OK. USB is probably OK too, though I'm less familiar with the protocols. You want to make sure that you control the driver, but if it's simple enough, and doesn't require commands to be embedded in the data (UGH: JavaScript, etc. HTML1 is probably ok, but why?) then it should be ok.
Now, of course, this won't protect you against being communicated to by devices that abuse the protocol, so you need to ensure that your interpretations of it are secure against anything except over-voltage (and you can try to protect against that, but don't feel secure).
But for controlling such a device RS232-C is really overkill, and for getting data out a video driver is all that you need. And often more. Medical device connections aren't usually space limited, so USB has minimal advantages in that way. And the connection protocols are simple enough that I once wrote one from scratch. (I wanted to control a printer from a terminal that had a documented output port. I forget why, but I later adapted that into an X-Modem connection, but I don't remember what the device was that it connected to. But the protocol was simple. The problem was cable wiring didn't match any known design, and I ended up needing to make about 50 custom cables. If they'd actually followed the RS232-C specs rather than using their own special pin-out mapping it would have been a lot easier.)
Very well: Apple knowingly contracts out production to a sweatshop, giving them billions of dollars in business year after year. One must assume they did due diligence and didn't find a problem with the labor practices. I don't believe anyone gets a pass just because they contract work out.
If I had mod points I'd dither between insightful and informative.
Real-time OSs have a long reputation for being a pain in the ass. I don't know whether this has changed in the last decade, but what has changed is the price of adding an additional CPU. You only need an OS if more than one program is going to be running on the same processor. If you can include enough processors for all real time jobs + 1 to run everything else on, you don't need an RTOS. You *do* need a good inter-processor communications mechanism (which must handle availability, as the real-time processors can't).
I'm just talking off the top of my head, as I've never designed the kind of system I'm talking about, but with the decline in price of low-end processors it seems like a quite reasonable approach. And RTOSs have the strong reputation of something to be avoided if at all possible.
Yes, but the fork can have a really trimmed down and tightened up communications connection. Say only allow RS232-c connections to communicate. It's not a high speed connection, but you aren't passing any hefty baud rate over it. (Well, not for most devices.) You don't need to allow internet connections at all. Or possibly you could use an RS232-c for input and a video connector for output.
If you handle the communications properly, the only vulnerabilities that will matter are those targeted specifically towards your device.
To consider: Instead of adding RTOS, consider adding a separate processor without an OS. You only need an OS if more than one program is going to be using the processor at the same time. Micro-scale computers are now cheap (though I don't know how reliable). So if your project currently has no OS, and you just want to run two programs at once, you might use two separate processors. Or if ONE of them needs hard real-time, you might put a normal OS on the other one, and have it share the non-real-time programs.
Not sure how that would work out, but real-time OSs used to be a nightmare to work with, and any reasonable way of avoiding it was reasonable to investigate.
That said, of course it depends a lot on what your touch screen project is and what your real-time requirements are.
While I agree with you, I will comment that the only way I've found to disable thunderbird notices from popping up in the middle of a running virtual machine is to kill the program before I start the virtual machine. This is Linux (well, Mozilla) being equally retarded.
FWIW, I *NEVER* want thunderbird to tell me that it's just checked my mail and I have these unread messages. *NEVER*! I check my mail when I'm not doing anything else, and I don't want to be interrupted while I'm doing something else. When I'm not in a virtual machine at least I can just close the window, but when I'm in a virtual machine even that won't work without I first disengage the virtual machine from screen capture and then close the dialog and then re-engage the virtual machine. And even normally I don't want that message. But there doesn't appear to be any way to turn it off.
OTOH, recent advances seem to indicate that while there are lots of systems with planets, our configuration is quite unusual. So perhaps, though not alone in the universe, we are alone in this section of the galaxy...and how big a section is questionable. Some estimates seem to indicate that the probability would be this 1/8th of the galaxy (figure wholly invented...but tells you my estimate). And that's for multicellular carbon-oxygen based life.
OTOH, I don't believe we have good estimates for red dwarf systems. And that's the most numerous kind of star.
That said, there's lots of places in the Drake equation where they are using "best guesses" for values. So don't take this estimate seriously. But the Fermi paradox *is* worrying.
Wait!! Molten salt or molten sodium? Molten salt doesn't have the same series of problems as molten sodium. (It has a different set. But fires aren't even nearly as dangerous.)
It's a "bullshit conclusion" because "free will" is not well-defined. The researchers had a definition that they used, but there's no reason to believe that other people use the same definition, as there's no sufficient consensus as to precisely what "free will" means, and the devil is in the details.
If I assert that you have free will, but your conscious perception of free will is an illusion, how could you possibly go about proving it either true or false?
If I assert that everything is mechanistically deterministic, but it's so chaotic that your decisions cannot be predicted am I asserting that you do or do not have free will?
What if I assert the same thing with a base layer that's quantum probabilistic rather then mechanically deterministic?
Different people will give different answers to those questions. So free will is not consensually well defined. And from my investigation most people don't even have a good personal definition.
Protein balance is not just the number of amino acids, but the ratio. Tofu is quite low in a couple of them, but I don't remember which, possibly methionine is one of them. So you need to supplement with other foods to balance. Either that or eat huge quantities of tofu.
While you should be eating vegetables anyway, if you are going vegetarian you need a different balance of vegetables. You aren't, after all, just getting vitamins and minerals, you are also aiming for a balanced protein, and most vegetables don't balance. You need to include beans, nuts, and mushrooms. Tofu is good, as soybeans have a better balance than do most beans. Lentils are only slightly different from beans. It's been a long time since I worked one out, but it can be done. If you don't you may start getting sick and have no idea as to why.
Of course, if you allow eggs or cheese then this is no problem. But the costs of a vegetarian diet cannot be simply mapped onto the costs of vegetables in an omnivorous diet.
Tofu is lower in protein density/pound than is chicken, and I'm not certain that the protein balance is as good, so your calculations don't prove your point. It's probably correct, but the calculations only indicate that it's well worth further investigation rather than proving it correct.
Actually, to make tofu tasty you need considerably more than just a few spices. You usually need nuts, mushrooms, etc. or peanut sauce (which probably includes sugar). I have eaten fried tofu that was quite delicious and which only had oil and spices added...though I don't know what the spices are, and I've never successfully duplicated the dish. Chicken is a lot easier. Curry power and some oil (which could be left over chicken fat) is all that's needed, though naturally you'd want to change the spicing frequently.
That said, most people in the US eat more protein than they need. Tofu pieces cooked into stir-fried vegetables and nuts is quite sufficient. And I'm not sure the ration of tofu quantity to chicken quantity that would be needed to create equivalently tasty dishes. I *am* sure that leftovers are nowhere near as tasty. They are best used as soup starter.
FWIW, I bought a small bottle of the house brand of dill pickles at Whole foods. After I got it home I compared it with a bottle fo the Lucky's house brand of dill pickles. They seemed to be exactly the same except for the label, down to the shape and krinkle pattern on the jar lid. But the Whole Foods price was identical the Lucky's price for a jar twice as large. YMMV.
For that matter, the Buddha was not a vegetarian. He didn't approve of killing animals (well, he probably didn't), but he seems to have had no trouble eating meat that someone else had killed and offered to him. One report is that his cause of death is indigestion after eating too much pork.
Hindus refuse to eat cattle, but I've never heard that they have a requirement for vegetarianism. The Muslim population only decline eating beef for economic and political reasons. The Jains may actually be religious vegetarians. (I'm not sure. They wear nets to avoid killing insects by inhaling them, but they were also known as some of the fiercest soldiers. And that's about all I know about them.)
Sorry, but one doesn't need to "hate vegetarianism" in order to not want to be one. There are lots of things I don't want to be, which I don't hate. Vegetarian is one of them. I have no objection to other people practicing vegetarianism...except when they insist that I also be one. It's sort of like my attitude towards religion. If people don't insist that others share their delusion, then I'm quite happy to allow them to hold it. And I don't insist that they accept, or, usually, even be aware of my attitude towards their faith. If they do, I can get rather abusive. Similarly with vegetarians. But if they just want to share a vegetarian meal, I won't even mention my attitude. I often eat vegetarian meals anyway. (Salt is a different matter. I won't eat a meal that has salt cooked into the food. But I also don't insist that anyone else should refrain from salting their food...or lecture them on why they shouldn't. Unless they ask.)
P.S.: I don't feel I'm being picky about usage or grammar. I believe that they way you say things shapes how you feel about them, so that you should attempt to be precise. Perhaps, however, you didn't mean what you wrote.
Artificially cultured beef could, in principle, but healthier and tastier. It's not clear that it could even in principle be cheaper. What might be cheaper is genetically modified lizards. Modify them so that they taste like beef rather than "like chicken". Being cold blooded they could, in principle, be a lot cheaper to raise. And some of them can live on vegetarian diets, supplemented by whatever insects they can catch. These could, in principle, be cheaper and more ecological than chickens.
But do note the number of "in principle"s scattered through my comment. Each one denotes something that at minimum hasn't been reduced to practice, and sometimes it just means there's no theoretical objection that I'm aware of.
OTOH, anything that can be done by an organism can, in principle, be cone by an artificial analog. And the optimizations induced can be very different. So eventually I would guess that artificial beef can be cheaper. healthier and more ecological. My guess at the date would be 50 to 100 years from now. I.e., beyond the Singularity.
You are thinking of chickens. Cattle are raised in fields. Beef cattle even more than dairy cattle. Any other way is too expensive. Feed lots are only for a very short period of time.
Goats are easier to raise, and can be raised in much less space than cattle. Unfortunately, they are rampantly destructive. They eat not only grass, but shrubs, small trees. Hell, they even eat fiberglass insulation. I can't imagine that it was good for the goat, but it didn't harm it. And the plastic top off an imitation convertible (car). They'll even gnaw on wood. And this was all one rather mild tempered nanny-goat.
To be fair, I think the smartphone market is nearing saturation, and that means that the days of increasing sales year-to-year are past. So what's needed is to come up with an new, equally popular, product. That's a lot more difficult. The other problem is to keep your current customers satisfied. Someone remarked that the current phone is stuffed with apps that aren't being used (by some customers) and without sufficient memory. Those are things that could be addressed, but they wouldn't make any news. (Whether Apple intends to address them is another question.)
Slashdot Mirror
OK. USB is probably OK too, though I'm less familiar with the protocols. You want to make sure that you control the driver, but if it's simple enough, and doesn't require commands to be embedded in the data (UGH: JavaScript, etc. HTML1 is probably ok, but why?) then it should be ok.
Now, of course, this won't protect you against being communicated to by devices that abuse the protocol, so you need to ensure that your interpretations of it are secure against anything except over-voltage (and you can try to protect against that, but don't feel secure).
But for controlling such a device RS232-C is really overkill, and for getting data out a video driver is all that you need. And often more. Medical device connections aren't usually space limited, so USB has minimal advantages in that way. And the connection protocols are simple enough that I once wrote one from scratch. (I wanted to control a printer from a terminal that had a documented output port. I forget why, but I later adapted that into an X-Modem connection, but I don't remember what the device was that it connected to. But the protocol was simple. The problem was cable wiring didn't match any known design, and I ended up needing to make about 50 custom cables. If they'd actually followed the RS232-C specs rather than using their own special pin-out mapping it would have been a lot easier.)
Very well: Apple knowingly contracts out production to a sweatshop, giving them billions of dollars in business year after year. One must assume they did due diligence and didn't find a problem with the labor practices. I don't believe anyone gets a pass just because they contract work out.
If I had mod points I'd dither between insightful and informative.
It doesn't matter WHAT your OS. That this was intentional on Apple's part is just one mode of failure. Hard disks crash.
The answer is backups. Backups. Backups. So far usb hard disks are reasonable backup devices, but if it's important, don't rely on just one.
Does that still work? I thought that had been disabled.
Of course you could do:
rm -rf "/*[A-z0-9]"
I'm relatively sure THAT hasn't been disabled. But you also need to be logged in as root.
Or perhaps a variation on: /dev/null
mv *
I've never tried it, of course...
I'm sorry if that was your honest opinion, but when I read it my first thought was "I wonder who's paying him to post.".
It that *is* your honest opinion, I hope I never use any software that you write.
Real-time OSs have a long reputation for being a pain in the ass. I don't know whether this has changed in the last decade, but what has changed is the price of adding an additional CPU. You only need an OS if more than one program is going to be running on the same processor. If you can include enough processors for all real time jobs + 1 to run everything else on, you don't need an RTOS. You *do* need a good inter-processor communications mechanism (which must handle availability, as the real-time processors can't).
I'm just talking off the top of my head, as I've never designed the kind of system I'm talking about, but with the decline in price of low-end processors it seems like a quite reasonable approach. And RTOSs have the strong reputation of something to be avoided if at all possible.
Yes, but the fork can have a really trimmed down and tightened up communications connection. Say only allow RS232-c connections to communicate. It's not a high speed connection, but you aren't passing any hefty baud rate over it. (Well, not for most devices.) You don't need to allow internet connections at all. Or possibly you could use an RS232-c for input and a video connector for output.
If you handle the communications properly, the only vulnerabilities that will matter are those targeted specifically towards your device.
To consider: Instead of adding RTOS, consider adding a separate processor without an OS. You only need an OS if more than one program is going to be using the processor at the same time. Micro-scale computers are now cheap (though I don't know how reliable). So if your project currently has no OS, and you just want to run two programs at once, you might use two separate processors. Or if ONE of them needs hard real-time, you might put a normal OS on the other one, and have it share the non-real-time programs.
Not sure how that would work out, but real-time OSs used to be a nightmare to work with, and any reasonable way of avoiding it was reasonable to investigate.
That said, of course it depends a lot on what your touch screen project is and what your real-time requirements are.
While I agree with you, I will comment that the only way I've found to disable thunderbird notices from popping up in the middle of a running virtual machine is to kill the program before I start the virtual machine. This is Linux (well, Mozilla) being equally retarded.
FWIW, I *NEVER* want thunderbird to tell me that it's just checked my mail and I have these unread messages. *NEVER*! I check my mail when I'm not doing anything else, and I don't want to be interrupted while I'm doing something else. When I'm not in a virtual machine at least I can just close the window, but when I'm in a virtual machine even that won't work without I first disengage the virtual machine from screen capture and then close the dialog and then re-engage the virtual machine. And even normally I don't want that message. But there doesn't appear to be any way to turn it off.
The Fermi Paradox would seem to contradict that. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... )
OTOH, recent advances seem to indicate that while there are lots of systems with planets, our configuration is quite unusual. So perhaps, though not alone in the universe, we are alone in this section of the galaxy...and how big a section is questionable. Some estimates seem to indicate that the probability would be this 1/8th of the galaxy (figure wholly invented...but tells you my estimate). And that's for multicellular carbon-oxygen based life.
OTOH, I don't believe we have good estimates for red dwarf systems. And that's the most numerous kind of star.
That said, there's lots of places in the Drake equation where they are using "best guesses" for values. So don't take this estimate seriously. But the Fermi paradox *is* worrying.
Wait!! Molten salt or molten sodium? Molten salt doesn't have the same series of problems as molten sodium. (It has a different set. But fires aren't even nearly as dangerous.)
It's a "bullshit conclusion" because "free will" is not well-defined. The researchers had a definition that they used, but there's no reason to believe that other people use the same definition, as there's no sufficient consensus as to precisely what "free will" means, and the devil is in the details.
If I assert that you have free will, but your conscious perception of free will is an illusion, how could you possibly go about proving it either true or false?
If I assert that everything is mechanistically deterministic, but it's so chaotic that your decisions cannot be predicted am I asserting that you do or do not have free will?
What if I assert the same thing with a base layer that's quantum probabilistic rather then mechanically deterministic?
Different people will give different answers to those questions. So free will is not consensually well defined. And from my investigation most people don't even have a good personal definition.
Protein balance is not just the number of amino acids, but the ratio. Tofu is quite low in a couple of them, but I don't remember which, possibly methionine is one of them. So you need to supplement with other foods to balance. Either that or eat huge quantities of tofu.
Ostriches are warm blooded, so they need more food to be raised to harvesting size. Also, lizards live in a much wider variety of environments.
That said, OK, ostriches are a "bird in the hand".
Well, that's one way of being wrong.
Well, the bigger problem they've been having is that people have been taking all their food, and occasionally them.
While you should be eating vegetables anyway, if you are going vegetarian you need a different balance of vegetables. You aren't, after all, just getting vitamins and minerals, you are also aiming for a balanced protein, and most vegetables don't balance. You need to include beans, nuts, and mushrooms. Tofu is good, as soybeans have a better balance than do most beans. Lentils are only slightly different from beans. It's been a long time since I worked one out, but it can be done. If you don't you may start getting sick and have no idea as to why.
Of course, if you allow eggs or cheese then this is no problem. But the costs of a vegetarian diet cannot be simply mapped onto the costs of vegetables in an omnivorous diet.
Tofu is lower in protein density/pound than is chicken, and I'm not certain that the protein balance is as good, so your calculations don't prove your point. It's probably correct, but the calculations only indicate that it's well worth further investigation rather than proving it correct.
Actually, to make tofu tasty you need considerably more than just a few spices. You usually need nuts, mushrooms, etc. or peanut sauce (which probably includes sugar). I have eaten fried tofu that was quite delicious and which only had oil and spices added...though I don't know what the spices are, and I've never successfully duplicated the dish. Chicken is a lot easier. Curry power and some oil (which could be left over chicken fat) is all that's needed, though naturally you'd want to change the spicing frequently.
That said, most people in the US eat more protein than they need. Tofu pieces cooked into stir-fried vegetables and nuts is quite sufficient. And I'm not sure the ration of tofu quantity to chicken quantity that would be needed to create equivalently tasty dishes. I *am* sure that leftovers are nowhere near as tasty. They are best used as soup starter.
FWIW, I bought a small bottle of the house brand of dill pickles at Whole foods. After I got it home I compared it with a bottle fo the Lucky's house brand of dill pickles. They seemed to be exactly the same except for the label, down to the shape and krinkle pattern on the jar lid. But the Whole Foods price was identical the Lucky's price for a jar twice as large. YMMV.
For that matter, the Buddha was not a vegetarian. He didn't approve of killing animals (well, he probably didn't), but he seems to have had no trouble eating meat that someone else had killed and offered to him. One report is that his cause of death is indigestion after eating too much pork.
Hindus refuse to eat cattle, but I've never heard that they have a requirement for vegetarianism. The Muslim population only decline eating beef for economic and political reasons. The Jains may actually be religious vegetarians. (I'm not sure. They wear nets to avoid killing insects by inhaling them, but they were also known as some of the fiercest soldiers. And that's about all I know about them.)
Sorry, but one doesn't need to "hate vegetarianism" in order to not want to be one. There are lots of things I don't want to be, which I don't hate. Vegetarian is one of them. I have no objection to other people practicing vegetarianism...except when they insist that I also be one. It's sort of like my attitude towards religion. If people don't insist that others share their delusion, then I'm quite happy to allow them to hold it. And I don't insist that they accept, or, usually, even be aware of my attitude towards their faith. If they do, I can get rather abusive. Similarly with vegetarians. But if they just want to share a vegetarian meal, I won't even mention my attitude. I often eat vegetarian meals anyway. (Salt is a different matter. I won't eat a meal that has salt cooked into the food. But I also don't insist that anyone else should refrain from salting their food...or lecture them on why they shouldn't. Unless they ask.)
P.S.: I don't feel I'm being picky about usage or grammar. I believe that they way you say things shapes how you feel about them, so that you should attempt to be precise. Perhaps, however, you didn't mean what you wrote.
Artificially cultured beef could, in principle, but healthier and tastier. It's not clear that it could even in principle be cheaper. What might be cheaper is genetically modified lizards. Modify them so that they taste like beef rather than "like chicken". Being cold blooded they could, in principle, be a lot cheaper to raise. And some of them can live on vegetarian diets, supplemented by whatever insects they can catch. These could, in principle, be cheaper and more ecological than chickens.
But do note the number of "in principle"s scattered through my comment. Each one denotes something that at minimum hasn't been reduced to practice, and sometimes it just means there's no theoretical objection that I'm aware of.
OTOH, anything that can be done by an organism can, in principle, be cone by an artificial analog. And the optimizations induced can be very different. So eventually I would guess that artificial beef can be cheaper. healthier and more ecological. My guess at the date would be 50 to 100 years from now. I.e., beyond the Singularity.
You are thinking of chickens. Cattle are raised in fields. Beef cattle even more than dairy cattle. Any other way is too expensive. Feed lots are only for a very short period of time.
Goats are easier to raise, and can be raised in much less space than cattle. Unfortunately, they are rampantly destructive. They eat not only grass, but shrubs, small trees. Hell, they even eat fiberglass insulation. I can't imagine that it was good for the goat, but it didn't harm it. And the plastic top off an imitation convertible (car). They'll even gnaw on wood. And this was all one rather mild tempered nanny-goat.
Cook is doing his job of defending Apple.
To be fair, I think the smartphone market is nearing saturation, and that means that the days of increasing sales year-to-year are past. So what's needed is to come up with an new, equally popular, product. That's a lot more difficult. The other problem is to keep your current customers satisfied. Someone remarked that the current phone is stuffed with apps that aren't being used (by some customers) and without sufficient memory. Those are things that could be addressed, but they wouldn't make any news. (Whether Apple intends to address them is another question.)