We've know for ages that Betelgeuse was about to go supernova. Of course, that astronomy talk meaning "probably within a few centuries or so". I didn't even see anything in the article that implied that this was unexpected. It's true that the author personally projected all sorts of disasters, but he didn't even claim to be an astronomer.
So this is a "Yawn" story, not even worth a disclaimer.
That doesn't tell you whether there are references that aren't generated through the new system. (E.g., an array on the heap that has a user generated pointer to an array element.)
So you can end up with stray pointers to memory that's already been released...and possibly reused.
When I've needed to do this kind of thing, and I have, just not on an 8086 descendant platform, I wrote a separate function in assembler. Enabling this doesn't justify allowing the compiler language to permit this foolishness. (Well, not necessarily foolishness. That was the only way I could do a random access read from the disk..library problems. Still, not an argument for allowing this to be done from within the language.)
It doesn't need to be always enabled. A compiler switch to enable it is quite reasonable. But it needs to be always available. (And saying that garbage collectors, like Bohm[sp?], are available doesn't satisfy the requirement. But a good, fast, garbage collector for C/C++ is basically impossible, because you never know which integer is going to be converted into a pointer. Or added to a pointer to yield another pointer.
That may be, but references are much nicer to work with than pointers. The only problem is you can't delete them, you've got to wait for them to go out of scope. This makes using them with the heap problematic.
I purely despise the syntax that C came up with for using values pointed to by pointers. And pointer/integer conversions, etc. should never have been allowed. It makes garbage collection a guessing game. Garbage collection *should* be a part of any decent language. The only reason it isn't reasonable for C/C++ is the infernal mucking around with pointers/integers that it allows. Pointer arithmetic should be absolutely forbidden.
That said, I'm not sure whether I prefer C over C++, if one restricts oneself to a decent subset of C++...but some of the libraries that I want to use are only C++ libraries...so that sort of forces the issue for me.
If you want them to behave responsibly, hold management responsible for when they don't. Demand extradition of felons. (Promise that capital punishment won't be imposed, and mean it, so that governments that believe that they shouldn't kill except in anger won't have legitimate grounds to refuse extradition.)
And if you can pull random Canadians off international flights that just happen to be diverted to a US airport, then you can certainly pull one of these felons off.
I should technically say suspects, but everyone knows without reasonable doubt (or can find out if they're interested) who the Chief Officers of these corporations are.
P.S.: Insurance is against accidents, not against intentional crimes. If the convict (after the trial!) has any insurance that could pay part of his fine, confiscate it in addition. One can't buy insurance to pay off intentional torts.
(Caution: IANAL. I'd be interested in hearing reasoned arguments as to why what I'm proposing is against the law more than current governmental actions already are. [I don't accept that the US had any business pulling a passenger off an international flight, even if it *was* diverted to a New York airport.])
FWIW, I've heard that BP was to blame for the extent of *that* disaster, also. BP had been contracted ahead of time to hire cleanup crews to be available in case of any problems, but instead they sat on the money. So there weren't any "stand-by emergency workers" standing by.
Could be wrong. Don't really know. But it was one of the stories I heard.
Iff you start holding management (top level and their immediate subordinates) and the board of directors personally responsible, this will stop...or at least vastly slow down.
Originally that "iff" at the start was a typo, but as I went to correct it, I changed my mind. I think "If and only if" *is* the correct operator.
FWIW, I believe that under law the top level executives and the board of directors ARE personally liable. But somehow the prosecutors don't find those targets appealing, and they get to choose which cases they prosecute.
It doesn't *have* to be corruption. That's only one possibility. Personally, I think it is, but only if you give corruption a very wide interpretation. If a DA prosecutes someone powerful, whether they win or lose their career is probably over. Same for the Attorney Generals, but with a tougher criterion for powerful. And judges also, for whatever reason, tend to give favorable treatment beyond the bounds of law or reason to the more powerful.
They *laws* are fair (in the sense recognized by François Villon: simplified"The law forbids both the rich and the poor from sleeping under the bridge."), but the enforcement isn't even fair in that sense.
Rubber won't work. The components needed to keep it flexible tend to vaporize in vacuum.
OTOH, you can probably come up with something made from silicone that will do the job. It just can't have any volatile ingredients.
I'm sure this has been a problem, but it believe that it's already been solved. (I just don't happen to know what the answer was.)
OTOH, we're talking about wanting a long lifetime. Maybe they'll use hermetic seals...only thing is, I think Mercury is also volatile. But there's probably a silicone compound that you could substitute, and which isn't volatile. That means you lose flexibility in your external joint.
The alternative is if you can come up with a tough flexible outer layer that can be patched, and which can overlay the ENTIRE vehicle. Unlikely if you're using treads.
Other solutions that occur to me would be practical only after the base were built, and would essentially involve a sealed chamber that the robots walked into to be "washed off". Maybe someday, but not now.
OK. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is important. Starship Troopers has mainly had it's innovative elements incorporated into popular culture, but it's a good read with a few important ideas about responsibility. (Don't know if I agree, but they're important anyway.) Time Enough for Love should be read in the context of the rest of the Future History series, esp. Methuselah's Children. In that context it's good. Friday is entertaining, but trivial.
And, to give you context, Stranger in a Strange Land was important in it's time, but people took it too seriously in ways it was never intended to be taken. It played an important part in the reassessing of sexual morality that took place during the 1960's-70's, but it isn't currently significant. (Much less significant than "If this goes on..." from the Future History series.
Only problem is, the Future History series is sadly dated. Things didn't work out that way, so the earlier stories in the series are difficult to read now. (Too depressing...still, there are also calamities that have been avoided. "Blowups Happen" didn't happen.)
Re:in other news, cementing the BP CEO has started
on
Gulf Oil Leak Plugged?
·
· Score: 1
No.
Corporations were invented to allow financial contributions from lots of people who couldn't control how their money would be used to be aggregated together to accomplish large projects. It wasn't to indemnify the CEOs or the boards of directors, it was to indemnify the minority stockholders. The failure to prosecute CEOs is a perversion of the law...and not according to the law, except that a prosecutor is allowed to choose which cases to pursue.
Re:in other news, cementing the BP CEO has started
on
Gulf Oil Leak Plugged?
·
· Score: 1
There's a huge difference between a minority stockholder and an executive. And if you own more than 10% of the company (I think that's the amount), then you ARE legally responsible for the transgressions of the company. This is just rarely enforced. But it should ALWAYS be enforced. It usually costs more to enforce than you would recover, but it should be done anyway, to promote ethical and safe behavior.
Yes, real life is full of trade-offs, but this isn't one of them. This is powerful people saying "You can't hold me to blame, because I'm too powerful." No good comes of allowing this to happen.
Re:in other news, cementing the BP CEO has started
on
Gulf Oil Leak Plugged?
·
· Score: 1
There's the problem. The company shouldn't be the sole bearer of the financial burden. Every executive that overrode professional advice should share in that burden.
This, of course, would mean that it would be crucial that "professional advice" have strong protections so that it couldn't be coerced to recommend whatever the executives desired.
But when the sole financial burden is born by the company, and the actual individuals within the company who make the decisions are not held at fault, then this kind of problem is probably inevitable. N.B.: I believe that our laws actually read that the burden is also born by the executives and the board of directors, but that this is almost never enforced. But it *should* be, even when it isn't cost effective. Because it's an excellent conditioning tool.
I accept that neither the GP nor I know much about petroleum engineering. And also that if it is actually a standard relief well, that your statements are correct.
Unfortunately, BP has earned a reputation for lying and carelessness about side effects. So I don't believe that just because they say it's one thing, that's actually what it is. It's actually even worse that trusting a promise from Microsoft. (Though only because MS software isn't quite as damaging.)
Blame is always tiresome. But they have both been criminally irresponsible. And they should BOTH be made to pay for it.
OTOH, proving it can be difficult. But the problem is, even when the proof is available and evident, there's no prosecution of anybody powerful.
Yeah, I think Nixon should have died in jail. Clinton appears guilty of a real estate scam, but that's small potatoes.. I accept that Regan was so mentally incapacitated that he wasn't responsible for his criminal actions, but his wife and advisers weren't. Don't know about Ford. I've heard a few assertions that seem worthy of jail time, but I'm not sure. Bush is definitely guilty of many crimes. I think high treason is one of them, but that has a rather limited definition, and I could be wrong. And I'm just hitting the presidents.
The thing about stem cells is that they can reproduce and indefinite number of times. It's not until they specialize that you start running into things like the 50 generation limit.
(Though the cells being talked about probably aren't toti-potent stem cells, so who knows. Perhaps they do have some limit. But that's not the way to bet.)
So think of it as accepting a temporary weakness to strengthen your child.
Doesn't mean it's Apple's fault, but the distributor is responsible for ensuring that the source is available. IIRC (I've never tested the boundary, so I don't remember it clearly) *EITHER* you distribute the source with each binary copy, or you must ensure that the source is available to anyone who desires it for seven years. The answer I've always found easiest is to just distribute the source with every binary.
Yes, the developer had no right to license the code as he did. Neither did Apple.
Don't know how this will work out, or even how it should. Did Apple know, or have reason to know, that the code was GPL licensed? And that the developer didn't own the right to re-license it? If so, then Apple should just stop distributing it and refund the money to anyone who asks, and then be off the hook. If not, then Apple should be required to release the source to anyone who asks.
OTOH, "should" doesn't have much to do with how legal cases work out. And IANAL.
Typically its a blinking red, not solid red and they aren't stuck, they are set that way on purpose because traffic is so low in the middle of the night that its ridiculous to wait for a full light cycle at totally empty intersections so they make it into the equivalent of a stop sign. Obviously in that condition they would not send the signal to turn off anyone's engine.
He wasn't talking about typical, he was talking about system problems. Which will happen.
Which, of course, means that the word "mistake" should be changed. I just can't decide to what. It's clearly something that they did on purpose with malice aforethought, but it doesn't seem to qualify as assault, burglary, or any of the other terms that seem almost appropriate.
Well, one result is that I'm less likely to buy O'Reilly books. Another is that I'm less likely to buy ANYTHING from his web site...or even visit it to look-up information.
I don't like to do business with people who don't respect my privacy. I'm grateful to him for being honest. I've only recently (the last year or so) started avoiding doing business with Amazon. Previously I'd considered them less dishonest than Barnes & Nobel. (Faint praise, but enough that I had been willing to do business with them.)
Well, since I stopped doing business with Amazon, I found a local book store that will order things for me. I can't see them in advance, since they aren't in stock, but I couldn't see them at Amazon either. I guess that if I decide to get an O'Reilly book in the future, I'll go that route.
That's a good argument that GPS doesn't need to transmit data. I'm not certain that it's a correct statement of the implementation. (If it were, why would the govt. require all cell phones to include a GPS?)
So far I've been able to avoid GPS. I understand that if I want a new cell phone this may be difficult, so I'm wondering how easy it is to find a pocket faraday cage large enough to hold a cell phone. It couldn't be grounded, but...
Slashdot Mirror
We've know for ages that Betelgeuse was about to go supernova. Of course, that astronomy talk meaning "probably within a few centuries or so". I didn't even see anything in the article that implied that this was unexpected. It's true that the author personally projected all sorts of disasters, but he didn't even claim to be an astronomer.
So this is a "Yawn" story, not even worth a disclaimer.
That doesn't tell you whether there are references that aren't generated through the new system. (E.g., an array on the heap that has a user generated pointer to an array element.)
So you can end up with stray pointers to memory that's already been released...and possibly reused.
When I've needed to do this kind of thing, and I have, just not on an 8086 descendant platform, I wrote a separate function in assembler. Enabling this doesn't justify allowing the compiler language to permit this foolishness. (Well, not necessarily foolishness. That was the only way I could do a random access read from the disk..library problems. Still, not an argument for allowing this to be done from within the language.)
It doesn't need to be always enabled. A compiler switch to enable it is quite reasonable. But it needs to be always available. (And saying that garbage collectors, like Bohm[sp?], are available doesn't satisfy the requirement. But a good, fast, garbage collector for C/C++ is basically impossible, because you never know which integer is going to be converted into a pointer. Or added to a pointer to yield another pointer.
That may be, but references are much nicer to work with than pointers. The only problem is you can't delete them, you've got to wait for them to go out of scope. This makes using them with the heap problematic.
I purely despise the syntax that C came up with for using values pointed to by pointers. And pointer/integer conversions, etc. should never have been allowed. It makes garbage collection a guessing game. Garbage collection *should* be a part of any decent language. The only reason it isn't reasonable for C/C++ is the infernal mucking around with pointers/integers that it allows. Pointer arithmetic should be absolutely forbidden.
That said, I'm not sure whether I prefer C over C++, if one restricts oneself to a decent subset of C++...but some of the libraries that I want to use are only C++ libraries...so that sort of forces the issue for me.
If you want them to behave responsibly, hold management responsible for when they don't. Demand extradition of felons. (Promise that capital punishment won't be imposed, and mean it, so that governments that believe that they shouldn't kill except in anger won't have legitimate grounds to refuse extradition.)
And if you can pull random Canadians off international flights that just happen to be diverted to a US airport, then you can certainly pull one of these felons off.
I should technically say suspects, but everyone knows without reasonable doubt (or can find out if they're interested) who the Chief Officers of these corporations are.
P.S.: Insurance is against accidents, not against intentional crimes. If the convict (after the trial!) has any insurance that could pay part of his fine, confiscate it in addition. One can't buy insurance to pay off intentional torts.
(Caution: IANAL. I'd be interested in hearing reasoned arguments as to why what I'm proposing is against the law more than current governmental actions already are. [I don't accept that the US had any business pulling a passenger off an international flight, even if it *was* diverted to a New York airport.])
FWIW, I've heard that BP was to blame for the extent of *that* disaster, also. BP had been contracted ahead of time to hire cleanup crews to be available in case of any problems, but instead they sat on the money. So there weren't any "stand-by emergency workers" standing by.
Could be wrong. Don't really know. But it was one of the stories I heard.
Iff you start holding management (top level and their immediate subordinates) and the board of directors personally responsible, this will stop...or at least vastly slow down.
Originally that "iff" at the start was a typo, but as I went to correct it, I changed my mind. I think "If and only if" *is* the correct operator.
FWIW, I believe that under law the top level executives and the board of directors ARE personally liable. But somehow the prosecutors don't find those targets appealing, and they get to choose which cases they prosecute.
It doesn't *have* to be corruption. That's only one possibility. Personally, I think it is, but only if you give corruption a very wide interpretation. If a DA prosecutes someone powerful, whether they win or lose their career is probably over. Same for the Attorney Generals, but with a tougher criterion for powerful. And judges also, for whatever reason, tend to give favorable treatment beyond the bounds of law or reason to the more powerful.
They *laws* are fair (in the sense recognized by François Villon: simplified"The law forbids both the rich and the poor from sleeping under the bridge."), but the enforcement isn't even fair in that sense.
No, the poundal is the unit of mass. I think pound is a unit of force.
Rubber won't work. The components needed to keep it flexible tend to vaporize in vacuum.
OTOH, you can probably come up with something made from silicone that will do the job. It just can't have any volatile ingredients.
I'm sure this has been a problem, but it believe that it's already been solved. (I just don't happen to know what the answer was.)
OTOH, we're talking about wanting a long lifetime. Maybe they'll use hermetic seals...only thing is, I think Mercury is also volatile. But there's probably a silicone compound that you could substitute, and which isn't volatile. That means you lose flexibility in your external joint.
The alternative is if you can come up with a tough flexible outer layer that can be patched, and which can overlay the ENTIRE vehicle. Unlikely if you're using treads.
Other solutions that occur to me would be practical only after the base were built, and would essentially involve a sealed chamber that the robots walked into to be "washed off". Maybe someday, but not now.
OK.
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is important.
Starship Troopers has mainly had it's innovative elements incorporated into popular culture, but it's a good read with a few important ideas about responsibility. (Don't know if I agree, but they're important anyway.)
Time Enough for Love should be read in the context of the rest of the Future History series, esp. Methuselah's Children. In that context it's good.
Friday is entertaining, but trivial.
And, to give you context, Stranger in a Strange Land was important in it's time, but people took it too seriously in ways it was never intended to be taken. It played an important part in the reassessing of sexual morality that took place during the 1960's-70's, but it isn't currently significant. (Much less significant than "If this goes on..." from the Future History series.
Only problem is, the Future History series is sadly dated. Things didn't work out that way, so the earlier stories in the series are difficult to read now. (Too depressing...still, there are also calamities that have been avoided. "Blowups Happen" didn't happen.)
No.
Corporations were invented to allow financial contributions from lots of people who couldn't control how their money would be used to be aggregated together to accomplish large projects. It wasn't to indemnify the CEOs or the boards of directors, it was to indemnify the minority stockholders. The failure to prosecute CEOs is a perversion of the law...and not according to the law, except that a prosecutor is allowed to choose which cases to pursue.
There's a huge difference between a minority stockholder and an executive. And if you own more than 10% of the company (I think that's the amount), then you ARE legally responsible for the transgressions of the company. This is just rarely enforced. But it should ALWAYS be enforced. It usually costs more to enforce than you would recover, but it should be done anyway, to promote ethical and safe behavior.
Yes, real life is full of trade-offs, but this isn't one of them. This is powerful people saying "You can't hold me to blame, because I'm too powerful." No good comes of allowing this to happen.
There's the problem. The company shouldn't be the sole bearer of the financial burden. Every executive that overrode professional advice should share in that burden.
This, of course, would mean that it would be crucial that "professional advice" have strong protections so that it couldn't be coerced to recommend whatever the executives desired.
But when the sole financial burden is born by the company, and the actual individuals within the company who make the decisions are not held at fault, then this kind of problem is probably inevitable.
N.B.: I believe that our laws actually read that the burden is also born by the executives and the board of directors, but that this is almost never enforced. But it *should* be, even when it isn't cost effective. Because it's an excellent conditioning tool.
I accept that neither the GP nor I know much about petroleum engineering. And also that if it is actually a standard relief well, that your statements are correct.
Unfortunately, BP has earned a reputation for lying and carelessness about side effects. So I don't believe that just because they say it's one thing, that's actually what it is. It's actually even worse that trusting a promise from Microsoft. (Though only because MS software isn't quite as damaging.)
Blame is always tiresome. But they have both been criminally irresponsible. And they should BOTH be made to pay for it.
OTOH, proving it can be difficult. But the problem is, even when the proof is available and evident, there's no prosecution of anybody powerful.
Yeah, I think Nixon should have died in jail. Clinton appears guilty of a real estate scam, but that's small potatoes.. I accept that Regan was so mentally incapacitated that he wasn't responsible for his criminal actions, but his wife and advisers weren't. Don't know about Ford. I've heard a few assertions that seem worthy of jail time, but I'm not sure. Bush is definitely guilty of many crimes. I think high treason is one of them, but that has a rather limited definition, and I could be wrong. And I'm just hitting the presidents.
The thing about stem cells is that they can reproduce and indefinite number of times. It's not until they specialize that you start running into things like the 50 generation limit.
(Though the cells being talked about probably aren't toti-potent stem cells, so who knows. Perhaps they do have some limit. But that's not the way to bet.)
So think of it as accepting a temporary weakness to strengthen your child.
I think you need to reread the GPL.
Doesn't mean it's Apple's fault, but the distributor is responsible for ensuring that the source is available. IIRC (I've never tested the boundary, so I don't remember it clearly) *EITHER* you distribute the source with each binary copy, or you must ensure that the source is available to anyone who desires it for seven years. The answer I've always found easiest is to just distribute the source with every binary.
It's not either, it's BOTH.
Yes, the developer had no right to license the code as he did. Neither did Apple.
Don't know how this will work out, or even how it should. Did Apple know, or have reason to know, that the code was GPL licensed? And that the developer didn't own the right to re-license it? If so, then Apple should just stop distributing it and refund the money to anyone who asks, and then be off the hook. If not, then Apple should be required to release the source to anyone who asks.
OTOH, "should" doesn't have much to do with how legal cases work out. And IANAL.
Typically its a blinking red, not solid red and they aren't stuck, they are set that way on purpose because traffic is so low in the middle of the night that its ridiculous to wait for a full light cycle at totally empty intersections so they make it into the equivalent of a stop sign. Obviously in that condition they would not send the signal to turn off anyone's engine.
He wasn't talking about typical, he was talking about system problems. Which will happen.
Which, of course, means that the word "mistake" should be changed. I just can't decide to what. It's clearly something that they did on purpose with malice aforethought, but it doesn't seem to qualify as assault, burglary, or any of the other terms that seem almost appropriate.
Well, one result is that I'm less likely to buy O'Reilly books. Another is that I'm less likely to buy ANYTHING from his web site...or even visit it to look-up information.
I don't like to do business with people who don't respect my privacy. I'm grateful to him for being honest. I've only recently (the last year or so) started avoiding doing business with Amazon. Previously I'd considered them less dishonest than Barnes & Nobel. (Faint praise, but enough that I had been willing to do business with them.)
Well, since I stopped doing business with Amazon, I found a local book store that will order things for me. I can't see them in advance, since they aren't in stock, but I couldn't see them at Amazon either. I guess that if I decide to get an O'Reilly book in the future, I'll go that route.
That's a good argument that GPS doesn't need to transmit data. I'm not certain that it's a correct statement of the implementation. (If it were, why would the govt. require all cell phones to include a GPS?)
So far I've been able to avoid GPS. I understand that if I want a new cell phone this may be difficult, so I'm wondering how easy it is to find a pocket faraday cage large enough to hold a cell phone. It couldn't be grounded, but ...