Space travel is pretty old. All it really takes now is good engineering, and a lot of money. China may still be stifling innovation with central planning, but it is a lot better than the USSR in the days of Sputnik and Yuri Gargarin. If China says they can send a man into space, I really don't care to doubt them. The zero-carbon city they are building is a lot more interesting.
Cameras might change the behavior of rational criminals, but not crazy criminals. I expect that the crazy criminals will stay crazy (and get caught), while the rational criminals will invest in false plates or stolen cars, and balaclavas. Or maybe Ned-Kelly masks.
Or how about 25 years, flat? If you do the net-present-value calculations on the money that is likely to be received from a work, it's going to be basically zero after 25 years. All long copyright terms do is prevent our culture from properly assimilating works that should be on the public domain - artists cannot quote or adapt any work made since Mickey Mouse, without getting a license or risking a lawsuit. Mozart copied his predecessors, often to an outrageous extent. Great authors used to quote other authors. Now satire is the only defense against imitation.
Besides, some of like to use our computers for something other than running the OS. For example, Gentoo users can use the extra RAM to re-compile their kernel.
I hope they are registered and approved to engage in exclusive dealing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_dealing), otherwise they may be in hot water with the ACCC over the TPA.
Good article. It says that crime rates in the UK are flat, or decreasing. The only reason the media are worried is because changing demographics are shifting poor people from Glasgow (and other traditionally poor regions) into London, and bringing crime closer to the reporters.
Personally, I see the use of black box software as an unrepeatable experiment, which I don't see as scientific. Black box software can depend on arbitrary parameters, filtered outputs, or the other tricks that can hide in the software, without any public scrutiny or review. How about just replacing the results section with "trust me, I tested it".
Let's add a fourth category to Unnecessary, Invalid, and Bullying. Failure to differentiate patents from copywrite. A template or classification system is essentially a "system and method", so it really falls under patents, not copywrite (protection of creative works). Unlike literature or software, a classification system is not a work of art. So why not sue using the patent (if they wanted one)? OK, I'm not a lawyer, and they may have a case. I'm still pissed off at the concept.
I believe that the exact wording was a "contract to begin developing". No helmets, just the groundwork. I guess that could be $4M. As for soldiers panicking, the helmet would probably pick it up, and show a busy sign or something. Come to think of it, showing when a soldier is in a state of panic (or rage) could be more useful then the communication component.
OK, Afghanistan is a difficult battlefield, with no real oil. If the US wanted a scapegoat, they could have gone straight for Saddam, or that guy in Iran. Framing Osama bin Laden for 9/11 does not make any sense, it's just plain paranoid. Why not pick a scapegoat who is either easier to blame (like Saddam), or completely fictional (1984 style).
After Iraq, if the US asks to inspect anyone people will just say that the US is not to be trusted on weapons inspections. Dictators will be able to claim that the US is sending in spies, not working towards disarmament. With Russia going nuts, and Pakistan on the brink, the US has lost the credibility it needs to diffuse international conflicts.
OK, google "fizzbuzz". A large number of people in the industry (especially "qualified" ones, who haven't been selected for skill) have no idea how to work with computers. People plagiarize at university, get friends to sit their exams, and lie on resumes. There is no better indicator than an on-site, in-person coding test. Some tests are better than others (some employers are not too competent themselves), but there is no other way to verify whether a potential hire is remotely competent. It's not the only indicator (other indicators can be used once the candidate has been pegged as potentially useful), but failing to use it is suicide for any business that can't afford to have worse than useless programmers.
Yet you are not tired of the internet, which is popular *because* it is anonymous. If the internet wanted people to have a solid identity, then we would have seen it arise. White lists have never worked, and white lists are basically the same as having an identity.
OK, I'd be careful of the whole social networking thing. I'm pretty sure that if you meet a potential spouse through this, the rights on your first born child are forfeit to Apple, Nike, and AT&T.
Toyota is run by automotive engineers. They do pretty good.
Re:I don't know if I fully agree with that
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'd say that a GREAT manager can be anyone, as long as they know to trust the right people, and have all the management and people skills. An indifferent manager (i.e. most of them - micro-managers, churners, money-hosers, process nuts, looneys) becomes truly awful when they have no idea what they are doing. And you can bet that the nightmare hire MBA that can't be fired for political reasons gets shafted to IT, rather than sales or operations or anything important.
OK, so Apple is taking a note from the playbook of the dinosaur mainframe corporations? Proprietary systems, closed systems, fully integrated from top to bottom. Not to mention the complete lack of class.
And they don't want to destroy the innovative, anti-Microsoft, pro-Google Firefox or Safari browsers. No sensible parasite kills its host. They only want to take down IE, which drives traffic to MS search.
OK, so he fucked up. Still, it takes one event like this, and about 100 potential white hats are going to decide that disclosure is a mugs game. Better to break in and steal stuff, or don't bother about security at all. Too few programmers / admins learn security, because it practically makes you a criminal. So who will bother apart from a diminishing number of professional white hats, and an increasing number of professional criminals?
Slashdot Mirror
Space travel is pretty old. All it really takes now is good engineering, and a lot of money. China may still be stifling innovation with central planning, but it is a lot better than the USSR in the days of Sputnik and Yuri Gargarin. If China says they can send a man into space, I really don't care to doubt them. The zero-carbon city they are building is a lot more interesting.
Cameras might change the behavior of rational criminals, but not crazy criminals. I expect that the crazy criminals will stay crazy (and get caught), while the rational criminals will invest in false plates or stolen cars, and balaclavas. Or maybe Ned-Kelly masks.
Or how about 25 years, flat? If you do the net-present-value calculations on the money that is likely to be received from a work, it's going to be basically zero after 25 years. All long copyright terms do is prevent our culture from properly assimilating works that should be on the public domain - artists cannot quote or adapt any work made since Mickey Mouse, without getting a license or risking a lawsuit. Mozart copied his predecessors, often to an outrageous extent. Great authors used to quote other authors. Now satire is the only defense against imitation.
Besides, some of like to use our computers for something other than running the OS. For example, Gentoo users can use the extra RAM to re-compile their kernel.
It's a pity that funny only goes to +5.
Is SFU and SUA what the developers in Microsoft use to do real work?
This is a very good reason for *not* regulating PayPal as a bank or broker. PayPal competitors couldn't afford the red tape.
I hope they are registered and approved to engage in exclusive dealing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_dealing), otherwise they may be in hot water with the ACCC over the TPA.
Good article. It says that crime rates in the UK are flat, or decreasing. The only reason the media are worried is because changing demographics are shifting poor people from Glasgow (and other traditionally poor regions) into London, and bringing crime closer to the reporters.
Personally, I see the use of black box software as an unrepeatable experiment, which I don't see as scientific. Black box software can depend on arbitrary parameters, filtered outputs, or the other tricks that can hide in the software, without any public scrutiny or review. How about just replacing the results section with "trust me, I tested it".
Let's add a fourth category to Unnecessary, Invalid, and Bullying. Failure to differentiate patents from copywrite. A template or classification system is essentially a "system and method", so it really falls under patents, not copywrite (protection of creative works). Unlike literature or software, a classification system is not a work of art. So why not sue using the patent (if they wanted one)? OK, I'm not a lawyer, and they may have a case. I'm still pissed off at the concept.
I believe that the exact wording was a "contract to begin developing". No helmets, just the groundwork. I guess that could be $4M. As for soldiers panicking, the helmet would probably pick it up, and show a busy sign or something. Come to think of it, showing when a soldier is in a state of panic (or rage) could be more useful then the communication component.
Globally find and replace '3' with '9999999'. What could possibly go wrong?
"the term is ex-CIA *Asset* " .. I think banks have similar terminology.
OK, Afghanistan is a difficult battlefield, with no real oil. If the US wanted a scapegoat, they could have gone straight for Saddam, or that guy in Iran. Framing Osama bin Laden for 9/11 does not make any sense, it's just plain paranoid. Why not pick a scapegoat who is either easier to blame (like Saddam), or completely fictional (1984 style).
After Iraq, if the US asks to inspect anyone people will just say that the US is not to be trusted on weapons inspections. Dictators will be able to claim that the US is sending in spies, not working towards disarmament. With Russia going nuts, and Pakistan on the brink, the US has lost the credibility it needs to diffuse international conflicts.
Well, there are probably laws against testing lawyers. They wrote them all, remember? Don't mod this funny, it's not.
OK, google "fizzbuzz". A large number of people in the industry (especially "qualified" ones, who haven't been selected for skill) have no idea how to work with computers. People plagiarize at university, get friends to sit their exams, and lie on resumes. There is no better indicator than an on-site, in-person coding test. Some tests are better than others (some employers are not too competent themselves), but there is no other way to verify whether a potential hire is remotely competent. It's not the only indicator (other indicators can be used once the candidate has been pegged as potentially useful), but failing to use it is suicide for any business that can't afford to have worse than useless programmers.
Yet you are not tired of the internet, which is popular *because* it is anonymous. If the internet wanted people to have a solid identity, then we would have seen it arise. White lists have never worked, and white lists are basically the same as having an identity.
OK, I'd be careful of the whole social networking thing. I'm pretty sure that if you meet a potential spouse through this, the rights on your first born child are forfeit to Apple, Nike, and AT&T.
Toyota is run by automotive engineers. They do pretty good.
I'd say that a GREAT manager can be anyone, as long as they know to trust the right people, and have all the management and people skills. An indifferent manager (i.e. most of them - micro-managers, churners, money-hosers, process nuts, looneys) becomes truly awful when they have no idea what they are doing. And you can bet that the nightmare hire MBA that can't be fired for political reasons gets shafted to IT, rather than sales or operations or anything important.
OK, so Apple is taking a note from the playbook of the dinosaur mainframe corporations? Proprietary systems, closed systems, fully integrated from top to bottom. Not to mention the complete lack of class.
And they don't want to destroy the innovative, anti-Microsoft, pro-Google Firefox or Safari browsers. No sensible parasite kills its host. They only want to take down IE, which drives traffic to MS search.
OK, so he fucked up. Still, it takes one event like this, and about 100 potential white hats are going to decide that disclosure is a mugs game. Better to break in and steal stuff, or don't bother about security at all. Too few programmers / admins learn security, because it practically makes you a criminal. So who will bother apart from a diminishing number of professional white hats, and an increasing number of professional criminals?