From my user perspective I find awesome that they bought delicious and will keep it running. But from a business perspective.... Why in hell buy this thing? How does it fit in their plans for hitting it big (if there is any)?
Well, I'll be looking forward to their interview.:p
If you really like your job regardless of your boss and his treats (I mean, the place is so good he can be overlooked), then it's harder not to get worked out about it.:/
Totally agree. I would add that he should avoid working much more than he's supposed to, and that if he's tough enough not to waste any time socializing (no sarcasm intended), he should invest that on a side project of his own.. it could be his your way out(being his own boss that is) of our hell.
Oh, thanks, I didn't pay attention to that. But still as it stands it's possible that it was indeed unintentional him opening his profile like that, and his public claims are merely a (rather good) coverup for it
You're doing a wiiiild generalization. I work on IT/software development and am not on the autism spectrum, neither is any of my coworkers. And think I know how to spot someone with asperger's after working with them every day for a while....
I don't think Bill Gates is autistic, there's no way, he's too much adapted... people with mild autism may know how to interact socially in a pretty normal way, but those are people who really worked their asses off towards that, clearly that isn't Gates' case. He just spent most of his life talking to machines rather than people, therefore he lacked some social skills.
More seriously, even with chemical propulsion, the worst case, you can get to Mars in about six months. Sure it's a hard problem, but that's all that it is. There's nothing impossible about getting to Mars. It would be nice to have some far faster means of getting there, but it's not necessary.
But, considering that's the way to go, can you estimate how much would that cost to assemble,test, launch, deploy, etc? Would the astronauts have canned food for a year or would have some sort of greenhouse to grow their own? Can they carry the necessary amount of fuel to be used in the years they'll spent on the trip? How much would the payload be.... How exactly would they avoid the martian windstorms(this might pose a problem specially to the launch back to Earth) and extreme temperature variations.. I'm just saying, we can't overlook the "details".
There's a whole lot of people with lots of will and wits to do it. It's just that the 'money people' doesn't seem to be an expressive crowd among them, and the government thinks it's better to spend our taxpayer's money giving it away to banks or killing and starving already dirt-poor people in the middle east.
Also, It all sounds very exciting when some promising report such as this one comes out on the media. But there's a few engineering and life-sustaining problems to be overcome so the trip becomes reality, and research in that area is more often than not preceded by years of seemingly(or 'from a business perspective') fruitless research. Imo, that seems to have driven some potential investors away.
I wonder if these reports will get them the government funding they've been dying for so their engineering department can work towards the mars trip. If it doesn't I don't know what else will.
It's always possible. But then again just like people think traditional voting system is secure. Very specialized software that run on top of special hardware, as I suppose this voting machines do, are similar to airplanes navigation systems or even engines of cars. What I mean is, they can be much more closely controlled than people. Call me a misanthrope(or a engineer:p) but I trust machines I understand better than people with good references to get things done the way I expect.
It usually takes more than three days to hack anything which flaws aren't by any means evident. It sure shows the voting machines are quite secure, but does that really show that they are "unhackable"?
I get your point. I don't really know MythTV project, I just has have seen it and heard about it. But I do participate in a few other projects, I never mistreat any noobs or people looking for help. But I'm not always helpful either, and keep it to myself sometimes. Sometimes it's because I'm just tired. Sometimes it's because I sense the guy is gonna ask me to tie his shoes for him next (and also because I'm tired. I'm usually tired:p).
If jackasses get under your skin like that, then you're in trouble, because the OSS world has a good amount of them. You must come and show people that you know what you're talking about and provide every proof you have in a (if possible)followable way. Because those same jackasses might not really know the project in depth as they might appear to (even though because some projects are just too damn big). So don't expect that. They might just be repeating to you the troubleshootings some other dude in the development wrote in the wiki because so far it seem to have worked every time, and they don't care(or don't know at moment how) to analyze it a whole lot.
It's always good to start assuming that even though they are the ones caring the thing on, you just might be seeing what most of them don't. And therefore be assertive about it. It's also always good to consider that the person who might actually know about that part of the code is not available at the moment, so writing it in the mailing list might elicit better results.
All in all, what I'm saying here might not be applicable, the structure, the way a project is carried on, the people etc, may change from project to project, so follow your own head.
Things have been cooling down in the last few years. But microsoft used to ferociously attack the open source world. Or you don't remember? They were ruthless, bullies really.. they would go on the press and unprovokedly say flat-out lies just because giving OSS a bad reputation in the "computer layman world" was good for[their] business. That among other things. This didn't happen once, twice or trice.. it happened many times throughout the years.
I think yours is a good point, fighting microsoft shouldn't be the focus, but fighting back may still be necessary.
Whatever the potential problems I still believe it works better than the traditional voting system. If not, people should be questioning the widespread use of web banking or software in airplanes too. I'm not saying I don't think those are as secure as it gets(more than humans anyway), but the interesting point is that it seems to interest some of those with power that voting machines keep being unreasonably untrusted while some other more complex systems not.
I'm sick of the stupid headlines I've been reading about the so called projects of MIT students lately... I mean, clearly an 'immortal invulnerable program' is impossible at least for practical purposes by definition(they're dependent on the underlying OS, on other softwares and last but not least on the hardware integrity). Other recent headlines about their CS students claiming to be able to tell who's gay based on their facebook friends.... pff omg, when did it all get so preposterous.
Why aren't they more honest about the reach of their ambitions. If you take these teachers words to the letter it seems like they don't know what's theoretically sound and what isn't...
Slashdot Mirror
From my user perspective I find awesome that they bought delicious and will keep it running. But from a business perspective.... Why in hell buy this thing? How does it fit in their plans for hitting it big (if there is any)? Well, I'll be looking forward to their interview. :p
If you really like your job regardless of your boss and his treats (I mean, the place is so good he can be overlooked), then it's harder not to get worked out about it. :/
Totally agree. I would add that he should avoid working much more than he's supposed to, and that if he's tough enough not to waste any time socializing (no sarcasm intended), he should invest that on a side project of his own.. it could be his your way out(being his own boss that is) of our hell.
Oh, thanks, I didn't pay attention to that. But still as it stands it's possible that it was indeed unintentional him opening his profile like that, and his public claims are merely a (rather good) coverup for it
But it's weird, I've read on the news that it was almost 300 pictures.. but I only see a couple dozens.
You're doing a wiiiild generalization. I work on IT/software development and am not on the autism spectrum, neither is any of my coworkers. And think I know how to spot someone with asperger's after working with them every day for a while.... I don't think Bill Gates is autistic, there's no way, he's too much adapted... people with mild autism may know how to interact socially in a pretty normal way, but those are people who really worked their asses off towards that, clearly that isn't Gates' case. He just spent most of his life talking to machines rather than people, therefore he lacked some social skills.
More seriously, even with chemical propulsion, the worst case, you can get to Mars in about six months. Sure it's a hard problem, but that's all that it is. There's nothing impossible about getting to Mars. It would be nice to have some far faster means of getting there, but it's not necessary.
But, considering that's the way to go, can you estimate how much would that cost to assemble,test, launch, deploy, etc? Would the astronauts have canned food for a year or would have some sort of greenhouse to grow their own? Can they carry the necessary amount of fuel to be used in the years they'll spent on the trip? How much would the payload be.... How exactly would they avoid the martian windstorms(this might pose a problem specially to the launch back to Earth) and extreme temperature variations.. I'm just saying, we can't overlook the "details".
There's a whole lot of people with lots of will and wits to do it. It's just that the 'money people' doesn't seem to be an expressive crowd among them, and the government thinks it's better to spend our taxpayer's money giving it away to banks or killing and starving already dirt-poor people in the middle east. Also, It all sounds very exciting when some promising report such as this one comes out on the media. But there's a few engineering and life-sustaining problems to be overcome so the trip becomes reality, and research in that area is more often than not preceded by years of seemingly(or 'from a business perspective') fruitless research. Imo, that seems to have driven some potential investors away.
You must be a troll, a very sad one. Cause if you're not I would object what are you even doing on this website.
I wonder if these reports will get them the government funding they've been dying for so their engineering department can work towards the mars trip. If it doesn't I don't know what else will.
http://br-linux.org/2009/video-e-fotos-do-boot-do-linux-em-uma-urna-eletronica-brasileira/ (scroll down the page a bit)
It's always possible. But then again just like people think traditional voting system is secure. Very specialized software that run on top of special hardware, as I suppose this voting machines do, are similar to airplanes navigation systems or even engines of cars. What I mean is, they can be much more closely controlled than people. Call me a misanthrope(or a engineer :p) but I trust machines I understand better than people with good references to get things done the way I expect.
It usually takes more than three days to hack anything which flaws aren't by any means evident. It sure shows the voting machines are quite secure, but does that really show that they are "unhackable"?
I get your point. I don't really know MythTV project, I just has have seen it and heard about it. But I do participate in a few other projects, I never mistreat any noobs or people looking for help. But I'm not always helpful either, and keep it to myself sometimes. Sometimes it's because I'm just tired. Sometimes it's because I sense the guy is gonna ask me to tie his shoes for him next (and also because I'm tired. I'm usually tired :p).
If jackasses get under your skin like that, then you're in trouble, because the OSS world has a good amount of them. You must come and show people that you know what you're talking about and provide every proof you have in a (if possible)followable way. Because those same jackasses might not really know the project in depth as they might appear to (even though because some projects are just too damn big). So don't expect that. They might just be repeating to you the troubleshootings some other dude in the development wrote in the wiki because so far it seem to have worked every time, and they don't care(or don't know at moment how) to analyze it a whole lot.
It's always good to start assuming that even though they are the ones caring the thing on, you just might be seeing what most of them don't. And therefore be assertive about it. It's also always good to consider that the person who might actually know about that part of the code is not available at the moment, so writing it in the mailing list might elicit better results.
All in all, what I'm saying here might not be applicable, the structure, the way a project is carried on, the people etc, may change from project to project, so follow your own head.
Things have been cooling down in the last few years. But microsoft used to ferociously attack the open source world. Or you don't remember? They were ruthless, bullies really.. they would go on the press and unprovokedly say flat-out lies just because giving OSS a bad reputation in the "computer layman world" was good for[their] business. That among other things. This didn't happen once, twice or trice.. it happened many times throughout the years. I think yours is a good point, fighting microsoft shouldn't be the focus, but fighting back may still be necessary.
But applying the same logic, we should go back to manual in a whole lot of other areas where things are nowadays totally automated.
Whatever the potential problems I still believe it works better than the traditional voting system. If not, people should be questioning the widespread use of web banking or software in airplanes too. I'm not saying I don't think those are as secure as it gets(more than humans anyway), but the interesting point is that it seems to interest some of those with power that voting machines keep being unreasonably untrusted while some other more complex systems not.
The outcome of this contest doesn't prove much really. But as I heard their development is solid, just like bank websites or airplane softwares.
Yeah, their headlines are pure sensationalism. And if I'm not mistaken what your saying is actually demonstrable.
I'm sick of the stupid headlines I've been reading about the so called projects of MIT students lately... I mean, clearly an 'immortal invulnerable program' is impossible at least for practical purposes by definition(they're dependent on the underlying OS, on other softwares and last but not least on the hardware integrity). Other recent headlines about their CS students claiming to be able to tell who's gay based on their facebook friends.... pff omg, when did it all get so preposterous. Why aren't they more honest about the reach of their ambitions. If you take these teachers words to the letter it seems like they don't know what's theoretically sound and what isn't...