I'm in favor of the 2nd amendment, but I'm not a gun nut. I have never owned or fired a gun in my life. I just think no government should arbitrarily restrict the ownership of any kind of goods.
Tools to do this are available for free. Most software projects use open-source solutions rather than coverity. All coverity does is put it all in one nice package for continuous integration.
You don't understand what the term "uncertainties" is about. It defines whether the work is research or not. Testing is definitely not research.
What you listed are actually the non-technical reasons that make testing rewarding, and those are related to management, customer support and interaction between divisions, which is what I said in my original message.
the anti-gravity well would be generated by energy, which itself doesn't need to be infinite. It's fine if you have to refuel your flying car with matter from time to time. Or maybe it could be gathered as you fly.
Testing can be as hard as development: it's not easy, for example, to develop and execute a test plan for a complex failover in a distributed system, and to be able to give to the developer a good repro case/setup so they can debug things if something went wrong.
The fact that many developers wouldn't be able to do this (mostly due to not understanding how important those issues are and refusing to focus on them) doesn't make it complicated.
Setting up infrastucture, writing validation, building and deployment scripts are all fairly simple things to do, accessible to anyone with a bit of technical know-how. That doesn't mean it's not work, it just doesn't require as much skill as software engineering or science.
But they're not. The drivers are pretty good. Just don't buy stuff from a paranoid company that hides its specs and ignores Linux. Even NVIDIA is not one of them, has they have understood Linux is a very important sector, at least for scientific computing if not gaming.
And unlike with Windows, the drivers actually come with the kernel, and get uploaded along with it.
Testing is easier, meaning you don't have to be as good. It also means it's easier to go up the hierarchy and get a better income. A tester has more opportunities to shine because he makes the links between various divisions. The lony developer might have a higher start salary, but unless he can chance upon leading a new project, he won't get to evolve much.
By pointing a gun at a criminal, you're putting his own life in danger, which makes it more likely that he will attempt to fight back. Guns only work for self-defense when you have superiority. Pointing a gun at someone better armed than you or at an armed mob is just plain suicide. This is an education problem.
The aspects of the technology that you should talk about are those that are directly related to competition, intellectual property, business model and eventually regulations. Interestingly, those are also the aspects that interest me as a technology entrepreneur.
Software algorithms to improve the quality of images, in particular optics, is already embedded directly inside the latest mobile phones and works in real time. That software takes into account the defects and bias of each type of lenses to produce the best images possible with the cheapest optics possible.
How does your software compare to that? Does it require to know technical details about the camera optics? Is it based on machine learning, and if that is the case, does it need to be trained on particular pictures set for each camera? On what hardware do you already have an implementation, and how fast is it? How fast could it get if optimized? What is it that makes your algorithm better than the competition? Will it remain better? How much effort would be required for a competitor to reproduce it? Is it patentable? Is your business model about embedding it in smartphones? If so, are you working with OEMs to integrate it transparently or do you provide it as a separate application? Have you considered a software as a service model? Could the modifications your algorithm does to the original images cause problems with certain regulations? Some sectors may require to take pictures of videos for study or proof (health and insurance come to mind), would you be able to certify that your technology does not affect a diagnosis? Could this be a barrier to working with OEMs?
I just went to the official website selling them. The board + a case + a power plug + a SD card = 64 euros (VAT included), which is 84 dollars. That's without delivery fees of course.
The board alone seems to be about 36 dollars without VAT.
Slashdot Mirror
She was probably selected because she's a girl.
HTML5 was already formed as the result of a fork of the W3C called the WHATWG.
News at 11.
McCain's are the best.
Yes, as a smart person you think about those things when you're an adolescent. Then you grow up.
The main challenge of exascale computing is energy efficiency. It's going to cost 100 million dollars per year in electricity alone.
Too bad it's not a realistic depiction of how gravity works.
I'm in favor of the 2nd amendment, but I'm not a gun nut. I have never owned or fired a gun in my life.
I just think no government should arbitrarily restrict the ownership of any kind of goods.
Tools to do this are available for free. Most software projects use open-source solutions rather than coverity.
All coverity does is put it all in one nice package for continuous integration.
Aren't they just roads?
But the USA is just and pure. It is the land of freedom, so it's okay if they do it.
You don't understand what the term "uncertainties" is about. It defines whether the work is research or not. Testing is definitely not research.
What you listed are actually the non-technical reasons that make testing rewarding, and those are related to management, customer support and interaction between divisions, which is what I said in my original message.
- take-off stress being particularly high
- structural micro-damage to wings being critical
Software development is full of uncertainties.
Testing isn't.
Natural selection at work.
The proposed design is a copter.
Your arguments only apply to planes, and even more-so to reactor planes.
the anti-gravity well would be generated by energy, which itself doesn't need to be infinite.
It's fine if you have to refuel your flying car with matter from time to time. Or maybe it could be gathered as you fly.
The fact that many developers wouldn't be able to do this (mostly due to not understanding how important those issues are and refusing to focus on them) doesn't make it complicated.
Setting up infrastucture, writing validation, building and deployment scripts are all fairly simple things to do, accessible to anyone with a bit of technical know-how. That doesn't mean it's not work, it just doesn't require as much skill as software engineering or science.
But they're not.
The drivers are pretty good. Just don't buy stuff from a paranoid company that hides its specs and ignores Linux. Even NVIDIA is not one of them, has they have understood Linux is a very important sector, at least for scientific computing if not gaming.
And unlike with Windows, the drivers actually come with the kernel, and get uploaded along with it.
CUDA is available for all of Windows, Linux and Mac OS X.
90kg for five foot nine is still somewhat overweight, unless you're a body builder.
Testing is easier, meaning you don't have to be as good. It also means it's easier to go up the hierarchy and get a better income.
A tester has more opportunities to shine because he makes the links between various divisions.
The lony developer might have a higher start salary, but unless he can chance upon leading a new project, he won't get to evolve much.
By pointing a gun at a criminal, you're putting his own life in danger, which makes it more likely that he will attempt to fight back.
Guns only work for self-defense when you have superiority. Pointing a gun at someone better armed than you or at an armed mob is just plain suicide. This is an education problem.
The aspects of the technology that you should talk about are those that are directly related to competition, intellectual property, business model and eventually regulations.
Interestingly, those are also the aspects that interest me as a technology entrepreneur.
Software algorithms to improve the quality of images, in particular optics, is already embedded directly inside the latest mobile phones and works in real time. That software takes into account the defects and bias of each type of lenses to produce the best images possible with the cheapest optics possible.
How does your software compare to that? Does it require to know technical details about the camera optics? Is it based on machine learning, and if that is the case, does it need to be trained on particular pictures set for each camera? On what hardware do you already have an implementation, and how fast is it? How fast could it get if optimized?
What is it that makes your algorithm better than the competition? Will it remain better? How much effort would be required for a competitor to reproduce it? Is it patentable?
Is your business model about embedding it in smartphones? If so, are you working with OEMs to integrate it transparently or do you provide it as a separate application? Have you considered a software as a service model?
Could the modifications your algorithm does to the original images cause problems with certain regulations? Some sectors may require to take pictures of videos for study or proof (health and insurance come to mind), would you be able to certify that your technology does not affect a diagnosis? Could this be a barrier to working with OEMs?
I just went to the official website selling them.
The board + a case + a power plug + a SD card = 64 euros (VAT included), which is 84 dollars.
That's without delivery fees of course.
The board alone seems to be about 36 dollars without VAT.