By 'console' I was thinking of a web interface provided by the smart meter, similar to a wireless router console.
On second thought, the extra features I was hoping for wouldn't really work without replacing the outlets. The smart meter could only switch per-circuit, which generally *would* require re-wiring to target individual outlets.
Also, supplying DC or different AC voltages without changing the socket would require each device to safely handle being plugged in to a 'dumb' outlet. Better to just have the device use its own power converter.
The DC support I'm fishing for is primarily for lighting, but then again costs vs. benefits of 'smart' outlets aren't so hot for lighting. Probably better to have separate DC (lighting) and AC (everything else) distribution within the home/building, with different outlet standards for each.
For non-lighting DC use, my main issue currently is the proliferation of incompatible AC to DC adapters. That could be fixed by standardized adapters, no pressing need to supply DC straight from the wall.
So no need to upgrade wiring or outlets, just add support for negotiating power requirements (e.g. max amps, voltage, AC frequency or DC) between the device and smart meter using ethernet-over-powerline before turning the mains circuit on?
Allow support for configuring individual outlets as 'smart' (safer but only works with support on the device) or 'dumb' (plain old AC mains outlet) via the smart meter's console, and you've got a sane upgrade path.
Apart from better metering, I like the potential for improved safety that could come with redesigning outlets, if it means that:
A toddler can't stick metal objects in the socket and get electrocuted.
Power doesn't come on if it's at risk of overloading the circuit (i.e. maximum required current is negotiated against what's available).
Power doesn't come on if it's at the wrong voltage or frequency.
Power doesn't come on if the device requires grounding or surge/spike protection that isn't present.
Also a good opportunity to get an international standard outlet (please, not the parallel pins), and a chance to look at DC from the socket. And maybe put an end to ground loops while we're at it?
Erm, so the argument is that something that is considered poor style shouldn't be mentioned in a style guide? Doesn't hold water I'm afraid.
Whether or not it's obvious isn't even relevant. The point of the style guide is to prescribe good style. It's obvious you shouldn't drive your car on the sidewalk, so why have a law against it?
What's more, the question of how best to refer to the user really is of interest to developers who weren't itching to type 'bitch'. Some likely options:
The invention here is just tooling for data mining commit data. And as such it's a great, since the alternatives are to review commits manually (too inefficient and error-prone), or ignoring commit data altogether (and instead basing management decisions on, um...).
Only a robot or an incompetent manager would take the generated profiles at face value. They could take them as a starting point, and follow through with manual spot checks on commit quality, and as a talking point for performance reviews.
In the past I've appealed to commit stats for performance appraisals. It's as good an objective measure as I could think of, and absolutely good enough to identify substandard employee performance.
I know everyone has the right to justify their own lives how they want, but the underlying reason you want to earn more money is so that you can have more sex, and the reason you want to have more sex is so that you can have more kids.
I sort of agree, the OP can likely skim and toss that one.
But once they're 'out in the real world', they'll likely be working with people that really should read it. Then it'd be handy for beating people over the head with.
Taking that line a bit further, retailers might be better pushing back on the brands/manufactures to make up their shortfall, rather than trying to herd customers. After all, the physical presence of the B&M stores, plus their advertising on TV, flyers, etc, all adds brand value to what they're selling. Take that away, and brand owners will have to make a bigger direct investment in advertising themselves, or lose exposure.
So the switch is that the current-day B&M drop their own branding and instead operate as licensed showrooms for the brands they sell. The in-store prices are the same as online - or less, particularly in the case of ex-demo, end-of-line stock, and in-store promotions.
They could even go exclusive so that you can only buy brand X from brand X's own online store or showroom, but that's maybe not a good idea if purpose of the showroom is to compete with other brands rather than other retailers.
The concept of advertising on FB is much more solid than people spending a lot of time on the site. FB knows a lot about you and the recommendations of people you know or respect. Thus it can target you with advertising that you might actually be interested in.
I consider it abhorrent, BUT, if the ads served up for me were mostly useful rather than mostly junk, I'd hate advertising just a bit less.
There's a grain of a good idea there though. We could have an escrow-like system where two cloud providers are involved, with network connectivity between them that is fast and cheap. One provider is used for storage only, and one for processing only.
By combining storage and session keys, unencrypted data would only be exposed briefly on the 'processing' provider while it's being queried. And where feasible, store individual values encrypted end-to-end, and only decrypt them on a trusted machine.
Not perfect of course, but perhaps a useful compromise. It might also be possible to offset the extra bandwidth costs by combining the best deal on storage with the best deal on processing.
The reasoning in TFA is even worse than in the summary - the claim that 'sounding out' doesn't happen is based on MRI scans of a particular brain region that responded only to the shapes, irrespective of the sounds they represented.
Ermm, so what if the 'sounding out' actually does happen, but in a different brain region? Oops, didn't think of that!
I'm pretty certain the 'sounding out' does always happen, on some level. For example, if I see the word 'night', there's going to be neural activation associated with a hard 'G' sound (and a soft 'G' sound, and an 'H' sound), even though it's irrelevant to the word, and even though I'm not consciously aware of it.
Except that the corporation doesn't set the share price, the market does. And in the case of MSFT, it appears the market got it badly wrong.
That is to say, the disgruntled shareholders should be humbly flagellating themselves for paying too much for the stock in the first place.
Looking at Y-Charts over the decade, MSFT has been delivering solid profit growth save for a small hiccup in 2002. But over the same period, its P/E ratio (basically, the market's fudge factor for expected growth) has declined from an absurdly high what-were-they-thinking 50+ to a very affordable 10. Good marks for the company, bad marks for the market.
(OK, I'm assuming here that MSFT didn't fool the market with bad guidance along the way...)
But now we have the internet, the great leveller. Main reason the game hasn't changed yet is that the electoral cycles are long, so things happen in slow motion.
Just look at the way campaigns are turning to viral marketing these days. Having money to throw around doesn't help so much there, so someone with modest means and good ideas could certainly eat the big boys' lunch.
You may well be correct from a legal standpoint in some jurisdictions, but regardless of the law, 'downloading is a copyright violation' is just plain fucking braindead. Not least because it's inconsistent with how copyright licensing actually works.
When I download a song from iTunes, I rely on someone on the other end of the wire having a legal right to make that copy. I don't have to obtain permission from the publisher or artist, it's up to Apple to ensure the transaction is legal. The understanding is that it's them making the copy, not me.
So how do I know that downloading from iTunes isn't a copyright violation, but downloading for free from the WarezHouse website or from Joe Random over P2P is?
Other than a gut feeling about how reputable the source is, I really don't have a fucking clue, and no chance of getting a fucking clue either. And yet now my entire life - financial situation, lifestyle, criminal record - are at risk if I get it wrong.
Sorry for being pedantic, but neither T-SQL nor PL/SQL is an SQL dialect. They're both procedural languages that support embedded SQL. SQL itself is a declarative language.
Apart from the ANSI standards, SQL dialects don't seem to have names in common usage, as it's generally implied by the DBMS, e.g. if you're talking about SQL on an Oracle database, then everyone knows you're using Oracle's dialect of SQL.
Slashdot Mirror
By 'console' I was thinking of a web interface provided by the smart meter, similar to a wireless router console.
On second thought, the extra features I was hoping for wouldn't really work without replacing the outlets. The smart meter could only switch per-circuit, which generally *would* require re-wiring to target individual outlets.
Also, supplying DC or different AC voltages without changing the socket would require each device to safely handle being plugged in to a 'dumb' outlet. Better to just have the device use its own power converter.
The DC support I'm fishing for is primarily for lighting, but then again costs vs. benefits of 'smart' outlets aren't so hot for lighting. Probably better to have separate DC (lighting) and AC (everything else) distribution within the home/building, with different outlet standards for each.
For non-lighting DC use, my main issue currently is the proliferation of incompatible AC to DC adapters. That could be fixed by standardized adapters, no pressing need to supply DC straight from the wall.
Once upon a time, I asked myself: 'What useful thing did I learn in high school?'.
The best answer I could come up with was 'Always stretch before exercising!'.
Then this study come out. That pretty much confirms five of the best years of my life were utterly wasted.
Let's see now, my first three LPs were:
Fore - Huey Lewis and the News
Invisible Touch - Genesis
No Jacket Required - Phil Collins
But no Whitney. I'm not a psycho.
So no need to upgrade wiring or outlets, just add support for negotiating power requirements (e.g. max amps, voltage, AC frequency or DC) between the device and smart meter using ethernet-over-powerline before turning the mains circuit on?
Allow support for configuring individual outlets as 'smart' (safer but only works with support on the device) or 'dumb' (plain old AC mains outlet) via the smart meter's console, and you've got a sane upgrade path.
Sounds good to me.
Apart from better metering, I like the potential for improved safety that could come with redesigning outlets, if it means that:
Also a good opportunity to get an international standard outlet (please, not the parallel pins), and a chance to look at DC from the socket. And maybe put an end to ground loops while we're at it?
Erm, so the argument is that something that is considered poor style shouldn't be mentioned in a style guide? Doesn't hold water I'm afraid.
Whether or not it's obvious isn't even relevant. The point of the style guide is to prescribe good style. It's obvious you shouldn't drive your car on the sidewalk, so why have a law against it?
What's more, the question of how best to refer to the user really is of interest to developers who weren't itching to type 'bitch'. Some likely options:
Static variable types are so 2025.
FTFY
The invention here is just tooling for data mining commit data. And as such it's a great, since the alternatives are to review commits manually (too inefficient and error-prone), or ignoring commit data altogether (and instead basing management decisions on, um...).
Only a robot or an incompetent manager would take the generated profiles at face value. They could take them as a starting point, and follow through with manual spot checks on commit quality, and as a talking point for performance reviews.
In the past I've appealed to commit stats for performance appraisals. It's as good an objective measure as I could think of, and absolutely good enough to identify substandard employee performance.
That's brilliant, I wonder if they have a patent on that scheme...
I know everyone has the right to justify their own lives how they want, but the underlying reason you want to earn more money is so that you can have more sex, and the reason you want to have more sex is so that you can have more kids.
No kids and you're as good as a dodo.
I sort of agree, the OP can likely skim and toss that one.
But once they're 'out in the real world', they'll likely be working with people that really should read it. Then it'd be handy for beating people over the head with.
(Metaphorically that is, the first few times...)
Indeed. We've already spent 200,000 years playing Angry Birds, and counting.
I will never forget that statistic. Share my pain.
Taking that line a bit further, retailers might be better pushing back on the brands/manufactures to make up their shortfall, rather than trying to herd customers. After all, the physical presence of the B&M stores, plus their advertising on TV, flyers, etc, all adds brand value to what they're selling. Take that away, and brand owners will have to make a bigger direct investment in advertising themselves, or lose exposure.
So the switch is that the current-day B&M drop their own branding and instead operate as licensed showrooms for the brands they sell. The in-store prices are the same as online - or less, particularly in the case of ex-demo, end-of-line stock, and in-store promotions.
They could even go exclusive so that you can only buy brand X from brand X's own online store or showroom, but that's maybe not a good idea if purpose of the showroom is to compete with other brands rather than other retailers.
The concept of advertising on FB is much more solid than people spending a lot of time on the site. FB knows a lot about you and the recommendations of people you know or respect. Thus it can target you with advertising that you might actually be interested in.
I consider it abhorrent, BUT, if the ads served up for me were mostly useful rather than mostly junk, I'd hate advertising just a bit less.
Somewhere I have a book consisting of documented source code for the ZX81 ROM.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not volunteering to scan it and build a ROM image from it...
I've heard that recommendation a lot but I fail to comprehend the logic behind it.
If you don't want/need swap, you can optimize for performance by disabling it.
If you do want/need swap, you can optimize for performance by using a fast drive, e.g. an SSD.
There's a grain of a good idea there though. We could have an escrow-like system where two cloud providers are involved, with network connectivity between them that is fast and cheap. One provider is used for storage only, and one for processing only.
By combining storage and session keys, unencrypted data would only be exposed briefly on the 'processing' provider while it's being queried. And where feasible, store individual values encrypted end-to-end, and only decrypt them on a trusted machine.
Not perfect of course, but perhaps a useful compromise. It might also be possible to offset the extra bandwidth costs by combining the best deal on storage with the best deal on processing.
The reasoning in TFA is even worse than in the summary - the claim that 'sounding out' doesn't happen is based on MRI scans of a particular brain region that responded only to the shapes, irrespective of the sounds they represented.
Ermm, so what if the 'sounding out' actually does happen, but in a different brain region? Oops, didn't think of that!
I'm pretty certain the 'sounding out' does always happen, on some level. For example, if I see the word 'night', there's going to be neural activation associated with a hard 'G' sound (and a soft 'G' sound, and an 'H' sound), even though it's irrelevant to the word, and even though I'm not consciously aware of it.
Food and sarcasm!
Except that the corporation doesn't set the share price, the market does. And in the case of MSFT, it appears the market got it badly wrong.
That is to say, the disgruntled shareholders should be humbly flagellating themselves for paying too much for the stock in the first place.
Looking at Y-Charts over the decade, MSFT has been delivering solid profit growth save for a small hiccup in 2002. But over the same period, its P/E ratio (basically, the market's fudge factor for expected growth) has declined from an absurdly high what-were-they-thinking 50+ to a very affordable 10. Good marks for the company, bad marks for the market.
(OK, I'm assuming here that MSFT didn't fool the market with bad guidance along the way...)
But now we have the internet, the great leveller. Main reason the game hasn't changed yet is that the electoral cycles are long, so things happen in slow motion.
Just look at the way campaigns are turning to viral marketing these days. Having money to throw around doesn't help so much there, so someone with modest means and good ideas could certainly eat the big boys' lunch.
Bieber for president!!
Nice to know it wasn't just the Nth generation copy I played circa 1987. I kinda suspected bit rot!
In the same subgenre, one of my favourite games is Datamost's Aztec (wikipedia) on the Apple ][ - mostly because of the buggy implementation.
Some of the useful bugs I can remember:
OK done reminiscing...
You may well be correct from a legal standpoint in some jurisdictions, but regardless of the law, 'downloading is a copyright violation' is just plain fucking braindead. Not least because it's inconsistent with how copyright licensing actually works.
When I download a song from iTunes, I rely on someone on the other end of the wire having a legal right to make that copy. I don't have to obtain permission from the publisher or artist, it's up to Apple to ensure the transaction is legal. The understanding is that it's them making the copy, not me.
So how do I know that downloading from iTunes isn't a copyright violation, but downloading for free from the WarezHouse website or from Joe Random over P2P is?
Other than a gut feeling about how reputable the source is, I really don't have a fucking clue, and no chance of getting a fucking clue either. And yet now my entire life - financial situation, lifestyle, criminal record - are at risk if I get it wrong.
Sorry for being pedantic, but neither T-SQL nor PL/SQL is an SQL dialect. They're both procedural languages that support embedded SQL. SQL itself is a declarative language.
Apart from the ANSI standards, SQL dialects don't seem to have names in common usage, as it's generally implied by the DBMS, e.g. if you're talking about SQL on an Oracle database, then everyone knows you're using Oracle's dialect of SQL.