is just applied neuroscience, but unless you constantly take blood samples, monitor the brain waves and have an exact map of the brain, it will contain allot of fuzzy guess work. Sociology is get worse, since it is applied psychology to a large group of people. The key problem is that the system they are trying to describe is constantly changing. Even worse, policy makers are tying to influence the system based on the findings of sociology. Economy is basically just sociology centered around money. Here the feedback loop is even worse, people are constantly trying to influence the system. The key problem is if ever the system is sufficiently well described (it that is ever possible), this model becomes invalid the moment people try to game eh system using that model.
I think you two are thinking along the correct lines. Although ex-military types may have the better training and discipline, they still generally have a well adjusted moral compass (at first), but the criminal types don't. The criminals may still have the upper hand, until the shooting starts, since they don't care for others.
The key point that shows this is a scam is the fact that they are equipped and stocked for one year. In almost all scenarios where you would need something like this, one year later is not much less lethal than the day you got into the shelter. Generally speaking, if you take it seriously, you should aim for 25 years.
I also find the claim that the shelter will sustain a direct hit by a nuclear bomb ludicrous. I think they do not realize what a nuke can do in lay down deployment. Nuclear bunkers that are built for direct hit are a thick outer shell and an inner shell connected by hydraulic shock absorbents. Most nuclear shelters where designed with the calculated risk that they will not survive a direct hit, since you will not waste a nuke on civil targets. (If that is true, is a totally different question.)
Looks out of window, yup coal plant still running as base load / backup for wind.
Power generation of wind may be the cheapest, but it generally is not factored into the equation, that other power plants need to be ready to take up the slack when demand rises or generation drops. But since that is the problem of the network operator, not the power plant operator, this is generally handled under "transmission costs". The network operators pay reliable power plants run on standby and these are commonly nuclear, coal and gas power plants. This is then partially subsidized, a subsidy that is commonly not associated with the wind power generation.
Ignoring the financial aspect of it all, as long as coal and gas power plants serve as base load providers for wind and solar, no ecological gain is achieved. The problem is that big coal power plants need the better part of a day to go from cold to operational, but need to switch into the network within seconds. The result is that they run in standby, which still produces 75% of the CO2 but adds no power to the Grid.
What if that ubernerd, brony and pony BDSM loving person is your no. 1 contributor? Who cares what it does while not coding, if the code is awesome, functional and just fits in?
This is more a matter of priorities. Generally speaking in open source development everybody is time poor. You get a bunch of requests on input on how do to something, half of them never become contributors, even if you invest time. As a result idle chatter on possible solutions is held to a minimum. On the other hand a patch must either be accepted or rejected. As a result it must be reviewed and thus it will get focus form core developers. Although it may appear so, it has nothing to do with power display, it is simple a human trait to work on the important things (accepting & rejecting patches) and mostly ignoring idle chatter. This is one of the reasons you don't generally hear much in mailing lists by the core developers.
The irony if it all is that Brooks himself proposed solutions how to cope with the Mythical Man Month. One of them was the "surgical team". In that developers are supported by additional staff. That is you don't add programmers to the team, you add specialists that take tasks of the hands of the programmers so that the programmers can work more efficient. If I see this correct, TFA is suggesting just that; split the problem into smaller problems (divide and conquer) and then put additional staff on hand to manage the Ops part and closely mesh them with the Dev part, thus DevOps. If people would actually read the damned book they would not spout nonsense the they are "proving this decades-old theory wrong", when actually implementing variations on solutions proposed in 1975!
In addition to that, the issue of gender is sort of fake. Since most open source is done online and everybody hides behind nicknames and avatars gender the last thing you know about a contributor. You just can't tell the gender un1c0rn23@gmail.com and if you can something is deeply wrong with that person. This is about software development and not a singles bar.
I find the "I'm a girl and you hurt my feelings" type of articles and posts really odd. Somehow you should sense that the contributor is a woman and thus be "nice" to her; like accept all patches unquestioned or something. I have shied away from some projects where the meritocracy was too deeply entrenched, but the last thing I would think about was writing a long article how mean these people are...
I think in this case the issue was not really the fraud protection, but the abysmal customer service. Similar things happened to my, but one phone call always resolves the issue; even at 11PM on Sunday.
Yes they will and that is a future you need to get to grips with. Now these systems that are tested now will still have a driver on board. They may reduce the regulation on mandatory breaks and maximum working hours, but we are talking 5-10% reduction in workforce. I seriously don't think that any real autonomous car or truck will be fielded any time soon, within the next ten years.
Trains are only efficient if you can get the train full. For example, take mail. For about the same capacity, you can send one train with 7 carriages once a week or one truck every day. Sure the trucks are probably more expensive, but the customer would rather have their book tomorrow morning for a higher fee, than in a week. Trains only work where really large amount of freight is transported from one location to the other and the actual duration of trip is not that important. These are thinks like raw materials, such as coal; a domain where you will also see river barges.
I once drove a car that was fitted with adaptive cruise control and lane assist. I very rarely needed to do anything, just watch traffic and be ready when the systems disengaged or misbehaved. This system is basically a beefed up version of the combination of the two.
This feels quite like the autopilot on an airplane. You focus on the big picture tasks and don't concentrate on the minute details of flying the airplane. The result is that the pilot is more alert over a longer period of time.
I can see these type of systems work, well before we see fully autonomous cars. The Google cars look interesting, but are a joke if you look at the details and the amount of precise and accurate data that needs to be fed into the system. These systems work of the bat and need little extra data and can rely on nothing but their sensors.
learn a proper object oriented language before you write any serious programs
Although I agree with the general gist of your comment; I could not disagree more strongly about learning a "proper object oriented language". I would rather have you learn functional programming than object oriented; but optimally both. The problem is that allot of object oriented code is redundant and bloated, generally stemming from kingdom of the nouns type syndrome. Hybrid languages like C++ or JavaScript are genius in that you can mix functional and object oriented programming to form a concise solution to the problem.
Google is a search engine, it should not be liable to the content it indexes. The "right to be forgotten" as applies to say Facebook makes sense, if you close your account you have the right that all content about you and of you is deleted. What google is handling is not data about people, it's data about publicly available web sites. If a news outlet reports falsely about you, bring it up to them (slander and libel laws). But articles that are truthful a few years in the past should not be magically delisted.
Yes but it appears that only the French are bonkers enough to think to apply the law world wide.
Getting training is not the same as certification. Yes if you want to become a project manager, training is a good idea; but that is true for all field of work. The certification on the other hand is in my opinion nonsense. Basically all certification proves that you where able to sit down and learn the answers to a set of possible questions. It does not convey any skill in actually performing the task.
The interesting thing and lack of basic reasoning skills comes from the fact that Dr. Richardson apparently can only picture sex robots as being a simulacrum of the female gender. Although I don't have hard numbers at hand, I read in an interview with the Real Doll creator, that the male gender did sell almost as well as their female gendered dolls. The kicker is that most dolls were soled with the swap-able genitalia and both genitalia. If we see a usable sex robot any time soon, you can rest assured that it will probably come in both gendered versions.
But no, let's make this about women and how they are objectified.
AND that is what TFA sais. In 3.5% of all reports, the incident was classified as a NMAC (near mid air collision). The remainder of the reports where either air space violations, flying above 500 ft AGL in C or B airspace (5 nm from an Airport), incidents with military drones, that have a special FAA permission or vague reports that my not have been a drone at all, like a "drone" at 51,000 ft.
The only thing the hobbyist are pointing out is that the report appears to be way worse than it actually is.
I liked LILO, because of the simple fact that is was so much simpler than GRUB. If you are booting a single partition system (plus swap) from ext3, there is not much wizbang you need. But then I also just use what the distro uses by default, since it works out of the box.
Actually that analogy holds up quite well, just they ignore the corollary. A good craftsman does not blame his tools, since he knows that the tool selection process is part of the job. A good craftsman will not even start a job with a crappy tool.
Exactly, I was going to propose SCL (Simatic Control Language), but you beat me to it. SCL is a pre standard dialect of IEC 61131-3, ST. In the case of PCS7 the CFC and SFC code is first translated to SCL and then to S7 byte code.