... because of concerns about potential hijackers taking over the plane, I can imagine that there will eventually be an impetus to actually remove the ability for pilots to tell the plane to fly any differently than it is programmed to.
Of course, this will go spectacularly wrong when someone manages to program a plane to do something that it's not supposed to, and the pilots will have no ability at all to correct it, even if they *ARE* trained to.
No... Venus might be closer than Mercury at their respective closest, but Venus is also further away from Earth than Mercury at their respective furthest because Venus' orbital radius is more than double that of Mercury. On average, it ends up that Mercury is the closest planet to Earth. It is also, not coincidentally, the closest planet to all the other planets as well... at least on average, over the entire lifetime of their respective orbits.
Or... they could also just leave the goddamn clocks alone and let 12PM actually define the middle of an actual solar day like it more or less actually is on standard time.
If people are so freaking upset about not having any daylight in the evening, why don't they just quit their job and find another one with more favorable hours?
It's worth noting that the reason that people typically think that businesses should be open at time X is because the sun is always up by that time, even in the middle of winter.
If you push sunrise back an hour, then that isn't true anymore.... and regardless of how high the soapbox is that you stand upon to preach about it, it's unlikely that the perception is going to change. At the very least, you are going to be looking at having to push school start times back an hour to compensate, and that in turn is going to mess with everyone's schedule if they have kids.
The people who say it isn't useful don't want it to be useful.
What's the more outlandish? That you somehow know what other people you've never met might intend or want, or that your experiences are not necessarily the same as other peoples, and that the experiences described are not necessarily simply the result of wishful thinking?
I have no problems using DDG.
Like I said... hooray for you. That's not everyone's experience, and your counterpoint of how well it works for you is immaterial. Your persistence on the point, and particularly in how you suggested that people who believe it is not useful must simply not want it to be useful, is lending no small amount of credibility to the idea that *you* are the one with the agenda.
Literally, a pawn is a chess piece. Full stop. Other definitions which might be applied to it exist by virtue of a metaphor for anything or anyone whose loss is relatively inconsequential and typically part of a calculated gamble to achieve some supposedly greater gain.
People often complain Duckduckgo.com doesn't return the same number or quality of search results as Google; That's simply not true.
Or... you could find a better way to say that instead of being so dismissive of it or suggesting that their experiences can't possibly be representative.
The vast majority of the time I use it, I find the information I'm searching for on the first try.
Good for you. That's not everyone's experience however... including my own, for what's that worth, and you suggesting that because you don't seem to have any problem with it must mean that people who say it's not as useful for finding what they want online can't possibly be representative of the real world is absolutely no different than someone suggesting that it's *NOT* really useful because they haven't been able to get good results from it.
In terms of workflow, using a virtualbox has no real advantages over a separate computer, and is perhaps more convenient only than dual booting.
The cheapest solution is to have one OS and not two, but since you need a second one with virtual box anyways, you might as well have it on a separate computer where it can't possibly touch your other one, and even better, doesn't take away any RAM or CPU resources away from it either, as Virtualbox often would (typically using 100% of a single core, even when nothing is happening in the virtual box) As for network security, that's what hardware firewalls are for. In case you haven't realized it, I've always been talking about *professional* computer use here, not casual home user stuff or what the average person is necessary liable to already happen to have laying around.
My point is that Wine isn't suitable for everything, and I even named one program that I really do use which I sincerely wish would work under Wine but doesn't, and probably isn't ever going to. Where multiple computers may already exist, it is no less inconvenient to a workflow to install a new version of windows on a virtual box on a Linux machine and install the software on that virtual box than it is to just install it on a separate windows box on the same network.
And of course, as I also said, the only really competitive software to the example I gave that *does* work on Linux isn't anywhere nearly as easy or intuitive to use... but the above poster asked for an example of a program that didn't work under Wine, so I thought I'd oblige with one.
Any additional fees the merchant charges must be the first message the customer sees when they are handed the machine, and the customer has to acknowledge that amount, essentially like a tip where the dollar value of the tip is precalculated. The combined total is then displayed and the customer again has to approve that total amount before their PIN is entered. Any fees the merchant charges cannot be hidden, unlike a regular banking fee. Independently run ATM's that charge a fee to dispense cash are required to do the same thing. In both cases, at least in my experience, it is not too inconvenient to avoid these fees by simply spending a small amount of extra effort to use alternative facilities that do not charge them.
In terms of workflow, it's the same as two computers. In particular, you still need to have both OS's, and sharing data between the virtualbox and the underlying OS is not any different than sharing data between two physical workstations on the same network.
Dual booting is even worse, because it becomes impossible to switch rapidly between them without completely stopping everything that you are doing in one mode to switch to the other.
The difference in expense compared to inconvenience and reduction in productivity of not using a single OS system is, IMO, comparatively minor. In the end, it's cheaper and more reliable to just have two whole computers networked together instead of virtual box. It's cheaper yet to have a single computer running a single OS.... but as I said above, some software does not work in Wine, so a single OS isn't workable where such software is part of a person's workflow unless that OS is Windows.
I'm not sure where you're working that you get 15 minutes of time outside before work
On the commute to work, perhaps? Honestly, that's all it takes. While it's true that no small number of people do need to start work before the sun actually comes up in the middle of winter, the reality still is that most do not. Moving sunrise an hour later would, however, subject virtually everybody to a completely sunless commute except those who start work *very* late.
Perhaps you didn't see what I said.... I said that if one is going to use a virtual box, why wouldn't they just use a whole different computer? It takes up just as much resources as a virtual box does, after all. And suggesting that they use a different operating system (which is what they are doing when they are using virtual box) is not going to be any kind of selling point for the operating system that virtual box might be running on.
At some point people need to realize that they've chosen to live in a place where the sun rises late in the winter, and become OK with that fact.
Perhaps they are... right now.
But if you end up pushing sunrise back an entire hour, they aren't the ones who chose to suddenly have to now always do their entire commute before dawn, because on standard time, they didn't have to worry about it, and during the summer, the sun comes up early enough that DST doesn't keep them out of the sun either.
What's stupid is expecting a bunch of other people to change their clocks twice a year.
Absolutely. But pushing the clocks into permanent DST isn't the way to do that.
I'd somewhat rank physical health as a somewhat more important "nice to have" than what ultimately only amounts to a whimsical preference to happen to want daylight in the evening.
The adaptation you are talking about is an extremely mild one that we can and do routinely ignore.
Citation, please. Right now, most people actually *DO* get some amount of morning sunlight which they would not receive if you moved sunrise to being an hour later. While it's true that some do need to be at work before dawn and don't ever see the sun in the winter, not even during their morning commute, this number does not represent the majority of people. Inflict that on everyone, and you are going to see very real and very unpleasant results.
There is a reason why after trying two years of year-long DST in the early 1970's it was scrapped and went back to the way things were, and that reason is just as true today as it was then.
Are they still doing that? I thought Blizzard had smartened up after they were found to be in the wrong and had to start giving refunds to some of the players they they found they had wrongfully banned.
I'm not sure how that's a selling point for Linux.... leaving aside that this would still require me to own Windows, in terms of workflow, there is no difference between using a virtual box and just owning a whole separate computer that might be networked with it, with the down side is that the virtual box takes up a lot of system resources on the Linux workstation while running while a separate computer would not.
Not the OP, but one of the major grievances I have with Wine is trying to use is Genetica 4.0, which does not work in Wine. Genetica is no longer being actively developed, as far as I know, so I expect there will be no plans to ever port it to Linux either.
I played around a little with Substance Designer, which does work on Linux, but I found it was nowhere near as intuitive to use as Genetica, which had dozens upon dozens of different wizards for designing different material types. With Substance designer, I have to do almost everything from scratch so despite being what seems like it may very well be a technically superior product, it is simply not as useful.
No platform is as close to Java as dot NET, but many other modern languages are similar enough to Java that translating between them is actually quite straightforward, while still being pure to the design of the target language.
Not necessarily cheap, as I said... but doable, and if it ever became an impediment to progress it would be easily worth the money to execute, since it is, as I said, at least a tractable problem.
Blargh... I needed to read that before I hit post. I completely rambled in the second paragraph there. Hopefully my meaning is clear.. that if a caller spoofs a number at a different exchange than they are actually calling from, then the exchange at the spoofed number will not be able to verify that the number is calling the target. Reverse lookup would fail and the call could be either rejected or the call display information could simply say that the number is not verified.
When the sun is rising at 5:30am, it's also setting late enough that most people are still getting sunlight after they are finished their work day.
But it doesn't rise at 5:30 am in the winter when you go north of about 45 degrees. It doesn't rise until after 7:30 in the middle of winter, and will set sometime before 5pm.
I realize that this is before many people are home from work, and I can appreciate how much people might want the sun to be up after they get home, but in the end, the compromise that must be made of not having sunlight in the morning is going to have far too great of an impact on people's health by changing their serotonin and melatonin cycles to be worth it. While it's true that there are a lot of people who even need to be at work before the sun comes up in the winter, a majority of people will still get at least some morning sunlight before they get to work, which wouldn't be the case anymore if you pushed sunrise to later in the day by an entire hour.
Perpetual motion machines might be nice to have too... but I'm sorry, that's just not how the the real world works.
The telcos can easily verify that your number is in range
For direct calls, sure... not so much for routed calls, which is how call spoofing works. The telco has zero ability to tell that a call that appears to be coming from an exchange actually *originated* within that exchange... the telco can bill the appropriate company for any call coming from the exchange (essentially charging for data usage), but the company that they bill may have nothing to do with the caller. Presumably, the company that the telco company bills will in turn bill the exchange that the call actually came from, and so on... all the way down to the individual subscriber, but there's no guarantee of that if the subscriber is already paying for some fixed-rate plan that allows them to make as many long distance calls as they want.
This is why end-to-end reverse-lookup will resolve most call spoofing... if a company routes their call through another exchange, they cannot force the reverse-lookup to go through the same exchange, so your phone exchange would as directly as possible contact the claimed originating exchange where the originating exchange would, if the number claimed was some local one while the caller is calling from elsewhere in the world, then where a reverse lookup would reach wouldn't correspond with where the call is really coming from, and so the target wouldn't receive any sensible info from the exchange it tries to do a reverse-lookup on.
Some minor alterations to any reverse-lookup protocol may be necessary to allow for legitimate case spoofing, like showing a company's main office or 1-800 number, even if the call is coming from a direct dialout line in the company, but in general, end-to-end reverse lookup is going to be the most reliable way to defeat unauthorized spoofing, where the spoofer has no real control over the exchange a caller would ultimately reach if they called what they believe is the caller back.
Because who the phone company has to ultimately bill or any number that might be associated with it isn't necessarily going to mean anything to a person who needs to answer the phone. The telco knows what exchange a call is coming from, but doesn''t necessarily have any particular phone number for that exchange... the only phone number they will have is for who they have to bill which might not even go through that exchange, and is as likely as not to be useless to a person who receives the call. A company ABC which might not have any direct dealings with customers might own company XYZ which in turn owns a company QRS, so why when you are getting a call from QRS should you always get a number for ABC (who would never directly call you) just because that is the only contact number the telco has for who to bill?
It doesn't save any daylight though... it steels some from the morning to add some in the evening.
And considering the proven health benefits that exist for having exposure to the sun in the morning, it's better from a health-perspective if the sun rises earlier rather than later anyways, so the entire concept of DST Is just plain fucking stupid, completely ignoring human biology and fundamental truths about how humans have adapted and evolved.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, this will go spectacularly wrong when someone manages to program a plane to do something that it's not supposed to, and the pilots will have no ability at all to correct it, even if they *ARE* trained to.
No... Venus might be closer than Mercury at their respective closest, but Venus is also further away from Earth than Mercury at their respective furthest because Venus' orbital radius is more than double that of Mercury. On average, it ends up that Mercury is the closest planet to Earth. It is also, not coincidentally, the closest planet to all the other planets as well... at least on average, over the entire lifetime of their respective orbits.
Why is this news?
Or... they could also just leave the goddamn clocks alone and let 12PM actually define the middle of an actual solar day like it more or less actually is on standard time.
If people are so freaking upset about not having any daylight in the evening, why don't they just quit their job and find another one with more favorable hours?
I'm quite sure that the cost per subscriber to them would be negligible.
If you push sunrise back an hour, then that isn't true anymore.... and regardless of how high the soapbox is that you stand upon to preach about it, it's unlikely that the perception is going to change. At the very least, you are going to be looking at having to push school start times back an hour to compensate, and that in turn is going to mess with everyone's schedule if they have kids.
What's the more outlandish? That you somehow know what other people you've never met might intend or want, or that your experiences are not necessarily the same as other peoples, and that the experiences described are not necessarily simply the result of wishful thinking?
Like I said... hooray for you. That's not everyone's experience, and your counterpoint of how well it works for you is immaterial. Your persistence on the point, and particularly in how you suggested that people who believe it is not useful must simply not want it to be useful, is lending no small amount of credibility to the idea that *you* are the one with the agenda.
Literally, a pawn is a chess piece. Full stop. Other definitions which might be applied to it exist by virtue of a metaphor for anything or anyone whose loss is relatively inconsequential and typically part of a calculated gamble to achieve some supposedly greater gain.
Or... you could find a better way to say that instead of being so dismissive of it or suggesting that their experiences can't possibly be representative.
Good for you. That's not everyone's experience however... including my own, for what's that worth, and you suggesting that because you don't seem to have any problem with it must mean that people who say it's not as useful for finding what they want online can't possibly be representative of the real world is absolutely no different than someone suggesting that it's *NOT* really useful because they haven't been able to get good results from it.
Pot, meet the kettle.
In terms of workflow, using a virtualbox has no real advantages over a separate computer, and is perhaps more convenient only than dual booting.
The cheapest solution is to have one OS and not two, but since you need a second one with virtual box anyways, you might as well have it on a separate computer where it can't possibly touch your other one, and even better, doesn't take away any RAM or CPU resources away from it either, as Virtualbox often would (typically using 100% of a single core, even when nothing is happening in the virtual box) As for network security, that's what hardware firewalls are for. In case you haven't realized it, I've always been talking about *professional* computer use here, not casual home user stuff or what the average person is necessary liable to already happen to have laying around.
My point is that Wine isn't suitable for everything, and I even named one program that I really do use which I sincerely wish would work under Wine but doesn't, and probably isn't ever going to. Where multiple computers may already exist, it is no less inconvenient to a workflow to install a new version of windows on a virtual box on a Linux machine and install the software on that virtual box than it is to just install it on a separate windows box on the same network.
And of course, as I also said, the only really competitive software to the example I gave that *does* work on Linux isn't anywhere nearly as easy or intuitive to use... but the above poster asked for an example of a program that didn't work under Wine, so I thought I'd oblige with one.
Any additional fees the merchant charges must be the first message the customer sees when they are handed the machine, and the customer has to acknowledge that amount, essentially like a tip where the dollar value of the tip is precalculated. The combined total is then displayed and the customer again has to approve that total amount before their PIN is entered. Any fees the merchant charges cannot be hidden, unlike a regular banking fee. Independently run ATM's that charge a fee to dispense cash are required to do the same thing. In both cases, at least in my experience, it is not too inconvenient to avoid these fees by simply spending a small amount of extra effort to use alternative facilities that do not charge them.
In terms of workflow, it's the same as two computers. In particular, you still need to have both OS's, and sharing data between the virtualbox and the underlying OS is not any different than sharing data between two physical workstations on the same network.
Dual booting is even worse, because it becomes impossible to switch rapidly between them without completely stopping everything that you are doing in one mode to switch to the other.
The difference in expense compared to inconvenience and reduction in productivity of not using a single OS system is, IMO, comparatively minor. In the end, it's cheaper and more reliable to just have two whole computers networked together instead of virtual box. It's cheaper yet to have a single computer running a single OS.... but as I said above, some software does not work in Wine, so a single OS isn't workable where such software is part of a person's workflow unless that OS is Windows.
On the commute to work, perhaps? Honestly, that's all it takes. While it's true that no small number of people do need to start work before the sun actually comes up in the middle of winter, the reality still is that most do not. Moving sunrise an hour later would, however, subject virtually everybody to a completely sunless commute except those who start work *very* late.
Perhaps you didn't see what I said.... I said that if one is going to use a virtual box, why wouldn't they just use a whole different computer? It takes up just as much resources as a virtual box does, after all. And suggesting that they use a different operating system (which is what they are doing when they are using virtual box) is not going to be any kind of selling point for the operating system that virtual box might be running on.
Perhaps they are... right now. But if you end up pushing sunrise back an entire hour, they aren't the ones who chose to suddenly have to now always do their entire commute before dawn, because on standard time, they didn't have to worry about it, and during the summer, the sun comes up early enough that DST doesn't keep them out of the sun either.
Absolutely. But pushing the clocks into permanent DST isn't the way to do that.
I'd somewhat rank physical health as a somewhat more important "nice to have" than what ultimately only amounts to a whimsical preference to happen to want daylight in the evening.
Citation, please. Right now, most people actually *DO* get some amount of morning sunlight which they would not receive if you moved sunrise to being an hour later. While it's true that some do need to be at work before dawn and don't ever see the sun in the winter, not even during their morning commute, this number does not represent the majority of people. Inflict that on everyone, and you are going to see very real and very unpleasant results.
There is a reason why after trying two years of year-long DST in the early 1970's it was scrapped and went back to the way things were, and that reason is just as true today as it was then.
Are they still doing that? I thought Blizzard had smartened up after they were found to be in the wrong and had to start giving refunds to some of the players they they found they had wrongfully banned.
I'm not sure how that's a selling point for Linux.... leaving aside that this would still require me to own Windows, in terms of workflow, there is no difference between using a virtual box and just owning a whole separate computer that might be networked with it, with the down side is that the virtual box takes up a lot of system resources on the Linux workstation while running while a separate computer would not.
Not the OP, but one of the major grievances I have with Wine is trying to use is Genetica 4.0, which does not work in Wine. Genetica is no longer being actively developed, as far as I know, so I expect there will be no plans to ever port it to Linux either.
I played around a little with Substance Designer, which does work on Linux, but I found it was nowhere near as intuitive to use as Genetica, which had dozens upon dozens of different wizards for designing different material types. With Substance designer, I have to do almost everything from scratch so despite being what seems like it may very well be a technically superior product, it is simply not as useful.
No platform is as close to Java as dot NET, but many other modern languages are similar enough to Java that translating between them is actually quite straightforward, while still being pure to the design of the target language.
Not necessarily cheap, as I said... but doable, and if it ever became an impediment to progress it would be easily worth the money to execute, since it is, as I said, at least a tractable problem.
Blargh... I needed to read that before I hit post. I completely rambled in the second paragraph there. Hopefully my meaning is clear.. that if a caller spoofs a number at a different exchange than they are actually calling from, then the exchange at the spoofed number will not be able to verify that the number is calling the target. Reverse lookup would fail and the call could be either rejected or the call display information could simply say that the number is not verified.
When the sun is rising at 5:30am, it's also setting late enough that most people are still getting sunlight after they are finished their work day.
But it doesn't rise at 5:30 am in the winter when you go north of about 45 degrees. It doesn't rise until after 7:30 in the middle of winter, and will set sometime before 5pm.
I realize that this is before many people are home from work, and I can appreciate how much people might want the sun to be up after they get home, but in the end, the compromise that must be made of not having sunlight in the morning is going to have far too great of an impact on people's health by changing their serotonin and melatonin cycles to be worth it. While it's true that there are a lot of people who even need to be at work before the sun comes up in the winter, a majority of people will still get at least some morning sunlight before they get to work, which wouldn't be the case anymore if you pushed sunrise to later in the day by an entire hour.
Perpetual motion machines might be nice to have too... but I'm sorry, that's just not how the the real world works.
For direct calls, sure... not so much for routed calls, which is how call spoofing works. The telco has zero ability to tell that a call that appears to be coming from an exchange actually *originated* within that exchange... the telco can bill the appropriate company for any call coming from the exchange (essentially charging for data usage), but the company that they bill may have nothing to do with the caller. Presumably, the company that the telco company bills will in turn bill the exchange that the call actually came from, and so on... all the way down to the individual subscriber, but there's no guarantee of that if the subscriber is already paying for some fixed-rate plan that allows them to make as many long distance calls as they want.
This is why end-to-end reverse-lookup will resolve most call spoofing... if a company routes their call through another exchange, they cannot force the reverse-lookup to go through the same exchange, so your phone exchange would as directly as possible contact the claimed originating exchange where the originating exchange would, if the number claimed was some local one while the caller is calling from elsewhere in the world, then where a reverse lookup would reach wouldn't correspond with where the call is really coming from, and so the target wouldn't receive any sensible info from the exchange it tries to do a reverse-lookup on.
Some minor alterations to any reverse-lookup protocol may be necessary to allow for legitimate case spoofing, like showing a company's main office or 1-800 number, even if the call is coming from a direct dialout line in the company, but in general, end-to-end reverse lookup is going to be the most reliable way to defeat unauthorized spoofing, where the spoofer has no real control over the exchange a caller would ultimately reach if they called what they believe is the caller back.
Because who the phone company has to ultimately bill or any number that might be associated with it isn't necessarily going to mean anything to a person who needs to answer the phone. The telco knows what exchange a call is coming from, but doesn''t necessarily have any particular phone number for that exchange... the only phone number they will have is for who they have to bill which might not even go through that exchange, and is as likely as not to be useless to a person who receives the call. A company ABC which might not have any direct dealings with customers might own company XYZ which in turn owns a company QRS, so why when you are getting a call from QRS should you always get a number for ABC (who would never directly call you) just because that is the only contact number the telco has for who to bill?
It doesn't save any daylight though... it steels some from the morning to add some in the evening.
And considering the proven health benefits that exist for having exposure to the sun in the morning, it's better from a health-perspective if the sun rises earlier rather than later anyways, so the entire concept of DST Is just plain fucking stupid, completely ignoring human biology and fundamental truths about how humans have adapted and evolved.